[Dan416]

LRT promotes development because it is part of the street, unlike subways which are separate. Subways turns the streets above into highways, doesn't have traffic-calming effect of LRT.

LRT = pro-transit and pro-urban
Subways = pro-car and pro-suburban

BRT is not rail, so it won't attract choice riders or development no matter what.

This is surely doady's most nonsensical post yet. I nominate it for worst doady post ever.

 

[gweed123]

LRT promotes development because it is part of the street, unlike subways which are separate. Subways turns the streets above into highways, doesn't have traffic-calming effect of LRT.

LRT = pro-transit and pro-urban
Subways = pro-car and pro-suburban

BRT is not rail, so it won't attract choice riders or development no matter what.

LRT propaganda much??? Yeesh...

 

[Electrify]

I thought Eglinton's spacing was 800 m, and SELRT was 400 m?

The tunnel portion west of Yonge stops are about 650m apart (comparable to much of the Bloor-Danforth line) while east of Yonge they are about 1000m apart (comparable to the Spadina line along much of the Allen). Beyond the tunnel, most of the stop spacing is about 400m.

 

[taal]

I'd argue, as a few have, plopping down a LRT anywhere really won't necessarily spur development along the line. Hi-way 7 is a good example, though no LRT - and a BRT is only being built now; This area (the Markham stretch up to Warden or so) has been booming (mainly commercial development) and more so now residential development regress of any mass transporation. There is service on Hi-way 7 don't get me wrong, I take it eveyday - but I don't think this really contributed to much if any of the development, it would have happened either way.

What about the Spadina side of the Yonge/University line ? Okay it's not a LRT but very little development took place along this route - very little revitalization, very little of anything. Were starting to see some action now but nothing for many years.
I'm very curious how Sheppard will turn out (whatever is built).


I think a key to all of this is how much commercial development is along the line - that's what really spurs everything, including more residential development.

 

[Electrify]

I'll give doady credit for at least not beating around the bush. Most times when I bring up elevated rail or monorails, one of the reasons it gets shot down (more at Skyscraper City than here) is because it removes human activity from the street level and moves it about the ground. However, these people will also tend to support subways even though they have many of the flaws which plague above-grade transit.

With that said, the Minneapolis LRT is more of a rapid transit line (ie: Calgary) rather than a local line (ie: Transit City).

 

[Electrify]

I'd argue, as a few have, plopping down a LRT anywhere really won't necessarily spur development along the line. Hi-way 7 is a good example, though no LRT - and a BRT is only being built now; This area (the Markham stretch up to Warden or so) has been booming (mainly commercial development) and more so now residential development regress of any mass transporation. There is service on Hi-way 7 don't get me wrong, I take it eveyday - but I don't think this really contributed to much if any of the development, it would have happened either way.

What about the Spadina side of the Yonge/University line ? Okay it's not a LRT but very little development took place along this route - very little revitalization, very little of anything. Were starting to see some action now but nothing for many years.
I'm very curious how Sheppard will turn out (whatever is built).


I think a key to all of this is how much commercial development is along the line - that's what really spurs everything, including more residential development.

Re-zoning helps as well.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

This is surely doady's most nonsensical post yet. I nominate it for worst doady post ever.

seconded

 

[doady]

I'll give doady credit for at least not beating around the bush. Most times when I bring up elevated rail or monorails, one of the reasons it gets shot down (more at Skyscraper City than here) is because it removes human activity from the street level and moves it about the ground. However, these people will also tend to support subways even though they have many of the flaws which plague above-grade transit.

Yeah, elevated transit cutting through a neighbourhood isn't much different than an elevated expressway cutting through a neighbourhood. SCC is similar to downtown in that regard with the RT having the same effect as the Gardiner. Transit systems should be built for people, not cars. Instead of building subways, it makes more sense to build commuter rail for motorists. Just look at Montreal: no streetcars, lots of underground rail, and a heck of a lot of expressways. Coincidence? I think it just shows how it is better to build transit for people instead of cars. Build transit to promote urban ideals instead of suburban ones.

 

[Rainforest]

LRT promotes development because it is part of the street, unlike subways which are separate. Subways turns the streets above into highways, doesn't have traffic-calming effect of LRT.

Building LRT as a method of calming traffic is way too expensive. LRT should be built where it is needed to transport people, whereas the goal of calming traffic can be achieved by reducing the speed limit, or a number of other inexpensive changes.

LRT = pro-transit and pro-urban
Subways = pro-car and pro-suburban

Downtown, undoubtfully the most urban part of Toronto, is defined primarily by the Y-U-S subway loop. Streetcars are a useful addition, but they alone would not sustain the amount of rides generated by those towers. Just compare the CBD roughly between Yonge and University that has both subway stops and streetcars, and the areas further west or further east that have all the same streetcar lines but no subway stops.

BRT is not rail, so it won't attract choice riders or development no matter what.

VIVA - that is not even BRT, just an express bus with an effective branding - has attracted a lot of choice riders.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Transit systems should be built for people, not cars. Instead of building subways, it makes more sense to build commuter rail for motorists. Just look at Montreal: no streetcars, lots of underground rail, and a heck of a lot of expressways. Coincidence?

Yeah, Montreal is a real snooze and it's clear when you're walking around their ghost town of a downtown that the place was just built to move drivers in and out quickly. I mean, Ste. Catherine street? Not a soul on the sidewalk after 5PM. And have you been to the Plateau? I had to drive my car from the Sam's Club to the Jack Astor's across the road - it was such an auto-centric landscape.

Why can't it be like one of those great, walkable cities with LRT? You know, like Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, Sacramento or Charlotte.

 

[Dan416]

Having visited Montreal many times, I find it a lot more compact and easy to navigate without a car than Toronto. If Montreal is an argument against subways, well then let me just laugh in your face.

Hell, why not use New York City or Tokyo or London to argue that subways are anti-urban and pro-suburban?

Gawd I feel like we're back to debating with Tea Partiers.

 

[gweed123]

Just look at Montreal: no streetcars, lots of underground rail, and a heck of a lot of expressways. Coincidence? I think it just shows how it is better to build transit for people instead of cars. Build transit to promote urban ideals instead of suburban ones.

Causality fail.

 

[gweed123]

BRT is not rail, so it won't attract choice riders or development no matter what.

Is that why Ottawa has the highest per capita transit ridership of any mid-size city in North America?

PS: Ottawa's Transitway (a BRT system!) also carries more people (~240,000 per day) than the following LRT systems:

Phoenix (40,500)
Minneapolis (27,100)
Dallas (57,700)
Charlotte (19,200)
Denver (63,100)
Boston's Green Line (231,200)

...and yes...
Portland (119,300)... Yes, the Mecca of LRT carries about half of what Ottawa's BRT system carries.

In fact, the ONLY LRT system in North America that carries more people than the Ottawa BRT does is Calgary, at 278,100. But even then, Ottawa's overall transit system carries more people per day (525,600 vs 534,800) than Calgary.

So much for "BRT won't attract choice riders", eh?

 

[M II A II R II K]

A Desire Named Streetcar


March 2, 2011

By Wayne Curtis

Read More: http://www.architectmagazine.com/planning/a-desire-named-streetcar.aspx


This past January, the Federal Transit Administration signed an agreement with the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority for $45 million in federal economic stimulus funds to build a new, 1.5-mile streetcar line. It would link Canal Street with the Union Passenger Terminal, a 1954 structure that’s now home to the Amtrak and Greyhound stations. Skeptical New Orleanians wondered why. Of course, connecting to a regional transportation center was a sensible thing. But the line passed block after block of bleak, asphalt-savanna surface parking that flanks partially filled office towers. Why not route the new streetcar through communities that already had a denser residential population?

The answer came pretty quickly. Routing the streetcar through an underused part of the city, it turned out, was like adding water to sea monkeys. The blocks came to life almost immediately. The Domain Companies, a developer specializing in mixed-use developments with projects in New York and Louisiana, announced that four of those empty blocks would soon give rise to some 450 new apartments and 125,000 square feet of retail and restaurants. Other projects also quickly took root in the area: An auto dealership would be converted into a much-needed downtown supermarket, and the 1,193-room Hyatt Regency New Orleans, which sits just north of the new streetcar line and has been empty since Hurricane Katrina, started getting a $243 million overhaul. The area even got a new name: the South Market District.

“What we felt made this site ideal,” Matt Schwartz, principal of Domain Companies, told The Times-Picayune, “was the streetcar expansion.” If all goes well, the South Market District will be a textbook example of how transit-oriented development (TOD) is supposed to work. Bring in transit, and builders of higher-density residential and retail will follow.Yet listen carefully, and you can hear an echo in New Orleans. Because bringing TOD to New Orleans is a bit like telling Chicago about these tall buildings called skyscrapers. A popular bumper sticker here gets it right: “New Orleans: So Far Behind We’re Ahead.”

.....

 

[Rainforest]

This past January, the Federal Transit Administration signed an agreement with the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority for $45 million in federal economic stimulus funds to build a new, 1.5-mile streetcar line.

...

The blocks came to life almost immediately. The Domain Companies, a developer specializing in mixed-use developments with projects in New York and Louisiana, announced that four of those empty blocks would soon give rise to some 450 new apartments and 125,000 square feet of retail and restaurants.

This line is very short, 1.5 mile = 2.4 km. Even at 12 kph, the trip time would not exceed 12 min.

Great out-of-the-box thinking on the part of New Orleans transit planners, as they found the right place to build a streetcar line. But a 15-km or 20-km transit corridor won't necessarily thrive with the same technology choice.