Today Fri Sat
It is forcast to be Fog at 11:00 PM EDT on May 24, 2012
Fog
29°/18°
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Chance of a Thunderstorm
31°/19°
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
26°/16°

20 Comments

news

2010 Villain: Subway Fetishism

201012-heroesandvillains-villain-subway-fetish.jpg
Illustration by Brian McLachlan/Torontoist.


Torontoist is ending the year by naming our Heroes and Villains—Toronto’s very best and very worst people, places, and things over the past twelve months. From December 13–17: the Villains! From December 20–24, the Heroes! And, from December 27–30, you can vote for Toronto’s Superhero and Supervillain of the year.


Ponies. When we were eight many of us wanted ponies. Or racecars, or rocket ships to call our own.
We did not get these things, and though that stung at the time, no reasonable person would have expected our parents to procure them for us. Wanting wasn’t a justification for having.
The grown-up version of wanting ponies in our current tranportation-planning climate is subways. The reasons we like subways are clear: subways are sleek, subways are fast, and subways are tidily buried underground. Wait times are (generally) both shorter and more predictable than with surface vehicles, the ride is smoother, and the climate control (a big deal in winter especially) far more effective.
These are all real merits. Our attachment to subways is not frilly and it is not superficial: study after study shows that the more comfortable and appealing a transit option is, the more likely it is to attract riders. And we need more transit riders, desperately. With the city’s population projected to grow by 500,000 over the next twenty years, we need to collectively become far more efficient in our transportation use—there simply isn’t room on the roads for us all to drive.
But liking isn’t a justification for having, either. Setting aside for a moment all the very real (and in our view independently decisive) concerns about available funding, political brinksmanship, and opportunity cost of delaying construction for the several years it will take to get approval for a new approach to transit, is this: subways are the wrong tool for the job. Subways excel at moving very large volumes of people, and are an ideal form of transit for very densely populated areas. But for all that our population is going to grow substantially, we’re not going to increase in density by anything close to the amount needed to make subways an appropriate transit choice. It is simply far more firepower than we require to move the number of people we will have to move.
Building subways in the absence of this density amounts to placing too much weight on our likes, our wishes, our preferences, and perhaps our prejudices, at the expense of everything else—efficiency, frugality, expediency, and the basic equity we should strive for by building transit to serve as many Torontonians as possible. It is inordinately, unjustifiably wasteful to hang on to this attachment—real and legitimate though it may be—when it is for something that is both unnecessary and costs three times as much as the alternative.

Filed under: , , , , , ,

Report error Send a tip

Comments

  • http://www.jakebabad.com Jake

    I don’t know if “appropriate” is the right word. Subways are absolutely appropriate, but I agree that a complete transit system uniting the megacity is somewhat implausible. Interesting debate.
    I’m working on a book about Toronto and I’m blogging about my attempts to self-publish at http://www.jakebabad.com

  • http://undefined jurgvonschmurg

    Can we make blind, unquestioning support of light rail a villain too?

  • http://www.nobodysbusiness.ca Johnnie Walker

    I love Brian’s illustration for this one.

  • http://undefined Andrew

    The DRL subway is a more urgent priority than any number of light rail lines all over hither and yon.

  • http://undefined Solex

    No it isn’t, and building it will be disruptive to the parts of Toronto that it will go through.

  • http://undefined Sean Marshall

    I agree and disagree with this one. The Eglinton LRT’s central portion is in essence, a subway. The one subway not championed by Ford, the only one we need, is the Downtown Relief Line. (And any infrastructure project is disruptive, Solex). Other than that, TC, proper regional rail (electric, frequent, smaller GO trains) and some improved bus schedules is all we will ever need.
    But calling “Subway Fetishism” a villain is unfortunately weak, just like calling the suburbs a villain. I hate to say it, but it feels like Torontoist is out of touch with the Toronto that lives north of St. Clair and has to crush on a Yonge subway to commute, because this site has great material and I’m usually a huge fan of the annual Heroes and Villains list.

  • Transity Cyclist

    This article is very clever. Couldn't have said it better myself!

  • Eric S. Smith

    “…it feels like Torontoist is out of touch with the Toronto that lives north of St. Clair and has to crush on a Yonge subway to commute…”

    Is there a subway scheme on the table that would have any benefit for such people? Improved signalling and automated train operation will increase capacity on the Yonge line at some point in the future, but eagerly anticipating that day is not the “Subway Fetishism” that's being talked about here.

    A hypothetical north-of–St. Clair Yonge subway user who favoured turning the Scarborough RT into heavy rail at the expense of putting LRT down Jane would pretty much have to be a subway fetishist, since the Transit City option would actually create another north-south route for some commuters, taking a bit of pressure off of YUS.

  • http://www.facebook.com/marshall.sean Sean Marshall

    “Is there a subway scheme on the table that would have any benefit for such people?”

    Yes, there is. The Downtown Relief Line. Metrolinx put it back on the table and all sorts of LRT fans, like myself, support it. Steve Munro supports it, the man every LRT superfan quotes. Bonus: it would pass through regions that have subway densities.

    It isn't LRT versus subway folks, it's the right tool for the right job. Sure, Rob Ford will screw up the little progress we made, but subways aren't a villain. Ford's transit plan perhaps.

    Oh, and by the way, the Jane LRT isn't even funded, it was always on the backburner. It would't do much for the Yonge overcrowding either. The other question asked, but never answered, was how Jane and Don Mills LRTs, if ever built, would make it to the Bloor-Danforth Subway, and how they wouldn't dump more passengers on the B-D, or Bloor-Yonge bottleneck. The DRL answers those questions, without the uber-expense of rebuilding Bloor-Danforth again for hundreds of millions of dollars.

  • Eric S. Smith

    The DRL doesn't seem to have much visibility, though, so I'm reluctant to agree that it's on the table. There is/was Transit City, with three levels of government in support, and now Angry!Mayor is pushing for the Scarborough Subway. To what extent is Metrolinx supporting the DRL? How often, and in how much detail, has Council voted for DRL-related research and planning?

    I firmly believe that, despite the benefits of the DRL, your average “World-Class cities have subways” commenter is imagining a station near his or her house, or lots of brightly coloured new lines criscrossing the city, and probably both. Thus, fetishism and villainy.

  • sadp

    Ugh, the DRL, not this old horse. Would be nice, but is it really necessary?

  • Eric S. Smith

    What's your alternative, magically making Bloor/Yonge able to handle more throughput?

  • Functionalist

    QUOTE: “But for all that our population is going to grow substantially, we're not going to increase in density by anything close to the amount needed to make subways an appropriate transit choice. It is simply far more firepower than we require to move the number of people we will have to move.”

    Actually, large parts of Toronto such as downtown and the older west and east end neighbourhoods like the Junction have the density for subways, but no subways are planned. Also, Toronto has some of the densest suburbs in North America. Many suburban communities are as dense as downtown neighbourhoods, like North York Centre or Crescent Town. Suburban Toronto is not dense enough to justify a large network of lines in the suburbs, but it is dense enough for one new east/west line, and contains lots of employment and destinations like the airport. It's not just density, but ridership on surface feeder routes (like LRT in the future) that makes subways appropriate. The suburbs have the numbers of riders and density to justify at least one new real grade-separated subway line. It will continue to increase.

    QUOTE: “Building subways in the absence of this density amounts to placing too much weight on our likes, our wishes, our preferences, and perhaps our prejudices, at the expense of everything else—efficiency, frugality, expediency, and the basic equity we should strive for by building transit to serve as many Torontonians as possible.”

    But the density is there, though you're probably just not familiar with it. All surface routes feeding into the existing subway are very well-used. We know what works and we know what kind of system we want to have. If we don't follow that, we'll never be happy with our city, building some highly compromised system. Our wishes are sound.

    Torontonians know how crowded the system is. They want quick and efficient transit and know that this metropolis does indeed require more subway lines with its population and transit usage. LRT fetishists continue to insult them, seeing the average citizen as stupid or childish. Too bad, because a combination of subway and LRT expansion will absolutely be necessary to tackle the gridlock in Toronto in the short-term future.

  • sadp

    Ugh, the DRL, not this old horse. Would be nice, but is it really necessary?

  • Eric S. Smith

    What's your alternative, magically making Bloor/Yonge able to handle more throughput?

  • Functionalist

    QUOTE: “But for all that our population is going to grow substantially, we're not going to increase in density by anything close to the amount needed to make subways an appropriate transit choice. It is simply far more firepower than we require to move the number of people we will have to move.”

    Actually, large parts of Toronto such as downtown and the older west and east end neighbourhoods like the Junction have the density for subways, but no subways are planned. Also, Toronto has some of the densest suburbs in North America. Many suburban communities are as dense as downtown neighbourhoods, like North York Centre or Crescent Town. Suburban Toronto is not dense enough to justify a large network of lines in the suburbs, but it is dense enough for one new east/west line, and contains lots of employment and destinations like the airport. It's not just density, but ridership on surface feeder routes (like LRT in the future) that makes subways appropriate. The suburbs have the numbers of riders and density to justify at least one new real grade-separated subway line. It will continue to increase.

    QUOTE: “Building subways in the absence of this density amounts to placing too much weight on our likes, our wishes, our preferences, and perhaps our prejudices, at the expense of everything else—efficiency, frugality, expediency, and the basic equity we should strive for by building transit to serve as many Torontonians as possible.”

    But the density is there, though you're probably just not familiar with it. All surface routes feeding into the existing subway are very well-used. We know what works and we know what kind of system we want to have. If we don't follow that, we'll never be happy with our city, building some highly compromised system. Our wishes are sound.

    Torontonians know how crowded the system is. They want quick and efficient transit and know that this metropolis does indeed require more subway lines with its population and transit usage. LRT fetishists continue to insult them, seeing the average citizen as stupid or childish. Too bad, because a combination of subway and LRT expansion will absolutely be necessary to tackle the gridlock in Toronto in the short-term future.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Colin-Kelly/100000312454656 Colin Kelly

    Subways are cheaper in the long run and have a greater service life and can be run autonomously (No Union Drivers). After factoring the guaranteed 150% cost over runs and land expropriation subways are probably cheaper to build.

  • Lula ore

    Subways are absolutely necessary in a city whose population is increasing. It’s time we started looking at the long term instead of findings band aid ways to solve the transit crisis the city is currently in.

    • http://www.new-media.ca Apriori

      Problem is money and time. Everyone wants subways, but if we are to afford them, we’ll have to wait another decade or two.

  • Stephan

    I remember way back with the Scarborough LRT expansion. What a joke! It took years for them to sort that technical joke out! Lets not have a chapter two here! I wish this city,province and country band together and dedicate a long term solution. Like build 1 subway station every year!

    stephan