News   Dec 11, 2025
 258     0 
News   Dec 11, 2025
 124     0 
News   Dec 11, 2025
 728     0 

Highway 401 Transit and Auto Tunnel

A new route is not a trip generator in and of itself, it would provide relief to the 427, Gardiner and DVP. We need a multimodal transportation system with more redundancy built into it.

Studies show more lanes does not meaningfully remove congestion. It may for a few years, but when people see congestion has been lowered, they may start driving. Or, as the city grows, more people arrive and drive.

I feel that we should construct the 407 transitway before we seriously consider a transit tunnel under the 401.
Or, use the Midtown Corridor.
 
Why do we want to get more traffic downtown and what will it do when it arrives there? If people need to get downtown then improve TRANSIT, if vehicles need to cross the city then build by-passes. Building a tunnel so that vehicles can get downtown (or pass through downtown) is simply stupid!
This traffic is coming downtown whether you like it or not. Not just people in their cars from the burbs, but deliveries, construction vehicles etc etc. Not everyone can use transit. I am as big a transit booster as anyone, but we need other modes of transportation. And if you go back to my original premise I said "If we are going to build a tunnel anywhere" not that we should necessarily build this one.
 
Studies show more lanes does not meaningfully remove congestion. It may for a few years, but when people see congestion has been lowered, they may start driving. Or, as the city grows, more people arrive and drive.


Or, use the Midtown Corridor.
I agree with you that it may generate "some" more trips, but still hold to the premise that we need multiple transportation options. The GTA has almost tripled in size since I moved here 40 years ago and there has been very little new infrastructure built, highway or transit.
 
This traffic is coming downtown whether you like it or not. Not just people in their cars from the burbs, but deliveries, construction vehicles etc etc. Not everyone can use transit. I am as big a transit booster as anyone, but we need other modes of transportation. And if you go back to my original premise I said "If we are going to build a tunnel anywhere" not that we should necessarily build this one.
We have "other modes of transportation" than transit. Car transportation is highly prioritized, which is why we find ourselves in the mess we are in as the city grows. What we actually need is "other modes of transportation" than cars.
 
This traffic is coming downtown whether you like it or not. Not just people in their cars from the burbs, but deliveries, construction vehicles etc etc. Not everyone can use transit. I am as big a transit booster as anyone, but we need other modes of transportation. And if you go back to my original premise I said "If we are going to build a tunnel anywhere" not that we should necessarily build this one.

We need to be much more discerning about traffic that “needs” to come downtown (deliveries being a need) versus traffic that “wants” to come downtown (people enjoy moving by single occupant auto, but that’s ultimately an option that we can never buikd enough capacity to serve adequately).
The road network into Downtown is well enough developed and invested already that we have to turn to a demand management approach - the Ford strategy sticks our heads in the sand about this. Keeping drivers happy by letting them use road space wastefully is utterly futile.
It’s time to manage demand - some form of congestion pricing, tolls, or just let congestion force people to make different choices about when and where to use their cars.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
I agree with you that it may generate "some" more trips, but still hold to the premise that we need multiple transportation options. The GTA has almost tripled in size since I moved here 40 years ago and there has been very little new infrastructure built, highway or transit.

The rough cost is about $50 billion. For that same cost, what other transportation things could be done that may have more meaningful effect?


For a measly $75M you can have a long distance train that would take some cars out of the mix.


The whole ALTO project is estimated at over $80 B, for 1000km. So, for under $50 B Windsor -Toronto could be built

Instead of the Tunnel, I bet Metrolinx could come up with multiple projects that would move more people better.
What would the cost for 2WAD GO?


That is estimated at $14 B

What if we decided to buy back the 407?


"tens of billions"

Something needs to be done, but the answer is not always more lanes on the 401. It is one of the widest highways in the world,and it is not in one of the largest cities in the world. If adding lanes was the solution, the problem would have long been fixed.
 
Something needs to be done, but the answer is not always more lanes on the 401. It is one of the widest highways in the world,and it is not in one of the largest cities in the world. If adding lanes was the solution, the problem would have long been fixed.
Yet, it is the busiest highway on the continent. I prefer to view it through the lens of capacity rather than congestion. There will always be congestion, and adding lanes will never not make that a factor, however 6 lanes moving at 20km/h vs 8 lanes moving at 20km/h are still moving more people and goods at the end of the day. Now, you can argue the efficiency of such a wide highway with cars having to change lanes, which is a real effect, and is IMO why the collector/express system can work so well when properly designed.
 
Studies show more lanes does not meaningfully remove congestion. It may for a few years, but when people see congestion has been lowered, they may start driving. Or, as the city grows, more people arrive and drive.


Or, use the Midtown Corridor.
Doesn’t the same argument apply to transit? After a few years, use picks up on the transit line and it becomes more crowded. So we shouldn’t expand transit lines?

Expanding the highway to provide relief for a number of years could be a boost to GDP as movement of goods increases.
 
Doesn’t the same argument apply to transit? After a few years, use picks up on the transit line and it becomes more crowded. So we shouldn’t expand transit lines?

