News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1.2K     6 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 895     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.8K     0 

London Rapid Transit (In-Design)

It's just unfortunate that it's the default choice, when there are so many other transit technology alternatives out there (i.e., Monorail). Light Rail definitely has its place, but it's not the only choice. Just look at Japan - a treasure trove of two dozen different kinds of transportation systems, all kinds of rubber-tire automated guideway systems, monorails (suspended and supported), street running, elevated, underground systems...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They haven't decided on any technology yet.

There are certainly advantages, though, to going with LRT, as they could easily work out a deal with the Province to piggyback on Metrolinx orders and receive good pricing due to the economy of scale.
 
Richmond at the core is a 4 lane street with no space on either side. I wonder how they plan to put a lrt/brt down the middle/one side.
 
Last edited:
I could think of a way... :)

436367487_640.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 436367487_640.jpg
    436367487_640.jpg
    53.7 KB · Views: 1,446
UD2 said:
Richmond at the core is a 4 lane street with no space on either side. I wonder how they plan to put a lrt/brt down the middle/one side.
Click to expand...
The PIC boards are up on the project website. Based on them, the North-East line would be tunneled from Oxford to Central in order to get under the freight line there. For people not familiar with London, this major downtown route can be blocked for 10+ minutes at a time due to long freight trains and for trains adjusting at the nearby freight yard which literally park across the road. In downtown, it would operate on a couple with Richmond for southbound and Clarence northbound.
 
I agree that alternative technologies can be great especially monorail but not for a city the size of London.

Monorail is quiet, easier to build, very reliable, safe, and affordable but the stations come at the standard price over every station. The stations alone would be too much for the city unless they did something like the SkyTrolley stations.
 
Great news for London and it will be used and, unlike Hamilton, they won't accept the money or the idea of rapid transit kicking and screaming.

It's great the London has already fired off the official request to Queen's Park and made particular reference to Toronto, Hamilton, Brampton, and Mississauga getting 100% financing and London expects the same. Actually London will be ponying up $125 million but mostly thru development charges.

To show how eager the city is, the report and request makes mention of the new government in Ottawa.............they aren't wasting anytime. They know the time has never been better. They are also hoping to start construction as early as 2017 meaning they are not willing to work on "Toronto time" where the endless committees and environmental reviews take longer than the actual construction. They also know that time is of the essence and that if London wants federal support then it must get shovels in the ground as soon as possible lest a future federal government try to back out.

This is great for London and I see on one of the maps that the LRT to Fanshawe also shows a future extension to the airport.
It would be a hoot if London manages to get rapid transit to the airport before Toronto does.
 
Orange line might be light rail, blue might be BRT

1297768358158_ORIGINAL.jpg


Stories

http://www.lfpress.com/2015/11/04/n...o-build-a-light-rail-transit-system-in-london

http://www.lfpress.com/2015/11/05/l...lected-next-term-to-make-light-rail-a-reality

-----

Bus service is bus service no matter how you sell it. I am not a fan of BRT.

It's now being argued that London is the largest city in Canada without a expressway for local use or a rapid transit line (BRT counts). Not sure how valid they are but those arguments, combined with a progressive city council and provincial and federal infrastructure money, may make LRT a reality.
 
This plus the fact that BRT is much more affordably expanded than LRT.

London is being both visionary and prudent...........building LRT where needed and not for political advantage. They refuse to view improved transit as a LRT or nothing scheme like Miller. Different corridors require different needs and the city has decided that LRT is not needed on the Blue Line and I tend to agree. They are putting the most money into the line they know will have the highest ridership.
 
London City Council has just unanimously passed the LRT/BRT rapid transit plan and now is forwarding an official request for money to Queen's Park.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top