[GreatTallNorth2]

I wanted to start a thread on London Transit, mainly dealing with future plans for the system. I don't know about you, but I am a little underwhelmed by London Transits future plans. They are talking about Bus Rapid Transit, but really it is just enhanced bus service. No right of way and no stations. Anyways, I thought I would share a letter that I wrote to our mayor, our controllers, city councillors and LFP editor and the responses.

Dear Annie Marie Decicco Best,

I wish to inform you that London, Ontario is once again "missing the train" by not planning right now for a rapid light rail transit system. Just look at every other city in Ontario our size or larger and you will find that they are in the planning stages and beyond in building rapid light rail systems in their cities. Take for example the cities of Kitchener/Waterloo/: this area has been planning a light rail system for several years now at the cost of $300 million. It will probably be in operation in five years or less.

http://transitea.region.waterloo.on.ca/

Where will Kitchener get the money to build this system, you ask? The province has committed to paying two-thirds the cost of building it and the province is asking the federal government to pay for the balance. That means the entire capital cost of Kitchener's light rail transit system will be paid for by the upper levels of government. Similar projects will take place all over the province in Toronto, Mississauga, Hamilton and York Region. All of these projects are being funded by a government initiative called Move Ontario 2020.

http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/news/Product.asp?ProductID=1383

My question to you, Anne Marie, is this: When is London going to come up with a solid plan to build a similar system and why would you allow the province and federal government to build Kitchener a light rail system and not want the same for the citizens of London?

London Transit is in the planning stages of what they call a "Bus Rapid Transit" system. They are correct that it is a bus system, but "rapid" it is not. It is not rapid because it does not have "right of way" or dedicated roads for buses. It also does not have real station stops. The proposal I have read makes me embarrassed to be a Londoner and it will not get people out of their cars and onto transit.

I hear catch phrases used in our city such as "London is a creative city" and "London is progressive" and I have to scratch my head. The only London I know that is creative and progressive is the one across the pond.

Anne Marie, the time is now to start action on light rail. Gas prices are rising and Londoners want real solutions to our transportation problems. Tomorrow, the money will not be handed out by the province and the system we wish we had will cost four times as much. We lost out thirty years ago in building a proper expressway system (unlike Kitchener). Please ensure we don't lose out again.

Yours truly,
XXX

Response #1
Mr XXXX
Thank-you for your comments. As Ward 4 Councillor I would like to hear more about the funding by other levels of government. I think you should appear in front of the Environment and Transportation Committee to explain more. I will forward your email to the ETC secretary to contact you to set a time for your appearance if you are interested in speaking to us about this matter.

Best. Wishes

STEPHEN ORSER
Councillor, Ward 4

Response #2
Hi Stephen,

Perhaps Mr. XXXX would like to read the final report of the LTC Long Term Working Group's final report which will be coming before Council through ETC in the next few weeks. The report will also refer to funding from other levels of government and we, in fact, had a presentation from Kitchener/Waterloo last yaer about what they had done. Thanks.

Nancy
Nancy Branscombe

City Councillor - Ward 6
London, Ontario

Response #3
Dear Mr. XXX,
Greetings! Thanks for your note. Let me assure you, we have not missed the train. We are on top of it. It is a matter of timing, population, size and growth. We are getting there and are planning for it. As the Chair of the LTC I will refer your letter to Mr. Larry Ducharme, the LTC General Manager, who I noticed you copied.

If you wish to review our plans I or Mr. Ducharme or a member of his planning staff would be happy to review them with you.

Warmest personal regards,

Harold Usher, P.Eng., DTM
Councillor Ward 12
Chair London Transit Commission

[LondnPlanr]

In short, well done.

Make sure you follow up with your responses, and yes, take up Harold on his offer to review their 'plans'. Cripes, I'll join you!

Get in touch with me via personal message if you want.

[MolsonExport]

Well done. I am with you on these arguments.

[worldwide]

im just finishing up my diploma here in vancouver that would allow me to qualify for jobs as a planning assistant or planning tech. im seriously considering looking for a planning job in london, preferably with london transit, or at city hall. what do you guys think my chances would be? and do you think that a job in planning in london would be a good alternative to working out west? i really like london and i know the city very well. i would love to lern more about the city and help it progress into the future.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Well, I got a great response from Anne Marie herself. It shows that she did not read the email.


Response from Mayor Anne Marie
Hi XXX:

In fact, we have supported efforts and plans with our colleague cities for rapid transit between the Windsor to Quebec corridor. I agree, it is the way of the future, and hopefully, both the provincial and federal governments will work toward building it.

Sincerely,

Anne Marie DeCicco-Best
Mayor

[flar]

I've never had high hopes for transit in London. So many of London's little club of "leaders" simply don't care about public transit.

[worldwide]

hahaha that is too funny GTN2

[FazDeH]

You know I've been as questioning of Londons leadership as most on this forum, but I've actually had a chance to sit down and talk with the Mayor recently, and one thing I asked her was about transit as I use it, and the area of the city I live in doesn't have good transit coverage.
She said the city does have a short term plan to expand coverage and that an LRT line is something they are considering, the expense for such a project however is why they have kept it simply on the city planning room floor.
That statement resulted in alot of questions from me, mostly about inovation and partnership with the private sector to reduce the cities finacnial commitment to which I got a big "well that's something we've been considering" . I have to admit that the conversation left me still with questions, but sadly the mayor had to continue serving tables. It's really funny having the mayor of the city bring you a beer, if any of you want to exeperience that you should try Friday Night Lights, Saturdays shes there and its generally slow so she actually has time to chat, and she didn't seem to mind as I tried to be as polite as possible without saying "Why is the city doing NOTHING to prepair for the future?!"

[GreatTallNorth2]

I am sure that Anne Marie is a nice person. I talked to her several years back and she was indeed friendly. The problem, however, is that she does not possess the qualities of a leader.

After she emailed me, I sent her a response telling her that she did not read my message properly. She then sent me another email (yesterday) saying that she misunderstood my original message, but that Nancy Branscombe was looking into the situation regarding transit. Contrast that with Kitchener's mayor. He has been at the forefront leading Kitchener to a place where LRT is probably going to happen soon. Our politicians are not stepping up and making noise about good transit. They don't even know what good transit is. Instead, we spend our time talking about the small, petty issues at City Hall.

