An urbanist view of Toronto’s initiatives to designate streets for pedestrians and cyclists instead of cars…
When Rob Ford was mayor of Toronto, he mastered the low art of the catchphrase. Stopping “the gravy train” played to the idea that city government was all bloat, all the time. “Subways, subways, subways” was a promise of more expensive underground transit, rather than less-costly, on-road light rail, in low-density Scarborough. None of this was rooted in reality or good public policy, but that wasn’t the point – stirring up resentment among suburban voters was the point.
By that measure, Mr. Ford’s most resonant slogan was his claim that the city had declared a “war on the car.” Streetcars and (a very few) bike lanes were making the city impassable for humble drivers, he claimed. (The mayor got around in a black Cadillac Escalade.) This mantra was no truer than his other mantras, but it stuck in the urban hive mind.
The chaotic Ford years can seem like a distant memory for Canada’s largest city – now run by the conservatively progressive John Tory – but their spirit has never really gone away. Rob’s brother Doug is, of course, Premier. His nephew, Michael, occupies the family seat on city council, representing Etobicoke North. And road rage still fuels Toronto politics.
Consider Michael Ford’s latest campaign to end one of the best things to happen in the city during the pandemic. Last summer, a program called ActiveTO removed cars from a few major roads on weekends, including parts of the pseudo-highway Lake Shore Boulevard, to allow people more space to bike, walk and get outside. The city resumed the program this summer – grudgingly, with fewer, shorter and less frequent closings.
The concept, even in its truncated form, attracts tens of thousands of cyclists and pedestrians to its most popular routes.
Yes, it can slow drive times on some adjacent streets – as do the scores of restaurant patios that have taken over chunks of road across the city – but that’s a small price for briefly making Toronto feel like something more than a grid of commuter arteries.
Enter Councillor Ford. He wants to end ActiveTO’s road closings, which he says are creating a “mass amount of congestion” for drivers. The young dynast hasn’t revived his late uncle’s “war on the car” trope and sounds pleasant and reasonable in interviews. But he is every bit as wrong when he places the convenience of motorists above the interests of other city residents, and the needs of people passing through a neighbourhood over those actually living there.
Let’s review the arguments. Mr. Ford is right that some ActiveTO road closures have increased congestion. City figures point to longer travel times on the Gardiner Expressway during some weekends when Lake Shore West was closed. Even if drivers themselves have some responsibility here – ActiveTO has been a fact for two summers running; pick another route! – of course being stuck in traffic is annoying.
Far less persuasive is the notion that cyclists have other options. Mr. Ford suggests they try the waterfront Martin Goodman Trail, as though it wasn’t already so crowded as to be the site of narrowly averted Tour de France-style pile-ups every weekend from May to October. The pandemic has revealed the pent-up desire for places to stroll and pedal, in a city centre with few green spaces, and little room for modes of transport that aren’t motorized. The city says that 34,000 cyclists and 5,000 pedestrians used Lake Shore West on one day in May when it was closed to car traffic. That’s more than the number of cars and trucks using it on the average weekend day.
The difference is, when cyclists feel congested or unsafe by a lack of road space, they stay home – or they drive. Cycling congestion is thousands of people invisibly at home or behind the wheel, not cycling. By taking a small amount of road space from cars, a few days a month, ActiveTO has shown that Toronto has been in the throes of a silent, years-long cycling traffic jam.
Where the campaign against ActiveTO really founders, though, is on philosophical ground. Mr. Ford believes saving a few minutes of drive-time for a few thousand drivers is worth depriving the city of new, much-needed space for safe recreation. But the places where we live are more than just spaces to drive through. If you wanted to boil the issue down to a Fordian slogan, urbanists have one ready-made: “Cities are for people.”