Saturday, February 4, 2012Partly Cloudy -1°C
City

Jan Gehl Inspires Toronto

Posted by Lisa Pasold / June 6, 2009

New York bikes BroadwayDanish urban planner extraordinaire, Jan Gehl, was at the Design Exchange on Wednesday, talking about public spaces for the 21st century.

Gehl is the powerhouse behind Melbourne's successful urban design strategy and he recently worked with New York City's radical Commissioner of Transportation Janette Sadik-Khan for the PlaNYC Initiative, including the new pedestrianization of Times Square. If you want clearly-stated, clearly-do-able urban design, Gehl is the man to listen to. And the city of Toronto is listening.

The old Toronto Stock Exchange was standing-room-only for Gehl's lecture. "I am a bit surprised that at 3 o'clock on an ordinary Wednesday, we can have half of Toronto at the Design Exchange," Gehl marvelled, getting to the podium.

Founder of Gehl Architects, and a retired Urban Design professor at Copenhagen's School of Architecture (at the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts), Gehl is an incredibly charming, articulate, and exuberant proponent of the walkable city. Starting out with praise for Jane Jacobs, Gehl has his audience wrapped around his practical fingers within seconds.

He credits his vision of the livable city to his wife - he claims that when he married, years ago, his psychiatrist wife demanded, "Why are architects not interested in people?"

So Gehl became interested in people. "Being sweet to people is really sweet to the economy," he says. (Hear that, Toronto City Council?) But how to be "sweet" to a city's inhabitants? According to Gehl, a sweet city is lively, attractive, safe, sustainable, and healthy. And we already know how to do this: limit cars, encourage bicycling, and create better outdoor public spaces so that people can walk on the streets of our city.

critical mass toronto

Gehl believes firmly in the built-a-better-mousetrap theory: if we make a city's core amazing, people will want to live there, and the city will thrive - economically, culturally, and architecturally. "Make the space good and they will come. I have not a single example of anywhere in the world where this is not true. When we provide places of good quality, people will come. Because there is nothing more interesting in the city than the people."

And he's not talking out of his hat: Gehl has been involved not only in making Copenhagen the amazingly walkable city that it is today, he's also been changing cities across Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Mexico, the U.S., China, and Saudi Arabia.Gehl signing books at DX

So how can we apply these ideas to Toronto? Unfortunately, in a city hampered by the ward system, where City Council seems unable to get out from its car wars, I just don't know how Toronto is going to put this into action. Our mega-city means suburban councillors all-too-often dictate downtown decisions.

Gehl stays away from directly criticizing our City plans. Instead, he focuses on success in other countries; his work in Melbourne seems particularly relevant to Toronto - our cities have similar built histories, sprawl problems, and public issues. But after a radical shift in outlook in 1994, Melbourne now has the most extensive tram system in the world and has "Copenhagen-ized" its downtown, making it pedestrian and bike friendly. It's also considered one of the best places to live on the planet.

"It's a matter of invitation," Gehl says. "Ever since the car rolled in, it is as if we've forgotten why it is we had cities... It is arbitrary, the level of traffic in each city. It is silly to add more roads, you'll only get more traffic." But the same equation means a city that gives more lanes to bikes and pedestrians will increase bikes and pedestrians. And increase quality of life. That's exactly the route New York has decided to go, with Gehl's help. "And New York, if you can do it there, you can do it anywhere," he half-sings.

But getting our city to budget for a big idea seems like a long pedal uphill. In a city where the tiny change of a bike lane on Jarvis causes City Council to erupt with charges of car hatred, I wonder how we're ever going to get to a 21st century approach to solving our problems. I wish Gehl could wave his practical Danish hand and get us a miracle.

UPDATE (June 23rd, 2009):
Jan Gehl's presentation has been archived on video and is now available for viewing on the Design Exchange web site.

Biking Broadway photo courtesy of Gehl Architects.
Photo of cyclists in Toronto by Leanne Eisen.

Discussion

20 Comments

Sean / June 6, 2009 at 12:25 pm
user-pic
Wonder when Miller will move to New York?
Lainey / June 6, 2009 at 01:40 pm
user-pic
Doesn't new york also have the worst traffic in the downtown part of manhattan? sorry for not using the correct geography lingo, I'm not a frequent visitor. That's all we need is the downtown of toronto being so much more hectic and undriveable than it currently is. Riding bikes to work everyday makes sense if 11 months out of the year you have wonderful weather. When you see only mediocre weather patterns for 3/12, it should be deemed useless.
Taimes / June 6, 2009 at 03:54 pm
user-pic
Not to mention that for anyone in Etobicoke, Forest Hill, North York, and the Beaches, biking will never be a viable means of transport to the office, no matter how many bike lanes are put in the dontown core. I forsee even longer commutes in my future.
Transituser / June 6, 2009 at 04:07 pm
user-pic
Hey Taimes, maybe biking will never be a viable means but transit is.
AC/DC / June 6, 2009 at 05:07 pm
user-pic
isn't that what miller wants? a transit city?
too bad the transit system is unbearable, there isn't even air conditioning on the spadina streetcar, and if anyone knows, the spadina streetcar in 30 degree weather is the absolute pits.
Ian / June 6, 2009 at 06:08 pm
user-pic
"Not to mention that for anyone in [...] the Beaches, biking will never be a viable means of transport to the office"

My father lives in the beaches and bikes downtown to work at least 3 days a week during the warm months; as did I when I lived there. The Martin Goodman Trail/Lakeshore path is a fine way to bike downtown from the Beaches, and Dundas isn't bad either.

Forest Hill seems like it would be just as possible, though I've never tried it. Perhaps this is a good idea for a bike trip.
Jer / June 6, 2009 at 07:38 pm
user-pic
too bad these pedestrian meccas are only viable 6-8 months a year and only truly enjoyable 3 months a year. Better solutions are partially enclosed, partly climate protected, pedestrian paths.
Luke / June 7, 2009 at 12:15 am
user-pic
Biking already is a viable means of transportation, and Toronto is wisely working to make it more viable. And I should add that I lived in Etobicoke for a year and biked to work at Spadina and Adelaide five days a week, even into November. It took about the same time as TTC or driving, and thanks to the path along the Humber river and the Martin Goodman trail, it was not only efficient but really enjoyable.
Bubba / June 7, 2009 at 01:31 am
user-pic
Gee I wonder how the city of Copenhagen does it considering they are further north than Toronto! They seem to manage and do it quite well with the "mediocre weather patterns for 3/12" and in a cold climate. People seem to forget that cities are about people not cars. If it were up to me downtown Toronto would have tolls on fossil fuel powered cars, and SUV's would have a premium toll to subsidize bike lanes and improve transit. Bike usage in Toronto has been on the increase the past few years, and it's going to keep going in that direction as more people start to live in the city core. And as far as the 905 tourists are concerned the can park their big gas guzzling SUV crossover cars at the GO station and take the train into the city.
To Bub / June 7, 2009 at 01:49 pm
user-pic
SO should there be a biking tax as well? I think it's only fair that these people should have one, seeing as greedy Miller has found a way to tax any other person or thing, why not tax those people who ride on bikes? We need to pay for all these street developments, reducing lanes from 2 to one, somehow, and seeing drivers don't benefit from bike lanes at all, it's only fair that bikers are the ones to get taxed for these advances. The difference between copenhagen is that we're in fucking canada. get over it, and stop trying to have toronto be some nouveau european city, let alone Manhattan. lets look at some numbers -
Area [1][2]TOronto
- City 630 km2 (243.2 sq mi)
- Urban 1,749 km2 (675.3 sq mi)
- Metro 7,125 km2 (2,751 sq mi)
Area [2]Copenhagen
- Urban 455.61 km2 (175.9 sq mi)

Wikipedia the facts, copenhagen has less people living in the city - about half a million, whereas toronto has almost 3 million people in the downtown urban area ALONE. You cannot even compare the two when the situations are completely different. It's not like we're dealing with some tiny area, its a HUGE area with more people. How about instead of using tax dollars to benefit a small number of people who ride bikes to work for whatever reasons- incomes, environment, speed, etc. and put that money elsewhere where it benefits more people, i don't know like back in public schools, or helping at risk kids or homeless on the street. It just doesn't make sense what Miller is trying to make Toronto, besides crumbling at the seams. There's a reason why drivers hate cyclists because you guys dont believe the rules apply to you. So many times have a seen a biker ride through red lights, and do plenty of things that a driver would get charged for. I only hope if cyclists get their dream land, you get the same rules as drivers.
Rob replying to a comment from Taimes / June 7, 2009 at 03:13 pm
user-pic
You're missing the point. Read up on most of these cities and you'll find that outside of the downtown core, much of the cycling infrastructure is focused on getting people TO transit stations.

So while "for anyone in Etobicoke, Forest Hill, North York, and the Beaches, biking will never be a viable means of transport to the office" is largely true, if you shift your focus to a quick hop to the local subway or GO station, it suddenly becomes very possible. . .
Eric replying to a comment from To Bub / June 7, 2009 at 11:04 pm
user-pic
3 million people living in the downtown urban area alone? Please, check your facts or watch your terminology.

Last time I checked the 2006 Census from statscan, Toronto (city) only has 2.5 million residents; and that's from Steeles to the lake, Hwy 427 to the Rouge.

Another thing, cyclists are bound by the Highway Traffic Act already; the only problem is that it's not strictly enforced or widely known. There are law-abiding cyclists and drivers, just as there are violators on both sides. Let's not point fingers too quickly and shift blame around.
Bradley Wentworth replying to a comment from To Bub / June 8, 2009 at 12:34 am
user-pic
To Bub wrote: "drivers don't benefit from bike lanes at all". Actually, drivers probably benefit the most from bike lanes. Do cyclists just appear like mushrooms? No, they are people going places, and if they did not ride their bikes, they could well be in cars clogging up road space further. In most places, even without bike lanes, there's plenty of room for a car and a bike to share the lane. The majority of trips in this city do not require 1.5 tons of aluminum and plastic driven by an engine whose efficiency comopared to human muscle is laughable. Encourage more cycling with bike lanes and you create more space for the remaining cars.

