News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.7K     0 

TheTigerMaster said:
I saw someone on Twitter call the conservative outrage over this, "automobile socialism".
Click to expand...

This definitely is one issue where the political spectrum is somewhat flipped upside down. You have conservatives (traditionally for free market capitalism) essentially arguing for a socialist road system, while you have liberals (traditionally also for mostly free market, but with government's thumb on the scale to make things more equitable) arguing for a free market solution.

bobbob911 said:
The rationale is that transit loving councilors will think twice about jacking up the toll rate, and car loving councilors will think twice about jacking up the TTC rate. It puts everyone in the same boat. Its a great idea.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It forces both 'sides' (since there is definitely a pro-car faction and a pro-transit faction on Council) to come together and find a solution that doesn't screw one group over more than the other. Instead of a $0.10 TTC fare hike and drivers paying the same, we may only get a $0.05 TTC fare hike and a $0.05 toll hike. Or they may just find some other way to make up that revenue so that neither group is scape-goated.
 
Instead of a $2.00 Gardiner/Don Valley toll, it should be the same price as a TTC fare. For using electronic billing then $2.90, else if cash $3.25. With increases tied to the TTC fare.
 
bobbob911 said:
The rationale is that transit loving councilors will think twice about jacking up the toll rate, and car loving councilors will think twice about jacking up the TTC rate. It puts everyone in the same boat. Its a great idea.
Click to expand...
Sounds like another scenario wherethere would be a funding shortfall.

There is a need to consider more sustainable alternatives. Like property tax. Like fares hikes. Like pressure on the province and fed to pay up.
 
chicu1981 said:
Sounds like another scenario wherethere would be a funding shortfall.

There is a need to consider more sustainable alternatives. Like property tax. Like fares hikes. Like pressure on the province and fed to pay up.
Click to expand...

News flash: This IS a fare hike. The fare is going from $0 to $2 (or whatever it ends up being).

There won't be a funding shortfall, because if there is it likely means that people switched to transit, in which case they would be paying the exact same thing (if a TTC fare is selected). And parallel routes have minimal excess capacity to absorb additional traffic, so people either suck it up and pay it, or switch to transit, in which case they're still paying it.
 
Of course, tolls on the Gardiner & Don Valley would be moot, if the province took over both the Gardiner Expressway and Don Valley Expressway, where they belong.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
This confuses me. The Gardiner cost about $1 Billion to rebuild. That's four years of revenue from these taxes and tolls generating a combined $250 Million annually. Any idea how she calculated that?
Click to expand...

she didn't calculate anything - that's the figure given in the city report.

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2016.EX20.2

Should Council decide to implement expressway tolling, a toll which recovers the cost of the Gardiner project (about $1.40 per trip) would free up $2.6 billion in total funding (including $1.85 billion in debt) currently contained in the City's approved 10-year capital plan. A toll of up to $2.00 per trip would generate just under $5 billion expressed in today's dollars over 30 years.[/quoute]
Click to expand...
 
chicu1981 said:
Sounds like another scenario wherethere would be a funding shortfall.

There is a need to consider more sustainable alternatives. Like property tax. Like fares hikes. Like pressure on the province and fed to pay up.
Click to expand...

Ha! I am all in favor of increasing property taxes, but that (and begging the other two governments) are pretty much the *LEAST* sustainable alternatives there are!
 
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...se-of-inevitability-from-905-politicians.html

Highway toll plan prompts anger, sense of inevitability, from 905 politicians

Durham
“I think this is a short-sighted solution to Toronto’s problems — they’re literally taxing the 905 to pay for Toronto’s problems,” said Durham Region Chair Roger Anderson. He's forgetting that some of our road problems are caused by 905 drivers. He said with all the special municipal revenue tools only Toronto has, such as a land-transfer tax, under the Toronto Act, many aren’t being used or are used at rates that don’t capture fair market pricing. “But they want to keep property taxes so low. A $500,000 house in the 905 pays almost double the property tax that a $500,000 house in Toronto pays,” he noted. Anderson said tolls will end up hurting Toronto businesses. “I think this is going to backfire.”
Click to expand...

Oshawa
Henry said many Oshawa residents, facing exorbitant hydro bills compared to just a few years ago and other hikes for user fees, are past the tipping point. “There’s just no more money that people have left anymore. "He warned that Toronto’s business sector will suffer. “I use the DVP to get to Toronto. I think this will ricochet. For the folks that would have gone to the Eaton Centre, they will stay and shop in Oshawa.”
Click to expand...

Oakville
“To my knowledge nobody (from Toronto) contacted my office,” Burton said. Though he pointed to the lack of consultation by Toronto, he said the move is inevitable.
“All over North America governments are resorting to tolls — it’s just a matter of time before it happens here,” he said. Burton said he only uses the GO Train when travelling into Toronto. “I adopted the practice years ago, rather than sitting in the Don Valley Parkway or Gardiner parking lot. A huge number of our residents use the GO Train.” Burton said he supports a user-pay approach to covering the costs to maintain the major highways. “The world divides between people who want to put the cost of running a society on some kind of tax and those, like many economists, who talk about user-pay.”
Click to expand...

Vaughan
“The reality is that the City of Toronto has billions of dollars worth of unfunded projects looking for revenue sources,” he said. “Citizens want (Mayor John) Tory to make key strategic investments in infrastructure and transit. The choice is pretty clear you either dramatically raise taxes or move to a user-fee model. He can also seek help from senior levels of government; unfortunately, however, they are facing their own fiscal challenges. To deliver on his promises, he will have to move quickly and decisively. I think that is his plan.”
Click to expand...


Mississauga
“I support the building of regionally-integrated transit and transportation networks through dedicated funding. Mayor Tory has many tools at his disposal to raise revenues that other cities do not have. He has chosen to implement road tolls that will not only affect residents in his city, but those in the 905 as well,” Crombie said. “It’s important that Mayor Tory understand the ramifications of his actions on business and tourism. However, as Toronto owns the Gardiner and DVP, he is free to impose these tolls without input from his neighbours in the 905,” she added. “I would caution him, though, that he must ensure that every penny of the money collected is reinvested into the repairs of the Gardiner and DVP, as well as into regionally-integrated transit projects that connect the 905 and the 416,” Crombie said. “Residents need to see that this money is not going into general revenue, but directly into projects that address the dire problem of gridlock and congestion. People simply want to be able to move more quickly and easily around the GTA and any money that is collected must make this happen.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
This is nothing but good news and goes back to what I said during the civic election.........Tory is not fiercely ideological in either direction.

As for a good chunk having to go towards the Gardiner rebuild, that is a farce. A new underground Gardiner could be built with little cost to the city if the city decided to get innovative. Sell the current East Gardiner corridor to a developer and build an underground Gardiner near the rail yards. Take the money from the sold Gardiner and buy a corridor and then GIVE the money to a developer.
The proviso is that they could build what they want on top of a totally TRENCHED Gardiner and they build the complete Gardiner {including paving} under their building. It's been done thousands of times all over the city..........it's called a parking garage. The developers could be given a total waiver to any required parking which would make it even more enticing to a developer. Effectively they would be just building a garage like they do for every other development they have ever built except instead of having parked cars under their building they have moving ones.

The Gardiner gets built for next to nothing, the city gets the ongoing tax revenue from the future developments on both the old and new Gardiner corridor developments, and the Gardiner is out-of-sight-out-of-mind.
 
Criticize Tory all you want. He's actually making the politically difficult call. Should have been done years ago. And it sucks to have to wait till 2024.

My fear, however, is that this just created a wedge issue for the next provincial election. The Conservatives will fire up the "war on the car" and will win the 905. Especially when this proposal comes on the heels of the hydro scandal.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top