
Today’s ATC post – which happens to be a guest post – is coming to you live from on board the UP Express train that runs from Union Station in downtown Toronto to Pearson Airport. (Everywhere should have free wifi.)
I’m on my way to Philadelphia and I’ve been wanting to try this train since it opened earlier this summer. It feels great to finally ride it. It’s everything I could have hoped for. It even has that new car smell :)
Last month I wrote a post called, 10 reasons to visit Toronto right now. It was in honor of my good friend Alex Feldman’s visit. Well now it’s my turn to visit Philadelphia and he has decided to return the favor and do a Philly version of that same post.
Alex is to Philadelphia what I am to Toronto. He grew up in Philly. He was educated in Philly (we went to Penn together). And he’s super passionate about the future of Philly. And I think that’s how everyone should be about their city.
So I hope you enjoy his list of 10 reasons to visit Philadelphia right now. It’s basically my to-do list for this weekend.
———————————————
10. World Heritage City: Philadelphia is on track to become the first World Heritage City in the United States. This UNESCO designation will underscore the city’s historic importance as the birthplace of American Democracy as well as the historic urban fabric which gives the city it’s walkable, urbane character.
9. Shopping: Philadelphia has come a long way as a shopping destination. Conde Nast Traveler recently ranked the city as number 2 out of the best shopping destinations in the world. 3rd Street in Old City has become a hotbed for independent boutiques while Rittenhouse Square has attracted new chains such as Uniqlo, Theory, and Vince. More is on the way with a complete re-make of the Gallery shopping mall slated to start soon and the new East Market complex under construction.
8. The Pope is Coming: In case you haven’t heard, Pope Francis will make his first visit to the United States - with a 3 day visit to Philadelphia in late September. The visit will coincide with the World Meeting of Families gathering. A crazy number of visitors (2 million?) are expected to descend on the city - causing Philadelphians to panic, complain, and attempt to rent their houses for ridiculous amounts of money. But this important visit will help raise the profile of the city on the international stage.
7. Building Boom: There is probably more development happening in Philadelphia right now then any other time in recent history. The skyline is growing with additions by Norman Foster, Cesar Pelli , and Kohn Pedersen Fox. New apartment buildings, condos, and rowhouses are under construction across the city (rental vacancy rates are less than 2%). In addition the Barnes Foundation and the new Singh Center for Nanotechnology mark impressive additions to the city’s architectural landscape.
6. Public Spaces: Philly’s public realm has seen massive investment over the last several years. A complete remake of the landscape outside of City Hall has become the new Dilworth Park. The designers of NYC’s highline have added two public spaces to the city (Race Street Pier and the new Central Green in the Navy Yard). And Schulkill Banks recently added a new boardwalk which the New York Times raved about when they ranked Philly as the number 3 city to visit in 2015. More is on the way with the first phase of the Reading Viaduct Rail Park expected to start soon.
5. Waterfront: Philadelphia’s Delaware River waterfront has long been cut off from the city by interstate 95. Things have started to change recently, with new trails and pier parks recently added to the working waterfront. Even Penn’s Landing, the city’s much maligned waterfront attraction is seeing improvements - including the tremendously popular Spruce Street Harbor Park - a pop-up park featuring floating beer barges, shipping container food stands, and tons of hammocks.
4. Food: Philly is one of the best food cities in the United States. So much is happening right now in the city’s dining scene, it’s hard to keep track of the latest restaurant openings. Neighborhoods such as Fishtown and East Passyunk have emerged as hot dining districts with BYOB chef driven restaurants. More can be gleaned from the Washington Post which recently summarized the dining scene better than I can.
3. Pop-up Gardens: One of the best reasons to visit Philly in the summer is the opening of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society Pop-Up gardens. The wildly popular beer gardens, began several years ago as an initiative to remake underused or vacant lots into useful public spaces. This summer, 2 gardens - one on 15th and South and one at 9th and Wharton have been transformed into vibrant spaces for eating, drinking, and hanging out.
2. Le Bok Fin: Speaking of temporary uses, the most recent addition to Philly’s pop-up (or iterative placemaking) scene is a rooftop bar called Le Bok Fin. Situated on the 8th floor of an old vocational high school in South Philly (and named after the school’s restaurant - which in turn is a play on one of Philly’s most famous French restaurants). This is the first iteration of development at what is planned to become an amazing new center for creatives inside the old school - being led by Lindsey Scannapieco and her team at Scout LTD. Check out Le Bok Fin for incredible views of the city skyline (especially at sunset).
1. Bike Share: While a little late to the party, Philly recently launched it’s own bike share program - which is proving to be a huge success. Dubbed Indego, the new bike share is easy to use, has 60 stations, more than 600 bikes and is becoming one of the best ways to hop around town. Check one out and go explore Philly!
Image: Alex Feldman

For those of who were following Architect This City during the Gardiner Expressway East debate here in Toronto, you might remember that Darren Davis (transport planner with Auckland Transport) wrote a guest post called, Three minutes that rule the world – Will demolishing the Gardiner East actually make traffic worse?
It was an incredibly popular post at the time, so I’m thrilled that Darren volunteered to do another one on road tolls. This is a topic that I’m very interested in and have written about a few times. Road pricing, as you’ll see below, puts us in a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation. But sooner or later I think we will need to get our head around it, as will many other cities.
I hope you enjoy today’s post. Thanks again Darren.
——————————-
Today on Architect This City, we have a guest post by Darren Davis, who is a transport planner in Auckland, New Zealand. He’s a regular commenter on this blog, and I know he’s been following the Gardiner East debate quite closely – as many urbanists around the world are. I appreciate him offering and taking the time to write this piece. Thank you.
——————————–
The decision this month on whether to demolish the Gardiner East Expressway and replace it with a surface boulevard or to rebuild it with a similar elevated structure will be a watershed moment for Toronto, akin to the decision not to have freeways in the urban core of Vancouver in the late 1970s.
There are numerous good reasons why removing the Gardiner East elevated structure is the right move for Toronto, covered previously by The Globe and Mail and in the Council for Canadian Urbanism’s open letter to Toronto City Council. If you aren’t aware of these, I strongly recommend reading them.
Also of note are two things:
Just 3% of Downtown commuters drive on the Gardiner Expressway East, a tiny fraction of the 68% who arrive Downtown on public transit.
The “remove” option does not reduce traffic capacity over the “hybrid” option but could reduce travel speeds in uncongested conditions (read on for why I don’t think that this will happen in real life).
However, one element of this debate that has not got much airtime is the transportation modelling that claims an additional two to three minutes travel time with the “remove” option over the “hybrid” option which retains the elevated expressway in a slightly modified form.
Toronto Mayor John Tory has stated that "I didn’t get elected to make traffic worse. And let’s be clear, removing that piece of the Gardiner will almost certainly make traffic worse.” But is it in fact true that demolishing the Gardiner Expressway East will make traffic worse as the transportation modelling claims?
The key thing to understand is that transportation modelling, which tries to predict future travel times, is the product of a bunch of assumptions which may not in fact be borne out in real life.
For example, the effect of induced traffic, where additional traffic capacity leads to additional traffic being attracted to the route, is reasonably well known but generally not factored into transportation modelling. Induced traffic happens because increased travel speeds attracts traffic that would have otherwise avoided the route at congested times; attracts people to drive where they previously used other modes and encourages trips that would not otherwise have taken place. The effect of induced traffic is to quickly nullify the benefits of adding traffic capacity.
However, what is less well known is that the reverse happens where there is either a reduction in traffic capacity (not the case in Toronto as the “remove” option retains the same traffic capacity) or speed.
This is because in this situation, four things happen:
Some travel re-routes. The “remove” option with a widened Lakeshore Boulevard as part of the street grid simply gives more ability for traffic to re-route away from congestion over an elevated expressway structure where drivers are literally trapped until they reach their exit.
Some travel re-times. Some people will retime trips to avoid congested travel times, such as starting and/or finishing work at less congested times.
Some travel changes mode. Some people will be encouraged to change mode by the perceived worsening in traffic conditions.
Some travel is avoided entirely. Some people will choose not to travel at all in the peak of the peak. For example, this could take the form of working from home or shopping on the internet instead of by car.
Transportation models only take into account the first item but not the others. The modelling is also sensitive to traffic growth assumptions and assumed mode split and trip distribution. Often transportation models assume continued growth in car travel even though per capita kilometres travelled peaked about a decade ago.
While this may all sound well and good theory, does this actually happen in practice?
In Auckland city centre, we have extensive experience with the reallocation of road space away from general traffic. Many busy key city centre approach routes have had general vehicle lanes reduced to make way for bus lanes (which generally carry around 65-70% of the people moving capacity of the street).
This has involved up to a 50% reduction in private vehicle capacity (whereas in Toronto, the “remove” option retains the same traffic capacity but may slow throughput). Auckland has done two of these in the past twelve months – both involved converting a general traffic lane to a bus lane.
Don’t get me wrong: There is sometimes pain at implementation with about a three week period of congestion as car drivers adapt to the new reality - and most likely negative media coverage will accompany this. But after about a month, equilibrium will be restored and life will continue much as it did prior to the change.
Part of this is that there will be various “optimisations” during this introductory period where signal timings are adjusted and other tweaks made – the sort of tweaks that can only be fine-tuned in a real world situation. But a bigger part of this is that the four factors above - re–routing, re-timing, mode change and avoided travel - come into play.
I cannot overemphasise enough that life will return to normal surprisingly soon if the Gardiner East Expressway is demolished and replaced by a widened Lakeshore Boulevard.
My advice
When people talk about two to three minutes of extra travel time, take the foregoing into account and take those claims with the very big grains of salt that they deserve. If Toronto makes the right choice and chooses the “remove” option, my bet is that the biggest surprise of all will be how little difference it makes to peak travel times for the 3% of Downtown commuters who used to use the Gardiner Expressway East.
Disclaimer
The author of the above post is an employee of Auckland Transport, however, the views, or opinions expressed in this post are personal to the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Auckland Transport, its management or employees. Auckland Transport is not responsible for, and disclaims any and all liability for the content of the article.

Today’s ATC post – which happens to be a guest post – is coming to you live from on board the UP Express train that runs from Union Station in downtown Toronto to Pearson Airport. (Everywhere should have free wifi.)
I’m on my way to Philadelphia and I’ve been wanting to try this train since it opened earlier this summer. It feels great to finally ride it. It’s everything I could have hoped for. It even has that new car smell :)
Last month I wrote a post called, 10 reasons to visit Toronto right now. It was in honor of my good friend Alex Feldman’s visit. Well now it’s my turn to visit Philadelphia and he has decided to return the favor and do a Philly version of that same post.
Alex is to Philadelphia what I am to Toronto. He grew up in Philly. He was educated in Philly (we went to Penn together). And he’s super passionate about the future of Philly. And I think that’s how everyone should be about their city.
So I hope you enjoy his list of 10 reasons to visit Philadelphia right now. It’s basically my to-do list for this weekend.
———————————————
10. World Heritage City: Philadelphia is on track to become the first World Heritage City in the United States. This UNESCO designation will underscore the city’s historic importance as the birthplace of American Democracy as well as the historic urban fabric which gives the city it’s walkable, urbane character.
9. Shopping: Philadelphia has come a long way as a shopping destination. Conde Nast Traveler recently ranked the city as number 2 out of the best shopping destinations in the world. 3rd Street in Old City has become a hotbed for independent boutiques while Rittenhouse Square has attracted new chains such as Uniqlo, Theory, and Vince. More is on the way with a complete re-make of the Gallery shopping mall slated to start soon and the new East Market complex under construction.
8. The Pope is Coming: In case you haven’t heard, Pope Francis will make his first visit to the United States - with a 3 day visit to Philadelphia in late September. The visit will coincide with the World Meeting of Families gathering. A crazy number of visitors (2 million?) are expected to descend on the city - causing Philadelphians to panic, complain, and attempt to rent their houses for ridiculous amounts of money. But this important visit will help raise the profile of the city on the international stage.
7. Building Boom: There is probably more development happening in Philadelphia right now then any other time in recent history. The skyline is growing with additions by Norman Foster, Cesar Pelli , and Kohn Pedersen Fox. New apartment buildings, condos, and rowhouses are under construction across the city (rental vacancy rates are less than 2%). In addition the Barnes Foundation and the new Singh Center for Nanotechnology mark impressive additions to the city’s architectural landscape.
6. Public Spaces: Philly’s public realm has seen massive investment over the last several years. A complete remake of the landscape outside of City Hall has become the new Dilworth Park. The designers of NYC’s highline have added two public spaces to the city (Race Street Pier and the new Central Green in the Navy Yard). And Schulkill Banks recently added a new boardwalk which the New York Times raved about when they ranked Philly as the number 3 city to visit in 2015. More is on the way with the first phase of the Reading Viaduct Rail Park expected to start soon.
