To some people who have spent their whole lives downtown the 905 might seem like something out of M. Night Shyamalan’s ‘The Village.’ Stray too close to Steeles and the monsters in their SUVs will jump out and grab you…

In a recent discussion board thread about improving transit in Mississauga, one opinion about the improvements already in place was that “unfortunately, the political response has been with absurdities like creating HOV lanes on the 403 (taking away an active traffic lane from an already-congested highway), dedicated diamond lanes, giving consideration to bicycles and other such nonsense.” While this might not represent the opinion of the average 905er, my 15 year experience in the suburbs suggests that sustainable transportation, as a culture, may not be the default frame of mind.

The 905 isn’t the most sustainable place to live. It’s not the most walkable or transit-friendly place to live either. But, it is a place where many people have chosen to live, and many more will continue to make that choice. It’s not going away, and if we want to transform this region into a place where sustainable mobility is the first and best choice, then we have to work within the confines of the low-density, car-oriented suburb.

Out here, walking is something people do to get some exercise – rarely to get anywhere. In many cases, a walk to the corner store is an expedition or a walk at the edge of a busy artery. In my case, it’s both. With no sidewalks, my own experience is a two kilometer walk in the ditch of a busy highway where nesting birds have actually attacked me (not a pleasant summer). At night, the streetlights are often faulty. With this experience the norm in many communities in the 905, I truly don’t blame anyone for driving to pick up a carton of milk. So what will it take to change this mentality? Is it a matter of building sidewalks and attractive streetscapes, or is it more important to deal with the fact that there often isn’t anything interesting within walking distance?

To bridge the gap between my own home and the rest of the universe I’ve picked up cycling to reduce the 20 minute walk to the bus stop to a 4 minute trip. But, while cycling on city streets is second nature to many downtown residents, cycling in the suburbs can be asking for trouble. Stoplights are few and far between, causing major arteries to become speedways where on-road bicycle lanes wouldn’t be safe to ride in. While many municipalities have wonderful, well-used trails, they often follow winding rivers and creeks and aren’t very useful for commuters looking for the quickest route. In order to allow for a culture of cycling to get somewhere to blossom, speed and safety must be addressed. Could legalized riding on the sidewalks be a solution? With bicycle theft a major concern in light of recent events, how can we convince businesses to install bike racks when very few of their customers and employees arrive by bike? And what about connecting to transit? Metrolinx is funding bicycle infrastructure on vehicles and transit stations, but what else is needed?

Transit, being a cornerstone of sustainable mobility, is a very interesting issue in my neck of the woods. Some consider it a necessity, others a dream just over the horizon, and yet others view it as a vehicle for big-city problems to arrive on their doorsteps. There is no question that there is demand for increased transit service in the 905, but overall ridership remains low. Is this because buses don’t run frequently, or do buses run infrequently because ridership is low? Should transit agencies move to a model where frequent service is offered at a higher cost, or should under-performing routes be cut to keep costs low? When it comes to service coverage, many routes only skirt the edge of neighbourhoods. Smaller community buses can navigate narrow neighbourhood streets, but the costs are often the same as a full sized bus. Is this the price we should pay to improve service? How do we resolve disputes where residents oppose buses in their communities?

There is no question that rapid transit expansion needs to occur in order to make public transit competitive with the private automobile. But, if we evaluate projects on ridership projections, many important corridors will never reach levels with justify building subways and light rail in the 905. While higher order transit tends to attract more ridership than buses running every few minutes ever could, road expansions still easily meet the demand requirements to justify expansion. How can we convince policy-makers, stakeholders and the general public that investing in transit has a greater benefit than investing in highway construction? Should we even be building lines just on ridership projection, or should a more broad-based set of criteria be used?

One of the roles of Metronauts is to provoke discussion about the quest for sustainability in the Greater Toronto & Hamilton Area – perhaps this is why I’ve decided to open with a list of questions. Many will be discussed in more depth in the coming weeks and months, but lets not forget how important the issue at hand is. Using the Regent Park redevelopment as a benchmark, it could be another 50 years before significant sustainable redevelopment occurs in the vast tracts of low-density sprawl surrounding Toronto and Hamilton.

We can’t afford to wait 50 years to start over with a clean slate.

Building a transit culture in the 905 isn’t going to be an easy task, and with the online comments I referred to above, it’s painfully clear that it will be an uphill battle. But, it is something that has to be done in order to have a successful and healthy region. While there is no doubt that the City of Toronto is the economic engine of the region (and of the country), we cannot let it be eclipsed by a chassis rusting around it, choked to death by congestion.