Hume: City Building; Vancouver vs. Toronto

[Hipster Duck]

Toronto is more my kind of city and has a lot more edge than Vancouver, which can sometimes seem like the IKEA catalogue of world cities. Still, it's unfair to dismiss Vancouver's accomplishments which, by the numbers, are much more impressive than Toronto's. For example, Vancouver built 60km of real rapid transit in the time that it took us to build 6.

Their design review panel may be a bit dogmatic, but it has largely prevented crimes against urbanity like one-story LCBOs from gracing high Victorian commercial strips or 50-storey condo towers from planting their feet in "designated" historic neighbourhoods. Walking along a newly developed commercial street in Vancouver is often bland, but hardly ever offensive.

Their Metro Vancouver authority (nee GVRD) has over 40 years of experience collectively administering a wide range of services across the region, while GTA mayors bicker and fight over self-interests like the factions that split Beirut.

Their transportation projects are products of professional planning and regional coordination, while our transportation "master plan" is basically the wet dream of an aging streetcar evangelist and his pied piper ensemble of Gladstone hipsters.

If I lived in Vancouver I'd be more bored but I'd probably be less cynical.

 

[ShonTron]

If I lived in Vancouver I'd be more bored but I'd probably be less cynical.

Wow. That's a great perspective. Vancouver is pretty, but you are right, a bit boring, but a matured regional planning and transport regime that I do envy.

And you left out suburban transit foamers from the ensemble.

 

[freshcutgrass]

So you're saying Toronto is a model of perfection while Vancouver is an unmitigated disaster? It seems to me that the ideal solution resides somewhere in between.

No...that's not what I'm saying.

I'm not speaking in the hypothetical, but in reality. In reality, there is Toronto and there is Vancouver....no ideals somewhere in between. If the end result of so-called superior planning is Vancouver, then I prefer the inferior planning of Toronto, as the end result is more pleasing to me.

I guess when I say that Vancouver does some things right, it's in the small touches that I notice it. For instance, in the west end where they have prohibited through traffic on some streets, the "traffic barriers" are quite beautiful gardens. Where we have done the same in Toronto (Earl Street, in particular) there are a couple of concrete slabs across the street without even a through route for a bicyclist. They just seem more thoughtful at times.

You're just being anecdotal. I could just as easily come up with a million things that Toronto doesn't just do with more "thought" or "flair" to them, but that Vancouver doesn't even attempt.

Planting flowers is not the solution to everything. If Vancouver wants to alot a bigger portion of their smaller budget to flowers...great. Personally, I'll take the 50 outdoor artificial ice rinks. What did Woody Allen say...."between air-conditioning and the Pope...I'll take air-conditioning.

I think it would be fair if we assume that one of the reasons their real estate is pricier than ours must be due in part to the geographic limitations of the central city, where the difference between south and north of False Creek is significant, and their downtown is constrained, whereas ours has three directions in which almost unlimited growth can occur.

What constraints? Relegating Vancouver to a couple of square kms on the peninsula is another one of their planning mistakes....the city has 114 sq kms to work with. That's why everything beyond the peninsula looks like Brampton.

They have high real estate prices because they don't have a well balanced housing market.

Still, it's unfair to dismiss Vancouver's accomplishments which, by the numbers, are much more impressive than Toronto's. For example, Vancouver built 60km of real rapid transit in the time that it took us to build 6.

I love that kind of cherry-picking logic...it means everything we already had done means nothing. Hey...I did more good deeds than you did in the same time period (well, at least in the time-frame I decided to cherry-pick for my argument).

Also, it wasn't really "Vancouver" that built it.

Their Metro Vancouver authority (nee GVRD) has over 40 years of experience collectively administering a wide range of services across the region, while GTA mayors bicker and fight over self-interests like the factions that split Beirut. Their transportation projects are products of professional planning and regional coordination

Oh yea...and what is the result...a "regional" only transit attitude, that cow-tows to the suburban majority. How much of that suburban commuter line is actually "inner city" ? It is there to offer mostly suburban commuter service outside of the City of Vancouver.

