London Public Transit

[upinottawa]

Even if it was feasible (boy would it be expensive to convince one of CN or CP to abandon its tracks), I wonder if light rail on London's current rail corridors makes any sense. Many of the major population areas of the city would not be served by such a system.

That leads me to think that light rail would need to be at grade on major roads in order for the investment to be successful and to be approved. However, as stated above, it would be a difficult sell to remove lanes for cars on Richmond, Oxford, Dundas, etc. Light rail could work on Wellington Road South (as the street is wide enough), but unfortunately the neighbourhoods south of Commissioners are very suburban and not very transit oriented.

Looking at the current LTC map, the following appear to be the largest corridors served by LTC:

- Downtown to UWO/Masonville (Richmond or Warncliffe/Western)
- Downtown to Fanshawe (Dundas or Oxford)
- Downtown to White Oaks (Wellington)
- Downtown to Dundas East (Dundas)

It does not appear as if any of those corridors would be well served by light rail on existing tracks.

Some one better versed in these things may have a different take.

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by upinottawa

Even if it was feasible (boy would it be expensive to convince one of CN or CP to abandon its tracks), I wonder if light rail on London's current rail corridors makes any sense. Many of the major population areas of the city would not be served by such a system.

That leads me to think that light rail would need to be at grade on major roads in order for the investment to be successful and to be approved. However, as stated above, it would be a difficult sell to remove lanes for cars on Richmond, Oxford, Dundas, etc. Light rail could work on Wellington Road South (as the street is wide enough), but unfortunately the neighbourhoods south of Commissioners are very suburban and not very transit oriented.

Looking at the current LTC map, the following appear to be the largest corridors served by LTC:

- Downtown to UWO/Masonville (Richmond or Warncliffe/Western)
- Downtown to Fanshawe (Dundas or Oxford)
- Downtown to White Oaks (Wellington)
- Downtown to Dundas East (Dundas)

It does not appear as if any of those corridors would be well served by light rail on existing tracks.

Some one better versed in these things may have a different take.

I'm not saying for CN to abandon there tracks. Just asking to build in there right of way. Let them have one track so they can make local deliveries and let VIA rail still come downtown. CN would probably look at a proposal that would include new track that bypassed the city as it would be an operational improvement from not having to slow down when entering the city.

Second I suggested that the Northeast route at Highbury to go North to Fanshawe and head East on Oxford to the Airport as there is enough space without having to demolish buildings.

Third the south line will go right by the hospital. There it could go west to Wellington by building the line just south of Commissioners Road.

Dundas east can be served by spur off the Northeast line at Highbury that follows CP's right of way east. This is assuming that Southeast line isn't enough service for that area.

I already said that a line to UWO would be the last to be built as it would have to be a Subway. There is no space anywhere to build a dedicated LRT ROW on the surface.

Keep in mind that LRT is meant to be the backbone of a transit system. It's not going to serve small corridors well as stops are usually more then 1 km apart. One stop is meant to serve 3 ,4 or more communities.

[SlickFranky]

I've often thought the same thing; that London should be putting serious effort into getting those trains to route around the city. But whenever I whip out a map, the rail lines really don't go to the right areas for a LRT system. As one would expect, they spend most of their time in semi-industrial areas, and even where they intersect major streets/avenues it's not usually in the right spot. And you guys are right, many of our major arteries cannot spare a lane of traffic for transit r.o.w. So in the end I'm not too surprised we haven't had a heavy push for any sort of rail transit.

So I'm thinking now, maybe our arrangement is better suited to a commuter-rail / park-n-ride system. I'm picturing a small scale setup, maybe 6-10 total stops. With a system like that in place, St Thomas will want access. From there...who knows, maybe we could get seasonal/weekend service to Port Stanley again.

Only if the lines were available of course...which would cost a fortune. Maybe all I really want is better regional rail...either way, those freight trains are in the way, and I would still support moving them south of the 401.

[Koolfire]

I drew up a map with possible stations that are within 10 minute walk (from centre of circle to the black line) and 20 minute walk or about 3 minute bus ride (green line). The red line is LRT that would us CN track.

All that is missing is North and a Southwest line to get about 75% or more of London within 20 minute walk of a station. Some of the neighbourhoods on the fridges are just not going to have good coverage.

