News   Jul 05, 2022
 33     0 
News   Jul 05, 2022
 141     0 
News   Jul 05, 2022
 736     1 

London Rapid Transit (In-Design)

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
24,874
Reaction score
5,470
Location
Toronto
Great transit? It has great commuter transit, but not great local transit
Compared to where? TTC is great local transit. I'm challenged to find anywhere in Canada that's better - or the USA to be honest. Whenever I return back to Toronto, I've been reminded that the grass isn't always greener.

Montreal is similar - particularly after their frequency improvement in recent years. And Vancouver isn't bad too - even if service isn't quite as frequent as it should be. NYC might have been better once - but the sorry state of the subway system, and the ever infrequent bus services strike against it.

LA has certainly improved in the last couple of decades.

Ghettos in London Ontario? I'm struggling to believe that. Can you draw the area on a map ... I have to see this on Streetview to believe it!
 

kEiThZ

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
5,711
I actually don't get your point about the ghettos, I'm actually extremely confused.

His original point was that point only cities with ghettos have good transit. But now that he admits London has a (student) ghetto, what's the excuse for their shit transit system?

It's the usual reflexive defence from anybody when their hood gets called out for making bad choices. Funny enough, my wife's younger cousins who live in London hate how bad their transit system is. And they blame older generations for giving them crap infrastructure.

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

European cities were bombed to smithereens and still built out better urban centres. London, ON looks like a bombed out city with half the downtown being empty lots. And they did that to themselves, by literally demolishing buildings themselves. No war required.

Go look at photos of London from the 1940s and 50s.
 

Haljackey

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
614
Reaction score
393
Location
London, Ontario
Ghettos in London Ontario? I'm struggling to believe that. Can you draw the area on a map ... I have to see this on Streetview to believe it!

Dundas east of Adelaide (EoA) is probably the closest thing London has to a ghetto. The city has been pumping in money to try and fix it up however.


There's even a song about it by local rocker Bobnoxious. It's quite catchy

 

Haljackey

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
614
Reaction score
393
Location
London, Ontario
The TTC is fine for non-peak trips. The 905 is kind of bad though.

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:
View attachment 374588

Your point being ... ?

Posted this on reddit- https://www.reddit.com/r/londonontario/comments/s37ry4
A report just recently came out showing very high vacancy in downtown London. One of the reasons cited was a lack of parking. https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/londons-downtown-office-vacancy-rate-hits-record-high

This can cleaned up a bit by parking garages (unsightly), underground (expensive) and/or better transit investment. The Downtown Loop BRT line should make the bus routes through/around downtown more efficient, but there is still a certain stigma about riding the bus.
 
Last edited:

kEiThZ

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
5,711
f0519454106a73a507bda6c66b26216f.jpg


OLD-JLC.jpg


293b47fde4ba885a900e3cf9361f9cc3.jpg


Tell me again about how London was built as a car centric city....

It was just fine until the Silent Generation and the Boomers turned it in to the sprawling car dependent mess it is today.
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,819
Reaction score
1,806
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.

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.

More like we need to git gud.

There are parts of Toronto and parts of Vancouver I would avoid, even during daylight.

My point is that a ghetto is a sign of urban decay of which if London truly had one, would be evidence of that decay. No part of London is to be avoided. The worst, like others have pointed out is East of Adelaide along Dundas. Go along it and you will start seeing that although it isn't the greatest, it is better than Jane and Finch or East Hastings. Because London is still a more affluent of a city and short of a freeway ripping through the city, it is still a very car centric city.

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

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:
View attachment 374588

Your point being ... ?

Fine is not great. Off peak is not a good metric either. I would say the best local transit would be Vancouver, as much o the area is served well with buses and their Skytrain.

Compared to where? TTC is great local transit. I'm challenged to find anywhere in Canada that's better - or the USA to be honest. Whenever I return back to Toronto, I've been reminded that the grass isn't always greener.

Montreal is similar - particularly after their frequency improvement in recent years. And Vancouver isn't bad too - even if service isn't quite as frequent as it should be. NYC might have been better once - but the sorry state of the subway system, and the ever infrequent bus services strike against it.

LA has certainly improved in the last couple of decades.

Ghettos in London Ontario? I'm struggling to believe that. Can you draw the area on a map ... I have to see this on Streetview to believe it!

TTC has a problem with not having enough frequency for the demand. That means waiting or the next bus/subway/streetcar. The real reality is that transit is not great anywhere.

His original point was that point only cities with ghettos have good transit. But now that he admits London has a (student) ghetto, what's the excuse for their shit transit system?

It's the usual reflexive defence from anybody when their hood gets called out for making bad choices. Funny enough, my wife's younger cousins who live in London hate how bad their transit system is. And they blame older generations for giving them crap infrastructure.



European cities were bombed to smithereens and still built out better urban centres. London, ON looks like a bombed out city with half the downtown being empty lots. And they did that to themselves, by literally demolishing buildings themselves. No war required.

Go look at photos of London from the 1940s and 50s.

Actually, my point is that the reason for a lack of transit investment is due to a lack of want by most citizens as they won't be using it.

A lot of European cities were rebuilt from nothing and they built in the transit they knew they needed. So, by that logic, we need to completely level the city and rebuild it with the transit it needs. Or, we understand that it is not that simple.

Dundas east of Adelaide (EoA) is probably the closest thing London has to a ghetto. The city has been pumping in money to try and fix it up however.


There's even a song about it by local rocker Bobnoxious. It's quite catchy


Goo to hear someone knows where I mean. Now, compare that to Jane and Finch and East Hastings.

Posted this on reddit- https://www.reddit.com/r/londonontario/comments/s37ry4
A report just recently came out showing very high vacancy in downtown London. One of the reasons cited was a lack of parking. https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/londons-downtown-office-vacancy-rate-hits-record-high

This can cleaned up a bit by parking garages (unsightly), underground (expensive) and/or better transit investment. The Downtown Loop BRT line should make the bus routes through/around downtown more efficient, but there is still a certain stigma about riding the bus.

The solution is not one thing. London should build parking garages and underground parking. They should also build BRT/LRT. The problem, like you say is the stigma towards transit. That is why a BRT wont be as successful as an LRT would be. London is one of the busiest Via stations. To me that seems odd, until you think about how it isn't a bus.

What does the war have to do with anything? Austria was building great transit infrastructure decades before the war...
And in the 1940s, London was ripping up their streetcar lines. Now, that needs to be reversed. The transit renaissance has been happening for about 15 years - since around 2008 as make work projects to stimulate the economy after the great recession. Now, the ball is rolling that more places are jumping on the movement.
 

ssiguy2

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
3,543
Reaction score
1,451
I'm not surprised by the higher vacancy rates in the core. Downtown London has basically been under COVID for the last 4 years as so many streets have been shut down for massive reconstruction.

London, for it's size, actually has a pretty good transit system and you never wait more than 15 minutes for nearly any bus during the day and less in rush hour. The city also has express routes. They even have articulates to serve the higher ridership routes.

The City has sunk a small fortune into turning the downtown over the last few decades but the last 4 years have killed it backed up by a growing homeless and drug problem in the core. Eventually things will pay off especially when COVID is gone and the BRT Loop is finally completed. The downtown in 10 years will be a vastly different one than it is today due to the soaring downtown/inner city population and the BRT fully operational. The city also wants to have 70% of it's entire fleet zero emissions within 10 years and all routes entering the core which will make it a more pleasant environment.
 

ARG1

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
1,923
Reaction score
4,703
Location
North Toronto
There are parts of Toronto and parts of Vancouver I would avoid, even during daylight.

My point is that a ghetto is a sign of urban decay of which if London truly had one, would be evidence of that decay. No part of London is to be avoided. The worst, like others have pointed out is East of Adelaide along Dundas. Go along it and you will start seeing that although it isn't the greatest, it is better than Jane and Finch or East Hastings. Because London is still a more affluent of a city and short of a freeway ripping through the city, it is still a very car centric city.
No it isn't. Abandonment is the major sign of urban decay. Even the ugliest of ghettos are still a representation of life, its less of a question of existence as much as it is a question of how much of a city they take up. San Francisco is a massive L when it comes to ghettos and being ugly when it comes to the amount of Ghettos - and even then the last thing I'd call san francisco is in a state of "urban decay" or "lifeless". On the other hand, when most of your offices are abandoned and unused - that's a much bigger sign that something is truly wrong with your city. It means your city no longer holds any economic power, and is reliant on external forces to remain sustainable.
Fine is not great. Off peak is not a good metric either. I would say the best local transit would be Vancouver, as much o the area is served well with buses and their Skytrain.
Define what you mean. Fine is definitely underselling it. Its definitely an extremely usable local transit network - and is a great example for the rest of North America to follow, the importance of service compared to infrastructure.
TTC has a problem with not having enough frequency for the demand. That means waiting or the next bus/subway/streetcar. The real reality is that transit is not great anywhere.
???

What route doesn't have enough frequency for the demand? The only thing I can think of is maybe certain streetcar routes, but even then we just ordered 60 new streetcars in addition to the existing 20 we have.
Actually, my point is that the reason for a lack of transit investment is due to a lack of want by most citizens as they won't be using it.
?????????????????????????????

I have absolutely NO idea what you're trying to say here.
A lot of European cities were rebuilt from nothing and they built in the transit they knew they needed. So, by that logic, we need to completely level the city and rebuild it with the transit it needs. Or, we understand that it is not that simple.
A lot of cities were leveled, and while it did do a lot to improve transit, it in no way is a requirement - and those cities are proof of that. Most european cities already had massive transit networks prior to WW2 - especially cities like Vienna, Berlin, London, and Paris. They were building tons of transit even before they were leveled, and post WW2 only saw a moderate increase of transit construction overall.
And in the 1940s, London was ripping up their streetcar lines. Now, that needs to be reversed. The transit renaissance has been happening for about 15 years - since around 2008 as make work projects to stimulate the economy after the great recession. Now, the ball is rolling that more places are jumping on the movement.
This has nothing to do with the war...
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,819
Reaction score
1,806
No it isn't. Abandonment is the major sign of urban decay. Even the ugliest of ghettos are still a representation of life, its less of a question of existence as much as it is a question of how much of a city they take up. San Francisco is a massive L when it comes to ghettos and being ugly when it comes to the amount of Ghettos - and even then the last thing I'd call san francisco is in a state of "urban decay" or "lifeless". On the other hand, when most of your offices are abandoned and unused - that's a much bigger sign that something is truly wrong with your city. It means your city no longer holds any economic power, and is reliant on external forces to remain sustainable.

Show me an area of London that has a decent amount of abandoned buildings or houses.

Define what you mean. Fine is definitely underselling it. Its definitely an extremely usable local transit network - and is a great example for the rest of North America to follow, the importance of service compared to infrastructure.

There are 2 sides of transit that if they exist, then it is good.
One is how frequent it is. The other is whether it can fit you when it arrives. Having to wait for the next bus/subway/streetcar because this one is full is not a sign of good transit. It is a sign of transit that is well used.

What route doesn't have enough frequency for the demand? The only thing I can think of is maybe certain streetcar routes, but even then we just ordered 60 new streetcars in addition to the existing 20 we have.

Line 1 for example. At Bloor, during the commute, you will not get on the next subway. King Streetcar is also the same issue.
Steeles has buses coming in under 5 minutes, but can you get on one? It is great that it comes every 2 minutes, but if 10 guess pass you buy, it isn't good at all.

The point of transit isn't about seeing it go by, but it being able to take you where you are going.

I have absolutely NO idea what you're trying to say here

The citizens of London have voted for their representatives. Those representative are the ones making the decisions. So, the citizens are voting for the people who will put in place things that they feel they want in their city. If the citizens won't use transit, then they aren't likely going to vote for protransit representatives.

A lot of cities were leveled, and while it did do a lot to improve transit, it in no way is a requirement - and those cities are proof of that. Most european cities already had massive transit networks prior to WW2 - especially cities like Vienna, Berlin, London, and Paris. They were building tons of transit even before they were leveled, and post WW2 only saw a moderate increase of transit construction overall.

Who Killed Roger Rabbit?

This has nothing to do with the war...

You are right. It has to do with Who Killed Roger Rabbit.
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
24,874
Reaction score
5,470
Location
Toronto
TTC has a problem with not having enough frequency for the demand. That means waiting or the next bus/subway/streetcar. The real reality is that transit is not great anywhere.
Where? It certainly happens after an incident, or delay, etc. But not on a daily basis. It does happen from time-to-time on the surface, but where I've consistently observed it, they've tended to fix it with increased service ... or diamond lanes.

With I suppose the well known exception of the southbound Bloor platforms in AM peak. Though hopefully the $10 billion or so of projects underway will alleviate that.

But tell me more about these non-existent ghettos?

Goo to hear someone knows where I mean. Now, compare that to Jane and Finch and East Hastings.
There's certainly a couple of blocks in Vancouver I'd avoid, but I wouldn't call it a ghetto. It's more a homeless problem.

Jane and Finch? What amazes me the most driving through and changing buses at Jane and Finch, is just how normal it looks, and quiet it is. I don't think one would consider it unsafe to walk there in the dark. It's probably unsafe to go around waving a gun and shooting at the locals ... :)

What route doesn't have enough frequency for the demand? The only thing I can think of is maybe certain streetcar routes, but even then we just ordered 60 new streetcars in addition to the existing 20 we have.
Is there really such streetcar routes any more? They've been very good about supplementing service with buses for some time. And the worst problems were dealt with by the transitway along King Street.

Downtown London has basically been under COVID for the last 4 years as so many streets have been shut down for massive reconstruction.
Well it certainly seems like 4 years ... unless London has a deep dark secret! :)
 
Last edited:

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,819
Reaction score
1,806
Where? It certainly happens after an incident, or delay, etc. But not on a daily basis. It does happen from time-to-time on the surface, but where I've consistently observed it, they've tended to fix it with increased service ... or diamond lanes.

With I suppose the well known exception of the southbound Bloor platforms in AM peak. Though hopefully the $10 billion or so of projects underway will alleviate that.

But tell me more about these non-existent ghettos?
The fact that it is a $10 billion fix shows that it is not good.
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
24,874
Reaction score
5,470
Location
Toronto
The fact that it is a $10 billion fix shows that it is not good.
Building an entirely new subway line through downtown demonstrates that TTC has poor transit?

You dodge so many questions, while making your claims. Where are these non-existent ghettos? Which city in Canada (or USA) has much better transit? How is Vancouver a ghetto issue, rather than a homeless issue?
 

kEiThZ

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
5,711
A lot of European cities were rebuilt from nothing and they built in the transit they knew they needed.

Wrong. A lot of Europe was even rebuilt as car centric. Go read up on the ideas of Le Corbusier. Everybody knows all about bike friendly Amsterdam. It wasn't always that way. It was so car friendly that pedestrian deaths soared. And when children started getting run over, there was a backlash. It took them nearly three decades to get to where they are. But the key is to at least start down that road. And here you get to see the history in Amsterdam that would have made it like a car dependent American city:


Here is a great video on Rotterdam to explain how a city built for cars can get better:


I will never understand why despite all evidence, folks like you insist that no change is possible. Do you actually like London being the crapfest it is? I don't. I see so much potential in that city. And it breaks my heart, how they squander it. I would love to retire there if they actually built a decent urban core.
 

Top