The Key to Building Transit-Oriented Development
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.ย. 2024
- Transit-Oriented Development is a great thing to have, but what's the most important thing when it comes to building them? Reece breaks it down.
As always, leave a comment down below if you have ideas for our future videos. Like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon so you won't miss my next video!
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): www.epidemicso...
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreet...
=PATREON & TH-cam MEMBERSHIPS=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon or right here on TH-cam! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
TH-cam Memberships: / @rmtransit
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
(Not officially affiliated with the channel)
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: reecemartin.ca
Substack: reecemartin.su...
=ABOUT ME=
Hi, my name's Reece. I'm a passionate Creator, Transportation Planner, and Software Developer, interested in rapid transportation all around my home base of Toronto, Canada, as well as the whole world!
#tod #citybuilding #transit
I remember when I was a kid, when they built the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) in London. It was a complete urban wasteland. The only thing there was the Canary Wharf Tower. A skyscraper in the middle of nothing. I thought it was so weird/silly, but with hindsight it was probably the entire reason that the whole area is now a massive financial hub with about 20 tall towers and loads of urban residential areas. It's also really easy to get around.
The same thing is happening in Battersea now.
Absolutely, London has done pretty well on this! The Docklands was exceptional!
@@TheLiamster True, although they really need to finish the job and take it all the way to a revamped Clapham Junction.
I think Tokyo is a great example of Transit-Oriented Development
This is because of the involvement of private train companies in such development as RM touched on in his video on Tokyo. This gives the train companies the maximum incentive to make sure that the housing and commercial developments they make (and their hinterlands) are as accessible to their transit networks as possible.
Also, the laws prohibit the duplication of private networks where there is existing provision, helping to prioritise development of transit networks in underserved areas.
Absolutely, Tokyo is on another level for most transit issues!
Omg we have a worse situation in New Jersey. North Brunswick converted its old Johnson & Johnson factory into mixed use housing and restaurants as part of a transit oriented development plan. However, they were missing one thing. THE ACTUAL TRANSIT. There were so many issues between Middlesex County and NJ Transit about funding the station which would fill the long gap between Jersey Avenue and Princeton. I really hope they get their act together
That hurts! But, yeah a lot of development with very poor transit still gets called "transit oriented"!
Your enthusiasm is infectious! I live in a town of 75,000 with a very limited bus service and drive everywhere. Watching you opens a whole new world to me. I will be visiting Washington DC in the near future, and am planning to not have a car, but to use transit from Reagan National and then using the metro to go to the baseball stadium.
I love it! Honestly not having to rent a car makes travel so much better, way less hassle at the airport on both ends, hop on the train or bus and go!
Look into supplementing metro rides with capital bikeshare
I hope it went well! WMATA isn't bad
"Everything happens at once." Planners tend to think in linear time lines, looking down upon future growth as if looking down from above at a map (think felt tips on city maps). However, reality is more like a bubbly stew with a mix of political considerations, public money availability, private capital, shifting public tastes, racial/ethnic issues, broad brush demographics, street crime, and public health. For these reasons, public transit buildout appears not to be well thought out. The classic mantra is "a half of glass of wine is better than none" glass after glass after glass.
Yes! Which is why the transit most underly everything!
I think the DLR is a great example of this. The whole area of the now famous Canary Wharf was basically empty industrial wasteland until after the DLR came. Almost immediately after a direct connection via automated light metro was established to the city and to residents around it, the area became one of the most productive in London, literally building its second skyline. Really goes to show what happens when we build around rail.
It’s among the best examples!
Some of London's suburbs are like this as well. There's a channel called Jago Hazzard and in some of his videos he talks about how stations that are now on the Central line loop in North East London were built by private railway companies and then they built houses around it with a "build it and they will come" mindset
@@KarimElhoussami Definitely. The whole metro-land thing is actually a very interesting way of looking at suburban development. I just don’t think it’s as good an example of what is possible
In NL, cities usually build a new railway station before developing a new living area: it increases the price of the new houses when they are easier to reach, which contributes to the cost. It also keeps the pressure on new road lower, so road infrastructure is cheaper.