5. Waterfront: Philadelphia’s Delaware River waterfront has long been cut off from the city by interstate 95. Things have started to change recently, with new trails and pier parks recently added to the working waterfront. Even Penn’s Landing, the city’s much maligned waterfront attraction is seeing improvements - including the tremendously popular Spruce Street Harbor Park - a pop-up park featuring floating beer barges, shipping container food stands, and tons of hammocks.
4. Food: Philly is one of the best food cities in the United States. So much is happening right now in the city’s dining scene, it’s hard to keep track of the latest restaurant openings. Neighborhoods such as Fishtown and East Passyunk have emerged as hot dining districts with BYOB chef driven restaurants. More can be gleaned from the Washington Post which recently summarized the dining scene better than I can.
3. Pop-up Gardens: One of the best reasons to visit Philly in the summer is the opening of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society Pop-Up gardens. The wildly popular beer gardens, began several years ago as an initiative to remake underused or vacant lots into useful public spaces. This summer, 2 gardens - one on 15th and South and one at 9th and Wharton have been transformed into vibrant spaces for eating, drinking, and hanging out.
2. Le Bok Fin: Speaking of temporary uses, the most recent addition to Philly’s pop-up (or iterative placemaking) scene is a rooftop bar called Le Bok Fin. Situated on the 8th floor of an old vocational high school in South Philly (and named after the school’s restaurant - which in turn is a play on one of Philly’s most famous French restaurants). This is the first iteration of development at what is planned to become an amazing new center for creatives inside the old school - being led by Lindsey Scannapieco and her team at Scout LTD. Check out Le Bok Fin for incredible views of the city skyline (especially at sunset).
1. Bike Share: While a little late to the party, Philly recently launched it’s own bike share program - which is proving to be a huge success. Dubbed Indego, the new bike share is easy to use, has 60 stations, more than 600 bikes and is becoming one of the best ways to hop around town. Check one out and go explore Philly!
Image: Alex Feldman

For those of who were following Architect This City during the Gardiner Expressway East debate here in Toronto, you might remember that Darren Davis (transport planner with Auckland Transport) wrote a guest post called, Three minutes that rule the world – Will demolishing the Gardiner East actually make traffic worse?
It was an incredibly popular post at the time, so I’m thrilled that Darren volunteered to do another one on road tolls. This is a topic that I’m very interested in and have written about a few times. Road pricing, as you’ll see below, puts us in a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation. But sooner or later I think we will need to get our head around it, as will many other cities.
I hope you enjoy today’s post. Thanks again Darren.
——————————-
Today on Architect This City, we have a guest post by Darren Davis, who is a transport planner in Auckland, New Zealand. He’s a regular commenter on this blog, and I know he’s been following the Gardiner East debate quite closely – as many urbanists around the world are. I appreciate him offering and taking the time to write this piece. Thank you.
——————————–
The decision this month on whether to demolish the Gardiner East Expressway and replace it with a surface boulevard or to rebuild it with a similar elevated structure will be a watershed moment for Toronto, akin to the decision not to have freeways in the urban core of Vancouver in the late 1970s.
There are numerous good reasons why removing the Gardiner East elevated structure is the right move for Toronto, covered previously by The Globe and Mail and in the Council for Canadian Urbanism’s open letter to Toronto City Council. If you aren’t aware of these, I strongly recommend reading them.
Also of note are two things:
Just 3% of Downtown commuters drive on the Gardiner Expressway East, a tiny fraction of the 68% who arrive Downtown on public transit.
The “remove” option does not reduce traffic capacity over the “hybrid” option but could reduce travel speeds in uncongested conditions (read on for why I don’t think that this will happen in real life).
However, one element of this debate that has not got much airtime is the transportation modelling that claims an additional two to three minutes travel time with the “remove” option over the “hybrid” option which retains the elevated expressway in a slightly modified form.
Toronto Mayor John Tory has stated that "I didn’t get elected to make traffic worse. And let’s be clear, removing that piece of the Gardiner will almost certainly make traffic worse.” But is it in fact true that demolishing the Gardiner Expressway East will make traffic worse as the transportation modelling claims?
The key thing to understand is that transportation modelling, which tries to predict future travel times, is the product of a bunch of assumptions which may not in fact be borne out in real life.
For example, the effect of induced traffic, where additional traffic capacity leads to additional traffic being attracted to the route, is reasonably well known but generally not factored into transportation modelling. Induced traffic happens because increased travel speeds attracts traffic that would have otherwise avoided the route at congested times; attracts people to drive where they previously used other modes and encourages trips that would not otherwise have taken place. The effect of induced traffic is to quickly nullify the benefits of adding traffic capacity.
However, what is less well known is that the reverse happens where there is either a reduction in traffic capacity (not the case in Toronto as the “remove” option retains the same traffic capacity) or speed.
This is because in this situation, four things happen:
Some travel re-routes. The “remove” option with a widened Lakeshore Boulevard as part of the street grid simply gives more ability for traffic to re-route away from congestion over an elevated expressway structure where drivers are literally trapped until they reach their exit.
Some travel re-times. Some people will retime trips to avoid congested travel times, such as starting and/or finishing work at less congested times.
Some travel changes mode. Some people will be encouraged to change mode by the perceived worsening in traffic conditions.
Some travel is avoided entirely. Some people will choose not to travel at all in the peak of the peak. For example, this could take the form of working from home or shopping on the internet instead of by car.
Transportation models only take into account the first item but not the others. The modelling is also sensitive to traffic growth assumptions and assumed mode split and trip distribution. Often transportation models assume continued growth in car travel even though per capita kilometres travelled peaked about a decade ago.
While this may all sound well and good theory, does this actually happen in practice?
In Auckland city centre, we have extensive experience with the reallocation of road space away from general traffic. Many busy key city centre approach routes have had general vehicle lanes reduced to make way for bus lanes (which generally carry around 65-70% of the people moving capacity of the street).
This has involved up to a 50% reduction in private vehicle capacity (whereas in Toronto, the “remove” option retains the same traffic capacity but may slow throughput). Auckland has done two of these in the past twelve months – both involved converting a general traffic lane to a bus lane.
Don’t get me wrong: There is sometimes pain at implementation with about a three week period of congestion as car drivers adapt to the new reality - and most likely negative media coverage will accompany this. But after about a month, equilibrium will be restored and life will continue much as it did prior to the change.
Part of this is that there will be various “optimisations” during this introductory period where signal timings are adjusted and other tweaks made – the sort of tweaks that can only be fine-tuned in a real world situation. But a bigger part of this is that the four factors above - re–routing, re-timing, mode change and avoided travel - come into play.
I cannot overemphasise enough that life will return to normal surprisingly soon if the Gardiner East Expressway is demolished and replaced by a widened Lakeshore Boulevard.
My advice
When people talk about two to three minutes of extra travel time, take the foregoing into account and take those claims with the very big grains of salt that they deserve. If Toronto makes the right choice and chooses the “remove” option, my bet is that the biggest surprise of all will be how little difference it makes to peak travel times for the 3% of Downtown commuters who used to use the Gardiner Expressway East.
Disclaimer
The author of the above post is an employee of Auckland Transport, however, the views, or opinions expressed in this post are personal to the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Auckland Transport, its management or employees. Auckland Transport is not responsible for, and disclaims any and all liability for the content of the article.
Because there is no incentive to act in the public good, we often act in what we perceive to be our own personal interest, which is often the antithesis of the public interest. And remember that if we are driving, we are traffic. So often people will sit fuming in their cars in the midst of congestion with thoughts like in this cartoon. But of course with unpriced roads, there is no real price signal to these drivers to consider taking the bus.

In a world where time is money, we are constantly berated about the economic costs of congestion. In 2011, the Toronto Board of Trade estimated that congestion in the Toronto region alone cost the regional economy $6 billion a year, rising to an estimated $15 billion in 2031 should no action be taken. More recent research by the CD Howe Institute pegs this figure at up to $11 billion.
Given these sorts of eye-watering figures, one might be tempted to think that car drivers, and in particular the goods industry, would be flinging their wallets open at the chance to buy their way out of congestion. And in fact Toronto has the 407 Express Toll Route which has elements of variable road pricing. However, while the 407 ETR carries around 350,000 vehicles per day, price increases have been matters of controversy. It provides some ability for those who can afford it to bypass Toronto’s notorious traffic congestion, but its fundamental weakness is that it’s just one road in one of North America’s largest city-regions.
Similar stand-alone efforts to address congestion in Metro Vancouver with tolled routes, such as the Port Mann Bridge on the Trans-Canada Highway and the Golden Ears Bridge, have fallen well short of their projected traffic volumes, while nearby untolled bridges such as the Patullo Bridge are heavily congested. We have a similar experience in New Zealand where our two tolls roads, with car tolls of $2 and $2.20 respectively, experience diversion rates of up to 30% to the alternative but substantially longer and slower free routes.
This brings up a fundamental paradox: Congestion costs the economy a fortune and congestion is a top-of-mind frustration, yet people seem reluctant to pay even comparatively small amounts to bypass congestion.
For example, the City of Toronto’s Roundtable on Gridlock & Traffic Congestion in February 2014 came up with the usual shopping list of “transportation systems management” responses – improved management of curbside space and construction projects; synchronized traffic signal phasing; better traveller information and improved incident response. While these are all worthwhile responses, they only improve system operation at the margins. Encouraging greater use of public transit was the very last recommendation and there was not a single mention of charging or pricing as a tool to address congestion. And the feverish activity continues with a hackathon called TrafficJam on October 2 - 4, 2015 with the goal of fixing Toronto’s traffic woes.

The very few cities that have actually had significant success at reducing traffic congestion – notably Singapore, London and Stockholm – have done this through cordon-based congestion pricing wherein if you pass the cordon, you pay the congestion charge. Entering central London on a weekday between 7am and 6pm will set you back a cool £11.50 ($C23.30). From 2003 to 2013, about £1.2 billion ($C2.42 billion) of congestion charge revenue has been invested in public transport, road and bridge improvements and walking and cycling, of which £960 million ($C1.94 billion) was for bus improvements. These measures have included significant road space reallocation to improve conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, public transit and the urban realm.
The latest Travel in London report states that “Over the 10-year period from 2003, total trips have increased by 11.4 per cent, with particularly notable increases of 52.3 per cent in rail trips and 32.0 per cent in Underground and DLR [Docklands Light Railway] trips, with cycle trips (as main mode) increasing by 53.9 per cent. Car driver trips decreased by 12.7 per cent over the same period” (my emphasis).
One interesting insight is that Stockholm trialed congestion charging and then reverted to business as usual of unpriced roads in advance of a referendum on congestion pricing. This gave Stockholmers a clear sense of the difference in traffic congestion and was crucial in supporting a yes vote in the referendum.
Stockholm has experienced a permanent reduction in traffic of about 20% across the toll cordon and congestion decreased by 30 – 50% - which demonstrates that traffic volume reductions have a disproportionately positive impact on congestion. About half of the “disappearing” drivers changed to transit, the rest to other alternatives such as different departure times and destinations and taking fewer trips.
For more on Stockholm, I suggest reading the Tools of Change case study on Stockholm Congestion Pricing.

Before and after congestion charge photos of traffic levels in Stockholm
While this sounds very promising, congestion charging has significant equity implications and requires upfront investment to provide people who either choose to or can no longer afford to drive with transportation alternatives. Both Stockholm and London invested very heavily in public transit in advance of implementing congestion charging.
And this brings up a big issue for Toronto.
For congestion charging to have a meaningful impact on congestion without stifling economic activity or impeding people’s ability to move around, the core capacity of Toronto’s transit system would need to be addressed first. In particular the Yonge Line capacity enhancements, Metrolinx’s Regional Express Rail and most likely the Downtown Relief Line would need to be in place to provide both capacity and choice for people who either needed or wanted a travel alternative to any congestion charge. This would mean that Metrolinx’s Big Move might need to get even bigger.
Disclaimer: The author of the above post is an employee of Auckland Transport, however, the views, or opinions expressed in this post are personal to the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Auckland Transport, its management or employees. Auckland Transport is not responsible for, and disclaims any and all liability for the content of the article.
Because there is no incentive to act in the public good, we often act in what we perceive to be our own personal interest, which is often the antithesis of the public interest. And remember that if we are driving, we are traffic. So often people will sit fuming in their cars in the midst of congestion with thoughts like in this cartoon. But of course with unpriced roads, there is no real price signal to these drivers to consider taking the bus.

In a world where time is money, we are constantly berated about the economic costs of congestion. In 2011, the Toronto Board of Trade estimated that congestion in the Toronto region alone cost the regional economy $6 billion a year, rising to an estimated $15 billion in 2031 should no action be taken. More recent research by the CD Howe Institute pegs this figure at up to $11 billion.
Given these sorts of eye-watering figures, one might be tempted to think that car drivers, and in particular the goods industry, would be flinging their wallets open at the chance to buy their way out of congestion. And in fact Toronto has the 407 Express Toll Route which has elements of variable road pricing. However, while the 407 ETR carries around 350,000 vehicles per day, price increases have been matters of controversy. It provides some ability for those who can afford it to bypass Toronto’s notorious traffic congestion, but its fundamental weakness is that it’s just one road in one of North America’s largest city-regions.
Similar stand-alone efforts to address congestion in Metro Vancouver with tolled routes, such as the Port Mann Bridge on the Trans-Canada Highway and the Golden Ears Bridge, have fallen well short of their projected traffic volumes, while nearby untolled bridges such as the Patullo Bridge are heavily congested. We have a similar experience in New Zealand where our two tolls roads, with car tolls of $2 and $2.20 respectively, experience diversion rates of up to 30% to the alternative but substantially longer and slower free routes.
This brings up a fundamental paradox: Congestion costs the economy a fortune and congestion is a top-of-mind frustration, yet people seem reluctant to pay even comparatively small amounts to bypass congestion.
For example, the City of Toronto’s Roundtable on Gridlock & Traffic Congestion in February 2014 came up with the usual shopping list of “transportation systems management” responses – improved management of curbside space and construction projects; synchronized traffic signal phasing; better traveller information and improved incident response. While these are all worthwhile responses, they only improve system operation at the margins. Encouraging greater use of public transit was the very last recommendation and there was not a single mention of charging or pricing as a tool to address congestion. And the feverish activity continues with a hackathon called TrafficJam on October 2 - 4, 2015 with the goal of fixing Toronto’s traffic woes.

The very few cities that have actually had significant success at reducing traffic congestion – notably Singapore, London and Stockholm – have done this through cordon-based congestion pricing wherein if you pass the cordon, you pay the congestion charge. Entering central London on a weekday between 7am and 6pm will set you back a cool £11.50 ($C23.30). From 2003 to 2013, about £1.2 billion ($C2.42 billion) of congestion charge revenue has been invested in public transport, road and bridge improvements and walking and cycling, of which £960 million ($C1.94 billion) was for bus improvements. These measures have included significant road space reallocation to improve conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, public transit and the urban realm.
The latest Travel in London report states that “Over the 10-year period from 2003, total trips have increased by 11.4 per cent, with particularly notable increases of 52.3 per cent in rail trips and 32.0 per cent in Underground and DLR [Docklands Light Railway] trips, with cycle trips (as main mode) increasing by 53.9 per cent. Car driver trips decreased by 12.7 per cent over the same period” (my emphasis).
One interesting insight is that Stockholm trialed congestion charging and then reverted to business as usual of unpriced roads in advance of a referendum on congestion pricing. This gave Stockholmers a clear sense of the difference in traffic congestion and was crucial in supporting a yes vote in the referendum.
Stockholm has experienced a permanent reduction in traffic of about 20% across the toll cordon and congestion decreased by 30 – 50% - which demonstrates that traffic volume reductions have a disproportionately positive impact on congestion. About half of the “disappearing” drivers changed to transit, the rest to other alternatives such as different departure times and destinations and taking fewer trips.
For more on Stockholm, I suggest reading the Tools of Change case study on Stockholm Congestion Pricing.

Before and after congestion charge photos of traffic levels in Stockholm
While this sounds very promising, congestion charging has significant equity implications and requires upfront investment to provide people who either choose to or can no longer afford to drive with transportation alternatives. Both Stockholm and London invested very heavily in public transit in advance of implementing congestion charging.
And this brings up a big issue for Toronto.
For congestion charging to have a meaningful impact on congestion without stifling economic activity or impeding people’s ability to move around, the core capacity of Toronto’s transit system would need to be addressed first. In particular the Yonge Line capacity enhancements, Metrolinx’s Regional Express Rail and most likely the Downtown Relief Line would need to be in place to provide both capacity and choice for people who either needed or wanted a travel alternative to any congestion charge. This would mean that Metrolinx’s Big Move might need to get even bigger.
Disclaimer: The author of the above post is an employee of Auckland Transport, however, the views, or opinions expressed in this post are personal to the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Auckland Transport, its management or employees. Auckland Transport is not responsible for, and disclaims any and all liability for the content of the article.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog