Video about LRT attracting development (Portland)

[M II A II R II K]

.

[video=youtube;y8h8NLAAEq4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8h8NLAAEq4[/video]

 

[kettal]

The construction crews built a block each week? We need to hire these guys here.

 

[rbt]

The construction crews built a block each week? We need to hire these guys here.

Very small blocks downtown (all streets are major streets) with many blocks as small as Temperence to Adelaide. Also, a good chunk of it MAX outside of the core is off-street and just plain gravel and IIRC wood ties. There are some places where it runs adjacent to farm fields.

That said, if they managed to build the tunnel including the station in the tunnel, and bridgework in 1 week I would be hugely impressed!

 

[GTS]

Great video, I doubt if the property values are going to rise 4X here in Toronto though. Still it is going to be a great investment for us Torontonians. I read a report that Portland transit system has been a huge success. I lived in Vancouver for a good chunk of my life and visited Portland and Seattle a number of times, it looks like Portlands own investment in public transit is paying off for the community. I hope Toronto has similar returns on its investment.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

The construction crews built a block each week? We need to hire these guys here.

If they were only constructing tracks a block each week that would be fine. If they are also digging down to replace the sewers, water and gas pipes, bury electrical cables, etc. it would take longer.

 

[kEiThZ]

That's fine for Portland. But it's not directly analogous to Toronto. They had no higher order transit before they got the LRT. And look at how they deployed LRT too. A lot of side-of-the road seggregated ROWs, the network largely confined to denser urban areas, etc. That's why the impact was so significant.

Look at what the Sheppard subway did to Sheppard East. Suggestions that it's only LRT that attracts development or that LRT will automatically raise property values significantly are obviously flawed. Any higher-order transit will bring development and a rise in property values. The question is how much. For a city like Toronto which has subways, LRT will be viewed as little more than nicer streetcar lines. Is that likely to attract a lot of development? We'll see.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

That's fine for Portland. But it's not directly analogous to Toronto. They had no higher order transit before they got the LRT. And look at how they deployed LRT too. A lot of side-of-the road seggregated ROWs, the network largely confined to denser urban areas, etc. That's why the impact was so significant.

Look at what the Sheppard subway did to Sheppard East. Suggestions that it's only LRT that attracts development or that LRT will automatically raise property values significantly are obviously flawed. Any higher-order transit will bring development and a rise in property values. The question is how much. For a city like Toronto which has subways, LRT will be viewed as little more than nicer streetcar lines. Is that likely to attract a lot of development? We'll see.

$10 says they will!

 

[Jaye101]

That's fine for Portland. But it's not directly analogous to Toronto. They had no higher order transit before they got the LRT. And look at how they deployed LRT too. A lot of side-of-the road seggregated ROWs, the network largely confined to denser urban areas, etc. That's why the impact was so significant.

Look at what the Sheppard subway did to Sheppard East. Suggestions that it's only LRT that attracts development or that LRT will automatically raise property values significantly are obviously flawed. Any higher-order transit will bring development and a rise in property values. The question is how much. For a city like Toronto which has subways, LRT will be viewed as little more than nicer streetcar lines. Is that likely to attract a lot of development? We'll see.

I don't think anyone ever implied this. Although it would be difficult and pointless if you're gonna attempt to argue that LRT wouldn't raise property values, when decades of planning indicate otherwise.

It's interesting that you ask if LRT is likely to attract development after much of this city's Avenues were developed as a result of streetcar development at the turn of the 19th century. There's no doubt that a network of Suburban LRTs will encourage intensification, however I find it odd that some hold their standards so low to that they continue to argue for LRT or Subways when we should be looking at a balance between both.

 

[kEiThZ]

I don't think anyone ever implied this. Although it would be difficult and pointless if you're gonna attempt to argue that LRT wouldn't raise property values, when decades of planning indicate otherwise.

It's interesting that you ask if LRT is likely to attract development after much of this city's Avenues were developed as a result of streetcar development at the turn of the 19th century. There's no doubt that a network of Suburban LRTs will encourage intensification, however I find it odd that some hold their standards so low to that they continue to argue for LRT or Subways when we should be looking at a balance between both.

I have never suggested that it's a dichotomy. The choice should never have been between LRT or subway. Unfortunately, the choices made under Transit City have made it that way. Look at the Kennedy-STC connection. What, by all rights should have been a subway, was purposely made LRT. Ditto for Don Mills-Agincourt. And there has been a concerted effort to argue that subways don't attract development. Just have a look at the TTC's presentations about Transit City. They constantly pick stations with low density around them and then generalize. And then leave you to infer that LRT is some kind of salvation in all this. There's no nuance in their debate or language.

If you want to talk about streetcars in the 19th century, you'll note that we placed them on streets that were already busy and when those streetcar routes got busier we upgraded them to subways. We didnt use streetcars to drive development. We put them where the demand was. That's not what is happening here. To the extent that development will occur, it's because of things like zoning changes, beautification, etc. all of which could have been accomplished without ever laying down an inch of track. But what inherent demand is there on Sheppard East to justify LRT that say Finch East does or Lawrence does not have? Please explain that to me. I agree with you that intensification will occur on some corridors (Eglinton, Finch West), but I still haven't found an adequate explanation from anyone on how Sheppard east of McCowan is going to see lots of development (regardless of whether it's medium or low density). Are they planning on turning all those streets with their backyards on Sheppard inside out? Are they planning on exprorpriating every single family home with a backyard on Sheppard? How are they planning on densifying Sheppard east of Agincourt? I'd agree though that Eglinton and Finch have tons of potential and LRT will suit them well.

 

[kettal]

If you want to talk about streetcars in the 19th century, you'll note that we placed them on streets that were already busy and when those streetcar routes got busier we upgraded them to subways. We didnt use streetcars to drive development. We put them where the demand was.

Well, this is certifiably false. Almost every old neighbourhood in Toronto was built around the streetcar, not vice-versa. Areas like Riverdale, Mimico, Mount Pleasant, and Willowdale, and pretty much everything along Bloor were built up as commuter suburbs only after the streetcars were installed. There's even a term for them: streetcar suburbs.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Portland's experience really has nothing in common with Toronto. Their downtown streetcar line basically covers Portland's equivalent of both 'Kings' and the port/raillands in Toronto, and since it's a one way loop an enormous percentage of downtown Portland is within 2 blocks or so of the line. It runs through areas that were already redeveloping and would have redeveloped, anyway...it's not like they built it in a static stable area and new projects and proposals and renovations only trickled in after that. The guy in the video talks about 'permanance' compared to buses...while that may be an issue in an American context if you have low frequency bus routes looping around neighbourhoods, it has zero relevance to Toronto. Bathurst, for instance, is seeing redevelopments, and not just the flurry of growth on the Vaughan side of Steeles at Bathurst, but is anyone afraid of the Bathurst or Steeles buses being cancelled? Would the Finch bus be rerouted off of Finch? Tridel is proving that you can take the crappiest plots of land in the city – sites that don't even have good bus service – and successfully build and sell condos.

Separating ideology from reality, the key to the suburb/streetcar relationship - at least in Toronto - is not the streetcars themselves, but main streets. Streetcars were built along main streets, and suburbs with main streets got streetcar lines right off the bat so that development could occur alongside actual transit – both transit and development reinforced the main street. Few main streets didn't get streetcar lines, and few streetcar lines were built on non-main streets...one almost invariably came with the other (the only substantial transit improvement available at the time). It wasn't a case of extending streetcars out into farmland and hoping development would follow. The legacy of streetcar suburbs is the mixed-use main streets, with solid streetscapes and quality retail spaces – there isn't a legacy of streetcars being able to generate nice neighbourhoods from scratch. We stopped building main streets, but not because we stopped building streetcar lines, and we stopped building new neighbourhoods with transit...even basic bus service often begins only after people move in to a new subdivision and start complaining.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

The city has a study ongoing on rezoning the arterial roads for mid-rise buildings at the same time, which should help attract development as well. See the Avenues and Mid-Rise Buildings Study at this link. Transit City seems to be the transporation outgrowth from the study.

The main objective of this City-wide Study is to encourage future intensification along Toronto's Avenues that is compatible with the adjacent neighbourhoods through appropriately scaled and design mid-rise buildings.