Mississauga Hurontario-Main Line 10 LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

It makes not different what line you want to use to promote LRT in Mississauga so long as various councilors remain on council, since they are car lovers and low taxes people. Then opposed Density also.

My ward councilor is one of those people who even opposed more density to support transit in the first place.

I was planning on appearing before council next Wednesday to present my budget request for transit as well taking council to task on Hurontario LRT, but I happen to be else where at the time.

Again up front cost is getting in the way when it should be made clear to them that operation cost will be lower than buses as well drive up the demand for development along the line.

Even though I will not make the meeting, I will be sending in backup info as to why council needs to get off their ass and hands to get this line moving. The mayor has already requested P3 help from the Fed's and is pushing the LRT at provincial level which is opposite to what she was doing 5 years ago.

One has to look at the ridership of 502 let alone 103 to see the ridership is there now let alone 19. Since 103 now see lower headway, ridership has jump to full bus load during the day that bypassing Sq One compare to the odd few riders last year while 19 is still seeing close doors to Sq One.

Councillor Nando Iannicca who ward is the Cooksville area has being pushing this LRT since he see it will kick start a number of high density projects waiting in the wings. He wants high density in his ward as he see his area being more the downtown area with higher residents numbers than the city core. He is correct to a point if the current Downtown 21 plan stays in place. If it doesn't and higher density is put in the Downtown 21 plan, Cooksville will be the 2nd heavy density area in the city where the sky is the limit.

I know the plan was to have LRT on Dundas, but since ridership is low west of Hurontario and the push to have BRT along Dundas to Burlington, the eastern section will have to be BRT at this time. At some future date, an LRT will show up for this section as well going west to the 403 unless there is an higher demand to go to Oakville, let alone Burlington. Then I have always saw TTC 512 making its way to Stoney Creek along Dundas.
 
City of Mississauga Prepares For Light Rail Transit on Hurontario

Nov 30, 2012

"The City of Mississauga is preparing for Light Rail Transit on the Hurontario corridor," said Mayor Hazel McCallion. "We are pleased with the announcement by Metrolinx yesterday that the LRT is part of its next wave of projects in the Big Move and we look forward to working with Metrolinx on the implementation of the LRT. We have done our homework. Our residents have told us this is what they need and want. We have a completed feasibility study and resulting Master Plan. We are working towards bringing it to Mississauga. We will face funding challenges and we are preparing for that. We are working with our funding partners including Metrolinx that has strongly supported us along the way. Light Rail Transit continues to be a priority and we know it represents the future for our City. Light Rail Transit on Hurontario can be found in all aspects of our future planning. It will not be easy. Anything worth doing takes time, money and effort and we respect that and are thankful for the support we have received."

About the Hurontario-Main LRT Project

The current Preliminary Design/TPAP Phase of the Hurontario-Main LRT project in the cities of Mississauga and Brampton follows an extensive Hurontario/Main Street Master Plan Study (2008 - 2010). The Cities of Mississauga and Brampton previously initiated the Hurontario/Main Street Study to develop a Corridor Master Plan integrating rapid transit, land use and enhanced urban design for the approximate 21-kilometre corridor between downtown Brampton in the north and Port Credit in the south of Mississauga.

The outcome of this study in 2011 was creation of the Hurontario/Main Street Master Plan, which sets out a vision for a unified concept for mobility in the 21st Century, which complements and complies with both the Province of Ontario's Places to Grow legislation and Metrolinx's The Big Move Regional Transportation Plan.
The Preferred Light Rail Transit (LRT) Option
Central to the Hurontario/Main Street Master Plan was the conclusion that LRT is the preferred form of transit on the corridor. The LRT system, as envisaged in the Master Plan, will link two Urban Growth Centres (as designated in Places to Grow) and cross five Mobility Hubs identified as locations for multi-modal, inter-regional transit connections and enhanced transit-oriented development.

The LRT system is intended to be a catalyst for economic development, residential intensification, improved quality of life and long-term municipal sustainability.

