Road Tolls coming to Toronto | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Road Tolls coming to Toronto

Does anyone think Doug Ford would have brought in tolls? No, rich establishment boy-Tory can't stop spending and has allowed the people Rob Ford cut off the public purse to get back in the trough. Does anyone really believe that money is going straight into transit infrastructure? I say maybe for the first year. I remember when the first gas tax was brought in "to build better roads" but ended up in general revenue while the roads never got fixed.

Anyway, this will only clog up Lakeshore Rd. more.
 
Roadghost said:
Does anyone think Doug Ford would have brought in tolls? No, rich establishment boy-Tory can't stop spending and has allowed the people Rob Ford cut off the public purse to get back in the trough. Does anyone really believe that money is going straight into transit infrastructure? I say maybe for the first year. I remember when the first gas tax was brought in "to build better roads" but ended up in general revenue while the roads never got fixed.

Anyway, this will only clog up Lakeshore Rd. more.
Click to expand...

Have you ever actually seen Doug Ford in action? He really is a nasty piece of work.
 
Come a time you step off your front lawn there will some kind of user fee involved. Gonna see the world by drone. Never leave the basement except to dust off the landing pad. I'll use an umpires wisk. Sad.
 
inreb said:
Come a time you step off your front lawn there will some kind of user fee involved. Gonna see the world by drone. Never leave the basement except to dust off the landing pad. I'll use an umpires wisk. Sad.
Click to expand...

Tsk-tsk, where's your drone license, Mr. Inreb? Have you paid your drone-surance premiums? Is your property zoned for that landing pad? Pale, fat children pawing greasy cellphones are our future. Improper, inexpensive dronery threatens them!
 
Last edited:
Flywheel said:
Tsk-tsk, where's your drone license, Mr. Inreb? Have you paid your drone-surance premiums? Is your property zoned for that landing pad? Pale, fat children pawing greasy cellphones are our future. Improper, inexpensive dronery threatens them!
Click to expand...

I'm grandfathered in. Can you not tell by the way I drone on and on around here? Tsk indeed.
 
Face said:
Have you ever actually seen Doug Ford in action? He really is a nasty piece of work.
Click to expand...

Used to deliver to their family warehouse in Etobicoke. Rob and Doug were tops. Great guys. You don't know what you're talking about.
 
inreb said:
Come a time you step off your front lawn there will some kind of user fee involved. Gonna see the world by drone. Never leave the basement except to dust off the landing pad. I'll use an umpires wisk. Sad.
Click to expand...

Uhh, not so fast. You'll need a Transport Canada drone license for that come spring.
 
Roadghost said:
Used to deliver to their family warehouse in Etobicoke. Rob and Doug were tops. Great guys. You don't know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

I've watched Doug's behavior in Community Council. I know exactly what I'm talking about. Thankfully it wasn't my item he went off on.
 
inreb said:
I'm grandfathered in. Can you not tell by the way I drone on and on around here? Tsk indeed.
Click to expand...

Given the revelations per minute, uplifting commentary and level attitude, I had my suspicions.
 
kwtoxman said:
Meh. Misleading. Single use zoning is not done on the scale that you (or that link) imply. It isn't hard to live close to work. It's easy to see resident options near work areas everywhere. I bet 95% of people could live within a 10 minute drive or public transit of where they work if they wanted to. The problem is most people don't want to because they want to pay less, have more, own property, won't compromise on where they work with two people in a household employed, or have more a obtuse reason (proximity to family, friends, certain recreation, want a certain lifestyle, etc). Single use zoning does not at all mean that one cannot live close to work.

Zoning has merits and its place. While single-use zoning is often implemented, don't confuse it with zoning areas and plans that provide a combination of local mixed uses. Land zoning may be prescribed (e.g., single use, multi-use), but it can and has been changed as well. Planning hasn't been inflexible. More fulsome reading here.
http://plannersweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2001/10/257.pdf
http://www.placemakers.com/2013/04/04/mixed-up-on-mixed-use/
Click to expand...
How many millions commute more than 10 minutes to work today in the GTA? You think most of them could choose to live within 10 minutes given the existing properties. Hell, even assuming all available residential zoned properties were built up rapidly, there's no way that many people could choose to live near work. (Note my impression is, like yours, not based on data. It's just my impression of the significant numbers that would make it impossible).

Most people don't actively choose the commuting lifestyle. It becomes the default because we've inherited the social planning values that are tied to the 'American Dream' vision of a detached home and at least one car. The ones who choose to try and avoid the ingrained car culture pay a lot more for it, and there are much fewer options for where they can live.

I overstated it when I said people don't have a choice, the point is the choice is very limited and made much harder by the way we build the infrastructure. Great for those pursuing the prescribed American Dream, not so much for anyone else.
 
Face said:
The City studied a section of underutilized commercial property along Danforth Ave in 2007 and up-zoned the lands to allow mixed use mid-rise development in early 2008. They even passed an Official Plan Amendment and zoning by-law so the lands could be redeveloped as-of-right.

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2008.SC12.25

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/bylaws/2008/law0103.pdf

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/bylaws/2008/law0104.pdf

Guess how much of this has been built. None, nadda, zero, ziltch! Because the market interest and economic benefit weren't there to interest anyone into taking the financial risk to by and build.

I had a client who owns one of the key parcels in this study area. He was interested in redeveloping, but when we actually designed a workable building to meet the density the City allowed, part of it needed to be taller than the City allowed. Staff were intransigent and the numbers didn't make it worth the fight. So it remains a commercial strip plaza and a long-term investment for my client.

I've worked as an urban planner for 30 years, half in the public sector and half in private, including some time as a developer with my own money invested. Planning theory is an easy target to blame, but things only get built if there's a market interest in the product and someone who is willing to take the risk to build it. Sprawl happened because people wanted it, and because the car and cheap land created the opportunity for it to happen. But unlike many American cities, enough people in Toronto wanted an urban living experience, so we have a vibrant city with both.

So if you want to give me the lowdown on urban planning and racism, buy me a beer or 2 and tell me all about it. I'm sure it will be most entertaining!
Click to expand...
I understand there's an ongoing tug of war between planners and builders when it comes to mixed use and low rise construction. My impression of the reason (would like to hear yours) isn't that nobody wants to live in those areas, but that that type of construction has lower profit margin than the highrises or acres of detached houses that builders are used to. It's really hard to imagine that almost any residential complex in Toronto wouldn't find buyers, and particularly so for one with human-scale neighbourhoods (as opposed to the acres of parks around highrises, or acres of roads around SDHs)

I think staff need to stick to their guns for the sake of the city's long-term health.
 
statsman said:
I have a few problems with tolls.
First off, they will apply (to start) with the DVP and Gardiner.
Won't this just result with a lot more traffic on the nearby streets? We're Canadians so we tend to be a bit tight with our money.
Secondly, tax dollars went to build these roads in the first place. How can the government charge us twice for the same thing without it being fraud?
Click to expand...

The average Canadian works to the end of May each year to cover their tax burden and holds record personal debt. Ya, we're tight.
 
fastar1 said:
How many millions commute more than 10 minutes to work today in the GTA? You think most of them could choose to live within 10 minutes given the existing properties. Hell, even assuming all available residential zoned properties were built up rapidly, there's no way that many people could choose to live near work. (Note my impression is, like yours, not based on data. It's just my impression of the significant numbers that would make it impossible).

Most people don't actively choose the commuting lifestyle. It becomes the default because we've inherited the social planning values that are tied to the 'American Dream' vision of a detached home and at least one car. The ones who choose to try and avoid the ingrained car culture pay a lot more for it, and there are much fewer options for where they can live.

I overstated it when I said people don't have a choice, the point is the choice is very limited and made much harder by the way we build the infrastructure. Great for those pursuing the prescribed American Dream, not so much for anyone else.
Click to expand...

You're still overstating it. I spent over 10 years in the GTA. Lived close to work all but for one short painful year where I took my time deciding what to do (and that was a 30-40 min commute). From core TO areas to GTA suburbs, I changed work over time, where I lived as well, and was able to live close to where I worked. Most anyone can do it (unless one works in a business where they simply drive to a worksite from their house and don't go to any central office). My evidence is based on simply always observing the reasonable proximity of residential units to work areas, everywhere. Most consider the downtown TO area the least served residentially speaking, and it still has residential options and lots of units available, with surface and subway public transit serving it as well.

Definitely most people commute over ten minutes to work in the GTA, and many do it over an hr each way. Most actively choose to literally NOT avoid commuting. It is an active choice, not some sort of crazy non-choice.
 
Last edited:
I lived in Toronto for a long time. That stretch of Danforth is very long, and there was at least one area that had some crime issues when I was there; still there when I left :p. So I could see council not wanting to put higher density housing there. Big tall guy before Rob talked on and on about putting in some waterfront parkland, in the meantime, condo after condo went up. That was when the council was working with the Mayor, so there was absolutely no excuse. So I can understand some people's frustration and wanting more people like Rob or Doug on council. As far as living ten minutes from work: It would take me twelve minutes from putting on my shoes, to sitting at my desk on a good day, and over an hour on a bad one. How do you then work out how far away 10 minutes is?
 
kwtoxman said:
You're still overstating it. I spent over 10 years in the GTA. Lived close to work all but for one short painful year where I took my time deciding what to do (and that was a 30-40 min commute). From core TO areas to GTA suburbs, I changed work over time, where I lived as well, and was able to live close to where I worked. Most anyone can do it (unless one works in a business where they simply drive to a worksite from their house and don't go to any central office). My evidence is based on simply always observing the reasonable proximity of residential units to work areas, everywhere. Most consider the downtown TO area the least served residentially speaking, and it still has residential options and lots of units available, with surface and subway public transit serving it as well.

Definitely most people commute over ten minutes to work in the GTA, and many do it over an hr each way. Most actively choose to literally NOT avoid commuting. It is an active choice, not some sort of crazy non-choice.
Click to expand...
Of course it's a choice. It's a choice where the penalty of finding a place close to work is exacerbated by the land use policies that since WWII have moulded our urban landscape into a paradise for drivers.

By creating more urban hubs than just the downtown core, that penalty will be minimized and the choice to live close to work (and shopping, and venues) will be easier.

I've also made the choice to live close to work for the past 10 years. I was very lucky to find an area that has useful transit and shopping next door. I don't need to own a car, and if I didn't I'd be further ahead financially than those who go with cheaper homes out in car country. But there's nowhere near enough housing options for all who'd want to opt out of car ownership. Of course others aren't as concerned about it as I am either. If they have to get a car, they get a car. They pretty much make that assumption to begin with anyways. But let's not be under any illusion that it's all there for us to choose as we like. The infrastructure was laid decades ago and we're living now with the course they set back then.
 
toronto just can't make a decision about anything. remember when vehicles had to pay that extra registration tax and then they took it away saying it was an unfair anti-car fee? and now we're back in the exact same cycle again.
 
How can we really know a bad idea is all that bad until we throw millions of dollars at it? That's basically best practice for modern municipal governments. We elect councillors who hire consultants who were formerly city employees who *might* have the expertise required. Then everyone blames some fat guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom