picard102
Senior Member
Indeed. Look forward to some evidence to back up those claims.
2013 research by the Conference Board of Canada found that drivers in the GTA paid 146% of the cost of public road use.
Maybe you have something more recent?
|
|
|
Indeed. Look forward to some evidence to back up those claims.
2013 research by the Conference Board of Canada found that drivers in the GTA paid 146% of the cost of public road use.
Maybe you have something more recent?
Northern Light
Superstar
Link please
Northern Light
Superstar
So I went searching for the report; I haven't found the original yet; but I have found quotes from it; and it says something completely different than what you said.
Overall, the study finds that Ontario drivers pay approximately $7.7 billion in revenue, whereas the Province and municipalities collectively spend $10-13 billion on roads. In other words, the study concludes that drivers pay between 59 percent and 77 percent of the total cost of the roads they use.
I have confirmed that the original report is archived and no longer on the public website.
The Raise the Hammer piece linked above also notes that the report contained suspect methodology that assumed GTA drivers never used highways outside the GTA; that collisions have zero cost to taxpayers (ahem, healthcare, emergency response); and that otherwise omitted additional externalities.
Not to mention the glaring conflict of interest ............
"The authors thank Teresa Di Felice and Christine Allum of the Canadian Automobile Association South Central Ontario (CAASCO) for initiating and defining the research and research questions."
".......The Conference Board also acknowledges the CAASCO for financially supporting this research"
Last edited by a moderator:
Mercenary
Active Member
I think building of this highway needs to be complimented finishing the missing link and opening the Toronto North Station and running trains from milton to Markham.
Otherwise building a highway will only increase traffic.
If they have an alternative, then traffic will move freely.
Otherwise building a highway will only increase traffic.
If they have an alternative, then traffic will move freely.
allengeorge
Senior Member
There should be a moratorium on building SFH or low-density residential on the southern border of Caldeon.
The region needs to prioritize intensifying housing along corridors that actually have transit and existing infrastructure. For example, large chunks of Brampton do not allow multi-unit housing - even if it’s close to transit lines. How is this good use of the land we have?
allengeorge
Senior Member
I’ll also point out that the way we (as in the GTHA) build to support population is absolutely bizarre.
We’re supposed to set aside enough land to support population targets, and in large, instead of trying to intensify usage of what we have - we simply build out. From a purely economic perspective, that’s nuts: we can’t amortize the cost of an asset over more people, and we don’t actually gain the benefits of a large population (density matters as much as size). Also, this form of building spreads people out even more, increasing commute times, requiring more roads, single-occupant cars and making the development of efficient transit incredibly hard.
We’re supposed to set aside enough land to support population targets, and in large, instead of trying to intensify usage of what we have - we simply build out. From a purely economic perspective, that’s nuts: we can’t amortize the cost of an asset over more people, and we don’t actually gain the benefits of a large population (density matters as much as size). Also, this form of building spreads people out even more, increasing commute times, requiring more roads, single-occupant cars and making the development of efficient transit incredibly hard.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Meh. I think the 407 tolls are fantastic. Amazing how the private sector actually manages to accurately value an expressway. 407ETR sets tolls that discourages heavy vehicles (which would disproportionately damage their roadbed). And sets tolls at a level that consistently ensures free flowing traffic, which goes up with each passing year, because of increasing demand. Any truly honest pricing system would price the 401, DVP, etc similarly.
The trucks aren't the problem and fulfill a vital economic function. It's the single and double occupancy cars that are the problem. Leave the trucks. Toll the cars.
Why would the 407 do that? They set tolls based on demand for their Highway and their targeted traffic flow. If the 401 charges displace traffic to the 407, demand for their freeway goes up. Not down.
kEiThZ
Superstar
1) The term "freeway" has nothing to do with being toll free. A blurb from Wikipedia on the term should help clarify:
2) There is no specific right or entitlement to toll free auto mobility across the province, any more than you are entitled to toll free rail or air travel across the province.
3) Road space is a finite resource with growing demand for it, owing to population growth and sprawl induced demand. There's only one effective way to price it. With tolls. You're free to take HWY 7 if you want to save the $10 on your drive from Orrawa to London.
Why and how?
