Roads Poll: What would be your ideal Gardiner Tear Down?

[sixrings]

I dont like the idea of Tolling the roads to pay for a tunneled portion.... To me it makes sense to maintain it and Toll the roads to finance the DRL... The Tolls can only pay for one thing and as much as I understand peoples want for a Tunnel we NEED a DRL....

 

[dunkalunk]

I dont like the idea of Tolling the roads to pay for a tunneled portion.... To me it makes sense to maintain it and Toll the roads to finance the DRL... The Tolls can only pay for one thing and as much as I understand peoples want for a Tunnel we NEED a DRL....

+1, and also a parking levy

 

[Mapleson]

I'd say that at least in the interim, increasing parking rates would be a better income generator than highway tolling, not that we shouldn't do both. Highway tolling mostly effects peak usage, while increasing parking rates is better at controlling discretionary car trips and the decision to own a car (or two). Toronto definitely does have some wiggle room when compared with other North American cities (In Particular, Calgary). See Here.

The thing with road tolling is, is that people expect an increase in the level of service to justify the tolling. You could widen the highway, or improve its safety and throughput, but then you would end up with traffic flooding onto Downtown Streets with nowhere to go. Improving the traffic flow on the highway would also be counterintuitive to expanding transit. I could be misjudging the way people think though.

I think people could survive without the Gardiner, but it'll take massive transit improvement, $2/barrel oil, and a chunk of it to fall onto LSB for them to realize it.

Did you mean $200/barrel oil? Because I think cheaper oil would mean more drivers, not less. It's the whole reason we have petrol stations instead of ethonol stations (gas was $0.05/gal in the US when Ford started mass production, which undercut his theory of farmers making their own corn-based fuel).

The Gardiner would look fine if there wasn't $200 million in backlog repairs. Sightlines aren't going to get much better with it gone because of all condos down there. A belowgrade highway would be more expensive than a DRL per kilometre, and we all know how well that's been funded. They didn't tear down the Golden Gate Bridge just because the BART had a tunnel under the bay, both are usually packed at rush hour now. The Gardiner would still be packed at rush hour even with a DRL, and I for one would rather have the two options of packed road or packed subway, than the one option of packed subway road.

 

[rbt]

You do understand that, while our banks came through the fiscal/credit crises in pretty good shape, the resistance to increasing dividends (which I presume is the stashing away that you refer to) was necessary to build their Tier I capital levels to the new benchmarks required by international banking rules and regulations. Tier I capital level requirements increase in 2012 under Basel III. Now that those levels have been reached, all of the big 5 are talking about some level of dividend increase.

Sure, and glad of it. Banks are handy things to have reliable.

Many Dubai banks have the government or a Sheikh as a primary shareholder. Their profits, those large dividend payments that Canadian banks are about to put out, typically go toward city building exercises. Canadian Bank dividends probably aren't going to be building much in the way of infrastructure within Toronto; I know mine certainly won't be.

We have every bit as much money, we just distribute and spend it differently.

 

[GraphicMatt]

We have every bit as much money, we just distribute and spend it differently.

Even at the governmental level, we have a ton of fiscal capacity for capital projects. We'll spend 30 billion dollars on fighter jets over the next decade or so. An investment that size in Canada's major cities would be transformative and provide a significant ROI through increased economic activity.

Canada's governance model is a relic of the pre-urbanized Canada.

 

[Filip]

Even at the governmental level, we have a ton of fiscal capacity for capital projects. We'll spend 30 billion dollars on fighter jets over the next decade or so. An investment that size in Canada's major cities would be transformative and provide a significant ROI through increased economic activity.

Canada's governance model is a relic of the pre-urbanized Canada.

I completely agree.

While it is necessary to replace these aging fighters as none of us want a repeat of the Seaking fiasco (Chretien canceled a Mulroney-led effort to replace aging military helicopters and eventually they just started falling out of the sky killing our soldiers), it does seem a bit forced considering our cities are facing incredible infrastructure problems.

Canada is just such a wealthy country with just embarrassing urban infrastructure. I still find it hard to believe that we do not have at least electrified the Via Corridor after most of this planet has, including Eastern Europe in the 1960s. What boggles my mind is what possesses all parties (including the Liberals) to spend such effort pandering to rural interests. Our cities are the drivers of our economy and have considerably more political seats at stake than rural ridings which can stretch for hundreds of kilometres.

 

[BMO]

I completely agree.

While it is necessary to replace these aging fighters as none of us want a repeat of the Seaking fiasco (Chretien canceled a Mulroney-led effort to replace aging military helicopters and eventually they just started falling out of the sky killing our soldiers), it does seem a bit forced considering our cities are facing incredible infrastructure problems.

Canada is just such a wealthy country with just embarrassing urban infrastructure. I still find it hard to believe that we do not have at least electrified the Via Corridor after most of this planet has, including Eastern Europe in the 1960s. What boggles my mind is what possesses all parties (including the Liberals) to spend such effort pandering to rural interests. Our cities are the drivers of our economy and have considerably more political seats at stake than rural ridings which can stretch for hundreds of kilometres.

they have to pander to rural concerns, because how the seat system works in parliament is that there aren't an equivalent proportion of city seats to rural seats, so even if proportionally more ppl live in cities, the seat system doesn't necessarily reflect that, in turn to give rural residents more influence, otherwise all the money would be focused solely on cities.