[MolsonExport]

The city definitely needs a change of leadership and vision.

[ssiguy]

I think the first thing london Transit should do is extend the late-night routes. Midnight is ridiculous especially for a university/college town like London and we live in a much different world than 1970.
Not all routes have to be later but maybe the 10 busiest or so running til atleast 1:30, preferably 2:00, epecially on the weekends.

[FazDeH]

^^^ I completely agree about extending the bus schedules. I could think of at least 4 or 5 bus routes that the city should have late hours for. I think it would be a cheap substitution to cabbing for the public, lets face it, if you go downtown on a Friday or Saturday night, getting home is the last thing you want to worry about, but there are so few options. And I think it would help reduce the problem of drinking and driving, so the police would have less to worry about.
Major bus routes should have a last bus leave downtown by 2:30am, I think that would be really well recieved. The Richmond, Oxford east, Kipps, Wellington, Westmount to name afew. Basically the most used student buses, maybe even at a reduced rate... something to think about.

[worldwide]

the 9A and 9B whitehills should run until midnight instead of finishing at ~7pm and no service on sundays.

and then the 6 richmond could just turn into the 9C at UWO from midnight to about 2 or 3 am

also the 19 should run a bit later than it currently does, and the 17 needs much more frequent service.

[ldoto]

Wed, May 28, 2008


London commuters frustrated with parking downtown will soon have a new option.

The City of London and London Transit have joined forces to offer a $50 monthly park-and-ride pass.

Beginning June 1, Londoners will be able to park their vehicles at a municipal parking lot located north of Dundas Street and take a bus downtown.

“The city has a supply issue of long-term parking close to the core area,” said Larry Ducharme, general manager at the London Transit Commission.

Long term means parking a vehicle for eight hours, or the length of a work day.




Commuters can leave their car in one of the two parking lots with access from English Street, Elizabeth Street, Adelaide Street and Queens Avenue. They can then board a bus on Dundas Street between English and Ridout Streets on routes 2 Dundas, 7 Wavell and 20 Cherryhill anytime from Monday to Sunday.

A London business manager said the program should help the weekday parking crunch downtown.

“Anything that can alleviate the problem of parking downtown during the week is positive,” said Bob Usher, manager of the Covent Garden Market and London Downtown Business Association board member.

Participants will be issued a special parking and transit pass. They will be able to claim the federal tax credit for the bus pass portion of the expense.

The park and ride will be a pilot program for a few months to gauge interest. The pass will be continued if there is a good response, said city parking manager Shane Maguire.

The program was motivated by a 2006 city parking study that highlighted a need for more long-term parking downtown.

“A number of long-term parking spots in the downtown have been lost in the last year to construction and other development,” said Maguire.

The park-and-ride may have spin-off benefits for the surrounding Old East area. The manager of the Old East Village business improvement area said she will be watching the program with interest.

“It remains to be seen if the people parking their cars will come into the Old East commercial corridor,” said Sarah Merritt. “Anything that brings people into the area can only be of use to us.”

[MolsonExport]

Egads, I read this somewhere else!

[upinottawa]

If London was to build a light rail line, from where to where would it run? If the light rail vehicles were to run in mixed traffic there would be more options than if the vehicles were intended to run in separate lanes. However, if the LRVs operated in separate lanes (and I do not mean grade separated), the system would be more effective and could draw better ridership numbers.

That being said, I could not imagine London politicians (and the electorate) supporting the coversion of two lanes on Richmond, Dundas or Oxford to exclusive use by LRVs. Also, I could not imagine London politicians supporting a line from downtown to UWO/Masonville (such a line would be heavily used during the 26 weeks of university classes, but would receive light traffic during exams and the summer).

Anyone have in mind a proposed route that could be politically feasible?

[Koolfire]

If London was to build a light rail line, from where to where would it run? If the light rail vehicles were to run in mixed traffic there would be more options than if the vehicles were intended to run in separate lanes. However, if the LRVs operated in separate lanes (and I do not mean grade separated), the system would be more effective and could draw better ridership numbers.

That being said, I could not imagine London politicians (and the electorate) supporting the coversion of two lanes on Richmond, Dundas or Oxford to exclusive use by LRVs. Also, I could not imagine London politicians supporting a line from downtown to UWO/Masonville (such a line would be heavily used during the 26 weeks of university classes, but would receive light traffic during exams and the summer).

Anyone have in mind a proposed route that could be politically feasible?

Yes, It would be a matter of making a deal with CN. Their lines would give you access to the South, Northwest, NorthEast (Airport and Fanshawne if you go up Highbury and the East on Oxford to the Airport) and the Southeast. So spots are too narrow to build two tracks and a little property acquisition might be needed. It's not going to drop you off a Dundas and Richmond but a frequent bus loop would do fine. And when the time is right you build a North to Southwest Metro. Calgary's first line started with a deal with CP.

[GreatTallNorth2]

I think the best way to get light rail in London is to start with this question: how do we get the CN or CP tracks outside the city? If we could accomplish this, it would be a double blessing. We could remove the headaches of long trains running through the centre of the city and replace them with light rail trains moving passengers in the city. This idea would take a strong willed visionary in the mayor's city...something we do not have.

[MolsonExport]

London today:
No freeways, no LRT.
Extreme amounts of development on the periphery.
Dead-end major arteries (Wellington, Sarnia Road, Gainsborough/Windermere)

London tomorrow:
Gridlock.

[manny_santos]

I think the best way to get light rail in London is to start with this question: how do we get the CN or CP tracks outside the city? If we could accomplish this, it would be a double blessing. We could remove the headaches of long trains running through the centre of the city and replace them with light rail trains moving passengers in the city. This idea would take a strong willed visionary in the mayor's city...something we do not have.

There is a proposal that was produced in the 1970s that would have routed freight rail traffic outside of the city, and created rapid transit corridors. One copy of it can be found on the main floor of Weldon Library. Very interesting stuff, which also included various road widening proposals - some of which have YET to be built!

[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]

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.:rolleyes:

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.

http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg138/koolfire_ssp/london.jpg

[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]

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.:haha: 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.:cheers: ) 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]

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. :koko:

[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]

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

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 (http://www.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.

