B
bizorky
Guest
^Maybe because Toronto is a larger city in terms of square kilometres.
|
|
|
B
Bogtrotter
Guest
They're supposedly to scale.
R
roch5220
Guest
Toronto's subway resembles ................ more of a commutter network, and ........... only getting worse. So much for downtown coverage.
The metro is more extensive for downtown coverage, however, as a system as a whole (including surface routes) the TTC is much better, especially as most surburban stations in Toronto have direct access to surface routes in station vs that of Montreal. Transfers from buses to the subway at busy surburban intersections in Montreal is quite inconvient.
The metro is more extensive for downtown coverage, however, as a system as a whole (including surface routes) the TTC is much better, especially as most surburban stations in Toronto have direct access to surface routes in station vs that of Montreal. Transfers from buses to the subway at busy surburban intersections in Montreal is quite inconvient.
O
Oliver Tweed
Guest
Why the hell is everything impossible because of our cash-strapped system? Let's fix the f***ing system then. How is Montreal able to build and we aren't?
D
doady
Guest
This kind of statement is just as bad as anything in the articles in the first post. Montreal has more stations in the suburbs than Toronto does; this is a fact. Just because there is an extension to Vaughan doesn't mean anything cuz of most the system is still built along established corridors: Bloor, Danforth, Yonge, Sheppard... it is nothing like a commuter network.
E
Ed007Toronto
Guest
Quebec never elected Mike Harris.
B
Bogtrotter
Guest
"The metro is more extensive for downtown coverage, however, as a system as a whole (including surface routes) the TTC is much better, especially as most surburban stations in Toronto have direct access to surface routes in station vs that of Montreal. "
Yeh- suburban transport in Toronto is much better. MTL is expanding commuter rail service which should improve things however. It's commuter rail was pretty bad. Suburban bus trips are no worse than here IMO.
MTL system had massive government funding as well in anticipation of the World's Fair and Olympic games. It's a more dense system within the city centre with better coverage to toursit and business sectors. I particularly like the cavernous stations, BUT it hasn't actually grown much in recent decades either. I'm not entirely sure but i think Montreal gets more funding from the Quebec governement- which in turn probably gets more funding from the Federal governemnt
I've read that TO's system is the most underfunded in NA, which is why I suspect it takes a decade or more to save the cash for any kind of expansion -even if it's just a couple of stations. It's weird that ridership is down especially considering how fast the population is growing. I know money from the Feds is how some large US cities have accomplished major expansions. How does Paris, Marseille, Stockhom, Milan etc get funding for their extensive subway systems?
Yeh- suburban transport in Toronto is much better. MTL is expanding commuter rail service which should improve things however. It's commuter rail was pretty bad. Suburban bus trips are no worse than here IMO.
MTL system had massive government funding as well in anticipation of the World's Fair and Olympic games. It's a more dense system within the city centre with better coverage to toursit and business sectors. I particularly like the cavernous stations, BUT it hasn't actually grown much in recent decades either. I'm not entirely sure but i think Montreal gets more funding from the Quebec governement- which in turn probably gets more funding from the Federal governemnt
I've read that TO's system is the most underfunded in NA, which is why I suspect it takes a decade or more to save the cash for any kind of expansion -even if it's just a couple of stations. It's weird that ridership is down especially considering how fast the population is growing. I know money from the Feds is how some large US cities have accomplished major expansions. How does Paris, Marseille, Stockhom, Milan etc get funding for their extensive subway systems?
R
roch5220
Guest
Well, that all depends on what you consider downtown. I would accept the argument that Montreal's current and planned extensions service the suburbs and not adding downtown coverage, but its quite obviously however you slice it that Toronto's coverage downtown is lacking vs. Montreal's. Now, based upon argument's sake, you use the # of stations based upon a set enclosed areas, then maybe Toronto has more stations, but that does not = better coverage.
Also, if someone not familiar with Toronto or Montreal, and you compare maps, and you asked them to guess if they were looking at a subway map or a commutter map, I'm sure you would have a higher hit rate with Toronto's looking like a commutter. Even comparing Toronto's map with the others in that website link comparing other system maps, Toronto's does look like the outlier vs other systems that focus more on central city/core/ring type systems. Where cities, with the possible exceptions of Chicago's, focus on central city coverage, Toronto's definately has a greater surburban reach. Then again, comparing Toronto to more european/asian type cities that have great densities could be also a contributor.
D
Degnaw
Guest
As bad as it is, the only way for the TTC to get ANY funding for a subway extension is if other municipalities care about it, namely, the 905. If it was a queen/drl line, the 905 would definately not help fund in and the project would go nowhere. Clearly, its stupid.In Toronto there seems to be the idea that the subway needs to be GO-style commuter rail. That's why dense areas of the city get LRT and fields in Vaughan gets a subway extension.
T
TdotTrickyRicky
Guest
^That is certainly the current reality but if we think outside the box for a second the fact 905 needs to even be a player to initiate subway funding is a sign of a disfunctional system.
W
wyliepoon
Guest
For whom the road tolls
Lawrence Solomon
National Post
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Traffic congestion costs Toronto an estimated $1.8-billion a year, and a poll of business leaders this month said fixing it should be the new city council's first priority. In the final instalment of a four-part series, Lawrence Solomon argues that toll roads are not part of the solution -- they are the entire solution.
Three years ago, with urban road tolls working brilliantly in London, Toronto mayoralty candidate David Miller mused that tolling promised to be advantageous for Toronto, too. His rivals pounced on his statement and Miller meekly recanted. Road tolls held no promise after all, he decided, if they threatened his candidacy.
How does play-it-safe Mayor Miller feel about road tolls today? ''I don't believe they're the right solution for Toronto,'' he answers, adding that he has thought long and hard about toll roads over the past three years.
Does Miller pooh-pooh the successes that London and other cities have had -- an end to gridlock, increased transit use, less pollution -- all because of tolling?
Well, then, I ask, would he consider the more sophisticated system for Toronto? ''[That's] not on my agenda,'' Miller says, ending the conversation. ''You have my position.''
It's hard to blame Miller for his caution. The last thing a politician wants, as he's seeking re-election, is a political wrong turn that could give his election rivals an opening. Although public opinion polls show Miller comfortably in the lead, his lacklustre leadership also makes him vulnerable: According to a Toronto Star/Decima poll released last month, Miller has a modest 53% approval rating, including only 17% who are ''very satisfied'' with him.
What does Jane Pitfield, Miller's chief opponent, think of roads tolls? ''I'm fundamentally opposed,'' she blurts, quickly re-blurting that she would consider letting the public decide the issue through a referendum, but (blurt #3) ''not at this time.'' Moreover, she says adamantly, Toronto should adopt the best practices from around the world, and if road tolls turned out to make sense for Toronto, she'd be all for them.
While Pitfield drives off in all directions, and Miller steers clear of controversy, Toronto's traffic worsens, harming the economy and the environment. Cities with courageous leaders, in contrast, see solutions to traffic and their civic leaders see electoral success.
No civic leader has been more courageous than ''Red'' Ken Livingstone, London's radical mayor, who ran for office in 2000 on what many considered a suicidal pledge to toll private vehicles entering downtown London. To the amazement of a press and political establishment that mocked his campaign, Londoners took his arguments to heart and voted him in. The concept then proved so successful -- within a year trips by car declined 30% while those by bicycle rose by 20%, by taxi 20%, and by public transit 23% -- that Livingstone ran for re-election four years later on a vow to extend the tolling system. Londoners re-elected him.
Stockholm and its mayor went down a more circuitous road. There, left- leaning Social Democrat Mayor Annika Billstrom ran for office in 2002 pledging to avoid road tolls, then overwhelmingly unpopular with the public. The national government, also led by Social Democrats, thought otherwise: Over her fierce opposition, it forced tolling on Stockholm in what became known as the Stockholm Trials, a seven-month test period from Jan. 1 of this year to July 31. After Stockholm residents had experienced the toll system first hand, they would deliver their verdict in a referendum on election day, Sept. 17.
