London Rapid Transit (In-Design)

[kEiThZ]

Not sure what having a ghetto has to do with the provision of transit services.

Maybe you can explain your red herring a bit better.

All I'll say is that when I can travel to Salzburg and ride a trolley bus system, it's pretty ridiculous to go to London (a much larger city) and not even see decent bus frequency. Add a decade more of suburban growth with further underinvestment in transit and they are going to get even shittier. Especially when the part of the city they are ignoring (Wonderland area) is sprawling substantially.

 

[ssiguy2]

If London is a rust belt dying city than this country is doomed. London is one of the fastest growing cities in all Canada. As far as London Transit, it does better in ridership than most of it's similar size contemporaries.

London is conservative by nature. Socially it's quite liberal and always votes centre, centre-left but is cautious. It can really hurt the city in terms of creating a dynamic forward looking city. Conversely, London's resistance to inner city freeways has left the city with wonderful and historic downtown neighbourhoods and a walkable and constant urban form.

 

[sche]

Conversely, London's resistance to inner city freeways has left the city with wonderful and historic downtown neighbourhoods and a walkable and constant urban form.

ahem…

 

[micheal_can]

Not sure what having a ghetto has to do with the provision of transit services.

Maybe you can explain your red herring a bit better.

All I'll say is that when I can travel to Salzburg and ride a trolley bus system, it's pretty ridiculous to go to London (a much larger city) and not even see decent bus frequency. Add a decade more of suburban growth with further underinvestment in transit and they are going to get even shittier. Especially when the part of the city they are ignoring (Wonderland area) is sprawling substantially.

A city this size in NA not having a good transit system does not mean it is dying any more than a city the same size in Europe with a good size city means it is flourishing. London is a car centric place. Their transit reflects that. Being car centric is not a metric to use to show it is dying.

 

[nfitz]

Name me a city without any 'ghetto ' that has a great transit system.

Toronto

I've walked most of the worst parts of this town at night, and they feel safe enough. And no one would argue that we don't have great transit.

 

[kEiThZ]

Being car centric is not a metric to use to show it is dying.

This ain't the 90s anymore.

See the photos above. Ever walk the area near the VIA station? You really going to argue this isn't signs of decay?

They were a vibrant mid sized industrial city 30 years ago. Now they are a deindustrialized shell of themselves and getting worse by the year.

They may not just want to be a bedroom community to Toronto. But a substantial lack of focus on developing their own urban core, and a high preference for suburban development, all but guarantees they grow more like Mississauga than Hamilton.

 

[kEiThZ]

ahem…

View attachment 374534View attachment 374535View attachment 374536

Thank you. I go to London regularly to visit my in-laws. My FIL has a business right downtown. It's really sad to me to think of how much the city has decayed since the 90s. And yet some want to stick their head in the sand and pretend everything is fine based on a recent rebound that is literally about stacking up suburban housing. Traffic was terrible before Covid. It's getting worse again. I don't even want to imagine what a decade more of suburban growth is going to do to that city.

 

[ARG1]

Name me a city without any 'ghetto ' that has a great transit system.

Name me a city without any 'ghetto'... end of sentence.

If you want a city with great transit that is primarily targeted to the middle class, well, Washington D.C.

For various reasons, whether good or bad is hard to say, Washington D.C is definitely on the more expensive when it comes to Metros in the United States. What this means is that Washington falls into the GO Transit situation where the vast majority of commuters on the system are typically white collar middle - upper middle class workers. This also by extension applies to the bus network.

 

[Haljackey]

ahem…

View attachment 374534View attachment 374535View attachment 374536

London is slowly chipping away at all the surface parking. Richmond Street from downtown to Richmond Row now has all adjacent surface parking removed. Other streets like King and Dundas are nearly filled in too. There are still some large lots by the CN rail line but that's because there isn't much else you can build along the train tracks. In time I hope that will be taken up by another use.

I have hope my hometown will continue to improve in terms of transit and transit oriented developments. Progress has been slow but it is happening. A new municipal election later this year could change things up too- and hopefully for the better. I am hopeful they will green-light the west leg of the BRT. The north leg has by far the most benefit but is is also by far the most controversial. So long as the funds for that line are spent on some other projects, London can maybe use all the funding allocated by the province/feds. If not, we're a stupid doo-doo head just like how we left money on the table on other infrastructure projects in the past like a 402 freeway that would have run north of the city.

 

[Towered]

Not sure what having a ghetto has to do with the provision of transit services.

Maybe you can explain your red herring a bit better.

All I'll say is that when I can travel to Salzburg and ride a trolley bus system, it's pretty ridiculous to go to London (a much larger city) and not even see decent bus frequency. Add a decade more of suburban growth with further underinvestment in transit and they are going to get even shittier. Especially when the part of the city they are ignoring (Wonderland area) is sprawling substantially.

Salzburg also has a solid S-bahn system, including a plan to build a stretch underground through the historic centre to effectively serve as a subway. Now that's a country that has its shit together when it comes to transit infrastructure.

 

[kEiThZ]

What's really heartbreaking is all the old photos of London. Beautiful city. It's disgusting how much they bulldozed to accommodate cars. And now they want to perpetuate that further?

 

[kEiThZ]

Name me a city without any 'ghetto'... end of sentence.

It's also funny that he thinks London doesn't have a "ghetto". I guess it only counts as a ghetto if it's poor immigrants. Tons of students living like poor immigrants, in an area close to campus, doesn't count....

 

[micheal_can]

They seem to be doing their best to go that way. Not just a bedroom community. But a failed rust belt city to boot! What other explanation is there for refusing to build a transit system when the province and feds are offering to pay for 70% of it? Unbelievable.

Growth will and should go to communities that have a little more common sense. And those cities can leverage their transit investments to actually build proper and vibrant urban areas. Not the suburban crap that London is overloading on.

Toronto

I've walked most of the worst parts of this town at night, and they feel safe enough. And no one would argue that we don't have great transit.

Great transit? It has great commuter transit, but not great local transit

This ain't the 90s anymore.

See the photos above. Ever walk the area near the VIA station? You really going to argue this isn't signs of decay?

They were a vibrant mid sized industrial city 30 years ago. Now they are a deindustrialized shell of themselves and getting worse by the year.

They may not just want to be a bedroom community to Toronto. But a substantial lack of focus on developing their own urban core, and a high preference for suburban development, all but guarantees they grow more like Mississauga than Hamilton.

Ever walk north of Dundas?
Ever walk south of the tracks?
Ever walk east of Clarence?

There are certain areas of the city that are covered in vacant land and parking lots. However, this is true of every city in North America.

Name me a city without any 'ghetto'... end of sentence.

If you want a city with great transit that is primarily targeted to the middle class, well, Washington D.C.

For various reasons, whether good or bad is hard to say, Washington D.C is definitely on the more expensive when it comes to Metros in the United States. What this means is that Washington falls into the GO Transit situation where the vast majority of commuters on the system are typically white collar middle - upper middle class workers. This also by extension applies to the bus network.

You got my point of the ghettos. I know London has one. Basically, EOA..... If you are from London you know what that means.

It's also funny that he thinks London doesn't have a "ghetto". I guess it only counts as a ghetto if it's poor immigrants. Tons of students living like poor immigrants, in an area close to campus, doesn't count....

I know it does. I know people who used to lie in those areas.

Salzburg also has a solid S-bahn system, including a plan to build a stretch underground through the historic centre to effectively serve as a subway. Now that's a country that has its shit together when it comes to transit infrastructure.

So, we need to be conquered in a war to see good transit?

 

[ARG1]

Great transit? It has great commuter transit, but not great local transit

It has great local transit, I don't know what you're talking about. You don't need LRT or subways to not have great transit. Toronto has a world class network of bus routes that perfectly make use of our existing subway network to create an amazing feeder system. You can go to any major street, and within 10-15 minutes have a bus arrive - no need to worry about things like looking at schedules. On major routes like Finch and Steeles, a bus will arrive every 2-3 minutes. Despite what a lot of people in this city think, the TTC is actually fantastic for the amount of infrastructure we have.

You got my point of the ghettos. I know London has one. Basically, EOA..... If you are from London you know what that means.

I actually don't get your point about the ghettos, I'm actually extremely confused. From what I'm gathering, your point with the ghettos is that transit is often most attractive to poor people, and they are the target demographic for most transit systems. If you don't have poor people, then a transit system suffers from poor ridership. Am I correct?

If that's what you're trying to claim, I'm sorry but this isn't true. I can't prove it by showing an example of "a city where ghettos don't exist but transit is great" because for that to happen - one must find a city where ghettos don't exist. Every city will always have some camp or alley where the homeless or some lower class congregate - no exceptions.

So, we need to be conquered in a war to see good transit?

More like we need to git gud.

 

[DirectionNorth]

Great transit? It has great commuter transit, but not great local transit

The TTC is fine for non-peak trips. The 905 is kind of bad though.

Ever walk north of Dundas?
Ever walk south of the tracks?
Ever walk east of Clarence?

There are certain areas of the city that are covered in vacant land and parking lots. However, this is true of every city in North America.

Sporadic parking lots in a large downtown is different from having parking take up half of downtown. This isn't a fair comparison, but how often do you encounter surface parking lots in DT?
This is a non-comprehensive map of surface parking in London:

So, we need to be conquered in a war to see good transit?

Your point being ... ?