HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1921  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2013, 12:36 PM
CaptainKirk CaptainKirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattgrande View Post
You clearly haven't driven through Chicago... That place is toll central.
Tools are avoidable there if you opt for I-94, but the I-80/90 route has a fair amount of tolls, but all reasonably priced.

It's seems much more fair than the exorbitant prices of the 407, which is nothing but a highway sold for the rich.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1922  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2013, 1:18 PM
mattgrande's Avatar
mattgrande mattgrande is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,245
I kinda feel like the 407 is "luxury priced." I'm hoping that if they implement tolls on the 401/403/QEW that they will be priced cheaper than the 407...
__________________
Livin' At The Corner Of Dude And Catastrophe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1923  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2013, 7:26 PM
NortheastWind NortheastWind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattgrande View Post
I kinda feel like the 407 is "luxury priced." I'm hoping that if they implement tolls on the 401/403/QEW that they will be priced cheaper than the 407...
Well that's one way of reducing traffic congestion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1924  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2013, 9:31 PM
Jon Dalton's Avatar
Jon Dalton Jon Dalton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,778
Metrolinx suggested that a 10 cent per km highway toll on 400 series highways would provide $1.5 billion in revenue - almost enough to cover the Big Move. That doesn't seem outrageous to me, considering the dual benefit of reduced traffic congestion and transit alternatives.

Doing some quick Google mapping, driving the 401 from 427 to DVP would cost $2.33 with a 10 cent/km toll. If you did that trip today, how much would you waste in traffic? (stop and go driving guzzles gas). I would not be surprised if it could be empirically proven that this toll would pay for itself through increased fuel economy due to improved traffic flow.

Not to mention that even if your time is worth minimum wage, paying the toll would give you a few hundred percent return in saved time. I drove this stretch several times a week during the late afternoon for a stretch in the mid-2000's, and it was not uncommon to spend an hour on the 401. Every GTA driver knows this.
__________________
360º of Hamilton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1925  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2013, 11:58 PM
durandy durandy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 620
Ontario needs road pricing, not more revenues

By Andrew Coyne, Postmedia News April 3, 2013 7:06 PM

http://www.canada.com/Ontario+needs+road+pricing+more+revenues/8191448/story.html#ixzz2PRpYihSx

Could road tolls be part of Ontario’s future? Remarkably, an idea long derided as outlandish, political suicide at best, is shaping up to be one of the central issues in the next provincial election. Yet such are the ways of politics that both sides have managed to get it wrong.

...

The point of a toll, like any price, is to charge people the full cost of their use of resources. The point of a subsidy is to hide the true costs from them: in this case, to induce more people to use transit than would do if they had to pay the full price.

But that’s a good thing, isn’t it? Don’t we want to encourage more people to use transit? No, we don’t. What we are trying to do, remember, is to reduce congestion. Paying people to ride the bus or the train, most of whom would have done so anyway, is a costly and roundabout way to go about it, with horrendous side-effects.

It’s unnecessary, for starters. Start charging drivers the full cost to use the roads, and you will automatically tip the balance in favour of transit for many of them (and, as a bonus, speed up the trip: Not only do drivers pay now to use the “free” roads, in the form of time stuck in traffic, so do bus passengers).

What is more, subsidizing transit contributes to another problem more typically blamed on private cars: sprawl. If people had to pay the full cost to use the roads, they would be less likely to live miles out of town, more likely to want to live near where they worked, with all of the associated benefits of density. But just as subsidizing the roads artificially encourages the commuter lifestyle, so does subsidizing transit. The Metrolinx scheme would help to create the very problem it seeks to “solve.”

Indeed, subsidizing transit isn’t even a very good way to get people to use transit. The biggest reason most people don’t take the bus isn’t the price. It’s the deep unpleasantness of the experience. If we were really serious about encouraging transit use, we wouldn’t entrust it to clanking great statist monopolies like (God save us) the Toronto Transit Commission. We’d turn it over to entrepreneurs whose livelihoods depended on finding ways to make it more comfortable and convenient.

