[makattack]

I'd pay a toll on the DVP if it means that I could go 120kmh in rush hour and if they added capacity (added lanes, fixed the bottleneck at the 401)

But, what will happen is a government cash grab by putting a toll and not providing anything in return (ie. $2 to drive on the outdated DVP Parking Lot so City Council can build bike lanes that no one uses)

 

[GraphicMatt]

I'd pay a toll on the DVP if it means that I could go 120kmh in rush hour and if they added capacity (added lanes, fixed the bottleneck at the 401)

But, what will happen is a government cash grab by putting a toll and not providing anything in return (ie. $2 to drive on the outdated DVP Parking Lot so City Council can build bike lanes that no one uses)

Are the cyclists pedaling around the city in fact invisible to some people? Because I see them. Even in January, there are a lot of them.

Tolls won't exist to make your drive more pleasant. They'll exist to make you consider not driving. Any other way of putting it is just spin.

 

[kEiThZ]

Are the cyclists pedaling around the city in fact invisible to some people? Because I see them. Even in January, there are a lot of them.

Tolls won't exist to make your drive more pleasant. They'll exist to make you consider not driving. Any other way of putting it is just spin.

That's your view. Don't think that everyone would agree with not getting any further benefit from tolls.

 

[jwill]

New bike lanes equal new bike commuters equals fewer cars on the roads. Probably not on the DVP, but on downtown streets anyway.

 

[TOareaFan]

New bike lanes equal new bike commuters equals fewer cars on the roads. Probably not on the DVP, but on downtown streets anyway.

That is the theory....any evidence that it is working?

 

[makattack]

Tolls won't exist to make your drive more pleasant. They'll exist to make you consider not driving. Any other way of putting it is just spin.

You obviously haven't been on the 407. As a 407 user, I and many other daily 407 users gladly pay the toll for a pleasant drive as oppossed to being stuck in gridlock on the 401.

Tolls should not be used to force people into not driving, it's obvious it doesn't work as car use is already very expensive (gas tax, tolls, insurance, licence fees, etc), yet there are still thousands of people driving to work each day in the GTA. The only thing that will force people out of driving is improved TTC and GO Transit (faster trains, more frequent etc.). Once the TTC and Go end up being a faster and better alternative to driving, you will find that people will flock to those options.

 

[GraphicMatt]

You obviously haven't been on the 407. As a 407 user, I and many other daily 407 users gladly pay the toll for a pleasant drive as oppossed to being stuck in gridlock on the 401.

Tolls should not be used to force people into not driving, it's obvious it doesn't work as car use is already very expensive (gas tax, tolls, insurance, licence fees, etc), yet there are still thousands of people driving to work each day in the GTA. The only thing that will force people out of driving is improved TTC and GO Transit (faster trains, more frequent etc.). Once the TTC and Go end up being a faster and better alternative to driving, you will find that people will flock to those options.

It's not a binary decision by any means - what tolls roads will do in my mind primarily is force people to think more about where they live in relation to where they work, and the modes of transportation they will use to get around. Improving transit alone won't do this.

That said, transit should absolutely be improved, and toll revenue can help with that. I generally object to the whole "The government can't do x, y or z until transit is improved!" line of thinking, though, as it's such a moving target.

 

[kEiThZ]

It's not a binary decision by any means - what tolls roads will do in my mind primarily is force people to think more about where they live in relation to where they work, and the modes of transportation they will use to get around. Improving transit alone won't do this.

That said, transit should absolutely be improved, and toll revenue can help with that. I generally object to the whole "The government can't do x, y or z until transit is improved!" line of thinking, though, as it's such a moving target.

But for a lot of people it's a simple binary decision. If transit is faster and/or more comfortable (whatever their value matrix is composed of) they'll choose transit over driving. I mean, really, who truly enjoys driving in rush hour?

However, I guarantee you that if the government were to simply impose tolls without having built an alternative first, all you are going to do is anger a lot of people who feel they have no choice but to drive. Let's face it, transit today is slow and crowded. Imposing road tolls given the alternative today will simply be seen as a tax grab.

What needs to be done is for a regional agency like Metrolinx to run the show on both transit and roads. This way Metrolinx can issue bonds and start building up transit and after a short lag period (construction time) start imposing tolls on parallel highways.

 

[Second_in_pie]

But for a lot of people it's a simple binary decision. If transit is faster and/or more comfortable (whatever their value matrix is composed of) they'll choose transit over driving. I mean, really, who truly enjoys driving in rush hour?

However, I guarantee you that if the government were to simply impose tolls without having built an alternative first, all you are going to do is anger a lot of people who feel they have no choice but to drive. Let's face it, transit today is slow and crowded. Imposing road tolls given the alternative today will simply be seen as a tax grab.

What needs to be done is for a regional agency like Metrolinx to run the show on both transit and roads. This way Metrolinx can issue bonds and start building up transit and after a short lag period (construction time) start imposing tolls on parallel highways.

My timeline would be:
First, implement MO2020, with the all day Go improvements being most important.
Second, implement a rush hour congestion charge. At this point, rush hour commuting by transit should be in no way painful, and the extra riders in the system make it easier to see what patterns are. Put this money into corridors that need it, by improving speed or capacity.
Fourth, implement a full congestion charge. This would partially be used to subsidize transit operations, and to continue upgrading the system so it just touches the point of redundancy.
Fifth: ???
Sixth: PROFIT!

 

[afransen]

But for a lot of people it's a simple binary decision. If transit is faster and/or more comfortable (whatever their value matrix is composed of) they'll choose transit over driving. I mean, really, who truly enjoys driving in rush hour?

