[afransen]

Basically I'm saying that throwing extra taxes at drivers to add more transit options for people who already have more transit options than country or suburban people just pits people against each other. That's why it's so important to see and build transportation options regionally (in and out of major urban centres), because you want to bring more transit options to everyone, including the suburbs, yet if you do this by penalizing drivers, you're eliminating crucial transportation options for everyone, including people who live downtown.

We are doing just that with big investments in GO. I'd support it being even bigger. Funding will be an issue, so tolling can do double duty of reducing highways congestion at peak and supporting alternative travel modes for people using highways.

 

[sixrings]

I'm not either, so I'm not worried about that mobility data in the hands of the authorities.... so long as it doesn't end up in the hands of marketers. The fact that I drive to North York City Center three times a week should not lead to my being bombarded with ads from retailers on Yonge Street.

- Paul

That is my biggest annoyance of my data being used by people trying to profit on me. That said no one is framing me for some murder which is what a lot of the people who are afraid of sharing data seem to think is the inevitable end.

 

[sixrings]

There doesn't seem to be much appreciation of the Manhattanization of Toronto and the fact that living in Toronto is increasingly a luxury. It's the main reason property tax rates are so low in Toronto, as otherwise many people who grew up in Toronto wouldn't be able to afford to keep their homes. It's the reason New York subway fares are so low. Many people have to commute long distances by car for their jobs and they don't have reasonable transit options. You can say, "Well too bad, move downtown and sell your car", but many such people have families and couldn't handle the rent.

Basically I'm saying that throwing extra taxes at drivers to add more transit options for people who already have more transit options than country or suburban people just pits people against each other. That's why it's so important to see and build transportation options regionally (in and out of major urban centres), because you want to bring more transit options to everyone, including the suburbs, yet if you do this by penalizing drivers, you're eliminating crucial transportation options for everyone, including people who live downtown.

Not charging tolls though is just creating more traffic as people feel that driving is free and move out to Milton, Barrie, Whitby and then driving into Toronto causing gridlock. Yes go will help some of those commutes but not all. And no matter what it is very difficult to encourage transit use in the suburbs which is why we should be encouraging the Manhattanization of our city. At least then we can service people through transit or they can bike or walk to wherever they are going. This free road model is unsustainable.

I’d also like to quickly comment on Toronto’s taxes. A 1400 sq ft home in my area of Toronto is 1.6 million with 7000 taxes. Meanwhile a family member of mines 3600 sq ft home in Mississauga city centre is also 1.6 million with 9000 in taxes. So there definitely is a difference in taxes that Toronto is more. That said a 3600 square foot Toronto home would be north of 3 million where I live. So it’s actually cheaper living in Mississauga. At least bang for buck. Which is the problem. People live further because they figure they can drive for what is relatively little.

 

[ARG1]

Not charging tolls though is just creating more traffic as people feel that driving is free and move out to Milton, Barrie, Whitby and then driving into Toronto causing gridlock. Yes go will help some of those commutes but not all. And no matter what it is very difficult to encourage transit use in the suburbs which is why we should be encouraging the Manhattanization of our city. At least then we can service people through transit or they can bike or walk to wherever they are going. This free road model is unsustainable.

I’d also like to quickly comment on Toronto’s taxes. A 1400 sq ft home in my area of Toronto is 1.6 million with 7000 taxes. Meanwhile a family member of mines 3600 sq ft home in Mississauga city centre is also 1.6 million with 9000 in taxes. So there definitely is a difference in taxes that Toronto is more. That said a 3600 square foot Toronto home would be north of 3 million where I live. So it’s actually cheaper living in Mississauga. At least bang for buck. Which is the problem. People live further because they figure they can drive for what is relatively little.

You do this by creating proper transit alternatives that make people want to live their car, not hampering what already exists.

 

[sixrings]

You do this by creating proper transit alternatives that make people want to live their car, not hampering what already exists.

