Toronto’s election campaign has produced two real stinkers in the Mayoralty race. Rob Ford wants a few subway extensions, elimination of streetcars and everyone else left to buses. Rocco Rossi would sell Toronto Hydro, use the supposed proceeds to build subways, and last but not least, extend the Spadina Expressway via a tunnel to downtown.
I will not waste space on critiques of these plans. The proposition that subways will solve every problem has been discussed at length here and doesn’t need yet another round. The idea of an expressway tunnel is so outlandish, so contrary to four decades of city planning, so much an attack on the City of Toronto, so unworthy of one who would be Mayor, that it deserves only contempt.
However, these ideas come from somewhere. “Out there” the pollsters must say there is a gold mine of resentment by those who drive, and by those who would drive given half a chance. That translates to support for anyone who wants all transit plans to take a back seat to right-thinking, road-oriented policies. How, in a city that considers itself a progressive, pro-transit 21st century metropolis, is this possible?
The origins lie decades ago, even before the Spadina Expressway was stopped by then Premier Davis.
In 1966, the TTC network was much smaller, the east-west Bloor-Danforth subway had just opened from Keele to Woodbine and extensions to Islington and Warden would follow in 1968. The TTC contemplated suburban transit and proposed a ring line using streetcars (what we now call LRT) northeast into Scarborough, then across the Finch hydro corridor, and finally south and west to meet the western subway terminal. The line included a branch to the airport.
Meanwhile, Queen’s Park, enamoured of high-tech transit, fell into an oft-seen trap of Canadian politics — policy exists to serve industrial development, and plans are gerrymandered to serve industrial/manufacturing aims before the actual needs of the province or city. This always starts out with the best of intentions, but can do great damage when the product falls short if its hype.
Such was the case with the original scheme for magnetic levitation urban transit and a variation on “personal rapid transit”, probably the most expensive taxi system imaginable.
Leaving aside the debates on maglev, GO Urban and what eventually became the RT technology, there was one basic problem. The momentum to build into the still-empty suburbs was lost, and the perceived cost of new transit skyrocketed.
By 1990, frustration with the inactivity on transit expansion culminated in an announcement by then Premier Peterson of suburban subway extensions plus the Waterfront West LRT. The Sheppard subway was added to the mix at the last minute to bump the total spending numbers, a vital part of a pre-election campaign.
Peterson lost to Bob Rae, and the NDP government inherited this plan. Facing a recession in the construction industry, the last thing the NDP wanted was talk of scaling back expensive transit construction or replacing it with a less-costly alternative. All we actually built was a tiny chunk of tunnel on Eglinton and the beginning of the Sheppard Subway.
The Rae government begat the Harris regime and an almost complete withdrawal of Queen’s Park from transit funding from which Toronto has never recovered. The TTC slashed service across the board, and particularly hard-hit was the streetcar system. It gained two new lines (Spadina and Harbourfront), but not, on a permanent basis, the extra cars needed to operate them. For a time, system riding was down, and a smaller fleet was all the TTC needed. However, this compromised the TTC’s ability to add service in peak periods. Streetcar lines that once boasted frequent service all day turned into nightmares of overcrowding and unreliability.
The scheduled AM peak service shows a nearly 20% the decline in service on the streetcar route network. The numbers below are for the routes that existed in 1981 (all current routes except Harbourfront and Spadina).
- February 1981: 239 standard-sized cars
- November 1990: 217 cars of which 34 were ALRVs (75-foot cars) for an equivalent capacity of 234 “standard” cars
- September 2010: 169 cars of which 38 are ALRVs for an equivalent capacity of 188 “standard” cars. If the 504 were running to Dundas West Station, this number would rise to about 194.
Streetcars became synonymous with bad transit service just as the city began to reverse the trend to suburban living. The many new downtown and near-downtown condos show there’s a market for in-town living, but the new residents must put up with poor transit service, not the greatest advertisement for life without a car.
TTC compounds the problem with poor line management, indifference to service quality and the attitude that “TTC culture” prevents any improvement.
Bus riders in the suburbs encounter similar problems on busy routes, but at least in recent years a fleet refresh plus improved loading standards make some difference although many would argue that the TTC is still only barely keeping up to demand.
Plans and promises for new transit lines are on the back burner in Malvern and Northern Etobicoke, two remote outer parts of the City.
Car drivers see no improvements. Overwhelmingly they drive outside the core, indeed outside the 416. No subway will help them, and transit in the suburbs is a distant second choice.
Even for commuters to downtown, GO has been starved for expansion, and service is very core-oriented. Bus service in the 905 generally supports peak direction, peak period travel, and the idea of a “transit lifestyle” is unheard of. The first line proposed for frequent all day GO service is an airport shuttle at a premium fare serving almost none of the potential demand in its corridor.
There are many plans including the most recent consolidation, Metrolinx’ Big Move, but little action. Planning aims to reduce congestion and pollution, but even the best case only keep pace as population and travel growth outstrip capacity benefits.
Funding stretches out to the dim future, and politicians’ will to engage in debates of tolls or taxes is held hostage by the “no new tax brigade”. Even business groups like the Board of Trade recognize the need to invest in transit, but this is very slow to appear. We won’t see major improvements for years. The glass is more than half empty. After $50-billion in transit spending, congestion won’t be much better than it is today, although more people will be riding transit.
Can we blame motorists for thinking nobody takes them seriously, that nothing will ever be done? Politicians talk about transit, but until quite recently did little to actually improve it. Half measures are the norm, and real transit improvement throughout the GTA is always something for tomorrow when fiscal and political pressure might relax enough for a tiny bit of new spending and revenue generation.
How can regional governments justify big spending on transit when they see little hope of Provincial support and Metrolinx treats local service as something others will pay for?
Motorists are left steaming in their traffic jams. We have built a region on car travel, but at a density the road network cannot support. No subway line will cure problems on the 401.
Our challenge is to build and run enough transit to handle the demands transit can reasonably address. We will never solve all of the road problems> On some roads, life will become worse for motorists as more and more capacity is devoted to transit, cycling and pedestrians.
Trying to “solve” congestion by turning the clock back 50 years on highway plans, by gutting the surface transit system, will do nothing but make even worse the long-standing need for better transit. A “war on transit” solves nothing.
Every politician, every agency at the city and provincial level needs to speak with one voice on transit improvements. The TTC above all agencies must show how it can run better service to improve the lot of transit users today. The City and Province must lead on transit planning, construction and service, and engage voters on the issues of new revenues for capital and operating spending.
Politicians with facile “solutions” who appeal to a motorists’ nirvana that cannot be attained, should be dispatched to the electoral dustbins they so richly deserve.
Steve Munro 
You have mentioned many times, including this post, what should be done. I guess the question to ask now is, WILL it be done? The cynic in me suspects nothing substantial will be accomplished to solve these problems. And–I’m sorry: I suspect Rob Ford of being anti-transit because he considers it a socialist plot.
LikeLike
Hi Steve – just wanted your take on this – I have been reading through the TTC Commission meeting notes, as you know they are all down at the archives, for the years 1966 thru to 1985 recently.(Yes a long, and sometimes boring process). Anyways, from everything I have read it appears Scarborough is mostly to blame in a way for the RT technology. All the correspondence I have read shows Scarborough whining and complaining bitterly to the TTC, the City of Toronto and the Province about not wanting to be ‘second-class’ . They felt that a streetcar line was unfair. If others got a subway, they didn’t want to be stuck with a measly little streetcar etc. There is a good 6 or 7 years of this whining which shows up all the time. I mean they really started whining back in 54, Scarboro was a bunch of disconnected outposts here and there and they were always demanding more bus routes from the TTC. Just never happy! Anyways, do you think this attitude made it much easier for the Province to step in with the ‘new” RT tech????
LikeLike
A great post Steve, I really wish you had a larger platform to share it with
LikeLike
This is the best description yet of Toronto’s lost decades of transit. While Metrolinx writes another report on how much concrete can be poured, they continue to neglect the basics such as service planning, for example does anyone in GTA transit “management” understand the concept of a “timed transfer” between intersecting lines?
LikeLike
I have a lot of issues with Rossi’s plans, but in all fairness I believe it is important to point out a misrepresentation that would not go unmentioned if the tables were turned: Steve wrote, “Rocco Rossi would sell Toronto Hydro, use the supposed proceeds to build subways, …”
Rossi’s plans are to use the supposed proceeds to pay repay the city’s debt, then earmark the payments that would have been used to service that debt to build subways. As many have pointed out, including Steve, using proceeds from the sale of assets is a one-time cash injection, but the intent here is to use those proceeds for a one-time elimination of something that creates an ongoing item on the city budget. Granted, debt servicing payments don’t go on forever, but they are a far cry from a one-time issue.
That said, my concern with Rossi’s plan deals with more on how one can assure that the shift in spending from debt servicing to transit capital funding can be guaranteed to continue past his administration’s tenure. Added to that, there is the lack of planning on how to fund the operation of this new infrastructure.
LikeLike
Several of the leading candidates have their own transit plans, mostly stopping what we have currently planned and replacing them with their own. Enough already, do not stop any current construction going on. Else, we will never get anything built.
For those whose plans include just building heavy rail subways, where will the extra money come from? Heavy rail subways need high density to support them. Do the neighbours want high-rise buildings in their neighbourhood?
Streetcars were replaced by buses in most cities in North America. History has shown that decision was a mistake. Toronto did not, but did not expand into the suburbs either. Yes, streetcars are not liked by most of those who drive cars, but are liked by most of their passengers. However, light rail in their own right-of-way would be better in suburbs, if we can ever get the transportation department to give transit the real traffic signal priority they require.
LikeLike
The absurd Ford and Rossi plans cap off a profoundly disappointing electoral cycle for anyone who hoped that thanks to Transit City we might finally see the light at the end of Toronto’s long, dark, and depressing transit tunnel.
The crucial problem is leaving projects that are (by their very nature) long-term and capital-intensive to the vagaries and whims of short term political expediency. Without a sustained and guaranteed level of funding from the federal and provincial governments, expensive (in the short term) transit projects that will not reap gains for the city until years after their completion will always be a prime target for small-minded politicians like Ford whose stale and empty rhetoric about a “war on cars” and “defending the taxpayer” reveals only their unsuitability to lead a modern metropolis.
LikeLike
Tell me about it. I live in one of those new downtown condos, love streetcars, but have to put up with irregular service. Sigh. You’d think having a far-too-small fleet would actually make the TTC raise their line-management game.
LikeLike
What’s not obvious is how to best give feedback to the mayoral candidates.
As the election goes on, I am forced to consider Pantalone and Thompson to be the two best candidates. Thompson’s platform and experience has some obvious drawbacks, but Pantalone’s platform is invisible!
LikeLike
The TTC improved service on the 509 Harbourfront route this board period, especially during the peak periods. Six cars in the AM peak and 7 cars in the PM peak. A few years ago, it was 4 and 5 respectively. As always, line managment is still an issue at times with bunching, but overall, service is much better than a few years ago.
LikeLike
If Sarah Thompson was committed to building Transit City, but also included the DRL I’m pretty sure I would be voting for her without a second thought. Not that I might not end up voting for her- I am undecided at this point. At this point I know its anybody but Ford or Rossi.
Smitherman has been jumping left and right- I think this is going to hurt him in the end, unless just prior to the election Ford is still leading and people move to support Smitherman only to block Ford.