As soon as the Trials began, and the benefits of tolling began to sink in, public opposition began to change. By June, a majority in the city had swung in favour of the tolling. By the end of the trials, only 40% of Stockholm residents opposed the toll and the merits of tolling had become so clear that even in Stockholm's suburbs, where the opposition to road tolling had raged most, the public became evenly split -- 46% for and 46% against. The public sentiment in favour of the trials was cemented on Aug. 1, one day after the Trials ended, when Stockholm's streets once again become congested.
Needless to say, along the way Mayor Billstrom became a fierce advocate of the tolling system, and ran for re-election as its champion.
On Sept. 17, Stockholm residents voted to make the tolls permanent. They also voted Billstrom out of office.
The change in public attitudes towards tolls follows the facts on the ground. Facing a charge of 10 to 20 kronors ($1.50 to $3) to pass an electronic toll gate during weekdays between 6:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., some 100,000 drivers per day decided to make lifestyle changes. Traffic declined by 22%, travelling speeds for buses and cars in the inner city increased between 30% and 50%, public transit use increased by 9%, and emissions decreased by 10% to 14%. A cross-city rush-hour trip that once took two hours, compared to 30 minutes in off-peak hours, took less than 45 minutes during the Stockholm Trials. As a side benefit, traffic injuries dropped by 10%.
In Stockholm, as in London, previous attempts at alleviating traffic congestion proved futile. The latest instance occurred several months before the trials began, when the city added 200 new buses to its fleet, boosted the number of rush-hour trains and express bus routes it operated, and installed 1,800 new park-and-ride places at stations. The expenditure -- some $200-million -- would have been largely wasted had the Trials not increased demand for public services: The additional transit facilities had next to no effect on the number of cars on the streets.
Other traffic-reduction measures, such as bicycle lanes and sky-high gasoline taxes, also accomplished little. Gasoline taxes were also counter-productive in fighting gridlock because they penalized vehicles that are part of the solution -- including private automobiles that relieve congestion by operating on uncongested streets.
Once targetted tolls came into place, drivers had meaningful choices. Some shifted their commutes and shopping trips to different times of the day, when the streets were less congested and the tolls lower; others arrived before 6:30 a.m. or left after 6:30 p.m., to avoid the toll altogether. Others changed their routes to avoid areas subject to tolls, or put off trips that could just as easily wait. Some shared rides with others to also share the cost; still others switched to taxis or public transit or bicycles or walked. With the price signal directing traffic, almost everyone became savvier about where and when they would travel.
The savviness grows around the world. It is now the policy of the European Union government to electronically toll roads throughout the EU. In the U.K., where even rural roads are slated to be tolled by 2014, the next Queen's Speech to Parliament is expected to discuss road tolling. In Milan, road tolling trials begin in 2007. In New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is soon expected to unveil a historic plan for modernizing the city, with tolling as a centrepiece. Around the world, more than 100 cities are studying how best to implement tolls.
Toronto, David Miller would have us believe, is a special case not suited to tolling. Trust me, he says, ''I've thought about this for three years.''
LawrenceSolomon@nextcity.com
Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute, a division of Energy Probe Research Foundation. He is also a director of PEMA, a non-profit with patents on electronic toll road technology.
Lawrence Solomon
National Post
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Traffic congestion costs Toronto an estimated $1.8-billion a year, and a poll of business leaders this month said fixing it should be the new city council's first priority. In the final instalment of a four-part series, Lawrence Solomon argues that toll roads are not part of the solution -- they are the entire solution.
Three years ago, with urban road tolls working brilliantly in London, Toronto mayoralty candidate David Miller mused that tolling promised to be advantageous for Toronto, too. His rivals pounced on his statement and Miller meekly recanted. Road tolls held no promise after all, he decided, if they threatened his candidacy.
How does play-it-safe Mayor Miller feel about road tolls today? ''I don't believe they're the right solution for Toronto,'' he answers, adding that he has thought long and hard about toll roads over the past three years.
Does Miller pooh-pooh the successes that London and other cities have had -- an end to gridlock, increased transit use, less pollution -- all because of tolling?