[FazDeH]

I would personally be on board for the idea of light rail, but given the present restrictions, I don't see it happening anytime soon.
**Koolfire, your plan is really ambitious. Keep in mind that much larger cities only have 1 or two lines servicing the most heavily trafficed areas of town. Take Edmonton for example, even now with the expansion project on the LRT they will still only have one line.
I agree with you regarding the concept that we need LRT, but I think for maximum use the lines would need to be from Masonville down Richmond connecting to Wellington to Whiteoaks, and then eventually from Dundas east at Argyle to either downtown or further west. with bus connections at all stops.
At present we need to consider simple ideas. For example during rush hour, and lets face it, rush hour is BAD in London, we could have carpool dedicated lanes only. It's drastically reduced traffic in other cities because of the reduced number of cars on the road.
Something else I've seen out west was reversable lanes,. for example, Oxford,... during high traffic times, 3 lanes could be devoted to one direction of traffic instead of two. The same could be done on Commissioners, Wellington, Highbury and Adilade.
Other ideas could be as simple as ride discounts on buses during busy times of the day, unless a person has a bus pass, in which case some sort of compensation could be made.

[upinottawa]

Koolfire: I like your spirit, however I cannot imagine such a system ever being approved.

Faz: I think your ideas -- especially regarding reverseable lanes -- are reasonable and should be considered.

On the transit end of things: it would be interesting to see more "express" services like the UWO Express (does this still exist) that provides some limited stop service. It would also be good to see buses have some priority at intersections.

Unfortunately, light rail will be a difficult sell in the near future.

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by upinottawa

On the transit end of things: it would be interesting to see more "express" services like the UWO Express (does this still exist) that provides some limited stop service. It would also be good to see buses have some priority at intersections.

The 6 and 13 became express in the morning when it got full. I remember so many times getting on at Mills st and after the Oxford stop it was too full to take anymore passengers so it didn't stop till Campus. LT should consider a route that goes from UWO to Fanshawe. I had lots of friends that always had to transfer at Oxford and Richmond.

As for my plan being ambitious, I was thinking that would be a built out system in a time span of 30 years or so after the first shovel goes in the ground. Expanding each line accordingly. Both Edmonton and Calgary had some idea of were future expansion was going to go. I'm just trying to give an idea of how a fully built out system on existing tracks would look like.


I also was toying with the idea of letting the LRT run in Mixed traffic on Waterloo up to CP's line from downtown then take the CP line over to Pratt's Lane. (I recall that the townhouses there are owned by the University. If they are maybe a little push from students and alumni might make the University donate the needed land. ) From there head north to Western Road and either run it along Western Road or through campus. Then continue up the western side of Western Road till Richmond then cross to the east side for Richmond near were Richmond and Western meet and take it up to Masonville.

[FazDeH]

***Upinottawa, there are no express lines, but I think they would be a really good idea running from hub to hub. As for priority at intersections, the LTC is actually installing electronic devices on the buses that will change the lights, the same concept as emergency services vehicles.
Maybe something we might be overlooking is lane priority, instead of commiting a lane of traffic on a major road to just mass transit, maybe a concept of buses come first,... double or triple buses with limited stops travelling down the road, where bylaw a car in front has to move aside, that in conjunction with the "intersection flashers" would make for a very speedy travel time from any corner of the city to downtown. How hard would that be? Pass a bylaw, purchase several larger buses and have the flashers installed. We could even go H2 powered to be green. They could also integrate this whole park and ride program, instead of driving from westmount or masonville to downtown, go to the mall hop on a direct service bus that will get you there in 5 minutes. I think that would be a much cheaper and easier transit fix.

[ldoto]

People in the west end of London who'd like to be bussing it instead of taking the car are in luck.

The LTC is expanding two west-end bus routes in August.

Sections of the 19 Oakridge and 20 Cherryhill lines will be replaced with extended routes bringing more Hyde Park-area residents into the fold. They've been asking for service for a while, now.

Other areas in the city that don't currently offer bus service will be getting it in the coming years.

Bus routes are scheduled to be expanded to Summerside next year, and Lambeth in 2010.

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by ldoto

People in the west end of London who'd like to be bussing it instead of taking the car are in luck.

The LTC is expanding two west-end bus routes in August.

Sections of the 19 Oakridge and 20 Cherryhill lines will be replaced with extended routes bringing more Hyde Park-area residents into the fold. They've been asking for service for a while, now.

Other areas in the city that don't currently offer bus service will be getting it in the coming years.

Bus routes are scheduled to be expanded to Summerside next year, and Lambeth in 2010.

I'm always amazed that people will complain about not having service but choose to live out there.

[upinottawa]

From today's London Free Press:

Moving forward on public transit
By Paul Berton

In terms of long-term transportation planning, London isn't exactly on the cutting edge.

We lag Kitchener-Waterloo, to name just one nearby example, in presenting a comprehensive transportation master plan that targets public transit and is aggressive enough to attract federal and provincial money -- money that is readily available.

Some cities are already well on their way to building inner-city light rail systems. It will be some time yet before London has a plan for a bus system that addresses the realities of the 21st century.

But with the cost of gas, automobiles, repairs, parking, land, road building and time spent in congestion all skyrocketing, there's no time to lose in catching up and offering Londoners better and more convenient alternatives to the automobile.

London's transportation master plan, completed in 2004, was really a plan for roads. The London Transit Commission did a master plan in 2006, but the two need to be integrated. That was the purpose of the long-term growth working committee, which looked at the big picture and reported to council recently.

Now London needs a new transportation master plan that could dedicate some of the money previously aimed at road widening to beef up public transit.

"The London Transit Commission has gone as far as they can with the budget we've given them," says Coun. Nancy Branscombe, who headed up the committee. "We need to get the public engaged, we need a cultural change."

A cultural change indeed. There will be those who say the system isn't good enough, so they're not going to use it; and others who say we must use the system first if we are ever to improve it.

Light rail systems are prohibitively expensive. That's fine if they're being used well, like, say, GO Transit in Toronto, because of the money they save on other infrastructure.

But we may have to take baby steps here first with buses and graduate to something more efficient. We may need bigger buses, express buses and dedicated lanes, and they are no doubt coming along with other improvements already announced by LTC .

But what we need more than anything, as Branscombe says, is a cultural change, a new way of thinking, an acceptance that public transit is not as cumbersome as too many of us believe.

[ssiguy]

That's very true but I wouldn't hold up GrandRiver Transit as a panacea. It ridership level is exactly one half of London's. Actually, when compared to other mid-size cities in the country London does very well.

HOV, express buses are a good idea and I think one prioity is to extend the hours of operation. No service past midnight is absurd.

[manny_santos]

The transit system in Columbus, Ohio is purely a system of local bus routes and express routes. The more I think about it, the more I think London might be best served by a system like Columbus - however I don't know how well the system in Columbus works. Anybody have any insight?

Assuming that it is a good idea, I think that all major neighbourhoods throughout the city (Oakridge, Byron, Masonville, etc.) should be served by at least one express route. Not to say that there should be one separate route for every neighbourhood, you would have one route for example that would start in Byron and go to the airport via Oxford Street, with stops at Hyde Park, Wonderland, Wharncliffe, Richmond, Quebec, Fanshawe College, and Clarke.

[miketoronto]

The London Transit Commison serves almost the same number of riders each day as the transit system in Columbus, Ohio. It should be noted that the Columbus system serves a larger population base, and also a larger central city with much higher amounts of jobs downtown, than London.
So that should tell something that London's ridership is already at about the same level.
Also London moves two to three times the % of people each day by transit, than Columbus.

London should just do like Edmonton does. In Edmonton, buses operate into transit centres at major malls, etc. During peak hours, many buses after entering the transit centre, operate non stop to downtown Edmonton and also the area universities, colleges, and West Edmonton Mall.
Buses mostly operate on a 30 minute timetable and are timed to meet at the transit centre.
There is then a high frequency route that opereates between these transit centres and major areas like downtown.
Seems to work well in Edmonton and it arrested a ridership decline that was happening there.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Koolfire

I'm always amazed that people will complain about not having service but choose to live out there.

well, people make choices like that for a multitude of reasons. I live in NW sector (Hyde Park) but while I value transit, it ranked far down my list of priorities, which were:

1. quality of housing for price
2. neighborhood quality/price
3. accessibility to UWO (employment)
4. accessibility to services and shopping
5. educational facilities for children
6. recreational options (not that much currently, but it is a short drive to Grand Bend)

[ssiguy]

What about London doing a "BLine" type service?
Just on about the busiest 6 routes with articulated buses, stops about every km, all entry boarding on POP basis. Proper shelters, running every 5 minutes all day long and these could be the only buses in the system that run til maybe 2AM? It has been VERY successful in Vancouver and the 98BLine to Richmond say an 70% increase in ridership and 40% of those riders were new to transit.

[manny_santos]

I was reminded today of why I'm not happy to be back in this city. I was waiting for a 17 Oxford West bus on Oxford east of Wharncliffe (which runs every half hour), at a clearly signed temporary stop due to the construction along Oxford. I was waiting with a middle-age woman and two elderly women.

When the bus finally showed up - after sitting in front of the Alibi Roadhouse plaza for about four minutes - it kept going by without stopping, even when I waved my arms.

The middle-age woman called London Transit, mentioned the two elderly ladies (who had already ventured off the sidewalk onto the construction area to catch this bus), and you know what they told her?

The driver was told to skip certain stops because he was running behind!!!

We pay sky-high taxes for this. Just re-affirms my sour attitude about being back in this city after being in Mexico City for over three weeks. Here I pay $1.90 per ticket for this lousy service, while down there I paid 17 cents CDN to use the subway and 42 cents CDN to use a bus - both very reliable. Shame.

[DB_in_Cbus]

You're just in luck - I lived in London for 4 years and now am in Columbus. Columbus and London are very similar is a lot of ways, but where they differ greatly is the highway system. You're never more than 2 miles from a freeway in Columbus, so getting around the city is very easy. Add that to the fact that the city is very laid-out (London is much dense, and the neighbourhoods run together), and public transit is basically a non-option for most of the population. Public transit has an advantage in London because there are no highways, so most times there's little time difference in taking a bus or taking a car (unless you're going to Hyde Park, or somewhere else equally distant).

There's also a strong stigma against public transit in most mid-sized American cities. It's seen as something that poor people do, and poor people are "natually" criminals, so many people see using public transit as an outright danger. I don't agree of course, but many of my friends do.

I've noticed very little difference in the bus system between London and Columbus. The busiest Columbus route is even the number 2! The crosstown buses here would be the equivalent of the 2 or 13 in London. The local routes run every 1/2 hour or less, too, so it's very similar to London.

Interestingly, there's a movement in Columbus to either bring back a street car or Light Rail. I really think though, because of the highway system (you can get form downtown to the outer suburbs in 15 minutes), it simply wouldn't fly. London is much more primed for light rail simply because of the lack of highways.

[manny_santos]

London Transit continues to have poor service. The following is a Letter to the Editor I have had published on lfpress.com.

In my travels I have used public transit systems in Toronto, Mississauga, Brampton, New York, and Mexico City, in addition to London. London Transit has, by far, the most awful level of service.

On June 15, I finished my work shift at Western and went to catch my usual 10 Wonderland bus. I had to walk slightly further to the stop because of construction. I was right on time for the bus and was running for it, but the driver pulled away without even letting me on.

In a city like Brampton or Mississauga, one must only wait a few minutes for the next bus. In London, it's half an hour. I am just lucky I was not trying to get to a job interview.

We pay sky-high taxes in this city for such a poor level of service. Shame on the City of London for not taking steps to develop a real transit system like Kitchener-Waterloo is in the process of doing. Hopefully future generations will not make the decision I have made to leave London once I am done school because of the lack of progression on mass transit here.


So far there's one comment, agreeing with me. Between this and what happened earlier in June, I'm just about ready to throw up my hands with London Transit.

Originally Posted by DB_in_Cbus

There's also a strong stigma against public transit in most mid-sized American cities. It's seen as something that poor people do, and poor people are "natually" criminals, so many people see using public transit as an outright danger. I don't agree of course, but many of my friends do.

I think there is some stigma against public transit in London as well, although the socioeconomic types of people you see are vastly different from one route to the next. You've got relatively well-behaved Western students and Fanshawe students on some routes (emphasis on relatively), and on others you've got angry people who yell at their wives on their cellphone.

I also think there is less stigma against public transit in cities where it is faster to get somewhere by taking public transit than driving. London is certainly not such a city.

P.S. Come to think of it...I guess I'm not the only person on this forum who works at Western either.

[ldoto]

London Transit cleared the road yesterday for a dramatic expansion by breaking ground on a satellite bus facility on Wonderland Rd. S. The $19-million garage and maintenance building will be able to handle 100 buses, half as many as the current fleet. LTC general manager Larry Ducharme said the building would help expand the volume and efficiency of service, combined with the introduction of new technology.

"We are at capacity and with the rate of growth we see for ourselves we need this new facility," said Ducharme. The building is being paid for by a $10.4-million provincial grant and an $8.6-million federal grant. Both contributions came from increased gasoline taxes dedicated to improving transit services.

The LTC now has 192 buses, seven more than the official capacity of the existing storage and maintenance facilities. The LTC plans to add 100 buses by 2024 when it has set a goal of increasing annual ridership 30% to 28 million. The building will be located in the opposite corner of the city from LTC headquarters at Highbury Ave. and Brydges St. Ducharme said the new satellite location on Wonderland Rd. near Wharncliffe Rd. is in a fast-growing area.

"As the city grows west and this area requires more service, this makes a more strategic starting point for the buses," he said. Ducharme said the LTC will soon launch a new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service he described as "light rail without the rail". He said the BRT buses will be larger and travel express routes between major destinations in the city. He said the BRT service would eventually travel on designated lanes. Now that it can track buses with GPS, Ducharme said, London Transit is introducing more new technology to improve service.

Automatic voice response will allow riders to call the LTC and find out when the next bus will arrive at a specific stop in real time. The same service is becoming available on the LTC website and through mobile applications. Buses en route will be able to send a signal to delay or extend signal traffic lights to speed up service.