The Lives and Deaths of Cities

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

^^ What's missing is mixed use and retail no?

And I agree. This is why I say today's CityPlace is tomorrow's Jamestown. I can't believe they went through all that trouble to build that many condos and didn't plan to put in decent retail at the bottom.

I lived for a year in the Spadina-Fort York area about a decade ago. The giant condos felt as disconnected from the city as my parents' outer 416 home. These places aren't (or weren't at the time) walkable in any real sense. They just seem designed to warehouse workers within walking and transit distance of the core.

They're much better connected these days with new nodes like The Well, and I assume when the GO RER stations get built they'll feel integrated with the city.

A bigger concern IMO is the fact that we're packing in 40+ storey condos in too tight a space, with Toronto's free for all planning. Case in point is Mercer Street where Second City used to be. The street is drenched in eternal darkness, and there's many units in the immediate vicinity that will never see a day of natural sun. Just North of it, another 2-3 towers are going up on King Street's restaurant row. Even in Hong Kong their new builds don't have this kind of extreme density, and the complete lack of tower separation is just going to turn many of these units into future slums. Especially for the old midrises that now find their units backed into a dark alleyway.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

^^ What's missing is mixed use and retail no?

And I agree. This is why I say today's CityPlace is tomorrow's Jamestown. I can't believe they went through all that trouble to build that many condos and didn't plan to put in decent retail at the bottom.

I lived for a year in the Spadina-Fort York area about a decade ago. The giant condos felt as disconnected from the city as my parents' outer 416 home. These places aren't (or weren't at the time) walkable in any real sense. They just seem designed to warehouse workers within walking and transit distance of the core.

But there is retail. Walk through City Place in the and you'll come across restaurants, grocery stores, medical offices and cafes. There's a school and a popular park in the neighborhood too. As a visitor, it honestly seemed pretty idyllic and the the first thing I thought about was how wrong the naysayers from a decade ago predicting the next Jamestown were.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Unless you're willing to deport them from Quebec, those anglos are still Québecers though, so their travel preferences and activities should count as those of the residents of Quebec broadly. So I guess we're can move on from your personal projections here?



You don't need the database. Use flightaware and count the flights. I did. And then I did rough math based on aircraft type. Lots of RJs flying 70-90 pax between Montreal and New York and Boston. Meanwhile, Montreal-Toronto has RJs and everything from 190 seater 321s to the odd 300 seat A330 and B787. There's nearly 35 flights each way between Montreal and Toronto's two airports. Average number of seats per departure is probably over 150. There's about 25 flights between Montreal and New York City's three major airports. Average number of seats is probably close to 120. Flights between Montreal and Boston makes a complete mockery of the idea that this is major destination from Montreal. I won't give the number. Some of you need to look it up to get over yourselves.

And none of that even includes trains or buses. VIA sends 9-10 trains per day combined to Ottawa and Montreal. Each one of those trains carries about 300 pax. Go look up how many trains run between Montreal and Boston and New York. I am too lazy to look up buses. But I would bet money there's more bus traffic between Montreal and Toronto than there is between Montreal and New York or even Boston.

I’ve been to Boston more than a dozen times. Always drove.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by theman23

But there is retail. Walk through City Place in the and you'll come across restaurants, grocery stores, medical offices and cafes. There's a school and a popular park in the neighborhood too. As a visitor, it honestly seemed pretty idyllic and the the first thing I thought about was how wrong the naysayers from a decade ago predicting the next Jamestown were.

Honestly I'll be relieved if I'm wrong. To me, places that are mostly designed for mostly transient twenty/thirtysomething renters and aren't really designed to cater to families, just seem destined to really become ghettos as newer development takes the spotlight. But hey, if I'm wrong and SSP is still here on 20 yrs, I'll admit it.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by vanatox

I have taken the bus to NY maybe two times (a long time ago). I have never taken a plane or a train to travel to NY, Boston or Toronto. I have always used my car. I have been to these 3 cities many times. Most Quebecers would also travel by car to go to these cities since it is so much cheaper and convenient.

It's also much more convenient to cross the border by car than by bus/train. I recall taking the bus to NYC from Toronto in the past, and crossing the border would add 1-2 hours of delay to the trip.

We need a Schengen style agreement with the US to get rid of these pesky border controls. It should be as seamless as crossing from France to Switzerland.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by theman23

But there is retail. Walk through City Place in the and you'll come across restaurants, grocery stores, medical offices and cafes. There's a school and a popular park in the neighborhood too. As a visitor, it honestly seemed pretty idyllic and the the first thing I thought about was how wrong the naysayers from a decade ago predicting the next Jamestown were.

Yeah - I’ve posted about this before but despite not liking the aesthetics of city place it’s actually turned into a real neighbourhood. It’s a far cry from the master planned suburban tower complexes.

[ssiguy]

Canadian cities are hamstrung by our Constitution stating that they are really nothing more than creations of their respective province. Since 1867 we have gone from a rural to urban society yet our Constitution has not changed to reflect our current urban reality and never will.......thank you Quebec.

Our cities are having to foot the bill for their swelling populations while having very little taxation powers, save one, property taxes. It's about time our cities started laying down the law on who will benefit from the taxes collected and who pays for them and a damn good place to start is our universities and colleges.

Our post-secondaries have been coddled too long and it's about time they started paying their fair share. They pay no property taxes but certainly enjoy all the municiple benefits and yet send a VERY small amount to their respective cities in lieu of taxes. Traditionally this was fine as nearly all the students were Canadian so those services were paid for previously by their parents or later when they join the workforce. Now, however, huge numbers of the student body are foreign students who have never paid taxes, probably won't during their studies, and potentially never will if they leave the country yet local property owners have had to subsidize the city services they use ie roads, transit, water, garbage/recycling, bikeways, libraries, community centres, fire, police etc. The foreign students get all the city services free and gratis and this has to stop. Either the city begins to refuse all DISCRETIONARY civic services to foreign students or they start charging universities property taxes to make up for the expenses. "Technically" the cities cannot charge a uni/cc property taxes but can simply stop providing all civil services until they pay the equivalent.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by thewave46

The worry being that I've seen these things slip away, more so than I've seen them reinvigorated, especially in the place I live. Yes, I get it, life and death and all, but 'new life' always looked a heck of a lot more like Costco than local business springing up.

Whether suburbia was in the sky, or on the ground, it was more suburbia. The loss was just more permanent in some places.

CityPlace. Suburban or not? By a contemporary measure, urban. But there's something intangible and missing. A few blocks north. There's something in the latter that the former doesn't have.

Hence the lament.

You're comparing Fort York Blvd./Bremner Blvd., a collector road, to Queen Street, a major arterial road and transit corridor? What did you expect?

I think you just don't like new things. Personally, I think Cityplace is a major improvement over this: https://maps.app.goo.gl/w3F21bmw2Wzc5MLm6

Let Queen Street be Queen Street and let Fort York Blvd./Bremner Blvd. be Fort York Blvd./Bremner Blvd. Building a Faux Queen Street will be just that, a Faux Queen Street, especially if it is not even an arterial road. Is that really what Toronto needs more of? Imitation? Guess what defines suburbia. Imitation. Cookie cutter. Chain stores. Homogeneity.

That's the problem with New Urbanism. Suburbs doing that whole faux-historic thing, and it comes off as faux-historic. That's the suburban way.

[casper]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

It's also much more convenient to cross the border by car than by bus/train. I recall taking the bus to NYC from Toronto in the past, and crossing the border would add 1-2 hours of delay to the trip.

We need a Schengen style agreement with the US to get rid of these pesky border controls. It should be as seamless as crossing from France to Switzerland.

The most frequent train service between the US and Canada would be the Cascadia between Vancouver and Seattle/Portland. It is fine, you do pre-clearance but the train still needs to stop at the border but it is not significant.

