News   Apr 25, 2024
GTA 2024 BILD Award Finalists Announced — and You Can Vote!
 253     0 
News   Apr 25, 2024
Brightwater Resubmission Proposes Increased Density and Height in Port Credit
 813     2 
News   Apr 25, 2024
Wyse Meter Solutions Encouraging Sustainability Through Submetering Technology
 822     0 

London Rapid Transit (In-Design)

ssiguy2 said:
The problem is that London is still stuck with the at grade CN at Richmond & Oxford and is only getting $500 million of infrastructure as opposed to the $800 million it wanted.
Click to expand...

London hasn't made any requests for money yet; what they eventually ask for is what they want. The province and feds did NOT turn down an $800M request and ask them to reduce the project scope; this decision was made purely for the cities own budget (operations and maintenance).

They're is absolutely nothing at either the provincial or national level preventing from from proposing additional infrastructure items. In fact, I get the impression that both governments are aggressively courting proposals from the non-big cities just to prove their infrastructure plans were not Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver centric.
 
Last edited:
44 North said:
Ultimately I think St Clair isn't the greatest example of a before/after, considering it already had streetcars prior to the ROW's construction. LRT-izing the roadway (and the complete capital works that goes along with such a conversion) definitely improved the area, not to mention allowed for the planning dept to hyperfocus on rezoning/upzoning. But IMO much of that would've happened without the ROW and by keeping the streetcar as-is. The "LRT" merely accelerated this (inevitable) process.

Either way, BurntCreek seems out to lunch. There's ample evidence that street rail (whether modern "LRT", or a rickety old trolley) improves property values. There's a reason why cities the world over have (re)embraced the technology that once ran along their streets a century ago. My Layman's guess as to why? Simply put: streetcars/LRT are better than buses.
Click to expand...
You say that there is ample evidence that street rail improves property values, but you havent provided one example. Now, in toronto, property values are going up everywhere. Whether there is bus, subway, or street car. But where are the property values the highest? Answer is, along the subway route. And thats also where the comercial property (which is an even better indicator) values are clearly the highest. As someone else mentioned earlier, along st clair, comercial real estate has converted to residential.

Then you say that cities the world over are re embrasing "technology that once ran on streets". But again, you havent provided a single example of of city that didnt already have trams, who is converting to street rail from scratch. In north america, toronto and san francisco is all thats left.
 
How bout this: you find the evidence that tram-style light rail projects give a net zero (or net negative) impact on nearby property values. After all it was you who posited that argument.
 
Burnt creek said:
You say that there is ample evidence that street rail improves property values, but you havent provided one example. Now, in toronto, property values are going up everywhere. Whether there is bus, subway, or street car. But where are the property values the highest? Answer is, along the subway route. And thats also where the comercial property (which is an even better indicator) values are clearly the highest. As someone else mentioned earlier, along st clair, comercial real estate has converted to residential.

Then you say that cities the world over are re embrasing "technology that once ran on streets". But again, you havent provided a single example of of city that didnt already have trams, who is converting to street rail from scratch. In north america, toronto and san francisco is all thats left.
Click to expand...

I guess The Green Line in Minneapolis, let alone the Blue line doesn't count?? Then there is The Phoenix Line that has grown 6 miles already in a short time frame with more coming in the next year or 2 as well down the road. Seattle is leap frogging the plan expansion by a decade or 2. All have seen an increase of development that would not happen if the LRT was not built.

I know the City planner for Minneapolis visit Mississauga years ago to help on the land use for the LRT proposed route and stated public that they were seeing $14 dollar return on very $1 invested in the Blue line and would be hard press to see $6 if it was BRT.

St Clair is seeing an investment today with higher density buildings been built on it or in the planning stage, let alone the upgrading of existing buildings/retail in the last 8 years because of the ROW.

There are places building new lines that never had one in the first place.

Kansas City that just open up a 2 mile route going no where, has seen ridership climb 3 times higher than plan for planning to the point more service is being put on the road with longer service hours. They are also looking at ordering a six car as well expanding the line.

I guess Philly, New Orleans don't count as existing systems like the ones you have stated?? Where does Calgary and Edmonton fit in??

I guess the conversion of commercial space to residential on Yonge St as well the downtown core don't count by your standards that are on a subway line???

London is different than Toronto, but it will see an increase of development on an RT line. How much is a different story depending on what been used for it. You need to visit Sheppard White Elephant Line area to see what that subway hasn't done for it in the way of development.
 
Last edited:
drum118 said:
I guess The Green Line in Minneapolis, let alone the Blue line doesn't count?? Then there is The Phoenix Line that has grown 6 miles already in a short time frame with more coming in the next year or 2 as well down the road. Seattle is leap frogging the plan expansion by a decade or 2. All have seen an increase of development that would not happen if the LRT was not built.

I know the City planner for Minneapolis visit Mississauga years ago to help on the land use for the LRT proposed route and stated public that they were seeing $14 dollar return on very $1 invested in the Blue line and would be hard press to see $6 if it was BRT.

St Clair is seeing an investment today with higher density buildings been built on it or in the planning stage, let alone the upgrading of existing buildings/retail in the last 8 years because of the ROW.

There are places building new lines that never had one in the first place.

Kansas City that just open up a 2 mile route going no where, has seen ridership climb 3 times higher than plan for planning to the point more service is being put on the road with longer service hours. They are also looking at ordering a six car as well expanding the line.

I guess Philly, New Orleans don't count as existing systems like the ones you have stated?? Where does Calgary and Edmonton fit in??

I guess the conversion of commercial space to residential on Yonge St as well the downtown core don't count by your standards that are on a subway line???

London is different than Toronto, but it will see an increase of development on an RT line. How much is a different story depending on what been used for it. You need to visit Sheppard White Elephant Line area to see what that subway hasn't done for it in the way of development.
Click to expand...
The examples you cite are all stand alone grade separated transit lines. They dont run on streets. In the case of edmonton, that now changed very recently.
 
Last edited:
Not SHIFT, but London is opening its first dedicated transit lane tomorrow. Very small, but a start (picture from City of London).
http://www.london.ca/newsroom/Pages/dedicated-transit-lane.aspx

15285029_10154814747775802_2211416098058671093_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top