Now that a car seat lives permanently in the backseat of my car and I have learned how much it compresses the passenger seat in front of it, I have on more than one occasion thought to myself, "I guess this is why people feel the need to buy bigger cars." And the data shows this is true: cars generally keep getting bigger.
A brand-new report from Transport & Environment found that over the last 25 years in the EU, the UK, and Norway, the average newly-sold car has increased in length by 1.2 cm per year, in height by 0.5 cm per year, and in width by 0.5 cm per year.
But it's not necessarily because buyers are looking to fit more kids and car seats. Average household sizes have fallen in the US, so it's similar to housing: people are having fewer kids and, therefore, want to consume bigger homes (and cars). My cursory understanding is that there tends to be some gamesmanship with car sizes and emissions targets, but I do also think it's a case of consumers just wanting bigger and better.
For those of us who deal in the built environment, this is an important trend to consider because larger cars (1) tend to kill more pedestrians and (2) take up more space in our cities. The report estimates that, if current trends continue, European cities could lose between 8.5 and 14% of their on-street parking spaces by 2040.
Small marginal changes of only a few centimetres may not seem material on an individual basis, but when you layer on pedestrian deaths, urban parking constraints and traffic congestion, it only strengthens the case for the Tokyo model of urbanism.
Cover photo by Oleksandr Voloshchenko on Unsplash
Slides from Transport & Environment
It's that time of year again. Monocle just released its annual survey of the most liveable cities in the world.
If you're a regular follower of the magazine and/or its quality-of-life survey, you'll know that North American cities don't generally fare well in this ranking. This year, the only one to appear is Vancouver. You'll also know that there are some usual suspects that appear near the top (here comes the spoiler). This year's top city is Tokyo.
One of its standout features, yet again, is its liveability and orderliness despite being one of the largest urban regions in the world. But there's also talk about some of its grandiose city-building initiatives, one of which includes the new Takanawa Gateway City.
The 13-hectare (32-acre) development is a transformation of a former rail yard in south Tokyo into what is being called a futuristic "global gateway." The megaproject includes retail, office, hotel, residential, and cultural uses, plus a 1.1-kilometre elevated pedestrian promenade that stitches it all together.
There are also autonomous mobility devices called "iino" that actively roam the district and offer pedestrians free, futuristic rides. Here's a video and an image from JapanStation:
We talk a lot on this blog about Tokyo's granular, small-scale urbanism. But obviously the city also builds big, though it's not exactly what you'd find in other cities. For one thing, the development is vertical in a way that is difficult to achieve outside of cities like Tokyo.
Here's a comprehensive walking tour of the district. At 42:02, you'll see a rooftop public space that is extremely well used, especially given that the development only recently opened. I also find it remarkable that so many people in the video have taken their shoes off to use the free, public foot bath.
Could you imagine doing that in your city? It's perhaps a perfect example of how Tokyo miraculously pulls off being both big and liveable.
Cover photo by Tsuyoshi Kozu on Unsplash
Toronto Pearson Airport has just announced a $3 billion investment called LIFT, which stands for Long-term Investment in Facilities and Terminals. (This feels like a "how do we make this acronym work" kind of name.) The investment includes an upgraded baggage system, an expansion of the airfield to 2.2 million square metres, and a bunch of new tech.
Following this, the plan is to refresh Terminals 1 and 3, and look for opportunities to create some net-new terminal space. And when it's all said and done, the program is expected to grow the airport's capacity to about 65 million passengers per year by the early 2030s.
My first reaction when I read the announcement was, "Great, let's make Pearson better." My second reaction was, "Why only 65 million passengers? Why not 100 million or even 125 million?" (Side note: I love airports and I think it would be a lot of fun to design and/or work on one.)
For those of you who are curious, here are the top 10 busiest airports in the world by annual passenger volume (according to Gemini):
My follow-up question to Gemini was my second reaction: Why not target 100 million passengers? The response I got was, "Yeah, well, the airport is physically constrained and simply doesn't have the room for this kind of volume." So then I asked it to give me the land area in both acres and square kilometres for the same list of airports:
The obvious question: If Tokyo and London can achieve close to 100 million passengers on less than 4,000 acres, why can't Toronto? Gemini then said, "Okay, yeah, I guess it might be possible," but then gave a number of reasons why it's currently more challenging; everything from the layout of the runways to the high percentage of origin & destination travel over connecting flights.
I frankly don't know enough about the operations of international airports to comment intelligently, but at the end of the day, the LIFT program is fundamentally about densifying the existing airport lands and unlocking additional capacity. And that's what it will take to eventually get to 125 million!