U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [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 05-21-2014, 05:16 AM
 
273 posts, read 261,444 times
Reputation: 91

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Basing from Long Island, it seems like the neighborhoods built in the first decade immediately after WWII were a bit better at having sidewalks than those that came afterwards.
In Canada it's the opposite. In Canada it's the older suburban residential streets that sometimes don't have sidewalks, while the newer ones always do (though sometimes on only one side of the street). And sometimes short cul-de-sacs in newer areas don't have sidewalks. But the main road the cul-de-sac runs off always do.

You won't find a subdivision built in Canada that last 30 years that doesn't have any sidewalks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-21-2014, 07:35 AM
gg
 
Location: Pittsburgh
17,921 posts, read 18,241,603 times
Reputation: 11481
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101 View Post
Generally speaking Canada is a Different country,different attitudes,cities designed with the pedestrian in mind rather than the car. You learn to dress for winter.
I hardly think that is true!


Rob Ford on Cyclists - YouTube

I will take Pittsburgh over Toronto that is for sure, not to mention Boulder, Portland, Seattle, DC and Denver.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2014, 06:20 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,953,386 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by memph View Post
Toronto has a fair bit, but I'm pretty sure it's still less than Philadelphia
You'd be wrong.


Quote:
I think part of it is the way population is distributed. In U.S., with many cities, you'll have major cities to the west, south, north, east... every direction. In the Canadian cities, you typically don't have any major cities nearby, just a couple far a way, and some small (<100k pop) cities closer. Even in Southern Ontario, most cities are strung along the 401 corridor, and you just need a few stubs to connect to the cities that aren't.
You realize that this is essentially paraphrasing what I said in the comment that you quoted?

Canadians didn't build an interstate system not because they're smarter than Americans - the Canadians didn't build them because their country is enormous with 1/10 the population of the US. Toronto to Winnipeg is a 25 hour drive. 21 hours if you cut through the northern tier of the US. The closest cities west of there - Regina and Calgary - are 8.5 hours apart.

Where the cities in Canada are closer together - Windsor/London/Hamilton/Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal/Quebec you have a freeway system pretty much the same as what you'd see in the US


Let's just dispense with the nonsense that Quebec and Ontario don't have a lot of freeways

Montreal
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...3%A9al.svg.png

Ontario - blue is existing. Red is planned/proposed. It's pretty easy to see on the map where Toronto is
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ork-future.png
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2014, 06:24 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,953,386 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by h_curtis View Post
I hardly think that is true!


Rob Ford on Cyclists - YouTube

I will take Pittsburgh over Toronto that is for sure, not to mention Boulder, Portland, Seattle, DC and Denver.
What a clown that guy is. There are benefits to regional amalgamation but people like Ford are clear examples of the drawbacks.

"We don't live in Florida"

Cycling is a pretty big deal in Minneapolis and Madison and both of those places are colder than Toronto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2014, 10:53 PM
 
Location: Thunder Bay, ON
2,610 posts, read 3,759,792 times
Reputation: 1616
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
You'd be wrong.




You realize that this is essentially paraphrasing what I said in the comment that you quoted?

Canadians didn't build an interstate system not because they're smarter than Americans - the Canadians didn't build them because their country is enormous with 1/10 the population of the US. Toronto to Winnipeg is a 25 hour drive. 21 hours if you cut through the northern tier of the US. The closest cities west of there - Regina and Calgary - are 8.5 hours apart.

Where the cities in Canada are closer together - Windsor/London/Hamilton/Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal/Quebec you have a freeway system pretty much the same as what you'd see in the US


Let's just dispense with the nonsense that Quebec and Ontario don't have a lot of freeways

Montreal
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...3%A9al.svg.png

Ontario - blue is existing. Red is planned/proposed. It's pretty easy to see on the map where Toronto is
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ork-future.png
I was focusing on Ontario, I do think Quebec has more. So for Ontario, yes, there are several freeways heading into Toronto, but is it as much as if it was an American city? It's certainly a lot less than Dallas which has a similar population, although admittedly DFW is the freeway capital of the world...

I think I've made a decent case that outside Toronto, Ontario cities have fewer freeways than American cities of similar size.

So for Toronto, maybe we could compare to cities like Philadelphia, Boston, DC, Atlanta, Miami, Houston which are similar in size (D.F.W. is similar in population too, but it seems like it's well above even the American average). I counted 176 freeway exits+interchanges in the GTA. I think it's around 400km of highways within the urbanized portions of the GTA.

