A Desire Named Streetcars

At the candidates’ debate I attended a few sleeps ago, the need for better public transit in Toronto came up. All candidates, being in Toronto, agreed that the federal government should put more money into public transit. A lot more. The city and the province concur; they argue only on which new subway line should be built. Other Canadian cities are in a building period.

I agree that public transit is a good idea. It is of particular benefit to the poor, it reduces traffic, and it reduces pollution. It also reduces carbon emissions, for what that is worth. As one candidate put it, “we need to get people out of their cars.”

At the same time, putting huge sums into subway lines right now strikes me as perhaps a bad idea. Technology is changing quickly. There is a real possibility that, with self-driving cars, the private automobile will become obsolete on its own: no need for anyone to keep a car idle in a garage for private use. When an owner does not need it, they can let it roam for fares. Less traffic, fewer emissions, and a quite possibly cheaper form of transport than a bus or subway. At no public cost—or government could spend their money subsidizing such rides for the poor.

Other technologies also seem to be on the horizon. There is Elon Musk’s tunnel-boring project, which may make subway tunnels a lot cheaper if we can just hold off for a bit. Along with road tunnels to reduce traffic problems. Dubai is experimenting with self-driving helicopter taxis, which may not do much for the carbon footprint, but could reduce both traffic and commute times. 

Self-driving air taxi.

Is this a good time to be ploughing billions into traditional technologies that may be obsolete in a few years? Especially since a new subway line takes years to build.

I can see a thing or two we could do right now, instantly improving the situation at almost no cost.

Shut down an existing street with an existing streetcar line to vehicular traffic. I’d say we choose Queen, Roncesvalles, and Broadview. We instantly have what is now referred to as LRT, as with the Spadina line, or the new line being built on Eglinton. Such streetcars no longer face the delays from traffic and obstructed track that are the great curse of the current system. Cyclists instantly have a safe route to and through the heart of downtown. Segways, electric scooters, and e-bikes could share the space—all more efficient and less polluting than cars. We will have improved public transit, and at the same time forced more people out of their cars, supposedly one of our objectives. We will, at almost no cost, have the “feeder lines” to east and west so long called for to reduce congestion on the existing downtown subway lines. Shopping will be easier and more social on such streets, without the need to go to the corner and wait for the lights to cross. And with the ability of commuters to impulse buy as they see an interesting shop on their way—something lost in a subway ride. Street life, a wonderful part of the urban experience in so many European cities, will be intensified.

You might object that all this makes things tough on the poor drivers.

But it is impractical now to try to drive downtown; much faster to cycle or subway, not to mention the problems with parking. Is much really lost? And if cars depart a given street, we suddenly have new real estate available for development, currently locked up in parking spaces.

Why is nobody suggesting this?

I fear it is because, without big new public expenditures, there are simply fewer opportunities for graft.