Why American public transit is so bad

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by badrunner

Canadian suburbs somehow manage to be even worse than sunbelt suburbs. All the soul sucking banality of sunbelt suburbs without any of its charms or good weather. AND you get to ride the bus everywhere too? What fun!

not denying that. Personally I avoid Brampton like the plague. I genuinely don't understand the desire to live in locations like that. But yet it's one of the fastest growing cities in the province, so people must like it for some reason.

Most households have cars in Brampton, so they aren't reliant on it. They have sky high auto insurance rates however which makes car ownership quite expensive, as well as lots of large multi-general households due to the demographics. I imagine a lot of the transit ridership comes from people commuting to work and when the 1-2 cars in a household of 4-6 adults are in use by other family members.

[C.]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

not denying that. Personally I avoid Brampton like the plague. I genuinely don't understand the desire to live in locations like that. But yet it's one of the fastest growing cities in the province, so people must like it for some reason.

Most households have cars in Brampton, so they aren't reliant on it. They have sky high auto insurance rates however which makes car ownership quite expensive, as well as lots of large multi-general households due to the demographics. I imagine a lot of the transit ridership comes from people commuting to work and when the 1-2 cars in a household of 4-6 adults are in use by other family members.

Cost of living?

It's cheaper to buy a house in the burbs than a similar product in Toronto?

[ssiguy]

Another problem with US transit is that you have so many cities that build these fancy new LRT routes and subway expansions and then run them at horrible frequency levels literally taking the word "rapid" out of rapid transit.

[GreaterMontréal]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

I agree. I'm extremely urban, but if you go the suburbs, big gardens and even private forests in your backyard like the ones in Atlanta, is the way to go. There are horrible examples in Toronto and Brazilian gated communities where the houses take the whole plot while you rely 100% on cars. What's the point then?

A lot of people in Montréal and Toronto have a Chalet or Cottage. In Montréal it's either in the Laurentians or in the Eastern Townships. I'm not familiar with Toronto but I know it's similar. The highways that goes north or south are always jampack Friday afternoon and Sunday morning.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Another problem with US transit is that you have so many cities that build these fancy new LRT routes and subway expansions and then run them at horrible frequency levels literally taking the word "rapid" out of rapid transit.

LA is guilty of this. We need much more frequent headways. They finally figured this out for our bus system with the new, next gen plan being approved yesterday with 5 min headways for many of our lines but the rail system needs this too.

[Stay Stoked Brah]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Another problem with US transit is that you have so many cities that build these fancy new LRT routes and subway expansions and then run them at horrible frequency levels literally taking the word "rapid" out of rapid transit.

Nothing rapid about 20-30 minute wait times and this happens in far too many cities after evening rush hour, after 7:00pm.

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

A lot of people in Montréal and Toronto have a Chalet or Cottage. In Montréal it's either in the Laurentians or in the Eastern Townships. I'm not familiar with Toronto but I know it's similar. The highways that goes north or south are always jampack Friday afternoon and Sunday morning.

Jammed with buses surely ?

[PFloyd]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I’ll concede that. If this wasn’t an urbanism forum, but a “suburbanist” forum, American cities would crush Canadian cities for suburban living standards.

American suburbs in the eastern half of the continent are exurban and sprawly, but from a suburban homeowner perspective, that’s kind of the point: you get a lot of living space, a bigger house, nicer landscaping, trees, and, in many exurban areas, a small, tidy prewar village with a Main Street atmosphere within easy driving distance. You don’t get much of that in the suburbs of major Canadian cities.

Here in the GTA, the western lakeshore suburbs like Port Credit, Oakville and Burlington kind of have that, but at a big price premium and they’re not quite as nice as a north shore Chicago suburb or Connecticut/Westchester county.

Full disclosure: I am as anti-suburbs as the next guy in this supposedly "urban forum".

Having said that, the main reason that most American suburbs are nicer than Canadian ones, is that the Upper-Middle Class and above in Canada never left the core of the cities in mass, like it happened in the US.

