News   Jul 16, 2024
 185     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 471     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 592     2 

Does Toronto look to North America or elsewhere for inspiration for transit/infrastructure?

You just love putting words in people's mouths, don't you?

I never equated transit in transit in Toronto to cities in Europe. I said Torontonian attitudes to transit and transit usage are more similar to Europe than typical US cities. If you're incapable of seeing that distinction, then there isn't much point in having a debate with you.

You never equated transit in Toronto to European cities? You just did above, trying to make it seem like Toronto is on the level of European cities by bringing up modal share. You try to belittle the US and elevate Toronto/Canada by trying to compare it falsely with Europe/Asia.

Which attitudes of Toronto are similar to Europeans? Don't make me laugh. We have similar attitudes to Europeans but in 2015 most of the GO lines don't have all day service and not electrified when that is the norm in most of western. Toronto and Canada which is so culturally similar to the United States is somehow getting inspired for transit and density from European and Asia...Ok
 
I think perhaps TigerMaster is primarily concerned with new/current policies and direction we are going in whereas Adjei is focused on historical inspiration.

I think it is totally undeniable to say we have had a huge American influence. Toronto was very much an industrial city like many other Great Lake cities and later went through the standard deindustrialization and suburbanization (though TigerMaster's note on the diminished racial aspect is noteworthy).

Where we differ however is that many of the highways that were proposed (Fig 1)(Fig. 2) that would have made us more like Atlanta weren't constructed and the nodal approach to planning in creating many localized downtowns like STC, NYCC, etc.. (I think I remember reading once that a prominent city official in Toronto back in the day was quoted as saying something like this was inspired by Los Angeles which was considered preeminent modern city at the time). Seriously look at the highway systems of Detroit, Chicago, or even lesser cities like Cleveland, and compare them to Toronto's. The nodes are also notable because it limited the creation of a typical Concentric zone model city (I guess the historical example would be Chicago) and I think ours are more residential (if not mostly!) compared to what you'd expect in an American Edge City. The lack of these highways and the fact that most suburban subdivisions were built adjacent to the fringes (no leapfrogging) kind of kept Toronto pretty dense and compact compared to American cities. Chicago does not really have high-rises out of downtown really whereas Toronto has several, particularly near those nodes. I'm not too familiar with Asia but the impression that I get from images, video, and online is that having high-rises outside of a defined city centre is pretty normal. I think South America is similar to this as well, I remember being very young and going to Caracas (before it was a global murder capital) and I do recall there being high-rises all over the place not unlike Scarborough or North York.

As for transit planning now and for the future I would not disagree that we look to places such as Europe for inspiration. We are clearly trying to move away from auto-centric planning and moving toward a more transit-based one and I think the Avenues plan is a perfect example of that. It just so happens that those plans have historically been associated with places like Europe (Fig.3), whereas the auto-centric one was associated with American planning. I still however wouldn't say we didn't develop car culture though. Having grown up in northern Richmond Hill when it was pretty much the very fringe of the GTA to the north and having regularly interacted with places like Vaughan and Markham there was and still is a car culture. But yes, it's not quite as bad as some American cites.

Now, the idea that we continue to call one form American and the other European or Asian I think is where the true problem is. As Adjei mentioned, you could have a very dense and city with great transit in the United States and I will go further in saying you could just as well have a very auto-centric society in Europe. Many of the former Eastern Bloc countries have huge roadways and have very hostile environments to pedestrians. I was even surprised to hear when my girlfriend visited relatives living in Catania that she would always go to the mall and there it was very difficult to get around without a car (I later Google Maps/Streetviewed it and sure enough there was a big mall next to a highway). While I once again admit to know little about Asia, just looking at the area surrounding the Jin Mao and Oriental Pearl Towers in Shanghai seems like its very auto-centric. I think it just a matter of following the lead or being inspired by the places and cities that did something very successfully. Before when we were looking at building highways and suburbs the leaders happened to be cities in the United States, now we are focusing on Smart Grown, intensification, and Urban Growth Centres which is a direction that perhaps Europe and Asia succeeded better at. That being said there are also a few North American cities worth looking at for transit inspiration (particulalry for LRTs). It wouldn't surprise me if the American cities we are may be taking inspiration from are too looking at European or Asian examples. I don't think it's about what continent it's from, but about looking at successful examples and seeing if they can be reproduced here. Hell, I could say that we in the GTA are taking an aggressive South American (Curitiba, Bogota) approach to urbanism with the rise of BRT systems in York and Peel Regions. It's not about where it comes from, it's about whether or not it works.

Fig.1
20140331-Maps-Highways.jpg

Fig. 2
2011913-expressways-plan-1966.jpg

Fig. 3 Copenhagen's five finger plan
1426587689.png
 
Transit wise Canada and Toronto is on the level of the US...

If Toronto is looking to the best for transit, I sure am not seeing it..

That says it all.
If Toronto did look to Europe, it certainly didn't learn much but ends up functioning like a typical North American city.

And I think we shouldn't look at US cities in terms of transit because that's a really low bar. Beating Atlanta or LA is nothing to be proud of. Boston and San Fran's systems are still subpar by world standard. Even NYC is quite bad in comparison to London or Tokyo, no matter how many lines it seems to have.

Additionally to say Toronto didn't develope a car culture is laughable. Except for the core and areas immediately close to subways, the city is still very car dependent not to mention the metro area which is completely North America style where cars are indispensable.
 
I think perhaps TigerMaster is primarily concerned with new/current policies and direction we are going in whereas Adjei is focused on historical inspiration.

I think it is totally undeniable to say we have had a huge American influence. Toronto was very much an industrial city like many other Great Lake cities and later went through the standard deindustrialization and suburbanization (though TigerMaster's note on the diminished racial aspect is noteworthy).

Where we differ however is that many of the highways that were proposed (Fig 1)(Fig. 2) that would have made us more like Atlanta weren't constructed and the nodal approach to planning in creating many localized downtowns like STC, NYCC, etc.. (I think I remember reading once that a prominent city official in Toronto back in the day was quoted as saying something like this was inspired by Los Angeles which was considered preeminent modern city at the time). Seriously look at the highway systems of Detroit, Chicago, or even lesser cities like Cleveland, and compare them to Toronto's. The nodes are also notable because it limited the creation of a typical Concentric zone model city (I guess the historical example would be Chicago) and I think ours are more residential (if not mostly!) compared to what you'd expect in an American Edge City. The lack of these highways and the fact that most suburban subdivisions were built adjacent to the fringes (no leapfrogging) kind of kept Toronto pretty dense and compact compared to American cities. Chicago does not really have high-rises out of downtown really whereas Toronto has several, particularly near those nodes. I'm not too familiar with Asia but the impression that I get from images, video, and online is that having high-rises outside of a defined city centre is pretty normal. I think South America is similar to this as well, I remember being very young and going to Caracas (before it was a global murder capital) and I do recall there being high-rises all over the place not unlike Scarborough or North York.

As for transit planning now and for the future I would not disagree that we look to places such as Europe for inspiration. We are clearly trying to move away from auto-centric planning and moving toward a more transit-based one and I think the Avenues plan is a perfect example of that. It just so happens that those plans have historically been associated with places like Europe (Fig.3), whereas the auto-centric one was associated with American planning. I still however wouldn't say we didn't develop car culture though. Having grown up in northern Richmond Hill when it was pretty much the very fringe of the GTA to the north and having regularly interacted with places like Vaughan and Markham there was and still is a car culture. But yes, it's not quite as bad as some American cites.

Now, the idea that we continue to call one form American and the other European or Asian I think is where the true problem is. As Adjei mentioned, you could have a very dense and city with great transit in the United States and I will go further in saying you could just as well have a very auto-centric society in Europe. Many of the former Eastern Bloc countries have huge roadways and have very hostile environments to pedestrians. I was even surprised to hear when my girlfriend visited relatives living in Catania that she would always go to the mall and there it was very difficult to get around without a car (I later Google Maps/Streetviewed it and sure enough there was a big mall next to a highway). While I once again admit to know little about Asia, just looking at the area surrounding the Jin Mao and Oriental Pearl Towers in Shanghai seems like its very auto-centric. I think it just a matter of following the lead or being inspired by the places and cities that did something very successfully. Before when we were looking at building highways and suburbs the leaders happened to be cities in the United States, now we are focusing on Smart Grown, intensification, and Urban Growth Centres which is a direction that perhaps Europe and Asia succeeded better at. That being said there are also a few North American cities worth looking at for transit inspiration (particulalry for LRTs). It wouldn't surprise me if the American cities we are may be taking inspiration from are too looking at European or Asian examples. I don't think it's about what continent it's from, but about looking at successful examples and seeing if they can be reproduced here. Hell, I could say that we in the GTA are taking an aggressive South American (Curitiba, Bogota) approach to urbanism with the rise of BRT systems in York and Peel Regions. It's not about where it comes from, it's about whether or not it works.

Fig.1
20140331-Maps-Highways.jpg

Fig. 2
2011913-expressways-plan-1966.jpg

Fig. 3 Copenhagen's five finger plan
1426587689.png

Great analysis. I agree wholeheartedly with what you've said.
 
Additionally to say Toronto didn't develope a car culture is laughable. Except for the core and areas immediately close to subways, the city is still very car dependent not to mention the metro area which is completely North America style where cars are indispensable.

While Toronto certainly took a lot of inspiration from America's car culture, it was was nowhere near as prevalent as it was in the United States.
 
I dunno, I think the original question deserves a 'contrast and compare' analysis rather than a binary 'more this than that' proposition.

Toronto has made all the same mistakes as American cities, perhaps not to the same degree. Yet, we have pioneered in some ways and clearly been the envy of many since the 1950's (although stalling out somewhere along the timeline). We planned and built bad expressways but had the good sense to stop doing that. Davis' decision to halt Spadina was remarkable for the North American thinking of the day. The original decision to create GO transit, and the way we grew it from nothing into a superior bus and train system, is stellar. If you rode commuter trains in other cities in the seventies or eighties, you know what I mean. GO has always been spotless, comprised of modern equipment, and continually updated and expanded. NJT is probably the best on the continent, and that's an example where we have been surpassed by a former junk operation, but GO is right up there for all our criticisms of Metrolinx. Our subways have never been filthy, or graffitti ridden, or dangerous to ride.

When I go to the US, I see some amazing innovative things that we have fallen behind on. If you look at how Chicago transformed its downtown railway/industrial lands into a new waterfront, they are far ahead of us. Count the number of mature trees in downtown Chicago - that's a telling achievement because it takes decades of sustained focus, and not just one short-lived civic administration, to pull off. Chicago's heritage of rich architecture has permeated its civic thinking through good times and bad. Too bad the rest of the city is falling apart. I wish our harbourfront had been planned and executed by Chicago.

I won't discuss Europe or Asia. I have only seen some of it (and am mostly amazed) I don't believe there is an "Asian" approach or a "European" way. Paris and Rome do not do things the same way! If we haven't copied it all, does that mean we did badly? We have been inspired by others at times, although the "not invented here" mentality has hurt us (TTC being the most obvious culprit here, for the last 20 years anyways).

The biggest difference I see is that we are moving from the North American "expand outwards" philosophy of city building to the "constrained boundary and increased density" mode of growth. That is new for us. Toronto has been a concentric zone phenomenon - just look at where Asian, Jewish, or Italian populations have located between the 1920's and today. More recently we are banishing new immigrant populations and the poor to the far reaches of the city - the concentric tide has reversed! Our transportation thinking is reflecting that change (and like tidal activity, we have lost momentum and had to restart in the opposite direction)

A long-winded way of saying "in some ways but not in others" :)

- Paul
 
I think perhaps TigerMaster is primarily concerned with new/current policies and direction we are going in whereas Adjei is focused on historical inspiration.

Yeah I'm certainly looking towards our current policies/direction, as the original question was about present-day.

If you're looking historically, then without doubt Toronto has taken more influence from US planning. For example, our highway plans and paving over much of the city centre with parking lots.

Looking at present day I really can't see how Toronto is taking any inspiration from American cities. Toronto seems to be running from the American-model of cities as fast as it possibly can in fact.
 
The biggest difference I see is that we are moving from the North American "expand outwards" philosophy of city building to the "constrained boundary and increased density" mode of growth. That is new for us. Toronto has been a concentric zone phenomenon - just look at where Asian, Jewish, or Italian populations have located between the 1920's and today. More recently we are banishing new immigrant populations and the poor to the far reaches of the city - the concentric tide has reversed! Our transportation thinking is reflecting that change (and like tidal activity, we have lost momentum and had to restart in the opposite direction)

A long-winded way of saying "in some ways but not in others" :)

- Paul

Would you agree that Toronto has moved away from the American model of cities for inspiration at present day?
 
Would you agree that Toronto has moved away from the American model of cities for inspiration at present day?

Mostly, yes. Most US Cities have not figured out what to do about sprawl. Only a few are trying to put residential close to downtown. We are trying, although we're no experts yet.

Some US cities are doing just as well as Toronto for figuring out how to infill and revitalise old "rust" areas. Heck, even Omaha is doing great things in its old stockyard district. So we are still looking to the US for some things, but the overall urban vision is much broader.

- Paul
 
verything from the way the traffic lights to wayfinding, signage to even the signs on our highways looks like typical America.

Ummm, you realize this is because we share many common standards with the US right? And it makes sense to have harmonized standards. Imagine for example if neighbouring countries in Europe adopted different standards. Common standards mean that Americans can feel comfortable here and we, Canadians, can feel comfortable in the US.
 
Even our suburban development is different from the US, I have heard a few Americans comment on how many "tall buildings there are in Mississauga"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Based on what?

Things like this are inherently anecdotal. But perhaps the best way to quantify this will be to look at the modal share. NYC is the only American city with a higher public transit modal share than Toronto, and I suspect that's largely a function of the non-existent road capacity in NYC due to their very high population. And if we look at Los Angeles, which is reasonable to say has equal to worse traffic congestion than Toronto, the population still clings to their cars with 80% automobile share, and only 10% public transit share. And then if we look at more typical American cities over 1,000,000 population, we see their public transit modal share is typically less than 5%, with automobile share between 80% and 100% share.

Now if we look at Toronto, we see that the most recent data has 45% public transit modal share and only 40% driving share. This means that Toronto has lower diving modal share than all but one American cities, and higher transit share than all but one American cities (NYC in both cases). Toronto is also the only city in North America, with the exception of NYC, that has a higher public transit share than automobile. And I don't have historical data, but I'm fairly positive that Toronto's modal share was abnormally high even when road capacity wasn't an issue.

So basically Torontonians have more readily embraced public transit (and rejected automobiles) more readily than its American counterparts, with only a few (perhaps one) notable exceptions.

Speaking purely anecdotally, I've never experienced a social stigma against public transit in Toronto, whereas those attitudes are more prevalent in the US.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top