Highways In Canada II

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

At the end of the day the GTA is going from 6 to 10 million people in the next 20-30 years with 0 plans for new east-west transportation capacity. Something has to give, be it this or something else, or ideally, both.

We need to seriously evaluate the alternate option: of slowing down population growth. The GTA has net negative domestic migration so if immigration was slowed enough, the GTA's population growth could flatline for a generation.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Don’t stop the growth, but let it happen elsewhere, like London & Windsor in SWO, KWCG at the western fringe of GTA, Belleville & Kingston & Ottawa in the east, Sudbury in NEO, and Thunder Bay in NWO (although I’m not too confident about the last two).

Kenora’s too far from Winnipeg to become a bedroom community.

London is so far behind in terms of transportation infrastructure. I was there last week, it’s awful to drive in on a weekend and transit service is almost nonexistent (compared to what I’m used to in Vancouver). London has done almost nothing to deal with the major population growth since 2020.

The growth is everywhere in Southern Ontario.

[Dengler Avenue]

By the way, I thought that this was just a joke too, until some MTO engineers said that MTO’s actually been at it (planning-wise) for at least a decade.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

At the end of the day the GTA is going from 6 to 10 million people in the next 20-30 years with 0 plans for new east-west transportation capacity. Something has to give, be it this or something else, or ideally, both.

The idea that additional population growth requires additional road capacity always sounds very reasonable, but people often overlook how much capacity there already is relative to the population. Very few major world cities have road corridors that are as much as 18 lanes wide like the 401. For instance, the Periphique in Paris, the major bypass route around the municipality, tops out at around 12 lanes when including the collectors (the core part is mostly 6-8 lanes). So the 401 is 50% wider despite the GTA being half the size of the Ile-de-France region. And the 10 lane 407 also has a fair amount of room around it to allow for widening if the need ever did arise. And that's combined with our generally much wider suburban arterials. It's true that some have more highways to partially make up for each being smaller, but the total number of lanes still tends to be lower, and especially so relative to the population.

People underestimate just how much a modal shift can affect things. Transportation with general road space just takes up so much space it's hard for people to really conceive how much more one can carry with other modes. With road capacity in North America, it's often more a matter of growing into it rather than growing out of it. But if you look at many leading world cities and compare their road capacity to ours and their rail capacity to ours, it doesn't take long to see where we're actually lacking. For example, Paris has an east-west rail link (RER A) that carries about as many riders per day as the entire Toronto subway and GO network combined. Yet you could probably built 5 of such lines for the cost of the same road capacity.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that no new roads will ever be needed. Just that we overestimate how much capacity we need due to the congestion caused by our current inefficient modal split.

[ssiguy]

The concerns about productivity losses due to congestion is a valid one, however, that is due to transports getting stuck in traffic not cars. An easy way to fix this issue is to make the 407 toll-free for transport trucks. The Spanish owner of the 407 would actually lose very little money because very little transports actually use it due to it's astronomical tolls. Contrary to popular belief, most truckers are not employed by huge companies but rather are independent contractors so those tolls come right out of the truckers wallet. If a trucker wants to by-pass Toronto from the western portions of the 401/QEW to Oshawa, that a numbing $200 each way. At $30/hr that's almost their entire day's wages being sent to the 407 toll owner. Who in their right mind would do that?

If that wouldn't fly in court, Queen's Park could offer huge tax credits to transports for using the 407. This would effectively be a subsidy by QP but the expense would be pennies on the dollar compared to building a tunnel or even a elevated 401 structure. They, of course, could also build a passenger rail line along the 407 from Oshawa to Milton to relieve actually car traffic on the 401 or at least give people a viable alternative to it.

Either way, I don't think anyone has to worry. There is no way, in hell, that this will ever get built. From both a financial and logistical perspective it's an absolute impossibility.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The idea that additional population growth requires additional road capacity always sounds very reasonable, but people often overlook how much capacity there already is relative to the population. Very few major world cities have road corridors that are as much as 18 lanes wide like the 401. For instance, the Periphique in Paris, the major bypass route around the municipality, tops out at around 12 lanes when including the collectors (the core part is mostly 6-8 lanes). So the 401 is 50% wider despite the GTA being half the size of the Ile-de-France region. And the 10 lane 407 also has a fair amount of room around it to allow for widening if the need ever did arise. And that's combined with our generally much wider suburban arterials. It's true that some have more highways to partially make up for each being smaller, but the total number of lanes still tends to be lower, and especially so relative to the population.

