Reinventing Transit for the 21st Century

Canada’s first subway line, which opened in Toronto in 1954, was 7.4 kilometers long and cost $6.8 million per kilometer—$76 million per kilometer in today’s money. That seems a bargain […]
Published on March 12, 2024

Canada’s first subway line, which opened in Toronto in 1954, was 7.4 kilometers long and cost $6.8 million per kilometer—$76 million per kilometer in today’s money. That seems a bargain compared to a subway line Toronto is now constructing at a projected cost of well over $1 billion per kilometer.

Edmonton opened Canada’s first light-rail line in 1978 at a cost about $40 million per kilometer in today’s money. Today, Calgary, Hamilton, Kitchener, and Toronto are all planning or building light-rail lines that are expected to cost well over $250 million per kilometer. Similarly, Vancouver’s first SkyTrain cost about $41 million per kilometer in today’s money, but the region is now planning a line expected to cost $500 million per kilometer.

These numbers have led many people to ask why transit construction costs so much. I wonder instead: is there any rail project whose cost per kilometer is so great that transit agencies would reject it?

The answer to both questions seems to be the same. Transit agencies have discovered that politicians will fund any transit project, no matter what the cost, so agencies make no effort to restrain themselves and costs have ballooned out of control. For politicians, who are spending other people’s money, the benefit is the cost as higher-cost projects mean more money goes to contractors who will gratefully make contributions to political campaigns.

This situation is particularly aggravating to taxpayers because we have a newer technology that can do everything light rail or SkyTrains can do, and even substitute for many subways, that costs far less than rail transit. That technology, buses, can move more people to more destinations at higher speeds for far less money than any rail line.

Bus routes can also be changed overnight if transportation patterns change and don’t require years of planning and construction. Yet many transit agencies treat buses as if they are inferior to trains.

The other problem with Canada’s major transit systems is that they are monocentric, meaning focused on downtowns. That made sense 110 years ago when most urban jobs were in factories and most factories were in downtowns.

Then Henry Ford developed the moving assembly line for making his Model Ts. Such assembly lines required more land than older factories, so the factories moved out of downtowns, followed by retailers and many offices. Today, only about 10 percent of urban jobs are still located in downtowns while urban areas have numerous other economic centers.

Canada’s transit systems still focus on downtowns but poorly serve other economic centers. For example, before the pandemic 45 percent of workers in downtown Calgary took transit to work, but less than 10 percent of workers in the rest of the Calgary urban area commuted by transit. Instead of spending billions on obsolete rail lines, transit agencies need to reinvent themselves so that they serve all major economic centers as well as they now serve downtowns.

Most major economic centers are located near major freeway interchanges. Transit agencies should locate ten or so geographically distributed transit centers—which need be no more than curbside parking reserved for buses with some modest bus shelters—near freeway exchanges that are close to economic centers.

The agencies should then operate frequent, non-stop buses from every center to every other center. Local bus routes should radiate away from each center collectively reaching every neighborhood of the urban area. This will more than double average transit speeds and allow transit riders to get from any corner of an urban area to any other part of the area at speeds competitive with driving.

Such a polycentric system will serve a much higher percentage of the region’s workers and other travelers than the current monocentric system yet cost no more to operate. It will cost less to build than a single kilometer of rail line since most of the necessary infrastructure already exists. While some may worry that buses will get caught in congestion, the solution is to fix congestion for everyone, not spend billions on a slow rail system that only serves a few people in the region.

It is time for Canadian transit systems to enter the 21st century. Polycentric bus systems may be the best way to do it.


Randal O’Toole is a transportation policy analyst and author of Building 21st Century Transit Systems for Canadian Cities, a recent report published by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Related Items:

Read: Building 21st Century Transit Systems For Canadian Cities (52 pages) March 12, 2024.

Featured News


The Smallwood Solution

The Smallwood Solution

$875,000 for every indigenous man, woman and child living in a rural First Nations community. That is approximately what Canadian taxpayers will have to pay if a report commissioned by the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) is accepted. According to the report 349...

Building a 21st Century Transit System for Calgary

Building a 21st Century Transit System for Calgary

Calgary Transit is mired in the past, building an obsolete transit system designed for an archaic view of a city. Before the pandemic, transit carried 45 percent of downtown Calgary employees to work, but less than 10 percent of workers in the rest of the Calgary...

Invest in Roads Not Transit

Invest in Roads Not Transit

The jury is still out in Winnipeg: should governments be spending money on roads or more public transit? Well, a new policy brief from the Frontier Centre show that the sooner governments abandon their bias against cars the better. A recent University of Toronto paper...