I have done the ferry between Victoria and Port Angeles a few times. It is silly they do us immigration in Victoria before boarding and then customs on arrival into the US. It has been like that for years and the customs clearance when getting off the ship is little more that what you see in EU airports with the green/red lane existing baggage claim.

[casper]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Canadian cities are hamstrung by our Constitution stating that they are really nothing more than creations of their respective province. Since 1867 we have gone from a rural to urban society yet our Constitution has not changed to reflect our current urban reality and never will.......thank you Quebec.

Our cities are having to foot the bill for their swelling populations while having very little taxation powers, save one, property taxes. It's about time our cities started laying down the law on who will benefit from the taxes collected and who pays for them and a damn good place to start is our universities and colleges.

Our post-secondaries have been coddled too long and it's about time they started paying their fair share. They pay no property taxes but certainly enjoy all the municiple benefits and yet send a VERY small amount to their respective cities in lieu of taxes. Traditionally this was fine as nearly all the students were Canadian so those services were paid for previously by their parents or later when they join the workforce. Now, however, huge numbers of the student body are foreign students who have never paid taxes, probably won't during their studies, and potentially never will if they leave the country yet local property owners have had to subsidize the city services they use ie roads, transit, water, garbage/recycling, bikeways, libraries, community centres, fire, police etc. The foreign students get all the city services free and gratis and this has to stop. Either the city begins to refuse all DISCRETIONARY civic services to foreign students or they start charging universities property taxes to make up for the expenses. "Technically" the cities cannot charge a uni/cc property taxes but can simply stop providing all civil services until they pay the equivalent.

University students generally pay property tax or rent to landlords the same as any one else. The exception would be students living on campus.

At the larger universities, students usually are forced into some study body wide transit card they have to buy and to paying for recreation facilities and libraries on campus. Not certain how much they would be using local municipal facilities.

Most universities also maintain their on-campus road and many provide on-campus policing/parking enforcement.

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

There's an obvious reason for that. It starts with an L and ends with a E. For the same reason Liège and Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) are not very integrated. Ditto Lille and Courtrai.

I'm not really sure about what starts with an L and ends with an E, but feel free to enlighten me.

Seems as though the examples of not very integrated metro areas you mentioned are in different countries and have been for some time, by Canadian standards (we're a young country), whereas Ottawa and Montreal have been in the same country for its entire existence, and were within the same British entity (sorry), predating confederation. It's just facts.

If Ottawa and Montreal were to grow towards each other, it would have happened by now. Ottawa has a greenbelt I believe, and there's still quite a bit of distance separating them, as compared to Baltimore and Washington (175 km vs 55km). Ottawa in particular would have to be much larger, but Montreal as well, for them to come close to bleeding into one another, but that said, the Ottawa River is dotted with small towns on both sides of the provincial border. It's not along A40/ON-417, the main highway running between the two, so travelling between the two cities can give the impression that there is nothing in between them.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Zeej

I'm not really sure about what starts with an L and ends with an E, but feel free to enlighten me.

Seems as though the examples of not very integrated metro areas you mentioned are in different countries and have been for some time, by Canadian standards (we're a young country), whereas Ottawa and Montreal have been in the same country for its entire existence, and were within the same British entity (sorry), predating confederation. It's just facts.

If Ottawa and Montreal were to grow towards each other, it would have happened by now. Ottawa has a greenbelt I believe, and there's still quite a bit of distance separating them, as compared to Baltimore and Washington (175 km vs 55km). Ottawa in particular would have to be much larger, but Montreal as well, for them to come close to bleeding into one another, but that said, the Ottawa River is dotted with small towns on both sides of the provincial border. It's not along A40/ON-417, the main highway running between the two, so travelling between the two cities can give the impression that there is nothing in between them.

He does have a point though that language is often a factor in having linkages and relationships between cities and regions. You are correct that political boundaries also play a key role.