Well, then, I ask, would he consider the more sophisticated system for Toronto? ''[That's] not on my agenda,'' Miller says, ending the conversation. ''You have my position.''
It's hard to blame Miller for his caution. The last thing a politician wants, as he's seeking re-election, is a political wrong turn that could give his election rivals an opening. Although public opinion polls show Miller comfortably in the lead, his lacklustre leadership also makes him vulnerable: According to a Toronto Star/Decima poll released last month, Miller has a modest 53% approval rating, including only 17% who are ''very satisfied'' with him.
What does Jane Pitfield, Miller's chief opponent, think of roads tolls? ''I'm fundamentally opposed,'' she blurts, quickly re-blurting that she would consider letting the public decide the issue through a referendum, but (blurt #3) ''not at this time.'' Moreover, she says adamantly, Toronto should adopt the best practices from around the world, and if road tolls turned out to make sense for Toronto, she'd be all for them.
While Pitfield drives off in all directions, and Miller steers clear of controversy, Toronto's traffic worsens, harming the economy and the environment. Cities with courageous leaders, in contrast, see solutions to traffic and their civic leaders see electoral success.
No civic leader has been more courageous than ''Red'' Ken Livingstone, London's radical mayor, who ran for office in 2000 on what many considered a suicidal pledge to toll private vehicles entering downtown London. To the amazement of a press and political establishment that mocked his campaign, Londoners took his arguments to heart and voted him in. The concept then proved so successful -- within a year trips by car declined 30% while those by bicycle rose by 20%, by taxi 20%, and by public transit 23% -- that Livingstone ran for re-election four years later on a vow to extend the tolling system. Londoners re-elected him.
Stockholm and its mayor went down a more circuitous road. There, left- leaning Social Democrat Mayor Annika Billstrom ran for office in 2002 pledging to avoid road tolls, then overwhelmingly unpopular with the public. The national government, also led by Social Democrats, thought otherwise: Over her fierce opposition, it forced tolling on Stockholm in what became known as the Stockholm Trials, a seven-month test period from Jan. 1 of this year to July 31. After Stockholm residents had experienced the toll system first hand, they would deliver their verdict in a referendum on election day, Sept. 17.
As soon as the Trials began, and the benefits of tolling began to sink in, public opposition began to change. By June, a majority in the city had swung in favour of the tolling. By the end of the trials, only 40% of Stockholm residents opposed the toll and the merits of tolling had become so clear that even in Stockholm's suburbs, where the opposition to road tolling had raged most, the public became evenly split -- 46% for and 46% against. The public sentiment in favour of the trials was cemented on Aug. 1, one day after the Trials ended, when Stockholm's streets once again become congested.
Needless to say, along the way Mayor Billstrom became a fierce advocate of the tolling system, and ran for re-election as its champion.
On Sept. 17, Stockholm residents voted to make the tolls permanent. They also voted Billstrom out of office.
The change in public attitudes towards tolls follows the facts on the ground. Facing a charge of 10 to 20 kronors ($1.50 to $3) to pass an electronic toll gate during weekdays between 6:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., some 100,000 drivers per day decided to make lifestyle changes. Traffic declined by 22%, travelling speeds for buses and cars in the inner city increased between 30% and 50%, public transit use increased by 9%, and emissions decreased by 10% to 14%. A cross-city rush-hour trip that once took two hours, compared to 30 minutes in off-peak hours, took less than 45 minutes during the Stockholm Trials. As a side benefit, traffic injuries dropped by 10%.
In Stockholm, as in London, previous attempts at alleviating traffic congestion proved futile. The latest instance occurred several months before the trials began, when the city added 200 new buses to its fleet, boosted the number of rush-hour trains and express bus routes it operated, and installed 1,800 new park-and-ride places at stations. The expenditure -- some $200-million -- would have been largely wasted had the Trials not increased demand for public services: The additional transit facilities had next to no effect on the number of cars on the streets.
Other traffic-reduction measures, such as bicycle lanes and sky-high gasoline taxes, also accomplished little. Gasoline taxes were also counter-productive in fighting gridlock because they penalized vehicles that are part of the solution -- including private automobiles that relieve congestion by operating on uncongested streets.
