No point in linking any articles, but John Tory, the stooge of Kathleen Wynne, is set to introduce gardiner/DVP tolls today.
At this point I don't have anything else to say.
Articles that don't use the word "stooge":
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/11/23/tory-set-to-announce-tolls-on-the-dvp-and-gardiner.html
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tory-road-tolls-1.3865246
I may be a little bit of a devil's advocate, but I actually support tolls, if they are done correctly. I don't know about Toronto (or even Ontario for that matter), but tolls are a great way to pay for expensive infrastructure projects (something Ontario doesn't seem to know how to do, considering their debt).
Federally, tolls should be implemented on parts of the Trans Canada to help finish twinning it from coast to coast (it's embarrassing the way it is currently especially in parts of BC such as Kicking Horse Pass). It will cost billions to do this, something both the provinces and the federal government just doesn't have.
I just hope that at least in Ontario, whoever wins the next election continues to complete road projects such as ON 69 and ON 417 as well as the twinning projects ON 11/17 and ON 17 near Kenora.
No one likes to pay tolls, but sometimes it's necessary to bite the bullet to get something done faster IMO.
Toronto is complaining much of the use is coming from out-of-townees which are not paying city taxes to maintain the roads.
To avoid this unfairness, I see 3 alternatives to all out tolling:
-Just toll out of town folks. If your license plate is registered at a Toronto address, you will not get dinged.
-Re-amalgamate Toronto to include cities like Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughn, Markham, etc. This would essentially create a 'super city', where everyone's taxes could go into maintaining these roads.
-Have the province operate/maintain the roads (not gonna happen, Ontario is broke).
That last one is what happens in nearly every other place in North America.
I guess I can kiss any hope of clinching the DVP goodbye. I am not paying what I'm sure will be quite high bill by mail fees. Thankfully I already have the Gardiner.
Most of the shunpikers will just use the 401 and 427 rather than the Gardiner and the DVP. I always thought the Gardiner and DVP were provincial highways, but I guess not.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on November 24, 2016, 07:43:07 AM
No point in linking any articles, but John Tory, the stooge of Kathleen Wynne, is set to introduce gardiner/DVP tolls today.
At this point I don't have anything else to say.
Explain how John Tory is Wynne's stooge. Please use concrete examples and evidence to support your claim.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on November 24, 2016, 10:24:20 AM
I may be a little bit of a devil's advocate, but I actually support tolls, if they are done correctly. I don't know about Toronto (or even Ontario for that matter), but tolls are a great way to pay for expensive infrastructure projects (something Ontario doesn't seem to know how to do, considering their debt).
Ontario's really embraced those sorts of alternative funding methods. The last three major highway projects in the province have all been delivered using that method (though the tolls for Herb Grey Pkwy won't be collected until the new bridge opens). On the non-highway side of things, PPP has been embraced on a number of fronts too.
The bigger downside of that is the Owner loses a bit of control over design, which can have some negative impacts to road users.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on November 24, 2016, 10:24:20 AM
Federally, tolls should be implemented on parts of the Trans Canada to help finish twinning it from coast to coast (it's embarrassing the way it is currently especially in parts of BC such as Kicking Horse Pass). It will cost billions to do this, something both the provinces and the federal government just doesn't have.
The Ontario portion has approximately 1600 km of two lane TCH routing. Four laning in Northern Ontario typically runs $8-12M per km. So, you're talking around $16 Billion to twin it. On roads that have nowhere near enough traffic to ever hope to recoup the cost (not to mention that more traffic would take Highway 11, which is not significantly longer but would presumably be untolled).
Quote from: SignGeek101 on November 24, 2016, 10:24:20 AM
No one likes to pay tolls, but sometimes it's necessary to bite the bullet to get something done faster IMO.
Completely agree. When people lament the tolls on 407E, it's good to remind them that they likely wouldn't have the highway for quite a while yet if it weren't being tolled.
Quote from: haljackey on November 24, 2016, 06:11:09 PM
Toronto is complaining much of the use is coming from out-of-townees which are not paying city taxes to maintain the roads.
To avoid this unfairness, I see 3 alternatives to all out tolling:
-Just toll out of town folks. If your license plate is registered at a Toronto address, you will not get dinged.
-Re-amalgamate Toronto to include cities like Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughn, Markham, etc. This would essentially create a 'super city', where everyone's taxes could go into maintaining these roads.
-Have the province operate/maintain the roads (not gonna happen, Ontario is broke).
As much as Toronto politicians want to spin it that way - "it's those who are not from here! Don't blame me, blame them!" - traffic on the DVP and Gardiner is pretty well 100% originating from or destined for locations in Toronto. So they as residents or the businesses they work/shop/etc at are paying into Toronto's tax base. It's local.
This is more a case of a mayor who is philosophically opposed to raising taxes, but needs money somehow.
Quote from: US 41 on November 24, 2016, 10:36:09 PM
Most of the shunpikers will just use the 401 and 427 rather than the Gardiner and the DVP. I always thought the Gardiner and DVP were provincial highways, but I guess not.
All through traffic already uses those routes, they move far better than the Gardiner-DVP. Those are entirely local access routes into central Toronto.
The westernmost about 6 km of the Gardiner was provincially-owned, but as Toronto development crept out to engulf it and therefore all traffic on it was local then it didn't make sense for the province to retain ownership of it. The balance of the Gardiner did receive provincial funding for its construction and some maintenance up until the mid 1990s. The DVP was and always has been municipally owned and maintained.
Quote from: vdeane on November 24, 2016, 09:03:47 PM
That last one is what happens in nearly every other place in North America.
I guess I can kiss any hope of clinching the DVP goodbye. I am not paying what I'm sure will be quite high bill by mail fees. Thankfully I already have the Gardiner.
That was today's news.
There was enough backlash in Toronto that the Mayor reneged on his initial plan. Instead, he is now going to try and make up the $300 million in annual revenue exclusively through pay by mail fees from tourists visiting from New York State.
Must be a whole lotta stoogin' on Toronto City Council as moving forward with road tolls was overwhelmingly approved, 32-9.
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2016/12/13/council-backs-torys-move-to-impose-roll-road-tolls.html
Why would it take 5 years to implement? Tolling seems to me to be more of an on/off thing (the route is either tolled, or it's not), so I'm not sure what the difference in driving down the road in 2019 vs 2024 would be.
I wonder if I'll be able to find an excuse to clinch the DVP by then, slip in before the tolling starts?
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on November 25, 2016, 09:57:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 24, 2016, 09:03:47 PM
That last one is what happens in nearly every other place in North America.
I guess I can kiss any hope of clinching the DVP goodbye. I am not paying what I'm sure will be quite high bill by mail fees. Thankfully I already have the Gardiner.
That was today's news.
There was enough backlash in Toronto that the Mayor reneged on his initial plan. Instead, he is now going to try and make up the $300 million in annual revenue exclusively through pay by mail fees from tourists visiting from New York State.
Does Canada have any enforcement ability against people from another country? Would the mayor just hope that people see a bill and pay it? Could someone be denied entry/detained at the border because when their passport is scanned, something comes up on the computer saying they owe a toll from a previous trip?
Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Why would it take 5 years to implement? Tolling seems to me to be more of an on/off thing (the route is either tolled, or it's not), so I'm not sure what the difference in driving down the road in 2019 vs 2024 would be.
I wonder if I'll be able to find an excuse to clinch the DVP by then, slip in before the tolling starts?
These posts make me lol.
The idea of driving to another country to simply clinch a road is already using a lot of discretionary spending. Incurring an additional $2 CDN toll would probably account for significantly less than 1% of your total trip cost. In fact, regular swings in the price of fuel could have a greater impact on such a trip cost than paying a toll on the DVP.
Won't someone please think of the children!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2016, 01:50:34 PM
Does Canada have any enforcement ability against people from another country?
Roads, vehicles, and traffic offences are provincial and municipal responsibilities, not federal.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2016, 01:50:34 PM
Would the mayor just hope that people see a bill and pay it? Could someone be denied entry/detained at the border because when their passport is scanned, something comes up on the computer saying they owe a toll from a previous trip?
In terms of the border issue, likely no. In terms of billing you, it depends on the jurisdiction and how willing they are to play ball. Using the 407ETR as a comparison, there are some states and provinces that do share their plate information with them, while some other states and provinces do not. So in the case of the latter they're somewhat stuck.
In terms of collecting from those who refuse to pay, I'm not sure if the collections process is really worth their while. However, in Toronto at least if your vehicle has three provincial offences against it (parking tickets, etc) and they find it in violation for a fourth time instead of writing a fourth ticket they will tow your vehicle.
Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Why would it take 5 years to implement? Tolling seems to me to be more of an on/off thing (the route is either tolled, or it's not), so I'm not sure what the difference in driving down the road in 2019 vs 2024 would be.
I wonder if I'll be able to find an excuse to clinch the DVP by then, slip in before the tolling starts?
Something about time to design and construct, and not being a Cuomo state, it won't get rushed in 12 months.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on December 14, 2016, 02:47:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Why would it take 5 years to implement? Tolling seems to me to be more of an on/off thing (the route is either tolled, or it's not), so I'm not sure what the difference in driving down the road in 2019 vs 2024 would be.
I wonder if I'll be able to find an excuse to clinch the DVP by then, slip in before the tolling starts?
These posts make me lol.
The idea of driving to another country to simply clinch a road is already using a lot of discretionary spending. Incurring an additional $2 CDN toll would probably account for significantly less than 1% of your total trip cost. In fact, regular swings in the price of fuel could have a greater impact on such a trip cost than paying a toll on the DVP.
Won't someone please think of the children!
Laugh all you want, but if I go to a roadmeet in a place like Milwaukee or Minneapolis next year, and my choices for the return trip consist of deadheading down I-80/90, driving through Ontario along 403 and the QEW (netting clinches of 406 and 420), or driving through Ontario along 401, and I know tolls would be implemented on the DVP and Gardiner soon, I would be MUCH more likely to chose the latter option and add a diversion to clinch the last few km of the DVP I'm missing than I otherwise would be.
Also, it's not just the $2 toll, but the $20 pay by mail processing fee. I am not getting TorontoPass or whatever they'll call it for one clinch. I don't go rush down to NYC to clinch the East River bridges because of the constant talk of tolling them, even though the combined toll would be orders of magnitude higher. Why? Because I have E-ZPass! Plus I'm sure that Toronto's policies won't be much better than the 407's (a road that has single-handedly turned off not only me but the entire rest of my family from the idea of using an all-electronic toll road).
Quote from: Alps on December 14, 2016, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Why would it take 5 years to implement? Tolling seems to me to be more of an on/off thing (the route is either tolled, or it's not), so I'm not sure what the difference in driving down the road in 2019 vs 2024 would be.
I wonder if I'll be able to find an excuse to clinch the DVP by then, slip in before the tolling starts?
Something about time to design and construct, and not being a Cuomo state, it won't get rushed in 12 months.
Oh. The article made it sound like some gantries would go online in 2019 and others wouldn't be installed until 2024. Guess it's a very poorly phrased sentence (that, or Americans and Canadians have two different definitions for "phased in").
Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2016, 08:03:48 PM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on December 14, 2016, 02:47:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2016, 01:24:03 PM
Why would it take 5 years to implement? Tolling seems to me to be more of an on/off thing (the route is either tolled, or it's not), so I'm not sure what the difference in driving down the road in 2019 vs 2024 would be.
I wonder if I'll be able to find an excuse to clinch the DVP by then, slip in before the tolling starts?
These posts make me lol.
The idea of driving to another country to simply clinch a road is already using a lot of discretionary spending. Incurring an additional $2 CDN toll would probably account for significantly less than 1% of your total trip cost. In fact, regular swings in the price of fuel could have a greater impact on such a trip cost than paying a toll on the DVP.
Won't someone please think of the children!
Laugh all you want, but if I go to a roadmeet in a place like Milwaukee or Minneapolis next year, and my choices for the return trip consist of deadheading down I-80/90, driving through Ontario along 403 and the QEW (netting clinches of 406 and 420), or driving through Ontario along 401, and I know tolls would be implemented on the DVP and Gardiner soon, I would be MUCH more likely to chose the latter option and add a diversion to clinch the last few km of the DVP I'm missing than I otherwise would be.
Also, it's not just the $2 toll, but the $20 pay by mail processing fee. I am not getting TorontoPass or whatever they'll call it for one clinch. I don't go rush down to NYC to clinch the East River bridges because of the constant talk of tolling them, even though the combined toll would be orders of magnitude higher. Why? Because I have E-ZPass! Plus I'm sure that Toronto's policies won't be much better than the 407's (a road that has single-handedly turned off not only me but the entire rest of my family from the idea of using an all-electronic toll road).
Laugh all you want, but if I go to a roadmeet in a place like Milwaukee or Minneapolis next year, and my choices for the return trip consist of deadheading down I-80/90, driving through Ontario along 403 and the QEW (netting clinches of 406 and 420), or driving through Ontario along 401, and I know tolls would be implemented on the DVP and Gardiner soon, I would be MUCH more likely to chose the latter option and add a diversion to clinch the last few km of the DVP I'm missing than I otherwise would be.
Also, it's not just the $2 toll, but the $20 pay by mail processing fee. I am not getting TorontoPass or whatever they'll call it for one clinch. I don't go rush down to NYC to clinch the East River bridges because of the constant talk of tolling them, even though the combined toll would be orders of magnitude higher. Why? Because I have E-ZPass! Plus I'm sure that Toronto's policies won't be much better than the 407's (a road that has single-handedly turned off not only me but the entire rest of my family from the idea of using an all-electronic toll road).
You have no idea what Toronto's policies will be regarding pay-by-mail tolling options. The 407's policies are in all likelihood far more punitive to out of province travelers than Toronto's will be, simply because tourism is a valuable industry to Downtown Toronto. React to the facts you read, not the facts that you make up.
Being honest, posts like this just read like someone wanting to complain about something on the internet, rather than provide actual intellectual stimulating conversation. Posts like this increase the noise in the signal to noise ratio that is the internet.
Complaining about how the potential road tolls might affect how you value spending your own personal time is akin to Rob Curtis writing that "Rob Curtis is gearing up for Friday" on facebook.
Well said! :clap:
-----
Toronto seriously needs to come up with new revenue sources if they want to expand transit services. I think I am actually supportive of tolling, especially if it's just a 2 dollar on/off toll, regardless of distance traveled (1 interchange or the entire highway costs the same). That goes against the 407, which charges you an entry fee, a camera fee if you don't have a transponder, plus your total kms on the highway.
These tolls will also help sell the hybrid plan for Gardiner East, which keeps the DVP connection grade-separated. It's far more attractive for drivers compared to the at-grade boulevard proposal.
It was either this or something like London U.K's congestion tax. It was going to happen eventually.
You two, I'm talking to you Asphalt and Cbeach, can laugh at myself and V all you want, but I honestly can't fathom why so many would support these tolls.
The reasoning we hear from John Tory is "to build transit", but to build what exactly? Again, I've been asking for years, why is it that PRIVATE COMPANIES built the first subway lines in NYC (and operated them) at the turn of the 20th century and yet a century later, with so many advances in technology, they cost a ridiculous amount of money?
Cbeach, you refused to talk about transit in the past and transit is super relevant to this discussion. What they plan to build for the most part practically sucks.....the Crosstown LRT, watch and see how SLOW that thing will be in the outdoor portion east of Laird. Yeah, so thanks for nothing, just like any widening project in the GTA, what do they always end up....HOV lanes, again MTO, thanks for nothing. And the Sheppard East LRT, the TTC was very bold to design a future subway diagram that has the Sheppard East LRT on it.....MARK MY WORDS, and trust me, the Sheppard East LRT will be rebranded 515 Sheppard (assuming a new streetcar route is not created in the meantime)
We actually do have a subway line under construction.....and it's an extension of the LEAST UTILIZED portion of the two main lines. Gotta love that, Queen's Park could cough up the money because the Finance Minister at the time, Greg Sorbara, just happens to have investments in that area where the subway is going to end in Vaughan. Seriously, it's a tale of two subway rides, go north towards Finch at 5PM on a weekday one day, and then go north towards Downsivew on 5PM on another weekday, it's apples to oranges in how they are used. Hell, the AM service pattern of the line has HALF of the trains terminate service towards Downsivew at St. Clair West because it's not at all practical to run Northbound trains frequently up there.
If you want to talk about funding such extravagant projects without tolls or implementing "revenue tools", as Kathleen Wynne likes to say, I won't get into such details in how it could be done because you would not like what I have to say.
Tolls on the Gardiner/DVP has always been an elephant in the room for years....I'm sure the other elephant in the room regarding GTA transportation will possibly be discussed by Metrolinx, the decision to charge for parking at GO Stations.
Regarding toll collection, V is right on the nose, you can think they will make decisions that make sense especially regarding tourists, but will they, probably not. The whole idea is principle, when I take I-190 and cross the Grand Island Bridges, I understand that the toll is $1 to cross. However, if they had an AET system set up, it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth, a simple $1 toll easily turns into a toll that costs at least $5 or more. Let's not mention that the Gardiner toll could start at $2, but it could go up, out of control like how Metrolinx always raises the prices of GO Fares......and you wonder why my blood boil when I learn that some of the bus drivers make over $100,000.
Our friends in Quebec at least did the right thing when A-30 opened by constructing an old school toll plaza, at least it gives the people who want to bypass Montreal a simple toll and not some disgusting surcharge for not holding the special transponder for that area. They understood that there are going to be drivers (especially truckers), who want to simply bypass the area, but not get dinged for unfair camera charges.
Quote from: haljackey on December 14, 2016, 11:27:10 PM
Well said! :clap:
-----
Toronto seriously needs to come up with new revenue sources if they want to expand transit services. I think I am actually supportive of tolling, especially if it's just a 2 dollar on/off toll, regardless of distance traveled (1 interchange or the entire highway costs the same). That goes against the 407, which charges you an entry fee, a camera fee if you don't have a transponder, plus your total kms on the highway.
These tolls will also help sell the hybrid plan for Gardiner East, which keeps the DVP connection grade-separated. It's far more attractive for drivers compared to the at-grade boulevard proposal.
It was either this or something like London U.K's congestion tax. It was going to happen eventually.
Why should any "congestion tax" happen over here, for god sakes, THIS IS NOT EUROPE, and my god, it will never be Europe.
