[Northern Light]

He has every right to however. Induced Demand is one of those things I feel that people often shout without properly understanding. Induced Demand has to come from *somewhere*, and cannot appear to fill up a highway from absolute nowhere. Highway 413 is located in a transit desert where most of the traffic is heavy industry and minor commuters from Bolton, Georgetown, and Northern Brampton. There aren't that many places for commuters to come from, and the greatest beneficiaries are truck drivers coming from Northern Canada. As a result its absolutely fair to question at the very least whether or not Induced demand even applies in this situation.

Yes, he has the legal right to say something incredibly stupid, for which he cites absolutely no evidence; and if you read he the entire article, it goes on to show his understanding of the theory is laughably bad.

He shows no evidence of having studied origin-demand modelling, no evidence of understanding induced demand, no understanding of a finite public purse (we can't fund every project, we must therefore choose to invest dollars wisely).

What he does show, is that he is wholly biased in his position; and lacks any academic or other credentials on which to base his opinions.

Frank Notte is director of government relations for the Trillium Automobile Dealers Association, representing over 1,000 new car dealers across Ontario.

He is the head lobbyist for people who sell cars..............FFS you couldn't ask for a more obvious conflict-of-interest.

****

You or anyone else; are free to advocate for the construction of this highway.

I fervently believe that position to be incorrect; but we needn't go over arguments that been made time and again, once more.

But if an opinion is going to be cited from a non-member, there really ought to be some basis to take that opinion seriously based either on the expertise of the author; or evidence they cite from experts.

Here, we have neither.

'nuff said.

 

[sche]

He has every right to however. Induced Demand is one of those things I feel that people often shout without properly understanding. Induced Demand has to come from *somewhere*, and cannot appear to fill up a highway from absolute nowhere. Highway 413 is located in a transit desert where most of the traffic is heavy industry and minor commuters from Bolton, Georgetown, and Northern Brampton. There aren't that many places for commuters to come from, and the greatest beneficiaries are truck drivers coming from Northern Canada. As a result its absolutely fair to question at the very least whether or not Induced demand even applies in this situation.

Interestingly, I think you don't properly understand induced demand. Induced demand is literally about how demand for mobility appears out of seemingly nowhere.

You see, the problem is that this "There aren't that many places for commuters to come from" is maybe true right now, but wait a few years and it won't be, due to the existence of the highway (this is very important). More people and development will occur in places like Georgetown and Bolton where the only viable mobility option is the car, people will make choices like choosing to live further from their workplace such that they can take advantage of the new highway, businesses will relocate to places that are conveniently accessible from the new highway, people will make more and longer trips, etc etc. And as you said, the area is a transit desert, and a highway only exacerbates that, so all of these newly generated trips and development will be completely inaccessible and hostile to any mode other than the car (and I don't think I need to get into why cars are bad for cities and people, do I?)

Induced demand is literally just economics - theoretically, if there is a good or service that people want, and the cost (in terms of time, money, inconvenience) is close to zero, demand is practically infinite.

 

[afransen]

^It's a similar misunderstanding that causes people to say tolling doesn't work to reduce congestion. By making long distance drives more expensive, particularly at peak, you un-induce that demand. People make different decisions would where they live and work, or when they travel. They carpool more. When I was still in the office, I knew many people who lived quite far from work, who found others to carpool with in the same office just so they could amortize the cost of the 407 over 4 passengers. The question is more: how could it not work!?

 

[ARG1]

^It's a similar misunderstanding that causes people to say tolling doesn't work to reduce congestion. By making long distance drives more expensive, particularly at peak, you un-induce that demand. People make different decisions would where they live and work, or when they travel. They carpool more. When I was still in the office, I knew many people who lived quite far from work, who found others to carpool with in the same office just so they could amortize the cost of the 407 over 4 passengers. The question is more: how could it not work!?

Congrats on completely misunderstanding what I wrote in the other thread. Have a cookie.

 

[afransen]

Congrats on completely misunderstanding what I wrote in the other thread. Have a cookie.

Not referring solely to your comment, but more generally on the sentiment out there among detractors of tolling. Your position is more that tolls are 'unfair' if there are not appropriate alternatives provided, as you feel is the case with DVP/Gardiner. I don't agree that we should be trying to address social 'fairness' by providing free highways (madness). I approach it more from the perspective that congested highways are a tragedy of the commons and a symptom that demand exceeds supply. Tolls should be used to allocate highway capacity efficiently to highest and best use, and to create more social value from the infrastructure investments. Tolls should be low off-peak (contrary to how the 407 works, which is expensive even when it is abandoned late at night).

 

[Transportfan]

What he does show, is that he is wholly biased in his position

The problem with rebuttals like this is that most ordinary people who like the idea of a new highway often don't say so, leaving people officially involved in highway interests to do all the talking, while opponents tend to be very vocal (activist culture), giving the impression that there's more opposition than there really is.

 

[Undead]

^Which is exactly where the term "silent majority" comes from

 

[Northern Light]

The problem with rebuttals like this is that most ordinary people who like the idea of a new highway often don't say so, leaving people officially involved in highway interests to do all the talking, while opponents tend to be very vocal (activist culture), giving the impression that there's more opposition than there really is.

This argument is a curious one.

It suggests that we ought to put every single public policy to a popular vote; one in which the vast majority of people aren't experts and have insufficient knowledge to make a thoughtful decision. (no matter one's position}

Whether to build another fire hall, police station, hospital, subway line or highway should be up to a popular majority.

I believe in democracy; and even more direct democracy (referenda) than we currently make use of; but I most certainly oppose that idea that something's general popularity (or unpopularity) should be the basis of all public decision making.

 

[Haljackey]

407E made logical sense as it was simply a extension of a highway that just seemingly ended at some random local road. To maximize it's usefulness it needed a connection to the 401 on the east end of Greater Toronto. May as well extend it all the way to a major road (35/115) while you're at it.
-I still question the need for both the 412 and 418, that seems overkill - but since the tolls may be removed on these maybe they make a little more sense.

Building a completely new highway is a lot more complicated than widening or extending an existing highway. To me it makes sense for it to at least go from the 410 to 400, since now both the 410 and 427 will end at a major highway rather than suptter out at a local road like 407 did at Brock Road (although 410 continues as the 10).
-The stretch between 401 and 410 doesn't really 'complete' the existing highways, so I think that's a stretch that's less important at least for now. I'm sure any driver in Brampton would disagree with me as that would funnel cars from the 401 to 410 in order to access the 413 without this connection. (Still, that's less cars going to Toronto on the 401 using the 400/401 interchange which is a good thing.)

 

[kamira51]

407E made logical sense as it was simply a extension of a highway that just seemingly ended at some random local road. To maximize it's usefulness it needed a connection to the 401 on the east end of Greater Toronto. May as well extend it all the way to a major road (35/115) while you're at it.
-I still question the need for both the 412 and 418, that seems overkill - but since the tolls may be removed on these maybe they make a little more sense.

Building a completely new highway is a lot more complicated than widening or extending an existing highway. To me it makes sense for it to at least go from the 410 to 400, since now both the 410 and 427 will end at a major highway rather than suptter out at a local road like 407 did at Brock Road (although 410 continues as the 10).
-The stretch between 401 and 410 doesn't really 'complete' the existing highways, so I think that's a stretch that's less important at least for now. I'm sure any driver in Brampton would disagree with me as that would funnel cars from the 401 to 410 in order to access the 413 without this connection. (Still, that's less cars going to Toronto on the 401 using the 400/401 interchange which is a good thing.)

Absolutely agree with this.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

I will reiterate that I do support a cross region road for northern Peel and York regions. However I doubt a full fledged 400 series highway is needed. A provincial level 4 lane highway (like Hwy 9 or 10) would work just as well IMO

 

[kamira51]

I will reiterate that I do support a cross region road for northern Peel and York regions. However I doubt a full fledged 400 series highway is needed. A provincial level 4 lane highway (like Hwy 9 or 10) would work just as well IMO

I agree, a four lane highway is all caledon needs to get trucks off mayfield. I just want a road with no stoplights going east and west north of brampton.

Another option would be a design like the 115/35.

 

[Transportfan]

This argument is a curious one.

It suggests that we ought to put every single public policy to a popular vote;

No it doesn't. It just means naysayers tend to be more vocal than other people.

 

[KevinT]

In an alternate timeline where the conservatives didnt sell the 407, i belive we wouldn't need this highway.

Bam.

 

[KevinT]

It suggests that we ought to put every single public policy to a popular vote; one in which the vast majority of people aren't experts and have insufficient knowledge to make a thoughtful decision. (no matter one's position}

One need only look to California's rolling blackouts to see the this effect in action.