Once targetted tolls came into place, drivers had meaningful choices. Some shifted their commutes and shopping trips to different times of the day, when the streets were less congested and the tolls lower; others arrived before 6:30 a.m. or left after 6:30 p.m., to avoid the toll altogether. Others changed their routes to avoid areas subject to tolls, or put off trips that could just as easily wait. Some shared rides with others to also share the cost; still others switched to taxis or public transit or bicycles or walked. With the price signal directing traffic, almost everyone became savvier about where and when they would travel.
The savviness grows around the world. It is now the policy of the European Union government to electronically toll roads throughout the EU. In the U.K., where even rural roads are slated to be tolled by 2014, the next Queen's Speech to Parliament is expected to discuss road tolling. In Milan, road tolling trials begin in 2007. In New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is soon expected to unveil a historic plan for modernizing the city, with tolling as a centrepiece. Around the world, more than 100 cities are studying how best to implement tolls.
Toronto, David Miller would have us believe, is a special case not suited to tolling. Trust me, he says, ''I've thought about this for three years.''
LawrenceSolomon@nextcity.com
Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute, a division of Energy Probe Research Foundation. He is also a director of PEMA, a non-profit with patents on electronic toll road technology.
W
wyliepoon
Guest
What London did with its Gardiner
Fancy a congestion zone charge in Toronto?
Joseph Brean
National Post
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
CREDIT: Scott Barbour, Getty Images
A car enters London's downtown congestion charge zone. A system of cameras, below, photographs licence plates to track vehicles that enter the zone. The daily charge is (ps)8 or $17. Residents who live in the congestion zone receive a 90% discount.
Portobello Road is famous the world over as a place where junk goes to get a second life.
Like the similarly named Italian mushroom, this street market in northwest London thrives on what would otherwise be waste: ratty old clothes that can only look cool on young hipsters, battered leather handbags, discarded books and especially that type of cheap furniture that is generously described as ''vintage.''
In recent years, this phenomenon of reclaimed garbage has been spreading here with astounding success, from consumer goods to entire neighbourhoods.
And as it does, London's experience offers Toronto a case study that -- with some adjustment -- might illuminate the future of its downtown lakefront. Similarly, London's recent experiment with a congestion charge offers an inspiring but cautionary tale for any Toronto politician who would flirt with such a plan.
At the top of Portobello Road is the Westway, a ghastly elevated highway similar to the Gardiner Expressway. When it was built 35 years ago, it was big, noisy and a psychological and physical barrier to pedestrians, although it remains absolutely necessary to the flow of cars into and out of central London.
In any other city, things might have stayed this way, with the Westway marking the no-man's land between chic Notting Hill to the south and the grittier council estates to the north.
But this is London, where real estate is so tight that even parking spots in some areas sell for $500,000. And so the underside of the Westway has gradually developed into a wonderland of reclaimed commercial and public space.
As Toronto debates the future of the Gardiner, London has found a middle ground between the competing alternatives of the ''big dig'' and the 10-lane ''boulevard.'' It has incorporated the Westway into city life.
Moving eastward in the shade of the towering concrete roof, one passes a sports complex, a nursery, a woodworking business, a refugee resource centre, a community theatre and a skateboarding park.
The junction with Portobello road is the most commercial, with an arcade of jewellery and clothing stores interspersed with restaurants and commercial office space. Nearby is one of London's hipper social clubs, which is essentially two walls with the Westway as a roof, and therefore never receives noise complaints.
In short, the area is structurally similar to the bleak intersection of Yonge Street and Lake Shore Boulevard, but to a pedestrian, it could not be any more different.
Walking there yesterday, and passing a group of handicapped people who stopped to look at an amateur photography and poetry exhibit posted on a chain-link fence, it became apparent that such quaint scenes are possible not despite commercial development of public land, but because of it.
This place under the highway used to be crap, fit for nothing more than industrial storage and homeless squats, or at best a parking lot, just like the nether regions of the Gardiner. But now it is a neighbourhood, thriving with small businesses.
Construction on the Westway started in 1971 to ease the huge burden on the local thoroughfares, but it was built a straight line ''with no regard to the local community,'' says Robert Harvey of the Westway Development Trust, which manages the space beneath.
''Once they were completed, they realized they had gone through an entire community and split it in half,'' he said.
It took the Trust eight years to repay all its startup loans and grants, and now it only has to cover its operating costs, which it manages easily from the commercial rents, with the 60% surplus going back into community projects.
Following the Westway into central London, one drops down on to the Marylebone Road, and immediately encounters another feature of London traffic that has already been discussed for Toronto and might one day be in the cards -- the congestion charge.
This is the fee -- initially (ps)5, ($10.65) now (ps)8 ($17) -- that drivers pay when they cross into the zone that includes the downtown core and some of the central residential areas, but excludes the boundary roads and some major thoroughfares.
It is roughly comparable to the area in Toronto north of Front Street, south of Bloor, west of Jarvis and east of Bathurst.
Residents of the congestion zone receive a 90% discount, but everyone else is billed automatically by a system of cameras that photograph licence plates.
Jo DeBank, spokeswoman for London TravelWatch, said there were awful growing pains when the charge began in 2003, with people being fined exorbitantly for paying late, even when payment itself was so inconvenient as to be almost impossible.
But since then, she said, it has succeeded in its primary goal, which is not so much to discourage cars from driving in London -- the economy depends on that -- but to encourage those for whom (ps)8 daily is a bit steep to use public transit.
The bus system, in turn, has been improved with the added revenues, she said, and new lanes added to make the buses run quicker.
Although to a frequent user of the TTC, all this might sound like a pipe dream, London's congestion charge is notable for the benefits it has brought to drivers.
A spokesman for the RAC Foundation, an advocacy group for drivers, said the speed of traffic has increased by about two or three miles per hour, from an average of around 10 mph before the charge. In fact, he said, congestion had already improved by the time the charge began, because drivers had shifted their patterns in expectation, and the city had completed a major roads improvement project.
He also said the flow has changed, with a lot less stop-and-go these days because of a traffic-light system that controls pedestrians, rather than letting them control it.
Despite some controversy, the scheme has been so successful that it will be expanded next year into west London, a controversial move that some think negates the whole idea.
Ms. DeBank said she would like the expansion to be two separate zones -- the current one, and the new one -- because to have one large zone spoils the deterrent effect; anyone who lives inside the larger zone only has to pay a mere fraction.
But to divide London into zones for any reason is politically dangerous, especially if the congestion charge system were to one day expand further.
As Toronto seeks to solve its own traffic problems, it would be wise to consider such dangers, but also to learn from a city that, for better or worse, has at least blazed a trail.
Fancy a congestion zone charge in Toronto?
Joseph Brean
National Post
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
CREDIT: Scott Barbour, Getty Images
A car enters London's downtown congestion charge zone. A system of cameras, below, photographs licence plates to track vehicles that enter the zone. The daily charge is (ps)8 or $17. Residents who live in the congestion zone receive a 90% discount.
Portobello Road is famous the world over as a place where junk goes to get a second life.
Like the similarly named Italian mushroom, this street market in northwest London thrives on what would otherwise be waste: ratty old clothes that can only look cool on young hipsters, battered leather handbags, discarded books and especially that type of cheap furniture that is generously described as ''vintage.''
In recent years, this phenomenon of reclaimed garbage has been spreading here with astounding success, from consumer goods to entire neighbourhoods.
And as it does, London's experience offers Toronto a case study that -- with some adjustment -- might illuminate the future of its downtown lakefront. Similarly, London's recent experiment with a congestion charge offers an inspiring but cautionary tale for any Toronto politician who would flirt with such a plan.
At the top of Portobello Road is the Westway, a ghastly elevated highway similar to the Gardiner Expressway. When it was built 35 years ago, it was big, noisy and a psychological and physical barrier to pedestrians, although it remains absolutely necessary to the flow of cars into and out of central London.
In any other city, things might have stayed this way, with the Westway marking the no-man's land between chic Notting Hill to the south and the grittier council estates to the north.