Once the Hurontario/Main Street Study was completed, the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton proceeded with the next stage, a Request for Proposals to undertake the Preliminary Design/TPAP Phase, including extensive public and stakeholder consultations. Through this competitive bidding process, SNC-Lavalin and its team was selected to spearhead the Preliminary Design, Engineering and TPAP Phase encompassing both technical and community outreach aspects of the process. This work is currently underway.
Master Plan Documents
To view Master Plan related documents (2008 – 2010), click here.
 
Here is a question for everyone.

First the background.
I live in Malton, part of Mississauga. Many people in Mississauga are not even sure if Malton is part of Mississauga. We often feel like we are not part of the city and often identify ourselves as from Malton only, so much so that we speak of Mississauga as a different city. The LRT is going nowehere near here and it won't have any effect on the traffic here. The LRT is not part of some grand city building "Transit City" plan which would eventually have a LRT line to here.

To pay for the city's share of the LRT, Mississauga may have to raise property taxes or have a special tax.
So the question is "why should we in Malton have to pay for the LRT?"
 
Vaucluse said:
Here is a question for everyone.

First the background.
I live in Malton, part of Mississauga. Many people in Mississauga are not even sure if Malton is part of Mississauga. We often feel like we are not part of the city and often identify ourselves as from Malton only, so much so that we speak of Mississauga as a different city. The LRT is going nowehere near here and it won't have any effect on the traffic here. The LRT is not part of some grand city building "Transit City" plan which would eventually have a LRT line to here.

To pay for the city's share of the LRT, Mississauga may have to raise property taxes or have a special tax.
So the question is "why should we in Malton have to pay for the LRT?"
Click to expand...

Why should you get bus service then, since Malton can't pay their fair share of the cost in the first Place for it.??

Based on your current share, you would be lucky to see a bus every 60 minutes 5 days a week with no weekend service.
 
At today design charrette for the Imperial Oil Lands, the LRT now go west of One Port Development across the mouth of the Port Credit River to the centre of the Imperial Land and then north to Lakeshore protection for future expansion to the west.

The main call was to make Port St a transit pedestrian mall with no development on the south side, east of One Port site.

The current Staff vision for the LRT on Hurontario between Port St and the QEW will be 100% on the west side in its own ROW.

Not sure if cutouts of the LRT was at the June meeting since I was in Europe, but can be had now in Metrolinx colours.

From what I was told today, there will be a stakeholder meeting late Jan and a public meeting late Feb. One reason for the uproar over the budget for transit and the city is the fact there is no known cost as to what the city maybe looking at and that will not be known till spring. Regardless of this, the city should be banking money away now for this LRT or one of the other 7 lines I see for the city down the road. What came out of today meeting is an example of extra cost that will not be paid for by Metrolinx under the current budget for it.
 
I don't have the numbers to discuss specific routes but I think you're correct on that count. However, that arguement could be said for most routes in Mississauga and for public transit as a whole and I'm sure that could be said about driving on the roads as well. Yes everyone likes to shit upon Malton: the feds with AVRO, the prov with the original route of the 409, and the city which appears to focuses on Streetsville, MCC and Port Credit only (dare I mention that the map on the Hurontario-LRT website cuts off half of Malton?).

In case your wondering, I'm for the LRT I just think we need to think bigger and sooner. Maybe we should have a plan for radial routes from the city centre that reach out to all parts. I've been on a few trams in European cities whch follows a route that hits the big commuter draws, like Grenoble for example, imagine a LRT line that goes from the airport to MCC then to UTM. However for now there is only one LRT line proposed now. If this was part of a much grander scheme with eventual LRT across the city then I could see that everyone pays and everyone benefits.

AS for my question, I'm asking for something different than a "be happy with what you got" answer. So let me present it a different way:
Pretend you are a councillor for Malton, Clarkson, or Meadowvale. How would you answer the question "why should my taxes be increased for a project that doesn't affect my community?"

I'm asking this as a question among friends now, but in a few months (years?) the members of city council will have to answer questions like this posed by their constituents.
 
Vaucluse said:
I don't have the numbers to discuss specific routes but I think you're correct on that count. However, that arguement could be said for most routes in Mississauga and for public transit as a whole and I'm sure that could be said about driving on the roads as well. Yes everyone likes to shit upon Malton: the feds with AVRO, the prov with the original route of the 409, and the city which appears to focuses on Streetsville, MCC and Port Credit only (dare I mention that the map on the Hurontario-LRT website cuts off half of Malton?).

In case your wondering, I'm for the LRT I just think we need to think bigger and sooner. Maybe we should have a plan for radial routes from the city centre that reach out to all parts. I've been on a few trams in European cities whch follows a route that hits the big commuter draws, like Grenoble for example, imagine a LRT line that goes from the airport to MCC then to UTM. However for now there is only one LRT line proposed now. If this was part of a much grander scheme with eventual LRT across the city then I could see that everyone pays and everyone benefits.

AS for my question, I'm asking for something different than a "be happy with what you got" answer. So let me present it a different way:
Pretend you are a councillor for Malton, Clarkson, or Meadowvale. How would you answer the question "why should my taxes be increased for a project that doesn't affect my community?"

I'm asking this as a question among friends now, but in a few months (years?) the members of city council will have to answer questions like this posed by their constituents.
Click to expand...

I have been the voice for transit since 2000 and have yet to see other people stepping up to the plate to deal with it. The few that have show up only to bitch about something with no solution to deal with it. Then they are gone and never heard again. In a few cases, the person was their own enemy, not the system. I have push for a transit advisory committee for years and we may see one in 2015 after the next election when it should be now. I don't have all the answers or solution, but I deal with what I think is best city wide to the point the mayor has centre me out a number of time to the point she has said she agrees with me 85% of the time and disagree on the other 15%. That is higher than I expected.

How would you answer the question "why should my taxes be increased for a project that doesn't affect my community?"
Click to expand...
Are you prepare to pay 3-5 times the current taxes to pay the full cost of all your service in your ward than pay a flat rate city wide?? This means you are 100% responsible that needs to be built, repair or maintain only to your ward and nothing to the city. You will be require to pay a cost to use any other service outside your ward including the roads. Depending on what ward it is, the cost could be higher or lower than the 3-5 time rate.

I was using what a transit rider would say as response to your question and it also applies to other areas of the city.

I have done ridership counts and route cost over the years and can say/have stated to council, "40% of routes don't meet the threshold to exist since there is no growth in then well been built out decades ago and no density there now nor plan for." We have seen service cuts and cancelling of services almost yearly over the past 5+ years due to routes failing to meet the bare minimum cost ratio. Another few are plan for Jan with a couple more later on in the spring. Until council and the NIMBY stop fighting to allow more density across the board and more funding for transit, Peter got to pay Paul to get service.

When I look at Malton, it cut off from the city as a whole with poor service to the city centre because of the airport. It would have been better off being part of Etobicoke like Etobicoke has said it should have been part of Mississauga or a good portion from it west of the 427/27/Brownsline. This even comes from a few councilor in Etobicoke. It could have been part of Brampton, but since its Mississauga we have to deal with it as best we can.

I have for years push for 30 minutes service for #7, 7 days a week going on 10 years with 15 minutes to the airport. We have the largest airport in our backyard and only supply garbage service to it.

Over all, service sucks city wide due to lack of funding, density and grid system.

I can't remember when it was as a date, but during the time council was held at the court house, I made a presentation on transit where I was calling for 9 LRT lines to be built in the city. After that meeting, council came up to me saying they finally realizes where I was coming from and now to start doing it. They also said all of staff that were behind me were shacking their heads in totally agreement with my presentation, but has fail to be fall through on it today.

In Oct of 2013, you will be getting max 30 minutes with shorter headway at times, for all day and 7 days a week for 107, as well a faster trip.

As to service and funding transit, I have given council a list of question for anyone complaining about 1/2 empty buses on the road and a list of answers they will hear in response to them. Bottom line, until there is a true well service transit service meeting riders needs including density, you will see empty to 1/2 empty buses on the road for various routes at various times.

We have no 7/24 service city wide and thats on my books since 2002 in a report to the city. In Europe you have it as well standard service on Friday and Sat to 3 am before night service kicks in. Only saw the odd route that saw over 30 minutes headway 7 days a week and some thing long over due here.

Staff presented a graph for the budget I have being asking for a long time that show how slow buses have come over the past 5 years cause by traffic. This graph shows the catch 22 they are in when dealing with service level due to lack of funding. It means either adding another bus to maintain the current service level or increase headway/cut service to deal with the longer trip time. Once you increase/cut service, riders look to the car for their travel mode.

I agree 100% on trams since I visited 12 countries and 24 cities on a fact & research trip to Europe this past summer to find what I have being saying for years. We are 25+ years behind Europe on most level especially Trams/LRT and no where near on regional rail or service level. All the photos I shot on my trip are on my site by city and country from June 21-Aug 22 at this time with 8 more days of photos to be added. All the videos are up, but not all tag or label due to lack of time now. There are over 12,000 photos that were taken and required a lot more time to fix than I plan on as well having it done. Because of lack of time and longer time frame, I haven't been able to do the urban photos that I have shot since my return which is a few 1,00's at this time nor post then.

At the end of the Day, the Hurontario LRT needs to be up and running by 2018. It will kick start of wave of development to help to keep taxes low, if it does start then, otherwise higher taxes will be require at all levels.

At this point of time, I have no faith in Metrolinx nor the next government to fund transit 100% as original plan in 2008, as well built them. Talk is cheaper than action. Lets see what is said next Wednesday on the LRT.
 
Last edited:
Malton has some excellent transit service:
- TTC, MiWay, and Brampton Transit all in 1 terminal (I gotta admit though that 36B, 96B, and 37A can go to Westwood)
- 11/11A/11B is one of the most frequent routes in the entire system, but Brampton Transit's 5, 11, and 30 are the most frequent serving the terminal.
- 3 bus routes to/from the airport.
- 107 provides express service to the City Centre and has been recently upgraded to operate during middays.
- 16/16A is the second-busiest loop route in the system (after 36).
- Another express route proposed connecting Malton and Meadowvale via Derry.

What more can one ask? In fact, I'm envious, because the entire community can be reached by transit. Here in Brampton, only a few communities are blessed with this kind of service: express + arterial local + local loops.

- Also, remember that a chunk of Ward 5 is in the Hurontario corridor, so Coun. Crombie also has to represent that part of her ward too.
 
aleesia said:
Malton has some excellent transit service:
- TTC, MiWay, and Brampton Transit all in 1 terminal (I gotta admit though that 36B, 96B, and 37A can go to Westwood)
- 11/11A/11B is one of the most frequent routes in the entire system, but Brampton Transit's 5, 11, and 30 are the most frequent serving the terminal.
- 3 bus routes to/from the airport.
- 107 provides express service to the City Centre and has been recently upgraded to operate during middays.
- 16/16A is the second-busiest loop route in the system (after 36).
- Another express route proposed connecting Malton and Meadowvale via Derry.

What more can one ask? In fact, I'm envious, because the entire community can be reached by transit. Here in Brampton, only a few communities are blessed with this kind of service: express + arterial local + local loops.

- Also, remember that a chunk of Ward 5 is in the Hurontario corridor, so Coun. Crombie also has to represent that part of her ward too.
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention that Malton has a GO Transit line with 25 min service to Union, as well as Mississauga's only VIA stop. Malton also, has pretty good bicycle connection to Toronto and acceptable connections to Mississauga (out of rush hour and weekends anyway). Of course we must mention that Malton is well served by the 427, 409, 401 and 407 highways.
Did you know that Malton has an airport?
Actually, if we could get someone to dig a canal to Lake Ontario and build a Zeppelin mast at the airport we would have all of our bases covered.

Now back from my comedy bit. If you look at the city's ward map the one thing that stands out about ward 5 is it's size. If you look cloder you will see that there is two population centres divided by a few km of industrial lands. Yes, one ward 5 population centre is near Hurontario but the other isn't. For the purposes of my question just ignore Malton for now and imagine how you would convince someone who lives far away from the line that it's in their best interest to build it.
 
Drum118,

Some very good points and this was the type of answer I was looking for.

First some background. Malton was almagameted to Toronto Township (which eventually became Mississauga) in 1951, however the citizens of Malton preferred to be part of what eventually became Etobicoke. The reason for not allowing Malton to go to Etobicoke was that Toronto Township needed the taxes from the Malton industrial areas (A.V. Roe and Orenda Engines) to develop the township. After amalgamation there was twenty years of trying to get of of the township and into Metro Toronto, without success of course.

In my opinion the points you've made about density and redevelopment and it's relation to taxes are important and need to be part of the discussion. A recent headline in the Mississauga News was about the upcoming 7.8% tax increase in the budget that many are already complaining about it, but the same people will also say that they don't want increased densities like Toronto. We must remember that for Mississauga to remain viable we have to pay for it, so either we keep increasing our taxes or we add more people to pay taxes with us. I think we could have room for higher densities and more people without losing the suburban feeling that everyone is here for. However, not everyone is going to be able, or want, to use their cars to get around in a higher population future, some will take transit.
There is something else that is a little abstract but will affect us in the future as well, that is the price of oil. There are two factors here that concern me, the first is the number of new automobile owners in the world, second is the production of curde oil itself. Everytime a car is bought in India or China a little more upward pressure is put on the price of oil. The production of crude oil itself hasn't increased appreciably in the past six years even though the price of oil has been around $100/bbl for most of that time. So an increase in demand for oil and stable but not increasing supply equals higher oil and eventually gasoline prices. So what does this mean for Mississauga? Well it means that more people will take transit for economic reasons.

Now we can't just take thousands of commuters out of their cars and drop them in busses, that's not getting rid of congestion it's only shifting it to somewhere else. That is why we need higher orders of transit like the Hurontario LRT and eventually other LRT lines.

But how does cityhall sell the LRT to the city? This is my question. We here discuss the merit of various routes and technologies, about ridership and fares. We all agree on the need for more transit and if it was left up to us we would have this line and an entire network up and running in a few years (it took Bordeaux 6 years from 0 to first ride on their tram system!). Unfortunately, those of us at UT and who live in Mississauga are only a small subset of the people of Mississauga. If city hall can't convince the car loving people of Mississauga on the merits of this LRT then there won't be one. So the politics of LRT is really what my question is about.
 
Vaucluse said:
After amalgamation there was twenty years of trying to get of of the township and into Metro Toronto, without success of course.
Click to expand...

I wonder what the western boundary would have been if Malton had joined Metro. If the Etobicoke Creek was chosen to run all the way up to Steeles (which was the northern boundary of Toronto Township originally), that would make Toronto continue almost all the way to Hurontario in the northwest.
 
Transportfan said:
I wonder what the western boundary would have been if Malton had joined Metro. If the Etobicoke Creek was chosen to run all the way up to Steeles (which was the northern boundary of Toronto Township originally), that would make Toronto continue almost all the way to Hurontario in the northwest.
Click to expand...

The proposal at the time was to take Malton, the AVRO lands and the part of Toronto-Gore (or the Gore of Toronto as it was once called) that is was in Toronto Township into Metro-Toronto. So that means everything east of Airport road to Steeles, plus the village of Malton at the north west corner of Airport and Derry roads, plus what the GTAA now calls the Boeing lands (named after the previous owner) which is the now empty large lot at the south west corner of Airport and Derry roads.
 
Transportfan said:
That would obviously have been a given.
Click to expand...

Malton's first cemetery was/is located about 50 east of Bramalea Road, so if Malton was looking for the largest land grab, everything east of Bramalea Road could be argued for. I mentioned the Village of Malton to be specific that the proposal was just for the village proper and not for "greater" Malton. My fault, maybe next time I'll post a map. Cheers!
 
Was told today subject to the consultation finishing up their work on time, Public meeting will be May 14 in Mississauga and May 15 in Brampton.

There has been a lot of issues related to the loop in the city centre and not surprised to hear, since I don't support it in the first place.

The other issue is having the line in an ROW or not, south of the QEW.

There is no opposition of taking the Port St stop off Port St and move it onto One Port Land, since One Port wants it there to help their development in the first place. Even though its not on the table at this time, the option of extending the line west over the Port Credit River Harbour to connect with the future development of Imperial Oil Land. That extension is at least 20 years down the road if not more.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top