The strangest moment in last week’s epic transit showdown – besides when The Toronto Sun’s Sue-Ann Levy mysteriously began making fun of my wardrobe on Twitter – occurred at the beginning of Mayor Rob Ford’s speech, as he entreated his colleagues to “stop playing politics” with transit.
That line, to his evident dismay, brought a chorus of sardonic laughter, as many in the cheap seats were clearly thinking about pots and kettles. But Ford’s sentiment has a certain validity. After all, in a debate in which the stakes are so very high, every politician, expert and advocate feels their own position is, for lack of a better phrase, post-political, and thus should represent the end of the conversation.
Sometimes, the politics is dressed up in fancy policy duds (Metro’s Network 2011 or the TTC’s Ridership Growth Strategy); other times it wears only a loin cloth (Mel’s Sheppard stubway; Ford’s “Transportation City”). Yet it’s all politics.
Which is fine – the people pay, the people should have their say. But vigorous debate is surely just a means to an end, which is informed government decision-making followed by policy implementation. Our transit debate, by contrast, has been infected for a generation with an infinite loop bug. It’s like an Wagnerian opera that won’t get beyond the overture, or the football game that doesn’t end because the refs didn’t sound the two-minute warning.
As Scarborough’s Chin Lee said on Wednesday, “Every time the government changes, we divert from what we did before.” Ain’t that the truth.
The question is, how does this city short-circuit the infinite loop?
In this space two weeks ago, I asked who was prepared to be the grown-up in the city’s latest spasm of transit politicking. TTC chair Karen Stintz, of course, gets the prize, for all the reasons that have been articulated on this blog and elsewhere.
Armed with Wednesday’s council compromise position, Queen’s Park must now demonstrate that it is also capable of acting like the grown-up, which, in this instance, entails absorbing all the advice it has received and making a definitive executive decision, once and for all.
The official pronouncements from Premier Dalton McGuinty and his infrastructure minister Bob Chiarelli are almost convincing, but there was still enough equivocating on the part of the latter that I am tempted to conclude that the Liberal’s fractious cabinet has yet to fully recognize their own agency in this mess.
On Wednesday, after the vote, Chiarelli made this statement: “I would encourage council and the mayor’s office, leave your politics at the door, come into the room and understand that the people of this city want results – shovels in the ground. It should be the transit rider first. Further prolonged debate borders on being irresponsible [italics added].” In the next breath, he said that until the Sheppard expert panel review is complete, “we will not have a complete plan.”
My verdict: Chiarelli is guilty of…playing politics, hoping against hope that Ford will extract his feet from the quick-drying cement of his pro-subway stance and join Stintz’s coalition of the willing.
Won’t happen. Memo to the minister: The mayor has no end game.
Indeed, the Liberals, between now and the end of March, have to get their heads around the reality that Ford and a minority of council are not only off-side but plan to devote a certain amount of political energy to discrediting what the mayor rather remarkably described as council’s “irrelevant” decision. (Which raises the question: if that vote was irrelevant, what about the ones that went his way?)
Rather than bickering internally about strategies to allow the mayor to save face, the Liberal cabinet should engage itself in a much more important discussion with far more significant long-term consequences: are they genuinely prepared to now let Metrolinx do what it was set up to do five years ago, which is hoover some of the election-cycle politics out of transit investment?
We know the Liberals failed horribly at this already once, when, despite Metrolinx’s years of planning and consultation about a GTA-wide transit plan, they readily capitulated to Ford’s bullying upon taking office. Instead of negotiating the non-binding MOU that council ultimately undid last Wednesday, the Liberals last March could have simply ordered Metrolinx to conduct a cost-benefit assessment of Ford’s subway/underground LRT plan viz the $100 billion Big Move strategy, and then make the ultimate decision based on rational side-by-side comparison.
The Liberals have one chance to redeem themselves from that egregious mistake, but just one: if they balk, they may as well disband Metrolinx because its mandate to act independently will have been shattered beyond repair. What’s more, the government’s long-awaited investment strategy for transit, due in June, 2013, will be politically still-born because every stakeholder in this debate will know that the cabinet can always be manipulated into overriding Metrolinx’ spending plans.
So whatever the result of the Sheppard subway expert study that’s to be delivered next month, the choice facing Queen’s Park is enduring on multiple levels. To build transit in Toronto and simultaneously defend Metrolinx, they must blow the whistle, close the doors and leave the station.
If the mayor’s on the train, great. If he’s on the platform, that’s his choice.
As Abraham Lincoln famously observed, “You can’t please all of the people all of the time.” And that’s just politics.
29 comments
John… Just for your consideration. The voice of Scarborough is being ignored. During the municipal elections Ford was given a mandate ie 47% of the popular vote based on his subway platform. In Ward 40 Norm Kelly was given 74% of the popular vote based on a Sheppard subway and it will be his Ward that will hardest hit by grid lock as a result of dedicated right of way, surface rail transit. The majority of councilors who voted to revert back to surface rail are downtown representatives. There are close to a million people living in Scarborough and the commuting public living in the communities to the east and north of Scarborough, come through Scarborough on their way to work, causing ugly congestion for a period of 6 to 8 hours during the day. There is no rapid transit north of the 401 that bridges the city from east to west so we choke on a perpetual “rush hour”. The 401 is 16 lanes across the top of the city and it is full. It takes more than an hour and a half to go from the airport to where I get off at Warden from 3:30 in the afternoon till at least 7:30 will similar travel times in the morning. In the event of a major accident on the 401 arterial roads Sheppard being on of them provide a relief route for the 401. My doctor has told me that pollution in the Hogs Hollow overpass area is the worst in NA because of this incredible concentration of traffic. Now I ask you, politics aside, where is the common sense why would anyone looking at this logically ever decide to put a raised rail-bed down the middle of an arterial road and make things horribly worse. How is a “local” transit solution that is appealing to some people who don’t want to ride buses going to fix what is wrong in North Toronto.
Of course the Liberals caved to Ford. Had they stood up to him they would have brought down the wrath of Ford Nation allies within and beyond the GTA. Following the prevailing winds allowed them to stand back and let Ford do their work for them.
well said John. Toronto’s transit politics is like a bad soap opera that goes back and forth to nowhere. Finally there is a chance for a reasonably good ending, don’t add another twist to it.
patrick —
Everything you said was great up until “where is the common sense why would anyone looking at this logically ever decide to put a raised rail-bed down the middle of an arterial road and make things horribly worse.”
The common sense thing to ask is why you are even talking about a Sheppard subway. There is no money for it. Hasn’t been since they built the thing. That’s not to say that Sheppard doesn’t need better transit, but you are arguing for something that doesn’t exist except in the mind of the mayor.
Simply because residents want a subway does not deem it to be the right answer. Should we ignore scores of examples across North American and northern Europe that clearly show that going underground should only be used for the densest of communities? Should we ignore almost every transit planner on the TTC who research ridership data & say that there is no financial argument, short-term or long-term, to put transit underground from the DVP east?
The traffic challenges you highlight are certainly real and worthy. But they exist all over the city. You think the residents are Sheppard & Scarborough are miffed they’re not getting transit? How about the downtowners who have not had a subway station built since 1966 yet has seen the population double in that time?
Underground transit is a privilege that should only be used for the densest of communities. LRT is vastly superior and more flexible than subway, and about 10-times less to build.
After hearing last week all about how any new Toronto LRT lines must go underground. How unaffordable subways are better because they are above all not on the surface. And how road tolls are out of the question when looking for revenues to fix our gridlock woes. I was left wondering… on what day, month, year exactly did Toronto’s asphalt become its new “sacred ground”? Now today, the City is introducing user fees for its playing fields, essentially charging for a piece of its natural space. Still not a word on fees for the daily users of its acres and acres of asphalt. Of course not… You can’t put a price on paradise!
Moya… you are ignoring the context of my note. We are drowning absolutely choking on grid lock. I said there is 16 lanes of bumper to bumper traffic running through north Toronto. Nobody goes anywhere quickly up here and the pollution is intensifying. Is that not a big part of the equation that should be under consideration. The Liberals have a Green strategy as part of their governing platform. The crosstown 401 should be a huge consideration in any transit deliberations. Affordability is a question to be considered but it is not “the” question. I would suggest that it should be asked more creatively…how can it be funded might the better question. There are so many options none of which are being brought into play. I hope John Tory and Civic Action are successful in raising the visibility of “this” discussion. I do know that the Dr, Chong report has many suggestions on how to approach. I’m just afraid that “local” politics are going to get in the way of an open minded discussion.
Patrick —
I’m not unsympathetic to your view nor to the gridlock on the 401 and surrounding areas.
But I would suggest that this problem is truly a GTA-wide problem and not specifically a TTC issue (but obviously, the TTC has t play a role in reducing highway traffic). What the issue is on the 401 is not having an equivalent line of a GO commuter line much like the Gardiner/QEW has. Long-distance commuter rail is needed up near the 401 much more so than a subway because a subway on Sheppard East, stopping every 1km or 2km is not the release valve for parallel highway traffic.
Tthe problem, as John states, is what role does the province/Metrolinx play in this and what role does the TTC and local councillors carve out?
@Patrick,
I have argued in this space that the residents of this city need to contribute financially to solving the problem of gridlock. But the gridlock at the core of this fight is that the mayor has promised to build something without realistically answering the question of how he will pay the bill. Road tolls are politically untenable in this city, and everyone knows that. So why not a time-limited special levy on the property tax, or an add-on to the HST across the GTA, with funds earmarked for transit construction? Spread the financial burden across the largest possible tax base, and then pledge to remove it once the project is complete. This formula has worked in other places, and it could work here. But as long as the mayor persists in the fantasy that development charges and TIFs will cover the costs, nothing will happen. In which case the people of Scarborough will know exactly whom to blame for the continuation of their (real) traffic problems.
Absent a ward-by-ward survey, I don’t know how it is possible to say that a particular candidate won because of one issue or another. Perhaps there is such a survey, that I’m unaware of — I’d be happy to be pointed to it.
It’s time to compromise. Build the Crosstown as fully grade separated with some savings perhaps with elevated sections on Eglinton in the suburbs, extend the Sheppard subway line a few kilometres so that it can eventually be completed to central Scarborough in subsequent phases, and build the most affordable on-street LRT lines where the buses are most crowded like on Finch West. Both Ford’s vision and that one supported by the majority of council must be acknowledged to build a fast, reliable, and extensive transit system for Toronto in the 21st century. An LRT line on Eglinton that will go through dozens of high-traffic suburban intersections probably won’t that reliable in spite of the breakthroughs in modern light rail versus traditional streetcars. Vehicular accidents on Eglinton that result in closures are a regular occurrence. It’s also a very long central arterial that crosses the entire city and will be the logical airport connection. Anything less than real grade separation along the whole route of the line won’t result in a particularly major improvement outside of the central section.
Yes politics infects decisions at the expense of doing what is right. Public opinion does as well. Every one is in on the game, journalists as well. This is nothing new and will persist.
How can the average person even hope to form an informed opinion when left in the dark on the details and issues? How much is this going to cost (capital and operating) and who is going to pay? What happens if fuel prices drop dramatically, will ridership once again follow employment trends? Would ending the monopoly on public transit be more effective? Etc., etc.
BTW John, where did you get the 2005 ridership figures for your St. Clair article in last weeks Globe? Every source that I could find notes ridership of greater than 31,000. The EA for the LRT reports more than 32,000. Ridership between 1982 and 1984 was north of 40,000. Was the 24,000 figure given to you by the TTC?
@ Patrick:
that’s BS. there are just as many of us in Scarborough that are pro-LRT as there are vocal subway advocates. Mayor Ford had his chance and continues to fail…you can probably say the same about Norm Kelly. The LRT or 5-in-10 plan was paid for and under construction. I live at Morningside/Finch and would have liked to be riding the LRT next year. But Ford and McGuinty’s dithering just have made us wait longer. The reality is a Sheppard subway would be nice, but the mayor has proven incapable of showing how he would finance it. A Sheppard subway like a Finch subway is a pipe-dream that Councillors feed their constituents because that is what they want to hear. Put subways downtown where they belong (where the high ridership can subsidize the rest of the system), and suburban capacity lines where they belong. period. everyone also seems to think that a subway line is going to make traffic congestion better. But 40 and 50 storey buildings in the corridor is only going to add to traffic congestion. The bottom line is traffic is going to get worse anyway (transit or no transit based on population projections and poor transit options in the 905). LRT plans are intended to transform road-space more in favour of transit, so that as traffic gets worse, transit is always a reliable ride. people are dreaming if they think that there is going to be some mythical alleviation of congestion on the 401 because of some higher capacity line on Sheppard. If Ford wants to focus on private sector investment and saving face let him occupy himself with a western subway extension to Downsview. let’s stop wasting money and time and finish the Sheppard LRT (where at least it can connect to UTSC and the zoo in the future).
@AR: Your compromise costs more than the $8b available. What additional revenue sources do you suggest to raise the money?
Meanwhile, in the US, the Tea Party is trying to derail subway development.
http://www.salon.com/2012/02/13/the_tea_partys_war_on_mass_transit/
@ john You could be as well served by BRT. If you think we don’t have to fix traffic congestion then you are naive. Population in Scarborugh is forecast to grow by another quarter of a million people in a very few years. If everyone took as myopic a view as you expound then we might as well tell our kids and their kids move away, their is no quality of life left in Scarborough.
Tolls and taxes. It’s the future under Metrolinx, anyway, so we might as well build a comprehensive system with on-street LRT and grade-separated lines to handle different corridors. Neither vision alone achieves everything needed. “Compromise” isn’t even the best word for it; it’s more a refinement of two flawed visions–one that’s technocratic and the other one populist–than anything.
Patrick: John Lorinc’s comment never says there isn’t a traffic problem; he only mentions ways to fund transit.
While you might want to believe that population growth is going up by 250,000 in a few years, you only need to look at the data on the recent census: population growth along the Sheappard East corridor *fell* over the last 5 years. It is becoming less dense.
The onyll people who should want a Sheppard subway are long-distant commuters, not local residents. Once subways are built you can kiss good bye any local service. Big-time transit only means the loss of the fine-grain detail that buses and LRT can look after.
I didn’t mean John I should have said Glen. I think John Lorinc’s last comment in response to mine has merit. That is the discussion that is needed. Not how do we build out transit for the money the province has budgeted. That is too narrow a focus. We need some “big” thinkers focused on a goal with a vision for the future.
@A my comment first to John and then to Glen was meant for your edification. I’ll get this right yet. My apologies to both John and Glen.
@A .. even under Transit City I wasn’t aware that LRT was planned for Finch E so I have to assume you were thinking of an LRT on Sheppard? So how is 15 km/hr on an LRT any different than 15 km/hr on a bus? With the exception you will have spent more than a billion dollars created more congestion on top of congestion and be at maximum utilization in very short order. Correct me if I’m wrong even using 4 car trains you can’t run them nose to tail and they require a certain amount of distance between them and they can’t leap frog each other. This is better and people will leave their cars at home. They will do this because they think this will be an improvement over what is available today?
@ Moya. Absolutely agree re the need for a long distance commuter rail parallel to 401. Bloor/Danforth is a great example where traveling on Subway still takes forever (from Kipling to Scarborough town centre takes more than an hour).
Our city is way too sprawled out for Subway to be the only transit solution. A combination of new commuter rail/subway/LRT/bus is the right solution to this problem. A mayor who would pit one mode of public transit against another is not helpful in solving our transit woes.
I’m no transit expert, but I thought the problem with the Scarborough RT is that the trains are lousy, and not that the tracks are largely elevated. So, why not do the same thing (elevated tracks and stations) on the parts of Eglinton that are currently going to be at grade? Building “up” can’t be as expensive is digging underground.
Has there been any research or analysis on that?
@ Patrick’s first comment
I could have sworn that Ford received his mandate based on a promise to not cut services (GUARANTEED), to keep property taxes down, to kill the VRT & LTT, and to stop nickel & diming people (i.e. not increase user fees).
Crediting his single midnight “transportation plan” youtube video (wherein he made the false claim that Sheppard could be running by 2015) as the primary reason all his supporters voted for him is delusional at best. And if that’s not your claim, then you’re admitting he has no mandate for his current stance at all.
The choice facing Scarborough is straightforward (and it’s not what the Mayor’s selling):
1. Improved transit service that meets their needs at least up to 2050, doesn’t sacrifice traffic lanes, gets buses off the road, can be extended to Malvern and points further, and can open within the next few years.
2. Increasingly crowded buses for the next decade, with years worth of construction, and nothing better than bus service to Malvern or anywhere else in northeastern Scarborough for the foreseeable future.
*Option 2 also involves all the development charge money that should be going to improve community facilities disappearing for the next 30 to 50 years.
Patrick, I don’t think you are reading people’s post, and at the same time you are pulling numbers out of thin air.
As mentioned by other posts, the expected speed of above ground LRT’s with its ROW is 22km/h, 50% higher than your number. Also you kept saying Scarborough’s population is nearly a million and is projected to raise by a quarter of a million in very few years. Where does that number come from? How many years exactly? A brief search showed me this:
Between the 2001 and 2006, Scarborough’s population increased from 588,730 to 602,575, a 2.4% change (http://www.toronto.ca/committees/council_profiles/pdf/scarb_population_page.pdf).
While the increase might have accelerated in recent years, it would take an explosive increase to bring the population to nearly a million in 5 years, and continued explosive increase for it to raise by another “quarter of a million in very few years”. Show me the evidences that such an explosive growth has happened and is going to continue into the next few years.
Please, if you want a serious discussion, stop throwing out mixed up and bogus numbers.
Mr Ford is the one who’s playing politics with transit. Political interference has no room in public transit.
@Yu… I’m not sure I understand your point. To me you are splitting hairs. My population numbers may not be exact but the number I usually quote is 27% of Toronto which is around the 600 thousand that you mention. Your disputing my number doesn’t change my point. I wasn’t trying to demonstrate my command of exact statistics I was commenting on the very large population that lives in Scarborough. Planners for the City when talking about outlooks are using the number 1 million that can be expected to land in Toronto over the next 10 years. The only place in Toronto with available land of any consequence for development south of Hwy 7 is in Scarborough, Etobicoke and North York. If you assume that 27% continues to hold true we are looking at something close to a million living in Scarborough. When you take into consideration a growing, lets put it a little stronger, burgeoning population that is bounded by the busiest piece of road in North America and people aren’t taking this into consideration when deciding on major transit build out. It’s absolutely ludicrous. Bringing up a statistical red herring in an effort to discredit an argument is a bit lame. Have a good one.
Hey, Patrick,
I was not about to respond as this discussion is clearly going nowhere. But you reminded me of somebody so I want to say this, just for fun:
You know, Scarborough is a very densely populated urban center that absolutely need subways, we have almost a million people here (what, it is more like 600K+? never mind, close enough); LRT just does not cut it, it is too slow at 15km/h (what. it is 22km/h? never mind, too slow anyway); and we already got the money we need to build the subway, a cool 1.8billion (what, we need $2.7billion? never mind, that is good enough). Now let us just do it!
You see, the margin of errors are all around 50%, but of course, the petty numbers have nothing to do with the validity of the idea.
@Patrick
But most of Toronto’s population growth over the last decade has actually come in the form of condo towers, primarily downtown. Many of those are near the subway lines, but a huge amount is actually in existing mid-rise street-oriented, streetcar-serviced neighbourhoods.
There’s obviously huge opportunity for redevelopment in the inner suburbs, particularly on all those surface parking lots, but there’s not nearly as much of it happening as you seem to believe.
If there is one argument Ford could have used to push his subway plan, and while not necessarily a good one but butter than repeating, “The people want subways,” is when the Progressive Conservatives get in again they may likely want to side with Ford and could cancel any LRT progress made in the interim.
Pat Sherman is a troll. Act accordingly and ignore him.