People underestimate just how much a modal shift can affect things. Transportation with general road space just takes up so much space it's hard for people to really conceive how much more one can carry with other modes. With road capacity in North America, it's often more a matter of growing into it rather than growing out of it. But if you look at many leading world cities and compare their road capacity to ours and their rail capacity to ours, it doesn't take long to see where we're actually lacking. For example, Paris has an east-west rail link (RER A) that carries about as many riders per day as the entire Toronto subway and GO network combined. Yet you could probably built 5 of such lines for the cost of the same road capacity.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that no new roads will ever be needed. Just that we overestimate how much capacity we need due to the congestion caused by our current inefficient modal split.

To be clear, Paris has way more auto capacity across it's metro network. It has 3 ring roads - Toronto has two, and Paris is not on the ocean / a Great Lake so it's ring roads actually go all the way around the city.

This effectively creates 6 routes through / around Paris. Toronto has two.

Paris has by a quick count 34 freeway lanes of capacity across the metro in the east-west direction.

Toronto has 24, and 10 of them are heavily tolled to reduce their effective capacity.

Paris also has an immensely denser transit network.

Paris has 11 million people in it so is significantly larger than Toronto, but is across 18,000km2 vs. the GTA's 7,000km2. Once you grow the GTA area out to roughly match the area of the Paris metro, you get a city closer to 9-10 million and suddenly it's not far behind Paris.

Damn, doing that comparison really highlights how wildly inadequate Toronto's infrastructure really is. I don't think many can even comprehend the sheer depths of Toronto's infrastructure deficit. It's a city of 8 million people operating on infrastructure which is generally similar to what it operated on with 3 million people in the 1970's. It's nuts.

There is the exact same number of untolled expressway lanes across the GTA as there was in 1968. That is 56 years ago. The GTA's population has more than doubled in that time. Some times we have to acknowledge that maybe some more capacity is necessary.

Modal shifts can indeed make a huge difference, but Toronto already has a very high transit modal share by North American standards, or even European standards (European cities are much better at cycling and especially walking modal shares, however). Plus the Toronto economy is very diverse and it's suburbs especially are very manufacturing and logistics focused - these industries simply need roads and cannot be supplemented by transit. Toronto has done an excellent job of focusing most transit-supportive employment in the downtown over the last 20 years which has resulted in a huge shift of whit-collar workers to transit compared to the 1990's, but the city has a huge blue-collar economy which needs roads to function, and which is being absolutely choke-hold strangled right now by congestion.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

To be clear, Paris has way more auto capacity across it's metro network. It has 3 ring roads - Toronto has two, and Paris is not on the ocean / a Great Lake so it's ring roads actually go all the way around the city.

This effectively creates 6 routes through / around Paris. Toronto has two.

Paris has by a quick count 34 freeway lanes of capacity across the metro in the east-west direction.

Toronto has 24, and 10 of them are heavily tolled to reduce their effective capacity.

Paris also has an immensely denser transit network.

Paris has 11 million people in it so is significantly larger than Toronto, but is across 18,000km2 vs. the GTA's 7,000km2. Once you grow the GTA area out to roughly match the area of the Paris metro, you get a city closer to 9-10 million and suddenly it's not far behind Paris.

Damn, doing that comparison really highlights how wildly inadequate Toronto's infrastructure really is. I don't think many can even comprehend the sheer depths of Toronto's infrastructure deficit. It's a city of 8 million people operating on infrastructure which is generally similar to what it operated on with 3 million people in the 1970's. It's nuts.

There is the exact same number of untolled expressway lanes across the GTA as there was in 1968. That is 56 years ago. The GTA's population has more than doubled in that time. Some times we have to acknowledge that maybe some more capacity is necessary.

Modal shifts can indeed make a huge difference, but Toronto already has a very high transit modal share by North American standards, or even European standards (European cities are much better at cycling and especially walking modal shares, however). Plus the Toronto economy is very diverse and it's suburbs especially are very manufacturing and logistics focused - these industries simply need roads and cannot be supplemented by transit. Toronto has done an excellent job of focusing most transit-supportive employment in the downtown over the last 20 years which has resulted in a huge shift of whit-collar workers to transit compared to the 1990's, but the city has a huge blue-collar economy which needs roads to function, and which is being absolutely choke-hold strangled right now by congestion.

A lot has been brought up of Toronto's success in achieving a high transit modal share, but I think a lot of that has to do with the lack of alternatives and people being forced to choose the least worst option. I think a lot of SSPers who infrequently visit Toronto don't understand how large and unwieldy it has become. At this point, any investment in transport infrastructure is welcome and bickering over the allocation between roads and transit just seems like a waste of precious time.

[haljackey]

Ya this is going to be a vision and nothing more like the previous Liberal Government's 350km/h HSR plan to London that vanished from the face of the Earth after the 2014 Ontario election.

Fixing bottlenecks on the 401 and rebuilding the major freeway interchanges to handle more capacity would cost a fraction of this tunnel proposal and give significant relief to the 401's traffic flow - which in turn will benefit the rest of the 400 series in the area.

If the issue is with logistics/freight trucking and transit, you could look into building HOV and truck only lanes. The HOV could be a 4 lane viaduct overtop of the centre of the highway while the innermost left express lane could be used for long-distance 18 wheelers only.

Basically throw money at what will give you the most benefit for the lowest cost.

If this tunnel thing happens, even just a portion of it would be baffling and take a decade or more to construct. I could see maybe something under Pearson or a double-deck connector between the 427 and 409 but that's really it.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Dougie appears to have lost it. Time to get the boys in the white coats and carrying a straight jacket to pay him a visit.

Well Ford knows that he's toast if the PP Conservatives get in federally. I don't know what's up with him lately. Maybe he's trying to see if he can get federal funding promises in the upcoming federal election?!?

Ford used to criticize Kathleen Wynne for "reckless spending" yet he is proposing spending that is WAY beyond what her government spent. His government right now is spending more than hers ever did even with inflation taken into account. There are already the Hwy 413 and Bradford Bypass projects and many huge subway and other transit project starting or under construction.

[shreddog]

Wrong thread

[niwell]

I was driving EB on the 401 this morning en route to Napanee. Smooth sailing my way but the WB lanes were already clogged, which isn't surprising. Even at this time though a significant portion of the traffic was trucking - addressing the freight issue seems to be a quicker win vs the tunneling under the 401 idea. Longer term this could involve elevated structures along key sections and a discount for 407 travel.

If we were going to do the tunneling route similar to Sydney I'd prefer the focus to be on other connections. A crosstown route along the lines of what Nouvellcosse mentioned above makes more sense than trying to cram more capacity in the 401 corridor. Link up the end of Black Creek while they are at it - the could alleviate a lot of local crosstown traffic freeing up longer distance drivers on the 401. Tolled would probably be inevitable but if it's Provincially owned these could be a reasonable rate compared to the current 407. Couple this with a completed 407 transitway as rail and revive the Crosstown GO idea as part of RER and we'd have a pretty good overall network.

Worth noting that Sydney is a city that has an even more limited highway network than Toronto, even with WestConnex. And is similarly crippled by awful traffic, though their commuter rail network is significantly better (at least until GO RER comes online). That said my relatives from the Southern Suburbs of Sydney just spent a couple weeks in Toronto before we went to the US and were shocked at how bad Toronto traffic was compared to a decade ago, though they were certainly used to the level of congestion. My uncle lived here until the 90s and used to come back more frequently so is very familiar with Toronto.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

To be clear, Paris has way more auto capacity across it's metro network. It has 3 ring roads - Toronto has two, and Paris is not on the ocean / a Great Lake so it's ring roads actually go all the way around the city.

This effectively creates 6 routes through / around Paris. Toronto has two.

Paris has by a quick count 34 freeway lanes of capacity across the metro in the east-west direction.

Toronto has 24, and 10 of them are heavily tolled to reduce their effective capacity.

Paris also has an immensely denser transit network.

Paris has 11 million people in it so is significantly larger than Toronto, but is across 18,000km2 vs. the GTA's 7,000km2. Once you grow the GTA area out to roughly match the area of the Paris metro, you get a city closer to 9-10 million and suddenly it's not far behind Paris.

Damn, doing that comparison really highlights how wildly inadequate Toronto's infrastructure really is. I don't think many can even comprehend the sheer depths of Toronto's infrastructure deficit. It's a city of 8 million people operating on infrastructure which is generally similar to what it operated on with 3 million people in the 1970's. It's nuts.

There is the exact same number of untolled expressway lanes across the GTA as there was in 1968. That is 56 years ago. The GTA's population has more than doubled in that time. Some times we have to acknowledge that maybe some more capacity is necessary.

Modal shifts can indeed make a huge difference, but Toronto already has a very high transit modal share by North American standards, or even European standards (European cities are much better at cycling and especially walking modal shares, however). Plus the Toronto economy is very diverse and it's suburbs especially are very manufacturing and logistics focused - these industries simply need roads and cannot be supplemented by transit. Toronto has done an excellent job of focusing most transit-supportive employment in the downtown over the last 20 years which has resulted in a huge shift of whit-collar workers to transit compared to the 1990's, but the city has a huge blue-collar economy which needs roads to function, and which is being absolutely choke-hold strangled right now by congestion.

I'm not seeing the level of Paris capacity that you're seeing. The only other things I see that could be described as a loop are the A86 but it's quite small with around 4-6 lanes and the A104, N104, N184 system but they're also not very wide. If we counted those it would bring the total closer to Toronto but barely. And that's still not counting Toronto's suburban arterials being much higher capacity than theirs or that the Gardiner/QEW also provide E-W connectivity through part of the metro area. But it's true that having the city centre in the actual geographic centre changes the dynamic since they serve people coming from all directions.

And while it's true that Toronto has a diverse economy which includes manufacturing, so does greater Paris so that's neither here nor there. No one is suggesting that we get rid of the existing highways so there's plenty of capacity for commercial vehicles if it isn't clogged by commuters. Wiki linked a Ont gov report showing that about 50% of 401 users are heading into town and just use it to get to the Gardiner, Allen, 427 etc. so they're just using a cross town highway since there isn't a more direct route. But they'd be well served by a GO expansion.

But yes, a vague, general statement like "Some times we have to acknowledge that maybe some more capacity is necessary" is certainly true. But that add nothing to the discussion about how much capacity is needed and when which are the relevant questions. In this case, we don't have to acknowledge needing more road capacity now because we don't. Fact is, NA was in a car-centric frenzy for several decades post-war and overbuilt roads to an insane degree while under-building transit. It's frustrating when people gloss over that reality with platitudes.

[MolsonExport]

Seems like Ford is just throwing jello against the wall, to see if it will stick.

The idea of a 55km second 401 under the 401 sounds insane. Where will the traffic go once it exits the 401? If it is through traffic, why not route this traffic outside of Toronto (for example, by removing or severely reducing the asininely-high tolls on the 407)?.

What would it cost? Hundreds of billions? How long would it take? Decades? What extreme congestion will it cause during construction? Standstill traffic on the 401 and access/egress routes?

[1overcosc]

Reducing/eliminating the 407 tolls isn't the panacea the opposition parties are asserting it to be. The 407 doesn't actually have that much spare capacity.

[MolsonExport]

so we should gamble on a $200 billion (or more?) highway tunnel?

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Ya this is going to be a vision and nothing more like the previous Liberal Government's 350km/h HSR plan to London that vanished from the face of the Earth after the 2014 Ontario election.

Fixing bottlenecks on the 401 and rebuilding the major freeway interchanges to handle more capacity would cost a fraction of this tunnel proposal and give significant relief to the 401's traffic flow - which in turn will benefit the rest of the 400 series in the area.

If the issue is with logistics/freight trucking and transit, you could look into building HOV and truck only lanes. The HOV could be a 4 lane viaduct overtop of the centre of the highway while the innermost left express lane could be used for long-distance 18 wheelers only.

Basically throw money at what will give you the most benefit for the lowest cost.

If this tunnel thing happens, even just a portion of it would be baffling and take a decade or more to construct. I could see maybe something under Pearson or a double-deck connector between the 427 and 409 but that's really it.

I believe fixing bottlenecks is the way to go, and I think Ontario has done a great job with this in the past few years with adding lanes west of Toronto, notably between the 407 and Milton and then between Highways 24 and 8 in Cambridge. Those used to be two of the worst stretches of 401 for congestion between London and Toronto, and from what I’ve seen the past couple times I’ve been that way, it flows so much better than before.

And before people cry “induced demand”, I’m just not seeing it on these two sections of 401. Where’s all the extra traffic and new congestion we were promised by the environmentalists and the Not Just Bikes crowd?

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

so we should gamble on a $200 billion (or more?) highway tunnel?

Maybe a tenth that.

Road tunnels are expensive but not nearly as wild as many are assuming Here.

Induced demand as a whole is wildly misrepresented in media. It’s a real phenomenon but far from what it’s portrayed as.

[TimB09]

Doug Ford trying for Canada's "Big Dig" project!

[biguc]

Wasn't the Sheppard subway originally supposed to be 401 relief? Why not try that again but actually try this time?

[MolsonExport]

I dunno. The Big Dig (Boston) was a notorious financial fiasco.

The cost of the planned Scarborough Subway extension has ballooned.

The Ontario line is planned for completion in 2031, and was estimated to cost upwards of $10.9 billion in the 2019 provincial budget, though updated reports say it could be as high as $19 billion.

There are no road tunnels of similar length in the world. Underground highways are much more expensive than underground rail. How would the interchanges work?