Cities with the shortest and longest commute times - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > General Developments and Discussions

General Developments and Discussions » Bridges | Cycling | Maritime


Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 31st, 2010, 06:00 AM   #1
Haljackey
Registered User
 
Haljackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 753
Likes (Received): 135

Cities with the shortest and longest commute times

Here's something you might find interesting:

Commute time: calculated as the average time (in minutes) of a trip to and from work, based on: US: 2008 Canada, Europe, Sydney: 2006.

Cities associated with low commute times are considered to be more attractive places to live.

With the highest average commute time, Toronto ranks last among the 19 metro areas for which data are available. With the exception of New York, the US cities do well on this indicator. London, Montreal and Toronto are the only cities to receive “D” grades.

# cities ranked: 19

The Grade

# - City Name - grade - average commute time in minutes

1. Barcelona A (48.4)
2. Dallas A (53.0)
3. Milan A (53.4)
4. Seattle A (55.5)
5. Boston A (55.8 )
6. Los Angeles A (56.1)
7. San Francisco B (57.4)
8. Chicago B (61.4)
9. Berlin B (63.2)
10. Halifax C (65.0)
11. Sydney C (66.0)
12. Madrid C (66.1)
13. Calgary C (67.0)
14. Vancouver C (67.0)
15. New York C (68.1)
16. Stockholm C (70.0)
17. London D (74.0)
18. Montreal D (76.0)
19. Toronto D (80.0)

Data unavailable for Hong Kong, Oslo, Paris,
Shanghai, and Tokyo.

Source: http://bot.com/Content/NavigationMen...2010_FINAL.pdf

Interesting to see where these cities fit. Looks like cities with more highways tend to rank higher compared to those with more rapid transit systems (subways).

I've been to both Barcelona and Toronto and I agree with this list. Barcelona has excellent transport infrastructure whereas Toronto has few transit lines and highways.

Thoughts?

Last edited by Haljackey; March 31st, 2010 at 06:07 AM.
Haljackey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 31st, 2010, 07:17 PM   #2
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 48,001
Likes (Received): 26463

This list is too limited imo.

Based on that list, I don't see any correlation between transit vs highway prominence. Barcelona and Madrid are examples of cities which have both good transit and highway systems, yet Los Angeles has limited transit but is still one of the best performing cities, while Toronto has a more or less similar transport system and is the worst performing city. On the other hand, Milan, a city with extensive transit is performing good, while London, which has very extensive transit options, is performing very bad.

Of course the geographical sizes of these cities can be an influence, although I doubt if it is a leading one (Dallas is very large, yet has short commuting times, while Stockholm is relatively compact but has very long commuting times).

Also, does this list include city propers, urban areas or metropolitan areas?
__________________

travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2010, 01:08 AM   #3
Haljackey
Registered User
 
Haljackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 753
Likes (Received): 135

Is it for the metropolitan area.

Size can be a factor, so can density, but it is sufficient transport infrastructure that affects these results the most.
Haljackey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old April 1st, 2010, 04:10 PM   #4
poshbakerloo
***Alexxx***
 
poshbakerloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London, Manchester, Cheshire, Sheffield, Moscow
Posts: 5,143
Likes (Received): 315

its 30mins-ish for me when commuting into manchester...although it can take as long as 2hrs when going home if i miss my train! urgh
__________________
"BEFORE WE MARRY...I HAVE A SECRET!"

I <3 London
poshbakerloo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2010, 07:47 AM   #5
Dr.Scope
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: WA, USA
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 1

While they are finally replacing the 520 bridge in to Seattle in 2014 or 2015 it will still have the same # of lanes... 3 on each side (1 is HOV) and will now cost money (toll bridge).

And if that is not bad enough the 405 has such bad surfacing it feels like driving on a pebble road

So Seattle should be higher up in my opinion.
Dr.Scope no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us