kamira51
Active Member
The 407 doesn't really benefit the Caledon-Brampton border.
|
|
|
DirectionNorth
Active Member
It doesn't need to be a highway. It can be the arterial I described in an earlier post, or it can be a new freight rail line. Looking around on Google Maps satellite, the area you describe is almost all generic sprawl to be found in every major city in North America.
wopchop
Building Toronto
So which is it? Is the purpose of the 413 to provide a bypass of the GTA, or is it to serve new development?
The Caledon/Brampton border is currently void of any significant development. Why does it need a 400-series 6-lane free-way for $6 billion? The development being proposed there would be adequately served by a more fiscally responsible project, such as the 4-lane arterial / parkway proposals. The need for a controlled access 6-lane highway seems rather dubious.
If one of the main purpose of building this highway is to provide a bypass for traffic, then that should also be questioned. That bypass already exists, and it literally serves the majority of commercial/industrial real-estate in the GTA. It is called the 407, and it is not at capacity. Why are we spending our tax dollars on a bypass of a bypass, which isn't at capacity?
Last edited:
north-of-anything
Active Member
To be clear, I believe the plan is for a 4-lane freeway that is designed to be upgraded to a 400-series 6-lane in the future... which would be fine if it wasn't so transparent what the long-term goal is.
Is there anywhere that I can find the proposals for new or retrofitted arterials or parkways through this corridor? I would like to see those alternatives more visible so we aren't fighting a label of "anti-growth NIMBYs".
Deadpool X
Senior Member
407 is worth $32 billion. Buying it is at least 5 times more expensive than building a new one.
wopchop
Building Toronto
That statement is trotted out a lot as a strawman. First of all, the government would not need to spend $32b to purchase an ownership stake in the highway. The ownership of the highway lease is divided into 3-stakes and the government could in theory buy into that consortium.
Personally, I don't advocate for buying it. However, it's interesting that people say that it is too expensive to buy. It is too expensive to buy because the lease generates so much revenue for the Consortium. But if it generates so much revenue, why isn't it worth owning a piece of the action?
Secondly, it is also unclear to me why the argument comes down to either owning it or building a new highway. The government could negotiate with the consortium to provide more access to commercial truck traffic. At the very least, the government should comment on that, and if it has been explored, as that was the exact recommendation provided to the PCs by a panel that they commissioned in 2018 to report on the GTA West Highway. It was also a conclusion reported to the Liberal government before they shelved the project. So far, it appears that they have ignored that panel and decided to revive the EA / Highway anyway.
Also - from a purely vindictive standpoint, I enjoy the idea of forcing this government to rectify the complete screwup that their party caused in the first place when they signed a secret contract to sell the asset that Ontarians had just paid to build.
Last edited by a moderator:
Northern Light
Superstar
As a matter of clarity, the government still owns #407; the consortium holds a very long term lease.
******
But as @wopchop notes the government has a variety of options other than buying into the lease, or buying out the lease.
The government could choose to impose tolls on #401 which would drive traffic to the #407, thus increasing its revenue and value. Perhaps the consortium could pay the Province to toll its competitor.
Either in the form of a dividend/one-time payment OR in the form of lower tolls.
The government could also offer the right to the contract to install and operate the tolls on all other 400-series highways.
In exchange for lower tolls on 407; and an equity transfer OR shortening of the lease of the highway.
*****
In the alternative (though I would oppose this) the government could build 413; even extend it east to 404 and make it free; that would undermine the #407's business model.
In exchange for not doing that, #407 could be asked to be more accommodating.
Needless to say, there's lots of leverage there for the government to use, should they be so inclined.
afransen
Senior Member
It is expensive to buy it for $30B when the idea is we would cut the toll rates that support that valuation to promote its use by commercial vehicles. Buying a small stake won't work because the government can't unilaterally stiff the other owners by cutting rates.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Would making Highway 407 free to use or reduce tolls by 90% result in more benefit to the economy than building Highway 413? Even if it costed 5 times more to do so?
nfitz
Superstar
Would turning the 407 into a parking lot benefit the economy? If it becomes congested, than capacity decreases. Meanwhile the costs business related to travel increase.
Haljackey
Active Member
Maybe so but the 401 would get less congested. Anything to relieve pressure on the 401 is a win economically. It's the backbone of the province.
This new highway would take some traffic off the 401 but nothing like reducing or eliminating tolls on the 407.
nfitz
Superstar
If 407 became overly-congested, thus reducing capacity, then 401 would become more congested too - at least at peak.
Best solution to relieve pressure on the 401 is to toll it in the GTA. until it's free-flowing at peak.
afransen
Senior Member
Might be good to develop some kind of functioning HOV lanes as well. The model used in the GTA on QEW etc. is a complete failure. I suspect they need on-ramps and offramps
innsertnamehere
Superstar
$$$$ for that. I'd rather it get spent on more actual capacity, like an additional GP lane.
Because of strong downward pressures on gas taxes in the US, most major highway projects in the last decade or two have been toll based projects, including widenings. They are much more expensive than a traditional widening as they require far more infrastructure to separate the toll lanes from the GP lanes, introduce toll infrastructure, etc, but it's the only way to get large scale road projects financed in most states.
DirectionNorth
Active Member
It's not "build the highway" or "buy all of the 407." The government can buy a part of the 407, or it can negotiate for lower toll rates. The goal is to not induce sprawl.
If a highway is not congested, it doesn't have enough demand. In cities, if traffic is free flowing, the infrastructure was a waste of money. I fear that it will lead to a scenario where poor people have to drive on congested roads and rich people can bypass them. There will always be people who have to drive. Commercial traffic is one example. I would not support it, at least not until transit is strong on every major corridor. (Edited for clarity)
I will try to make one when I find the time.
Last edited: