Mock-ups show two better ways
TheStar.com
August 30, 2007
Christopher Hume
Tucked away in a quiet corner at this year's Ex, the future can be glimpsed.
Just past the corn-dog stand, not far from the Human Cannonball, the observant visitor will notice two streetcar mock-ups. Both are examples of what the TTC is considering for use in this city.
(We may not be able to afford to operate the public transit system in Toronto, but thanks to the province – Ever so grateful Mr. McGuinty, Sir! – we can expect to get new rolling stock some time this century.)
About time, too. The battleships that rumble along the mean streets of Toronto now were interesting when they appeared back in the 1980s, but light rail transit – as streetcars are now called – has progressed. Even though the mock-ups on display bear little relationship to what will eventually appear in Toronto, they are clearly miles ahead of where we are now.
The most obvious feature, common to both models, is how much lower they are to the ground. Compared to the UTDC (the provincial Urban Transportation Development Corp.) vehicle we're used to, they seem to float just above the road. That eliminates the four-step climb at the entrance and exit of the current streetcar. This will be good news for the elderly, the disabled and mothers with strollers. It will improve access enormously, opening up the system to thousands of people for whom public transit represents a series of insurmountable barriers.
Though details of the seating arrangements are still years off, it's clear there are better configurations than those we're used to. The two contenders – from Siemens and Bombardier – are both worthy, and raise the question of how the decision should be made. For example, is it preferable to cram as many riders as possible into the vehicle? Or to accommodate a smaller number of users in comfort?
More important still is the relationship between inside and out. In other words, the best approach might be to ensure that everyone inside has a good view outside, not just because that's a more pleasant way to travel, but also because we can see where we're going.
Of course, we live in a city where such niceties seem entirely beside the point. Why bother discussing streetcar details when the system itself is not viable? So it won't be surprising that the decision about which streetcar to choose will be made for reasons other than efficiency, sustainability and user pleasure. It will be justified on the basis of which is cheapest.
As often as not, this kind of thinking is flawed. Consider the English practice, in which the least and most expensive proposals are eliminated and the winner chosen from what remains.
The better way is not necessarily the cheaper way. That's important for Toronto to keep in mind as we head into a civic recession with the most basic services up for grabs.
The TTC cannot afford to cut back any further; without public transit the city really has no future. We see evidence daily that the car cannot save us; indeed, it has become the problem. So at the very moment when streetcar (and subway) lines should be expanded, they face reductions.
These two mock-ups stand as a beacon. As they make clear, the technology exists and there are plenty of examples of advanced LRT operations around the world. Yet we remain firmly ensconced in a mindset and a system that's 20 or 30 years behind the times.
Wouldn't it be great if once, just once, the city, the province, maybe even the federal government, would get smart and make a serious commitment to public transit. That's unlikely, of course; it looks as if the train has already left the station.
