U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-24-2013, 04:05 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles
252 posts, read 501,847 times
Reputation: 79

Advertisements

One should have a vehicle if he is living in Saskatoon.
There are public transports but not much !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-24-2013, 05:42 AM
 
34,389 posts, read 41,480,724 times
Reputation: 29864
Here in Montreal there is a phone number on each bus stop, call that number and you'll get told what time the next bus arrives. works great in our house as we know the number of the bus stop on the corner by heart, unless theres a major snow fall or the bus breaks down you can time your walking out the door to catch the bus to the minute,15 minute ride and you are at the metro station.
However N.America is basically built around the car so while your transportation options may be fine in the big city those options dwindle as city sizes get smaller.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2013, 05:49 AM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,265,341 times
Reputation: 7586
Quote:
Originally Posted by fikatid View Post
I believe one thing that contributes to a sophiscated transit system is the density of the city. In that case it's difficult to compare it to places like Hong Kong. Perhaps it is more appropriate to compare to a city with similar size/density. If one is to compare it to Europe perhaps we can look at Stockholm/Copenhagen to Vancouver or something like that. I like alot of the Canadian cities and what they have done in the past in terms of urban and transit planning but none will ever have a rapid transit system like that of Hong Kong and Tokyo given the way people live. But I don't think people are giving it enough credit (I almost never rent a car when I am on a work trip to Canada which is not the case in the USA and Australia/NZ).

Density is only part of the story. Not all European cities are as small and compact as Paris. Let's look at some:

Munich, 1.4M pop, 310 sq km
Vienna, 1.7M pop 414 sq km

compared with
Toronto: 2.8M pop, 630 sq km.

Is the density different? Toronto has almost exactly the same density as Munich and Vienna, but boy those smaller cities half of our size have transit systems that put our TTC in shame instantly. Munich's system is what we expect to achieve in 2060. (let's not pretend their S-bahn is like our GO and argue that doesn't count. No, S-bahn is all day frequent service, fully integrated into the system, just like the subway).

Munich Metro Map - Munich Germany
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2013, 05:59 AM
 
411 posts, read 1,150,947 times
Reputation: 313
Montreal (and maybe Vancouver as well) == from good to excellent public transit system.
Waterloo, Toronto, and Ontario in general = very bad (expensive, rare time schedules, bad routes). Also not pedestrian friendly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-25-2013, 01:03 AM
 
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
382 posts, read 533,739 times
Reputation: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
Density is only part of the story. Not all European cities are as small and compact as Paris. Let's look at some:

Munich, 1.4M pop, 310 sq km
Vienna, 1.7M pop 414 sq km

compared with
Toronto: 2.8M pop, 630 sq km.

Is the density different? Toronto has almost exactly the same density as Munich and Vienna, but boy those smaller cities half of our size have transit systems that put our TTC in shame instantly. Munich's system is what we expect to achieve in 2060. (let's not pretend their S-bahn is like our GO and argue that doesn't count. No, S-bahn is all day frequent service, fully integrated into the system, just like the subway).

Munich Metro Map - Munich Germany
Yes I agree it's only part of the problem. That was actually what I was thinking, cities with similar size and density than cities like Tokyo and Hong Kong. I do think cities like Toronto lacks behind these cities, especially when it comes to investment in infrastructure and bike and pedestrian infrustrature. European cities seems more progressive and forward thinking nowadays which wasn't as apparent in the 80s and 90s when compared to several Canadian cities. There are certainly many things Toronto can improve on and follow some of the European cities leads even though many are not perfect.

And I like Montreal's system very much too. Very nice bike sharing system the last time I was there, and the subway has a lot of character.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2015, 01:41 PM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,265,341 times
Reputation: 7586
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayme2015 View Post
The issue in Ottawa is the city is massive land wise if you live way out in the suburbs but work downtown your looking at a long trip by bus.
everyone makes fun of how suburban Houston and Phoenix is, not realizing Ottawa is far worse
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2015, 10:32 PM
 
Location: BC Canada
831 posts, read 933,817 times
Reputation: 1119
Canadian cities do quite well considering our urban environment, high incomes, and high levels of car ownership.

We certainly have higher ridership levels that Aus/NZ and MUCH higher rates than the US, Really the US rates can't even be compared to Canadian ones because in the US the numbers are warped by the huge NYC ridership levels. US numbers are also worse than presented as they produce ridership levels based on unlinked trips. In other words a trip requiring 2 buses and a subway is treated a 3 trips in the US but only 1 in Canada.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2015, 09:02 AM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,265,341 times
Reputation: 7586
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooguy View Post
Canadian cities do quite well considering our urban environment, high incomes, and high levels of car ownership.

We certainly have higher ridership levels that Aus/NZ and MUCH higher rates than the US, Really the US rates can't even be compared to Canadian ones because in the US the numbers are warped by the huge NYC ridership levels. US numbers are also worse than presented as they produce ridership levels based on unlinked trips. In other words a trip requiring 2 buses and a subway is treated a 3 trips in the US but only 1 in Canada.
I'd say Vancouver does it the best. Montreal decent, Toronto, not close to good enough.

Vancouver has 1/3 of Toronto's population with a much smaller city/metro land area but the same metro system length. That's how far ahead of Toronto it is. Ideally Toronto should have the number of lines that Chicago does (I don't want to get into this we have much higher ridership argument again but it is fair to say a city like Toronto should have at least 5 or 6 *complete* metro lines).

Canada is OK in terms of public transit. Good? Nope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2015, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Gatineau, Québec
21,947 posts, read 27,360,351 times
Reputation: 8603
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
I'd say Vancouver does it the best. Montreal decent, Toronto, not close to good enough.

.
Montreal is really only lucky in that it's had less explosive population growth than Toronto. Montreal hasn't really expanded its system more than Toronto has. But Toronto's is bursting at the seams because the population in its service areas has grown so fast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2015, 10:12 AM
 
2,561 posts, read 2,180,112 times
Reputation: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
I'd say Vancouver does it the best. Montreal decent, Toronto, not close to good enough.

Vancouver has 1/3 of Toronto's population with a much smaller city/metro land area but the same metro system length. That's how far ahead of Toronto it is. Ideally Toronto should have the number of lines that Chicago does (I don't want to get into this we have much higher ridership argument again but it is fair to say a city like Toronto should have at least 5 or 6 *complete* metro lines).

Canada is OK in terms of public transit. Good? Nope.
I think Vancouver does it best in terms of fare integration. It has a simple 3-zone system that covers the entire metro area, no need to switch between different transit agencies. In terms of coverage, it's not that great as a lot of areas are not very close to Skytrain lines, and there are only a few stations in downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top