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.
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.
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).
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
