[Highinthesky]

I expected London's buses to look pretty much exactly the same as every city bus in Canada and likely the United States. I was kind of surprised to find that the world is crawling with the rolling rectangles.

[Wharn]

I expected London's buses to look pretty much exactly the same as every city bus in Canada and likely the United States. I was kind of surprised to find that the world is crawling with the rolling rectangles.

Such is the depressingness of buses. Dreary, terrible boxes on wheels.

[Stevo26]

Such is the depressingness of buses. Dreary, terrible boxes on wheels.

Agreed. Having recently started using LTC services again after a twenty-year hiatus, I notice that bus manufacturers still don't know how to make a bus that doesn't shake and rattle, jerk, and kick passengers around. You'd think that they would have learned how to improve seating and suspensions by now.

[haljackey]

:previous:

Too expensive. Just make boxes with an engine that can transport a lot of people. Niceties like a smoother ride, cameras and stop info will only come if there's money for it.

When laws were passed that required buses to be handicap accessible, most buses could not be retrofitted and cities were forced to purchase new ones. Cities could only buy what they could afford... the most basic models.

Most of the buses in London's fleet are part of a mass purchase made around the turn of the century.

I absolutely hate standing on the box-looking LTC buses as you're jerked every which way, even on smooth pavement.

[go_leafs_go02]

They showed some new ones on CTV News 2 tonight, and they looked pretty sexy. Still sorta boxy, with a better front with new headlights and design. They call them the smiling buses.

http://www.newflyer.com/index/xcelsior

[Wharn]

Agreed. Having recently started using LTC services again after a twenty-year hiatus, I notice that bus manufacturers still don't know how to make a bus that doesn't shake and rattle, jerk, and kick passengers around. You'd think that they would have learned how to improve seating and suspensions by now.

That's partially because the city is obligated to buy the cheapest models possible. I think buses have made massive improvements since the 1980s or so, but that still doesn't mean that they're any good. They don't dip and wallow as much as they used to (GM New Looks used to give me motion sickness) but you still have an absolutely bone-jarring ride. Which leads me to my question... why did you go back to using the LTC? If you got into a crash and totaled your car, pick up an $800 Cavalier. It would still be better.

They showed some new ones on CTV News 2 tonight, and they looked pretty sexy. Still sorta boxy, with a better front with new headlights and design. They call them the smiling buses.

http://www.newflyer.com/index/xcelsior

>5.88 miles per gallon

Jesus... and I thought my girlfriend's truck got bad mileage.

[MolsonExport]

Buses today are decidedly less comfortable (and a much jerkier, bone-rattling ride) than a few decades ago. I hate all those low floor buses that have few seats (to allow for the damned wheel housing) and next to no stabilizing technology. I know....easier for older/handicapped people to get on/off...but then there are no seats. Really puts me off of bus-based "rapid" transit.

[go_leafs_go02]

Buses today are decidedly less comfortable (and a much jerkier, bone-rattling ride) than a few decades ago. I hate all those low floor buses that have few seats (to allow for the damned wheel housing) and next to no stabilizing technology. I know....easier for older/handicapped people to get on/off...but then there are no seats. Really puts me off of bus-based "rapid" transit.

Low Floor buses are forced upon transit agencies due to legislation to ensure handicapped ability.

It says something when your average low floor bus lasts between 8-12 years on average, while high floor buses that are 20 years old plus are still on the road.

London has retired quite a few low floor buses already, while still has the older late 80s vehicles (orange buses) on the road, although I believe they will be finally retired sometime later this year to make the LTC fully accessible on all buses and routes.

[manny_santos]

Buses today are decidedly less comfortable (and a much jerkier, bone-rattling ride) than a few decades ago. I hate all those low floor buses that have few seats (to allow for the damned wheel housing) and next to no stabilizing technology. I know....easier for older/handicapped people to get on/off...but then there are no seats. Really puts me off of bus-based "rapid" transit.

I can't speak for too many other cities, but I find the newer buses in London to have a smoother ride than the older orange buses. Still, my biggest beef with the newer buses is the way that they brake - it is very sudden and if the driver doesn't know how to use the brakes, anyone who is standing up falls over. The older buses don't seem to have that problem. My experience on modern buses in Toronto, Mississauga, and Ottawa have been similar. I generally prefer sitting near the back of the low-floor buses. Nothing beats GO Transit buses though - VERY comfortable and smooth.

You haven't been on a jerky ride until you've ridden a bus with standard transmission. If you're caught standing up on one of those, you will need both hands to hold on for dear life.

[manny_santos]

Down where I am in Mexico City at the moment, I had the chance to talk to a couple of Mexicans who have visited London, Ontario a number of times. Their daughter used to work in the city. What was the one thing they could remember about London?

The "lousy public transit service".

I knew London was known for this in London, but is this really what people outside Canada associate with the city?!

If this is what people outside Canada who have actually heard of London associate with the city, then Mr. Fontana has a hell of a lot of work to do before he can even attract 10,000 jobs.

[CHIMO]

Complaint-laden service struggles with tight budget

LONDON TRANSIT: Manager Larry Ducharme says the highest priority is the Wonderland corridor where overcrowding is a major concern

By JOHN MINER, The London Free Press

Last Updated: May 13, 2012 7:34pm

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/05/13/19753571.html

As a newcomer to this forum and thread, but longtime reader (you guys post are slightly more insightful than those on the LFPress site) I'd like to jump right in and throw in my two cents on where the LTC can / could improve.

For a poorly funded, and mostly negleted transportation system, the LTC still performs its duties fairly well, and (In my experiences anyways) the staff and operators are well versed in customer service. As for being Ontarios second or third largest public traisit provider, the system could improve greatly, but that prospect seems unlikley to me as London chose long ago to adopt the personal automobile as its main means of mass traisit, therefore making public transit a tough sell. The increased and increasing ridership, should be a red flag to city hall that investment in the LTC is long over due. Londoners can take the tax increase if it means making mobility in the city more efficent, transit, namley public transit, which is key to growth and Londons goal of becoming a "green economy".

Light rail for the city seems like a pipe dream to me, we abandoned our street car system (LSR), and our inter-urban rail system (L&PS and L&LETC) over half a century ago. Their return is at best a long way off.

As for the current LTC, the city is, as usual, not hearing, or most likley, not listening to the non motoring public. I am in full agreement with the posters supporting extending service until 2 am, and moving the Saturday scheduel to Sunday, this should not be done ASAP, it HAS to be done ASAP, if downtown ever truly intends to be a magnet. More shelters, benches, and waste cans are a must. A the bare minimum every stop should have a concrete pad, for both doors of the bus, a bench, a scheduel on the sign post, and a garbage can.

Now regarding the idea being tossed around for a downtown bus terminal....have any of you cats ever considered converting the strech of King Street under the Galleria Mall, into a covered, centralized (just blocks away from VIA Rail, D&R, D&W), and viable (the mall has ample, under utalized underground parking) bus terminal. Make that block of King St. Bus only, add a couble of pedestrian islands and digital signs, a staircase/elevator/escalitor up into the mall, and there you go, boom done, a convienent downtown terminal. This in effect will move all downtown bus traffic out of the over congested D&R intersection with minimal route interruption during the construction phase. Freeing up D&R, and maybe oneday turning Dundas from Richmond to Talbot into a pedestrain only streetscape, would, from my perspective, be a massive step towards saving downtown, adding a level of interest to a rough corner, and clearing up our infestation of crack heads and dealers. Lots of people with jobs has a tendency to scare them away, because classical music dose not seem to be working...

The idea of rerouting CP, and CN around the city to the south and the city acquiring their entire ROW is just stupid, and will never happen, sharing the ROW, now there is a maybe. The Great Western has been there since the mid 1850's, and hopefully still be there in the 2050's, CP since the 1880's. Rail still has promise in North America, especially if the price of fuel continues on its enevatable upward trend.

To conclude my rant with a semi related downtown / traisit related point... the issue of a downtown grocer, what about in the Galleria itself, or in the parking lot at Clarence and King, or, thirdly, the parking lot near Richmond and Horton (also close to / serving SOHO)?

[MolsonExport]

Welcome to the forum and thanks for your commentary.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Complaint-laden service struggles with tight budget

LONDON TRANSIT: Manager Larry Ducharme says the highest priority is the Wonderland corridor where overcrowding is a major concern

By JOHN MINER, The London Free Press

Last Updated: May 13, 2012 7:34pm

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/05/13/19753571.html

As a newcomer to this forum and thread, but longtime reader (you guys post are slightly more insightful than those on the LFPress site) I'd like to jump right in and throw in my two cents on where the LTC can / could improve.

For a poorly funded, and mostly negleted transportation system, the LTC still performs its duties fairly well, and (In my experiences anyways) the staff and operators are well versed in customer service. As for being Ontarios second or third largest public traisit provider, the system could improve greatly, but that prospect seems unlikley to me as London chose long ago to adopt the personal automobile as its main means of mass traisit, therefore making public transit a tough sell. The increased and increasing ridership, should be a red flag to city hall that investment in the LTC is long over due. Londoners can take the tax increase if it means making mobility in the city more efficent, transit, namley public transit, which is key to growth and Londons goal of becoming a "green economy".

Light rail for the city seems like a pipe dream to me, we abandoned our street car system (LSR), and our inter-urban rail system (L&PS and L&LETC) over half a century ago. Their return is at best a long way off.

As for the current LTC, the city is, as usual, not hearing, or most likley, not listening to the non motoring public. I am in full agreement with the posters supporting extending service until 2 am, and moving the Saturday scheduel to Sunday, this should not be done ASAP, it HAS to be done ASAP, if downtown ever truly intends to be a magnet. More shelters, benches, and waste cans are a must. A the bare minimum every stop should have a concrete pad, for both doors of the bus, a bench, a scheduel on the sign post, and a garbage can.

Now regarding the idea being tossed around for a downtown bus terminal....have any of you cats ever considered converting the strech of King Street under the Galleria Mall, into a covered, centralized (just blocks away from VIA Rail, D&R, D&W), and viable (the mall has ample, under utalized underground parking) bus terminal. Make that block of King St. Bus only, add a couble of pedestrian islands and digital signs, a staircase/elevator/escalitor up into the mall, and there you go, boom done, a convienent downtown terminal. This in effect will move all downtown bus traffic out of the over congested D&R intersection with minimal route interruption during the construction phase. Freeing up D&R, and maybe oneday turning Dundas from Richmond to Talbot into a pedestrain only streetscape, would, from my perspective, be a massive step towards saving downtown, adding a level of interest to a rough corner, and clearing up our infestation of crack heads and dealers. Lots of people with jobs has a tendency to scare them away, because classical music dose not seem to be working...

The idea of rerouting CP, and CN around the city to the south and the city acquiring their entire ROW is just stupid, and will never happen, sharing the ROW, now there is a maybe. The Great Western has been there since the mid 1850's, and hopefully still be there in the 2050's, CP since the 1880's. Rail still has promise in North America, especially if the price of fuel continues on its enevatable upward trend.

To conclude my rant with a semi related downtown / traisit related point... the issue of a downtown grocer, what about in the Galleria itself, or in the parking lot at Clarence and King, or, thirdly, the parking lot near Richmond and Horton (also close to / serving SOHO)?

Typical Londoners 'can't do' attitude and why our city will continue to decline. I'm sure that Calgary, Edmonton, Kitchener, Victoria, Hamilton and Ottawa once abandoned streetcars years ago, but then they came to their senses and saw that LRT was the best solution for sustainable growth. All the above cities either have full LRT systems or are building systems - when they were the same size as London.

People who are content with the status quo in London should expect the city to decline and become irrelevant.

[manny_santos]

A lot of Londoners are completely satisfied with the status quo. Aside from minor traffic annoyances, I think London's older generation (age 50+) is highly satisfied with the city. I know that mass transit projects are not a priority for any of the older Londoners I know; that said, my mother and one of the elderly people she works with do with bus service was better in terms of timing and frequency.

That said, I think that the future of mass transit in London, if it happens, will be BRT, although I would never rule out LRT on existing rail corridors, especially the old L&PS and on the CP Rail corridor. BRT is going to be a tough sell for a very long time in London, though - I would love to see it today but I think it's 30 years off, minimum.

[CHIMO]

Thanks for the welcome MolsonExport!

Folks, let me clarify...

I am highly frustrated with the status quo, hence the rant...

I am just trying to be realistic...being born, and mostly raised in London, I have seen parts of the city and its services decline, even over the past few years. My fear of London taking on the looks of a hard hit Michigan town, are realized everytime I cycle around the city (just look at the state of Hamilton Road). London is a great place to live, and when it is available, work. I find it difficult to maintain a positive "can do attitude" when everytime I read the LFPress there seems to be an article about another step backwards with regards to public transit and cycle lanes. Most people of my generation in this city are in a state of total civic disconnect (especially our grads from Fanshawe and UWO) and they couldent give a shit about the affairs at city hall, and to me it seems that city hall is just fine with that, they (from my perspective) prefer to cater to the whims of suburban developers, and the old money in the north and west ends. The election of a career politician like Joe Fontana, is a prime example of the city as a whole prefering the "Status Quo" to any attempt at significant and real change. Mind you the revialization attempets for old east are an awesome step in the right direction, but to counter that the attempts at reviving SoHo are stagnant at best.

The LTC is one of my greatest frustrations... I moved back to the city with the intent of ditching my car to save money, time, and stress. In such an auto centric town I am finding it difficult to impossable at times to rely soley on my bike and the bus system. I want change in the city, I want to live car free, but the current LTC hardly meets the needs of the populace. I am greatly in favour of BRT, but as far as I can tell, that idea is only on paper (under a stack of papers regarding road widining, suburban development, and building bigger parking lots for our suburban "smart centers").

As I see it, Londons attempt at a new "green" economy, one that will move us away from the auto industry, is a complete joke! If we were serious, we would focus on getting our citizenry out of their cars! Our core investment and focus would start with bringing service levels on the LTC up to par with other Ontario cities of comparable size, at bare minimum bring its service level up to the point where it can meet or exceed the levels of ridership that we are seeing. Jam packed buses, and people being left behind at transfers and stops, dose not seem to get the point across to city hall. As for LRT, don't get me wrong, I am a huge supporter, and good on Hamilton, KW, and all of the other cities you listed GTN2. The point in my rant that I felt you missed is the fact London as a whole is as much addicted to their cars as the heads at D&R are to their crack. Bringing back the LSR and the L&PS just makes sense, but city council dosent comprehend common sense. Street cars would be awesome, but all I'm saying is that they are / are going to be a very tough sell, in a city that all ready has woes about its streets not being wide enough, and drivers who bitch about the LTC adding to congestion. The idea of sacrificing two lanes on major arteries for street cars is laughable to the bulk of our suburbanite citizenry. In the 1920's the L&PS was light years ahead of their time, yet to my knowlege, bringing back passenger service to that route, has made it as far as this forum. Have any of you guys ever driven down Highbury Ave. south twords St. Thomas in the morning? Count how many cars have more than one occupant, besides the school bus, none. "Greening" Londons economy has to start with public transit, not solar pannel plants. However we have been hooked on our cars for so long that withdrawl is going to be a long and painful process for the urban sprawl that is much of the city.

I love London, I just hate to see it in its current state...if we really want to be a leader in the economy of South Western Ontario, let alone attract employers, we need change. Namley with regards to civic involvment, intelegent uban planning, slowing down the sprawl, and building up downtown density. At the root of all of these, lies the LTC.

[Pimpmasterdac]

Welcome to the forum Chimo!

I agree that London has serious transportation problems, which are the root of its economic problems. Public transit will never be able to compete with cars if the travel time is substantially longer as is currently. Generally for many people in my age group, 20s-ish, getting a car is seen being able to get around quickly and not dependent on a bus schedule or rides from others as economic and social achievement of independence, a view which is shared by others.

The only way LTC will be able to compete with private transportation is if they have comparable travel times, plain and simple. LRT & BRT are IMO not going to happen anytime in the next 20 years, not because it shouldn't, but since it would require substantial expropriation in politically influential areas (specifically Richmond between Oxford & Windemere) and become a NIMBY like issue.

The best thing for LTC to do right now is express routes along bus corridors like the Wellington, Richmond & Dundas routes. Having buses come frequently and stopping only at major intersections would be a good start. This would allow buses to have a competitive travel time to automobiles and get people to reconsider the LTC. As the city continues to sprawl its going to need express routes to get from one end to the other, without 1+ hour travel times.

Unfortunately the LTC seems make decisions based on political basis rather than practical basis, like milk runs to Lambeth and other areas. Rather the LTC should focus on its core bread and butter routes with high ridership and fortify them before haphazardly adding under utilized or demanded routes. Hell even rerouting buses from Dundas to King & Queen has to be "studied" as nausea. The LTC tries to satisfy everyone and in the end satisfys no one. They need someone with a reasonable vision, focus on the core routes and go from there.

[GreatTallNorth2]

^ Amen!

[CHIMO]

Thanks for the welcome Pimpmasterdac!

Very well put...express routes...now thars an idea... they are an economical, practical, and logical next step for the LTC. More Londoners need to hear your point of view, especially down at city hall!

[MrSlippery519]

The only way LTC will be able to compete with private transportation is if they have comparable travel times, plain and simple. LRT & BRT are IMO not going to happen anytime in the next 20 years, not because it shouldn't, but since it would require substantial expropriation in politically influential areas (specifically Richmond between Oxford & Windemere) and become a NIMBY like issue.

The best thing for LTC to do right now is express routes along bus corridors like the Wellington, Richmond & Dundas routes. Having buses come frequently and stopping only at major intersections would be a good start. This would allow buses to have a competitive travel time to automobiles and get people to reconsider the LTC. As the city continues to sprawl its going to need express routes to get from one end to the other, without 1+ hour travel times.



Very well said and I completely agree, right now it's just not a realistic option for the average person to take the bus as it takes too long. Most people I know who take the bus simply have no other option.
I know for me to get to work (I live East end between Dundas/Wayvell) and I work Wonderland Rd South it takes about an hour and 40 minutes. That include a 10 minute walk from the athletic club to work. Driving takes me 20 minutes on a terrible day and 15 on a typical day.

Express routes right now are without a question the best option and as you said do it in the core areas where you know people are riding and you know more people would ride with a quicker service.

[go_leafs_go02]

https://twitter.com/AM980News/status/210871459223052288

London MPPs to announce "significant funding for the LTC," according to a release, at 1 p.m. Friday news conference. AM980 will be there ‪#fb‬

[MrSlippery519]

Really 1.7 million dollars and 3 news buses? I certainly understand there would be a significant cost for new bus stops/shelters, etc on King and Queen streets however why the need for 3 more buses?

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/06/19/19897601.html

[manny_santos]

Really 1.7 million dollars and 3 news buses? I certainly understand there would be a significant cost for new bus stops/shelters, etc on King and Queen streets however why the need for 3 more buses?

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/06/19/19897601.html

I am guessing that because the altered routes will be longer and will involve a couple of left turns that aren't there now, additional buses will be required in order to maintain frequency of buses on the affected routes without taking buses away from other routes.

[FazDeH]

I read the LFP article as well, and what struck me as odd is that a larger portion of this money is being allocated to adding 3 new buses because of this? Am I alone in thinking that the extra block in either direction shouldn't constitute the purchasing of 1.2 million in vehicles?
Gas; I get.. bus stops; I get.. but 3 new buses? common ltc... common.

[manny_santos]

I read the LFP article as well, and what struck me as odd is that a larger portion of this money is being allocated to adding 3 new buses because of this? Am I alone in thinking that the extra block in either direction shouldn't constitute the purchasing of 1.2 million in vehicles?
Gas; I get.. bus stops; I get.. but 3 new buses? common ltc... common.

In the downtown area, it very well might require additional bus purchases, especially at rush hour. Buses will need to make left turns from Wellington onto Queens Ave, and that area can get pretty backed up.

At the same time, we don't know if these buses might also be replacing older ones. I've been away from London for almost six months; are any of those orange buses still on the road?

[FazDeH]

^^^ I hadn't thought about downtown congestion being a factor for the need for extra buses, but you're right sometimes those left turns can be a little busy, considering the traffic flow down dundas at peak times, I can't imagine it would be that impactful on scheduling.(Especially considering every bus seems stop downtown for several minutes to wait as it is.. )

As for the orange buses, I haven't seen any in a while, but I think there are likely some that are still operating.
From what the article said though, these would be additional vehicles, not ones to be used to replace existing buses.

[BIGGUY2891]

At the same time, we don't know if these buses might also be replacing older ones. I've been away from London for almost six months; are any of those orange buses still on the road?

All the older buses have been retired as of a couple months ago. There were 20+ Xcelsior models brought into operation over the past few months. You can see the active fleet through this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Transit

[MrSlippery519]

I am guessing that because the altered routes will be longer and will involve a couple of left turns that aren't there now, additional buses will be required in order to maintain frequency of buses on the affected routes without taking buses away from other routes.

How much longer are we really talking though? I can see maybe needing to add 1 more bus to make up for the slightly longer route but 3 I just think this is the LTC's way of trying to get the city to back down from the idea of removing buses from Dundas.

[londoner_abroad]

How much longer are we really talking though? I can see maybe needing to add 1 more bus to make up for the slightly longer route but 3 I just think this is the LTC's way of trying to get the city to back down from the idea of removing buses from Dundas.

Remember there is more then one route along Dundas, I am actually surprised it will only take three more buses to reroute all routes. I believe they want to keep the same level of service and if they are now faced with a longer route they will need to add busses and modify schedules in order for buses to run as frequently(or not..haha) as they do now. One thing I think most people don't realise is all the behind the scenes work that would have to happen to change all these routes permanently - scheduling is a big one, think of all new schedules that have to be re-calulated, reprinted, the bus schedules as the stops changed, all maps at bus shelters changed. All we see is the bus and stop moving but there is a lot that has to happen for this type of change. Personally, I am happy with this proposed change, I always believed that a loop system within the downtown could work great, it will add to the dynamic of downtown with people actually moving around not just standing at the stop they got off at waiting for another bus. Plus now the Police will be able to tell at least some of the downtown loiterers to get moving as they will no longer be able to use the "i am waiting for the bus" excuse all day long...

[Pimpmasterdac]

Great to hear council is serious about implementing this King-Queens loop, taking buses off Dundas! If it does end up being implemented, its a fait accompli for Dundas becoming a pedestrianized.

Though I find the LTC, specifically Ducharme, has been very negative & cold to the idea. When it was suggested by council, he instantly began bemoaning the costs of doing it rather than finding a way to re-jig underutilized routes to make up for the extra travel time. Then when the city gets greater than expected transit funding for the province, and Ducharme says LTC has other priorities...

[FazDeH]

^^^ did he happen to mention what those other priorities would be? Optimizing the routes and their impact on the parts of the city seem like it should be pretty high on the list... the blue signs must be paramount.

[Pimpmasterdac]

From http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/06/08/19855411.html#/news/london/2012/06/08/pf-19855411.html

About $5.5 million of it will go toward operating costs and maintenance, new buses and the transit system's smart card payment program.

Still leaves $4 million of that free, either unaccounted or assigned yet. Ducharme doesn't seem all that pleased doing this re-routing. Rather than go look as see how the plan can be implemented, he moans says they need an addition $1.7 million rather than be creative. The LTC would do better fortifying the busy routes they currently have, than extending milk runs to the far edges of the city IMO.

[MrSlippery519]

Ducharme doesn't seem all that pleased doing this re-routing. Rather than go look as see how the plan can be implemented, he moans says they need an addition $1.7 million rather than be creative. The LTC would do better fortifying the busy routes they currently have, than extending milk runs to the far edges of the city IMO.

That is exactly how it seems, he just doesn't seem interested in anything unless it was his idea.