Of course, assuming that the Gardiner/DVP tolls use AET (which I think is a given at this point), if one doesn't have the transponder, obviously there is going to be some sort of camera charge for the intel in finding where the owner of that license plate lives, and sending a bill to that person's residence. All this costs money and it isn't free.
Basically, if you want to know what I have to say, how does New Brunswick of all places, a place with a population with a measly 750,000, afford to construct all those freeways they have built in the last 15 years or so. I've taken NB-2, and in midday, it was a very lonely drive, I think I ran into 3 other vehicles on the entire Grand Falls-Woodstock stretch. Even a more punch to the gut is how these roads have no tolls on them. I've said for years that Ottawa should fork over a huge amount of money for transit projects, if you can't see why it's justifiable, just connect the dots and you'll understand.
NB isn't the best counterexample. Most of their highway funding was to compensate for rail abandonments.
That being said, a real issue here is that, unlike most expressways but like a few in NYC, the Gardiner and DVP are city-maintained, so they're not getting provincial funding. I don't know how Canada allocates federal road funding, but it's possible that these roads aren't eligible. Tolls would theoretically reduce congestion by encouraging transit use. However, I see a decent amount of local traffic just shunpiking and making Lake Shore, Bayview and Don Mills pure hell.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
You two, I'm talking to you Asphalt and Cbeach, can laugh at myself and V all you want, but I honestly can't fathom why so many would support these tolls.
Val is complaining because it is going to cost very slightly more to aimlessly drive some roads. Aimlessly driving roads is an excellent way to piss away money. (I should know, I'm great at it).
If someone wants to argue why tolls are a bad thing, based on the actual merits of the project, I'm all ears. However, listening to someone whine about the fact that the next time they are going to set fire to a pocketful of their money, that they'll have to burn a couple of extra bucks is frankly irrelevant and annoying.
Yep. Driving in Canada isn't cheap. The toll will cost as much a 2 litres of gas. That's not too much in the grand scheme of things.
Quote from: cl94 on December 15, 2016, 09:11:10 AM
Yep. Driving in Canada isn't cheap. The toll will cost as much a 2 litres of gas. That's not too much in the grand scheme of things.
As the old proverb says "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", it may start as a $2 toll, but knowing Toronto council, it will probably easily snowball into a toll of $15 or more. That may not happen, but I am concerned as I would not trust council with the keys to the nuclear football.
Has anyone really thought carefully why 2019 is the implementation year? It's obvious, the next Toronto election is at the end of 2018 and I'm sure most voters will be indifferent as a toll will not have been implemented at that point.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
You two, I'm talking to you Asphalt and Cbeach, can laugh at myself and V all you want, but I honestly can't fathom why so many would support these tolls.
I'm actually on the fence about them. But that means that I can see both benefits and drawbacks and I more than willing to discuss either. Such as when I said:
Quote from: cbeach40 on November 25, 2016, 09:20:50 AM
As much as Toronto politicians want to spin it that way - "it's those who are not from here! Don't blame me, blame them!" - traffic on the DVP and Gardiner is pretty well 100% originating from or destined for locations in Toronto. So they as residents or the businesses they work/shop/etc at are paying into Toronto's tax base. It's local.
This is more a case of a mayor who is philosophically opposed to raising taxes, but needs money somehow.
Not necessarily saying I support road tolls, more that I can understand the logic of them.
What I do not support is knee jerk naysaying. You're going to make a statement, great. That's the point of the forum. But back it up.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
Cbeach, you refused to talk about transit in the past and transit is super relevant to this discussion.
No, it's not. That's why there's a mass transit section on this forum.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
What they plan to build for the most part practically sucks.....the Crosstown LRT, watch and see how SLOW that thing will be in the outdoor portion east of Laird. Yeah, so thanks for nothing, just like any widening project in the GTA, what do they always end up....HOV lanes, again MTO, thanks for nothing. And the Sheppard East LRT, the TTC was very bold to design a future subway diagram that has the Sheppard East LRT on it.....MARK MY WORDS, and trust me, the Sheppard East LRT will be rebranded 515 Sheppard (assuming a new streetcar route is not created in the meantime)
I'd mark your words (and also trust you?) but there really isn't a coherent sentence to follow and mark in there. :-D
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
If you want to talk about funding such extravagant projects without tolls or implementing "revenue tools", as Kathleen Wynne likes to say, I won't get into such details in how it could be done because you would not like what I have to say.
No, I'm actually curious of what you have to say. Please explain how our spending can be increased without increasing revenue.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
Tolls on the Gardiner/DVP has always been an elephant in the room for years....I'm sure the other elephant in the room regarding GTA transportation will possibly be discussed by Metrolinx, the decision to charge for parking at GO Stations.
Those are the only loaded topics regarding GTA transportation? That's... well, that's something.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
Regarding toll collection, V is right on the nose, you can think they will make decisions that make sense especially regarding tourists, but will they, probably not. The whole idea is principle, when I take I-190 and cross the Grand Island Bridges, I understand that the toll is $1 to cross. However, if they had an AET system set up, it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth, a simple $1 toll easily turns into a toll that costs at least $5 or more. Let's not mention that the Gardiner toll could start at $2, but it could go up, out of control like how Metrolinx always raises the prices of GO Fares......and you wonder why my blood boil when I learn that some of the bus drivers make over $100,000.
Well, that's pure speculation at this point.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
Our friends in Quebec at least did the right thing when A-30 opened by constructing an old school toll plaza, at least it gives the people who want to bypass Montreal a simple toll and not some disgusting surcharge for not holding the special transponder for that area. They understood that there are going to be drivers (especially truckers), who want to simply bypass the area, but not get dinged for unfair camera charges.
So they have to charge a toll based on the extra cost of manned tollbooths, plus the fact that traffic has to stop. Installing manned toll booths on the Gardiner or DVP would make the existing traffic seem downright pleasant.
But in terms of the cost, so it's a case of whether you make everyone pay more across the board, or you ding those who barely use it slightly more.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 15, 2016, 09:41:55 AM
As the old proverb says "The road to hell is paved with good intentions",
Which is not applicable in this case. Like, at all. It makes no sense in this context. :pan:
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 15, 2016, 09:41:55 AM
it may start as a $2 toll, but knowing Toronto council, it will probably easily snowball into a toll of $15 or more. That may not happen, but I am concerned as I would not trust council with the keys to the nuclear football.
