Highways in Canada

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by Mister F

No, but those roads are paid for by government subsidies. The vast majority of the Ontario road system is owned by municipalities and paid for by property taxes.

Last time I checked car owners paid property taxes, so are they not entitled to receive some benefits in return? (Unrelated: for the record, the topic we are arguing is NOT over entitlement to benefits from property tax, but who receives a proportionally larger piece)

Originally Posted by Mister F

Police and ambulances aren't cheap either.

Police seem more than able to pay a portion of their salaries through the issuance of traffic tickets. I think this may be one reason why many Canadian speed limits are set artificially low- far easier to find a bunch of people doing 120km/h on the highways and ticket them in bulk, rather than go on the hunt for the one truly dangerous driver doing 150+. They use the whole "safety" argument, as if people are completely incabable of judging the abilities of their vehicles and/or ajusting driving habits to suit conditions. The whole scheme, to me, looks like a method of generating work for them. But that's another argument for another day.

Ambulances are an essential service whether or not you have cars, and the marginal cost of deploying them to road accidents is likely minimal considering you already incur a significant fixed cost simply maintaining the system.

Originally Posted by vid

Then let's exclude the cleaning of city buses from the public transit budget in our comparison.

You need to have some sort of roadway or pathway to allow for provision of essential municipal services, and for transport by foot, handcart or bicycle. It has been this way since we first started building cities. Buses would be considered extras on top of this bare minimum, which is why I chose not to exclude cleaning them.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Police seem more than able to pay a portion of their salaries through the issuance of traffic tickets. I think this may be one reason why many Canadian speed limits are set artificially low- far easier to find a bunch of people doing 120km/h on the highways and ticket them in bulk, rather than go on the hunt for the one truly dangerous driver doing 150+. They use the whole "safety" argument, as if people are completely incabable of judging the abilities of their vehicles and/or ajusting driving habits to suit conditions. The whole scheme, to me, looks like a method of generating work for them. But that's another argument for another day.

Has that ever happened on a 400-series highway? I've never heard of people getting pulled over going 120 in Ontario.

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Last time I checked car owners paid property taxes, so are they not entitled to receive some benefits in return? (Unrelated: for the record, the topic we are arguing is NOT over entitlement to benefits from property tax, but who receives a proportionally larger piece)

As I said, roads are subsidized. As for who gets a proportionally larger piece, you're forgetting all the indirect costs that a car-oriented society inflicts. Health care costs, for example. People in car-oreinted areas tend to be fatter and less healthy than people in pedestrian oriented areas and they cost the health care system more.

Originally Posted by Wharn

Police seem more than able to pay a portion of their salaries through the issuance of traffic tickets.

Originally Posted by Wharn

Ambulances are an essential service whether or not you have cars, and the marginal cost of deploying them to road accidents is likely minimal considering you already incur a significant fixed cost simply maintaining the system.

A portion sure, but police don't pay for themselves by a long shot. They're one of the biggest items in any municipal budget. It's not just speed traps, it's responding to collisions, directing traffic when the power goes out, paying for all those cruisers, etc. Ambulance costs are also higher when more people drive. Road accidents are the leading cause of death for adults under 30 and second leading cause for people under 45. Fewer people driving means fewer ambulances responding to all those deaths and injuries.

[habfanman]

Originally Posted by Wharn

I was talking about the rest of the developed world outside of North America, not Montréal.

[habfanman]

Originally Posted by Wharn

You need to have some sort of roadway or pathway to allow for provision of essential municipal services, and for transport by foot, handcart or bicycle. It has been this way since we first started building cities. Buses would be considered extras on top of this bare minimum, which is why I chose not to exclude cleaning them.

In a city with proper public transit you don't need 16 lane highways, 8 lane arterials and 6 lane mini-highways running through neighbourhoods.

[habfanman]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

We are not in Europe. Compare Montréal and Toronto public transit systems to other North-American cities and we do pretty well.

Being slightly better than worst is hardly reason to celebrate.

[habfanman]

Originally Posted by Wharn

I think everyone is aware that landlords pay property taxes on their holdings, but that was not my point. Using Toronto as an example AGAIN, just because nobody cares about anywhere else:

Transit budget for the year 2010 was $1.3 billion, roadworks budget in 2007 was $230 million. Now according to Statscan (2006) the percentage of commuters who arrived at work using transit was 22.2%, while the number of people driving as a percentage of commuters was 71.1%. This includes people using GO Transit as well as a number of shitty feeder systems in the region. Years need not line up, we're just getting a rough idea.

Assume similar numbers in the City of Toronto. 31% ($440 million) of the TTC's operating budget came from subsidies in 2010. This subsidy alone, only for operations, is almost double what the road budget was. There is no way that 22% of the population, when paying similar property taxes, could fund this. The numbers don't add up: at best, each person pays for their own ride out of their own pocket. At worst, and this is what I suspect to be the case, drivers are subsidizing transit users. Since Toronto has one of the highest transit usage rates on the continent, I suspect the deal is similar elsewhere.

Sources:

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204281

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2008/03/04/car-toronto.html



Personally I think road tolls are a fantastic idea, as they allocate scarce resources to those who value them the most. Free Highways suffer from congestion partially because nobody is forced to consider how much their time is worth.

You're taking only one aspect into consideration, City Of Toronto road repairs, and conveniently ignoring the $300 million backlog.

What about new road construction? Provincial construction and repair? Federal? What about snow clearance? What about the cost of providing parking that's built into every commercial and residential development? The phenomenal cost of traffic accidents to the health system? What of the environmental and health costs associated with road runoff, disposing of old cars, tailpipe pollution?

What about the $5 billion that road congestion is costing the Toronto economy annually (and billions for every other city as well)
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/03/29/13399241.html

The cost of replacing the Turcot exchange in Montréal will be $3 billion (so, $5 billion). Just one interchange. We all have to pay for that whether we drive or not.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by habfanman

Being slightly better than worst is hardly reason to celebrate.

I suppose I see the glass half full....

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by habfanman

In a city with proper public transit you don't need 16 lane highways, 8 lane arterials and 6 lane mini-highways running through neighbourhoods.

8 lane arterials... like this one?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Boulevard+H...prP0BlMTeB0Ggr-kLLw&cbp=12,9.81,,0,-7.11

As far as I know University Avenue is the only 8 lane arterial in Toronto. And, unlike University Avenue, this example looks like it was built after the advent of the automobile... but hey, like Don Mills Road, you guys got some diamond lanes going. And by the way, last I checked Montreal was criss-crossed with highways, including one sitting in a trench. So really, it's just got its freeway lanes spread out along different routes.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by habfanman

You're taking only one aspect into consideration, City Of Toronto road repairs, and conveniently ignoring the $300 million backlog.

What about new road construction? Provincial construction and repair? Federal? What about snow clearance? What about the cost of providing parking that's built into every commercial and residential development? The phenomenal cost of traffic accidents to the health system? What of the environmental and health costs associated with road runoff, disposing of old cars, tailpipe pollution?

What about the $5 billion that road congestion is costing the Toronto economy annually (and billions for every other city as well)
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/03/29/13399241.html

The cost of replacing the Turcot exchange in Montréal will be $3 billion (so, $5 billion). Just one interchange. We all have to pay for that whether we drive or not.

But because of transit lanes andgrade-separated RT most of that $5 billion loss would be incurred by driv... actually on second thought you win. I don't really feel like arguing this anymore. Sucks for you guys and the Turcot, but how's that new private toll road coming along?

[Dwils01]

Highway 406 at the QEW in St. Catharines. Pic by me.

[Echoes]

Saskatoon's largest ever infrastructure project, Circle Drive South, consisting of a 6 lane bridge over the South Saskatchewan River, 5 interchanges, 3 railway grade separations, 10 km of freeway and sound attenuation continues.

Construction progress can be viewed via 3 live web cams (2 of which recently came online) found here: http://www.circledrive.ca/

[craner]

Great stuff for the 'Toon.

[sonysnob]

A new section of Highway 11 through Central Ontario is set to open this fall. On my way through to the north, I snapped a few photos of the new highway as it nears completion.

1. Highway Sign


2. Eagle Lake Road overpass looking north:


3. Future Hwy 124 overpass looking south:

[LeftCoaster]

Looks good, but is there really that much traffic between North Bay and Southern Ontario to justify twinning that stretch?

[6042905]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Looks good, but is there really that much traffic between North Bay and Southern Ontario to justify twinning that stretch?

Yes yes there is. Its a major trucking route that requires 2 lanes on each side.

Having a 2x2 lane highway shouldn't even be a question.

[go_leafs_go02]

It'll also help out summer weekend traffic to a certain extent.

It's a major trucking route, although even growing up in Southern Ontario for the first 20 years of my life, I never got past Bracebridge to the north.

[sonysnob]

There are busier roads then Hwy 11 in Ontario for sure, but Hwy 11 is definitely a very well traveled trunk highway, and it passes through an area that is ripe for future development. I'd wager that back in the 60s and 70s when Highway 11 was first twinned around Bracebridge and Huntsville that nobody would have figured how much those towns would have grown and prospered.

[habfanman]

Originally Posted by Wharn

8 lane arterials... like this one?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Boulevard+H...prP0BlMTeB0Ggr-kLLw&cbp=12,9.81,,0,-7.11

As far as I know University Avenue is the only 8 lane arterial in Toronto. And, unlike University Avenue, this example looks like it was built after the advent of the automobile... but hey, like Don Mills Road, you guys got some diamond lanes going. And by the way, last I checked Montreal was criss-crossed with highways, including one sitting in a trench. So really, it's just got its freeway lanes spread out along different routes.

You know, If all of our cities were as dense as you are, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Just thinking about how much time you've probably spent on Google street view makes me weep.

For the record, since you don't seem to comprehend, all of our cities INCLUDING Montréal, have far too many, too wide roads. By providing proper transit we could relieve the pressure and maybe even reduce highway capacity. I'm not picking on Toronto, Montréal is just as bad.

Now take your time.. reread what I just typed.. I'll give you a few moments..





Now here's a tough one: If University was built before the advent of the automobile, do you think that it was originally built as an 8 lane thoroughfare (to accommodate truly epic amounts of late 19th century horse traffic? Rolling felled trees sideways from Queen's Park to the lake? Chariot races?) or might it have been systematically widened over the years, wiping out whatever neighbourhoods existed at the time, to accommodate cars? (as also happened in Montréal.. GOT IT? UNDERSTAND? Not picking on Toronto. Montréal made the same mistakes. Are you comprehending?) Now, reread that bit.. read it again.. has it sunk in? Would you like to call a friend or ask the audience?

Try setting Google street view to 1890 and maybe you'll find the answer.

[vid]

University was built as a wide, tree lined and divided street from the start, and even though it is wide, it is lined with historic buildings. I can't think of any streets in Montreal that were built like that but I'm sure they exist.