The 407 is privately owned. Their tolls have nothing to do with the 401.
Haljackey
Active Member
If there's no toll-free to get through or around Greater Toronto, the provincial economy may suffer. People making these trips may use city streets, adding to congestion and costing the economy, or not take the trip at all and thus costing the economy.
Regarding new development, highways do not matter much these days. I can tell you London is sprawling out and we have no highways. It's going to happen with or without highways so long as the land use policies enable it. As growth continues without adequate transportation infrastructure to support it, the existing roads are overcapacity and a lack of foresight prevents them from being expanded or new roads built. Things have gotten so bad in London that anyone who lives in the north end wanting to access the 401 to get to Toronto will now go through back roads and access the 401 via Highway 8 in Kitchener (at least this is what happened pre-Covid). Quiet country roads are now turning into thoroughfares.
Back on the topic of this thread, right now there is political will to build the GTA West AKA 413. Even the Libs understood it's usefulness so this isn't just a PC project. The only difference is that the Libs didn't think it was needed for a while so they cancelled the study for the time being.
This highway isn't needed tomorrow, but the land should be reserved at minimum. Best to plan now if it's needed eventually.
Regarding new development, highways do not matter much these days. I can tell you London is sprawling out and we have no highways. It's going to happen with or without highways so long as the land use policies enable it. As growth continues without adequate transportation infrastructure to support it, the existing roads are overcapacity and a lack of foresight prevents them from being expanded or new roads built. Things have gotten so bad in London that anyone who lives in the north end wanting to access the 401 to get to Toronto will now go through back roads and access the 401 via Highway 8 in Kitchener (at least this is what happened pre-Covid). Quiet country roads are now turning into thoroughfares.
Back on the topic of this thread, right now there is political will to build the GTA West AKA 413. Even the Libs understood it's usefulness so this isn't just a PC project. The only difference is that the Libs didn't think it was needed for a while so they cancelled the study for the time being.
This highway isn't needed tomorrow, but the land should be reserved at minimum. Best to plan now if it's needed eventually.
allengeorge
Senior Member
Good. There is a cost to poor land-use, and leaders who encourage that - and citizens who buy into it - should be made aware of it. What’s being suggested is:
1. Not change land-use policies
2. Subsidize bad choices in (1) by building highways
That’s a bad call. What’s worse is that we’re doing little to nothing to fix (1), so whatever solution we build (aka. Hwy 413 in this case) is guaranteed to be inadequate. So, stop the treadmill. Stop subsidizing bad planning and bad policy.
Northern Light
Superstar
Forgive me; but you're making points you've already made; which multiple posters have pointed out simply aren't true; and/or you have no evidence in support of them.
There is simply no evidence that not building a highway will lead to any of the negatives you've suggested (traffic on local roads or some level of economic injury).
London's problem is a failure to impose proper built-form, community design and density; as well as build proper public transit.
It would certainly also benefit from improvements to intercity passenger rail service, which is a matter for both the Federal and Provincial governments.
That said, the latter is of little relevance to to what's being built at the edges of London's existing developed area.
Building or widening another highway will not improve matters in London or anywhere else.
Last edited:
picard102
Senior Member
You mean quotes like these?
Are Toronto drivers paying their fair share?
Many experts assert that if the costs of car-related greenhouse gas emissions, gridlock, and collisions are factored in, it becomes clear that drivers aren’t paying nearly enough.
www.thestar.com
Northern Light
Superstar
You mean quotes like these?
Are Toronto drivers paying their fair share?
Many experts assert that if the costs of car-related greenhouse gas emissions, gridlock, and collisions are factored in, it becomes clear that drivers aren’t paying nearly enough.
Which I already addressed by pointing out the flawed assumptions used to arrive at those calculations.
Those flaws include which roads are charged back to whom; and also include the failure to properly account for the full cost of constructing, maintaining and operating said roads; before we even get to the issue of externalized costs.
picard102
Senior Member
Again, do you have any research to refute them other than your expert opinion?
Northern Light
Superstar
You know what externalized costs are; and you know they were excluded from the report in question.
You know what roads were not included in the costing associated with the GTA, as this was discussed in the link I previously posted.
I'm not sure what else you would like.