Toronto has the worst average commute in the world

[saiho]

No, it doesn't fail to serve the needs of the city. The fact that it carries the 2nd most number of riders outside of NYC, proves that, but it does need to be improved to allow for more & better service. As for highways/roads? They serve cars, not so much people. We don't need highways downtown. But it does sound like you do want Toronto to get better transit improvement, so, we're on the same side there...

I never said there is a need for highways downtown. The fact that the TTC carries a lot of people doesn't mean anything. The Beijing Subway is the fifth busiest in the world yet if you went there good transit is the last thing you would think of. That is the reason why they are simultaneously building 10 more lines, to serve the city better.

 

[Calrissian]

I never said there is a need for highways downtown. The fact that the TTC carries a lot of people doesn't mean anything. The Beijing Subway is the fifth busiest in the world yet if you went there good transit is the last thing you would think of. That is the reason why they are simultaneously building 10 more lines, to serve the city better.

Been to Beijing.... worked and lived in Asia and Europe, and used transit everyday, and that didn't only mean subways... I had to use; buses (HK/Shanghai/Seoul), streetcars (Melbourne/Berln), regional rail (Tokyo/Paris/Sydney) to get around... They weren't always wisking everyone everywhere at great speeds... and in fact, in Toronto, as imperfect as it is, I still found it to be as efficient in its many connections and modes of transport (Lumping GO in there as well). So, the fact it is moving a lot of people is relevant, and again, Toronto's transit doesn't fail... even when held up against all the other systems. Those other systems suffered from similar problems (accidents/delays/traffic/suicides/out of service).

But this has all veered off of your original points which where: LA moves alot of people with Highways and NYC moves alot of people with subways, and Toronto does neither, which just isn't true, and more over, not even the complete picture.

But Toronto is definitely falling behind and needs investment in its transit pretty badly. Transit city, was at least a reasonable first step.

(still, I'd kill for a rail system like Tokyo, HK, Berlin... even Nagoya with their 4 lines and integrated JR surface rail)

 

[Hipster Duck]

Interesting how San Francisco is being brought up in a comparison with Toronto. For an area that rightfully bills itself as progressive, and with a very urban and dense city at its core, the transit system in the Bay Area is absolutely deplorable. In many ways, there are sober reminders that that is where Toronto and the GTA will end up if we don't get our act together (which is always a possibility).

MUNI (the oldest city-owned transit agency in the US) is characterized by a shiftless public sector union with one of the highest wages and most backward job security programs in the country, and operators are known for their complete inability to stick to schedules. A recent expansion strategy involved building an LRT line in the middle of the street that was meant to serve far-flung, low-income communities on a social equity basis, rather than on a commuter needs basis. Most observers would describe MUNI as symptomatic of institutional rot. Sound familiar?

In both Toronto and San Francisco, heavy rail expansion is pursued by pushing very expensive extensions into the hinterlands, while downtown core neighborhoods with very high densities and ridership must rely on overburdened and unreliable surface transit lines.

San Francisco was known as the 'Beirut of Transit' because it has a dozen or more local transit operators that steadfastly refuse to agree to any sort of fare integration. The GTA isn't quite that bad, but it's still characterized by transit fiefdoms. Metrolinx does not quite have the teeth that it requires for full service and fare integration.

In both cities, the construction of parallel rail tracks to build a high speed rail line is being stubbornly opposed by NIMBYs who just cannot give in. In SF, it's the NIMBYs of Palo Alto and the peninsula cities who are doing everything they can to block the California HSR line; in Toronto it's Weston NIMBYs inventing excuses about how diesel will give you cancer, etc. to block the Union-Pearson link.

 

[TOareaFan]

As for highways/roads? They serve cars, not so much people. ..

Until now, I did not realize that all those cars on the 401 are empty Thanks for that...where are the cars goin?

 

[saiho]

Been to Beijing.... worked and lived in Asia and Europe, and used transit everyday, and that didn't only mean subways... I had to use; buses (HK/Shanghai/Seoul), streetcars (Melbourne/Berln), regional rail (Tokyo/Paris/Sydney) to get around... They weren't always wisking everyone everywhere at great speeds... and in fact, in Toronto, as imperfect as it is, I still found it to be as efficient in its many connections and modes of transport (Lumping GO in there as well). So, the fact it is moving a lot of people is relevant, and again, Toronto's transit doesn't fail... even when held up against all the other systems. Those other systems suffered from similar problems (accidents/delays/traffic/suicides/out of service).

So what if you went to those places. I went there too, and rode those forms of transit .I don't think you can compare the "giants" (namely Hong Kong,Tokyo,Paris,Shanghai,Seoul) in transit to Toronto because after going to those places, I end up finding Toronto lacking in both fronts of transportation. Also who cares if they suffer the same problems as Toronto’s system? Every transit system has these problems, its like saying every city suffers from congestion. Yet why do some cities perform better than others? You could ask why do they have these problems and not suck so badly.

But this has all veered off of your original points which where: LA moves alot of people with Highways and NYC moves alot of people with subways, and Toronto does neither, which just isn't true, and more over, not even the complete picture. )

then what is the bigger picture? the GTA does niether.

(But Toronto is definitely falling behind and needs investment in its transit pretty badly. Transit city, was at least a reasonable first step.

still, I'd kill for a rail system like Tokyo, HK, Berlin... even Nagoya with their 4 lines and integrated JR surface rail)

of couse you would kill of those systems, its a no brainer.

