![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldThere's a science fiction short story, "The Return of William Proxmire" by Larry Niven, that has a time traveller making a future that's the opposite of what he wanted. In the story, the Wisconsin senator of the title went back in time to cure Robert Heinlein of his tuberculosis, keep him in the military and away from science fiction, reducing support for space exploration, and thus eliminate a major source of wasteful spending. Unintended consequences occur--other writers take Heinlein's place and are even more successful, Proxmire's own career is marginalized, and this world is one where space travel and colonization is far more advanced in our own history.
(Let me just note that I think this story is considerably unfair to Proxmire, by all accounts a popular and competent representative of his state whose priorities just didn't match up with others.')
Right now, theTransit City program whereby mass transit within Toronto and with the suburbs will be improved particularly via the construction of light rail routes integrated with existing networks, is strongly opposed by mayor Rob Ford. He doesn't like the streetcars which are present throughout the downtown, and he--like others, to be fair--assimilate light rail routes to streetcars. His solution? Building subways. eye weekly's Edward Keenan is quite unimpressed with Ford's plan for multiple reasons.
The thing is, there are significant differences. For instance, this author notes that a key difference is that light rail routes have right-of-way over traffic and that, outside of downtowns, they've fewer stop than streetcar routes. In another article, NOW Toronto suggested that light rail occupies a middle ground between buses and subways. transporting more people for proportionally the same cost as for buses more efficiently per-kilometre and per-million dollars than somewhat higher-capacity subways. Yet, the distinction's not made. Andrew Barton wondered in an amusing post that, if Rob Ford went back in time to abort a pro-streetcar movement in the 1960s and get them off the streets by 1980, the distinction would be made, that Transit City wouldn't face nearly the same amount of opposition, and that light rail would be ubiquitous.
I actually share Ford's strong preference for subways. For me, the romance of the subway is undeniable, my first trips making me think of a wormhole nexus in space, compressing distances between points and letting a community form that much more easily. More subways, increasing density along their routes and helping to knit together a worryingly fragmented city--remember the "Three Torontos" paradigm--would be wonderful. But still, Toronto's not going to see that amount of densification, with even the Sheppard line in northern Toronto carrying--well--about as many people as a light rail network. Outside perhaps the exception of the Downtown Relief Line, light rail is probably the best system for Toronto, a system allowing for relatively little spending and fairly high returns notwithstanding its lack of romance. Will Ford succeed in changing plans? Maybe, although maybe more likely wrecking the project entirely than shifting systems. Argh.
(Let me just note that I think this story is considerably unfair to Proxmire, by all accounts a popular and competent representative of his state whose priorities just didn't match up with others.')
Right now, theTransit City program whereby mass transit within Toronto and with the suburbs will be improved particularly via the construction of light rail routes integrated with existing networks, is strongly opposed by mayor Rob Ford. He doesn't like the streetcars which are present throughout the downtown, and he--like others, to be fair--assimilate light rail routes to streetcars. His solution? Building subways. eye weekly's Edward Keenan is quite unimpressed with Ford's plan for multiple reasons.
As policy, the mayor’s actions have been almost crazy. Alternatives for transit building have been considered by our best minds over the past decade. The consensus—at city hall, at the TTC, at the province’s Metrolinx agency, in the halls of academia—is that light rail is the best way to serve the most people, given the money at hand. The mayor’s subway-building scheme would serve a small area of Scarborough and cost vastly more than the entire Transit City network, which would span the whole city. For a moment, forget capital costs and consider only the year-over-year expense of running Ford’s proposed Sheppard subway. According to the back of my napkin, it would create a shortfall of at least $50 million a year for the next two to three decades.
“People prefer subways,” the mayor says, a phrase that acts as the introduction, thesis, proof and conclusion of his policy argument. Which is fine: I prefer to eat at Canoe, the famously luxurious restaurant atop the TD Centre. But if I pursued a policy of only eating at Canoe, my family would starve.
Still, even if money were not a factor, the mayor simply does not have the authority to dictate transit policy. Building subways, or streetcar lines, is a complicated business, and one that is the primary responsibility of the Toronto Transit Commission, Metrolinx (the regional transit coordination body), and the provincial government.
Of course, it isn’t just the transit players involved. The mayor has no authority to accomplish anything, really, by proclamation. If he wants to set transit policy (or even appoint the transit commissioners who set policy), he needs the approval of city council, which he may or may not get. Ford claims he didn’t get a vote on Transit City in the first place, so he sees no need to hold a vote on killing it. But the Toronto Transit Commission certainly formulated Transit City, and council records show that on July 16, 2007, Rob Ford joined the rest of city council in unanimously approving the initiation of it. He voted for light rail. Now that he’s changed his mind, he’ll need to put that to a vote, too.
The thing is, there are significant differences. For instance, this author notes that a key difference is that light rail routes have right-of-way over traffic and that, outside of downtowns, they've fewer stop than streetcar routes. In another article, NOW Toronto suggested that light rail occupies a middle ground between buses and subways. transporting more people for proportionally the same cost as for buses more efficiently per-kilometre and per-million dollars than somewhat higher-capacity subways. Yet, the distinction's not made. Andrew Barton wondered in an amusing post that, if Rob Ford went back in time to abort a pro-streetcar movement in the 1960s and get them off the streets by 1980, the distinction would be made, that Transit City wouldn't face nearly the same amount of opposition, and that light rail would be ubiquitous.
I actually share Ford's strong preference for subways. For me, the romance of the subway is undeniable, my first trips making me think of a wormhole nexus in space, compressing distances between points and letting a community form that much more easily. More subways, increasing density along their routes and helping to knit together a worryingly fragmented city--remember the "Three Torontos" paradigm--would be wonderful. But still, Toronto's not going to see that amount of densification, with even the Sheppard line in northern Toronto carrying--well--about as many people as a light rail network. Outside perhaps the exception of the Downtown Relief Line, light rail is probably the best system for Toronto, a system allowing for relatively little spending and fairly high returns notwithstanding its lack of romance. Will Ford succeed in changing plans? Maybe, although maybe more likely wrecking the project entirely than shifting systems. Argh.
