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.
I don't think it was 12am, but maybe 1-something, and the subways were closed. Being from NYC I am not used to subways actually closing.
I definitely think that SF's subway shuts down early, but so does Toronto's. It's not like Toronto's subway goes all night either. I do think Toronto has a superior system (to SF, but not DC or Chicago), but you guys have that same problem...
Nope. Toronto's subway lines finish their last runs aroune 2:30am seven days a week. I think you need a new watch.
Your New York numbers are way off. The city has at least 30 supertalls complete or in the pipeline. If just that one is off, the whole rest must be bad as well. I'm guessing only the Toronto number is accurate and you took creative liberties when calculating for the others.
Here's another metric: Number of Supertalls by City:
Nope. Toronto's subway lines finish their last runs aroune 2:30am seven days a week. I think you need a new watch.
I actually do need a new watch, lol. My current watch is old and scratched up, but are you sure about that?
Was this a recent change? I clearly remember the subways being closed before the bar was (last call is 2am in Toronto). Drunk me was pissed off about it, because I'm from NYC and our subways keep going 24/7 (and our bars stay open later too). I think it's a serious design flaw not just in Toronto, but many cities like SF too where subways stop running before bars close. I mean, I know there are buses, but I hate buses lol.
So I clearly remember the subway being closed before the bar. Drunk me had a little "culture shock" (lol) I don't live in Toronto and have only been once, so I don't know as much about it as many of a lot of people here but straight from the website it says 1:30.
The subway hours of operation on weekdays and Saturdays are approximately 6 a.m. to 1:30 a.m., and Sunday service approximately 8 a.m. to 1:30 a.m.
That's still later than BART and with much better headways generally since BART on late nights (well, late as in starting from 7 pm) and Sunday really screws the pooch by doing both lower frequencies for their lines and discontinuing service on two services so that the frequency boosts from interlining go way down and one-seat ride possibilities get limited. It's not apparent when you're just looking at maps, but it gets real apparent when you're living it.
Now that I think about it, nightlife is another category where Chicago is clearly in the lead. Probably should go: Chicago, Toronto, SF, DC.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 10-11-2016 at 05:49 PM..
3 times CN proposed plonking its tower in different spots adjacent to downtown Montreal. That's how long it took the then-crown corporation to shake off their denial at acknowledging dwellers' refusals at being dwarfed by any of the tacky-looking, now-ubiquitous landmarks.
Miost of the city by far is like that, it's awfully spread out. Staring at one another's consequently intense from being the only souls trundling the sidewalks. Their bus lines are miles apart from each other for the most part; none of them even plies 1 sidestreet route, because all traffic is funnelled to corridors along which traffic lights are posted about every mile, so forget dawdling in the direction of travel instead of waiting for a bus at a stop, because in its predominant suburban fabric there your bus will sneak up on you and you'll likely miss it from not running fast enough to either the stop ahead or the one behind.
Not so much thinking but more the case of knowing from points of certitude when finding ourselves reading the many, many childish, quarrelsome responses.
Just 1, eh? This coming from a constrictively walkable place where the majority (⅞?) of its parkland is limited to numerous :gasp: 2-way :exhale: ravines.
Did you just write everything on google translate?
Might as well make super-duper tram 1-way if indeed neglecting installation of complementary sidewalk. Mystifying prevelant walkability quotient there.
Relax. It's not even built yet, and you are already throwing mud? Nice.
If you add the land area of all those 60+ walkscore communities in the Bay Area, you get about 186 square miles. Toronto is 243 square miles.
Well yeah I know that, but it's largely irrelevant because my point about unvibrant cores in the Toronto CMA vs more vibrant cores in the Bay Area remains largely accurate.
I think if we're going to be alright with the cut-off of 60 on walkscore and looking at total areas and don't care so much about discontinuities, then Chicago would probably end up "winning" this metric since Chicago...
Oh absolutely perhaps but Toronto would probably be last of the 4.
I know you prob think GTA is some kind of backwater midwest suburb, and that SF is infinitely better (I agree btw that SF and Bay Area is a more attractive for work, life, and visiting, no argument), but I also want to provide some background info and current local developments, especially if we are going to bring in places like Mississauga:
Mississauga was literally built from the ground up in the 1970s and 80s, the golden age of automobile sprawl. Pretty much a boom town suburb where houses are cheap and abundant, a place for those who want to live in massive mcmansions but priced out of Toronto city proper, and predominantly newer immigrants from China, India, Middle East, and Eastern Europe.
Interestingly, it's also one of the fastest growing cities in Canada if not all of North America. All of this growth and resulting sprawl was the legacy of one mayor, Hazel McCallion, Mississauga's mayor for 36 years and only recently "retired" at age of 94, who transformed Sauga from a farming village in 1978 to what it is today, a half city half suburb kind of place.
All of this is set to change dramatically with the Sauga's new Hurontario LRT project, which received full funding from Province of Ontario in April 2015 and set to break ground in early 2017. Metrolinx Hurontario Light Rail Transit (LRT)
It is managed by the provincial crown transport corporation Metrolinx, with 20 km of dedicated track and 22 stations. It will intersect with 2 Regional Express Rail lines, which will connect downtown Mississauga with Toronto Union Stations via electric express rail with 15 min or less frequencies. There are at least 25 development projects along this corridor that will add densification, office space, all resulting in a more transit friendly, pedestrian friendly experience:
Thanks for the info. I certainly hope these plans come to fruition.
This has me thinking. The thread is about entire regions, not just the most prominent cities in each regions. I think I'll start weighing the other cities...
Haha you mean transit in Toronto has the same intensity for 50 miles( the distance between SF and SJ?)
Speaking of which, The Bay Area appears to be much more walkable than the Toronto CMA. Toronto itself is 1 point less walkable than Oakland.
Walkscore 60+ Greater Toronto Area: 1
Toronto 71
San Francisco Bay Area: 13
San Francisco 86
Berkeley 81
Albany 80
Oakland 72
San Pablo 66
Burlingame 66
Alameda 64
San Mateo 63
Watsonville 63
Daly City 62
San Leandro 62
Santa Cruz 62
El Cerrito 61
One actually feels this in person as well. Mississsauga for example has a huge skyline but when you get into the core, at street level, its hella dead compared to Downtown Oakland and Downtown Berkeley.
I went to this other huge town called Brampton to go to church--I swear every street was a mile wide and there eas not a soul walking. I kept thinking, such a shame all this wasted space.
Its cool to build highrises galore, but I was shocked at how unfriendly to pedesrtians the Toronto CMA is outside of the city itself.
Our geographic constraints coupled with suffocating NIMBYism force us to build tighter and more compact-even in inner Bay suburbs so...
No, what I mean is the two largest cities in the Bay Area (SF/SJ) have a lower walkscore than Toronto.
All those other small towns are irrelvant to the topic of walkscore and transit score. We are talking about the big cities here. Where a majority of people live (SF/SJ).
Toronto is 'one point less walkable' than Oakland because Oakland is tiny and has less than half a million people. Just like how SF is tiny and has less than 1 million people. At those sizes and populations figures, they will be "more walkable" than the 2.8 million people city of Toronto in at 240 sq miles. But when you are looking at your biggest cities (SF/SJ) the tables are turned.
Mississauga is a suburb. A relatively new-ish suburb. Not sure if you were aware of that already or not.
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.