 

[Calrissian]

So what if you went to those places. I went there too, and rode those forms of transit .I don't think you can compare the "giants" (namely Hong Kong,Tokyo,Paris,Shanghai,Seoul) in transit to Toronto because after going to those places, I end up finding Toronto lacking in both fronts of transportation. Also who cares if they suffer the same problems as Toronto’s system? Every transit system has these problems, its like saying every city suffers from congestion. Yet why do some cities perform better than others? You could ask why do they have these problems and not suck so badly.

of couse you would kill of those systems, its a no brainer.

Ya, there's a huge diff from visiting those places and living there daily relying on those modes of transit to get you around, only THEN can you compare it on the same level/experience.

A tourist taking the subway to the museum, is not the same as commuting daily to your work place. As I did in Tokyo, HK, Sydney, Berlin, Paris.. (and now, back in Toronto) over a few years, and at times, the problems they experience DO make you *think* they "suck" as you say. I can recall being stuck on many JR trains comign home from work due to injury and weather conditions... just like here.

And the point still remains; the GTA does move a lot of people, which you directly and in directly keep saying it does not! (thats it, thats my point!)

Uhg.. anyway, come back with any more defensive remarks you want, I'm done replying because it's taken the focus off of the subject of this thread..

 

[golodhendil]

The difference with a place like HK (which I would say has minimal transit breakdowns or delays compared to North America, as even a 5-10 min delay on the MTR would make news headlines for days and almost be demanded to have a public inquiry) is that when one mode has any problems, there are multiple other modes running the same corridor to make up for the service. If, say, the MTR had a technical problem that requires delay or temporary shutdown there will be another 10 bus routes and 20-30 minibus routes that one can use, in additional to the shuttle buses provided by MTR, as well as hundreds of taxis patrolling the streets for which the fare is more than half to a third as cheap as Toronto's, and if you are on the island you'd also have the trusty old tramline, and ferries to get across the harbour. In Toronto, you could wait, or try to cram into the shuttle buses, or walk.

And yes, this is speaking as someone who has lived and worked for years in multiple cities.

 

[saiho]

Ya, there's a huge diff from visiting those places and living there daily relying on those modes of transit to get you around, only THEN can you compare it on the same level/experience. A tourist taking the subway to the museum, is not the same as commuting daily to your work place. As I did in Tokyo, HK, Sydney, Berlin, Paris.. (and now, back in Toronto) over a few years, and at times, the problems they experience DO make you *think* they "suck" as you say.

There is also a huge diff between moving people around and moving people around efficiently. Which I have been trying to say from when you said, oh Toronto is fine its system carries a lot of people and yet everyone in this forum says that we need to do this we need to build that. The DRL is not built, what happened to the Sheppard subway. The effectiveness on one’s transportation system is not measured by how many people it carries. From what you been saying you sound like a tourist taking the subway to the museum on a Sunday.

I can recall being stuck on many JR trains comign home from work due to injury and weather conditions... just like here. And the point still remains; the GTA does move a lot of people, which you directly and in directly keep saying it does not! (thats it, thats my point!)

You have been totally ignoring my last comment on the unavoidable like accidents, suicides and weather. It doesn't make a transit system suck. having lack to transportation infrastructure does. So what if JR, Tokyo Metro, Toei metro, Keio , Keisei, etc has a few late trains because of unavoidable conditions. It still didn't stop the Nation Capital Region from being one of the best and timely mass transit systems in the world. like what Golodhendil said, even if such events have happened, you can find another way home. Why? Here I go again, good transportation infrastructure, something that Toronto lacks. But your missing the main point, and even if you are talking about the main point, your argument is invalid. The effectiveness of a transportation system is not by how many unavoidable incidents it has encountered.

I haven’t been stating my point because I though I didn't have to. I though what I have the say was pretty clear. But I guess I have to. Because what I though was obviously wrong. Toronto doesn't have an effective transportation system, it has a mucky compromise of both, yet other cities do, whether it is in the wrong direction ie. LA or the right one ie New York.

Uhg.. anyway, come back with any more defensive remarks you want, I'm done replying because it's taken the focus off of the subject of this thread..

Fine i will, You have been picking on the fact that I said Toronto system is not heavily used. But if read between the lines I said that Toronto is a city of bad compromises. Bad expressway, bad mass transit. But no, you have to point out that Toronto the second busiest transit system in NA, like some 5 year old child showing off something new that he has learned today. Do you think I don’t already know that? I’m pretty sure everybody in this forum knows this too. If you didn’t notice this is a transit advocate / metrophile / rail fan / denshamania section of the Urbantoronto. Do you seriously think everyone here does not know their facts?

Now that I am done I will be happily waiting for your reply. That is if you reply. if you don't then how about this:
"I dare you to reply."

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Worst? Nowhere near - IBM 2010 Global Commuter Pain Study:

http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/32017.wss

AoD

 

[SimonP]

Wow, the National Post totally misrepresented that study in their article. Their piece opens:

There’s nothing Torontonians like to do more than gripe about their commute. And now, a new survey proves that all that dissatisfaction with the trip to work is justified.

Canada’s largest city placed second this week on a worldwide “commuter pain†survey, with Johannesburg ranking as the only city with a more painful commute.

You have to read much further down the page to find that Toronto is second only in the "those who say traffic has worsened in the past three years" category. It is far from the worst overall. That is just bad journalism.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Let me do some quoting from the PDF of the report:

The consequences of traffic
As for a reduction in travel stress, 36% of the respondents said that improved public transportation would help. Beijing topped the list here (65%), followed by Milan (57%), New Delhi (53%), Sao Paolo (52%), and Paris (51%). Only 17% of respondents said they did not experience traffic stress. Leading the way here was New York City (34%), trailed by Houston and Melbourne (33%), Toronto (32%), and Stockholm (30%). These are all cities with well-developed public transportation systems.

AoD