Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker
Those numbers come from no where. The province doesn't even provide a breakdown between the Calgary and Edmonton projects beyond this year so it can keep itself from locking in a floor price. Plus the capital investment numbers under accruals doesn't really mean anything for cash flow.
On a project like this, when the province is spending a quarter billion building an interchange south of Edmonton, providing a bit for future proofing is smart. Future us will thank us, and will be paying for the privilege of thanking us.
Is it a current cost? Yes. But is it a current expense? No.
There is also the matter that if the corridor isn't being used, can't it me trimmed back, even with the road there? So narrower road equals a constraint forever.
|
Ah, future-proofing. It's a lovely word and concept because it's so ambiguous. What kind of a future are we trying to proof anyway?
This might be "smart", if the project in and of itself were smart. It's not - and until is is proven to be (which it won't), there is no reason to believe otherwise. That being said, and just taking it as given, any future in which a second ring road exists is patently stupid (to be blunt).
It's not like ROW and poor spatial patterns are free, and it's not like they don't have any externalities beyond the fact that even that marginal additional cost could be put toward something- infrastructure, policy (really almost anything including a giant rock on the side of the Bow) that doesn't go toward self-fulfilling that future in the first place.
Future us will thank us from making it more difficult in the future to waste a good future 10 Billion dollars on a presently outdated infrastructure model. Present us might be thankful that we can save even that marginal amount or put it toward something that has an actual proven return - it's not like there isn't a Greenline out there waiting (which isn't the best example, but I don't feel that saying Cycle tracks will be taken more seriously).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim
Not really. Look at the new Port Mann bridge. You have truckers and regular drivers all clogging nearby roads and crossings (especially the Pattullo bridge) to avoid the tolls. I doubt the tolls created a surge of transit use in the lower mainland and I doubt someone will wait for their 40 minute frequency bus in their suburban Calgary neighbourhood because of the toll either. Seems many are willing to wade through gridlock to save a couple bucks a day in tolls.
That being said, it's a pleasure to drive through the new Port Mann as you don't even have to slow down for that new 10 km stretch of road like you used to!
|
That's the point. People aren't willing to pay to save the time at the degree to which it's conventionally believed people are willing to do so - and which is often used as justification to build a project (except for a ring road, you need no justification for that other than tautology). Said differently, if that time savings isn't worth it, then people were and are actually fine with not having the bridge (or more lanes) to begin with. As such, the project should never have existed and that "investment" was misplaced. This pattern is repeating itself along a pretty significant amount of toll projects. The Port Mann is only one of many absolute Boondoggles.
In the context of the ring road, it's the same thing. If it were to be tolled and car driver's aren't willing to pay to save that apparent time, then it is a signal that it wasn't needed to begin with; that people find alternatives; that the current network was underutilized. Albertans sure love their market pricing, just not when it comes to the almighty vehicle.
In any case, what is clear despite what you've said, is that tolls (out of pocket charges) do, in fact, influence behaviour. Of course their won't be a surge of transit use. That's not how it works for anything. There would almost certainly be a marginal increase over like Origin-Destinations. Over time and many margins, mode shift becomes apparent. Not surprisingly, Vancouver is one of the few North American jurisdictions that can really claim an all day mode shift away from the private vehicle.
I would also like to point out that tolling and congestion charging are being blended in the above discussion. They are not necessarily the same thing.
Prev
Linear Mode
