News   Nov 08, 2024
 452     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 894     3 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 479     0 

Transit and Urban Issues: Doomed to second class status?

I don't think these issues are doomed to second class status. Who would have thought five years ago that the feds would be giving gas money for transit? Canada is continuing to urbanize. Rural areas are losing population while the big ten cities continue to gain population share. There's also a major migration to city centres across the country. Over time this will change the agenda.

And I don't see 905'ers and 416'ers really at odds with these goals. Congestion in 905 is going to make these people fight for the very same things. I have lots of family in 905 and the suburban areas of 416 and most want more transit. When the 401 comes to a full stop, and when people realize there's nowhere to put more highways or even more lanes the agenda will change. Throw in oil prices and that time is coming sooner than later.
 
I think most people who study the issue would agree that change is coming to North American society. There are only so many highways we can build, rising energy costs are going to alter how we function and travel, and the cost of maintaining suburbs is going to rise.

One example is transit. Highways get fuller as time marches on and some people start to question why there isnt more transit. But what form will that transit take? Will it be an overall appraoch to transit that focuses on local and regional? Will it be more about getting commuters too and from work? If GO for example is greatly expanded, and say even a few new lines built, will they just greenfields surrounded by surface parkings and serve as a way for suburban residents to go too and from work with little other consideration to the network. Or will they actually serves as hubs for the community as a whole and help foster more sustainable neighborhoods in the suburbs? If transit is expanded, yet its overall roll still functions as a cousin to the car and little else, than this would hardly bring any benefit to overall sustainable growth other than aleviate the need for additional highway expansion (to a point).

Lets take the issue of home heating. Energy costs may rise high enough that someone living in a 1700 sq ft home might find that the bills are going to be too much to handle. But how will they deal with the problem? Will they downsize to a smaller house that is more affordable to heat and cool, or do they demand that somehow the government start subsidizing their costs and offering rebates so that they need not give up their existing lifestlye?

What about the gas tax? How long will it be before we start to hear demands that the gas tax be cut as to give motorists a relief from rising gasoline prices. It does not matter that it would be a totally stupid policy that would offset costs for a minimal amount of time since a portion of the public doesnt care about whether its smart policy, only whether it saves them money in the immediate term.

Plus how many people are going to actually give up their cars? Even with rising fuel costs those can be offset by driving a smaller SUV or opting for a hybrid vehicle. If that is the case, instead of questioning the use of the car in general, it will do nothing to actually change peoples attitudes about car and suburban culture, only make them a little grumpy that they cant drive an 8 cyclinder SUV anymore.

The fundamental question is how will people change? Will they change their habits to more sustainable practices and opt out of the current suburban model and existence? Or will they instead try to maintain what they have at any cost? The suburbs might change a little over the next decade but until that last dying momment when there is nothing else they can do, and no other methods they can maintain their lifestyle as it exists, suburbia is unlikely to change until there is a fundamental difference in how people perceive it and how they function in it.
 
I "keep the hope alive" by viewing the "paradigm-shift" as one that is shifting just a bit each day/month/year, kind of like compound interest. It grows slowly, but at a little faster pace as time goes on.

It'll be gas prices that changes behaviour (almost everyone is motivated by money), and I'm sure gas taxes will be cut by Harper (his lead in the polls is kind of scary, actually), but hopefully enough people will be switching to transit that it's political advantageous to expand and subsidize it.
 
I think most people who study the issue would agree that change is coming to North American society. There are only so many highways we can build, rising energy costs are going to alter how we function and travel, and the cost of maintaining suburbs is going to rise.

Change will come only at the crisis point. That is the dumb path that the general public takes. Terrorists attack, public wakes up to the possibility terrorists could attack. Hurricane hits, public wakes up to the possibility hurricanes could hit. People drink contaminated water, public wakes up to the possibility of contaminated water. Social services are cut to give tax breaks or donations to charities fall, social problems increase to the point they are in the news constantly, public wakes up to the importance of social services and donations to charity. Ten years after an event the public goes back to sleep on the particular issue unless it is a continual problem. If people don't have it shoved in their faces the problem doesn't exist. The general population isn't thinking about greater good or sustainability... they are thinking about their own survival and materialistic things.