I was just thinking that as a francophone Canadian I never think of Antwerp in Belgium in spite of it being the second-largest city in the country. I can watch the francophone newscast from Belgium on TV5 and from I've gathered you could probably tune in for several days without even knowing that Antwerp exists. Same goes for the francophone newscast in Switzerland where it's all about Geneva, Lausanne, Neuchâtel... even though Zurich is the biggest city in the country.

I suspect that Flemish or Swiss German national newscasts don't cover francophone regions of the country that much either.

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by Acajack

He does have a point though that language is often a factor in having linkages and relationships between cities and regions. You are correct that political boundaries also play a key role.

I was just thinking that as a francophone Canadian I never think of Antwerp in Belgium in spite of it being the second-largest city in the country. I can watch the francophone newscast from Belgium on TV5 and from I've gathered you could probably tune in for several days without even knowing that Antwerp exists. Same goes for the francophone newscast in Switzerland where it's all about Geneva, Lausanne, Neuchâtel... even though Zurich is the biggest city in the country.

I suspect that Flemish or Swiss German national newscasts don't cover francophone regions of the country that much either.

I think that language is a minor factor here. I think distance is a bigger factor - the two cities are simply too far apart for greater integration, especially using Bal/Wash as a comparison. I recently took the train from Chicago to Milwaukee - it's a good in-between as they're roughly 120km apart downtown-to-downtown. Milwaukee is Ottawa-sized and Chicago is enormous. There is some commuter integration, particularly in Southern Wisconsin, but not very much. Just inland of the lakeshore, there is plenty of empty space between the two metros. At nearly 200km apart, and at their respective sizes, particularly during post WWII suburban and exurban expansion, the distance between Montreal and Ottawa is just too great to facilitate more integration. Also - particularly in Canada where we're not aggressive about building links, physical or otherwise.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Zeej

I think that language is a minor factor here. I think distance is a bigger factor - the two cities are simply too far apart for greater integration.

Indeed. The 160-180km drive between the two cities always felt twice that, and the long stretches of farmland with minimal services abutting the 417 mostly served to accentuate the point.

It's like expecting Toronto and London, ON to be integrated.

Ottawa-Montreal is a good place to do a trial run of actual high-speed rail service though, if the powers that be cared.

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Indeed. The 160-180km drive between the two cities always felt twice that, and the long stretches of farmland with minimal services abutting the 417 mostly served to accentuate the point.

It's like expecting Toronto and London, ON to be integrated.

Ottawa-Montreal good place to do a trial run of actual high-speed rail service though, if the powers that be cared.

Yes. Dare I even say.... high-frequency service?! Better than nothing, though not best. There is some commuter flow between the two and options are limited. Any actual service upgrade would be beneficial to both cities and their respective talent pools.

[ssiguy]

At least on the Ontario side, there is basically no habitation between Ottawa and Montreal. In 100 years they still won't be bleeding into one another. QC & Montreal maybe but even that will take ions.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

At least on the Ontario side, there is basically no habitation between Ottawa and Montreal. In 100 years they still won't be bleeding into one another. QC & Montreal maybe but even that will take ions.

Oh there most definitely is but it's along the old Highway 17 route that hugs the Ottawa River. It's continuously settled and inhabited the entire way. That's the route of the first historic road between Ottawa and Montreal. The settlement along that stretch has been there for 150-200 years.

[Dengler Avenue]

Sometimes I wonder: If 417 hugged Ottawa River east of the city instead of dipping down, maybe places like Hawkesbury would have been bigger. It could easily have been a commuter town for both Ottawa and for Montreal.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Sometimes I wonder: If 417 hugged Ottawa River east of the city instead of dipping down, maybe places like Hawkesbury would have been bigger. It could easily have been a commuter town for both Ottawa and for Montreal.

I've always found it (417) to be a weird routing, and we've discussed it here before.

[niwell]

In a straight line it's just over 100km from the edge of Orleans in Ottawa to Vaudreuil-Dorion. The 417 takes a significantly longer route - about 150km - and is an incredibly boring drive that I personally hate doing despite relatively easy traffic. It's just boring.