$15 toll for that? Going from $2 to $15 is something you think is reasonable. And based simply on supposition. Just... wow.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Taking aside the utter disaster that would be for the transportation system, that's definitely a terrible plan financially and politically. Salami tactics/death by a thousand cuts/getting nickled and dimed... a little here, a little there, and people don't rise up. A massive increase like that is utter foolishness.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 15, 2016, 09:41:55 AM
Has anyone really thought carefully why 2019 is the implementation year? It's obvious, the next Toronto election is at the end of 2018 and I'm sure most voters will be indifferent as a toll will not have been implemented at that point.
Wouldn't that make road tolls an election issue in 2018 then? Pushing it back until 2019 makes it an utterly massive election issue, exactly the opposite of what you said there.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 14, 2016, 11:41:56 PM
Why should any "congestion tax" happen over here, for god sakes, THIS IS NOT EUROPE, and my god, it will never be Europe.
Canada ain't Europe, but it ain't the USA either. We're more of a middle ground between the two.
The middle ground between a congestion tax and do nothing is exactly what this is.
Honestly I think a C$2 toll is pretty reasonable for the DVP and Gardiner, given that commuters to downtown Toronto have reasonable transit alternatives on both corridors (both the subway and Go trains, along with bus routes along the DVP and Gardiner themselves). That said I think it really should only apply during commute times and/or be a variable toll based on congestion.
However with the province tolling the 407 extension it's about time for Ontario (and whatever agency ends up tolling the downtown expressways, whether it's TTC or Metrolinx) to join E-ZPass or work out some sort of interoperability agreement.
Quote from: lordsutch on December 15, 2016, 01:14:22 PM
However with the province tolling the 407 extension it's about time for Ontario (and whatever agency ends up tolling the downtown expressways, whether it's TTC or Metrolinx) to join E-ZPass or work out some sort of interoperability agreement.
I agree completely. Enough people in Ontario have E-ZPass for the Niagara River bridges and the Thruway. You could probably get more New York people to consider using 407 if it was interoperable. I know I would if it just came out of my E-ZPass account instead of having to go online and pay separately.
While I do have fears that the $2 toll will eventually become $15 like the Port Authority has done over the Hudson, it might encourage more people to use the Subway and, like the MTA and PANYNJ, it could be used to fund transit improvements.
I'm not against paying a toll per se. I don't make much of an effort to shunpike tolls in the E-ZPass area; heck, I've paid the sky high rates on the NYC bridges/tunnels just to clinch stuff. I've even paid to cross the American span of the Thousand Islands Bridge just to get some photos of I-81 (and because it's my favorite bridge).
What I am against is paying more because I'm not from the area, don't have the local transponder, the office took its sweet time to mail the bill, etc. I don't even like E-ZPass states with different rates for people who have a transponder for their state and those who have transponders from other states. Nothing I can do about that, though. I can do something about this, though. I live in upstate NY. There are roadmeets in the midwest practically every year. Passing through the area to snag the clinch before the tolls go into effect is NOT hard, I just need to make it a priority and hope it aligns with my travel plans.
Many places that have AET have not only higher tolls for people without a transponder, but also surcharges for being billed in the mail. If they take too long to mail the bill, they can even charge late fees before your're even invoiced (this HAS happened with multiple AET toll roads in the US)! Between the higher tolls and the fees, it all adds up, quite a lot. Back in the day, everyone who drove the same distance on a toll road in the same vehicle class got the same bill. Not any more, and that makes me angry. While I do understand having some discount for having a transponder (it does, after all, cost more to collect cash at a booth), the price difference (especially) including fees is often more than is reasonable (see: ON 407, A-25, the MassPike, the Pennsylvania Turnpike, among others). That said, my understanding is that the bill by mail rate for the Golden Gate Bridge is actually reasonable, so it at least happens a non-zero amount of the time, but it's not often. Depending on the rates, it could be $2, or it could cost as much as half a tank of gas.
Personally, I find the idea of a small flat rate toll that is regardless of distance to be strange. I also know that tolls in NYC, which are also used to support transit (as this toll is intended for), are sky high. The reason? Transit tends to be a financial black hole. I would expect that toll to go up over time. Even at $2, though, it DOES add up for the commuters who use the road every day. I would expect a lot of traffic to divert and choke up the surface roads (and with Waze, no road is safe unless it's a dead end).
So, my desire to grab a clinch before the tolls come into effect is twofold: it's not exactly hard given my other travel priorities (ON 401 between Toronto and Kingston is on my todo list, as are many other 400 series highways), and because the past experience with AET in North America hasn't exactly been that great and I'm too stubborn to eat some costs even when they aren't terribly high in the big picture (not just AET either; I do my own taxes using a crappy electronic forms system instead of using software or hiring a tax preparer because I don't feel that I shouldn't have to do or pay for such a thing).
I would love to see Ontario (and Quebec; ideally also Nova Scotia and PEI) join E-ZPass or become interoperable (I think the 407 even uses the same technology as E-ZPass, so there's really no excuse other than the currency issue, and I can't see why something couldn't be worked out; credit/debit/ATM cards figured it out, why not toll transponders?). Heck, when the Thousand Islands Bridge finally joins like they've been talking about for years now, there will be an E-ZPass toll that one could pay and remain entirely within Canada! I would be much more likely to use the 407 system if it was interoperable, and most of my objections to this toll would evaporate if this occurred. Alas, even within Canada, interoperability is extremely poor. Quebec even has two different transponders in use in Montreal alone. Based on Montreal, I would expect TornotoPass to be a new transponder interoperable with nothing, not even the 407.
I'll admit, I'm not the typical user of the road. However, that doesn't mean that I have to be happy about this.
Heh. I remember when E-Z Pass on the Thousand Islands Bridge was part of NYSDOT's abortive Borders and Corridors ITS Strategic Plan about a decade ago. :D
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2016, 01:50:34 PM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on November 25, 2016, 09:57:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 24, 2016, 09:03:47 PM
That last one is what happens in nearly every other place in North America.
I guess I can kiss any hope of clinching the DVP goodbye. I am not paying what I'm sure will be quite high bill by mail fees. Thankfully I already have the Gardiner.
That was today's news.
There was enough backlash in Toronto that the Mayor reneged on his initial plan. Instead, he is now going to try and make up the $300 million in annual revenue exclusively through pay by mail fees from tourists visiting from New York State.
Does Canada have any enforcement ability against people from another country? Would the mayor just hope that people see a bill and pay it? Could someone be denied entry/detained at the border because when their passport is scanned, something comes up on the computer saying they owe a toll from a previous trip?
Depends on the state and the province. Some states and provinces have agreements where they share information with each other. Michigan and Ontario do this, as do New York and Ontario.
Quote from: vdeane on December 15, 2016, 01:55:20 PM
I'm not against paying a toll per se. I don't make much of an effort to shunpike tolls in the E-ZPass area; heck, I've paid the sky high rates on the NYC bridges/tunnels just to clinch stuff. I've even paid to cross the American span of the Thousand Islands Bridge just to get some photos of I-81 (and because it's my favorite bridge).
What I am against is paying more because I'm not from the area, don't have the local transponder, the office took its sweet time to mail the bill, etc. I don't even like E-ZPass states with different rates for people who have a transponder for their state and those who have transponders from other states. Nothing I can do about that, though. I can do something about this, though. I live in upstate NY. There are roadmeets in the midwest practically every year. Passing through the area to snag the clinch before the tolls go into effect is NOT hard, I just need to make it a priority and hope it aligns with my travel plans.
Many places that have AET have not only higher tolls for people without a transponder, but also surcharges for being billed in the mail. If they take too long to mail the bill, they can even charge late fees before your're even invoiced (this HAS happened with multiple AET toll roads in the US)! Between the higher tolls and the fees, it all adds up, quite a lot. Back in the day, everyone who drove the same distance on a toll road in the same vehicle class got the same bill. Not any more, and that makes me angry. While I do understand having some discount for having a transponder (it does, after all, cost more to collect cash at a booth), the price difference (especially) including fees is often more than is reasonable (see: ON 407, A-25, the MassPike, the Pennsylvania Turnpike, among others). That said, my understanding is that the bill by mail rate for the Golden Gate Bridge is actually reasonable, so it at least happens a non-zero amount of the time, but it's not often. Depending on the rates, it could be $2, or it could cost as much as half a tank of gas.
Personally, I find the idea of a small flat rate toll that is regardless of distance to be strange. I also know that tolls in NYC, which are also used to support transit (as this toll is intended for), are sky high. The reason? Transit tends to be a financial black hole. I would expect that toll to go up over time. Even at $2, though, it DOES add up for the commuters who use the road every day. I would expect a lot of traffic to divert and choke up the surface roads (and with Waze, no road is safe unless it's a dead end).
So, my desire to grab a clinch before the tolls come into effect is twofold: it's not exactly hard given my other travel priorities (ON 401 between Toronto and Kingston is on my todo list, as are many other 400 series highways), and because the past experience with AET in North America hasn't exactly been that great and I'm too stubborn to eat some costs even when they aren't terribly high in the big picture (not just AET either; I do my own taxes using a crappy electronic forms system instead of using software or hiring a tax preparer because I don't feel that I shouldn't have to do or pay for such a thing).
I would love to see Ontario (and Quebec; ideally also Nova Scotia and PEI) join E-ZPass or become interoperable (I think the 407 even uses the same technology as E-ZPass, so there's really no excuse other than the currency issue, and I can't see why something couldn't be worked out; credit/debit/ATM cards figured it out, why not toll transponders?). Heck, when the Thousand Islands Bridge finally joins like they've been talking about for years now, there will be an E-ZPass toll that one could pay and remain entirely within Canada! I would be much more likely to use the 407 system if it was interoperable, and most of my objections to this toll would evaporate if this occurred. Alas, even within Canada, interoperability is extremely poor. Quebec even has two different transponders in use in Montreal alone. Based on Montreal, I would expect TornotoPass to be a new transponder interoperable with nothing, not even the 407.
I'll admit, I'm not the typical user of the road. However, that doesn't mean that I have to be happy about this.
the 407 has high Monthly Transponder fees by joining EZ-Pass people get an account from a state that has a $0 pre mouth fee.
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on December 16, 2016, 12:06:34 AM
the 407 has high Monthly Transponder fees
The annual transponder lease is $23.50, which breaks down to $1.96 per month. CAA pegs the average annual cost of owning a small sedan at $6,729. If $23.50 is a big deal to you, perhaps car ownership isn't for you.
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on December 16, 2016, 12:06:34 AM
by joining EZ-Pass people get an account from a state that has a $0 pre mouth fee.
So where is the incentive for the private company to not charge the $4.05 video toll fees to people without a transponder? Maybe have an EZPass user fee then so they can recoup that lost revenue. Say, $4.05 for the EZPass fee?
The toll rate is specifically designed to maximize revenue - attract as many users as possible before service breaks down. There is zero advantage to them to inter-operate with EZ Pass or anyone else. Right now they have precisely as many customers as they want.
Quote from: Brandon on December 15, 2016, 03:59:00 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2016, 01:50:34 PM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on November 25, 2016, 09:57:55 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 24, 2016, 09:03:47 PM
That last one is what happens in nearly every other place in North America.
I guess I can kiss any hope of clinching the DVP goodbye. I am not paying what I'm sure will be quite high bill by mail fees. Thankfully I already have the Gardiner.
That was today's news.
There was enough backlash in Toronto that the Mayor reneged on his initial plan. Instead, he is now going to try and make up the $300 million in annual revenue exclusively through pay by mail fees from tourists visiting from New York State.
Does Canada have any enforcement ability against people from another country? Would the mayor just hope that people see a bill and pay it? Could someone be denied entry/detained at the border because when their passport is scanned, something comes up on the computer saying they owe a toll from a previous trip?
Depends on the state and the province. Some states and provinces have agreements where they share information with each other. Michigan and Ontario do this, as do New York and Ontario.
Right...but can any (and to clarify my 'Canada' remark earlier...) agency, province, city, etc enforce those violation notices for a citizen from another country? For example, the notice goes to the owner of record for the vehicle. Can a border patrol agent deny that person entrance into the country based on that violation? Do the local police, meter maids, etc, have access to that information?
Basically, and this would be the same in EZ Pass land here in the States as well, can New York go after someone from Canada, other than sending them the standard notice that they have to pay?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 16, 2016, 09:36:18 AM
Right...but can any (and to clarify my 'Canada' remark earlier...) agency, province, city, etc enforce those violation notices for a citizen from another country? For example, the notice goes to the owner of record for the vehicle. Can a border patrol agent deny that person entrance into the country based on that violation? Do the local police, meter maids, etc, have access to that information?
Basically, and this would be the same in EZ Pass land here in the States as well, can New York go after someone from Canada, other than sending them the standard notice that they have to pay?
For parking tickets and the like, short answer is no, there's not much they can do. Unless your own state/province has a reciprocal agreement with Ontario then there's no real enforcement.
For Ontario if you have outstanding municipally issued tickets then you can't renew your plate. So that's the extent of punishment for that.
However if you're a repeat offender (3 or more violations) and they find your car illegally parked they'll tow it instead of just writing another ticket.
Quote from: cbeach40 on December 16, 2016, 09:07:14 AM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on December 16, 2016, 12:06:34 AM
the 407 has high Monthly Transponder fees
The annual transponder lease is $23.50, which breaks down to $1.96 per month. CAA pegs the average annual cost of owning a small sedan at $6,729. If $23.50 is a big deal to you, perhaps car ownership isn't for you.
It is a bit high, when compared to other toll road agencies. For example, the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (ISTHA) charges a $10 refundable deposit for the I-Pass transponder (aka EZ Pass) plus $20 in preloaded tolls. There is no monthly or annual fee. The only fee charged is if you get the transponder at a Jewel-Osco (grocery chain), and they charge $2.90, payable to Jewel-Osco. That's a one-time fee. Quite frankly, ISHTA makes so much in tolls that charging anything extra just isn't worth it.
IMO annual/monthly fees for transponders should be illegal. Interoperability should be mandated and the amount people have to pay the same no matter where their transponder is from. There should not be minimum usage requirements for a transponder either. These are basic things that should be part of a "toll road user bill of rights" that needs to be enshrined into law in both the US and Canada.
Quite frankly, I find the 407's price gouging and profiteering to be offensive. Ontario ROYALLY screwed up when they sold the road. If I had my way, that deal would be turned into confetti and the company booted out of the province, or at the very least, extremely strict regulations would be forced onto the company (if Ontario must keep them around, they should be restricted to a 10% profit margin on the base toll rate, and no profit on anything else; for that matter, it should be strictly forbidden for any organization in any capacity to make money off a "fee" as the purpose of a fee is to pass a cost incurred by what the consumer is doing onto the consumer, not to provide another profit center).
As for enforcement, any place with an agreement with Ontario would apply their own penalties. So, if you rake up a lot of unpaid tolls, and your state would suspend your licence for that, if you state has that agreement, your licence would be suspended. And while I don't believe arrest warrants are issued for unpaid tolls, they are for many other types of unpaid fees (at least in the US), and that would certainly be available to personnel at the border. Even if there isn't an agreement or anything else, it could certainly come to bite you in the rear the next time you're in Ontario if the police spot your car.
Quote from: Brandon on December 16, 2016, 10:19:24 AM
Quite frankly, ISHTA makes so much in tolls that charging anything extra just isn't worth it.
If they make so much why is their work zone protection such utter crap? Crash attenuation? What's that?
:)
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2016, 01:05:31 PM
IMO annual/monthly fees for transponders should be illegal. Interoperability should be mandated and the amount people have to pay the same no matter where their transponder is from. There should not be minimum usage requirements for a transponder either. These are basic things that should be part of a "toll road user bill of rights" that needs to be enshrined into law in both the US and Canada.
Based on..? Other than the fact that you don't like it, is there a reason, based in actual legal rationale, for doing that?
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2016, 01:05:31 PM
Quite frankly, I find the 407's price gouging and profiteering to be offensive. Ontario ROYALLY screwed up when they sold the road.
Leased, but agreed it is a bad contract.
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2016, 01:05:31 PM
If I had my way, that deal would be turned into confetti and the company booted out of the province, or at the very least, extremely strict regulations would be forced onto the company (if Ontario must keep them around, they should be restricted to a 10% profit margin on the base toll rate, and no profit on anything else; for that matter, it should be strictly forbidden for any organization in any capacity to make money off a "fee" as the purpose of a fee is to pass a cost incurred by what the consumer is doing onto the consumer, not to provide another profit center).
It's a legally-binding contract. Reneging on it would be disastrous for the province's reputation as a place to do business, not to mention the legal fallout would be tremendous when the lawsuits start flying over that.
Reneging on a contract that was negotiated in good faith is an unfathomably terrible idea. Regardless of how much it may favour one side.
Quote from: Brandon on December 16, 2016, 10:19:24 AM
Quote from: cbeach40 on December 16, 2016, 09:07:14 AM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on December 16, 2016, 12:06:34 AM
the 407 has high Monthly Transponder fees
The annual transponder lease is $23.50, which breaks down to $1.96 per month. CAA pegs the average annual cost of owning a small sedan at $6,729. If $23.50 is a big deal to you, perhaps car ownership isn't for you.
It is a bit high, when compared to other toll road agencies. For example, the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (ISTHA) charges a $10 refundable deposit for the I-Pass transponder (aka EZ Pass) plus $20 in preloaded tolls. There is no monthly or annual fee. The only fee charged is if you get the transponder at a Jewel-Osco (grocery chain), and they charge $2.90, payable to Jewel-Osco. That's a one-time fee. Quite frankly, ISHTA makes so much in tolls that charging anything extra just isn't worth it.
As for you cbeach, you'd like to know how I would raise revenue without creating "revenue tools", for starters, I would wage war with the police unions, just look at how many everyday officers appear on that sunshine list. It's evident that the public sector is experiencing out of control growth in this province, and why should the politicians care, that's simply more votes for Kathleen Wynne's party. The same thing can be said of the teachers unions, which I detest even more, I have extreme hatred for teachers.
You want to raise revenue, I would tax every single sunshiner $10,000, if you did that, you'd have a billion dollars right there to work with.