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.:cheers: :cheers:

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.

[ldoto]

Transit plan includes GO trains :D

Tue, September 15, 2009

'It is a different way of thinking' :yes: :yes:

A four-line streetcar route shaped like a cross, with downtown London in the centre and the arms reaching north, south, east and west.

Two rectangles of bus routes intersecting those streetcar lines. GO trains heading east and west, and light rapid transit rail heading to smaller centres.

And all along the routes, people-friendly streets with commercial, retail and residential development built at key connections.

An ambitious plan unveiled yesterday at city hall turns the idea of London's transit system on its head.

Instead of buses and streetcars being an afterthought to development, the transit system would actually determine where and how the city grows.




"It is a different way of thinking," city planning and development manager John Fleming said yesterday after a short presentation to politicians. "We use transit as a way for sparking growth and attracting investment."

The plan, called an urban structure plan, is a long way from being implemented.

The city's planning committee merely commented on the plan and referred it to several other city agencies, such as the London Transit Commission, for comment.

"I like what we're trying to do, but most of us won't be around when it happens," Cont, Bud Polhill said.

"We are just beginning the discussion," agreed city planner John Fleming.

But it's a discussion Londoners should have, he added.

Cities across the U.S. are using the same principals to guide development in their major activity centres and residential neighbourhoods, and link the two, said London's urban designer, Sean Galloway.

In Toronto, all you have to do is look down from the CN Tower to see where the thriving, mixed-density neighbourhoods rise -- at the subway stations that lead to the core, he added.

Mixed residential-retail and commercial neighbourhoods would thrive in London where the streetcar, bus and rail lines intersect, Galloway said.

In London, the major centres of activity include the downtown, the University of Western Ontario, Fanshawe College, the hospital campuses, the airport, Innovation Park and, at the centre, the downtown.

The transit system would move people within London, and to London.

"Downtown should be the centre of Southwestern Ontario and we need transportation that allows that to happen," Galloway said.

[manny_santos]

I wonder what routes they're looking at for this. I still think the 1973 plan should be used in part, including use of the CP Rail corridor.

[ldoto]

CITY PLANNING: Some believe how Londoners get around will determine how the city grows

By JONATHAN SHER

Last Updated: 9th November 2009, 9:39am


With hundreds of millions of dollars in development at stake, politicians and bureaucrats have begun to debate how Londoners should move around in future and how the city should grow.

Already, some advocates of cars, buses and light rail seem on a collision course.

Deputy Mayor Tom Gosnell dismisses the idea the city should consider building a light-rail passenger service to stimulate development along rail corridors. Light rail, he said, is for cities with populations near one million, not smaller cities like London growing at a snail's pace.

"Light rapid transit -- our grandchildren can worry about that," he said.

His comments come as the city embarks on a year-long effort to plan transportation needs for the next 20 years. Citizens will be invited to weigh at 6 p.m. tomorrow at Western Fair's Carousel Room.

Such city planning is done every five years. But this time there's a twist -- a growing belief the choices made about how to move people affect how the city grows.

That change in focus is being pushed by city planners who see transportation as a tool to create vibrant communities where homes, retail and services are all an attractive walk away.

Planner John Fleming and urban designer Sean Galloway point to Charlotte, N.C., where 6,000 residential units have been built or are proposed near stops of its two-year-old light rail system.

"(Transportation planning) is not just about meeting existing needs. We need to look to the future," Fleming said.

But it's clear not all have the same vision.

Gosnell questioned whether city hall should be directing development.

"How much involvement will there be for the private sector on where they want to invest?" Gosnell asked.

Coun. Paul Van Meerbergen said city hall needs to focus more on maintaining and expanding roads already too burdened by traffic.

"The belief that most families will use transit is not realistic," he said.

Also concerned is a commissioner at London Transit, Coun. Harold Usher.

London Transit wants dedicated traffic lanes for express buses -- rapid bus transit -- and the preferred routes and nodes in which they intersect are different than shown on a map of light rail drawn up by city planners.

"(Bus rapid transit) -- that's what the public is thinking," Usher told city planners last week.

Those differing views make a challenge out of creating a transportation plan, said the official with that role, city road chief Dave Leckie.

"There is paradigm shift to make streets more into people places rather than just a conduit for vehicles," he told the city's community and protective services committee.

"I'm not sure where to take it through the transportation master plan . . . I'm struggling with how much weight (this) has from council."

Where some see conflict, Fleming sees a chance to discuss how choices about transportation will shape London's growth and its neighbourhoods. Though the map created by planners isn't a blueprint, it's a starting point.

"Light rail transit would be a major benefit to the city. It makes sense to phase it in," he said, adding there could be a transition from express buses to light rail.

Unlike motor vehicles, a train channels people to specific and limited places. And where it stops, there's the potential to build an exciting mix of homes, business and public space where people want to live, work and play.

"It can attract significant (private) investment," Fleming said.

Though buses stop, too, their routes can change overnight -- and that lack of permanence doesn't create incentives for investors.

Where buses stop will be different, too, Galloway said.

A bus might stop at a mall to serve the flow of shoppers, but Galloway sees that as a poor choice for a train. He wants stops in places where pedestrians -- not cars -- are king.

"London is at a critical moment, moving to the next phase of becoming a bigger city," he said.

That step -- building a light rail passenger service -- has been already taken by regional rival Kitchener-Waterloo and may be taken as soon as January by Hamilton.

Kitchener-Waterloo, which began planning in 2002, plans to spend $790 million, and hopes upper government funding could enable service to start in 2014.

Hamilton is expected to decide soon whether to create a line for express buses or a light rail.

If London is to compete with its own vibrant neighbourhoods, light rail should be part of that evolution, Fleming said.

He has a supporter in Coun. David Winninger.

"I don't think we can wait until we have 800,000 people to be well-positioned for the future," he said. "If we don't start planning now, the train will have left the station."

jonathan.sher@sunmedia.ca

-- -- --

HIGH SPEED RAIL LINES: Hoped-for route between Windsor and Quebec City.

LIGHT RAIL: Colour-coded, red the highest priority; others are brown, blue and orange. Could begin as express bus routes. Rail option could be streetcars or light trains.