The best and most desirable neighborhoods in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver are close to the city centre.

No slavery legacy and "coloured people" (as Americans used to call them) "moving into the cities, driving down property prices, and sending their kids to formerly all white schools and undermining the public education system, perception of increased crime", etc. (those are the words of American urban historians describing the "white flight phenomenon", not mine).

In the case of Toronto, with some exceptions, of course, the 905 'burbs are heavily immigrant, middle-class and below.

It's the opposite in the US - of course those suburbs are going to be nicer. Enjoy!

Me, no thanks.

[dc_denizen]

you're right, anglo canada was a racially homogenous white protestant monoculture 50 years ago. (actually, 25 years ago).

I think I get what you're saying. There would have been no white flight if the US had been similarly homogenous? And that Canada would have experienced white flight if there were large amounts of darker skinned minorities moving to Canadian city centers at the time?

[PFloyd]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

you're right, anglo canada was a racially homogenous white protestant monoculture 50 years ago. (actually, 25 years ago).

I think I get what you're saying. There would have been no white flight if the US had been similarly homogenous? And that Canada would have experienced white flight if there were large amounts of darker skinned minorities moving to Canadian city centers at the time?

Maybe, but it is what it is (or what it was). You live there, suck it up.

However, it’s not about “darker skinned minorities” as you call them, but black slavery legacy, and the prejudice that went along.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

you're right, anglo canada was a racially homogenous white protestant monoculture 50 years ago. (actually, 25 years ago).

I think I get what you're saying. There would have been no white flight if the US had been similarly homogenous? And that Canada would have experienced white flight if there were large amounts of darker skinned minorities moving to Canadian city centers at the time?

Non it wasn't. My mother moved from Nova Scotia to Toronto over 50 years ago (where I was born) and lived there for well over a decade. One of her most enduring memories of the city upon her arrival was how immigrant heavy it was compared to small town Nova Scotia. There were Jewish, Portuguese, Greek and Italian districts, and more than one Chinatown. There were South Americans, Jamaicans and other Caribs, etc. Her best friend was from Trinidad. Caribana, a product of the presence of Caribbean diaspora, started in 1967.

No one expect anyone to know everything about places they have limited familiarity with, but it's best avoid speaking authoritatively when one lacks sufficient authority.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

you're right, anglo canada was a racially homogenous white protestant monoculture 50 years ago. (actually, 25 years ago).

I think I get what you're saying. There would have been no white flight if the US had been similarly homogenous? And that Canada would have experienced white flight if there were large amounts of darker skinned minorities moving to Canadian city centers at the time?

Toronto's Number One Fan is wrong on this count. Maybe he is talking about some small town in Prince Edward Island or something.

Of course, our country is 100% based on Chinese money laundering, right?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by PFloyd

Having said that, the main reason that most American suburbs are nicer than Canadian ones, is that the Upper-Middle Class and above in Canada never left the core of the cities in mass, like it happened in the US.

The best and most desirable neighborhoods in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver are close to the city centre.

No slavery legacy and "people of colour" (as Americans used to call them) "moving into the cities, driving down property prices, and sending their kids to formerly all white schools and undermining the public education system, perception of increased crime", etc. (those are the words of American urban historians describing the "white flight phenomenon", not mine).

I think this is generally true. Not the only factor accounting for the transnational differences, but a major one. Toronto has Westchester/Connecticut demographic and lifestyle but more in-town, in formerly streetcar suburbs like Forest Hill and Rosedale. There were minimal postwar outward push factors in Canada.

Also, Canada has much stronger regionalization and central planning, which means few American style super-inefficient multiacre, exclusionary suburbs.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

No one expect anyone to know everything about places they have limited familiarity with, but it's best avoid speaking authoritatively when one lacks sufficient authority.

Toronto, even today, has a strong Protestant monoculture in wealthy in-town districts. Of course the city overall has incredible, almost unmatched diversity, but there is a noticeable WASP elite presence. Just stroll or drive around anywhere near Yonge from Yorkville to the 401.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by PFloyd

Maybe, but it is what it is (or what it was). You live there, suck it up.

However, it’s not about “darker skinned minorities” as you call them, but black slavery legacy, and the prejudice that went along.

A city like Toronto 50 years ago was similarly diverse to a typical large city in the NE US, minus of course the large African-American populations.

If you go back 75-100 years, then Toronto would correspond a lot more to the "White British Isles" stereotype, and this would have clashed a bit more with the NE US cities which typically started diversifying somewhat earlier.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Acajack

A city like Toronto 50 years ago was similarly diverse to a typical large city in the NE US, minus of course the large African-American populations.

If you go back 75-100 years, then Toronto would correspond a lot more to the "White British Isles" stereotype, and this would have clashed a bit more with the NE US cities which typically started diversifying somewhat earlier.

Eh, I think Anglo Canada has a stronger upper-class WASP monoculture than in the U.S., right now. Maybe this is due to more recent UK-based immigration, but places like West Van, wealthy Toronto areas, Westmount, etc. definitely have a WASP thing going on.

WASPs in the U.S. are kinda dead as a distinct cultural force, though there's some adaptation of WASP norms among the elites (Ralph Lauren and Martha Stewart as WASP caricatures yet both are Bronx-bred Jews). And Deep South elites are overwhelminging Protestant whites, but seems like a distinct cultural group of Methodist/Baptist elites. I'm not sure a Mississippi plantation family is in the same cultural sphere as a Main Line or Darien WASP.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

That is a really good point. I know that in Denmark, the development of the Nordhavn project and its incentives to e.g. the United Nations was inseparable from the metro expansion. I am not sure how the underlying laws worked, but reading about the project always gave the impression that the government was taking a "we can put new corporate buildings here now that the train will be coming" approach. Obviously they didn't have total control of the corporate decision-making process, but there were incentives and such up for grabs.

I think a huge factor in this, and perhaps an answer the question in the title, is metropolitan governance.

The U.S. especially has so many metros that are balkanized patchwork of municipal fiefdoms, that anyone wanting to build an auto-centric office park surrounded by parking merely needs to shop around in around to find a place that will let them do exactly what they want.

So the political will of a (usually larger) municipality that want to impose TOD principles as in "no developments unless they're close to good transit" can easily be circumvented usually while still remaining within the exact same metro area and retaining all of its other location advantages.

Strong metropolitan governance (or, even better, support for these principles from higher levels of government like states, provinces, landers, prefectures or even the national government) make it easier to impose such principles which effectively become impossible to get around.

At some point they're just simply the way things are done.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Crawford

WASPs in the U.S. are kinda dead as a distinct cultural force, though there's some adaptation of WASP norms among the elites (Ralph Lauren and Martha Stewart as WASP caricatures yet both are Bronx-bred Jews).

Isn't Martha Stewart Polish Catholic? I used to think she was the stereotypical WASP until I found out she was raised Catholic... at least according to Wikipedia she is.

[Crawford]

I thought she was half Jewish. I know she celebrates Seder (in a cultural, not religious sense).

In any case, she embodies a cultural WASPdom as a non-WASP.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I thought she was half Jewish. I know she celebrates Seder (in a cultural, not religious sense).

In any case, she embodies a cultural WASPdom as a non-WASP.

After looking it up online, maybe this stems from the fact that she likes to prepare lavish meals, and on one of her cooking shows, she showed Joan Rivers how to make a chocolate-covered matzah.

From this article: https://www.jta.org/jewniverse/2014/...e-waspy-matzah

"Never one to miss an opportunity to participate in a lavish meal, Stewart—though not a Jew herself—wanted to keep the tradition alive. So she took the next logical step and invited comedian Joan Rivers onto her show to make chocolate-covered matzah."

For all we know, Ms. Stewart also likes to prepare and teach people how to make the perfect Osechi Ryori for Japanese new year.