Going back to the OP though, I do think an important difference is that the amount of freeways in city cores is lower, and they're often located in places where they're not cutting downtowns apart from neighbourhoods (ex. DVP follows an existing natural barrier, Montreal's downtown highway is underground, Vancouver has none...). The amount of freeways in the suburbs matters less, since people most likely wouldn't have been walking to work anyways (at best, they'd be taking transit). In the core though, the odds are pretty good they're walking to work, and walking mode share is quite high for the cores of Montreal, Vancouver and Toronto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2014, 11:26 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 83,890,268 times
Reputation: 18049
When you live in more cold its unlikely most want to live outside city limits anyway really. I don't think walkable is like Miami tho most of the year in any cold climates. Just outdoors activity is lower overall than warmer climates. Its why so many move when retired to warmer climates. I mean you don't see swimmers much in winter in other areas but in southern Florida. Even the pacific with warmer weather is too cold. So I think OPs impression is just a impression on winter in his area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 07:16 PM
 
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
9,422 posts, read 18,316,727 times
Reputation: 11902
[
Quote:
Originally Posted by memph View Post
Going back to the OP though, I do think an important difference is that the amount of freeways in city cores is lower, and they're often located in places where they're not cutting downtowns apart from neighbourhoods (ex. DVP follows an existing natural barrier, Montreal's downtown highway is underground, Vancouver has none...). The amount of freeways in the suburbs matters less, since people most likely wouldn't have been walking to work anyways (at best, they'd be taking transit). In the core though, the odds are pretty good they're walking to work, and walking mode share is quite high for the cores of Montreal, Vancouver and Toronto.
I think Montreal is an exception in Canada as far as freeway planning goes with their autoroutes as they pass right through the middle of the city and radiate out into all directions along with bypass routes and suburban connectors. The metro area functions as a crossroads hub between Toronto, Ottawa, Quebec City, NYC, Vermont/New England and north to the Laurentians all directly connected to Montreal. Some of the freeways cut right through the density of city core and residential neighborhoods. Particularly the tunnels under downtown and the sunken freeway heading north from downtown. The big problem they have though is aging bridge infrastructure and mid 20th century freeway design.

The suburbs of Montreal don't seem to sprawl out as far though even with all their autoroute freeways, the rural pastures are closer in than most US metro areas. Montreal has a lot more density within its city limits than most US cities.

Vancouver's topography pretty much forced higher density growth given that its wedged between the mountains and the sea. It's probably a good thing a freeway never went through the middle of the downtown peninsula and right through Stanley Park.

Is Calgary all that dense or does it have American sunbelt kind of sprawl? They have decent enough light rail transit connections for a city of its size, but it also seems to have a lot of crosstown freeways or "trails" as they call them.

Last edited by Desert_SW_77; 05-23-2014 at 07:33 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 07:34 PM
 
3,431 posts, read 3,044,150 times
Reputation: 4133
Fewer expressways, combined with the fact that more people tend to live in the core of Canadian cities, in contrast to many U.S. cities. Canadian downtowns generally aren't ghost towns on weekends, but that seems to be a persistent problem with a few U.S. cities. Maybe the lower crime rate in downtown areas is a factor, people arent scared to venture downtown on evenings or weekends. Canada does have similar issues with urban sprawl, though, and extensive suburbs that require either a car or public transit if you live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 07:43 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
12,670 posts, read 8,740,385 times
Reputation: 7281
Quote:
Originally Posted by caphillsea77 View Post
[
I think Montreal is an exception in Canada as far as freeway planning goes with their autoroutes as they pass right through the middle of the city and radiate out into all directions along with bypass routes and suburban connectors. The metro area functions as a crossroads hub between Toronto, Ottawa, Quebec City, NYC, Vermont/New England and north to the Laurentians all directly connected to Montreal. Some of the freeways cut right through the density of city core and residential neighborhoods. Particularly the tunnels under downtown and the sunken freeway heading north from downtown. The big problem they have though is aging bridge infrastructure and mid 20th century freeway design.

The suburbs of Montreal don't seem to sprawl out as far though even with all their autoroute freeways, the rural pastures are closer in than most US metro areas. Montreal has a lot more density within its city limits than most US cities.

Vancouver's topography pretty much forced higher density growth given that its wedged between the mountains and the sea. It's probably a good thing a freeway never went through the middle of the downtown peninsula and right through Stanley Park.

Is Calgary all that dense or does it have American sunbelt kind of sprawl? They have decent enough light rail transit connections for a city of its size, but it also seems to have a lot of crosstown freeways or "trails" as they call them.
Yes it was a very good thing. One plan was to have an ocean side freeway that would of run along where Beach Ave is now. It would of removed Sunset Beach and English Bay beach to head through Stanley Park.
It literally would of destroyed Vancouver.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2014, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Gatineau, Québec
21,937 posts, read 27,326,583 times
Reputation: 8601
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
It's common for at least residential streets in the Northeast to be sidewalkless in the Northeast, hard to say it's the majority. And from a streetview skim, parts of the Midwest. Likely these total to more people than the West, it's possible that a majority of suburbs are sidewalks.



Basing from Long Island, it seems like the neighborhoods built in the first decade immediately after WWII were a bit better at having sidewalks than those that came afterwards.



As you as you listed Florida in those places, I guessed that was the one without sidewalks. The rest are all on the west coast.
Regarding sidewalks in Canadian suburbs, it doesn't seem to be an automatic to put them on every street as many streets do not have them. In most areas the criteria seems to be whether a street was designated by planners as a local collector that is likely to have bus service. That's what I have observed in most places.
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 > General Forums > Urban Planning
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