 

[dunkalunk]

Did you mean $200/barrel oil? Because I think cheaper oil would mean more drivers, not less. It's the whole reason we have petrol stations instead of ethonol stations (gas was $0.05/gal in the US when Ford started mass production, which undercut his theory of farmers making their own corn-based fuel).

The Gardiner would look fine if there wasn't $200 million in backlog repairs. Sightlines aren't going to get much better with it gone because of all condos down there. A belowgrade highway would be more expensive than a DRL per kilometre, and we all know how well that's been funded. They didn't tear down the Golden Gate Bridge just because the BART had a tunnel under the bay, both are usually packed at rush hour now. The Gardiner would still be packed at rush hour even with a DRL, and I for one would rather have the two options of packed road or packed subway, than the one option of packed subway road.

Yes, i got confused between $2/litre gas and $200/barrel oil while typing .

When you said Golden Gate Bridge, did you mean Bay Bridge? The Golden Gate Bridge and BART tunnel serve two completely different corridors.

While I'd like to see the Gardiner be gotten rid of eventually, I could only advocate for it if the traffic volumes suggest that it is no longer worth the cost of upkeep. For that, we would need more than just a DRL, but also frequent EMU service on GO, Waterfront East and West LRTs and improved signal priority on streetcars and buses.

 

[Automation Gallery]

I dont like the idea of Tolling the roads to pay for a tunneled portion.... To me it makes sense to maintain it and Toll the roads to finance the DRL... The Tolls can only pay for one thing and as much as I understand peoples want for a Tunnel we NEED a DRL....

Yeah but tell the general public ( motorists-private/commercial ) that you are about to toll old infastructure ( in this case the Gardiner Expy.) to build something ( DRL) that has nothing to do with the improvements of the roadway and that also might take 15-20 years to complete..now that does not make sense. Why is not a precentage of the 407 profits going into future planned GTA transportation.

 

[dunkalunk]

Why is not a precentage of the 407 profits going into future planned GTA transportation.

Because Harris leased it for 99 years to a private consortium.

 

[kEiThZ]

Even at the governmental level, we have a ton of fiscal capacity for capital projects. We'll spend 30 billion dollars on fighter jets over the next decade or so.

Actually, that's 30 billion over 30+ years. Just to correct the record. And that's the PBO numbers. An accounting method not applied to a single defence project prior, in Canada....which is why DND maintains that the costs will be around 18-20 billion. Acquisition will still be about 9-10 billion till 2020. And incidentally, we do actually have a relatively low defence expenditure as a percentage of GDP (some of the lowest in the developed world).

An investment that size in Canada's major cities would be transformative and provide a significant ROI through increased economic activity.

Canada's governance model is a relic of the pre-urbanized Canada.

It's not an either/or proposition. The federal government's first and foremost responsibility remains the security of the state.

That said, investment in urban regeneration and infrastructure needs to be made too. This is why I have maintained that the provinces should step up and take up the tax room being vacated by the feds. I am all for Ontario raising the HST to 15%. The provinces are bucking their responsibility to raise and spend revenues on municipalities (who are creations of the provinces). And the conveniently blaming the feds. The provinces should step up and raise corporate income taxes, personal income taxes and sales taxes as the feds are cutting them.

 

[kEiThZ]

I completely agree.

While it is necessary to replace these aging fighters as none of us want a repeat of the Seaking fiasco (Chretien canceled a Mulroney-led effort to replace aging military helicopters and eventually they just started falling out of the sky killing our soldiers), it does seem a bit forced considering our cities are facing incredible infrastructure problems.

Canada is just such a wealthy country with just embarrassing urban infrastructure. I still find it hard to believe that we do not have at least electrified the Via Corridor after most of this planet has, including Eastern Europe in the 1960s. What boggles my mind is what possesses all parties (including the Liberals) to spend such effort pandering to rural interests. Our cities are the drivers of our economy and have considerably more political seats at stake than rural ridings which can stretch for hundreds of kilometres.

It's not that they are necessarily pandering to rural interests. They just aren't pandering to big city interests. They pander to the 905 for example. And to smaller cities (Kingston, Fredricton, Moncton, etc.) throughout Canada.

 

[Mapleson]

When you said Golden Gate Bridge, did you mean Bay Bridge? The Golden Gate Bridge and BART tunnel serve two completely different corridors.

While I'd like to see the Gardiner be gotten rid of eventually, I could only advocate for it if the traffic volumes suggest that it is no longer worth the cost of upkeep. For that, we would need more than just a DRL, but also frequent EMU service on GO, Waterfront East and West LRTs and improved signal priority on streetcars and buses.

That'd be the one.

Interesting tidbit I came across "GO now carries 19% of inbound commuters to downtown, while the Gardiner carries 8%. The TTC carries 47% of commuters and other auto routes account for 26% of inbound traffic, according to 2006 figures."

That said, investment in urban regeneration and infrastructure needs to be made too. This is why I have maintained that the provinces should step up and take up the tax room being vacated by the feds. I am all for Ontario raising the HST to 15%. The provinces are bucking their responsibility to raise and spend revenues on municipalities (who are creations of the provinces). And the conveniently blaming the feds. The provinces should step up and raise corporate income taxes, personal income taxes and sales taxes as the feds are cutting them.

I agree, but the masses would revolt and elect Doug Ford as Premier. People want better services, but they don't want to pay for them. It's a common conversation I have when people start to complain taxes are too high. They aren't we are adding debt rather than paying it off and just prolonging the system of needs outstripping resources.