That's Newfoundland to me. I don't think that they have rail transit, too small, so you must mean somewhere else.
Too many people uses codes and acronyms on the internet that means different things depending on your location, or profession.
Yep, the Netherlands (sorry Newfoundland) does this very well! Especially with suburbs!
Singapore had missed out quite often on TOD (except for its 2 oldest MRT/subway/metro lines that were built simultaneously with the suburbs they served) because, probably worried about stations being underutilised, instead built many of the newer ones only decades after the surrounding land was already filled up with houses e.g. the inner suburb of _Boon Keng_ got a train station in 2003 while the surrounding land were already all occupied by public housing, with our nat'l archives having photos of them dated all the way back from 1971 (which shows how long ago those houses were built). We got 'lucky' with Tampines E station though as it opened just a year before the junior college (high school) beside it was effectively closed down (officially the gov't said it was instead merged into another school further away (Meridian JC)), so the closed-down school's land could possibly be resold for a higher price for redevelopment. However it must've been a bummer for the closed school's students who were excited about how going to & from school would be more convenient with the station's opening.
You make an excellent point about having transit available in developing communities before people make the (life-long?) decision of buying into a car-centric lifestyle!
Absolutely! Though car ownership doesn't have to be lifelong, it's designed to be a headache to get out of it so you don't get tempted . . .
I really, really hope East Harbour is well executed and shows people how transit-oriented development can be done right in Toronto
I agree, to be fair some locations like Vaughan Metropolitan Centre do better on the building the transit first metric, but fail on other ones!
@@RMTransit True, VMC is a good one too, overall. STC kind of had it right too, and hopefully it'll be better after Line 2 comes
Excellent video! Although, Reece, you were talking specifically about Toronto, your message 'build the transit before you build the development' is applicable world wide. It is certainly a message which needs to be heard in Britain where i live.
I think a lot of my videos are meant to be, a global issue through the lens of Toronto! The UK has done well too! Someone mentioned the DLR which is an excellent example!
I think Hudson Yards in NYC is a good recent example of TOD although the housing there is already expensive.
It is, and they built the transit at the same time!
This reminds me of pictures from when the #7 train (elevated) was built through Queens NY and the #2/5 elevated line through The Bronx. When the #7 line was first built there was NOTHING around it. Less than 30 years later there were vast neighborhoods around the line and the Worlds fair grounds (1939 then much later 1964-65). In The Bronx new brownstones were built near the line (I used to live in one of them) as it went up. Now there are issues extending lines due to money. At least The Bronx's east side will soon have new commuter stations into Penn Station. within 3 years.
This is why the vast undeveloped area around Sheppard West and Downsview Park should be designated as a mixed-use ultra-dense development area for employment and housing. The area is already served by mass rapid transit (Line 1) and regional rail (Barrie Line) and could be connected with the rest of the TTC network with the future Sheppard West extension. The area could and should become a new "downtown" to rival North York Centre. This side of Line 1 has tons of unused capacity and there are acres and acres available for development once the airport is finally closed.
Incidentally, this is how I build my cities and suburbs in cities skylines XD
I add stations, and turn them off. Then, as I get to that station, I turn it on. It's a decent way.
You are a good city builder!
although, usually I start with the fastest transit, which is HSR... which is probably not good city building 🤔
Exactly! I used to live in New Toronto, about 20 minutes west of Humber Bay Shores on the Long Branch streetcar line. Yup. An hour from Humber Bay Shores to downtown by transit. Now I live across the street from Old Mill subway station. Same distance from downtown. 20 minutes by subway. And now with the Bloor bike lanes going out to Runnemede, cycling downtown is better, too. But that's a whole other story. . . 😉
The Bloor Street Bike Lanes are game changers, but they are super ugly
One of the things that surprised me when i was working in down-town, is that my commute to Oshawa took less time than people commuting from parts of Scarborough.
