With an early election potentially looming in Ontario, Ontario Premier Doug Ford is pitching commuters on a road spending spree. In late September, he stood before reporters to propose a traffic tunnel under Highway 401, and this week he’s considering buying back Highway 407 to tackle Toronto's chronic congestion.
The tunnel, expected to stretch approximately 40 to 50 kilometres from Brampton to Scarborough, is presented as a solution to a critical issue for commuters in the Greater Toronto Area. But critics were quick to question its feasibility, cost and environmental impact, suggesting the announcement may be more of an election strategy than a practical plan.
In a Sept. 25 press conference, Ford announced plans for a feasibility study to evaluate the tunnel's length and cost, asserting that the project would proceed regardless of the study's findings: “We’re getting this tunnel built,” he said.
Earlier this week, Ford also confirmed that his government is considering buying back Highway 407 from its private owners, at a potential cost of more than $35 billion, and removing the toll currently levied on drivers.
Both the tunnel and highway buyback proposals have been received with a mixture of incredulity, amusement and outrage by experts in land use, who say the costs and environmental impacts will be huge — while the transportation gains will be negligible at best.
Induced demand
While Ford pitches the tunnel as a solution to traffic congestion, experts argue that the project could have the opposite effect. Shoshanna Saxe, associate professor of sustainable infrastructure at the University of Toronto, is particularly skeptical of the proposal.
“At a lower bound, the tunnel would cost $50 billion and take at least 20 years to complete,” Saxe said. Even with such a hefty price tag and timeline, Saxe contends, the tunnel would do nothing to alleviate congestion — in fact, it could make it worse.
Saxe said building more road capacity encourages more driving, eventually leading to the same or even worse levels of congestion, a well-documented phenomenon known as induced demand.
“We’ve tried this for 100 years,” she said. “Building more lanes or tunnels doesn't solve traffic—it just creates more of it.”
Saxe argues that a tunnel under the 401 would not only be a colossal waste of resources but would also exacerbate existing environmental problems, including increased pollution and urban sprawl.
Saxe told Canada’s National Observer that constructing an underground tunnel would require enormous amounts of energy and materials, leading to significant environmental damage.
“Building underground is about 30 times more polluting than building at the surface,” Saxe said. The construction process, the energy required to operate tunnel-boring machines, and the long-term costs of maintaining and ventilating the tunnel would all contribute to increased emissions.
“It’s not just bad economics or bad planning — it’s terrible for the environment,” she said.
Saxe also points out that Ontario has made strides in reducing air pollution, notably by closing coal plants before any other North American jurisdiction. However, the proposed tunnel could reverse those gains, leading to poorer air quality in the GTA. “Cars are one of the main threats to air quality, which we know causes cancer, dementia and other health issues,” Saxe said. “This tunnel would make that worse.”
Saxe found similar flaws in Ford's musings about buying back Highway 407. She contends that making the highway more affordable would lead to increased usage, which would exacerbate traffic issues rather than alleviate them in the long run.
Saxe advocates for investments in public transit and active transportation, instead of catering to drivers.
“Imagine what we could do with $50 billion or $100 billion to enhance public transportation in Ontario,” she said.
Instead of pursuing large-scale infrastructure projects that ultimately serve to encourage car dependency, Saxe believes that improving Go Train services, re-establishing bus routes, and creating dedicated bus and bike lanes would yield significant benefits in a fraction of the time.
Phil Pothen, land use and development program manager at Environmental Defence, said in an email that Ford's push for a tunnel, much like his advocacy for Highway 413, is based on a misrepresentation of how population and economic growth impact Ontario’s transportation system.
He suggests that, contrary to Ford’s assumptions, more people and jobs should not necessarily lead to more car commuters. Instead, increased population density in existing neighborhoods would reduce car trips by supporting schools, grocery stores, and cost-effective public transit, making it easier for residents — both old and new — to rely less on cars.
“There can be little doubt that, even if the Premier had any genuine intention of building this red herring highway scheme, it would make car traffic even worse,” Pothen said. “It would squander the scarce construction labour that is needed to end Ontario’s housing shortage, and it would cause a lot of environmental harm.”
Tunnel attractive to Ford — ‘whether it’s realistic or not’
Peter Graefe, an associate professor of political science at McMaster University, told Canada's National Observer that the core of Ford's electoral coalition consists of suburban residents who spend large portions of their day stuck in traffic in these areas.
“I think for Ford… this idea of a tunnel is attractive to him, whether it's realistic or not,” Graefe said.
In a statement, Ford highlighted the severity of Ontario’s gridlock, noting that Toronto-area commuters spend an average of 98 hours a year stuck in traffic, which not only cuts into time with family and friends, but also costs the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) economy $11 billion annually.
Graefe said Ford is promising to address congestion in a way that doesn't affect how people typically get around — in cars — which means that even if the plan is a bit far-fetched, many people will likely say, “Well, here's someone who's trying to solve our problems.”
Graefe noted that the tunnel project could significantly benefit Ford's constituency, particularly those working in construction and trades, suggesting it could create job opportunities for years.
“For Doug Ford, the real question is whether this proposal is solid enough to carry him through to the next election,” Graefe said. “The only real downside, I think, politically, is if people laugh at him and say that he’s just making things up rather than actually trying to find a solution to a real problem.”
Graefe said that Ontario voters tend to pay less attention to provincial politics, which allows politicians to get away with making lofty promises that may not be realistic.
Convincing the public to spend billions on a new tunnel or buying back Highway 407 would be a tough sell, Graefe noted. The large sums of money involved could spark concerns, particularly among residents outside the Greater Toronto Area.
Graefe warned that people in other parts of the province might feel alienated if the government appears to prioritize solving Toronto's traffic issues at such a high price, especially if it leads to higher taxes for all Ontarians.
Comments