[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I think everyone on this board knows what Ford doesn't: his "idea' is totally untenable in every way.

Read Bill Fisch's quote at the end of that Star article. Anyone who doesn't think some form of road pricing is coming post-2013 is living an illusion. It's inevitable, especially if people want to see the DRL or any other transit expansion of note. I can't believe it's any a question for anyone other than the Fords.

If you don't like it, well, I guess you can move somewhere else or just plain stop taking your car. whether it's GOOD or BAD or DESIRABLE is beside the point and politicians would do well to start embracing reality rather than coming up with fantastic diversions like this.

I guess we'll see how Premier Hudak handles the big bag of crap Metrolinx is going to dump on his doorstep but it's only a question of when, IMHO.

 

[BMO]

why don't they just give incentives for developers that are building on the lands directly above the tunneled highway, to build their portions of the tunnel directly under their buildings, since these developers would be digging anyway to build the underground parking.

 

[BMO]

I think everyone on this board knows what Ford doesn't: his "idea' is totally untenable in every way.

Read Bill Fisch's quote at the end of that Star article. Anyone who doesn't think some form of road pricing is coming post-2013 is living an illusion. It's inevitable, especially if people want to see the DRL or any other transit expansion of note. I can't believe it's any a question for anyone other than the Fords.

If you don't like it, well, I guess you can move somewhere else or just plain stop taking your car. whether it's GOOD or BAD or DESIRABLE is beside the point and politicians would do well to start embracing reality rather than coming up with fantastic diversions like this.

I guess we'll see how Premier Hudak handles the big bag of crap Metrolinx is going to dump on his doorstep but it's only a question of when, IMHO.

Why should drivers be punished for driving? They pay their taxes which are supposed to be sufficient for the up-keep and maintenance of provincial and municipal roads. Either reduce taxes and charge a toll, or increase taxes. But you can't keep the taxes elevated and charge a toll on-top of that.

 

[gweed123]

Why should drivers be punished for driving? They pay their taxes which are supposed to be sufficient for the up-keep and maintenance of provincial and municipal roads. Either reduce taxes and charge a toll, or increase taxes. But you can't keep the taxes elevated and charge a toll on-top of that.

Public transit users need to pay a toll on top of funding the system through taxes. Why should driving be any different?

 

[Swarley]

Why should drivers be punished for driving? They pay their taxes which are supposed to be sufficient for the up-keep and maintenance of provincial and municipal roads. Either reduce taxes and charge a toll, or increase taxes. But you can't keep the taxes elevated and charge a toll on-top of that.

That sounds like Rob Ford Logic TM.
The transportation system in the GTA is obviously grossly inadequate, if you hadn't noticed, due to chronic underfunding and underexpansion over the last 20 to 30 years or so - the existing spending is plainly NOT sufficient. So instead of taxing everyone to pay for road maintenance, how about we ask drivers to contribute a little more than everyone else? (Like transit users have been doing since....ever)

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Why should drivers be punished for driving? They pay their taxes which are supposed to be sufficient for the up-keep and maintenance of provincial and municipal roads. Either reduce taxes and charge a toll, or increase taxes. But you can't keep the taxes elevated and charge a toll on-top of that.

Oh, I guess others already answered.

London and New york - these places are also on planet earth, right? They both have people who pay taxes and tolls. What this comes down to is the illusion that road users are already paying for roads with taxes while transit is some ancillary thing. That's the fallacy.

you really answer your own question when you taxes are supposed to be sufficient. Your taxes are sadly inadequate to fund the road network to say nothing of the overall transporation network and most people assume otherwise. It can be a gas tax or some fancy GPS system but somehow drivers are going to pay more. The only way people will swallow it - and rightly so - is if funds are specifically directed towards transit. They will be.

I sincerely doubt you'd be any happier (not to mention REALLY surprised) if your income or property taxes rose to include a fair transit-roads component. Taxing drivers is the most logical and efficient means to accomplish that goal. It's rather obvious, actually, when you think about it logically.

 

[Mapleson]

The main think I find about Dougie's vision is the lack of thought about ventilation. Even Boston's Big Dig wasn't venting into the core of downtown.

I don't dispute the fact that a 100% privately funded venture would like to see a ROI asap, however I think that building this with 100% private money would never happen. Your analysis is built on the assumption that this would be a purely capitalist venture.

I don't see Harper or Hudak ponying up to pay a private firm to make money off a public investment. Harris already has attached the Conservative backscratching legacy to the 407. Without senior government spending, Toronto would be hard pressed to come up with 20% of the funds let alone 80%.

If this project is going to happen, it needs to find private sector funding for at least a third of the bill to show the Tories.

The CPP just bought 10% of Highway 407 for $900 million, so the entire value of that highway is now about $9 billion. How do traffic levels on the Gardiner compare to the 407?

If we're tolling highways, a lower risk option might be to sell off the DVP. You'd get several billion for it. That money could then be used by the city to bury the Gardiner and build a DRL. Once the UnderGardiner is built, and usage numbers are discovered, it can then also be sold off to pay down the rest of its construction costs.

The 407 has about 350,000 daily users and 150-200 million monthly vehicle-kilometres. The Gardiner peaks around 115,000 daily users (one way). So we might be able to get $3-5 billion for it. However, the maintenance backlog on the structure is well over $300 million. At $2.7 billion, it could pay for the Sheppard East subway, but not much more. Alternatively, it could clear the City's debts and free up interest payments for actual service delivery.

why don't they just give incentives for developers that are building on the lands directly above the tunneled highway, to build their portions of the tunnel directly under their buildings, since these developers would be digging anyway to build the underground parking.

Interesting idea. I'm picturing a concept where condos can have private exits underground to their parking lots. Drive downtown, skip the queue, and avoid the surface streets.

Why should drivers be punished for driving? They pay their taxes which are supposed to be sufficient for the up-keep and maintenance of provincial and municipal roads. Either reduce taxes and charge a toll, or increase taxes. But you can't keep the taxes elevated and charge a toll on-top of that.

Why is paying for use of a publicly owned road so much more objectionable to paying for use of a publicly owned pool or icerink? We have user fees for libraries, why should readers be punished for reading?

Taxes are enough (if you ignore the backlog) to pay for upkeep and maintenance, but they are not enough to pay for maintenance and expansion. With 100,000 new people in the GTA every year, there is ever increasing demand for the same resources. Without immigration, we wouldn't need expansion, but at the same time we would have a 'stagnating' economy.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Why does anyone take what Doug Ford says seriously? Seriously, quoting Doug Ford is a virus that has infected the media.

 

[lynchpin]

... the dreams of the brothers Ford do not seem to have a solid business case.

In case you haven't noticed, Bob and Doug are in dad's sticker business - not exactly the kind of business that qualifies one to run a $9B+ operation.

Don't get me wrong, Rob does lots of good things (not so sure about brother Doug), but running a business isn't one of them.

 

[dunkalunk]

IMO, it's probably more effective to tax the hell out of parking spaces downtown instead of using tolls on highways. With highway tolls, you only effect the people using that corridor, and increase traffic on parallel corridors. Road tolls only really work at reducing traffic when there are no effective alternatives; the Bay Bridge in San Francisco is a perfect example of this, while in Toronto there is both LSB and The Queensway.

Increasing parking fees has the effect of forcing everyone travelling to a destination (Downtown) to come up with alternates when they can no longer afford the luxury of driving. It also forces developers to rethink how much parking to provide for new and existing developments. If the city just simply charged the market rate for parking instead of subsidizing it to make it more accessible, then you would see a large shift of people moving away from their cars and off the Gardiner. And in the end moeny saved/earned can be redirected to transport infrastructure that is more effective at moving people such as the DRL, 15 minute GO service, ect.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I think that's a perfectly sensible argument. The whole point is that all the ideas - definitely including yours - need to be considered to find the best way to pay for roads and transit. I think that's really all the Toronto Board of Trade was saying (again).

That's as opposed to, for example, saying, without thinking at all, that 'There's NO WAY we'll do ANY of that stuff. Instead we'll breed Pegasus horses out at the zoo and fly them through a magical tunnel dug under the city. Then we can sell surplus flying horses to other municipalities to generate funding to deal with whatever traffic remains."

IMHO, that's about the level of reality Doug Ford is operating on. I started off wary of the Ford boys but willing to see them surprise me. Now I'm starting to wonder if there's even going to be a city left a few years from now...

 

[BMO]

Public transit users need to pay a toll on top of funding the system through taxes. Why should driving be any different?

False, Drivers pay for public transit too, every time they pay for Gas. In fact exactly 2% of the Gas Tax goes straight to public transit. When a transit rider pays for the transit, none of that money flows back to the drivers. Transit users also get tax rebates for taking transit, and do not pay for insurance.

Think of the toll for transit like each transit user filling up the tank for a TTC bus each time they walk on to transit. And Gas Tax goes into paving roads so that, YES, buses can transport people too.

 

[BMO]

Why is paying for use of a publicly owned road so much more objectionable to paying for use of a publicly owned pool or icerink? We have user fees for libraries, why should readers be punished for reading?

Taxes are enough (if you ignore the backlog) to pay for upkeep and maintenance, but they are not enough to pay for maintenance and expansion. With 100,000 new people in the GTA every year, there is ever increasing demand for the same resources. Without immigration, we wouldn't need expansion, but at the same time we would have a 'stagnating' economy.

because streets are public domain, I can live my life perfectly without ever stepping foot in a hockey arena or community centre, but I will 100% have to step outside of my house and use the public roadwork, whether it is walking to school, or driving to work, or walking to the bus stop.

That's why i support user fees, but don't make me pay for someone who is driving down the DVP with my taxes, when I take public transit. Either provide transportation services (a necessity) for free with elevated taxes, or reduce the taxes and charge reasonable user fees. When I drive I can't use the tunnels built for transit. When I take transit I don't use the gardiner to get to work.

 

[gweed123]

False, Drivers pay for public transit too, every time they pay for Gas. In fact exactly 2% of the Gas Tax goes straight to public transit. When a transit rider pays for the transit, none of that money flows back to the drivers. Transit users also get tax rebates for taking transit, and do not pay for insurance.

Think of the toll for transit like each transit user filling up the tank for a TTC bus each time they walk on to transit. And Gas Tax goes into paving roads so that, YES, buses can transport people too.

But 80% of the TTC's revenue comes from the farebox, which means only 20% comes from subsidies. And 2% of the gas tax isn't very much in the grand scheme of things. When you do the math, transit riders subsidize roads and drivers way more than drivers subsidize transit.

If your supposition were true, 80% of the cost of roads would be subsidized through the gas tax (same % as the farebox subsidizes the TTC). Obviously this isn't the case, so a substantial amount of the funding going to roads is coming from the general tax base, not specifically the gas tax.

 

[BMO]

I sincerely doubt you'd be any happier (not to mention REALLY surprised) if your income or property taxes rose to include a fair transit-roads component. Taxing drivers is the most logical and efficient means to accomplish that goal. It's rather obvious, actually, when you think about it logically.

Well considering some of the poorest people in Toronto drive to work, since it is often the only efficient way for them to get around, doesn't really support focusing the increased tolls on drivers solely. In fact, it's been shown that the subway and better transit is actually more prevalent in more affluent areas of the city. People don't drive because they are some elitist group of people who can't be bothered to brave the scorching heat on TTC buses. More often than not, people drive because it is the cheapest, most efficient, and best method for people to get around the city, even if with the long commutes we have. Which is a testament to our bad regional transit system.

Just because I pay $300 for a Babolat tennis racket doesn't mean I like spending that much money on a racket...but I will if it means I won't have to purchase a new $150 every year for three years, if this racket lasts three years without breaking.