GRAND AVENUES: Streets without light rail, pedestrianfriendly with treed medians, large boulevards with double tree rows, wider sidewalks and street parking.

EXPRESS BUS ROUTES: Routes that loop though the city.

GO TRANSIT RAIL LINES: Commuter trains connecting outlying municipalities.

[manny_santos]

There should be no further outward geographical growth of this city. There are just going to be further transportation problems if we keep letting the city expand outward, and if we keep catering to developers who insist on building residential developments with huge lots and commercial developments which do not facilitate pedestrian access. Just because soccer mom families like these developments doesn't mean we should allow them. Infill needs to be used extensively as well.

One example is the intersection of Wonderland and Riverside. That southwest corner should have commercial development on it. There was a group led by Monica Jarabek who opposed the development, but it would've provided a pedestrian-accessible shopping area for an area that has no other commercial development, especially as one goes westward on Riverside. Residents in that south part of Oakridge are forced to drive in order to get basic services. That land is otherwise wasted. True, we need green spaces in London, but there are plenty of green spaces nearby closer to the river.

It's bizarre how the so-called environmentalists in London don't want pedestrian-friendly commercial development in residential areas. I'll never forget Gina Barber's pleas to not allow Tim Hortons in Byron almost a decade ago, even though its addition has made the chain pedestrian-accessible in the north part of Byron. People in Byron used to drive to other parts of the city and back just to get a Tim Hortons coffee, but now they can either walk there or drive a short distance.

The city has got to start permitting more small commercial development in otherwise residential areas. Part of the transportation mess exists because people like myself who live in a huge low-density residential area have to drive just to get groceries or other basic services. There need to be more areas like Wortley Village all over the city. If people could work and shop close to where they live, no matter where they live in urban London, they wouldn't need transportation.

Once traffic patterns are changed, then we might have a need for mass transit other than anything that would serve Western and Fanshawe.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Is anyone going to the public meeting at Western Fair tonight (November 10th)? If so, we should meet up.

[MolsonExport]

The city should explore streetcars. This past summer, I was in Oslo (city pop 600K, metro 1.5 million), and I was amazed with the variety and quantity of mass transit options. Streetcars can utilize existing streets, while moving greater quantities of people faster and perhaps farther in greater comfort, than rapid bus, but at a lower cost than light rail.

[ldoto]

Yellow cars challenging mainstays
TRANSPORTATION: London Taxi will soon be the largest cab company in the city, its co-founder says



Customers who call London Taxi will find drivers committed to service because they own a share of the company, co-founder Hasan Savehilaghi said.

"This is their company."

Customers won't notice a difference in fares because city hall sets them.

London Taxi will have more than 40 yellow cabs in service by week's end and soon more than 100 vehicles of the 300-plus plates whose number is capped by the city.

"We are going to be, in very short order, the largest cab company in London," Savehilaghi said.

For seven years, he had headed a coalition of drivers called the London Taxi Association that claims to represent 400 drivers. There are more drivers than cabs because a typical cab is operated round-the-clock by multiple drivers.

The association was formed to improve the industry and the lives of drivers, but those goals were impeded by companies focused solely on profits while placing most costs and risks on drivers, Savehilaghi said.

Owners of plates and those who drive pay for vehicles, maintenance, insurance and gasoline and face the risk of assault, he said.

The two companies, Aboutown Ltd. and U-Need-A-Cab, only cover the cost of dispatching calls, Savehilaghi said.

"That's the major reason why we formed the co-op."

The co-op is owned by 19 cab drivers and 31 owners of taxi plates, a number that might expand as more drivers and owners join the company, Savehilaghi said.

His claims were challenged by the family that's owned Aboutown Ltd. since the 1970s.

"I entirely reject that our drivers are not treated with respect," Aboutown vice-president Jamie Donnelly said.

Aboutown has the city's largest and longest-standing fleet -- about 170 cabs -- and has been at the forefront of improved service for customers and safety for drivers, he said.

Officials with U-Need-A-Cab couldn't be reached.

Savehilaghi says London Taxi will end a practice followed by Aboutown that had the company charge reduced flat rates to clients such as Canada Post, the city's hospitals and to customers who use the company's airport shuttle service.

That practice squeezes precious dollars out of the pockets of drivers, he said.

The new company will also charge drivers less each week for its dispatch services -- $100 weekly compared to $130 to $140.

Donnelly defended the lower flat rates as a common industry practice and private deals that aren't governed by the city bylaw.

[manny_santos]

I'm surprised there hasn't been more discussion on the topic, but...what is everyone going to do if LTC goes on strike next week?

My coworkers are trying to set up carpools since many of us rely on LTC to get to work. Where I live, LTC is a must if you don't drive.

I guess Anne-Marie doesn't really want to get re-elected next year. Her stance on this issue has been disgraceful. On the bright side, a friend of mine at Western wrote Susan Eagle about the whole situation and she at least seemed willing to lobby others on Council to take action.

[ldoto]

An upstart London cab company, challenging years of dominance by a pair of taxi outfits, will celebrate its early success Tuesday night.

Yellow London Taxi, established in October as a co-operative owned by the drivers it employs, will hold an event they say will be attended by several notable city politicians.

Having started with 12 drivers, the company now has 50 shareholders — drivers and plate owners — and 41 cabs on city streets.

In total, there are more than 300 cabs in London.

NDP MP Irene Mathyssen is expected to attend the event, as is London Mayor Anne Marie DeCicco-Best, the company says.

Though the company isn’t yet profitable, co-founder Hasan Savehilaghi says the company is close to that goal.

Coun. Stephen Orser, a one-time cabbie who in the past has pushed for change to London’s taxi system, applauded the emerging business for gaining a toehold during a recession.

[ldoto]

5/26/2010

A campaign to add weekday bus service to Lambeth is heating up.

The London Transit Commission is set to vote today on a recommendation to add a Lambeth route this September. It's one way the LTC is hoping to win back customers and increase their ridership.

Councillor Susan Eagle has long fought for bus service in Lambeth, and says she's thrilled to hear that LTC staff are recommending the new route. Bus routes to the small community were discontinued about 10 years ago.

The new service will not include evenings, weekends, or holidays.

Officials with the Lambeth Community Association expect most residents to jump on board, although some local businesses worry about people having easier access to shop in London.