Or if the province is determined to underwrite the Metrolinx adventure, it can find the revenues within its existing budget: on this I am with Wynne’s critics. She is brave and right to raise the subject of tolls, and they are wrong to oppose it. But she is wrong to allow a perfectly good idea to be painted as a revenue grab. The province doesn’t need more revenues. It needs road pricing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1926  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2013, 6:47 AM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,348
I wouldn't be opposed to tolls if the price was right. At .10 cents a km it would cost me $30 per week to get to work and back, a price I am not willing to pay. I would avoid using the highway and take city streets at that price and I am sure alot of others would do the same. All tolls are going to do is take people off the express routes and cause further congestion on streets not equipped for that volume of traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1927  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2013, 12:03 PM
flar's Avatar
flar flar is offline
..........
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 15,740
^^And when it takes three times as long to get to work people would start to reconsider taking the back roads
__________________
RECENT PHOTOS:
TORONTOSAN FRANCISCO ROCHESTER, NYHAMILTONGODERICH, ON WHEATLEY, ONCOBOURG, ONLAS VEGASLOS ANGELES
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1928  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2013, 12:13 PM
CaptainKirk CaptainKirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by flar View Post
^^And when it takes three times as long to get to work people would start to reconsider taking the back roads
I'm ok with paying and those rates sound reasonable.

I'd much prefer to have it "hidden" at the pump in a gas tax.

It's more efficient in that it wouldn't cost as much to administer, and it essentially has the same people paying.

But then again, I wonder if any toll would create an incentive to use public transit but deterring highway use a little
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1929  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2013, 12:58 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,368
I'd prefer quick and easy 1 percent sales tax, either a separate sales tax or increase the HST. No up front cost associated like installing tolls. All municipalities would get funding for infrastructure money and those within the Metrolinx area all or a portion goes to them.

Dalton really missed the boat when Harper reduced the GST. He should have increased the PST by 1 percent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1930  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2013, 3:53 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,729
It will be interesting to see how this discussion unfolds over the next couple of months.

Courtesy StatsCan's Commuting to work: Results of the 2010 General Social Survey:

Satisfaction with time spent commuting to work, 2010

Census metropolitan areas of 250,000 to 999,999 residents

Very dissatisfied or dissatisfied: 14%
Satisfied: 48%
Very satisfied: 38%


When 86% of your working-age population is happy with their commute, promising escape from gridlock purgatory has no real meaning, and “revenue tools” becomes a challenging sell. We saw that reflected in August/September 2011 polling from Metrolinx/Environics, wherein 70% of those surveyed indicated that they saw no need for new transit levies, a finding most pronounced outside of the City of Toronto: “rejection of all four [ie. parking levy, sales tax, gas tax, road tolls] is most evident among those living in Hamilton and York Regions”.

This attitude may be shaped by Hamilton residents’ habitual movements. The Centre for Community Study's StatsCan reheat Where Hamilton Works, which shows that, as of the 2006 census, almost five in six Hamilton workers remained in the Hamilton CMA for work.

In order to close the sale in the GHA, Metrolinx needs to demonstrate a holistic understanding of the idiosyncratic regional concerns at this end of the 905.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1931  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2013, 7:45 PM
HillStreetBlues HillStreetBlues is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: KW/Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 995
I agree completely with Coyne's editorial posted above. It shouldn't be framed as being about revenue, it should be about finding a way to make the beneficiary pay a higher proportion of the cost of a service. Right now, costs of roadways are hidden to motorists, and subsidized by other taxpayers- so how can road-users be expected to make sound decisions about their usage?

