Calgary Roads

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Sad the whole enterprise is focused purely on selling rather than objective journalism, the sad thing is even if you pay for a subscription you still get ads. IMO a site with ads has some bias and is more likely to make a mountain out of molehill.

Why pay for a subscription? get the app on your phone and/or delete your cookie files once you reach your 10 articles. I won't pay the herald for the privilege of reading their poorly written and horribly edited articles. Is it just me or did they used to actually be good?

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Why pay for a subscription? get the app on your phone and/or delete your cookie files once you reach your 10 articles. I won't pay the herald for the privilege of reading their poorly written and horribly edited articles. Is it just me or did they used to actually be good?

It's true, I've just stopped going to their site at all. The android app is horrible and always crashed on me so it got uninstalled.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Isn't the whole idea to use the toll to fund the fixes to the roads?

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

Such a simple concept that I'm not seeing many people understand on my Facebook feed

Normally, the idea is to build the infrastructure first and toll the use of it afterwards to pay if off. I think you would have a hard time convincing people to pay a toll for "future" improvements. If I am paying for something, I want to use it as soon as I pay.

So simply introducing a toll on an existing condition, without any improvements, might be a hard sell. But, if the roads were to be upgraded/improved, and then tolled, that makes it more appealing to me.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

Such a simple concept that I'm not seeing many people understand on my Facebook feed

The argument is this:
Fact: You get the roads / congestion and mobility choices that you have right now with the amount of taxes & fees we charge you right now.
Are you happy with your commute right now?

1. If yes, continue doing what you are doing and oppose toll roads or addtional fees
2. If no, debate how much the fee needs to be to get infrastructure to the level that you will say yes.

Seems a little too clear-cut for people who are used to getting things with a heavy subsidy.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Normally, the idea is to build the infrastructure first and toll the use of it afterwards to pay if off. I think you would have a hard time convincing people to pay a toll for "future" improvements. If I am paying for something, I want to use it as soon as I pay.

So simply introducing a toll on an existing condition, without any improvements, might be a hard sell. But, if the roads were to be upgraded/improved, and then tolled, that makes it more appealing to me.

I agree 100%

Originally Posted by MasterG

The argument is this:
Fact: You get the roads / congestion and mobility choices that you have right now with the amount of taxes & fees we charge you right now.
Are you happy with your commute right now?

1. If yes, continue doing what you are doing and oppose toll roads or addtional fees
2. If no, debate how much the fee needs to be to get infrastructure to the level that you will say yes.

Seems a little too clear-cut for people who are used to getting things with a heavy subsidy.

Indeed .. I need to stay off social media for a bit otherwise I'm going to tee off on some people's short-sighted comments

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Normally, the idea is to build the infrastructure first and toll the use of it afterwards to pay if off. I think you would have a hard time convincing people to pay a toll for "future" improvements. If I am paying for something, I want to use it as soon as I pay.

So simply introducing a toll on an existing condition, without any improvements, might be a hard sell. But, if the roads were to be upgraded/improved, and then tolled, that makes it more appealing to me.

If you coordinate with specific improvement projects that will happen with a toll and won't happen without it and make it clear this should deal with the objection.

Denver and a few others did that for their transit expansion plans, asking people would they accept a GST and other fees for this list of specific projects that will be built in the next 15 years if the taxes were implemented. Something like that would be needed for it to become politically palatable.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Originally Posted by MasterG

If you coordinate with specific improvement projects that will happen with a toll and won't happen without it and make it clear this should deal with the objection.

Denver and a few others did that for their transit expansion plans, asking people would they accept a GST and other fees for this list of specific projects that will be built in the next 15 years if the taxes were implemented. Something like that would be needed for it to become politically palatable.

Exactly - what Michael suggested is probably the best way to sell it to the public

There will always be people who hate the tolls though, and probably a good number of them .. The City needs to compliment tolls with improved transit options to give them an alternative to commute without paying tolls .. The Green line is a start but it would be really nice if the LRT for those legs could get funded and built

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I never drive that section during rush hour, but my understanding is its pretty free flowing. Would a toll lane be any benefit for the north? I'd think you would end up with one mostly empty toll lane and 2 busier other lanes. Not busy enough to motivate people to pay though. Or am I wrong?

No, you are right. North of 24th (and south of about 33rd in the south) there is no congestion so a toll would be pointless. In between is where the problem is and with the lanes dropping off and starting continuously I don't know how a toll would work here anyhow.

Fundamentally I am not opposed to tolling roads, but not existing roads where no viable alternative exists. If the tolls were on newly build roads or used to add lanes to existing roads then I might be more inclined to accept them. Similar to the 407 in Toronto, the Golden Ears bridge in Vancouver (I think that is the one) or the numerous toll road that have been built in the US (I have used the ones in Oklahoma extensively).

But I would be more in favor of a dedicated sales tax (say 1 or 2 points) that would be used to fund transportation infrastructure - both roads and transit. Lots of US cities have gone this route and it seems to work relatively well.

[MalcolmTucker]

Specific Project Local Area Taxes are a great name, Vote yes on SPLAT!

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Why pay for a subscription? get the app on your phone and/or delete your cookie files once you reach your 10 articles. I won't pay the herald for the privilege of reading their poorly written and horribly edited articles. Is it just me or did they used to actually be good?

I just click "stop" once the story loads, but before their horribly written scripts can finish executing. Been doing this for many months now.

Much like how photo radar has basically allowed me to speed anywhere I want, if I can afford it, I'll admit that I like the idea of toll lanes. The wealthy can get where they want to go much faster than the commoners, who have to trundle along at a much slower pace in what now are even further congested lanes.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Normally, the idea is to build the infrastructure first and toll the use of it afterwards to pay if off. I think you would have a hard time convincing people to pay a toll for "future" improvements. If I am paying for something, I want to use it as soon as I pay.

So simply introducing a toll on an existing condition, without any improvements, might be a hard sell. But, if the roads were to be upgraded/improved, and then tolled, that makes it more appealing to me.

Borrow to get the work done right away and then use the toll to pay off the loan?

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Borrow to get the work done right away and then use the toll to pay off the loan?

On the surface I like this idea ... How would the numbers behind it look?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Isn't the whole idea to use the toll to fund the fixes to the roads?

Maybe, but people are (rightly) cynical enough to know that that will never happen in reality. The money will likely go into a general pot and used for general taxation and we'll be left with the same substandard roads, minus one lane.

If you must increase taxation to fund road users there is a very simple, elegant solution. Gas taxes, with the revenue ring fenced for transport infrastructure. Users pay based on how much they use and how much they pollute. Easy.

[lineman]

I'm wondering how reversible express lanes (like in the centre lanes of Chicago's Kennedy Expressway) would work in our city. For example, a express bypass through the river area Crowchild Trail to help movements to/from the SE employment area during peak hours.

[lineman]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Maybe, but people are (rightly) cynical enough to know that that will never happen in reality. The money will likely go into a general pot and used for general taxation and we'll be left with the same substandard roads, minus one lane.

If you must increase taxation to fund road users there is a very simple, elegant solution. Gas taxes, with the revenue ring fenced for transport infrastructure. Users pay based on how much they use and how much they pollute. Easy.

I suspect we as a city pay more than our fair share in fuel taxes to the provs/feds and only see a fraction of it in return.

[Dimension314]

Originally Posted by freeweed

I just click "stop" once the story loads, but before their horribly written scripts can finish executing. Been doing this for many months now.

Easiest way is to use cookieless browsing. In IE use a private browsing window Ctrl+Shift+P. In Chrome use Incognito mode Ctrl+Shift+N. Then browse all the articles you want as they cannot track how many you read.

[sim]

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

The roundabouts look great .. Will improve traffic flow nicely I think

With as much density planned in the Currie Barracks redevelopment I feel like 3 stoplights at that interchange so close together would cause a pretty good backlog in peak hours trying to get on to Crowchild

Yup, and it'll do wonders for pedestrians and cyclists especially.... But what's it matter, there's only about 4 or 5 schools within about 500 m of that monstrosity. Roundabouts, our new off target silver bullet.

Oh but the plans include provisions for cyclists... just so long as you aren't actually a cyclist.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Maybe, but people are (rightly) cynical enough to know that that will never happen in reality. The money will likely go into a general pot and used for general taxation and we'll be left with the same substandard roads, minus one lane.

If you must increase taxation to fund road users there is a very simple, elegant solution. Gas taxes, with the revenue ring fenced for transport infrastructure. Users pay based on how much they use and how much they pollute. Easy.

Gas taxes are perhaps reasonably elegant, but they aren't the right solution. Would you only raise this in the region where they are meant to fund said infrastructure? If so, how do you determine that boundary? Why? You will also get some interesting changes in who fills up where.

If not, you've put the costs of congestion onto people that have essentially nothing to do with causing it, i.e. rural residents. Nor do rural drivers contribute to local emissions to the same level or noise. If you are going to use a tax to internalize negative externalities, the tax should best be applied to those that actually cause those externalities.

To ameliorate the perception of HOT lanes being so called "Lexus lanes" (only for the rich), and on mores so on the basis of greater social equilibrium (both economically and socially), the tolls collected would largely go toward improving alternative modes. The portion allocated to roadways would go to maintenance and minor improvements only, not upgrades and additional lanes. Why fund something that created the problem in the first place?

[SubwayRev]

Originally Posted by sim

Gas taxes are perhaps reasonably elegant, but they aren't the right solution. Would you only raise this in the region where they are meant to fund said infrastructure? If so, how do you determine that boundary? Why? You will also get some interesting changes in who fills up where.

You can charge a local fuel tax, within the City of Calgary. This is done in Vancouver and Montreal.

Yes, fuel would be less expensive in Airdrie or Okotoks, and some people would drive there to save $5, but the vast majority wouldn't. And the additional revenue would more than make up for the people who are leaving the city to buy their fuel.

[sim]

Originally Posted by SubwayRev

You can charge a local fuel tax, within the City of Calgary. This is done in Vancouver and Montreal.

Yes, fuel would be less expensive in Airdrie or Okotoks, and some people would drive there to save $5, but the vast majority wouldn't. And the additional revenue would more than make up for the people who are leaving the city to buy their fuel.

Ah, this I did not know.

You've nevertheless still not priced what you are trying to price - congestion. To extend and elaborate on what I stated earlier, you're still putting more costs onto people (even in just urban areas) that drive to work or wherever during off peak hours although they are appropriately utilizing the given fixed cost infrastructure.

If your goal is to disincentivize driving in general, and I'm all for it, then yeah it's quick an elegant, but it isn't doing anything to price congestion (which is what the Manning centre was effectively doing).

[Fuzz]

It also doesn't get money out of "bedroom community" commuters, becuase they will fill up in their town before driving our roads. I do like the idea of gas tax paying for road funds, instead of general taxes though. Apparently in Ontario gas taxes fund almost all of their road costs.