Category: Travels

  • Another American streetcar, another disappointment

    Another American streetcar, another disappointment

    DC Streetcar eastbound on H Street

    In mid-November, I found myself in Washington DC, accompanying my spouse as she had multiple days of work-related meetings. While I spent part of my time visiting cities in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, I also visited several neighbourhoods in Washington itself. Among the things I wanted to see for the first time was the D.C. Streetcar, one of nearly a dozen systems built across the United States in the last two decades. I had already taken rides on modern streetcars in Atlanta, Detroit, Kansas City, Cincinnati, as well as Portland and Seattle, coming away mostly unimpressed — though Portland, Detroit, and Kansas City show some promise. Washington’s small implementation didn’t win me over either.


    I grew up in Brampton, a suburb of a city that maintained a large legacy streetcar fleet. Growing up, I thought streetcars were the greatest thing: big, smooth, quiet, gliding through some of Toronto’s most interesting neighbourhoods. I watched as the city expanded its street railway network along the waterfront and up Spadina Avenue before I had the opportunity to move to the big city.

    Living in Toronto, and reliant on the streetcars, I got to experience the highs and the lows of street railway operation: traffic congestion, bunching, diversions, bustitutions, but also the sweet late-night rides when the streetcar really felt like the king of the road. The new low-floor Flexity streetcars brought even larger vehicles, but they were subject to the same constraints as the smaller CLRVs.

    The TTC’s indifference to line management and the insistence on slow operation in the name of safety (without actually addressing problems like obsolete switches) made streetcar travel less magical with every passing year. But in Toronto, streetcars are still a workhorse, and there is still no easy way for buses to permanently substitute for the demand on routes like King Street.

    Visiting cities elsewhere in the world, like Vienna or Hiroshima, makes me realize that trams can and should work, something that Toronto has largely forgotten. Or something that American cities rediscovering the streetcar haven’t even figured out.

    Former D.C. Transit streetcar in the distinctive 1956-1962 Trans Caribbean Airlines colour scheme, at Seashore Trolley Museum in Maine

    Like all large American cities, Washington once had a robust streetcar network, with several private operators that consolidated into Capital Transit in 1933. Streetcars extended throughout the District and into Maryland suburbs, with separate companies providing service into Virginia’s sprawling suburbs until 1941.

    Within central Washington, streetcars were required by law to draw electric power from an underground conduit for aesthetic reasons, though outlying areas did not have this this obligation. Therefore, many streetcars in DC, including the modern PCC streetcars acquired in the 1930s and 1940s, had both overhead trolley poles and underbody current collectors.

    The last streetcar line in DC was abandoned in January 1962. Fourteen years later, the first section of the Washington Metro opened for service. Unlike the streetcars, the new Metro system was more of a regional service, reaching far out into the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. (Famously, the affluent and congested Georgetown area of Washington is not served by Metro, which was designed mainly as a commuter service.) Though bus service was consolidated throughout the region, there were parts of Washington left underserved by Metro and local bus. The District government began operating its own bus service, DC Connector, and began planning new streetcar services to serve traditionally underserved and rejuvenating neighbourhoods.


    Map of the proposed Phase I streetcar network. Only the thick red line was completed. 

    The first planned route would have connected Anacostia, a historic neighbourhood with a majority Black population, with the Metro and with the gentrifying Navy Yards district on the north side of the Anacostia River. At first, the new light rail would have followed a disused CSX freight spur line, but disagreements with the railroad and land title issues changed the route to a shorter, on-street alignment. After several false starts, work started in 2009 on a “demonstration line” between Anacostia Metro Station and Joint Base Anacostia–Bolling, a major military installation, with an extension to Minnesota Metro Station to follow.

    Looking east on Firth Sterling Ave SE with the tracks suddenly ending before Suitland Parkway. The abandoned CSX spur line right-of-way is on the right.

    Work was suspended indefinitely in 2010. Today, less than a mile of track remains abandoned in place.

    Looking west on Firth Sterling Ave SE toward Joint Base Anacostia–Bolling, where curb-side streetcar tracks installed in 2009-2010 are left abandoned

    An abbreviated 2.4 mile (3.9 km) H Street-Benning Road Line did open, however, in 2016, several years late. The route, which begins on the H Street overpass north of Union Station, extends east to Oklahoma Avenue, at a public park and sports complex north of the abandoned RFK Stadium. Service, which is currently fare-free, operates every 12 minutes during daytime hours. A parallel bus route, the X2 Benning Road–H Street Line, operates as frequently, but has a much longer route and is considerably faster.

    H Street, in the city’s east side, has long been a lower-income, majority Black neighbourhood, hit hard by disinvestment, civil unrest (especially after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968), crime, and depressed property values. But its proximity to the governmental, cultural, and commercial centres of the city made it an attractive corridor for redevelopment.

    A westbound streetcar shifts into the median on H Street on the way to Union Station

    Though Union Station is the western terminus of the short streetcar line, the connection to the Metro Red Line, Amtrak, MARC, and VRE trains is awkward. H Street is to the north of Union Station, crossing over the multitude of tracks leading into the station platforms on a long overpass. The streetcar stops halfway across, in the median. Passengers getting off the streetcar must walk further west on the median, then cross the eastbound lanes of H Street at a traffic signal controlling a driveway exit from the Union Station parking garage. A poorly marked sidewalk provides the connection into the parking garage (which also houses the Union Station intercity bus terminal) and down towards the main station building.

    The path from DC Streetcar, through a parking garage, towards Union Station

    Like most modern streetcar lines in the United States, the DC Streetcar runs in mixed traffic, in the outer driving lane. This allows for platform level boarding from the sidewalk at each stop, but it also leaves the streetcar susceptible to traffic delays due to congestion and from stopped cars and trucks. Though there are parking and layby spaces to the right of the streetcar track, a wide or improperly stopped vehicle can easily disrupt service. Streetcars regularly squeeze past properly parked delivery vans, as in the photo below.

    A streetcar squeezes past a stopped Amazon delivery van on H Street

    But new streetcar lines in North America are typically less about moving people than it is about sparking new urban development. On H Street, this has definitely happened. New mid-rise rental and condominium residential buildings line the western end, towards Union Station. A Whole Foods grocery store is at the base of one of those buildings, where previously, there was a parking lot and local grocery store.

    Streetcar passes a Whole Foods grocery store at the base of a mew seven-storey rental apartment building, northeast corner of H Street and 6th Street NE
    The same corner in 2008, with a neighbourhood grocery store on the northeast corner of H Street and 6th Street NE (Google Streetview)

    Still, I wonder how much the streetcar itself contributed to the gentrification of H Street. The streetscape is greatly improved, but streetcar ridership is low, despite the free fare. The close proximity to Union Station, government offices, and commercial areas, along with rezoning of vacant lots would have made a bigger impact. However, government investment on the corridor made it attractive for speculators and developers to assemble land and build.

    In the meantime, as rents skyrocket, crime remains a concern. New stores such as Whole Foods do not serve long-term residents and local businesses have been displaced. Like Whole Foods, the streetcar was designed to support the new community, while others continue to take the bus and shop at the Safeway on Benning Road.

    Looking east at H Street and 3rd Street, 2008 (Google Streetview)
    Looking east towards 3rd Street, November 2024

    If the H Street-Benning Road Streetcar was extended in both directions based on the original plans, it could prove to be a useful, albeit slow, transit service filling in one of the gaps left by the Washington Metro system. But as Washington struggles with its city budget, this is very unlikely. By the end of the year, the DC Circulator bus system will disappear for good, further orphaning the single short streetcar line operated by the District.

  • From Hamilton to Haldimand: a new transit link fills a major gap

    From Hamilton to Haldimand: a new transit link fills a major gap

    Southern Ontario Transit minibus in Dunnville, October 2024

    Earlier in October, I got to meet Rae Rivard, owner-operator of Southern Ontario Transit (SOT), a new intercity transit operator currently serving Hamilton and Haldimand County. The route, which launched on September 16th, offers three weekday round trips between Downtown Hamilton and Dunnville, serving the communities of Caledonia, Hagersville, and Cayuga.

    Haldimand County, along with the neighbouring Six Nations and Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation reserves, remained unserved by intercity or local bus services since the early 2000s; in 1990, United Trails operated a daily bus between Port Dover, Hagersville, Caledonia, and Hamilton. Cayuga and Dunnville were served by a Greyhound route on Highway 3 between Niagara and London. More recently, as Niagara Region was building a regional transit service and Norfolk County successfully applied for provincial funding for a new service between Simcoe and Brantford, Haldimand County refused to take part. Enter SOT.

    SOT, which charges a $10 one-way fare, operates without the support of the municipal government, and is unable to put up bus stop signs or actively promote its service at municipal facilities such as libraries or community centres. For this reason, ridership remains low, despite growing populations in Caledonia and Hagersville and convenient links to Hamilton Airport, Mohawk College, St. Joseph’s Hospital, and to GO Transit and HSR services.

    Rivard will tell you that “the primary challenge we face today is slow uptake. Due to a number of limitations and challenges currently out of our control, the number of regular and new riders trends up every week, but not as fast as we need to cover expenses…. Many of the limitations we are dealing with right now can easily be addressed at no expense, but these choices are out of our control.”

    Rivard reached out to businesses and social service organizations, but was turned away, adding that “the entire operation has been entirely funded out of me and my wife’s savings, and we are really struggling to keep up with expenses at this rate.”

    Without approved bus stop locations with curb access, SOT is not able to provide fully-accessible service, though it already has a wheelchair-accessible vehicle. The lack of physical bus stops and publicity has made it difficult to attract riders, though while riding with Rivard on a beautiful October afternoon, it was clear that a demand exists as several residents came up to the minibus to find out more information.

    My hope is that word spreads about this unique and essential operation and that the local communities provide the needed support to make this service work. If this initial route succeeds, SOT would like to expand service in Haldimand and take on other gaps in the Ontario network.

    At the Hamilton terminus, at Main Street and MacNab, across from the HSR terminal

    A new version of my Ontario Intercity Transport Map is now available

    I updated my Ontario Intercity Transport Map to add Southern Ontario Transit’s route. Commuter Connect in Northumberland County ended service not long after VIA Rail finally resumed its early morning train from Kingston to Toronto. East Zorra-Tavistock Transit in Oxford County did not last long either, and service there has ended.

    Added to the map:

    • Southern Ontario Transit between Hamilton, Caledonia, and Dunnville
    • Red Arrow’s daily Toronto-Western University express, which replaces its Toronto-Niagara Falls run
    • A new daily Flixbus route between Toronto, Hamilton, and St. Thomas
    • A new OnexBus route between London, Goderich, and Port Elgin, operating Friday through Monday
    • OnexBus’s London-Pearson Airport-Brampton route, which operates several trips a day
    • Ourbus’s Toronto-Ottawa route
    • Kasper’s daily Winnipeg-Kenora-Sioux Lookout service
    • Revisions to on-demand services in Niagara Region
    • Some revised routings and service levels across the province

    Removed from the map:

    • Commuter Connect in Northumberland County
    • East Zorra-Tavistock Transit
    • Kasper’s on-demand service to Red Lake/Balmerton

    Though it is good to see Bruce County — particularly rapidly growing Saugeen Shores — get another link, that part of Ontario is still poorly served; there should be daily services between larger Bruce County communities like Saugeen Shores, Kincardine, and Walkerton at least to Owen Sound and Hanover. Lindsay is also left without any intercity services, after TOK ended service from Toronto to Haliburton last year. where a Peterborough-Lindsay-Pontypool service, perhaps extending to Durham College/Ontario Tech University in Oshawa could prove to be a very useful route.


    If you like this post and you would like to help out with my online mapping and webhosting costs, consider buying me a coffee. Thank you!

  • Why transit system maps matter

    Why transit system maps matter

    I love maps, especially physical, paper maps. I like to visualize the places I travel to and determine how each city and region’s transit networks work. Though online interactive maps can be very helpful (like the ones I created to show all intercity transport services in Ontario and across Canada, filling a much-needed gap), there is still nothing like a well-designed static map, especially when it is in print and easily accessible to the public.

    This means providing maps that accurately and clearly depict the entire transit system, along with landmarks, connections, and frequency. Los Angeles Metro’s system map does a reasonable job for a map that covers a very large region.

    The Los Angeles Metro system map depicts the complex bus and rail network, including non-LA Metro agencies like Culver Citybus and Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus. Colours and line width used to denote operator, service type, and frequency.

    Thankfully, most urban transit systems in North America continue to provide proper system maps both on their websites and in print, provided free on request at subway booths or terminal offices. (Some, however, have charged a small fee for a physical copy of their transit maps, such as San Francisco’s Muni.) In Europe, complete transit maps often have to be purchased, such as in Berlin or Vienna.

    I recently visited two mid-sized American cities that have done away with physical maps for their transit systems: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Denver, Colorado. In those cities, figuring out how to get around by tram and bus was frustrating, even in an age of Google and Apple maps and transit planning apps accessible to anyone with a smartphone.

    Pittsburgh Regional Transit (formerly known as Port Authority Transit) operates a complicated web of bus routes that radiate from the city’s downtown core, along with a few cross-town and feeder routes. There are three busways and a light rail service to the southern suburbs. However, there is no proper system map, either in print or online as PDF or image file that allows the new or casual user to make sense of the network.

    Individual bus and LRT route schedules can be found under the Schedules tab on the PRT website, but one needs to know what route they are looking for. Under Rider Info, there is a link to a system map, but it takes the user to an ESRI interactive map.

    Screenshot of the system map page of the PRT website

    The user can then select a service by route name or number in a drop-down tool, but the map itself is difficult to figure out. Zooming in reveals the location of fare vendors and park-and-ride lots, but not important service details like route numbers or service frequency.

    Zooming in, park-and-ride lots become the most prominent feature

    Even at the neighbourhood level the map is difficult to read. The screenshot below shows Pittsburgh’s Oakland district, home to University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Mellon University, several other educational institutions, medical centres, parks, museums, and cultural venues. Many bus routes follow Forbes Avenue and Fifth Avenue, but as each route is layered on top of each other, it is difficult to discern where each route runs and where they go.

    PRT’s ESRI interactive system map, zoomed into the Oakland District

    Denver’s Regional Transportation District (RTD) also uses ESRI interactive maps to show bus routes (rail services are depicted in a static image map as well). At a small scale, only the light rail and commuter/regional rail services appear, along with transit park-and-ride locations. Denver’s bus system is less complicated than Pittsburgh, operating largely on a grid, but still, a proper map would make it much easier to get a sense of the network.

    RTD System Map zoomed out

    Zoom in, and bus routes appear, along with route numbers, but there is nothing to show the level of service for each route.

    Though online-only interactive maps have their purpose (my Ontario and Canada intercity maps are designed to show where connections exist, or not, and how to obtain schedule information), they are not well suited for urban transit systems and are very difficult to read on a mobile device. Properly designed static maps, in web image or PDF format do much better jobs.

    It is worth comparing Pittsburgh and Denver to the Toronto Transportation Commission (TTC). The TTC’s complete system map is provided to customers for free at subway stations, with smaller, simplified versions available as tear-away pamphlets. Large-format versions are also displayed across the network in bus shelters and subway stations. A PDF version can also be easily found on the TTC website in the main Routes and Schedules page. Surface routes are categorized by service level (express, frequent service, regular service, limited service, seasonal, and community routes) with major landmarks and transfer points to connecting services clearly indicated.

    I have some minor complaints about the TTC’s map (like regular routes, express routes should be categorized in the map based on their service levels, for instance) but it is a reasonable, easy to read map that is also quite easy to find.

    Unfortunately, more transit systems are moving away from easily accessible paper maps. Durham Region Transit, for example, no longer provides copies of its system map. Fortunately, a proper, well-designed PDF copy remains accessible on its website.

    When travelling, or looking to understand a city’s transit network though, there is nothing quite like poring through a well-designed, easy-to-read paper map. It would be a shame if more agencies went the way of Denver and Pittsburgh.

  • Travel by train (or bus): Denver’s renewed Union Station

    Travel by train (or bus): Denver’s renewed Union Station

    Denver’s Union Station, with the iconic “Travel by Train” neon signage

    Earlier this summer, I had the privilege of travelling with my spouse to California. We started in San Diego (where my partner was attending a conference) and then made our way northwards, to Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, San Simeon, and finally the San Francisco Bay Area. I continued my trip an extra three days to ride Amtrak’s California Zephyr train east through Nevada and Utah to Denver, Colorado.

    Looking south from the California Zephyr across the Colorado River near the Utah-Colorado border

    Besides the breathtaking scenery through eastern Utah and western Colorado, I wanted to visit Denver itself, including its Union Station.

    Denver’s Union Station was constructed in 1881 to serve the Denver Pacific Railway (the city’s connection to the Union Pacific transcontinental railroad at Cheyenne, Wyoming), as well as the Denver & Rio Grande, the Denver, South Park & Pacific and the Colorado Central Railroads. (Today, it is reached by tracks belonging to the Union Pacific or BNSF Railroads.) Renovated and expanded in 1914, one of the station’s most iconic features, rooftop neon signs beckoning customers to “Travel by train” were added in the 1950s, as interstate highways were being planned and constructed across the United States and air travel became more common.

    The station was nearly closed in the 1980s with only Amtrak’s Oakland-Chicago California Zephyr calling once a day in each direction. Passenger train facilities would have been moved to a small “Amshack” building outside of the downtown core, with the station building incorporated into a proposed new convention centre. (This proposal is similar to the fate of St. Louis’ Union Station, which was turned into a hotel, shopping, and entertainment centre, with the Amtrak station moved into a small building off-site.) Luckily, this never took place.

    Denver’s Regional Transit District (RTD) purchased the station in 2001, with a new master plan developed for the station property and the vicinity in 2002, approved by voters in 2004 as part of the “FasTracks” program. Denver’s light rail system was extended to Union Station in 2002, while the immediate area was redeveloped with midrise apartment and office buildings. The train platforms were rebuilt with a new canopy, meant to accommodate both Amtrak and proposed new commuter and regional rail services.

    Denver Union Station train platforms

    Connecting the historic Union Station building and train platforms with the LRT platforms two blocks north is a long underground bus concourse.

    Denver Union Station’s underground bus terminal

    The underground bus terminal serves local and regional RTD services, as well as Bustang, the State of Colorado’s intercity coach service. Bustang offers multiple daily bus services to cities such as Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Grand Junction, and Pueblo, connecting most of the state together. There are also seasonal ski buses from Denver, along with special runs for Denver Bronco games.

    Bustang service map

    There are also two free RTD bus services connecting Union Station with the rest of Denver’s downtown core: MallRide, a frequent, daily service along the 16th Avenue pedestrian mall (which was undergoing reconstruction in July 2024, and was on detour), and MetroRide, which operates during daytime hours on a parallel route.

    Splash fountains in the Union Station west plaza

    Union Station now hosts a boutique hotel, several restaurants and bars, a branch of a local bookshop chain, and includes amenities such as public art and a splash fountain outside its main entrance. Though the main lobby was undergoing minor renovations, it was clear how much work went into the project.

    Union Station lobby
    Take the A-Train
    Arriving at Denver International Airport

    Like Toronto’s Union Station, Denver offers an airport rail link, operating every 15 minutes most of the day. The electric A-Line train runs from Union Station, making 7 intermediate stops. With the exception of the airport itself, the A-Line operates within the regular RTD fare zone, with free transfers between connecting buses and trains.

    To enter or exit the airport station itself, occasional travelers must purchase a special $10 day pass (a standard day pass is $5.50), but that, of course, includes all rides taken before or after arriving at or departing from the airport. (By contrast, there are no transfers or fare discounts when connecting between UP Express and GO Transit, TTC, or suburban transit services.)

    Because of the additional stops and the long distance between Downtown Denver and the international airport (25 miles or 40 kilometres), the trip takes 37 minutes versus UP Express’ 25 minutes.

    Unfortunately, most RTD rail services, like the A-Line, follow existing or abandoned rail corridors. Though these routes offer limited obstructions to construction and allow for faster service than operating within roadways, they limit how much ridership can be generated by walk-on service. Even the Downtown Littleton station on the D-Line is distant from any commercial or residential uses, with a large commuter parking lot behind the historic station building.

    At least many RTD stations offer convenient bus transfers, which draw much of the ridership.

    The D-Line LRT at Littleton, Colorado

    A lot was done right at Denver Union Station, which is well served by local, state, and national rail and bus connections, and is serves well as a model for developing a good intermodal hub in a midsized city like Denver. There are certainly aspects that could be replicated at some GO Transit stations, such as Brampton, Port Credit, or Unionville, which are poised to become important intermodal hubs, such as great public spaces, easy connections between nodes, and complementary retail spaces. At Brampton in particular, much can be done with the small historic station building there to make it a centrepiece of a great downtown redevelopment.

    I am glad I visited Denver, and I am glad to have travelled by train.

  • A bus to St. Thomas, finally

    A bus to St. Thomas, finally

    Middlesex County Connect and “Local Motion” buses at St. Thomas, June 2024

    On Saturday, June 15, I took a trip that was not possible for over a decade: I went to St. Thomas, Ontario, without a car. This was possible because of one of several new intercity transit links that opened this year in Ontario, and I have updated my interactive map accordingly.

    (more…)
  • Transit museums’ transit dilemma

    The Pennsylvania Trolley Museum now features a new main entrance and exhibition hall, along with an on-street boarding area complete with vintage signage.

    While visiting Pittsburgh earlier in June, I also paid a second visit to the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum (PTM), located 45 minutes south of Downtown Pittsburgh in Washington PA. I had visited the museum a few years prior as part of a visit to the Pittsburgh area, but since then, a new section of the museum opened to the public, and there were additional cars in operation.

    While I went to PTM with a friend who planned to stick around until the evening, I planned to return to downtown Pittsburgh earlier in the afternoon. I found information on a local transit service operated by Washington County — called Freedom Transit — that ran a route to and from Pittsburgh that stopped not too far from the museum’s main entrance. That plan did not go well at all.

    It is an unfortunate irony that most North American transit museums have poor or non-existent transit access. There are historical reasons why this came to be, but some of the continent’s best transportation exhibitions are inaccessible to newer generations of transit fans, historians, and enthusiasts, many of which do not or cannot drive.

    Washington County Transportation Authority, or “Freedom Transit,” doesn’t offer much freedom
    (more…)
  • A walk to the ballpark

    Returning to Downtown Pittsburgh across the Roberto Clemente Bridge after the game and a fireworks display

    Earlier in June, a friend and I took a weekend road trip to Pittsburgh, a five-hour drive southwest of Toronto. On our first night there, we took in a ballgame at PNC Park, where the hometown Pirates hosted the Minnesota Twins.

    Though I do not follow the Pirates (who are in the National League) nor the Twins (who are in the AL Central), I was excited to take in a ballgame in Pittsburgh because I have heard about the park’s intimate confines, the great view of the Pittsburgh skyline, and the fireworks that follow certain Friday and Saturday night games. PNC Park lived up to the hype.

    Among the major North American sports leagues, Major League Baseball has the most significant differences between venues. Unlike hockey, basketball, soccer, and football fields, the dimensions of each playing surface vary considerably, as does the architecture. PNC Park was built in the retro-classic style similar to Baltimore’s Camden Yards; it opened in 2001. When the naming rights for the new publicly-financed stadium was purchased by local bank PNC, the city renamed the adjacent 6th Avenue Bridge for beloved Pirates player Roberto Clemente, a Hall of Famer and a humanitarian. That bridge is closed before and after each game to motor vehicles so that fans can walk and bike across the Allegheny River to and from downtown.

    Statue of Roberto Clemente located between the stadium and the bridge renamed in his honour. No statues of cable tycoons can be found here.

    The skyline view from behind home plate is spectacular, showcasing the most iconic buildings and some of the many bridges crossing the three rivers in the downtown area. With lots of washrooms, a wide concourse, and plenty of food and drink concessions, the stadium felt intimate, yet uncrowded. Lineups were always short, and where play wasn’t visible (such as in the washrooms), speakers played the radio broadcast. Ushers were very friendly and helpful as well.

    View from up behind home plate

    The game was followed by a 10-minute fireworks display, with the rockets launched off a barge in the Allegheny River.

    Finale of fireworks show

    Though transit access is quite good — there is a station one block away on Pittsburgh LRT’s North Shore extension — many fans walked part of the way home. Downtown parking garages — built for office commuters — provide much of the parking demand, so there are few surface parking spaces surrounding the stadium. Even the football stadium, a few blocks to the west, is mostly served by parking garages and another LRT station. Hotels, restaurants, museums, and apartments neighbour the two North Shore stadiums.

    Walkability and transit access are the key to fostering a great fan experience. Walkable stadiums promote safe, accessible, and sustainable travel to and from sports venues, and help support local businesses. Downtown locations have the advantage of having better transit access, existing parking facilities, and in the case of Pittsburgh (or Detroit, or Minneapolis), a downtown ballpark can be a point of civic pride, showing off the city to its inhabitants, and to a much larger audience.

    To see how your local sports venue ranks, visit my Story Map here.

  • Can you walk to City Hall?

    Can you walk to City Hall?

    Mississauga City Hall, one of the most walkable municipal buildings in Ontario

    In late March 2024, with a streak of mild, sunny days, I was eager to get outside and walk. As I have long been interested in local politics and planning issues, public transit, active transportation (especially walking advocacy), I thought I would try to get to every city, town, and township hall in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) without a car.

    This was a fun project, even if there were times I felt really frustrated at times by poor transit and long hikes. The highlight of my quest was a tour of Mississauga City Hall from Councillor Joe Horneck. Mississauga’s civic centre is one of Ontario’s most iconic — and walkable — government buildings.

    Mississauga Council Chambers

    Of the three levels of government (federal, provincial, municipal), the municipal level has the most impact on the day-to-day lives of most Canadians; it is also the closest level of government to all. Residents can depute at committee meetings, get meetings with their local councillor and city staff, and obtain building permits, marriage licenses, or pay bills at city and town halls. Therefore, they should be as accessible as possible, especially to those without cars.

    Only one GTHA town hall (Caledon) was completely inaccessible without a car, though several other town halls required long walks from the nearest transit stop, making them inaccessible to some residents. But I could get to Brock Township, the least-populated and most-rural municipality in the GTHA, thanks to Durham Region Transit’s On-Demand service, though I had some difficulty there.

    The complete list of GTHA city and town halls, along with photographs and a map can be accessed here.

    Preview of Story Map

  • A walk to the park? Ranking major league sports venues

    A walk to the park? Ranking major league sports venues

    Truman Sports Complex, Kansas City, Missouri. Kauffman Stadium (MLB Royals) on right, Arrowhead Stadium (NFL) on left. Kauffman Stadium has the lowest Walk Score in the league. Both sports venues have especially poor transit access, even for Kansas City.

    One of the best — or worst — experiences in North America can be going to see a ball or hockey game, concert, or other special event at a sports arena or stadium. Perhaps you want to make a day of it, taking in the city, going for a meal or drinks first and meeting up with friends or family. Or maybe you want just to park in a lot hours before game time and have a cookout.

    But the trip to and from that venue can make or break the experience. Does it involve hours in gridlock? Does it mean a long line in the outdoors for a shuttle bus? Or can it mean a short walk to a transit stop and quickly getting on your way?

    Target Field, in Downtown Minneapolis. Both light rail lines stop right next door.

    Last summer, I got to see the Toronto Blue Jays play at Target Field in Downtown Minneapolis. The Jays have a Canada-wide fan base, and the Twin Cities have the closest baseball venue to places like Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, and even Regina and Saskatoon. It felt like a home game with a very pro-Toronto crowd.

    Earlier that day, I noticed plenty of people wearing Jays hats and jerseys that were making the most of their road trip. They flooded local restaurants and bars. They checked out museums and the city’s signature parks. The Mall of America, at the other end of the Metro Blue Line LRT, was also full of Canadians. Minneapolis has a lively downtown, with very good bus and rail connections to the airport, the malls, St. Paul, and elsewhere.

    Walkability and transit access are the key fostering a great fan experience, for promoting safe, accessible, and sustainable travel to and from the venue, and for supporting local businesses. Though economists and urban experts will — rightly — dispute the economic benefits of subsidizing new sports stadiums, if they must be built, they should allow spectators to get around without a car as much as possible to reduce congestion, curtail impaired driving, and create a vibrant urban environment that everyone can enjoy.

    I used Redfin’s Walk Score tool to rank the venues of six major leagues in Canada and the United States: the CFL, MLB, MLS, NBA, NHL, and NFL; I also comment on their transit connections. Toronto’s three venues do very well, as do NBA/NHL venues in major cities like New York, Washington, and Los Angeles. Not surprisingly, football stadiums — especially NFL venues — do poorly.

    See the complete map and analysis on my ArcGIS StoryMap.

    Map of all major league sports venues in Canada and the United States
  • Can on-demand transit meet your demand?

    Can on-demand transit meet your demand?

    Durham Region Transit On Demand sedan

    Earlier in March, as part of my quest to visit every town, city, and regional government office in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) without a car, I took my first on-demand transit rides in a decade. This was necessary to visit Brock Township’s municipal offices, located in the village of Cannington, north of Port Perry. (I will discuss more about this project in the coming weeks.)

    Brock Township’s municipal offices, at right, sits in the heart of the village of Cannington

    Brock Township is the GTHA’s most rural and least populated municipality, home to just over 12,000. Until April 2023, GO Transit ran a daily bus service between Whitby GO Station, Port Perry, Cannington, and Beaverton (Brock’s largest community), but was cancelled after a ridership review. (GO has quietly cancelled several other bus routes that don’t cross county or regional boundaries in the last decade.) However, Durham Region Transit (DRT) offered an alternative: on demand transit.

    On-demand transit is not a new idea. In the 1970s, GO Transit operated experimental dial-a-bus services in suburban parts of Toronto, offering door-to-door service to and from the nearest subway station or a designated transfer point to frequent fixed-route bus services. In Bramalea, Chinguacousy Township operated Bramalea Dial-a-Bus, which brought residents to local employers, schools, and Bramalea City Centre. The service was replaced by fixed-route services when Brampton Transit was established shortly after amalgamation, merging the dial-a-bus operation and a privately contracted transit service in the old town of Brampton.

    Still image from “People on the GO,” a 1973 film by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communications. Bramalea’s Dial-a-Bus’ pink “lazy-b” logo was adopted by the successor transit agency, Brampton Transit during its first decade.

    “Trans-Cab” services continue to be used in outlying areas of communities such as Hamilton, Peterborough, and Sudbury, where transit agencies partner with local taxi companies to allow transit riders to begin or end their journey outside of urban or regional fixed-route areas, often at a premium fare.

    My first on-demand transit experience was taking Oakville Transit’s “zone bus” service in 2005. At the time, there was no fixed-route Sunday bus service in Oakville, but there were four zones for which you could call and request a ride, with a bus picking you up at the nearest bus stop. If your destination was in a different zone, you would transfer to another bus at Oakville GO Station. Today, Oakville offers on-demand service during late evenings from the Oakville GO Station and in new and outlying subdivisions where there are no nearby scheduled services.

    My other previous on-demand transit experience was in Winter and early Spring 2012, after I suffered a broken knee cap and had to rely on Toronto’s Wheel-Trans paratransit system. Though I was fortunate to be able to get around using Wheel-Trans during a temporary disability, it was often a frustrating experience trying to book trips, especially for social or leisure purposes. I quickly came to prefer the conventional system and used it as much as I could while recovering from that injury.

    A common message while trying to book rides on DRT On-Demand

    In 2024, there are over a dozen transit agencies providing on-demand transit services in Ontario and Quebec, either as standalone operations or in conjunction with fixed-route systems. You can find them in my interactive transport maps.

    Modern on-demand services, though they are typically accessed by mobile apps these days, present some of the same challenges, including cumbersome booking processes as well as high demand and limited availability for next-day and same-day trips.

    DRT offers on-demand transit trips for customers with disabilities (who are eligible for door-to-door service anywhere in the region), rural areas, and in designated urban areas (where pickups and drop offs are made at signed bus stops).

    DRT rural services, showing the rural on-demand service area and transfer points to fixed-route services (including GO buses at Downtown Uxbridge, Brock/407 and Clarington North)

    As Brock Township was the most distant and most difficult town hall in the GTHA to reach by public transport, I tried to book for the first day of my visits: Monday, March 11. After downloading the DRT app and inputting my information (name, email address, mobile phone number) I tried to book a return trip from Port Perry (which has a scheduled route connecting it to Uxbridge, Oshawa, and Whitby) the day before.

    At one point, I was able to get an outbound trip around 12:00 PM, but I could not get a return trip after multiple attempts. After failed attempts to book each ride, the app would go back to the beginning, requiring the user to input most of the same information multiple times. I gave up and went to northern York Region instead. After midnight, early Monday morning, when one could book trips for the following day, I tried again and managed to get a return trip that met my needs for Tuesday the 12th.

    Unable to book a return trip from Cannington to Port Perry for Monday, March 11, 2024

    Once I booked my trip, the rest of the experience was smooth. I got a text reminder of my upcoming trips, and on the app, I could track my upcoming ride, much like Uber or Lyft, with the driver’s name, vehicle description, and location. Each time, I paid with my Presto card, with DRT charging the same fare for on-demand as for conventional bus service. Drivers were professional and friendly. I was the only passenger for both trips, though they are often shared, and minibuses — such as accessible paratransit vehicles — are used for passengers with disabilities or larger groups.

    Notice of pickup

    I learned that the service could be quite busy and the app sometimes problematic — there is also a toll-free number that passengers can call, and that sometimes the telephone agent would be able to find matching rides that the app would not show.

    I was lucky that my trip was discretionary, but I could see how on-demand transit can be difficult and/or frustrating to use.

    Though DRT has restored most urban bus routes (many were suspended during pandemic-related restrictions), it still struggles to meet demand on its busiest corridors, especially those serving colleges and universities in Oshawa, Whitby, and Scarborough. A fire in one of DRT’s garages last summer hasn’t helped either. As a result, some urban areas in Ajax, Pickering, Whitby, and Bowmanville still have on-demand areas where fixed-route services have yet to be restored.

    On-demand transit has its place, especially in rural and outlying suburban areas, or during times of low demand. If done right, it provides affordable mobility to people who might otherwise go without, and as an alternative to driving a car or paying an expensive taxi fare for those with travel options. Durham Region has done a good job covering the entire region with fixed-route and on-demand services, especially at night, where the urban south enjoys 24-hour transit access.

    DRT overnight services, which includes two scheduled buses and five on-demand zones in the urbanized part of the region.

    Despite Durham’s efforts, on-demand services can be costly to operate, less flexible for prospective passengers, and be frustrating to use, though they can cover much larger areas than line haul routes. Scheduled, fixed-route buses offer predictable, simple, and often faster service than point-to-point bespoke services. On-demand transit has its place, but it is only one tool in a vast toolbox of mobility solutions. This was true in the 1970s and remains true today.