It is next to impossible to offer transit alternatives when people live in subdivisions and on large lots. The time it takes to walk to whatever bus stop is such a hindrance people just give up and drive. It is even worse when people’s destination is equally as rural as their starting point. It’s one thing for go to offer trains from the suburbs to downtown. But many people are travelling suburbs to suburbs making transit almost a impossible solution. The city should be encouraging as much of downtown to be where the work is taking place. It’s good to see office buildings finally being built. But it’s always going to be difficult solving the Scarborough to Mississauga commute. Or my wife who works near the airport and her co workers live in Barrie, Guelph, Hamilton. How does transit realistically solve those commutes. It rarely does.

anyways the point of tolls isn’t to punish people but to create funding to help build transit infrastructure which goes to the place the majority of people are heading. It isn’t for random destinations which no one can predict.

 

[gibsonm]

Again though, you're going to add costs to driving for people who don't have other viable commute options with the promise that the extra money collected will quickly provide realistic transit options that will liberate them from their vehicles. I don't buy it and I don't think the public does either, which is why the idea of tolling the DVP and Gardiner to pay for better transit and highways didn't fly with Joe public. Most people are keenly aware of their expenses in taxes and fees, and they see the strange government pet programs, waste, and mismanagement, and don't always believe that more taxes or fees will equate to better services. As mentioned prior, much of this revenue gets vaporized by wage increases and construction cost increases. Yes, if additional taxes or tolls are specifically dedicated to a new project, then we can track the money and we can say we're paying for an enhancement. More frequently such additional funds go into the general revenue slush fund. Was it worth making drivers pay more and discouraging trips that would bring more spending and jobs to the city? Did the higher cost of driving convert all those trips to transit rides? Did the transit substantially improve to make transit more viable for drivers?

We can do a lot to relieve congestion through incentives for flexible work schedules, moving to distance-based fares, and spending more of our transportation taxes on transit than new highways. I'm not opposed to tolling new highways. If you reallocate the capital public spending on highways to capital spending on transit, that's a big boost. Yes we'll still need to maintain existing non-tolled highways with public money, but drivers pay a lot of taxes through gas taxes and licensing to maintain them. Fair enough.

 

[sixrings]

Again though, you're going to add costs to driving for people who don't have other viable commute options with the promise that the extra money collected will quickly provide realistic transit options that will liberate them from their vehicles. I don't buy it and I don't think the public does either, which is why the idea of tolling the DVP and Gardiner to pay for better transit and highways didn't fly with Joe public. Most people are keenly aware of their expenses in taxes and fees, and they see the strange government pet programs, waste, and mismanagement, and don't always believe that more taxes or fees will equate to better services. As mentioned prior, much of this revenue gets vaporized by wage increases and construction cost increases. Yes, if additional taxes or tolls are specifically dedicated to a new project, then we can track the money and we can say we're paying for an enhancement. More frequently such additional funds go into the general revenue slush fund. Was it worth making drivers pay more and discouraging trips that would bring more spending and jobs to the city? Did the higher cost of driving convert all those trips to transit rides? Did the transit substantially improve to make transit more viable for drivers?

We can do a lot to relieve congestion through incentives for flexible work schedules, moving to distance-based fares, and spending more of our transportation taxes on transit than new highways. I'm not opposed to tolling new highways. If you reallocate the capital public spending on highways to capital spending on transit, that's a big boost. Yes we'll still need to maintain existing non-tolled highways with public money, but drivers pay a lot of taxes through gas taxes and licensing to maintain them. Fair enough.

So your fear is that the tolls won’t actually go to transit so therefore do nothing at all and it’s hope for the best. You also have fears that increased road prices will stop people from coming to the big city although places like LA and NYC haven’t seemed to have the issues you suggest will happen with additional taxes. I guess I’m an optimist, you’re a pessimist or just hate paying taxes.

 

[gibsonm]

No. I think we can do a lot to reduce congestion and enhance transit through clever policies such as distance-based fares, incentivizing staggered commute times and flexible work schedules, as well as using capital transportation funds to build new transit rather than highways. Adding to people's cost of living through added fees and taxes isn't always the answer. For certain enhancements, perhaps. I'd support tolling new highways. I don't support transit fare increases beyond the level of inflation because public transit should be affordable. GO is outrageous. Zone-based fares and RER enhancements should get a lot more commuters onto transit, which should raise revenues without raising fares. In fact, under a regional zone-based fare system like TRBOT's, train fares should decrease.

 

[sixrings]

No. I think we can do a lot to reduce congestion and enhance transit through clever policies such as distance-based fares, incentivizing staggered commute times and flexible work schedules, as well as using capital transportation funds to build new transit rather than highways. Adding to people's cost of living through added fees and taxes isn't always the answer. For certain enhancements, perhaps. I'd support tolling new highways. I don't support transit fare increases beyond the level of inflation because public transit should be affordable. GO is outrageous. Zone-based fares and RER enhancements should get a lot more commuters onto transit, which should raise revenues without raising fares. In fact, under a regional zone-based fare system like TRBOT's, train fares should decrease.

It’s up to private businesses to allow their staff to work from home or stagger their work hours. You don’t need government incentives for that. The gridlock has been the incentive over the last decade. My wife’s company moved to allowing people to work from 9-5 then to 8-4 then to 7-3 all in attempts to beat traffic. Finally post COVID they are going to be working from home.

what new highways are being built exactly? The biggest cost is maintain the current highways we have.

wouldn’t distance based fares be an attack on the poor the same way you believe tolls are. It’s one thing to say both parties should pay more but now you’re just advocating for the transit rider to pay more? That seems a bit counter intuitive.

I’m still confused why we can’t do all the things you have suggested and the one thing which we have suggested... TOLLs. Or are we supposed to just talk in circles until you get everything you want and concede out of exhaustion that you are 100% correct and we were clearly wrong the entire time.

 

[ARG1]

It is next to impossible to offer transit alternatives when people live in subdivisions and on large lots. The time it takes to walk to whatever bus stop is such a hindrance people just give up and drive. It is even worse when people’s destination is equally as rural as their starting point. It’s one thing for go to offer trains from the suburbs to downtown. But many people are travelling suburbs to suburbs making transit almost a impossible solution. The city should be encouraging as much of downtown to be where the work is taking place. It’s good to see office buildings finally being built. But it’s always going to be difficult solving the Scarborough to Mississauga commute. Or my wife who works near the airport and her co workers live in Barrie, Guelph, Hamilton. How does transit realistically solve those commutes. It rarely does.

anyways the point of tolls isn’t to punish people but to create funding to help build transit infrastructure which goes to the place the majority of people are heading. It isn’t for random destinations which no one can predict.

The answer is park and rides. No you cannot completely remove the car from the equation, but you can make the car a last mile solution, or partner up with services like Uber for your last mile solution. GO is proof that this can work really really well. To reach downtown Toronto from Maple, a train will get you there in 34 mins. With GO RER, Metrolinx claims that number will go down to 20 mins. The same trip right now would be 45 mins by car and it is currently off peak times where traffic is clear. Sure this is a very specific example that only applies to people who live right next to the GO station, but in general the vehicle catchment area around GO stations is quite large and they would be a much faster route for many even if they don't live near a station. Part of why GO RER is such a transformational project is that it will turn GO from a Park and Ride service that only serves peak hour commuters to a service that serves peak hour commuters, off peak hour visitors, and increase local access to frequent transit. Generally it could take you 15 mins to drive 7km down suburban arterials which means if you have a car and you live within a 7km radius around Maple, at best with GO RER reaching downtown will take 35 mins, and at worst, 50 minutes if you arrive right when the train leaves. In general though it will be a faster AND CHEAPER trip since that's less you have to pay for gas, that's less you have to pay for maintenance, that's more time you can spend working or doing other things while waiting on a train, and remember, I am comparing the GO train to OFF PEAK driving times where traffic is clear. Get to on peak times and the deal is even sweeter, which makes sense considering that's the market GO has been successfully catering to for the past 54 years.