Statistics Canada reported that in 2006 most people in the Toronto CMA (which includes far-flung suburbs like Oakville and Markham) live less than 10km away from their usual place of work; admittedly any commute will be longer than the "as the crow flies" distance. Still, these trips are or can be possible by bike.

My point is an argument of space: cars take up more of it. If a lot more people cycled, there would be a lot less traffic gridlock. I agree that cyclists need to stop breaking the laws; once cycling has reached a critical mass, make sensible laws to govern them, install bicycle signals at EVERY intersection (as Paris has done), and then crack down.

One last point: parking. Bike rings take away sidewalk and hence pedestrian space. Once a cyclist gets to her destination, she disappears out of the car-world. Next time you're driving, To Bub, count up all the bikes you see and imagine the number of extra parking spots necessary if they had driven instead.
Harry / June 8, 2009 at 08:42 am
user-pic
@Lisa

I studied with Jan Gehl (forty years ago) and then brought him to Kingston, Ontario to review a waterfront development scheme. So .... the problem isn't the ward system in Toronto (etc. etc. etc.) The problem with Toronto is simple.

Not one traffic engineer, not one urban planner, not one landscape architect, not one architect in Toronto (and the rest Canada) has the required skill sets needed to redesign the inner core of City of Toronto.

Moreover, not one politician on Toronto's Council has the required skill sets to make decisions on the redesigning the inner core of the City of Toronto.

There is only one person who has the required skill sets; his name is Jan Gehl! That's why he has been hired to redo the inner city cores of London, UK, New York, NY and a long list of cities around the world. It's really that simple, Gehl has to be hired by Mayor Miller. After all Gehl is the Gretzky of city design.
rolex replica / June 9, 2009 at 03:15 am
user-pic
Gehl is the powerhouse behind Melbourne's successful urban design strategy and he recently worked with New York City's radical Commissioner of Transportation Janette Sadik-Khan for the PlaNYC Initiative, including the new pedestrianization of Times Square.
Harry / June 26, 2009 at 12:39 pm
user-pic
Some (many?) people seem to mis-understand what Jan Gehl does when he re-designs any city and then implements the required progressive changes. The BIKINIZATION of a city, represents only 20% of what Gehl does when he completes his magical transformations. It’s the PEDESTRIANIZATION, that is the focus of Gehl’s transformations.

At the same time there appears to be a mis-understnding by many of what outcomes Gehl is after when he PEDESTRIANIZES any city. Most people think (including landscape architects, “urban planners” and politicians) that PEDESTRIANIZATION is all about people walking - going from point A to point B, to go to work , to go shopping or to go to visit. But anyone who thinks that’s the case is missing the entire point of PEDESTRIANIZATION. Although every Italian teenager understands PEDESTRIANIZATION (they call it PASSEGGIATA).

PEDESTRIANIZATION is all about NOT GOING: but to STAYING! Translation, it’s all about loitering, hanging out, and going nowhere. That’s the mark of a great livable city; having lots of space for people to loiter, hang out, and go nowhere! Those spaces are; sidewalks, squares, promenades, and esplanades. The latter are example of PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. Another term that many mis-understand.

Some Toronto artists and writers think that the ballroom at the Gladstone Hotel is a GREAT example of PUBLIC OPEN SPACE (I don’t know whether to laugh or cry!)

Gehl has 40 years of research to show that it is easy to destroy what little PUBLIC OPEN SPACE is available in most cities. Toronto is a prime example of the latter; both in having very little PUBLIC OPEN SPACE to begin with, and then destroying what little PUBLIC OPEN SPACE there is.
Leather Handbag / January 28, 2010 at 02:58 pm
user-pic
Well, Toronto is over 5 times the population of Copenhagen, so you are going to have to lay a lot of infrastructure to get comparable. Don't get me wrong, Toronto is doing some great things. I'm just not sure this is a good comparison and probably would not repeat it as a statistic.
traveler / April 12, 2010 at 07:23 am
user-pic
I'm sure that Jan Gehl is a highest level professional and all he does is okay
Lakshika weerasinghe / August 22, 2010 at 02:09 am
user-pic
i really like his ideas...he was a person who did everything for people in designing a city. what he says is the reality.
i like his ideas. im a town planning undergraduate student. his ideas are more helpful me.
Home improvement / August 23, 2010 at 09:30 am
user-pic
Gehl is the type of urban planner we need a lot more of in this world – concerned about humanising spaces, creating areas that are friendly for people, reducing auto-dependency, and above all – looking to make our cities nicer places to be in: surely what all urban planner should aspire to.

Add a Comment

Other Cities: VancouverMontreal