If we had the equivalent here, there would first of all be NO TTC style service for inner-city mass transit, and the entire GTA would operate on a combined GO Transit commuter service, with the balance operating at Mississauga Transit levels.

No thank you. I'll keep it local....let the suburbanites live with the results of their bad planning mistakes.

If I lived in Vancouver I'd be more bored but I'd probably be less cynical.

A lobotomy would accomplish the same thing without the hassle of moving.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Wow, did somebody just alert the Department of Hometown Superiority about me?

 

[ShonTron]

You just can't compare Translink and TTC/GO directly, but I see more of a region-wide transit system that works relatively well. I've rode Translink all over Vancouver, from Surrey to Port Coquitlam to Burnaby to North Vancouver and West Vancouver. Basically, Vancouver itself is serviced by a decent grid of diesel and electric buses, which run at reasonable service hours most time of the day. There are differences in service levels that actually reflect demand, so yes, while Vancouver has frequencies that would be the envy of anywhere else in North America aside from only perhaps Toronto, New York and Chicago, frequencies on the routes in North Van or Richmond are at levels similar to Mississauga or Brampton.

And at that, they have a proper regional fare structure, where even despite West Coast Express' high GO-like fares, there is full fare coordination with buses and Skytrain. They even advertise a transit sight-seeing tour from Waterfront to Coquitlam Central to Lougheed via 97-B Line (basically a all-day limited stop service akin to LA Metro Rapid or Acceleride) and return via Skytrain. And they are doing a good job with transit expansion using the medium capacity, high-speed ICTS system, except for that province/federal led RAV line.

I've never expected to see the likes of both Archivist and Hipster Duck bashed in one sweeping post. Well done, congrats.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Wow, did somebody just alert the Department of Hometown Superiority about me?

...they did. And when you see Nurse Ratched coming, your dream of a cynical-free life is about to come true. < big indian with pillow is on stand-by>

Hey...perfect analogy...

Toronto = Jack during the movie
Toronto taking a Vancouver pill = Jack at the end of the movie.

 

[Archivist]

I'm OK with being "bashed". I can't stop being amused at being too easy on Vancouver.

I'm sure I've posted this before, but one of my favourite lines that I say to Vancouverites who berate me for preferring Toronto, when they talk about the mountains, is "Well, we had mountains in Ontario long before you and we got over it". Try saying that to a BC person and see what happens. They just about have a coronary.

In fact, they're almost too easy to pluck at.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Vancouver has frequencies that would be the envy of anywhere else in North America aside from only perhaps Toronto...

Faint praise when the topic is Vancouver vs Toronto. I was hoping to have to work a little harder.

 

[ShonTron]

Archivist: Har, har.

Vancouver is underwhelming, especially when you hear such great things about it before you go and see it for yourself. I love Toronto, but you go elsewhere and you see the little details and landscaping that Toronto doesn't do well. I'm not talking Mag Mile, which is so over-the-top for my taste. Then again, there's little offensive about Vancouver's architecture, but there's nothing that wonderful being built either.

But they seem to get regional planning and regional transit better there, things that perhaps Toronto is slowly getting its head around.

FCG: I just made a rebuttal to your argument that transit stinks in Vancouver, and that's the best you can do? Please, do try harder.

 

[Hipster Duck]

A lobotomy would accomplish the same thing without the hassle of moving.

Ha ha. I'd be a humourless asshole if I jumped on that one so I'll let it slide.

but as for:

I love that kind of cherry-picking logic...it means everything we already had done means nothing. Hey...I did more good deeds than you did in the same time period (well, at least in the time-frame I decided to cherry-pick for my argument).

WTF? I mean, shouldn't the present be the most relevant time frame? I could say that Los Angeles led North America in rail expansion between 1900 and 1946; I could say that the city of Detroit was the fastest growing city in the US in 1928; I could say that Troy, NY was the richest city in the US in 1855, but none of those figures would be meaningful. If you insist that I'm cherry picking, then at least call a spade a spade and admit that Vancouver will have a more extensive rapid transit system, by length, in 2010 than Toronto.

 

[3Dementia]

"Well, we had mountains in Ontario long before you and we got over it".

My vodka martini came out my nose... hurt but it was worth it. Belly laughs are good for the soul.

 

[freshcutgrass]

I'd be a humourless asshole if I jumped on that one so I'll let it slide.

Wow...narrowly averted disaster did I? My lucky day I guess. (you see, ominous undertones that you could have jumped on it is not letting it slide).

I mean, shouldn't the present be the most relevant time frame?

Of course. Are you implying the transit infrastructure right now consists of only 6kms of rail transit? Isn't already having something for a long time better than just getting it? Are you beginning to see the flaw in your logic here...or at least my perspective?

at least call a spade a spade and admit that Vancouver will have a more extensive rapid transit system, by length, in 2010 than Toronto.

Is that a trick question?

Since Skytrain is more like a mini GO Train, serving a mostly suburban commuter service, I wouldn't even put it in the same category as TTC subways in the first place....we have it...they don't.

Secondly, the name of the game in transit is not he who has the most track wins. Toronto doesn't need to build subways over hill and dale to do the job more effectively. Translink services the same population as the TTC does...which one is more effective?

Don't get me wrong...Vancouver can't do what Toronto does...the different built environment doesn't allow it. That hybrid commuter mini-train thingy probably is the best they can do given the fact they have a tiny little urban square mile peninsula with the rest of the place sprawled out low density suburbs. But to project anything there as a model for Toronto is cuckoo (I have to stop these film references).

But you know what I think...


we should just let it slide.

 

[3Dementia]

??

=

 

[Earlscourt_Lad]

Well I'll just wade in here.....

Having spent years on both the TTC and BC Transit/Metrolinx (or whatever its called now), it's truly apples and oranges. But for what it's worth, Vancouver has a better regional transit system, but Toronto has a much better "downtown" system in the TTC. To travel from North Van to Langley on the same system with one fare is akin to travelling from Missisauga to Ajax on one system with one fare. Good luck with that trip here. While in Vancouver proper there is frequent service, it's nothing like here. Compare headways on the Dufferin bus with headways on the 9 Broadway to Alma, and I think the Dufferin bus edges it out. I look at it this way, if I lived in Markham, I'd want BC Transit, if I lived in Point Grey I would want TTC. I hope that makes sense.

As for the rest of it, I chose Toronto over Vancouver. I think Toronto is by far a better place (by my own personal metrics) than Vancouver. Much more variety, much more urban vibrance. Take the climate and the scenery away from Vancouver and you haven't got much left, and what's left is expensive. But my logic won't hold for someone who wants to live somewhere scenic, and somewhere where summer doesn't mean the air is like butter.

 

[Redroom Studios]

from page 1

^interesting that you post a pic of SF, which used to be one of my fav cities in the world... a town that is increasingly becoming soul-less as all the bohos/artists et al that made the town unique, are being priced out of the city.

SF is unfortunately becoming much like Vancover.... pretty postcard but generic (gene-rich) hollowing core. Weather sucks much of the time too (those in the know will agree). BTW, no black folks please.

as to point # 1 - on paper that may seem to be the case... I certainly wasnt disappointed with a lack of cool places to hang out and eat. We spent our first week in North Beach... our Little Italy cant compare. The rising prices as anywhere are caused by gentrification... its happening everywhere. Likely its more intense in SF because of the smaller area and already high pop density. As to the discussion about transit, I was amazed by the frequency of buses along Columbus near Washington Square... about every two minutes from 6 - 10 pm on a Saturday night as we watched a subtitled Italian film in the park. Our second week we rented a flat in Pacific Heights and that was a whole other world.

On your second point... that was definitley an impression I was left with, very few black people until you went south of Market St (SOMA) Certainly that is one of Toronto's strengths against American cities is our effortless mingling of various ethicities.

But alas, we are getting off topic again. The point being made by the SF reference was that of a coherent built form. Even though there is a consistency to that form, it is anything but stale or boring. Jumping back to the original Vancouver comparison, that is not to say that we need to copy their form. The lesson is that there is a plan in place and it is followed.

Personally I am a bit worried about what Toronto's entertainment and fashion districts are going to look like in 5 or 10 years. The range and scale of development in a mainly historic district is worrying. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised...