Quote:
Originally Posted by haljackey
Here's a pdf of the pamphlet I got yesterday if anyone's interested: http://www.london.ca/Transportation_Planning/pdfs/SmartMoves_MayNewsletter2011_forweb.pdf
So much for LRT and freeways, we get 2 'semi-express' bus routes (maybe BRT in the future), and a short extension of the VMP at-grade expressway in the east. They 'talked' about maybe building a VMP-like road in the west in like 50 years... no interchanges on either though. Road widenings/reconstruction will be selective at best. LRT 'may' be considered in later master plans.
...pathetic. I almost think I have a knack for this sort of thing because I live in a city that is so behind when it comes to transportation planning. |
To be fair, it would be difficult to feasibly implement LRT somewhere like London. The traffic patterns make it extremely difficult to build a coherent, navigable route, since it would involve trackage through the University campus, which is not exactly rail-friendly. But I definitely see your point, because they could at least
try to determine where the feasible LRT routes would be, rather than just avoiding the topic completely. It also ignores the need to attract industry to London by providing appropriate transportation (read: VMP freeway), and it ignores key missing links in the road system (still no sign of the Gainsborough-Windermere bridge). At least the report acknowledges that the city's bike lane network has room for improvement, but I don't know why Queens Avenue and Western Road are listed as "priority routes" if they already have bike lanes.
Look on the bright side, though: Toronto is currently trying to implement traffic planning initiatives that will actively aim to make congestion worse (LRT boulevards, 40 km/h arterial speed limits), but London is taking a hands-off approach. Not as progressive as K-W or even Hamilton, but at least it's not utterly destructive.
Threaded Mode