If you want me to explain better what I was speaking of regarding the Sheppard East LRT/Finch West LRT and rapid transit status, consider this diagram that which the TTC appeared to have released to showcase the new line numbers:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftorontoist.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F10%2Fttc-signs-4-map-detail-border.jpg&hash=ad88ffea0efa6655ace8eb4a70ce5f0892c7edad)
Let us go back in time to 1989, when the TTC introduced the so called "Harbourfront LRT":
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftransit.toronto.on.ca%2Fimages%2Fstreetcar-4001-03.jpg&hash=9c460e9a5c833eb148c933db32525d1a0555d5c2)
As you can see, they were showing off this route as being better than a streetcar, it was "Light Rail Transit", it was numbered Route 604 (for the record, 601, 602, and 603 referred to the other rapid transit lines at the time internally) unlike the other streetcar routes which were 500-series routes. This Harbourfront LRT actually appeared on the map as a rapid transit line like the other 3 from 1990 to at least 1993 (I can't find maps of the '94 and '95 ride guide):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftransit.toronto.on.ca%2Fimages%2F01-1991-front.jpg&hash=f958e1ad7a3547d90c21222843a977c3dfa8e319)
The TTC eventually came to realize that the speed of this line isn't all that great, and so with the Spadina right-of-way streetcar opening sometime in 1997, the combined route was renumbered 510 Spadina.....not to be outdone, an extension of the right of way along the Queen's Quay corridor to the Exhibition Grounds allowed the Harbourfront route to come back....this time as the 509 Harbourfront streetcar.
Basically, the point of this story is, who's to say when Crosstown, Sheppard East, and Finch West LRTs, that the TTC does not realize a similar endgame and decides to rebrand them as 500 series routes. I mean seriously, what is overall different about the right-of-way streetcar routes such as 509 Harbourfront, 510 Spadina, or more recently 512 St Clair, compared to the three future LRT routes I've mentioned? Stops may be further apart, but it's in reality the same thing, we all know the LRT will use a RYG traffic signal like any other right-of-way transit vehicle does.
Through my own riding experiments (on weekends mind you), I have observed that the Spadina streetcar takes approximately 2.5 times longer to complete a similar amount of distance than the University subway....I also estimated that roughly 30% of ride time on the Spadina streetcar is spent stopped at red lights. I was an opponent of Transit City long before Rob Ford came out of the woodwork, because frankly, it sucks. For the amount of money it costs to build a right-of-way, for service which isn't significantly better, or in some cases arguably worse, see Spadina, it's better off to do nothing on those corridors at this point, or better yet, the Crosstown should have been a full blown subway and the other 2 LRT lines should have been ignored.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 16, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
Don't mind cbeach40 and his holier than thou attitude. He is the essence of the Ontario government worker, arrogant and snobby.
1. That definitely is not what the OPS is like. In some ways to its benefit, in other ways to its detriment.
2. I'm not being arrogant, I'm just calling out flawed arguments. You're welcome to respond, ideally with thoughts and backed up ideas, not classless ad hominem attacks
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 16, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
As for you cbeach, you'd like to know how I would raise revenue without creating "revenue tools", for starters, I would wage war with the police unions, just look at how many everyday officers appear on that sunshine list. It's evident that the public sector is experiencing out of control growth in this province, and why should the politicians care, that's simply more votes for Kathleen Wynne's party.
It's really not evident. The Ontario Public Service is still much smaller than it was pre-Harris. But hey, the nice thing is that more work's been transferred to independent consultants and contractors. Which has worked so well, just look at winter maintenance.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 16, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
The same thing can be said of the teachers unions, which I detest even more, I have extreme hatred for teachers.
It's rather apparent they have failed at teaching some, so that may be understandable.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 16, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
You want to raise revenue, I would tax every single sunshiner $10,000, if you did that, you'd have a billion dollars right there to work with.
Yes, because a great way to encourage retention and attract talent is to cut their pay.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on December 16, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
If you want me to explain better what I was speaking of regarding the Sheppard East LRT/Finch West LRT and rapid transit status...
No, this is off-topic and the discussion should be moved to the mass transit section of the forum.
No more name calling. Stick to the issues or find yourselves with warnings and bans.
Quote from: cbeach40 on December 16, 2016, 01:20:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2016, 01:05:31 PM
IMO annual/monthly fees for transponders should be illegal. Interoperability should be mandated and the amount people have to pay the same no matter where their transponder is from. There should not be minimum usage requirements for a transponder either. These are basic things that should be part of a "toll road user bill of rights" that needs to be enshrined into law in both the US and Canada.
Based on..? Other than the fact that you don't like it, is there a reason, based in actual legal rationale, for doing that?
Based on my own moral principles based on fairness and absolute equality (basically, don't treat anyone any differently than anyone else except for anything based on how their actions affect you); I'll admit that I tend to take the uncommon stance that the law should bend to such things rather than the other way around.
Now oddly enough, Kathleen Wynne says she's not going to allow the tolls to go through....interesting....
https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/queenspark/2017/01/27/kathleen-wynne-stopping-john-torys-plan-for-tolls-on-dvp-gardiner.html
Quote from: vdeane on December 17, 2016, 12:12:16 AM
Quote from: cbeach40 on December 16, 2016, 01:20:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 16, 2016, 01:05:31 PM
IMO annual/monthly fees for transponders should be illegal. Interoperability should be mandated and the amount people have to pay the same no matter where their transponder is from. There should not be minimum usage requirements for a transponder either. These are basic things that should be part of a "toll road user bill of rights" that needs to be enshrined into law in both the US and Canada.
Based on..? Other than the fact that you don't like it, is there a reason, based in actual legal rationale, for doing that?
Based on my own moral principles based on fairness and absolute equality (basically, don't treat anyone any differently than anyone else except for anything based on how their actions affect you); I'll admit that I tend to take the uncommon stance that the law should bend to such things rather than the other way around.
I agree. I like to compare the electronic toll to the old school toll booth operator. Only the people who actually use the tolls should pay the tolls. The entire cost of the infrastructure for a turnpike, (i.e. capital costs for the road, maintenance, staffing, and administrative costs) were paid by tolls and tolls were only paid by those who actually drove the road and only when they drove. I don't like the newer toll structures that charge monthly fees for the privilege of having a transponder - the fees should be solely based on usage.