News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

TheTigerMaster said:
Why would we toll the DVP/Gardiner to pay for transit in other cities? They can toll their own roads.
Click to expand...
Please re-read what I wrote:
[majority owned by the City but open to other municipalities and private concerns (the corporations behind 407 lease, for instance, would bring expertise in running it) could then pay dividends to shareholders/partners if the yield is greater than cost, would be a good concept to look at.]
The reason other municipalities could/would buy-in is that they seem to be upset at the concept of Toronto charging tolls for their plebs. This way, by partly owning it, they can share in the cost, and they can share in the benefits, however they express themselves. Much the same would be accomplished if the province bought them from the city and tolled them, but that's not going to happen.

Edit to Add: Further to that line of approach, selling those 'highways' (in whatever fiscal form including off-loading to a corporation/consortium as buy-in share) would effectively be monies able to be spent on transit, even if the consortium share is used as collateral to borrow against. I'm not a great proponent of this form of financing and operation, but many cities have done this and continue to do it, as it gets debt off the books, and releases cash for more immediate needs. It is predicated on the need for highways diminishing as better transit replaces them.
 
Last edited:
WislaHD said:
When Jarrett did a talk in Toronto, he said that he found it odd that our E-W bus routes ended at Yonge line. I wonder if they were continous routes if it would be more cost-efficient? But at the same time, longer routes tend to be less cost-efficient. I wonder where the truth on that question lays, is having our routes cut in half saving us money or do we do it because the TTC has always done it that way?
Click to expand...

For some of the major E-W arterials, a combined E-W service is impractical:

- Steeles: the majority of riders want to connect to the subway, and since the subway is at Finch, both bus routes must go south on Yonge.

- Sheppard: the eastern direction is served by the subway. There is little benefit in combining #84 Sheppard West with the infrequent branch of #85 that reaches Yonge.

- Lawrence: Since the street is not continuous between Bayview and Leslie, there is much more demand west of Yonge than west of Yonge. Again, little reason to combine the routes.

- St Clair: high-capacity streetcar service west of Yonge, vs a short and infrequent bus route east of Yonge.

South of Bloor and all the way to King, the majority of E-W streetcar and bus routes go across Yonge already. A few rush-hour trippers are the only exceptions.

That leaves only 3 major arterials where the routes could be combined: Finch, York Mills / Wilson, and Eglinton.

Eglinton is getting the crosstown LRT, anyway.

Finch has recently got the express route #199 running across Yonge.

That leaves York Mills / Wilson only. Perhaps they can try combining the 95E service with the 186 rocket, and count how many riders actually take it across Yonge.
 
Rainforest said:
...
- St Clair: high-capacity streetcar service west of Yonge, vs a short and infrequent bus route east of Yonge.

...
Click to expand...

The St. Clair streetcar used to run 24-hours a day, east of Yonge and up Mt. Pleasant to Eglinton. During the day, they would use 4 streetcars between St. Clair subway station and Eglinton.
 
**Courting a little Saturday morning controversy. **

OK. So road tolls are approved in principle by this city council. So far so good in comparison with recent non-action. Discuss.
 
Road tolls will go towards rebuilding the Gardiner, not much left over in the pot for other projects.

I wonder if people will quietly stomach increases in the toll-rate in the future as they seem to stomach increases in the TTC-fare.

I think tying the highway toll to the TTC-Fare is actually a fantastic idea.
 
The money raised through tolls that is dedicated to Gardiner/DVP maintenance is money that doesn't have to be raised to pay for transit. In other words, the city's capital budget will have added flexibility with which to actually pay for unfunded transit plans. A big plus.
 
Unless there's the commitment of a real improvement to the Gardiner, such as a tunnel or infrastructure to offload it to the city grid so that the elevated stretch can be removed, I think tolls set a bad precedent. They will raise the cost of living for Torontonians. Soon only the wealthy will be able to live here and enjoy what the city has to offer.
 
Euphoria said:
Unless there's the commitment of a real improvement to the Gardiner, such as a tunnel or infrastructure to offload it to the city grid so that the elevated stretch can be removed, I think tolls set a bad precedent. They will raise the cost of living for Torontonians. Soon only the wealthy will be able to live here and enjoy what the city has to offer.
Click to expand...

The parking fees haven't reduced the numbers driving in.

With GO/RER/SmartTrack/Transit City/DRL, the transit numbers taking probably will increase, IF they actually do the transit infrastructure needed.
 
Euphoria said:
Unless there's the commitment of a real improvement to the Gardiner, such as a tunnel or infrastructure to offload it to the city grid so that the elevated stretch can be removed, I think tolls set a bad precedent. They will raise the cost of living for Torontonians. Soon only the wealthy will be able to live here and enjoy what the city has to offer.
Click to expand...
The best answer to this is transit expansion.

Build the DRL up to Sheppard. That subway has the potential to take so many drivers off the road from the same corridor as the DVP.
 
The article illustrates the perennial shortage of TTC funding just to maintain a state of good repair, let alone transit expansion, but I think it's a mistake to rely on road tolls to shore up these funds. The Gardiner Hybrid is an expensive project with few long-term advantages that will absorb most of the toll revenue. Now, if the cheaper boulevard option was constructed and some off-ramp infrastructure was built to allow a smooth transition between highway and city roads, I could see more value in the tolls.

I think tolls on a new underground highway connection between the western Gardiner and the Allen Expressway would allow for this transition from the Gardiner to the surface roads, and it would be affordable to drivers if the stretch of the tunnel from the Gardiner into the core remained free. The east end of the Gardiner might need a bit of offloading infrastructure as well. At that point the elevated stretch of the Gardiner between Strachan and the DVP could be removed or a toll tunnel replacement could be constructed. Perhaps there could be some savings in constructing the DRL as some of the construction could be combined with the expressway tunneling. None of this has to happen overnight. It could happen in stages over time.
 
New drinking game: take a shot every time Euphoria mentions "tunnels" or "underground highways".

I already read that three times today, so I'm pretty tipsy right now.
 
Special announcement from the federal government... better make that the province... sorry about that. This announcement on increasing the TTC operating budget from the city... Darn, no one is available for a photo op on the operating budget for public transit.

o-DEBATE-facebook.jpg


No body seems to want to help the transit operational budget.
 
W. K. Lis said:
No body seems to want to help the transit operational budget.
Click to expand...

Even Trudeau's "unsexy" transit announcements last summer dealt with capital cost for maintenance and signal upgrades. Evidently operational costs are even less sexy to fund than power washers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top