Expanding the highway to provide relief for a number of years could be a boost to GDP as movement of goods increases.
The case that you refer to in transit is true, but unlike driving, it supports climate goals, compact and livable cities, and more vibrancy in urban spaces. Transit induces positive externalities, whereas driving induces negative externalities. So the same argument cannot be applied to both scenarios unilaterally.
 
Doesn’t the same argument apply to transit? After a few years, use picks up on the transit line and it becomes more crowded. So we shouldn’t expand transit lines?

Expanding the highway to provide relief for a number of years could be a boost to GDP as movement of goods increases.

Actually you'd get mode change more often than twinning - the latter is highly costly, you'd probably get more bang from the buck with new lines elsewhere (think 401 vs 407). Also unlike transit, highways in and on its' own tend not to intensify land usages directly.

AoD
 
A new route is not a trip generator in and of itself, it would provide relief to the 427, Gardiner and DVP. We need a multimodal transportation system with more redundancy built into it.
A new route very much is a trip generator in and of itself. New highways generate new traffic and new congestion at all the streets that access it. Urban highways are very ineffective at moving large numbers of people. We should be reducing the number of cars going downtown, not increasing it.

Bigger cities don't need more highways when they're planned properly.
Doesn’t the same argument apply to transit? After a few years, use picks up on the transit line and it becomes more crowded. So we shouldn’t expand transit lines?

Expanding the highway to provide relief for a number of years could be a boost to GDP as movement of goods increases.
Yes the same principle applies to transit. The difference is that cars and the infrastructure needed to accommodate them take up much more space than any other mode of transportation, including mass transit, cycling, and walking. This means wider streets, bigger parking lots, more spread out land uses, and more infrastructure serving fewer people. Transit benefits the city's finances while cars are a net negative. Or to put it another way, the more we rely on driving the higher our taxes need to be.
 
The case that you refer to in transit is true, but unlike driving, it supports climate goals, compact and livable cities, and more vibrancy in urban spaces. Transit induces positive externalities, whereas driving induces negative externalities. So the same argument cannot be applied to both scenarios unilaterally.

Plus.... it is possible to add transit capacity on a scale that keeps up with demand, and does so without destroying the urban core.... whereas adding roads does not keep up with demand (in fact it induces demand) and downgrades the surrounding community.

- Paul
 
Honestly a way to improve congestion through the bottleneck between the 427 and 409 isn’t a bad idea.

Making it a 50km tunnel is bad.

Tunnelling the 409 under Pearson Airport to connect somewhere around the 401/410/403 interchange would relieve some of the congestion on the 409/427/401 interchange.
 

The rough cost is about $50 billion. For that same cost, what other transportation things could be done that may have more meaningful effect?


For a measly $75M you can have a long distance train that would take some cars out of the mix.


The whole ALTO project is estimated at over $80 B, for 1000km. So, for under $50 B Windsor -Toronto could be built

Instead of the Tunnel, I bet Metrolinx could come up with multiple projects that would move more people better.
What would the cost for 2WAD GO?


That is estimated at $14 B

What if we decided to buy back the 407?


"tens of billions"

Something needs to be done, but the answer is not always more lanes on the 401. It is one of the widest highways in the world,and it is not in one of the largest cities in the world. If adding lanes was the solution, the problem would have long been fixed.


For $50B? Not that I've costed it. But my fantasy would be to move the Gardiner out into the Humber bay on a bridge from Park Lawn to Jamieson Ave/Marilyn Bell Park. From there tunnel the Gardiner through the DT core. I'd tunnel the 409 under Pearson airport as I mentioned above. Then dump the rest into a real RER style urban rail system.
 
Yet, it is the busiest highway on the continent. I prefer to view it through the lens of capacity rather than congestion. There will always be congestion, and adding lanes will never not make that a factor, however 6 lanes moving at 20km/h vs 8 lanes moving at 20km/h are still moving more people and goods at the end of the day. Now, you can argue the efficiency of such a wide highway with cars having to change lanes, which is a real effect, and is IMO why the collector/express system can work so well when properly designed.

Point is, you can fit more people on a bus subway, train than you can with a car. And... the fact most of the freight rail lines are single track means a lot of those trucks could be transferred to rail if the infrastructure was there,.

Doesn’t the same argument apply to transit? After a few years, use picks up on the transit line and it becomes more crowded. So we shouldn’t expand transit lines?

Expanding the highway to provide relief for a number of years could be a boost to GDP as movement of goods increases.

It does. That is why places like New York have express and local subways. GO could be seen as the local and Via could be seen as the express.

For $50B? Not that I've costed it. But my fantasy would be to move the Gardiner out into the Humber bay on a bridge from Park Lawn to Jamieson Ave/Marilyn Bell Park. From there tunnel the Gardiner through the DT core. I'd tunnel the 409 under Pearson airport as I mentioned above. Then dump the rest into a real RER style urban rail system.
Yikes on the Gardiner. The rest isn't so bad.
 

Back
Top