LTC general manager Larry Ducharme points to growth in the city's southwest end and expects the new service to generate enough cash to cover 35% of the total cost which will come in at over $212,000 dollars.

During today's meeting, staff will also discuss reports showing ridership is still down 2.3% adding up to around $500,000 dollars in lost revenue.

[manny_santos]

London Transit is planning a pilot project for next summer that will see buses moved off Dundas Street in the downtown area, and moved to King (eastbound) and Queens (westbound).

I was originally against the idea when Shmuel Farhi brought it up last year, but I think it's a good idea now. There are way too many weirdoes crowded in that area waiting for buses - as frequent readers of my posts will know I am sick and tired of all the yelling, profanities and fighting that goes on (in front of children) in front of the Mascot Restaurant as well as McDonald's. Dundas should be a great place for pedestrians to shop, but as it stands right now it's not an area I (and I'm sure many other Londoners) enjoy walking through.

[bolognium]

There really needs to be a central bus terminal downtown. Having 3 or 4 buses idling on Richmond is ridiculous. I suppose moving the Dundas buses to King and Queens will help take a bit of pressure off of the Dundas and Richmond intersection, but the Richmond buses will still force people to wait and loiter on the sidewalk.

I lived in Kitchener and Cambridge for 3 years while I went to school at Conestoga and I loved Grand River Transit. They had large downtown terminals serving 15-20+ connecting bus routes. These terminals were not only extremely convenient, but very tidy in the sense that there were never buses constantly idling on street corners. London's mess of buses at D&R seems laughable in comparison.

[MolsonExport]

London Transit is planning a pilot project for next summer that will see buses moved off Dundas Street in the downtown area, and moved to King (eastbound) and Queens (westbound).

I was originally against the idea when Shmuel Farhi brought it up last year, but I think it's a good idea now. There are way too many weirdoes crowded in that area waiting for buses - as frequent readers of my posts will know I am sick and tired of all the yelling, profanities and fighting that goes on (in front of children) in front of the Mascot Restaurant as well as McDonald's. Dundas should be a great place for pedestrians to shop, but as it stands right now it's not an area I (and I'm sure many other Londoners) enjoy walking through.

YEAH, and the stench of urine from the weirdos... :yuck:

[manny_santos]

There really needs to be a central bus terminal downtown. Having 3 or 4 buses idling on Richmond is ridiculous. I suppose moving the Dundas buses to King and Queens will help take a bit of pressure off of the Dundas and Richmond intersection, but the Richmond buses will still force people to wait and loiter on the sidewalk.

I lived in Kitchener and Cambridge for 3 years while I went to school at Conestoga and I loved Grand River Transit. They had large downtown terminals serving 15-20+ connecting bus routes. These terminals were not only extremely convenient, but very tidy in the sense that there were never buses constantly idling on street corners. London's mess of buses at D&R seems laughable in comparison.

Even Brantford has such a bus terminal, which also doubles as that city's Greyhound bus terminal.

With regards to Richmond, I would have no problem with seeing only southbound buses on that street, and having all northbound buses move to Wellington, as far north as Central or Pall Mall.

[haljackey]

Good place for the central LTC bus terminal: Where the Wick used to be.

Also the vacant parking lot on the NW corner of Queens and Talbot is a good spot too.

[bolognium]

Good place for the central LTC bus terminal: Where the Wick used to be.

Also the vacant parking lot on the NW corner of Queens and Talbot is a good spot too.

There are a few surface parking lots that would be perfect for a downtown terminal, but I don't think the Wick lot would be large enough. I'm assuming the London terminal would be roughly the same size as Kitchener's Charles Street Terminal so I did a couple Google Map comparisons. There might be better areas, but I'm looking for locations that would require very little expropriation.



http://i38.tinypic.com/hulgg9.png
This is Kitchener's Charles Street Terminal. Like Manny said about Brantford's terminal, the Charles terminal also doubles as the City's Greyhound terminal. As you can see, it's quite large, serving as a central hub for many of K-W's buses.



http://i35.tinypic.com/rmtunb.png
Here is the Wick for comparison. Unless our downtown LTC terminal only served a handful of buses at a time it would likely be far too small.



http://i38.tinypic.com/35avvvd.png
At the top of this image is the parking lot on Clarence across from the Galleria. This lot is also a little on the small side, but it is VERY central. It is basically in the centre of downtown making everything fairly accessible. This would be my first pick as it would add much needed pedestrian traffic to this part of the core. The lots directly across King at the bottom of this image would also be a very good location for a terminal.



http://i36.tinypic.com/fntxyq.png
Another delicious spot for a terminal would be the large lot across from Laser Quest and Cousin Vinny's. However, with the new Shopper's Drug Mart development I'm not sure how much of this lot will be left available for the terminal. Again, the lot is very central and extremely close to Richmond St.



http://i36.tinypic.com/29yhb3o.png
This lot on York Street is directly across from the Convention Centre. This lot isn't as central as the above locations, but it is quite large and very accessible for buses.



http://i37.tinypic.com/11qmofp.png
This last lot is on Fullerton near the courthouse. Again, not as central as the earlier locations, but it is fairly large and would require no expropriation.



I really don't see us getting a downtown terminal any time soon because London just loves its desolate-looking surface parking, but it's still fun to play city planner from time to time :)

[haljackey]

An office building is going up on the Richmond/Carling lot. This would have been my first choice since it is on Richmond and close to Dundas, but sadly someone got to it first. :haha:

Based on your analysis of the land available and comparison to other terminals, I think the Queen/Talbot lot would be the best spot. Lots of space there. The Clarance/King lot is ok too, but remember it is used for the Blues Fest and other events.

[MolsonExport]

I think that clarence/king would be ideal...except for the fact that my very favorite Indian restaurant (Massey's) is right there!

[ssiguy]

As far as I'm concerned the LTC's first priority should be to get service past midnight on all days of the week. All buses should leave downtown at about 12:30 so the people working at the hospitals and late shifts can actually make it downtown for their transfer.
After that there should be maybe the 6 busiest routes running til 2:30am.
It would make a huge difference for the bar crowd and late night workers.
They should get UWO and Fanshawe to help fund it as the students are already getting huge discounts on their transit passes.
Just image at UWO along. Just $1 extra for each course taken when there are nearly 30,000 students taking 5 courses each. That tiny little $1 works out to $150,000 a year.

[Kokkei Mizu]

As far as I'm concerned the LTC's first priority should be to get service past midnight on all days of the week. All buses should leave downtown at about 12:30 so the people working at the hospitals and late shifts can actually make it downtown for their transfer.
After that there should be maybe the 6 busiest routes running til 2:30am.
It would make a huge difference for the bar crowd and late night workers.
They should get UWO and Fanshawe to help fund it as the students are already getting huge discounts on their transit passes.
Just image at UWO along. Just $1 extra for each course taken when there are nearly 30,000 students taking 5 courses each. That tiny little $1 works out to $150,000 a year.

It's a good idea to make major lines go to 2:30am. But what's the first bus of the day, 5am or 5:30? You might as well just make it 24 hours.

[manny_santos]

London traffic is now so bad that it took me 90 minutes to get from Fanshawe College to Byron today on London Transit. Traffic on Oxford Street was backed up literally from Wonderland Road to Colborne Street around 5:00. No accidents or construction, just sheer volume.

I feel like I live in Toronto. Oh wait, I could get across the city on the TTC faster than that.

[manny_santos]

Something I'd like to see London Transit do is develop express routes for some of the major existing bus routes (2, 4, 6, 10, 13, 17). To highlight why:

I'm now at Fanshawe doing a post-graduate diploma. I got on the 4 Oxford East on campus today. Not everyone waiting for the bus was able to fit on. A number of students who got on there got off at Oxford and Highbury, a short walk from the college. For all I know, the students unable to get on could have been going to White Oaks.

At Western I had the same issue - I wouldn't be able to get on a 2 Dundas because it was full of students, many of whom got off before Western and Platt's. Other times I got on I'd be late getting to the connecting bus because one group of students got on at Natural Science, and then when another group got on at Weldon Library the driver would have to tell them 5 times to move to the back before everyone was on and the bus could leave. Repeat at Alumni Hall. Repeat at Western and Brescia Lane.

What I'm proposing is an alternate for students like myself who have to travel long distances to get to and from class. For the 4 Oxford East "Express" going westbound for example, the bus would pick up students at Fanshawe College, and then it would not stop again until Oxford and Adelaide, again at Richmond and Oxford, again at Dundas and Richmond, and then not again until it was south of Commissioners Road, after which it would stop at all the normal stops through to White Oaks. A similar approach would be taken on other high-volume routes serving Western and Fanshawe - through the central city, stops at major intersections only, and then normal stops in the suburbs. There would still be a 4A and a 4B as there is now.

My inspiration for this is the New York subway, where certain lines are designated as "express" and skip several stops in lower/central Manhattan while stopping at all stops in upper Manhattan and other boroughs.

Thoughts?

[haljackey]

I'm at Fanshawe too and I take the 4 (Oxford East) bus as well (to downtown).

Getting a "express" bus from campus directly to downtown would certainly be a huge plus. I remember when I was at western I saw a 2C (Dundas) express a few years back that said "to Dundas and Richmond ONLY". Haven't seen em for at least 2 years.

As for some of the other routes, I don't think express buses are needed. From major campuses to the downtown hub sound like good ideas, but having one from a mall (such as the 10) isn't as needed.

One thing we could do is emphasize carpooling a bit more. This would work best for those coming out of town or don't live close to a bus route (such as those new suburbs in Lambeth).

The GTA has been pretty good with this. They have put carpool parking lots inside of highway loop ramps and then a bus travels from there to downtown Toronto. It could be applied in London to a certain extent, such as in a loop ramp of the Wellington Road interchange. A 13 express bus would then take them to Wellington and Dundas or Richmond and Dundas.

I dunno, just spurting ideas here. Might be best to discuss it further on the Smartmoves site.

[MolsonExport]

Time for a Fanshawe-Byron subway.

[ericlewis91]

new bus route

39 Fanshawe

http://www.ltconline.ca/pdfscheds/39ltc.pdf

from hyde park walmart to masonville mall

not that useful, everyone has cars around here

this bus also changes into the 38 stoney creek at the end of the route then changes back from 38 to 39
(this will connect sunningdale/adelaide to masonville right to walmart)

[haljackey]

:previous:

Everyone has cars except for the people who work for minimum wage at the mega-strip malls way out there.

The LTC is providing service here because they can't afford to get to/from work any other way. I wonder how much money the city is losing with this route?
-At least the Lambeth route is justified because people actually live there.

[ForestryW]

^^^ The LTC may be losing money, but don't forget that's the reason this is PUBLIC transit; it's the reason we don't hand our transit system over to a private company: so that we can provide transportation to those who need it, regardless of where they live.

[manny_santos]

Time for a Fanshawe-Byron subway.

Surrrrrrre...

[haljackey]

Here's a picture I took of London's bus hub: Richmond and Dundas streets in downtown London:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/af/Dundas_and_Richmond.JPG/1200px-Dundas_and_Richmond.JPG

[Kokkei Mizu]

Here's a picture I took of London's bus hub: Richmond and Dundas streets in downtown London:

This is what London considers their downtown bus hub? lol I think London should invest in a little more.

[go_leafs_go02]

This is what London considers their downtown bus hub? lol I think London should invest in a little more.


you can't even see it really in the picture.

It's a 4-legged intersection with bus stops on all 4 legs. They all have the sign.

A terminal would be better, but as far as I know, this intersection works well presently for transit.

[ForestryW]

I disagree. I don't think it's functional in the slightest. Kitchener-Waterloo got it right when they built a consolidated bus terminal for GRT, Greyhound, and other carriers.

Transit in London is eons behind K-W and the only excuse is complacency.

[haljackey]

If I recall correctly, even Woodstock has a bus terminal!

It doesn't make any sense that London doesn't have one. Imagine getting off your bus into a shelter or heated/air conditioned building, grabbing a coffee or magazine between transfers, and getting on another bus all in the same place. Makes sense to me...

Rerouting the east/west bound buses to King and Queen is a step for the better in my opinion, but not by much.

[manny_santos]

If I recall correctly, even Woodstock has a bus terminal!