People will move to fuel efficient cars when it saves them money. People will elect a government and hold them accountable to implement drastic environmental protections when they can't afford bottled water and they have trouble breathing. Look at that ridiculous "Biggest Loser" show where people feel like they have been saved when they are told they will be on the show... they couldn't bring themselves to work out until someone was in their face and pushed them hard. Personal health doesn't matter until the doctor gives you bad news. That is the general public in the "Me Generation"... the generation that exists when there hasn't been serious local issues like plague, war at home, a big recession, etc. for a long time... the complacency and selfishness rises. Unless you show homeless people, sick people, environmental damage, and so on constantly in the media the public forgets about it and focuses on the new plasma TV and sports car made more affordable by tax cuts that could have gone further helping someone else.

Sure there are people who are always thinking long term and big picture but those aren't the majority. Most of the population needs pay to entice them to work, need a manager to tell them what their job is, etc.
 
Transit and urban issues have been second class since the car became popular and will remain so for the forseeable future. Those of us who live downtown sometimes forget this but travel outside of the old city of Toronto or just look at a map of the GTA... mostly a suburban wasteland that continues to grow like a tumour by ferociously gobbling up farmland. We are and will continue to be a minority.
So poetic.
 
So poetic.

Thanks. One of my ancestors was a famous poet.

0312228104.jpg
 
More seriously: This thread is probably the best I have read since joining this forum! There is a good deal of thought-provoking material posted here.

I am in agreement with Ed's observation that there is not necessarily too much divergence between 905-ers and 416-ers on some of these issues. As a 905 resident myself, I think I am reasonably aware of most of these issues, and I am not the only one. I won't say that everyone shares this sensibility, but the urban agenda has come to the forefront in recent years, and demographic trends, if nothing else, will maintain the trend. I would also comment that the real "action" in coming years will be less in the core of the city, and more in the older suburbs, as we seek ways to intensify and redesign these areas. Lots of interesting things are ahead.
 
Walt:

I agree with your statement that there is not necessarily a big difference on some issues between the 905 and 416. However I do think that it also depends on the terms and deffinitions you use for each of these areas. It would be not too far off to assume that someone living in North York is likely to be have a fair bit in common with someone from Markham. But someone living at Bloor and Dufferin compared with someone living in Vaughan or Newmarket is going to yield a greater diversity in opinions.

One thing I did originally mention in my post was that my concern is not just with the GTA, but all of Ontario as whole. It is bound to happen that the suburbs bordering Toronto are likely to find themselves desiring more transit service and with development spilling over, finding that urban issues are more relevant too them. And even if we say that 5 million of the GTA's residences are concerned about urban issues (assuming everyone in Toronto and the immediate suburban cities share the same, strong concern), this is likely to drop off greatly once you leave this area.

Its cities like London, Kingston, Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge, Barrie, suburban regions of Ottawa such as Barrhaven, Orleans, and Kanata, Sarnia, Windsor, Chatam, and all the smaller towns and cities in the southern Ontario region. When you look at development in these and smaller cities, there is almost nothing resembling any concern regarding urban issues and sprawl. Again, I go back to the idea of driving down the 401 20 years ago and comparing then too today. Its been the growth outside of the GTA that I often find to be most horrific. While one doesnt think of these smaller cities as having an impact on land use, when you add up their total populations and their increasing proximity to major work centers, it is these places that one day are quiet little cities, and the next, find themselves swimming amidst a sea of sprawl.

Pickering, Ajax, and Whitby now represent one giant monoblob of suburbanity. Oshawa too has continued to creep along. Port Hope, Colborne and Cobourg, all increasingly closer to the GTA, are no longer just small, somewhat out of the cities, but finding themselves in a position where they are poised to become the newest addition the GTA suburban community. Once this happens, those cities, where land is still cheap and developers are just waiting to for that right momment, are going to become over boom towns with sprawl taking the lead.

Maybe the use of the term 905 to describe an Anti-Toronto if you will was not the most accurate. But I would still stand by my original thought that when comparing Toronto, and some of the more urban fringes of its suburban neighbors, to that which lies far beyond it and still composes a majority of people, that there are strong differences.

There has no doubt been some good progress made in the past 10 years to bring urban issues to the public and begin addressing many concerns that people in cities such as Toronto or Vancouver have. And even some of the suburban areas are catching on and slowly starting to rethink their own ideologies in terms of planning and how their cities are going to function in the future (Mississauga being a good example of a city that, despite some negative criticism that it gets, is at least making genuine attempts to figure out how it will grow and mature in the coming years and how it will progress).

But unless you are reading the Toronto Star or watching CBC or TV Ontario, these issues still get almost coverage and are not part of the political discourse outside of the more urbanized areas of Toronto. Until you can get a large majority of Ontarians (and Canadians on the federal level) to understand the importance of these issues, its only going to sit in a stalemate. The average voter in Thunder Bay or Kingston, or the 20% of rural Ontarians, or those not immediately affected by these issues, dont care. Many of these districts still salivate over the thought of big box development and highway projects and arent likely to care that Toronto is chocking under its smog and congestion.

Its the Rest of Ontario paradigm shift that needs to take place before any real action is ever going to happen. Its also, rather unfortunately, the one that is going to require the most extreme circumstances before it actually affects them enough for there to be a widespread concern for urban issues.

To take a view from the other side, from the Rest of Ontario if you will, there are also a lot of issues that are affecting them that often get ignored by the urbanized areas of Ontario as well. Rural issues are an excellent example of this. Yes we hear lots about Mad Cow and trade with the US being cut off, and other 'big' issues. But rarely ever do you see coverage that talks about agribusiness buying up small farms, or setting up pig farms that create an incredible amount of pollution. land speculation is another issue. Even in Kingston (Im using this as an example often because my family is from there so its a city Im very familiar with) there are farms that find themselves being threatened by real estate speculation. In smaller cities and communities where this is an important part of their culture, and how many of people survive, these are very important issues that almost get entirely ignored.

Perhaps part of the problem is simply inward thinking? I often hear plenty of comments, on this forum, in newspaper, magazines, and other media, that Toronto is all but ignored by the rest of Ontario and Canada. And I would agree that in many cases that is true. But the same is true for other parts of Ontario by Torontonians. Give a little, take a little I believe the saying goes.

However, I return to my original pesimistic attitude that in order for the changes to really begin to take place, their needs to be a shift in the fundamental way we view our cities and all the regions of Ontario (and going further, Canada). Right now, it seems as though the private ownership, me society has the stronghold grip over these decisions which results in a battle between cities and suburbs and rural where each place attempts to get what it can with little regard to concerns for the other. It wont just take a simple 'traffic is shitty and I want a bus or commuter train because I cant stand sitting in traffic for 4 hours a day' train of thought to see change actually take place. It is going to take something radical along the lines of 'I cant believe that the GTA has become so big that I can drive 3 hours on the 401 and the closest thing to country side I have seen is the airport'.

When we hear someone in Markham say 'I think we need to do something about our cities so that our actions here are not pushing farmers off their lands in Orillia or Brockville' or you hear someone in Sarnia say 'I think we need to address the problems that are affecting Toronto and other urban regions' then real change will be on the way. Until then, its largely hot air and political rhetoric that will result in little action, letting sprawl continue its reign.
 
"I would also comment that the real "action" in coming years will be less in the core of the city, and more in the older suburbs, as we seek ways to intensify and redesign these areas. Lots of interesting things are ahead."

I agree. Discussion of development in Toronto's suburban nodes or those in 905 centres like MCC or Markham are fascinating and important because they are so fundamental to the future dynamic and direction of the city region. I hope people from various areas who have strong feelings about their communities don't get discouraged by criticism and intense discussion regarding such developments. The outcome of development experimentation and lessons learned through example matter and have implications everywhere in the region.
 

Back
Top