News   Sep 06, 2024
 154     0 
News   Sep 05, 2024
 831     0 
News   Sep 05, 2024
 774     0 

Toronto, we're number ? of the cities with the best commutes.

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
24,069
Reaction score
14,774
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
I hope that with Transit City and Metrolinx, Toronto will at least make it into the top 10 world cities with the best commutes, in about 10 years. Click on this link for the Forbes article.

The List:
  1. Hong Kong
  2. Tokyo
  3. Chennai (formerly Madras)
  4. Dakar
  5. Osaka
  6. London
  7. Beijing
  8. Mumbai (formerly Bombay)
  9. Krakow
  10. Berlin
Even India’s Mumbai is better than Toronto at present.

World's 10 Best Commutes
Matt Woolsey, 10.28.08, 6:00 PM ET

You can arm yourself with an iPod full of movies, install fine leather seats and satellite radio, and convince yourself some poor sap has a commute worse than yours.

Except that isn't likely to improve it.

Chances are, those traveling to work in Hong Kong, Berlin and Osaka, Japan, don't need to adopt such tactics. That's because their commutes are among the world's most reliable, cheap and efficient.

The dense cluster of jobs on Hong Kong Island makes it possible for 90% of residents to commute on public transit. Osaka's high-speed rail connects it to the suburbs of Kobe and Kyoto, and Berliners, who rely heavily on bicycles, have few traffic problems compared with residents of cities like New York or Rome.

Dakar, Senegal, London and Chennai, India, also make the list.

Behind the Numbers
We compiled our rankings using data and research supplied by Jeffrey Kenworthy, a transportation professor at Murdoch University in Perth, Australia. He measured the world's 84 largest cities on the following criteria: the cost to the consumer and the government, overall investment in improvements, and the speed and safety with which workers are delivered to offices.

Scores were adjusted for gross domestic product, which allowed developing cities like Dakar or Krakow, Poland, to compete with cities from highly developed G8 nations.

Top Travels
Dense cities perform particularly well by our measures. There are only 8,000 full-time residents in the City of London, but there are 320,000 jobs there, according to the City of London Economic Development Office. That sort of commercial density makes the London rail system a very efficient mechanism for delivering people to their offices. The Tube, which is the world's largest urban railway, and commuter trains efficiently move people in and out of the city, whereas cars in such a small space would overwhelm the system.

The speed of transit not only benefits commuters; it contributes to a city's economic competitiveness. Outsourcing capitals like Chennai, which are heavily reliant on attracting informational technology companies, do well on our list due to the city's high investment rate in projects like the IT highway, and its MSRT mass transit rail system.

"Ease of urban mobility is a prerequisite for business to reach supplies and customers," says Maria Krautzberger, permanent secretary of the Berlin Senate Department for Urban Development. "Cities cannot secure their position in global networks otherwise."

The problem, however, is paying for those sorts of infrastructure improvements.

"When you add to taxation in order to pay for improvements, it makes the citizenry less competitive, compared to another city because of the tax burden," says Francine Senecal, vice chair of the City of Montreal's Executive Committee. At the Metropolis Conference in Sydney, Australia, last week, a meeting of private and public funding bodies, she pointed to the need for public/private partnerships in infrastructure development, a joint investment in roads, or works projects.

"Public-private partnerships allows the public sector more maneuverability because they don't have to increase the tax burden," she says. "Though obviously regulation is very important."

Seoul, Korea, for example, relies on a $2.5 billion Macquarie investment fund to spend on transportation and infrastructure improvements, while cities in India have sought market funding in the form of investment-grade municipal bonds for $302 billion in improvements over the next five years.

Of course, each city's traits come into play. Berlin's compact nature and commitment to bicycle lanes have made riding to work a popular option. According to the city government, 13% of all traffic is bicycle traffic, which keeps transit costs low for residents on the whole, and alleviates road traffic for drivers because there are fewer cars on the road.

And in Houston, jobs and population are so spread out that a relatively complex train system is needed. The city government has proposed between $3 billion and $7.5 billion of light rail improvements since 2003, though little has been done to successfully alleviate mounting traffic, which consistently ranks the city towards the bottom of our U.S. commute lists.

In the end, though, a poor commute is "a relative concept," says Nathan Rees, premier of New South Wales, Australia. "It's like being in love. If you think you are love, you are in love. If you think you are in traffic, you are in traffic."
 
Doubt it! New York isn't even on that list ... we'll never catch up to any of them they keep growing as well.h
 
If Toronto had shantytowns next to highways or industrial parks or the airport like India and Dakar, we'd be higher up the list...such slums really do cut down on commute times!
 
With a massive suburban rail network, and high-capacity commuter trains without doors (not to mention commuters who don't mind getting intimate with other commuters, unlike Toronto), no wonder Mumbai is in the top 10.

Mumbai_suburban_rail_map.png


060712_mumbai_hmed_3a.h2.jpg


*****

Now for my comment about Hong Kong. I wouldn't claim that HK has the best commute in the world (like Forbes, but like many Forbes list this one is pretty dubious- it's probably trying to showcase how people in different parts of the world get to work). However there is a pretty big difference between a Toronto commute and a Hong Kong commute. When I mentioned to my HK relatives that I have a 1 1/2-hour commute in Toronto (Scarborough to Downtown), they were all shocked because such a commute time is almost non-existent over there.

The most pressing concern for Hong Kong commuters is not how fast the transit system would get them from point A to point B, but how much it would cost them to get there. Rapid transit is the fastest way, but the most expensive. Buses are not as expensive as they are slower and get stuck in traffic. Double-decker trams, minibuses and the Star Ferry are among the cheaper options. Considering that most of the transit system runs on a fare-by-distance system, and that transit companies offer all sorts of little discounts and deals (from transfer discounts to coupons for free food for frequent passengers), and calculating which is the cheapest way to get somewhere becomes a huge headache, and something that, thankfully, Toronto commuters don't really have to deal with.
 
This list seems like total bollux. There is no way Mumbai can claim to have one of the "best commutes" on earth. It is, quite literally, a life and death challenge to get to work in that city! Say what you want about the Yonge Line, we don't have people riding on the rooftops getting decapitated by overhead wires or a cow wandering onto the tracks and stopping the entire system. This list seems more like what would make a cool documentary, or what is interesting to read about not what is actually the "best."

And what does that even mean? Are we talking about the shortest commute times? The lowest cost? Some kind of subjective "pretty-ness"?

(edit: I should say, Hong Kong & Tokyo @ 1-2 seems pretty logical)
 
Last edited:
I don't know about the other ones but HK and Tokyo definitely belong to the top of the list. They're very timely and I never had train problems or delays. Seoul is pretty good too. I was there for 2 weeks and never had problems with delays and there are so many lines. They're also very clean. I haven't seen any graffiti or garbage on the train.
 
Yeah but at least most people riding GO or the TTC make it to work alive.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/07/23/india.trains.reut/index.html
On average, 4,000 people die a year on Mumbai's railways, crushed under trains, electrocuted by overhead power lines or killed as they lean from jam-packed carriages to gasp for air. It is perhaps the world's deadliest commute.
That's not how you analyze two cities with completely different populations. Mumbai's population is greater than any North American city.

According to this white paper (Paragraph 1.15) India railway has a fatality rate of 0.0001 per million passenger km (2001-2002)

Take a look at this link, it suggests that US railway has a fatality rate of 0.05 per 100m passenger mile or 0.0003 per million passenger km for the same year.

Obviously Indian safety levels can be increased, but let's not over exaggerate the situation. The India rail service is 3x safer than the US counterpart. In fact, rail fatalities in Canada exceeds the Indian counterpart by 2x. Never mind automobile fatality which exceeds the Indian counterpart by 30x. :eek:

Link
 

Back
Top