 

[sixrings]

The answer is park and rides. No you cannot completely remove the car from the equation, but you can make the car a last mile solution, or partner up with services like Uber for your last mile solution. GO is proof that this can work really really well. To reach downtown Toronto from Maple, a train will get you there in 34 mins. With GO RER, Metrolinx claims that number will go down to 20 mins. The same trip right now would be 45 mins by car and it is currently off peak times where traffic is clear. Sure this is a very specific example that only applies to people who live right next to the GO station, but in general the vehicle catchment area around GO stations is quite large and they would be a much faster route for many even if they don't live near a station. Part of why GO RER is such a transformational project is that it will turn GO from a Park and Ride service that only serves peak hour commuters to a service that serves peak hour commuters, off peak hour visitors, and increase local access to frequent transit. Generally it could take you 15 mins to drive 7km down suburban arterials which means if you have a car and you live within a 7km radius around Maple, at best with GO RER reaching downtown will take 35 mins, and at worst, 50 minutes if you arrive right when the train leaves. In general though it will be a faster AND CHEAPER trip since that's less you have to pay for gas, that's less you have to pay for maintenance, that's more time you can spend working or doing other things while waiting on a train, and remember, I am comparing the GO train to OFF PEAK driving times where traffic is clear. Get to on peak times and the deal is even sweeter, which makes sense considering that's the market GO has been successfully catering to for the past 54 years.

That is all fine. But a lot of the traffic is just going between suburb to suburb which there would be no park and ride options because it’s next to impossible to service. I am perfectly happy though with go expanding.

btw if people are only commuting the last mile by car then why exactly would they oppose a toll on highways. Likely they wouldn’t be using them very much by your own examples.

 

[afransen]

anyways the point of tolls isn’t to punish people but to create funding to help build transit infrastructure which goes to the place the majority of people are heading.

Tolls aren't about being punished for driving. People are punished for driving today by getting stuck in jams. It is about giving people incentives to make different decisions. A small percentage of people changing their behaviour can result in big changes in congestion.

 

[gibsonm]

It’s up to private businesses to allow their staff to work from home or stagger their work hours. You don’t need government incentives for that. The gridlock has been the incentive over the last decade. My wife’s company moved to allowing people to work from 9-5 then to 8-4 then to 7-3 all in attempts to beat traffic. Finally post COVID they are going to be working from home.

what new highways are being built exactly? The biggest cost is maintain the current highways we have.

wouldn’t distance based fares be an attack on the poor the same way you believe tolls are. It’s one thing to say both parties should pay more but now you’re just advocating for the transit rider to pay more? That seems a bit counter intuitive.

I’m still confused why we can’t do all the things you have suggested and the one thing which we have suggested... TOLLs. Or are we supposed to just talk in circles until you get everything you want and concede out of exhaustion that you are 100% correct and we were clearly wrong the entire time.

I'm not understanding. Under TRBOT's regional zone-based fare.structure TTC riders pay the same fare as they do now to travel the same area. The difference is riders who live in Etobicoke will be able to travel to Square One and vice versa for that same fare cost because the zones are adjacent. It enhances business between adjacent zones no matter what city the zones happen to be in. It will substantially increase ridership yet also disperse it across the network to prevent congestion and choke points.

 

[afransen]

Was it worth making drivers pay more and discouraging trips that would bring more spending and jobs to the city?

Those trips are being discouraged now by horrendous traffic. Can you at least acknowledge this?

 

[afransen]

The answer is park and rides.

You can never build parking lots big enough.