HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2022, 9:04 PM
Qubert Qubert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 506
One thing that also seems to be in play is the level of white-collar employment concentration versus your average American metro. Both Calgary and Toronto have strong CBDs versus the huge job sprawl you see in places like Los Angeles which itself is a dense metro with a competent bus network. Washington DC, for instance, also descends into sprawl-o-world but the level of CBD job concentration makes Metro work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 3:28 AM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,700
Toronto higher job concentration than Chicago? Somehow I doubt it. TTC subway network is also not really designed for higher concentration of workers to begin with, being more grid-based compared to the more hub-and-spoke design of the Chicago L. Furthermore, where the ridership gap between the two cities is widest is not in their downtown heavy rail networks but in their outer suburban bus networks: TTC Subway has two times higher ridership than CTA L, while MiWay, Brampton Transit, York Region Transit, Oakville Transit have eight times higher ridership than Pace (approximately 128 million boardings serving a population of 2.5 million vs. 33 million boardings serving a population of 5 million in 2019).

A two times difference versus an eight times difference. Is this really about the amount of jobs or freeways downtown? Think about that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 4:48 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qubert View Post
One thing that also seems to be in play is the level of white-collar employment concentration versus your average American metro. Both Calgary and Toronto have strong CBDs versus the huge job sprawl you see in places like Los Angeles which itself is a dense metro with a competent bus network. Washington DC, for instance, also descends into sprawl-o-world but the level of CBD job concentration makes Metro work.
That's not how the GTA is at all.
The vast majority of commutes don't go anywhere new the CBD
Most of the jobs (75%) in the GTA are in the suburbs as illustrated by the stats below.



Again Toronto strong transit ridership numbers are due to frequent bus service in suburban areas

and here is Calgary for comparison


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/.../00008-eng.htm

Last edited by Nite; Jul 19, 2022 at 5:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 1:28 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 11,519
Toronto's ridership is due to more than just good bus service:

1. bus service (yes, a significant part)
2. lower incomes
3. better cultural associations to transit use (i.e. it's not just "for the poors" like it is in the US)
5. Strong land use patterns supporting transit (density around stations, including employment, even outside of Downtown)
6. far less auto infrastructure making driving more impractical
7. higher costs of operating a vehicle (gas is generally ~30% more, insurance is more expensive, etc.) - which compounds with lower incomes
8. better transit infrastructure which is better maintained and operates on better frequencies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 2:48 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Otisburgh
Posts: 44,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nite View Post
A well timed video by Reece about the massive transit expansion happening in Toronto right now

Video Link
Wow. I knew about only a third of these projects. This is massive. All in all, Toronto is currently witnessing the biggest mass transit expansion on the continent.

Montreal is basically getting the equivalent of a second metro system with the REM. https://rem.info/en
__________________
"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."-President Lyndon B. Johnson Donald Trump is a poor man's idea of a rich man, a weak man's idea of a strong man, and a stupid man's idea of a smart man. Am I an Asseau?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 3:31 PM
hipster duck's Avatar
hipster duck hipster duck is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
Wow. I knew about only a third of these projects. This is massive. All in all, Toronto is currently witnessing the biggest mass transit expansion on the continent.

Montreal is basically getting the equivalent of a second metro system with the REM. https://rem.info/en
Many Canadian cities are building a lot of infrastructure these days. We’re still playing catch-up with our peer countries, but at least we didn’t waste the last ten years of low interest rates sitting on our hands building nothing. I’m critical of a lot of what Canadian federal and provincial governments do, but on the infrastructure file I’m reasonably happy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 9:00 PM
tdawg's Avatar
tdawg tdawg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Astoria, NY
Posts: 2,935
Regarding infrastructure and Canada’s peers, I don’t think most people, especially Americans (sigh), realize how much of an impact the trillion dollar legislation passed in the US will have. It’s going to dramatically improve the lives of Americans for decades to come. Of course I wish more would go to urban and intra-state rail but it’s a big f’in deal.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/bipartisa...structure-law/
I have friends who live in Scranton, PA who are over the moon about the return of an Amtrak rail link to Penn Station.
__________________
From my head via my fingers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 10:48 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Yes, the US infrastructure package is big, and a huge help. But in the scheme of things it's still an incremental improvement.

First, it's only $550 billion in new spending. The rest was basically renewal.

Second, it's over five years.

Third, we already have $1.3 trillion in annual public infrastructure spending, which I think is just construction dollars. It's another $110 billion per year.

Fourth, it'll fund a lot of costs outside construction, so the construction amounts will be lower than that.

That said, it'll be a much larger boost in some critical underfunded areas like transit and intercity rail.

(PS, I haven't dug into this enough...if my numbers are wrong please say so.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2022, 5:40 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
There will never be an alignment between the cost of building proper transit systems in US cities, and the government's willingness to spend. We have the highest construction costs in the world, but only modest interest in actually spending money on transit/intercity rail.

If there is only $100B dedicated to rail, NYC/NJ's Gateway tunnel will take $30B and California HSR will take another $30B. That doesn't leave much for the other 47 states, even places like IL, VA or WA where the locals are highly supportive. In Chicago we just announced a $400M investment in intercity rail to be funded from the Biden infrastructure bill, which is nice but are CA and NY 60x more deserving of that money? A fitting amount for IL would be maybe $9B, but we can't ask for that much money because we don't have a plan for how to spend it - and creating such a plan would require tens or hundreds of millions in itself!
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2022, 4:02 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Part of the concept it to spread the money around more. Those projects will get money but nothing like that much. Or that's my understanding.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2022, 4:07 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,550
IMO the U.S. issue with rail funding is the bizarre funding formulas, largely unrelated to demand and ridership.

Most rail ridership in the U.S. is in the NYC area. I believe something like 75% of heavy rail ridership is in the NY area. Yeah, the region gets more funding than most areas, but it gets far, far less than the proportionate ridership. It historically gets like 20% of the funds, when it carries 75% of the ridership, which leads to weird pork projects like random U.S. trolley or commuter rail systems in metros that generate near-zero ridership. But it's good for ribbon-cuttings and platitudes about regional mobility, equity and clean air. It's how you get commuter rail in Albuquerque, or light rail in Norfolk.

But in competitor nations, the transit funds go to transit riders. French rail funds primarily go to Paris, Spanish rail funds primarily go to Madrid and Barcelona, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:16 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.