Ten cents a kilometre sounds reasonable. Okay, that's twenty dollars a week for someone who lives twenty kilometres from work, which is a considerable sum, but there are options to reduce that. One could take non-arterial roads, lengthening the trip. Or take public transit. Or carpool. Or live closer to work. Different people will choose a different option, but it will all serve to reduce congestion and make things more efficient.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1932  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 6:12 AM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguy1231 View Post
I wouldn't be opposed to tolls if the price was right. At .10 cents a km it would cost me $30 per week to get to work and back, a price I am not willing to pay. I would avoid using the highway and take city streets at that price and I am sure alot of others would do the same. All tolls are going to do is take people off the express routes and cause further congestion on streets not equipped for that volume of traffic.
This kind of selfish thinking is so typical. Who's paying that $30 now? People who don't commute 300km/week to work. On your behalf.

__________________
no clever signoff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1933  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 7:56 AM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by coalminecanary View Post
This kind of selfish thinking is so typical. Who's paying that $30 now? People who don't commute 300km/week to work. On your behalf.

I'd like not to commute to work at all, unfortunately there are no decent paying jobs in this city.

Selfish, your dam right, I already pay ridiculous amounts of taxes for certain services that I am not getting so we can support the welfare losers who live in this city. I am also paying 11.9 cents a liter in provincial gas taxes that are supposed to be going to roads in this province, but are being redirected elsewhere. I don't enjoy paying half my earnings in taxes of one form or another and getting nothing in return.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1934  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 7:57 AM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by flar View Post
^^And when it takes three times as long to get to work people would start to reconsider taking the back roads
Better three hours in my own car than three hours on buses.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1935  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 12:32 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,729
Again from StatsCan's Commuting to work: Results of the 2010 General Social Survey:

Commuting takes longer by public transit than by car

How someone gets to work is associated with how long it takes to get to work. Workers who walk or bicycle to work have shorter trips (14 minutes on average) while public transit users spend considerably more time travelling to work (44 minutes). Car users, including passengers, fall somewhere in the middle. Since the vast majority of workers travel in private vehicles, their average commuting time of 24 minutes is very close to the average for all workers.

It makes sense to compare the commuting times of car users and public transit users based on the size of the metropolitan area. In 2010, in the six largest metropolitan areas, car users took an average of 27 minutes to get to work, while public transit users took 44 minutes. In mid-sized metropolitan areas (areas with between 250,000 and 1 million residents), the difference in average commuting times was larger—23 minutes for car users and 46 minutes for public transit users.


Public transit users are more tolerant of longer commuting times

In larger metropolitan areas, 6% of workers who used an active mode of transportation (walking or bicycling) to get to work were dissatisfied with their commuting time. Public transit users were more likely than car users to be dissatisfied with their commuting times (23% versus 18%). Public transit users’ higher level of dissatisfaction was primarily due to the fact it took them longer on average than car users to get to work.

However, when commuting times were taken into account, a complex relationship between transportation mode and satisfaction level emerged (Chart 4). For shorter commuting times, public transit users were less satisfied than car users. Yet, as commuting time increased, the pattern was reversed. For example, 21% of car users with commuting times between 30 and 44 minutes said they were dissatisfied, compared with 10% of public transit users.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1936  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 1:10 PM
CaptainKirk CaptainKirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,449
^^^ Thistleclub, great info.

As far as the satisfied commuters, that's nation wide, no?

In places where they have public transit right like out west.

Wonder how satidfied soutern Ontariio commiuters are in comparison.

Quote:
Statistics Canada pegs Toronto’s 66-minute daily commute as the worst in the country,
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/20...gination_rush_hour_is_getting_worse.html

Also for Toronto ---
Quote:
“What jumps out from this study is the terrible public transit time,” Schiller said. “And that 85 per cent of car drivers have never considered public transit.”
To decrease congestion, Schiller said, public transit times must drop to give a real alternative to motorists. Commuters must also have other options such as dedicated bike lanes, which increase cycling and reduce the number of vehicles on the road.
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2011/08/25/canadas_slowest_rush_hour.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1937  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 4:50 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,729
The RCCAO issued a new transit funding report this week.

Congestion Mitigation Technologies Offer Solutions for the Greater Toronto, Hamilton Area

TORONTO - April 3, 2013 - When and where the volume of commuters exceeds the capacity of infrastructure, traffic congestion is the inevitable result. Ask any driver in Southern Ontario and they are sure to have traffic nightmare stories to tell.

Transportation failure is gradual and it becomes worse with time at an increasing rate.

More demand and less capacity, due to volume, accidents or construction means more spread of congestion over wider spaces and longer times. This results in lower service quality, as well as rising economic and social costs in this region.

These findings come from the report entitled Congestion Management in the GTHA: Balancing the Inverted Pendulum. It was prepared for the Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario and authored by a team from the University of Toronto’s Intelligent Transportation Systems Centre, led by its Director, Professor Baher Abdulhai.

"Transit expansion and road improvements are clearly required in this region, but we must also address congestion in smarter ways. This report makes a strong case for investing in technology to improve the capacity of both existing and new infrastructure," said Andy Manahan, Executive Director of the RCCAO.

Among Abdulhai's recommendations:

• Introduce Intelligent Transportation Systems to maximize infrastructure efficiency. For example, smart, self-learning traffic lights will cut down intersection delay and improve traffic flow across the whole road network.

• Manage congestion using road pricing to reduce capacity loss, moderate road use and generate revenues for reinvestment in the transportation system. Solutions are being developed to implement “dynamic congestion pricing” as a way to influence travel behaviour and spread travel demand more evenly across modes (e.g., transit, bike, walk, carpool), over time and along alternative routes.

• Encourage an open service innovation model to harness the collective intelligence of the community, including the public, private and academic sectors as well as the travellers. Open innovation can create an eco-system of solution providers that creates innovative solutions faster, at less cost and lower risk.

• Optimize large-scale emergency evacuation that could cut down evacuation time by as much as 75%.

RCCAO and the Canadian Automobile Association are part of a coalition that has been providing input to Metrolinx, an agency of the Government of Ontario, created to improve the coordination and integration of all modes of transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1938  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 6:09 PM
Jon Dalton's Avatar
Jon Dalton Jon Dalton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguy1231 View Post
I'd like not to commute to work at all, unfortunately there are no decent paying jobs in this city.

Selfish, your dam right, I already pay ridiculous amounts of taxes for certain services that I am not getting so we can support the welfare losers who live in this city. I am also paying 11.9 cents a liter in provincial gas taxes that are supposed to be going to roads in this province, but are being redirected elsewhere. I don't enjoy paying half my earnings in taxes of one form or another and getting nothing in return.
But would you pay $30 a week if that got you congestion free roads 90% of the time? That would save you several hours per week to spend with family, hobbies, or anything more enjoyable than traffic. And the one thing you can't buy is time.

I used to work in the same area you do and I would have gladly paid that. The stop and go traffic on the QEW was what drove me onto public transit for the last 5 years I worked there. I guess some people have a higher tolerance for traffic than I do.
__________________
360º of Hamilton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1939  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2013, 7:45 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,729
FWIW, the Toronto Region Board of Trade has rejected blanket toll roads but is in favour of high-occupancy toll lanes. With a mid-range rate of 30¢/km for single drivers, TRBoT estimates HOT revenue potential could be something on the order of $25m to $45m. The report's authors write:

Single occupant vehicles can pay a toll for the use of otherwise restricted high occupancy lanes (typically on expressways). High occupancy vehicles use the lanes for free. This tool requires the existence, creation or designation of high occupancy lanes, which can be used free of charge by vehicles with a minimum of passengers (i.e. high occupancy vehicles with two or more people (HOV2+) or three or more people (HOV3+))

Revenue: $25m-45m ($0.30/km) *estimate based on conversion of existing HOV lanes in Toronto Region to HOT lanes

Advantages
• Reduced congestion, especially if combined with dynamic pricing
• Directly targets driver behaviour and traffic congestion

Jurisdictions Where Tools Utilized
• Houston, TX
• Orange County, CA
• San Diego, CA



My guess is that HOT lanes will serve as a gateway measure for broader implementation of toll roads a few years hence.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1940  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2013, 4:14 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,729
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:56 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.