The power of Regional Rail!
Another great video. I love the crazy schedule you keep up in getting new content out!
I think the strongest model is for the transit agency to own the properties near its stations, with density exceptions. New extensions should be built to greenfield or near-greenfield to build new designed-for-density towns. They can target areas where two or more lines from various modes, with short extensions, can intersect there as a transfer stations. Rent from luxury and commercial properties can then become funding for the transit system, as well as at-cost or low-profit affordable housing units.
The biggest problem with transit funding is that while it drives business, businesses are loathe to pay back into transit. The transit agency needs to keep control over the property within a given radius of its stations, as opposed to the streetcar suburb model used in the early 20th century where they sold the land outright, made their profits up front, and then had no incentive to continue maintaining the system. Japan gets it right.
SIngapore has built a couple of rail lines that radiate out from downtown, but pass thru less populated areas for pretty long stretches before hitting more densely populated & outlying suburbs (e.g. Mt Pleasant along the Thomson-E Coast Line en-route to _Ang Mo Kio_ & Woodlands, Woodleigh along the N E Line en-route to _Serangoon_ ). So what happened was that the gov't built stations in those areas but opened them only much later than the rest of the lines, leading to criticism that the stations had become white elephants. Perhaps what could've been done was for public housing to've been built @ the same time as those stations so that they can be ensured with some ridership from the start (which the gov't has belatedly just announced for Mt Pleasant station, where public housing will now be launched there in the next decade, while the rest of its line is scheduled to open this year)
The entire Golden Mile is set to be turned into a high-density TOD with tens of thousands of housing units. Yet it will still take like 45 minutes to get downtown (possible 1hr if you include walking from home/work to the station). The area will probably end up along the lines of St Jamestown serving those in the lower-income bracket. But at least it will give us the much-needed affordable housing. This is just my opinion. U should consider doing an analysis on this.
Ideally the Relief Line will help improve travel times from the Golden Mile area by being able to switch from the Crosstown to the Relief Line at Don Mills (hopefully one day once the Relief Line is built).
@@djsiii4737 I actually did try to include the Ontario line into my calculations. My unscientific rush hour predictions gave me 15 mins on Line 5 to science centre station, 25 minutes on the Ontario Line to Queen Station, and 5 minutes on Line 1 to Union station. It currently takes around 55 minutes from Golden Mile via the 68 bus, Line 2 and Line 1. But ya, hopefully they actually build the line.
I don’t think it will take quite that long once the OL is built, but yeah its not great. Travel times not much better (if better) than Kennedy, despite being closer to Downtown!
South False Creek in Vancouver BC was opened in 1976 , the No. 50 bus started from day one. However many other development have not copied that.
Yep! Good example
Wanted this video for SO LONG 😭 Love it 👍
Thanks! What part of it were you waiting for?
MIMICO upgrade was a major mistake. The station should have been relocated instead since dense development was already built or planned at Parklawn and east along the lake front. Most of this is within walking distance and they could have eliminated the ubiquitous parking lot.
I agree. But a lot of development is coming around Mimico station now on Newcastle St and Audley St.
Not reason you can’t have both, especially with electric trains coming
@@RMTransit AGREED, but they could have built a transit hub for TTC streetcars, buses and GO Trains when they were redoing both facilities around the same time. They chose to expand the parking at Mimico station in the centre of a residential neighbourhood, which is the kind of thing you preach against.
Toronto built the sheppard line saying that ‘the development will follow’ then effectively banned significant development in the area bc of nimbys
There is a problem with your thesis that downtown should continue to be the focus.
There are employment centres outside of downtown Airport/Eglinton Renforth, Yonge & Finch, Steeles East and having to travel through downtown has 2 negatives:
1.) It adds time to the commute
2.) It burdens the already overburdened lines
Having other employment centres doesn’t make Downtown less important though! I’d also point out that LSW - North York is a route with loads of commute capacity.
I prefer pedestrian oriented development to transit oriented development because we can make cities walkable and compact without relying on expensive rapid transit systems to move people around. This type of development is especially helpful for smaller cities with a population under 500,000 that don't have the money or population to invest in light rail or other rapid transit system but also want to move away from car centric sprawl.
@@Browne7100 I'm thinking in the context of my small crappy car infested hometown of fake London in Canada when it tried to build an expensive light rail system to get people out of their cars and onto transit (the plan was cancelled after complaints from NIMBYs). The thing is that cities with a population the size of fake London don't need a fancy transit system to get around, the similarly sized city of Florence in Italy also has a fairly primitive transit system but they don't need one since the city is dense and compact with no cars at the centre of the city. Everyone walks everywhere in Florence because everything is within walkable distance and its a pleasant place to walk around.
A place like London still is going to need good transit, based on how the city is shaped. TOD and POD need to both happen. Given the rail line here TOD makes TONS of sense!
In my city they opened up a new suburb with a small commercial centre that was advertised as being a great place for families with parks, schools, affordable housing, and a new train line into the city.
Now more than a decade later, they've **started** the train line.
Strong Towns prefers Development Oriented Transit over Transit Oriented Development, build great places first, then use transit to connect later. Historically with all roads, rail, etc this is what we did because it worked. You are right when you say we need to get rid of our car mentality when it comes to transit, while I prefer to say we need to focus more on the places of transit rather than pure mobility.
The thing is, humans want to move. That mobility is more fundamental. If you don't build transit first people drive.
@@RMTransit That is only the case if the destinations require a car over walking. Back in the day, towns did not extend infrastructure far outside of the city limits, so most commercial activity was limited to the town, so people could just walk from their homes in town, or take the horse to town no car required. I also personally think your conclusion is incomplete when you say "If you don't build transit first, people drive" as people will only drive if there is a road, the way you avoid that car dependency is you don't build roads in the first place, or if you do, you ban development along the road and keep it only in the towns and cities. People drive if you make it easier and better than walking regardless of what transit is there.
Yes, but you fundamentally need a road to construct a development in the first place. So of course the road exists by default!
@@linuxman7777 Meanwhile in Singapore as cars are heavily taxed but public housing is plentiful & much cheaper than private housing, so demand for the latter is more inelastic & its easier to populate areas less accessible by public transport, though public housing estates usually will have at least a bus service to the nearest town centre (just that to get anywhere else further you probably have to transfer to another bus or train). In the end the gov't has concentrate much of its public housing building in newer towns e.g. _Punggol, Sengkang_ to populate them as rapidly as possible, to more easily justify building more facilities there e.g. shopping malls. A side effect though is that older towns now also have an ageing population as when families' children grow up & buy new homes to start new families, they'll often be moving out to a new town, so some older towns' facilities end up getting less utilised & closed down e.g. _Tg Pagar & Buona Vista_ swimming complexes
Excellent video , keep up the good work. I just moved to Humber Bay . The City and Province should of extended line 2 or the Ontario Line to service the area. I don't think a new Go Train station will be enough to support the 17 additional residential towers that is planned for the neighbourhood.
Honestly, frequent GO train service will be plenty for the foreseeable future, condos don’t generate nearly as much demand as it seems
Also just moved here and thinking the same. Hopefully that go station comes in soon
my city here in Germany did this. now, there's been a subway station in the middle of a field for 8 years
I'm pleased here in Edmonton we're building transit for planned TODs at Century Park, MacEwan, Blatchford, Strathearn, Hollyrood, Bonnie Doon, West Block, and Jasper Gates.
We also have this phenomenon of semi-unplanned density growing sortof organically at Stadium (to the Northwest, not where the TOD is officially planned) and Belgravia McKernan (not coincidentally the two closest stations to the core tunnels with residential land available.) No surprise the concept definitely works.
Hope we can insert Capital Line stations into the 2km intervals on either side of Stadium, at 106 Avenue and 113 Avenue. This will support TODs in the former flightpath noise zone and "South Northlands" respectively.
A good argument for free or low cost transit is that it prevents families from justifying a second or third car. Nobody wants to spend multiple dollars each time they need to do a quick errand. Or spend that to ride a bus a few blocks to rail that may have an additional fare.
Ideally there should be free transfers and affordable monthly passes to eliminate this problem
Thanks for Your point.
Reese, if you don't see the incredible irony of having a sign for North York Center behind you when making this video...
Shhh
Smart guy. Nice video.
It's interesting to note the time taken to get downtown from various parts of the city - wouldn't it be great to map those times using various modes of transit? For example, I can be downtown in 13 minutes by GO or UP Express from Weston whereas the subway takes 35 minutes from Royal York.
Absolutely, isochrone maps are awesome!
Building a GO station is a good solution in this particular case, but also something should be done about the streetcars being useless and little more than decoration!
My big reservation with this is that great transit networks were not built this way. And in places where transit has been built first (such as Los Angeles or Metro-Land in London) the result has been low density suburbia.
I'm not at all an expert on this, but I have a theory on why this might be. Developing greenfield neighbourhoods is a wildly profitable business to be in, provided you can find a site with relatively convenient access to trunk infrastructure (such as trunk water and sewer mains, and major road or transit corridors). If your city has a policy of promptly building trunk infrastructure to any site that is under development, then the number of sites under development will rise. With all these new developments coming online, the pressure on established neighbourhoods to densify is reduced.
In short, an infrastructure first approach increases the incentive to convert farmland to single family houses and simultaneously reduces the incentive to convert houses to higher density. The result is lots and lots and lots of houses.
Remember, LA was suburban a good 30 years before it became car dependent.
Development in Toronto very much followed transit lines traditionally, those being streetcar lines in the early 1900s. In NYC and Chicago, railway companies built the subways to their lands in the edge of the City where they were building new neighbourhoods. But in a modern sense, I agree with you. Municipalities are planning for low and maybe medium density neighbourhoods, and will only plan for high density development if there is at least an announcement or long-term plan for a rail extension to that given area. Mount Pleasant in Brampton is an example of a municipality doing things a bit different if at least they know the GO station will be built.
Those are two bad examples, Hong Kong and the like show there are many good ones!
Keep the content coming, excellent!
I can think of a number of transit mistakes in my city, Manchester, UK. The fact the it took more than 20 years to connect the Trafford Centre to the Metrolink, when they could have planned it in the design before it was built. Now that it has been built, and opened during the pandemic, numbers have been good, especially on weekends (when they operate a Sunday service, ie a reduced service on Sundays when it is at its busiest 🤦). Another one is the number of lines that converge at Cornbrook through to St. Peter's Square (I think it's 6 routes merge here), they built a second city crossing to reduce the numbers of trams using the main route, yet only one route is currently using it! 🤦 There are routes on the regional trains that would certainly benefit from being on the Metrolink network instead but those routes extend beyond the city so make it difficult to do, the possibility of a line share between trains and trams would be the best solution here (with trams already running high floor, the stations won't need converting)
I recommend putting a GO station at Park Lawn, decommissioning Mimico, and building a substitute station for Mimico at Islington if the Willowbrook Yard can accommodate one. Islington seems to be a happy medium between Long Branch and Park Lawn.
Not a bad idea at all!
Edmonton currently has three transit oriented developments and so far only one works and two are total failures. The worst of the worst is the Fort Road Belvedere corridor. It's been sitting empty for over 10 years and the newly widened Fort Road into a high speed 6 lane arterial road means it divides the community in half as it's more dangerous to cross as a pedestrian. It's ruined the community for good.
Vancouver seems to be doing transit oriented tower clusters well, with mini downtowns at various suburban centres. The amount of skylines a westbound visitor can see before downtown Vancouver is many. And they continue to be built, at places like Lougheed, Oakridge, and Surrey Central.
That is exactly what they did across the Asia-Pacific. Instead of developing a single downtown area, they developed multiple downtown areas, all of which are connected by transit. I don't know why the hell is this controversial in North America.
Would it be a better idea if they extended the Ontario line down to humber bay shores?
I wouldn't say so, a station is much less expensive and faster to build!
@@RMTransithmm Makes sense. And the station can probably benefit from the 15 min lakeshore west go service in the future.
I know you more of a modern transit youtuber but maybe you could make a video about all the rail lines In a city over the years
Heyy!! wait a little while and then look at your script so that there is a smooth cut
It’s hard sometimes, I do my best!
You should make a video about the west coast express and how it could be better
I need 25 Minutes to ride the 8 Kilometers to my work place on a bicycle here in Germany. The Bus (that only runs every half an hour) takes 21 Minutes. How the hell do you built a tram line that takes an hour for the same distance???
In this case it's a streetcar that runs on city streets. It has a dedicated tracks for maybe a couple of km until Roncesvalles Avenue, then it runs down the middle of Queen Street, mixed with surface traffic, along one of Toronto's most congested streets. Brutally slow. An hour is quite accurate.
So important to these new neighbourhoods is to facilitate actual local businesses. Too often a developer comes in and run all the businesses themselves. This gives them more control over the property and the 'quality' but impedes afforability (and sizing of the units) and a proper mix of uses. Having a local kebab shop and phone repair shop (which are often considered 'low class') in addition to a corner coffee shop provides much more value to the neighbourhood than just single glitzy two storey coffee shop. More diverse uses per m² is more value both socially and economically. I'm not against chain stores but against making a TOD into a glorified mall without basic necessary services available one would expect living in an urban setting. A city only consisting of Targets, Wallmarts, supermarkets and coffee shops isn't a city.
They should bring back allowing private developers to build their own lines to a common standard. Used to be that you could run your own line and then build up around it. Lots of streetcar suburbs got their start that way.
It was never banned as far as I'm concerned. Miami central brightline is TOD
Thank you. Thank you VERY much!! You cut through all the nonsense "this project is so great eye candy" that drives me crazy.
PROXIMITY 🚫➡️ GOOD SERVICE.
All that matters to the N.A. mind is *trip time*. Some people *may* enjoy the down time of longer transit trips 'sans-stress', MOST just wanna get home and 'move on'.....
In Singapore where I'm from, there were also instances where public transport could've been better co-ordinated e.g. _Telok Blangah_ MRT (subway/metro) station opened just south of the namesake inner suburb in 2011, but still the buses going into there (e.g. 272) only went up north into another suburb's town centre ( _Bt Merah_ ) which didn't have a station. It was only a few years later that bus 120 was introduced to connect the suburb to the station. Also _Joo Koon_ station was opened in 2009 as part of our rail extension further west into the western outlying industrial region of _Tuas_ , but with only 1 connecting bus from the station (252) & the region being pretty sprawled out (since it's less cost-effective to build industrial buildings taller; you'll need ever larger lifts to move large equipment between floors), there were still alot of industrial areas not reachable from the new station. The station was underutilised as many workers still continued transferring to buses 2 stations to the east ( _Boon Lay_ ) which had a bus interchange & thus more connecting buses, until 6 years later when _Joo Koon_ got those too (plus some buses being re-routed to call at the station).
In The Netherlands they bould a metroline, before the parts Zevenkamp, Hesseplaats and Nesselande was ready wit al the houses that are now there.
I think they did the same with Binnenhof and it gif people a chooce to life there and use transint....or they will buy a car as if they life in a Vila
Yep! Quite common to see this practice in the Netherlands!
I would not suggest that another GO station on Lakeshore west is really the answer here. Rather the issue should be resolved with fixing the tram service. Adding an extra stop - means slowing down the entire line that travels all the way out to Hamilton.
The service on Lakeshore, should not be a tripper 508 or a 501 that trundles along Queen, but instead, the service should be redone -to reflect the long trip from Long Branch to core. If it was possible - using the space between the Rail and Gardiner for an express trip - with another bridge to cross the Gardiner - into the CNE east of Dufferin would be ideal. The bridges for rail would be expensive, but it would make for radically better service for the west end
There was once the idea of a Waterfront west LRT - which likely has been part of the reason for the growth in the area. The transit should have been built...
LSE has 4 tracks and even if it had 2, a new stop need not slow down all trips - we already have express trains! Even still, electric trains will make trips faster even with more stops!
@@RMTransit yes but if you do not stop all trains - but only a fraction, then service becomes infrequent. This also only serves a single point, not the rest of the Lakeshore West corridor in Etobicoke - which is also developed/ developing. Consider the towers just west of Park Lawn - across from the Humber Bay parks. Also how the area west of there will intensify.
The streetcar trip - should be much faster, and could be with relatively little additional infrastructure. It should be that the streetcar runs out to Longbranch every 5 minutes - and is a sub 30 minute trip from Park Lawn to core, as this would be relatively easy to accomplish. Consider how long does the trip take from the Humber loop to St Josephs? (6-8 minutes) How long from CNE to Union Station (12 -15 minutes).
Yes the link from Queensway to CNE is a bit of a technical challenge, but not a massive one. It would also provide much improved service to a broader area (including Liberty village).
ps- and frankly there is a need for the service to have the advantage of electrification for the balance of the line. The trip needs to be sped up - and having stops in close proximity - undoes that. This is using GO - to fill an issue - that TTC service should really be addressing. Having a frequent local bus service to Mimico - would make sense, however there is going to be a growing need for service along Lakeshore out to Longbranch, and frankly fixing the problem on the Tram - is what is really required.
Do the trams in Toronto have preferential routing, or do they have to stop at each red light like cars? Otherwise, they're just glorified buses. The rails look decently straight, they could go 70-80 km/h on those tracks.
Jakarta's suburban light rail contractor mostly put their stations near their "TOD" Properties at it's suburban sections. (the acronym has been slightly misused here imo).
Good to hear!
Yeah, what is called "TOD" here in Indonesia is more often than not just transit-adjacent, not transit-oriented. I.e. you have people building high rise near major transit stops but without any consideration for pedestrian & bike routes, integration with other modes of transport etc.
@@junirenjana if it's anything like in Malaysia, they do it in such a way that it is profitable but not actually useful for most people.
"Vertical Highway Suburb" 🤣 poor Humber Bay Shores
Cool sweatshirt
As I we Edmontonians learned however, building transit first is not great if it's just gonna serve an industrial wasteland build along an old railway ROW. Not sure why, but TOD as never manifested all that well in Edmonton until recently.
I can attest as someone that has lived there before that Lawrence & Allen/Eglinton is closer to downtown than HBS.
Building a station seems like a good idea, but why is there no express bus service along the expressway as an interim solution?
In the history of Canada and of the United States the laying down of railway lines established towns that were not already established along rivers.
The footage at 4:40 blew my mind when i saw it. I have never once been to a major railway station in the Netherlands, where I live, that had so little people and so little trains! I see one train and 7 people. Is it because there are very few intercity services at this station? Or is it covid related?
Was possibly off-peak time and/or possibly long before a train showed up. That was Union station busiest station in the country, and at Union most ppl don't wait for the train on the platform, they wait in the concourse then the screens tell them which platform to go to when the train is close. During rush hour in the week the station is a complete zoo. On weekends it is much calmer but can get busy depending on what's going on in the city (sports, shows, etc.).
It was a very lucky shot, the station is big and so it can be hard to see trains in some shots, I also stood here after most had departed.
you wait underground for your trains at Union station mostly, not really at the platform. i don't believe you can go on most platforms until the train arrives
@@TheTroyc1982Mainland China is similar in that aspect too I remember, except that the waiting hall is usualy above instead of below the platforms (which is where arriving passengers are directed to instead, to separate their flow from departing passengers, like in an airport)
Why can’t they put street car on lakeshore? That seems to be an easy solution that could connect with the existing system and go straight to union
Great video!
Extend the Ontario line there once it’s built?
I agree with the general argument, but when you brought up that in your example that there is a station one kilometre away I almost fell off my chair. Why would you throw so much capital into building a new station, when a station is in cycling reach? looking at google maps I see that it is about 10 minutes cycling to Mimico station, and maybe with some adjustments (cycle track through Grand Avenue park?) this could be shortened even more. An extra stop on the rail line will make the ride for those who ride from further away take longer, and cycling for would not warrant building a new station if you'd ask me.
Winter in Toronto is long and hard and cycling in the rain also sucks. Cycling is not a solid solution. What about those who are not able to cycle due to physical limitations? What about parents who have to drop off small children at daycare on the way to work?
@@rebbiakiva I disagree. 'Not just bikes' has a great video about cycling in the winter, and why that works in Canada too. And besides as I mentioned, it's less than 10 minutes cycling at max. As we say in the Netherlands: "you're not made of sugar" ;)
@@SuperTobyproductions Not only can cycling in the winter be extremely dangerous with icy conditions, you would often get covered in salt and slush. Do you live in Toronto?
@@rebbiakiva but that's the point of not just bikes' video. The Toronto government should prioritizing clearing snow and keep the streets bikeable in the winter. These are policy decisions just like building a train station. It's a question of setting your priorities straight. I highly recommend watching their video if you haven't watched it yet.
@@SuperTobyproductions That still wouldn't help people with physical limitations, or parents with children.
I think that the barking riverside development in London is pretty bad, as it is only served by the overground every 15 minutes, with no direct access to central London.
Shouldn't they just extend the Ontario Line towards Humber Bay Shores or is that a bad idea?
Reminds me of River District in south Vancouver, its such a nice mixed used high density water front community that looks like it was designed around a skytrain station, but its not even close to any transit connections and so everyone drives and so parking and traffic are a nightmare. On the other hand there are the half dozen skytrain stations that are severely underused because Vancouver and Burnaby never bother rezoning the area around some of the stations.
The River District is crazy and much much worse haha. It will get mentioned in a video coming soon ;)
Thumbs up to ban parking mandates at TOD units.
While I agree that transit should be built first or in sync with new high density development, and that the Humber-Bayshore neighbourhood is poorly served by transit, the video fails to appreciate that the development that has taken place on Lakeshore Blvd W here was inevitable. The area was large motels and industries before developers came in, prime for redevelopment. Whereas the area around Eglinton West Station, which Humber-Bayshore is compared to in the video, is an older more traditional lotting network posing a challenge for developers to pick-up enough land for comparable dense development. When the University-Spadina line was built (which Eglinton West is on), density was built where it was feasible, at Riddelle Ave and Marlee Ave. But more is starting to take place now as the Eglinton Crosstown is being built. Also, would've appreciated commentary on the Waterfront LRT that was part of the original Transit City plan that would've ran on Lakeshore West.
The city and province can shape growth and they can both direct density and put infra in place. I don't think the redevelopment was necessarily inevitable but if it was a station should have been put in.
You should do an episode on LeBreton Flats in Ottawa. As of right now not too many people living near Pimisi station but a lot of condos in development.
That place has been waiting for development for, forever. Nothing was ever good enough.
An interesting site indeed! They’ve ever talked about burying the train!
For driving downtown 7:00 where are they going to park?
How hard would it be to convert streetcar routes to proper LRT?
*coughLINE4-SHEPPARDcough*
When you build TOD without the transit:
?OD
Precisely
1:14