In general, Thompson has been growing into her own and recently introduced her bike plan, which is based on sustainable, progressive and urban based planning- exactly what we need. I think if Thompson was to introduce her transit plan today it might look different from what it does. Unlike the other candidates- she is the only candidate who has even been willing to approach how we are going to fund transit in any meaningful way.
LikeLike
” “Out there” the pollsters must say there is a gold mine of resentment by those who drive, and by those who would drive given half a chance. ”
I think the current anti-transit/TTC “polling” is actually confusing or conflating *four* different groups (two of Steve’s groups I’m interpreting as follows):
1) “those who drive”: those who hate transit and rarely take it. Btw, I suspect a good many of our city councillors and more than a few of our TTC commissioners fall into this group; I’m open to (and hopeful of) being proven wrong;
2) “those who would drive given half a chance”: those who actually ride the system because economically they have no choice but would prefer to drive;
3) those who actually ride the system, love the idea of transit and would love to see it improved, but endure horrible service and overly long commutes on their particular routes (I’m in this category, if you hadn’t noticed);
4) those who no longer ride the system because of commuting inconvenience, and probably too many adverse experiences, but support the idea of public transit and would use it if it served their needs.
The first group is more or less a “lost cause” in terms of political support of public transit. But, the other three groups represent a significant opportunity for forward-thinking politicians and transit planners.
In my experience, using transit in many other cities (and even using the TTC in the “old” days) was a very positive experience. I don’t know why the TTC, and most everyone who discusses transit in Toronto, persists in presenting public transit as something that’s “good for us”; sounds like the reason your grandmother gave you to take cod-liver-oil: “It’s yucky, but just hold your nose and don’t think about it so it doesn’t taste so bad.” This is an ideal way to turn everyone off the whole idea of public transit. We shouldn’t be preaching a “holier-than-thou” message to commuters that it is their duty to take transit in order to server the larger good, we should be designing transit from the perspective of making it effective and efficient such that it doesn’t require personal sacrifice to take it, so that people are happy to leave their cars at home.
@ Pete Coulman, thanks for your kind words on the other thread!
LikeLike
“However, these ideas come from somewhere. “Out there” the pollsters must say there is a gold mine of resentment by those who drive, and by those who would drive given half a chance. That translates to support for anyone who wants all transit plans to take a back seat to right-thinking, road-oriented policies. How, in a city that considers itself a progressive, pro-transit 21st century metropolis, is this possible?”
This is assuming that all right-wing thinkers think that way, which we don’t. I want a decent transit system as much as the next guy but in the end, we want a choice on how we want to get around the city. Issues like road tolls, expensive parking at TTC lots, increasing costs, boorish TTC employees, make us realize that it is not worth the trouble going through all the trouble to do our part and take public transit.
“The Rae government begat the Harris regime and an almost complete withdrawal of Queen’s Park from transit funding from which Toronto has never recovered. The TTC slashed service across the board, and particularly hard-hit was the streetcar system. It gained two new lines (Spadina and Harbourfront), but not, on a permanent basis, the extra cars needed to operate them. For a time, system riding was down, and a smaller fleet was all the TTC needed. However, this compromised the TTC’s ability to add service in peak periods. Streetcar lines that once boasted frequent service all day turned into nightmares of overcrowding and unreliability.”
As a conservative, I too am not a fan of the Harris years, though the one bright side of this period of time was that transit systems learned to run leaner and without waste. Gone were the days where buses would run the entire length of their route empty because they ran on areas that did not need service. In fact, I would think that OC Transpo in Ottawa (where I came from) ran a lot better than before the cutbacks. They knew the value of a more efficient operation and the drivers who worked there always remained friendly and courteous.
“Can we blame motorists for thinking nobody takes them seriously, that nothing will ever be done? Politicians talk about transit, but until quite recently did little to actually improve it. Half measures are the norm, and real transit improvement throughout the GTA is always something for tomorrow when fiscal and political pressure might relax enough for a tiny bit of new spending and revenue generation.”
I say no, we do not. But the increasing gridlock of the city can be attributed to people refusing to take public transit. My wife, for example carpools with 2 other people to Downtown Toronto. We crunched the numbers and we found that for her to take the TTC downtown would require more money than driving in a carpool. Previously she used to take the TTC with a different carpool, but that was before the TTC took away metropass parking, which was an attractive incentive to take transit.
“Politicians with facile “solutions” who appeal to a motorists’ nirvana that cannot be attained, should be dispatched to the electoral dustbins they so richly deserve.”
I am not asking for a motorist’s nirvana, even I too think that cannot be attained. But I am part of a growing mass of people who maintain that a person’s method of getting to work, whether it be public transit, or by car, should be their choice. Forcing people into one choice or another is not the way to solve our transit issues. You want to make a better transit system? Make it more attractive to take transit. Give some incentive for people to leave their cars. Forcing people (using such tools like road tolls, bike lanes, etc) instead feeds the perception on the “war on cars”, especially those who feel that they do not have much choice but to drive. Like it or not, these people have a very powerful vote. The more you push, the more those who have no choice but to rely on the car will push right back. And although I believe that Ford and Rossi’s transit plans will never gain any traction, there may be some candidate down the horizon who may explicitly be “anti transit” who WILL declare a war on the TTC when he becomes mayor. All of this will feed into the desire to gut our transportation network and build nothing but expressways. Then you’re in trouble.
LikeLike
The only advantages that buses have over streetcars are that a bus can easily move around blockage on the street and that they can even jump in front of each other. A crowded streetcar cannot slow down and wait for the empty streetcar behind it to move in front of it and it can be hard – or impossible in many places like the Lake Shore or St. Clair Ave. – for a streetcar to move around an accident or other blockage on the road.
However, if properly implemented a network of streetcars can work better then buses. However, subways, streetcars/LRT, and buses all have a place in a properly constructed transit plan.
The problem with Go is different in that it is core-oriented. Some routes, like the Barrie and Stouffville lines suffer from being primarily single lined routes, it would make scheduling harder. However, GO could use buses, in addition to trains where possible, to increase service that does not require one to go downtown in the morning and from downtown in the evenings as well as service during the day.
LikeLike
“And although I believe that Ford and Rossi’s transit plans will never gain any traction, there may be some candidate down the horizon who may explicitly be “anti transit” who WILL declare a war on the TTC when he becomes mayor. All of this will feed into the desire to gut our transportation network and build nothing but expressways. Then you’re in trouble.”
————–
*sigh*. Woodbridge resident or not, it might be time for a few more Ford supporters to attend some of the mayoralty debates and hear how he presents himself. At both that I’ve attended so far, Councillor Ford notes several times how it is his experience running a printing company — and not his time at Council meetings, or committees, or even public information sessions — that qualify him for the mayoralty, and his only mentions of transit or the TTC have been negative swipes at their culture and/or especially future transit plans. For the most part, however, he does not mention ANYTHING of future projects he’d like to see except for the handful in his head that don’t already have plans in motion. He may not be as rabidly anti-Transit as the quote claims someone eventually might be, but he’s about as far from supportive as any lifetime resident of the city could ever imagine hearing in a campaign… and worse, he has advisors who are INDEED anti-transit. So yeah, he won’t be able to build expressways in 416 — the property acquisition alone makes the capital costs insurmountable… but he also won’t be spending any money on making the TTC into a service that more people will “want” to use — budget trimming doesn’t work like that.
When Ford proudly announces at a debate that he supports extra budget and increased revenue to make transit vehicles cleaner, less crowded, and more appealing to non-users, I *MIGHT* let him off the hook and accept that he’s not an anti-transit villain… but he still won’t even be close to getting my vote. Much like his impossible-to-sway supporters who are voting for him regardless of anything else that comes about negatively for his campaign, there’s absolutely nothing that can be said from him at this point that would sway me to consider giving him my “X”. Heck, Ford could even champion DRL at this stage and I both wouldn’t believe he understands it’s purpose or cares any greater about transit. Lost cause… and a potential disaster for city transportation.
Slow cuts and no investment in the future exacerbate the “glass more than half empty” that Steve described. Ford has no positive vision of the future that he can straight-faced say to a watching crowd, so he doesn’t. After all, he may be many awkward things politically, but he won’t lie… So when he doesn’t suggest anything positive for the future and instead relies on his similar experience to 100,000 other senior managers in this city to justify running it, well… *sigh*. That glass is totally empty.
(and Rossi? Clearly just in it for name recognition to run provincially in York Region or northwest 416 next fall. Not worth typing about… )
LikeLike
Has transit been short-changed in Toronto … Is that supposed to be a hard question? Of course.!! Transit will always be put on the back burner, that why we have the regional disaster we see today aka the GTA.
LikeLike
Steve, I think you’re beating a dead horse here. There has to be at least *some* expansion to the road network after 40 years of nothing — transit can’t take 100% of the growth.
And, while I personally don’t agree with the removal of streetcars downtown on aesthetic grounds, the increased traffic levels on King and Queen make streetcar transit ineffective on these two routes … we’re talking now, 2010 … not 1975. Buses wouldn’t be much better, but streetcars just don’t work anymore. Face it — we’re not the same city we were back then. What worked then doesn’t work now. The city has “densified” too much with all of those condos and the lower downtown area is a huge draw now.
You and I have both lived long enough to see things go full circle, and that’s what’s happening now with these proposals. Yes, I saw all of those transit proposals back then too, but they were all far-fetched ideas that were never taken seriously — especially the LRT loop from Islington to Warden via the Finch hydro corridor. It was laughed at back then. Who would have used it? Or, the proposal that would have seen the Spadina subway built as an LRT line with MU PCCs had the wye been kept. It was all meaningless junk.
Steve: And where would you build additional road capacity?
My point about the LRT loop was not even whether it was workable, but that it was one of many plans proposed, but never implemented. Showing off expensive and unworkable high technology took precedence, and once again transit wasn’t the real goal, any more than subway construction was only a side effect of construction stimulation 25 years later by the Rae government.
LikeLike
Stephen wrote:
“…a person’s method of getting to work, whether it be public transit, or by car, should be their choice.”
The problem with this statement is that some choices harm others, and therefore must be suppressed. The freedom to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.
Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health, Dr. David McKeown, has produced a report documenting how car pollution kills 440 people in Toronto each year, and injures 1,700 people so seriously that they have to be hospitalized. The mortality costs alone are $2.2 billion per year.
What is most interesting is the solutions to this public health epidemic of death and injury that are recommended by Dr. McKeown. His solutions to the epidemic of death and injury include road tolls, higher gasoline taxes, higher car registration fees and a tax on car parking lots. For details, see Table 8 on page 33.
I agree with Dr. McKeown. Driving cars is a deadly harmful behaviour that needs to be suppressed by taxes high enough to provide a serious deterrence to this behaviour.
LikeLike
Steve: And where would you build additional road capacity?
For starters, the suburban arterials north of Eglinton can be widened — there is sufficient land available in many areas to add an extra lane in each direction.
I wouldn’t extend the Spadina Expressway south, but the 400 could be extended south via an upgraded Black Creek and maybe trenched or tunnelled in the Georgetown rail corridor the rest of the way (with the trains running in the median like Spadina).
For downtown, a local “504” subway (but under Queen, not King) with BD-like spacing could eliminate the Queen, King, and Dundas car lines, allowing auto traffic to move much better on those routes. Keep College, Spadina, Bathurst, Harbourfront, and St. Clair as streetcar routes. I know — this is all far-fetched too.
LikeLike
Stephen Cheung writes:
“Issues like road tolls, expensive parking at TTC lots, increasing costs, boorish TTC employees, make us realize that it is not worth the trouble going through all the trouble to do our part and take public transit.?”
This statement conflates a few things.
First of all, as a “conservative”, or even as a “fiscal conservative”, you are complaining about the concept of user pay when you object to road tolls, the cost of parking, and increasing costs. What is the alternative? And are these costs really why you don’t want to take transit? Why do you expect free parking — a subsidy — anyway? How about the costs of gasoline and auto insurance, both of which have gone up briskly over the past few years. Have you written to Imperial Oil and your insurance company, telling them that these increased costs that it’s not worth the trouble to own and drive a car.
Second, road tolls have nothing to do with the inconvenience, or lack of it, of taking transit. Surely if road tolls were implemented, this would make transit more attractive. And the proceeds would help pay for transit and road improvements. Of course if you always wanted to drive free, road tolls would be anathema.
Third, the percentage of boorish TTC employees is low. I’m not sure that it’s any higher than boorish employees anywhere (and for a year I had to work for a real boor). How about boorish drivers, like the ones who cut off on an exit ramp, then cut back in line further up? Has that discouraged you from driving?
“Forcing people (using such tools like road tolls, bike lanes, etc) instead feeds the perception on the “war on cars”, especially those who feel that they do not have much choice but to drive.”
You know, I’ve had a driver’s licence since 1975, and I’ve owned at least one automobile since 1986. I support more bicycle infrastructure. I find my choice to ride a bicycle to be frustrated by lack of bicycle infrastructure, both downtown and in the suburbs (90% of my riding is in Etobicoke). I’ve also taken transit in the suburbs, and tried to walk there. In fact, the design of the suburbs, and significant portions of downtown, are designed for the car, and are (unintentionally, I expect) hostile to pedestrians and cyclists. For example, to keep traffic flowing on University Ave., pedestrians are expected to take two traffic light cycles to cross, pausing in the median.
Perhaps the response from motorists is, “suck it up, and deal with it.” Of course, that could also be the response of people to motorists — “suck it up and deal with it.” You’re still crying over the fact that TTC parking lots aren’t free any more. We’ve been through that before — do you still expect sympathy?
LikeLike
OC Corktown: I’m not asking for your vote for Rob Ford. 🙂 I’m just saying that he’s not as bad as everyone casts him out to be.
“Surely if road tolls were implemented, this would make transit more attractive.”
This statement would only be true if the alternative (in this case, public transit) was quantifiably more attractive than the quantifiable drawback of the road tolls. But we still have a very substandard transit network and forcing people to take such a substandard option is not “attractive”. It is similar to a subway shutting down due to an incident and forcing everybody to take shuttle buses. I would only accept road tolls if the alternative is a transit option better than what we have now. But we don’t have that. Not by a longshot. It would only stir up resentment towards the entity levying these road tolls, and that would spell trouble for the TTC.
LikeLike
“First of all, as a “conservative”, or even as a “fiscal conservative”, you are complaining about the concept of user pay when you object to road tolls, the cost of parking, and increasing costs. What is the alternative? And are these costs really why you don’t want to take transit? Why do you expect free parking — a subsidy — anyway? How about the costs of gasoline and auto insurance, both of which have gone up briskly over the past few years. Have you written to Imperial Oil and your insurance company, telling them that these increased costs that it’s not worth the trouble to own and drive a car.”
Our auto insurance actually went down when we moved to Woodbridge, and despite the higher gas prices, when the numbers are crunched, it is still cheaper for my wife to drive downtown than to take transit.
“Third, the percentage of boorish TTC employees is low. I’m not sure that it’s any higher than boorish employees anywhere (and for a year I had to work for a real boor). How about boorish drivers, like the ones who cut off on an exit ramp, then cut back in line further up? Has that discouraged you from driving?”
I could go into a pages long tirade about all of the boorish TTC employees I have encountered. There is the incident at Broadview station when I was literally threatened with arrest for having a legit day pass which he said wasn’t because it was mispunched by another collector. There is an incident when a bus driver literally took a swipe at me when I asked for a transfer after forgetting to get one. I was yelled at by a collector and called a “deaf doofus” because I needed directions and couldn’t hear over the subway noise. I have been yelled and cussed at by TTC employees at least once every time I try to take the TTC. You may think that the number of boorish TTC employees is small, but I seem to hit a 100% success rate these days. And I’m a really nice guy who’s just trying to do his part to take transit. Do TTC employees have a “Tory Detector” so they automatically switch to their “Anti-Tory” mode when I come around or something?
LikeLike
I use the TTC 5 – 6 days per week, and rarely have any problems with “boorish” employees. I do notice the odd exchange of testy words between a driver and passenger, or collector and passenger, but in all my years of using the TTC, I can’t think of anything that affected me personally. Sure, I’ve had the odd driver or collector be rude, but I simply ignore them and it literally has no impact on me. So, compared to Stephen Cheung, who apparently has frequent problems with staff, what’s the difference? Well, perhaps he’s walking into subway stations or onto buses “looking for a fight”, so to speak, while I (and most other riders) tend to keep to myself. And generally speaking, that’s the best attitude to have. If you mind your business, and be polite if you do have to speak with someone or ask for help, you shouldn’t have any problems.
LikeLike
Stephen Cheung: And I’m saying Ford IS as bad as everyone casts him to be. I went to the debates hoping to catch some glimmer that he has a goal, a vision, even just a sense of where the city is going or what it could be, and all I and the audience got was negative, defeatist, backwards, and short-sighted responses from him. He generally evaded the questions to stick to the fiscally-related talking points that he knows best, perhaps because he doesn’t know or understand the issue raised or perhaps because he didn’t want his truly negative thought to become a soundbite. Who knows? In either case, it makes him unsuitable to lead a city of this size and stature… but I’m sure he’d do fine as Mayor of Vaughan (oh, if only that were possible… ).
In front of 300 planners and architects several weeks ago, he evaded every question about design and quality during a discussion about how to keep up the recent spate of better-designed new-build properties, yet several times extolled his work in the suburbs that was later discredited anyway as not being not his work alone. He even said, and this is the exact quote, “I’ve turned Rexdale into Rosedale!” in terms of city beautification improvements. 300 people laughed, out loud… only he was being serious. I’m not really comfortable having a mayor that people laugh at for how ridiculous his thoughts and statements are. The sad part was, there were 250 people in that room that were better qualified to run the city than some guy with a printing company… but admittedly equally sad was that there were 200 people in that room better qualified for mayor than several of the other candidates there too.
Several “thinking” Conservatives locally have made it clear that they don’t support Ford, and other well-positioned locals have made references to the need for a vision and goal from the next mayor beyond just cuts, cuts, cuts… references that are pretty clearly aimed at hopefully driving people away from Ford. They all rightly see him as a Tea Party type candidate that exposes the worst of the conservative right rather than it’s stronger points. I would hope that thinking conservatives elsewhere (say, on this site, or any other site that hopes and drives for a better future) are taking note… he’s a one-trick pony who will live up to his one trick cuz it’s the only trick he knows. So that means a stop in the tracks (literally) for numerous projects and a period of discord and discontent in the city not seen in generations. To not see that he’s a threat to so many of the issues and ideas raised on a site like this is bewildering to me. Yes, everyone, Ford really is as bad as he’s cast out to be. Go see for yourself.
LikeLike
I’m willing to argue that the last time transit investment was really given a priority was with the Yonge line. It was built and planned before the automatic transmission, thus before suburban sprawl was the trend. The thought of an urban area the size of what it is today back then would be like us imaging non-stop city from Port Hope to Peterborough to Orillia to Orangeville to Lake Erie. It offered tight stop spacing through the downtown and old residential of 400-600 meters, and more spaced out spacing of 600-1200 meters through some of the early 20th century suburbs. While today such spacing of even 1.2 kilometers over extended trips across the GTA may become impractical, back then it was a very rapid way to get from the northern suburbs of Eglinton to downtown Toronto.
Of course, not long after the Yonge line was finished, the focus of suburban growth was entering full swing. Visions of Toronto included a massive highway network all through and around the city. Plans for a Queen line, which would have offered an east-west route right into the heart of downtown, were shelved for a line across Bloor and Danforth. When this line was completed, several features screamed “second-class” compared to the Yonge line. Stations used matte tiles making them look very plain, and the stop spacing was tight for the needs of its vicinity, let alone the growing city. This is most likely due to the vision of everyone driving along the highway network, while only those who lived in Toronto proper using the subway.
Of course the highway network was never built. Since then, we have seen plans either being canceled, or compromised to the point of almost uselessness. We tolerate our transit network, but it could and should be better than it is today.
LikeLike
As Metrolinx seems to be moving ahead with the plans as already agreed to and not paying much attention to the bizarre schemes proposed by our Mayoral candidates, I suppose we may be thankful that local politicians were removed from its Board last year. That said, it is sad to see that the Toronto mayor’s race cannot attract at least one candidate who can produce a clear, sensible and REASONED platform that is built on studies and some thought.
LikeLike
To “M. Briganti” I have a question why do you want to take away public transit on King and Dundas Streets and build a subway on Queen St.?
All we need is a few more streetcars and better line management not a hellishly expensive subway that would compel me and my neighbours to pay for, in aesthetics and in dollars. Just because someone from suburbia is stuck behind a streetcar’s open doors does not justify the capital expense of a subway. The entire ethos of downtown living is being able to hop on the streetcar to go a handful of stops, do your thing and then go home. All the while enjoying the vibrant street life of downtown. Not scurrying down some rat hole to be hurled through a nondescript dark tunnel.
Your transit is for long-haul suburban dwellers not urban life. Keep your hands off my (and Steve’s) streetcar!
LikeLike
Re: Stephen Chung
I think I’m on the same page as you in a lot of ways, so I can try and help explain some issues regarding the “war on the car.”
First, road tolls: I will agree that without a proper alternative, or at least be part of a plan to get an alternative built, it does end up being nothing more than another tax because people will still need to drive. With that said, I think Sarah Thomson has the right idea: During rush hour, there are a wealth of options getting into the city, and if one of these options is not within walking distance for you, you can always take local feeder routes or drive to them. While I believe that increased rates on downtown parking would be more productive (for reasons I won’t get into here), a toll executed like this I would not oppose. And it would be far more moderate than the “toll everyone who drives into downtown at any time $50” mentality which some here believe in religiously.
Bike lanes: With the increase in downtown population, improving cycling infrastructure makes sense. First, the way a vehicle’s internal combustion engine works, it is designed for traveling longer distances at a steady pace rather than short stop and go bursts (this will change with hybrids and electric vehicles though). Therefore for trips within the core, it is better to limit car use as much as possible. Secondly, if everyone who rode bikes within the city drove instead, it would create even higher amounts of gridlock and congestion. Cycling is a very healthy and efficient way of getting around dense areas, and provides a competitive yet affordable alternative to driving. In many cases, cycling is faster than driving in downtown Toronto.
With that said, I think we need to be strategic about where we put them. Jarvis is a good example. We took away a lane of traffic for a bike lane, yet we did not improve alternatives along the corridor. And since Sherbourne has a bike lane close by, the effort to get them on Jarvis could have been used towards improving east-west lanes which is where our bike network is most lacking.
(PS: I have an assignment coming up in a few weeks where we need to write a short “letter to the editor” about an environmental issue. Looking at how that bit on bike lanes came out, I think I will use that. So my prof doesn’t accuse me of plagiarizing, my full name is Benjamin Smith and my YorkU student number is 210—-57. Obviously, I am not going to post the full thing).
TTC Parking and the Vehicle Registration Fee: This is one area where I do agree with you, and am hoping the new mayor reconsiders how the current regime handled these. First not only is it far better to park at a TTC station than downtown, but this setup increases the amount of choice riders holding a pass. This means that a choice rider may be more likely to take transit a short/moderate distance for an errand. Now unless they drive a Hummer, it becomes for cost effective to drive for this same errand than spend $5 both ways.
The thing that gets me about the VRF is that it penalizes only Torontonians. I used to rent a basement apartment one side street north of Steeles, and I saved $60 per year because of it. If the $60 was charged province, or even just region wide with the money going straight to your local municipal transportation department then I could support it. In its current implementation I cannot.
LikeLike
Good post, and helpful comments, for the most part.
We do seem to like to put subways in the less-wise places, and when we finally get to some plan that isn’t too bad, people must mark it up to make them look more electable.
That said, there are some very significant shortcomings and flaws in what has funding and momentum now eg. the rail link to the Airport, and some aspects of the Transit City, which especially includes some aspects of the WWLRT.
I still think we need a push to explore doing a Front St. transitway, and it could be done with buses, or streetcars too, but we’ve lost a certain flexibility in the Queen/Gladstone area with all those condos because the local Councillor wasn’t so aware of things/potential plus the OMB/general blindness for actual growing transit.
I also agree with the comments about being careful where bike lanes get put – and while I don’t want to go back to 5-lane Jarvis, it’s absolutely true the Sherbourne St. is nearby, and I’d happily trade Jarvis for Bloor St. bike lanes, best spot in older TO for an E/W lane only since 1992. Bloor bike lanes arguably could expand the capacity of the B/D subway, as if we could shed crush loading onto bikes, even 1 or 2%, that is very cheap capacity ie. essentially for the price of paint, and a study, though the study is about equal to the entire cost of just repainting the entire danged road.
Caronto, the Carrupt…
Oh, the cover of eye mag has a great dig at Mr. Ford….
he’d be a nightmayor…
wish I’d thought of that term!
LikeLike
TTC employees are not boorish. Most are helpful and friendly – eager to look after passengers and are proud of their profession. A few are somewhat curt, but that is a long way from boorish.
Car Travel is massively subsidised at the current time. Road Tolls or other increases in car expense (gas taxes, registration fees) are not a “new” tax. They are a reduction in the subsidy. More money for transit would not be a net subsidy of transit. It would be a balancing of the subsidy currently given to cars.
I am not a conservative. If one must have a label, I am a socialist, but not always aligned with others that have the same label. However, conservatives, from my point of view, come in several flavours. As an example, I read and respect The Economist. It is much more conservative than me, but no less altruistic in its approach to issues. On the other hand I despise the National Post. It is merely a resentful hateful “me first” forum.
I believe that a certain amount of redistribution will make our society more equitable. A true conservative disagrees with me based on the (sincerely held) belief that interfering with the market means less total wealth which affects us all, and ultimately the poor the most. (The popular expression is “A Rising Tide Raises All Boats.) People who call themselves conservatives, but really only have a selfish, resentful “me first” agenda are not, in my view defensible. (Just to be clear – I disagree with most of what Stephen Cheung writes, but this is not intended to be an attack. I respect his right to his opinions.) Rob Ford is the epitome of the resentful “me first” attitude that is despicable. There is no empirical defence for his arguments – the man is a buffoon. Taking away from others will do nothing to ease the burden on the oppressed.
Rob Ford’s numbers simply don’t add up. If the entire City Council salary and expense budget was eliminated – not something I advocate – it would not even make a small dent in the budget problems this City is burdened with. Until Mr. “Time for a Change” begins to meaningfully reverse the damage of the Harris years we will always have a crisis.
The statements from Mr. McCuaig and Mr. Webster today are accurate and to the point. How we can cut taxes and spend billions on subways at the same time would be a mystery. At the same time, walking away from the Provinces (meagre) transit commitments would make the mystery even deeper.
I am going to vote for Joe. It does not make headlines to say, in essence that I live Toronto and am going to do my best to preserve what is good and incrementally improve that which isn’t. On the other hand, it is eminently more defensible than embracing more of the Harris/Lastman nonsense that caused all our problems in the first place.
LikeLike
Great column Steve. I am so disheartened by what I’m hearing from all the candidates.(Actually, I give credit to Pantalone for speaking realistically – albeit depressingly – about what we can afford.) Why don’t you run for office?
LikeLike
St. Clair is still the only route in Toronto with timed transfers, which allows stopovers on transit trips. It is time for timed transfers to be expanded all across the TTC, maybe starting with the next fare increase.
LikeLike
To Michael Vanner …
Yes, we will keep our hands off your lovely toy streetcars, so you can enjoy listening to them DING. They’re just as much my streetcars as they are yours, and I don’t want to see them go either, but they’re just not practical on King and Queen anymore. A subway along Queen would draw enough riders from King and Dundas that all three routes could be abandoned. King, Dundas, and the outer parts of Queen would get buses while the central part of Queen would operate like the BD with no surface transit. A subway further south won’t have the same effect.
Based on your criteria, Bloor and Danforth aren’t “vibrant” streets because they don’t have streetcars on them. And the people that live along Bloor and Danforth have to descend into a hellish climate-controlled cave to ride a few stops knowing that their train will never be more than 5 minutes away. Same goes for the Yonge subway crowd south of Bloor. What an awful suburban life they live. And now we’re condemning the Eglinton LRT riders to the same fate — but let me guess, it’s different for them because there’s a low platform and no third rail?
LikeLike
If these so called “fiscally conservative” mayoral candidates pay due diligence, they’ll decide that tunnelling is way to expensive. The problem is that whomever is elected may attempt to freeze LRT construction… in that scenario, the tables might turn and Metrolinx might be the ones to shove LRT down the city’s throat… imagine that.
With respect to replacing the 501/504 with a subway, dream on. I do believe in a DRL, but mainly as an express routing that will connect the B-D and underserved areas to downtown (such as Liberty Village and the Lower/Don Distillery District). By the time it gets built (if ever), it will be a major priority to relieve overcrowding on the B-D and lower Yonge, not to replace local transit.
LikeLike
Michael Greason says “I am going to vote for Joe.”
This is a good example as to why Ford may win. Thomson and Pantalone will snag a good 15 to 20% of the vote, which is going to allow Ford up the middle to win with only 30 – 35% of the vote. For this reason, I will not necessarily vote for the candidate who I would like to see win, I will vote for whoever has the most realistic chance of beating Ford. By all accounts, that will likely be Smitherman. Even though he is definately not my preferred candidate, I’d rather see him as Mayor than Ford.
LikeLike
Too all the commentators denying that the TTC has churlish employees your comments deviate strongly from the reality of the situation. The TTC had 31,000 complaints for the first eleven months of 2009 (I apologize but I could not find the 2010 statistics) which works out to somewhat less than three complaints for every employee. They also established a blue ribbon panel to address the issues this year.
LikeLike
To Michael Vanner: One fine Saturday a few years ago, I had a bunch of errands to run on various points on Queen West, and I thought, “Why not take the streetcar?” (I lived just east of Yonge at the time, a few blocks north of Queen.)
Several hours and much frustration later, I returned home with a single errand done, mostly thanks to poor streetcar service.
Lesson learned: these days, if I need to run more than one errand downtown, I take the car. Much easier to “enjoy the vibrant street life of downtown”.
LikeLike
M. Briganti writes:
“A subway along Queen would draw enough riders from King and Dundas that all three routes could be abandoned. King, Dundas, and the outer parts of Queen would get buses while the central part of Queen would operate like the BD with no surface transit.”
Inexplicably, the Wellesley bus can be jampacked, especially east of Yonge where it serves large numbers of apartment buildings. And Wellesley/Harbord is about as far from Bloor as King is from Queen.
The Annette, sorry Dupont, bus continues to operate as well, despite being about as far from Bloor as Dundas is from Queen.
Your suggestion that we could abandon King and Dundas carlines does not make sense, except in a wishful way.
“Based on your criteria, Bloor and Danforth aren’t “vibrant” streets because they don’t have streetcars on them. And the people that live along Bloor and Danforth have to descend into a hellish climate-controlled cave to ride a few stops knowing that their train will never be more than 5 minutes away. Same goes for the Yonge subway crowd south of Bloor. “
Good luck doing the expropriation required to put in the subway line, unless you bury it in the middle of Queen Street, which would be a construction nightmare to make streetcar track replacement look like an afternoons’ tree-house project for some bored schoolkids. There’s a reason there’s a row of parks and parking lots following the Bloor-Danforth and Yonge alignments. You’re proposing that for Queen?
In addition, the Bloor-Danforth stations were built on the cheap. Every new station on your Queen local line will need a second exit and handicapped access. More expropriation. Good luck with that.
LikeLike
M. Briganti > The Georgetown corridor does not have to room any car traffic. There is already issues about whether there is enough bridge room for the new rail lines. Putting a car route would somewhat deflate Metrolinx’s flawed argument for rushing the expansion of the corridor, that somehow it will reduce cars on the roads.
Toronto Streetcar> One issue that has plagued the Uxbridge/Stouffville bus/rail lines has been lack of demand. I remember it go so bad for a while that the GO bus from Uxbridge stopped at Warden and didnt even come downtown. Most of the traffic is one way commuter traffic and a single line can handle more (and Metrolinx is counting on it). The issue is demand and the fact that a vast majority of people like those in my family prefer to drive.
LikeLike
Stephen Cheung> Mr Ford accomplished very little in terms of public policy during his council years and one who follows City Hall knows that even the right wingers rarely sided with him and they actually voted with the majority most of the time (even if they deny it at election time).
To me there is a difference between commuter traffic and local traffic. As a downtowner with a car and a bike I don’t find congestion a problem except during rush hours. (I think the gridlock concept is more a PR campaign than a reality outside of the rush hour.) To me there is a big difference between a local family going on a trip or to the grocery store and thousands of single occupancy cars commuting along Bloor Street which has a subway. We really need to start looking at car traffic by type, for local traffic bike lanes present no war on anybody. The only war is the war on healthy communities by those that want to drive EVERYWHERE all the time.
The reality is that many people will ALWAYS choose a car over transit no matter how good that transit it. Conservatives always love subsidies when it for selfish reasons but hate subsidies for the common good. As a car owner, and transit user I would love to see road tolls, higher gas prices, higher taxes to pay for transit and other innovations such as usage based insurance. This would help ensure that where I live is more of a community and less of a highway.
Steve: Continuing on that sentiment, I am offended by a suburban politician who applies the model of a hypothetically congestion-free, six to eight lane suburban arterial road to streets downtown where people actually walk, shop, eat, live. When I come out of a Film Festival screening at 11 pm, all of the streets in the entertainment distract are full of people, and the restaurant patios are busy. If this were in Rob Ford’s burbs, there would be acres of parking around the cinemas and no street life, indeed no streets in the “city” sense of that word. And, by the way, there’s not very much transit service around at 11 pm, and the congestion is not caused by streetcars. It’s caused by a busy commercial neighbourhood full of activity.
LikeLike