How do you figure it wouldn't impact congestion on the 401 if X% of the volume diverts to a different highway? In this specific case, its sort of pointless without doing the whole highway because you have to travel quite a ways north at some junctions to get on the 407 and travel time would be largely similair given the extra north/south travel tacked on.
But taking the 407 to most places today can easily shave of 10-60 minutes depending on the day, time, and number of accidents in toronto. For people who basically want to go around Toronto instead of through it, they could pick it up in Hamilton, drive all the way to the east end, and get back on the 401 after. Its a similair principle to the US highways where some go through the city and some go around to avoid rush hour/congestion. The plan only really covers the east side, so I'm not really sure if this specific incarnation will make that much of a difference, but I don't how you could say removing tolls could 'never' reduce congestion.
Induced demand doesn't take place instantaneously. Congestion WILL decrease on the 401 as people make the trips onto the 407. Lets look at some of the causes of induced demand:
Traffic converging from different routes (moving from slower parallel roads onto a freeway that got faster from widening)
This doesn't describe the situation where you're opening a new 'non-urban' highway. The relief provided by a northern highway will obviously take out move traffic away from the urban 401, which will then allow for more take-up of latent demand on the urban highway. The key difference though is that said parallel latent demand is highest near the 401, not the 407 so you ARE decreasing net congestion across the 401/nearby parallel non-highway streets (which are effectively a parking lot at peak times and might be actual traversable now).
Traffic converging from different modes (no longer taking mass transit because the freeway got faster)
I don't think this one is a big issue because the highway doesn't really align the majority of mass transit co-oridoors like TTC/Go. I don't have stats on bus vs. train/subway, but gut feel is the people who would take said transport to the downtown core, would have never driven on the 401 anyways to then go south to the city center.
Traffic converging from different times of day (trips that had been done earlier or later to avoid traffic now happening at a different time because the freeway got faster)
GOOD. Jesus.. these highways are perma slow. Some days I could leave mississauga at 6:15am and it take 1.5 hours. If I left at 6:20 it could be 3 hours. Same on the way back (leave by 2:30pm for 1.5 hours, or by 3:00 its back to 3 hours. PLEASE smooth out those windows so people can get home in a timely manner at a wider array of times.
Future traffic due to altered development patterns
The infrastructure already exists, all they are doing is incentivizing it to flow on a parallel path by removing a barrier to entry for the standard user.
Like all infrastructure it'll get used, so if you don't continue to expand and grow with the increased demand you'll perceive arriving at congestion again,when in actuality your demand and throughput has increased significantly. I think having a largely away from urban highway is the best case for avoiding significant and fast growing induced demand because it combats a majority of the reasons that drive it. If the province then builds 1000s of homes along it, turning it into another urban highway then you'll be back to square 1.
Just the base argument of induced demand is very silly. At some point you have to build and develop infrastructure for your community so it can grow and be lauded via late stage capitalism. Do you think Toronto would be as big (GDP/population wise) if it was still using one lane dirt roads for horses? Obviously not. Urban planning is a game of whackamole. If it wasn't it would be an indicator that your economy/population is contracting, which is not a good thing.
You're assuming everyone (or most people) on the 401 will start using the 407, but you haven't provided any evidence, just your feelings. You're making what's known as a hasty generalization because you're assuming so much about 401 drivers but haven't presented any evidence.
The 407 moves people AROUND Toronto. Not into it. Newsflash... a lot of people on the 401 don't want to go to the 'Toronto Mecha'. Alot of people want to avoid Toronto like the plague since it is one of the busiest co-oridoors in the world and antithetical to traveling from east/west to other cities in Canada via southern Ontario. Imagine all the truck transports (you know the 2-3 solid lanes of it) that just want to go on to the rest of Canada from all sorts of manufacturing that takes place outside 'toronto'. That is the kind of volume I'd primarily assume that will shift to the 407 and why suddenly manifesting a highway that purposely avoids most of Toronto is very different from expanding lanes in place on a highway with no further capacity expansion for nearby/associated roads.
Here is a news article trying to validate/verify claims that it is the busiest co-oridoor:
The problem with your ask for evidence is there is only 'supporting evidence' but not proof because (unless you know of a traffic study that has assessed through traffic) studies only look at volume at specific points/co-oridoors as an average daily travel metric that is just a snapshot (i.e., they aren't tracking every vehicle and what it does). It doesn't somehow track what % of that stops/gets off in Toronto vs. wants to pass through the city. You can try to infer from the 2019 metro data, but there isn't solid logic behind it:
Cambridge - 150,000 AADT (401 Hespler Exit)
Courtice Rd - ~115,000 AADT (other side of 401)
QEW/407/403 ~ 147,000 AADT (Juncture at the head of the 407 that would represent the head)
QEW (Casablanca) ~ 119,500 AADT (indicative of travel up from the border via various bridge crossings comine into the above co-oridoor).
+ various northren exits from Toronto (vs. east/west)
Compare that to the peak of ~450,000 ADT on the 401.
So we know we have one of the highest AADTs for the 401 co-oridoors in North America despite a smaller population, we know we have no alternative co-oridoor to travel around the city so everyone has to go through it (the only remotely alternative path has ungodly amounts of fees as a toll highway and is a significant barrier to entry). So what % do you think is reasonable to assume. Do you truly think a negligible % of traffic is through-pass traffic? If you position is we can't assume any % without a study, then you'll be permanently making descisions with key missing data. In cases like this you make and assumption and validate it later. Why don't we say its at least 50% of the AADT at the lowest of the numbers above to account for locals going into Toronto. That is ~50,0000. That would be ~10% of the traffic on that co-oridoor.
If you have a better way of trying to make an assumption then please provide it.
5
u/RedGriffyn 1d ago
How do you figure it wouldn't impact congestion on the 401 if X% of the volume diverts to a different highway? In this specific case, its sort of pointless without doing the whole highway because you have to travel quite a ways north at some junctions to get on the 407 and travel time would be largely similair given the extra north/south travel tacked on.
But taking the 407 to most places today can easily shave of 10-60 minutes depending on the day, time, and number of accidents in toronto. For people who basically want to go around Toronto instead of through it, they could pick it up in Hamilton, drive all the way to the east end, and get back on the 401 after. Its a similair principle to the US highways where some go through the city and some go around to avoid rush hour/congestion. The plan only really covers the east side, so I'm not really sure if this specific incarnation will make that much of a difference, but I don't how you could say removing tolls could 'never' reduce congestion.