I’m sorry I should have added those cities. The odd thing is in BC is I noticed a bit more mid size and low rise apartments and mid and low rise size condos out side of Greater Vancouver that is not really common in southern Ontario. I have notice Victoria had lot of low rise and mid rise apartments and condos.
Huh. In Calgary (many decades ago) they certainly had routes like this, but they also had “express” routes that went around a suburb and then headed straight downtown. So you’d choose your bus depending on whether you were a downtown commuter, or if you wanted to go to a friends house but it was too far to walk.
I think you are suggesting that this was a conscious plan rather than happenstance. I’m a born and raised Torontonian, I started taking the bus and subway on my own around 1981. High rises exist almost entirely along the main thoroughfares.
Transit was planned on population, so the Yonge subway was the first developed to get people along the corridor downtown quickly. The original plan was to have the east-west line along Queen St., but by the time we were ready to build the population growth was pushing north across both east and west sides of the city to Bloor St. This northward push continued in the 60s, but it’s only in the 2020s that we are getting (will someday get?) mass transit across Eglinton in midtown.
That’s changing now, slightly. And with a population in Greater Victoria of only 400,000, that might be an explanation.
That is the chicken and egg question was public transit the driving factor for high rise apartments. Did lot of cities planners ban low rise and mid rise apartments in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s to push high rise apartments because they can provide better public transit than mid or low rise apartments.
Was race, demographics or wealth different in Canada than say the US to opt more for a public transit culture or was public transit just so bad because of the low density in the US most everyone owns a car and drive.
That is the chicken and egg question was there already public transit culture before they built the high rise apartments or was the public transit culture born after. Was public transit the reason they built high rise apartments.
What changed in Canada vs the US where taking public transit is more part of the Canadian culture where owning car and driving is more American culture. Was it race or demographics or wealth different in Canada than say the US at the time.
Did they ban mid and low rise apartments to build high rise apartments because they can provide better public transit service.
I’m not sure where you’ve got the idea that low and mid-rises were banned. Again, aside from along major streets you don’t find high rises. Today, Toronto is pushing for high density at major intersections and near transit hubs, mid rise along main streets in between, and low rise elsewhere.
There’s a good document from about 10 years ago that talks about the history of tall buildings in Toronto.
That is what I was getting at if most of the high rise apartments build in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s are along major streets or thoroughfares than public transit may be the reason why they built lot of high rise apartments than the typical US 2 to 6 story apartments.
Had Toronto built 2 to 6 story apartments along the major streets or thoroughfares the public transit may be really lacking than what it is today.
Private developers are driven by profit. If they can build higher density and sell it, they will.
Indeed, the question I have is why are high rises so much more profitable in Canada?
I lived for years in Montreal, and later for years in California. One huge difference in housing styles: Montreal suburbs have lots of high rise apartment buildings. San Francisco suburbs have zero. I’m not talking about the central cities, which obviously have plenty of high rises in both places.
I don’t know about that , If had to guess, I’d say it’s more likely that the high-rises went up because the demand for apartments near transit was high. You definitely need a certain density for public transit to work well but it doesn’t have to be high rises. There are areas of NYC where almost no buildings are higher than six floors ( and most are fewer ) that still have good transit. Because apparently 4-6 apartments on each 25 ft wide lot is dense enough.
Very familiar with it. Years ago, I took some courses out at the U of T’s Scarborough College, so I rode the York Mills 95 bus many times.
In later years, I’d live at Don Mills and Sheppard, so I’m also familiar with the Don Mills 25 bus and the Sheppard East 85 bus.
Not sure when you were last there, but I doubt you would recognize it with all the new apartments. They are about to redevelop the parking lot at Fairview Mall to add three more condos, although the city is not happy with the proposed traffic plan.
Wasn’t there even a small local bus service? Or perhaps it was a really small town. Like under 20,000 residents.
Nope, nothing.
And yet the OP feels comfortable talking about how “Canada” is culturally different on public transit.
Some one said those low rise apartments construction was made very cheaply and fire hazard may be that reason city planners in Canada hated low rise apartments where the high rise apartments where built much better and fire safety in mind.
But in the US investors and developers don’t want to build expensive apartments so they build lots of cheaply made low rise apartments but city hall or at federal government level in Canada bans those low rise cheaply made apartments and there is no incentive to build low rise good construction units because of cost for investors and developers to build good low rise apartments with fire safety in mind.
I am mystified by the OP. Canada is not at all good at public transit.
I live in the greater Toronto area, and the public transit is wholly inadequate.
@Jackson99 : I’m curious – do you live in Canada? Or, have you spent significant time in Canada?
A lot of the observations you’ve made in your thread seem to be based on reading, and looking at online maps and pictures (rather than first-hand knowledge), and you’re seeming to be arguing with Dopers who actually live in Canada, and have actual experience with Canadian public transit and Canadian cities.
What are you comparing it to? Compared to most North American cities it has very good public transportation.
In my experience only Montreal and New York might be better.
Right.
My Mom and I rode one of the last red car lines in the LA area. The cars went slow- maybe 20mph on the straights, but since they ran on the surface thru streets and stuff, they had to stop a lot. We used to be able to trot a bit and jump on when the cars slowed to make a corner- and we didnt pay. In fact, I never saw anyone pay, they just jumped on. Of course, that was a LONG time ago, and my memories are hazy. But the average speed, what with stops and corners was too damn slow for people who could drive 2-3 times that, if not more. Buses were quite a bit faster, and they could change the routes easily, as new shopping centers, hospitals and such were built.
So, Big Oil didn’t have to kill the Red car- they were doomed due to being obsolete anyway.
Kinda depends on what you’re comparing it to, no? The comparisons here have generally been with US cities.
I believe you’re in Oakville, right ? (As was I, for a time). Maybe Oakville Transit sucks but we’re talking about major cities here. Oakville is on one of the best GO commuter train lines in all of the GTA for access to downtown Toronto and to the subway system.
Most of my time in this area I’ve lived right within the city of Toronto. How often do you use its transit system? The last place I lived, I could either walk to the Yonge subway or if I felt lazy, take a bus the few blocks to the station, and I’d be downtown in 20 minutes. When my son and I were hockey fanatics we could take the subway right to Union station and get to Scotiabank Arena (at that time the Air Canada Centre) without even going outside. I had no complaints about the Toronto transit system, and the one in Montreal is even better.