It doesn't make any sense that London doesn't have one. Imagine getting off your bus into a shelter or heated/air conditioned building, grabbing a coffee or magazine between transfers, and getting on another bus all in the same place. Makes sense to me...

Rerouting the east/west bound buses to King and Queen is a step for the better in my opinion, but not by much.

Well...there is Starbucks on the northwest corner of Dundas and Richmond...

McDonald's and public transit go together like fish 'n' chips. Never ceases to amaze me how often I get on an LTC bus and it reeks of Rotten Ronnies.

[MolsonExport]

'Could be worse. In the Excited States of America, transit hubs (and greyhound stations) smell like Burger Thing and vomit. Have it your way.

[haljackey]

'Could be worse. In the Excited States of America, transit hubs (and greyhound stations) smell like Burger Thing and vomit. Have it your way.

Aww, you always know what to say. :redface:

[Snark]

'Could be worse. In the Excited States of America, transit hubs (and greyhound stations) smell like Burger Thing and vomit. Have it your way.

Would that make it a "Vomper"?

[ldoto]

London transit officials are showing off their green side.

On Tuesday morning, LTC representatives unveiled their new multi-million dollar satellite bus storage and maintenance facility in the city's south end.

Local politicians and transit representatives were on hand for the official ribbon cutting ceremony.

The new facility is located on Wonderland Rd. south and features green-friendly technology.

"We have heat deflection on the roof panels...it means you're running less air conditioning in the summer months," said Larry Ducharme, the LTC General Manager. " We have solar panels on the roof which allows us to sell energy back to the province with the proceeds going to drive down operating costs."

Ducharme hopes the new hub will allow the LTC to expand its service and increase ridership since the new storage facility will allow them to reduce travel time in the southwest end of the city.

The LTC committed 2.6 million dollars to the project, while the provincial government put up 10 million dollars and the federal government kicked in an additional 9.5 million dollars.

[ForestryW]

Build central bus terminal.

[Simpseatles]

One of my biggest beefs with the LTC has to be with advertisements. Some of the buses are basically just moving billboards. I don't mind small signs bellow the windows, but I can't stand the ones that cover up the entire bus, including windows. I've seen a giant Christmas one last year, a Westmount one (but they need all the people they can get), an awful Smart Moves one shwing a "futuristic" city bus and cars with happy kids on bikes, and my least favourite, the Station Park All Suite Hotel. "A world class hotel in a world class city!" Ya right, a "world class" city sure as hell wouldn't plaster an ad for a hotel on the side of a bus. They're just such an eyesore and it gives visitors a bad impression of our city.

Also, I saw a bus the other day that said hybrid on the side. I don't remember where but I was really surprised. I know you can find hybrids in many other places, but I've never heard anything about them being in London. Anybody else know what I'm talking about?

[haljackey]

I'm pretty sure buses in other cities have full-body advertisements on their buses as well. The New Flyer models London uses are in many cities in North America. It's just something we have to live with.
-And ya, the Smartmoves one is a joke. I gave up on that site many months ago.

And hybrids have been in use for about a year now. The first hybrids were smaller buses meant to replace those community shuttle things and whatnot. More recently however, full size hybrids have hit the roads.

Although I would rather see the LTC use natural gas, hybrid technology works quite well with buses because they remain stopped for so long all day. This allows the batteries to charge up and those are mounted at the top of the bus, not taking up valuable space inside like trunks for cars.

They cost a lot more money than regular buses but when I see cities like Chicago use hydrogen fuel cell buses it shows we need to at least go for hybrid/natural gas models.

[Kokkei Mizu]

One of my biggest beefs with the LTC has to be with advertisements. Some of the buses are basically just moving billboards. I don't mind small signs bellow the windows, but I can't stand the ones that cover up the entire bus, including windows. I've seen a giant Christmas one last year, a Westmount one (but they need all the people they can get), an awful Smart Moves one shwing a "futuristic" city bus and cars with happy kids on bikes, and my least favourite, the Station Park All Suite Hotel. "A world class hotel in a world class city!" Ya right, a "world class" city sure as hell wouldn't plaster an ad for a hotel on the side of a bus. They're just such an eyesore and it gives visitors a bad impression of our city.

Also, I saw a bus the other day that said hybrid on the side. I don't remember where but I was really surprised. I know you can find hybrids in many other places, but I've never heard anything about them being in London. Anybody else know what I'm talking about?

It just means it's a hybrid between a bus and a billboard :D

[ForestryW]

Haha. A busboard. Of the transitidae family.

Someone told me hybrid buses are in fact very inefficient because they are almost always either accelerating or decelerating, which takes more fuel. The net result is they are only slightly more efficient than conventional fuel buses.
Is this true?

[manny_santos]

And of course there's no less than three LTC buses plastered with Centretown Pawnbrokers. I once saw all three of them downtown at one time.

What I dislike most about LTC's advertising is what's inside the buses. Virtually all the advertising is aimed at the welfare ghetto demographics, nothing at MOPEs (Managers, Owners, Professionals, Executives). A typical LTC bus contains the following ad cards:

- Smart Moves London
- Centretown Pawnbrokers
- Stream Global Services (Start your new career TODAY!)
- Lifestyles condoms
- Middlesex-London Health Unit
- Gambling addiction help hotlines

As a student pursuing a career in business management I find the ads a little insulting, aside from the health unit ones and Smart Moves. Just because I take the bus doesn't mean I need a payday loan, that I have gambling problems, that I'm unemployed and will work in a call center getting yelled at all day by people, or, um, need a lot of condoms. I take the bus because it's more cost-effective and I am a believer in public transit. From a marketing standpoint though, except for the condom ads, advertisers are really wasting their money advertising to MOPEs that take the bus - and there are some in London.

On the other hand in Toronto and New York, ads inside the subways are for things like HBO or local radio stations. Things actually relevant to MOPEs.

[MolsonExport]

One of my biggest beefs with the LTC has to be with advertisements. Some of the buses are basically just moving billboards. I don't mind small signs bellow the windows, but I can't stand the ones that cover up the entire bus, including windows. I've seen a giant Christmas one last year, a Westmount one (but they need all the people they can get), an awful Smart Moves one shwing a "futuristic" city bus and cars with happy kids on bikes, and my least favourite, the Station Park All Suite Hotel. "A world class hotel in a world class city!" Ya right, a "world class" city sure as hell wouldn't plaster an ad for a hotel on the side of a bus. They're just such an eyesore and it gives visitors a bad impression of our city.

Also, I saw a bus the other day that said hybrid on the side. I don't remember where but I was really surprised. I know you can find hybrids in many other places, but I've never heard anything about them being in London. Anybody else know what I'm talking about?

^yep. Being at/near UWO daily, I've seen them all.

I loathe the term: World Class. there is a hidden word in the term, that says it all (hint: starts with 'a').

[MolsonExport]

What I dislike most about LTC's advertising is what's inside the buses. Virtually all the advertising is aimed at the welfare ghetto demographics, nothing at MOPEs (Managers, Owners, Professionals, Executives). A typical LTC bus contains the following ad cards:

- Smart Moves London
- Centretown Pawnbrokers
- Stream Global Services (Start your new career TODAY!)
- Lifestyles condoms
- Middlesex-London Health Unit
- Gambling addiction help hotlines




:D :haha: :haha:

truer words were never spoken. another disincentive for taking the bus.

[haljackey]

Was on a hybrid bus for the first time today. The interior didn't seem any different, although the bus was much quieter. After being stopped at a light, the bus accelerates without much noise, which caught me off guard the first time. I thought something was wrong the gears lol.

[bolognium]

What I dislike most about LTC's advertising is what's inside the buses. Virtually all the advertising is aimed at the welfare ghetto demographics, nothing at MOPEs (Managers, Owners, Professionals, Executives).

Aside from LTC, my only other daily public transit experience is with KW's Grand River Transit, but their advertising was no different than London's. It was always lawyers, condoms, money troubles, continuing education and disease awareness.

While I agree that the advertising isn't helping improve ridership, I don't think it's fair to single out the LTC for its advertisements.

[Blitz]

I spent most of today Christmas shopping downtown and after that experience I'm more in favour of removing buses from Dundas Street downtown. I don't mean to be judgemental but the people that just linger around the Dundas/Richmond area are really dragging it down. Some of the things I saw and heard today were disgusting and it seems like it's just getting worse. Maybe some of the offices like Ontario Works and the various other social services in that area need to move too.

I live downtown so I deal with it all the time but I'm just thinking that if a tourist from the nearby hotels walked along Dundas Street at any given time they wouldn't leave with the best impression just because of the people.

[MolsonExport]

^what, you don't like the smell of pee? :D

[manny_santos]

I spent most of today Christmas shopping downtown and after that experience I'm more in favour of removing buses from Dundas Street downtown. I don't mean to be judgemental but the people that just linger around the Dundas/Richmond area are really dragging it down. Some of the things I saw and heard today were disgusting and it seems like it's just getting worse. Maybe some of the offices like Ontario Works and the various other social services in that area need to move too.

I live downtown so I deal with it all the time but I'm just thinking that if a tourist from the nearby hotels walked along Dundas Street at any given time they wouldn't leave with the best impression just because of the people.

I feel the same way. And I agree, it has gotten worse in the past five years - although at least two people were murdered in that area in the 1990s.

London's high unemployment is very evident at that intersection.

[Highinthesky]

Things could be turning around for the Intersection. Farhi bought the building with the clock tower (old simpsons building) so a change in tenants could happen.

[Blitz]

I feel the same way. And I agree, it has gotten worse in the past five years - although at least two people were murdered in that area in the 1990s.

Yeah, I've never felt unsafe there (though I tend to avoid it at night) but the scuzziness level seems to be increasing. Also, the blaring of the classical music by the library and the McDonald's building doesn't seem to disperse them much and it just adds to the annoyance level of being in that area.

On the plus side, I did manage to get almost all my shopping done downtown. I know Citi Plaza gets razzed on here but it's pretty convenient for people who live in the area.

[MolsonExport]

^they do have a great dollar store.

[Blitz]

haha, well I didn't go there (although I've been there a few times in recent months). They just opened a Fairweather so hopefully that's a sign of more to come.

[Wharn]

Hey everyone, longtime reader but first-time poster. I thought I'd start out by posting a semi-relevant picture related to London's transit history; I believe this was one of the last streetcars to run in the city, shown here abandoned at Dundas and Eleanor after a November Blizzard wrecked the electrical lines. I believe the Kelvinator factory in the background is now an auto dealer. I kinda wish at least one streetcar line survived, perhaps the Adelaide one (since it seems to be the bus route with the fewest arbitrary and illogical route kinks, one would assume it would suit a linear streetcar line well). They clog up the streets somewhat, but perhaps that would have taught London that a city needs expressways to complement road and transit infrastructure.

On that note, does anyone know if the city has any official plans to build some new light rail lines, or is it just the typical London lipservice?


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5207/5333535967_4899d4be4b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26486173@N07/5333535967/)
London Ontario streetcar, Eleanor and Dundas 1940 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26486173@N07/5333535967/) by rising_sun_19 (http://www.flickr.com/people/26486173@N07/), on Flickr

[Snark]

I believe the Kelvinator factory in the background is now an auto dealer.

On that note, does anyone know if the city has any official plans to build some new light rail lines, or is it just the typical London lipservice?

My mother and a best friend's father worked at Kelvinator. That era represents, perhaps, North America at its industrial peak. A time in passing...Perhaps if MacArthur had got his way it might be different now, but there would be other dread consequences from such decisions...

Your LRT questions will be answered in good time.

[haljackey]

A couple more pics of rapid transit proposals for London:


http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/2816/clipboard02dv.jpg

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/9127/clipboard04ks.jpg

[MolsonExport]

That first photo is what we need, and not more, for an LRT system. Who cares if the Westmount mall is left out in the cold? Principle axes should be Wellington/Richmond (North/South) and Oxfart/Dundass (East/West)

[MrSlippery519]

That first photo is what we need, and not more, for an LRT system. Who cares if the Westmount mall is left out in the cold? Principle axes should be Wellington/Richmond (North/South) and Oxfart/Dundass (East/West)

Agreed that is exactly what we need, there is no reason for something like the second picture.

God I hope an LRT somehow get approved...not holding my breathe though.