However, I guarantee you that if the government were to simply impose tolls without having built an alternative first, all you are going to do is anger a lot of people who feel they have no choice but to drive. Let's face it, transit today is slow and crowded. Imposing road tolls given the alternative today will simply be seen as a tax grab.

What needs to be done is for a regional agency like Metrolinx to run the show on both transit and roads. This way Metrolinx can issue bonds and start building up transit and after a short lag period (construction time) start imposing tolls on parallel highways.

Keith, it will take decades for transit to be 'good enough' to allow road tolls. In the intervening decades, the lack of road tolls with continue to foster the pattern of development that sees people live very far from work, and take a highway to their office which is located along a highway, far from transit. I think we're better off starting with very low tolls, and warning people that they will be ramped up over a 5 or 10 year span. Fine, go ahead and borrow/build transit, but realise that the 'we must wait for transit to be good enough' is a tactic employed by those who do not want transit to improve or tolls to ever be imposed. It's worked damn well so far.

 

[TOareaFan]

Keith, it will take decades for transit to be 'good enough' to allow road tolls. In the intervening decades, the lack of road tolls with continue to foster the pattern of development that sees people live very far from work, and take a highway to their office which is located along a highway, far from transit. I think we're better off starting with very low tolls, and warning people that they will be ramped up over a 5 or 10 year span. Fine, go ahead and borrow/build transit, but realise that the 'we must wait for transit to be good enough' is a tactic employed by those who do not want transit to improve or tolls to ever be imposed. It's worked damn well so far.

I think the magic is defining what level of transit is "good enough". A few pages back, some folks were suggesting tolling the qew/gardiner as soon as 30 minute frequencies were introduced on Lakeshore West (just using this as an example)....at the time I took great exception to that because the gardiner/qew serves a much wider constituency than just the people served by Lakeshore west.

That aside, however, if all GO lines had a level of train service equal to what the Lakeshore currently has, I am one daily commuter that would support tolls and congestion charges. My "line in the sand, is simply that if you use transit to get in you should be able use the same transit to get home.....once that basic level is reached then I am all for tolls....I would not wait for 30 minute frequencies just give every one the option of what already exists on Lakeshore.

Now, getting everyone (or enough people) to agree on what "good enough" is...that is a trick.

While I am here, let's have a thought about all the "people should live closer to work" arguments. As I have pointed out before, most families these days are two pay cheque families......it is very difficult to imagine that every couple will be able to find a place to live that is very close (ie no commute) to both peoples' workplaces........where to live is another one of those non-binary decisions (influenced by two workplaces, locations of families/friends, etc etc).

 

[kEiThZ]

Keith, it will take decades for transit to be 'good enough' to allow road tolls. In the intervening decades, the lack of road tolls with continue to foster the pattern of development that sees people live very far from work, and take a highway to their office which is located along a highway, far from transit. I think we're better off starting with very low tolls, and warning people that they will be ramped up over a 5 or 10 year span. Fine, go ahead and borrow/build transit, but realise that the 'we must wait for transit to be good enough' is a tactic employed by those who do not want transit to improve or tolls to ever be imposed. It's worked damn well so far.

I don't think I (or for that matter, I think, most people) can support tolling today when GO is running trains at peak hours and only every half hour on some lines. Decent transit does not have to mean a subway on every street. The TTC is already decent enough (though questionable at the fringes like in Malvern or Rexdale). But transit from the 905 into the core is not yet reliable, I think, to force people off the roads with tolls.

I really don't think it will take decades. If MO2020 is completed in its entirety, I think GO will be a decent enough alternative to allow for some kind of congestion charge in the core. To move to tolling all 400 series highways though, will take some time. Local transit really needs to be bulked up in the 905 to do that. The same goes for other cities in Ontario.

 

[afransen]

So we can think about imposing tolls in 15 years? What do you think the cumulative investment in new buildings will be in the GTA during that time, all predicated on the assumption of free highways?

 

[kEiThZ]

So we can think about imposing tolls in 15 years? What do you think the cumulative investment in new buildings will be in the GTA during that time, all predicated on the assumption of free highways?

15 years? I don't think it'll take that long to finish most of what GO has planned under MO2020. But certainly key improvements need to be made before tolls come in: all of the listed GO capacity improvements, extensions to Aurora Road/Richmond Hill, Bowmanville and Bradford, and the electrification of GO Lakeshore. New lines like Bolton, Havelock, Seaton and Crosstown aren't needed necessarily before tolls come in.

And one other big need to make transit a truly viable alternative: fare integration across the GTHA and common fare payment. Presto has the latter, but work needs to be done on the former.

All of that is achievable within 10 years or less. Much of that (save maybe electrifcation of GO Lakeshore) is achievable in 5 years or less. After that, I think most of the public might grudgingly accept some kind of congestion charge.

Full blown road tolls of all major highways though, would take a fair bit of time.

 

[Second_in_pie]

So we can think about imposing tolls in 15 years? What do you think the cumulative investment in new buildings will be in the GTA during that time, all predicated on the assumption of free highways?

I'd say 10 years at the very most. The Stouffville and Barrie lines'll be getting all day service this year (when's Stouffville getting it anyways?) and Lakeshore West should be getting half hour frequencies in this year, if not next. All day service on the Stouffville and Barrie lines may be the tell, but I think with transit investment, it'd be maybe 5 years until it gets up to 30 min frequencies. At that point, I'd call it ok to begin the tolls.
If TC gets cut and replaced, that's enough time to start a transit plan round 2, with more BRT and better bus services in the suburbs, more subways in high density corridors, and LRT where it's actually needed.