Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
Matt Elliott writes a newsletter called the City Hall Watcher. And one of his features is something called Intersection Inspection. It is where he does a deep dive into traffic counts and modal splits for intersections across Toronto. This week, he covered Yonge & St. Clair in midtown, and so I thought it would be interesting to share it on the blog. (Thanks to Canada Record for the tag on X.)
Here are traffic counts for the intersection going back to 1984:
What seems clear is that Yonge & St. Clair is fairly evenly divided between cars and pedestrians. And it has been this way going back many decades. At the same time, though, the volume of cars seems to be declining. According to the above data, cars haven't seen a count above 20,000 since 2014. There does also seem to be a slight spike in bike usage recently (this is broken out further in Matt's newsletter).
Data is crucial to good city building and I don't think it is leveraged nearly enough. For example, take the intersection of Baldwin St and Kensington Ave in Toronto's Kensington Market. If you look at the traffic counts (which can also be found in the above newsletter), you'll see that 88% of traffic tends to be from pedestrians (79%) and bikes (9%). Only 12% of traffic is from cars.
With this data in hand, you might, then, ask yourself: Should Kensington Market be mostly pedestrianized? And in my opinion, this is a lot easier to answer when you have numbers in front of you telling you how humans actually occupy the area.
Reece Martin is a foremost public transit critic based in Toronto. His YouTube channel, RM Transit, has over 284k subscribers and some 50 millions views. If you're interested in public transit around the world, he is a great person to follow.
He also writes a blog. And today, he published a post talking about the "5 places in Toronto that should have more density." This, as we have talked about many times before, is essential. The way you get the most out of transit is to pair it with the right surrounding land uses. And here in Toronto, we have many instances of "not enough density next to transit."
For instance, the first place on his list is Bloor-Dundas West:
The site already has streetcar serving on two routes, the subway, GO, and UP Express (which will be connected with the subway in the next few years — construction is underway), and lots more transit could show up in the future, from an extension of one of the streetcar routes to the Junction (with a transferway please), to the Ontario Line that will be primed for a second phase in this direction if development justifies it, to the potential for future Milton line train service. The site is arguably already the second-best served for transit in the country after Union, and could be made much better in short order.
Hang on this last sentence for a second: the second-best transit node in the country. That's an incredible asset! Now consider the area's land use plan (red is mixed use and yellow is low-rise neighborhood in Toronto's Official Plan):
It is fairly well documented that communicating to transit riders how long they need to wait for the next train helps them feel like they're actually waiting less. The problem, it would seem, is the unknown.
This is akin to the pre-Uber days when you'd call for a taxi and then have no idea when it would actually show up. That used to feel like forever.
But what about if you communicate a schedule to riders and then it turns out to be a total lie? Well this is probably worse, because eventually, people will catch on to this. Also, you've just maximized the unknown.
Here is an interesting example of community activism. In 2021, Fabio Göttlicher -- a software engineer in Chicago -- started noticing that service levels on Chicago's Transit Authority (CTA) seemed to be declining.
I wrote a program that runs 24 hours a day that keeps tracking the live trains as they come into stations.
And then he discovered this:
What I found, when I first started in December 2021, was that the CTA was running only about 55 to 60 percent of the trains their schedule said they should be running. I started publishing the data in local Facebook groups for transit enthusiasts, on Reddit and other social media. That’s how Commuters Take Action started.
It's hard to think of a more frustrating scenario for transit riders.
Matt Elliott writes a newsletter called the City Hall Watcher. And one of his features is something called Intersection Inspection. It is where he does a deep dive into traffic counts and modal splits for intersections across Toronto. This week, he covered Yonge & St. Clair in midtown, and so I thought it would be interesting to share it on the blog. (Thanks to Canada Record for the tag on X.)
Here are traffic counts for the intersection going back to 1984:
What seems clear is that Yonge & St. Clair is fairly evenly divided between cars and pedestrians. And it has been this way going back many decades. At the same time, though, the volume of cars seems to be declining. According to the above data, cars haven't seen a count above 20,000 since 2014. There does also seem to be a slight spike in bike usage recently (this is broken out further in Matt's newsletter).
Data is crucial to good city building and I don't think it is leveraged nearly enough. For example, take the intersection of Baldwin St and Kensington Ave in Toronto's Kensington Market. If you look at the traffic counts (which can also be found in the above newsletter), you'll see that 88% of traffic tends to be from pedestrians (79%) and bikes (9%). Only 12% of traffic is from cars.
With this data in hand, you might, then, ask yourself: Should Kensington Market be mostly pedestrianized? And in my opinion, this is a lot easier to answer when you have numbers in front of you telling you how humans actually occupy the area.
Reece Martin is a foremost public transit critic based in Toronto. His YouTube channel, RM Transit, has over 284k subscribers and some 50 millions views. If you're interested in public transit around the world, he is a great person to follow.
He also writes a blog. And today, he published a post talking about the "5 places in Toronto that should have more density." This, as we have talked about many times before, is essential. The way you get the most out of transit is to pair it with the right surrounding land uses. And here in Toronto, we have many instances of "not enough density next to transit."
For instance, the first place on his list is Bloor-Dundas West:
The site already has streetcar serving on two routes, the subway, GO, and UP Express (which will be connected with the subway in the next few years — construction is underway), and lots more transit could show up in the future, from an extension of one of the streetcar routes to the Junction (with a transferway please), to the Ontario Line that will be primed for a second phase in this direction if development justifies it, to the potential for future Milton line train service. The site is arguably already the second-best served for transit in the country after Union, and could be made much better in short order.
Hang on this last sentence for a second: the second-best transit node in the country. That's an incredible asset! Now consider the area's land use plan (red is mixed use and yellow is low-rise neighborhood in Toronto's Official Plan):
It is fairly well documented that communicating to transit riders how long they need to wait for the next train helps them feel like they're actually waiting less. The problem, it would seem, is the unknown.
This is akin to the pre-Uber days when you'd call for a taxi and then have no idea when it would actually show up. That used to feel like forever.
But what about if you communicate a schedule to riders and then it turns out to be a total lie? Well this is probably worse, because eventually, people will catch on to this. Also, you've just maximized the unknown.
Here is an interesting example of community activism. In 2021, Fabio Göttlicher -- a software engineer in Chicago -- started noticing that service levels on Chicago's Transit Authority (CTA) seemed to be declining.
I wrote a program that runs 24 hours a day that keeps tracking the live trains as they come into stations.
And then he discovered this:
What I found, when I first started in December 2021, was that the CTA was running only about 55 to 60 percent of the trains their schedule said they should be running. I started publishing the data in local Facebook groups for transit enthusiasts, on Reddit and other social media. That’s how Commuters Take Action started.
It's hard to think of a more frustrating scenario for transit riders.
Other than the mixed-use triangle wedged between Dundas West and the rail corridor, the area looks pretty similar to much of Bloor Street in this city: mixed-use along the major streets and low-rise neighborhoods everywhere else.
We know why this is the case; it is about maintaining the status quo. But it is a suboptimal way in which to try and create transit-oriented communities. We need more density, and we need to start thinking radially instead of linearly. So here's what a 500m walking radius looks like around Bloor-Dundas West and its two closest subway station neighbors:
The important thing to pay attention to in this diagram is all of the yellow that falls within each radius. This is land that ought to be zoned mixed-use, but that we have instead decided to make low-rise and single-use. If our objective is to create more walkable, sustainable, and vibrant transit-oriented communities, this is not the way.
Other than the mixed-use triangle wedged between Dundas West and the rail corridor, the area looks pretty similar to much of Bloor Street in this city: mixed-use along the major streets and low-rise neighborhoods everywhere else.
We know why this is the case; it is about maintaining the status quo. But it is a suboptimal way in which to try and create transit-oriented communities. We need more density, and we need to start thinking radially instead of linearly. So here's what a 500m walking radius looks like around Bloor-Dundas West and its two closest subway station neighbors:
The important thing to pay attention to in this diagram is all of the yellow that falls within each radius. This is land that ought to be zoned mixed-use, but that we have instead decided to make low-rise and single-use. If our objective is to create more walkable, sustainable, and vibrant transit-oriented communities, this is not the way.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
