I have news for the pollsters and politicians: As a longtime resident of Scarborough, subways don’t fit the needs of modern suburbs. We deserve something far better — a modern light rail system.

This view isn’t about the reliability, speed and capacity of one system against another. Nor is it about asking suburbia to take a solution that is second best. It’s not even a discussion about money, although there is no money for new subways.

Rather, it’s simply figuring out which transit is the best choice for suburbanites. It’s all about what will work best along Sheppard or Eglinton or Finch in the suburbs, what meets residents’ needs, plus what supports existing jobs and the suburban quality of life.

We know that the subways now promised are the product of projections that were valid about a quarter of a century ago. The suburbs were to be full of manufacturing centres or offices, surrounded by workers’ homes. Towering over subway stations would be dense condominiums or apartments. Most commuting would be on the traditional pattern of living in suburbia while working downtown. Under these assumptions, subways are viable.

Building a transit system with a vision to stand the test of time is a risky proposition. A favourite example is the subway tunnel opened in the Bloor Viaduct years before it was required. Much less has been said about the subway era visions that created residential blocks around Jane and Finch, or near Kingston and Galloway.

Our world is a very different place than it was imagined to be in the 1980s.

Perhaps in spite of planners, our suburbs have thrived. Low density communities have continued to spread throughout suburbia, absorbing a new generation, creating stable neighbourhoods, and wary of further change. These communities have sponsored dozens of small economic centres, providing both local markets and employment. Intensification, a mix of middle height condominiums and retail, has been modest along the main thoroughfares.

Suburbia has not only adapted socially, but to new economic realities. A majority of Toronto’s residents now work outside its boundaries. Manufacturing has moved overseas. Employment growth is in services. Personal travel from the suburbs is usually local, while commuters go outside the city entirely. These trends show in our transit usage. Only recently did ridership exceed the level it had 25 years ago, before the exodus of employment.

Urban planning has largely adapted best examples from elsewhere with policies to fit our demographic, political and market realities. The results have provided Toronto with one of the highest qualities of life worldwide.

Trading this pragmatic, incremental and successful approach for a plan from the 1980s cannot be in the best interests of residents. It would put stable neighbourhoods at risk from overdevelopment, abandon local retailers and jobs, while not even providing transit for most suburban trips.

Suburban motorists may feel constrained by having a permanent easement for slow-moving vehicles. Indeed, tardy construction on St. Clair and Roncesvalles caused congestion for months. But light rail in the suburbs starts with different assumptions: new project management, plus adding space for transit, which means removing transit from the lanes used by cars.

Given the alternatives, a light-rail-based transit system is the best choice for much of suburbia. It is a transit system that meets, and will meet, the needs of both motorist and transit user. It’s one that supports existing jobs and local retailers. And one that does not add to the pressures facing established neighbourhoods.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Actually, the suburbs do not deserve subways. We deserve better.

David Soknacki, a former city councillor and budget chief, has lived in Scarborough since 1963. www.soknacki.com