But this is London, where real estate is so tight that even parking spots in some areas sell for $500,000. And so the underside of the Westway has gradually developed into a wonderland of reclaimed commercial and public space.
As Toronto debates the future of the Gardiner, London has found a middle ground between the competing alternatives of the ''big dig'' and the 10-lane ''boulevard.'' It has incorporated the Westway into city life.
Moving eastward in the shade of the towering concrete roof, one passes a sports complex, a nursery, a woodworking business, a refugee resource centre, a community theatre and a skateboarding park.
The junction with Portobello road is the most commercial, with an arcade of jewellery and clothing stores interspersed with restaurants and commercial office space. Nearby is one of London's hipper social clubs, which is essentially two walls with the Westway as a roof, and therefore never receives noise complaints.
In short, the area is structurally similar to the bleak intersection of Yonge Street and Lake Shore Boulevard, but to a pedestrian, it could not be any more different.
Walking there yesterday, and passing a group of handicapped people who stopped to look at an amateur photography and poetry exhibit posted on a chain-link fence, it became apparent that such quaint scenes are possible not despite commercial development of public land, but because of it.
This place under the highway used to be crap, fit for nothing more than industrial storage and homeless squats, or at best a parking lot, just like the nether regions of the Gardiner. But now it is a neighbourhood, thriving with small businesses.
Construction on the Westway started in 1971 to ease the huge burden on the local thoroughfares, but it was built a straight line ''with no regard to the local community,'' says Robert Harvey of the Westway Development Trust, which manages the space beneath.
''Once they were completed, they realized they had gone through an entire community and split it in half,'' he said.
It took the Trust eight years to repay all its startup loans and grants, and now it only has to cover its operating costs, which it manages easily from the commercial rents, with the 60% surplus going back into community projects.
Following the Westway into central London, one drops down on to the Marylebone Road, and immediately encounters another feature of London traffic that has already been discussed for Toronto and might one day be in the cards -- the congestion charge.
This is the fee -- initially (ps)5, ($10.65) now (ps)8 ($17) -- that drivers pay when they cross into the zone that includes the downtown core and some of the central residential areas, but excludes the boundary roads and some major thoroughfares.
It is roughly comparable to the area in Toronto north of Front Street, south of Bloor, west of Jarvis and east of Bathurst.
Residents of the congestion zone receive a 90% discount, but everyone else is billed automatically by a system of cameras that photograph licence plates.
Jo DeBank, spokeswoman for London TravelWatch, said there were awful growing pains when the charge began in 2003, with people being fined exorbitantly for paying late, even when payment itself was so inconvenient as to be almost impossible.
But since then, she said, it has succeeded in its primary goal, which is not so much to discourage cars from driving in London -- the economy depends on that -- but to encourage those for whom (ps)8 daily is a bit steep to use public transit.
The bus system, in turn, has been improved with the added revenues, she said, and new lanes added to make the buses run quicker.
Although to a frequent user of the TTC, all this might sound like a pipe dream, London's congestion charge is notable for the benefits it has brought to drivers.
A spokesman for the RAC Foundation, an advocacy group for drivers, said the speed of traffic has increased by about two or three miles per hour, from an average of around 10 mph before the charge. In fact, he said, congestion had already improved by the time the charge began, because drivers had shifted their patterns in expectation, and the city had completed a major roads improvement project.
He also said the flow has changed, with a lot less stop-and-go these days because of a traffic-light system that controls pedestrians, rather than letting them control it.
Despite some controversy, the scheme has been so successful that it will be expanded next year into west London, a controversial move that some think negates the whole idea.
Ms. DeBank said she would like the expansion to be two separate zones -- the current one, and the new one -- because to have one large zone spoils the deterrent effect; anyone who lives inside the larger zone only has to pay a mere fraction.
But to divide London into zones for any reason is politically dangerous, especially if the congestion charge system were to one day expand further.
As Toronto seeks to solve its own traffic problems, it would be wise to consider such dangers, but also to learn from a city that, for better or worse, has at least blazed a trail.
D
Darkstar416
Guest
Tolls are coming. Maybe not this election cycle, but they are coming.