Mississauga Hurontario-Main Line 10 LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[georgevicbell]

i fully agree that the loop either goes or the city pay for it. A large number of developers see no need for the loop in the first place. Same thing for Brampton.

Dundas & Hurontario is rip for development with 2 projects going before council starting with one in Feb another later this year.

The whole block Dundas to King-Hurontario to Confederation should be torn down and redevelop with a higher density than 18's with a number of existing businesses been relocated to the new development. Can be done in phases.

The east side to follow later.

If the city isn't willing to put money into this, I think developers start to raise a stink...why build massive condos if the target audience is not going to be able to get anywhere...

As a bargaining tactic saying you aren't going to pay anything is not a good way to get things done...saying you are putting money away starting today to do it, and you need more from other levels before you begin is a much better tactic I would imagine...even better is to say, we're going to start building this thing tomorrow, but it won't get finished until you guys send us the rest of the money...

 

[Swarez99]

So I still don't fully understand the need for this project - it just doesn't seem practical to how most of us live in Mississauga, this just seems like a new toy.

For middle class/above the go train probably more important- people work, or have kids who study downtown and access to go stations is pretty good around the city. I know people want all day go service on Milton line but it's still fairly easy to get downtown from most of Mississauga (yes you need a car to station)

- a lot of the jobs are down the 401 corridor, near the airport, down 427 or QEW. There are only a handful of people that this LRT would make sense for on daily basis and those people are still going to take the bus today if that is there only option. I can't see how it encourages people to take transit - one line will never do that. 10 at rush hour is also a disaster - an lrt would make this worse as I expect a minimal amount of people to change over to LRT.

This isn't Toronto where there is density, a dense downtown where people work/play/study etc. Everything in this spread out from jobs to where people live, shop etc. This just doesn't make sense to me on a practical level on how people in this city actually live.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Hilarious. And another 4% property tax increase to pay for the infrastructure deficit? The devil is still collecting his due. I still remember how smug some of my friends were, when Mississauga was rolling in fat wads from greenfield developments. Time to face reality. Shit costs money. If you want to unlock the potential of Hurontario, and keep growing, cash is going to need to be found.

Sadly, the cynic in me thinks that it will feed into the Parrish narrative.

AoD

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

So I still don't fully understand the need for this project - it just doesn't seem practical to how most of us live in Mississauga, this just seems like a new toy.

While obviously not a panacea, LRT will act as a higher capacity, reliable main line linking several major nodes including Square One/MCC, Trillium Health, Port Credit, and 2 GO stations. It will improve the commutes for those already taking transit, and induce some people at the margin to switch from driving thanks to improved reliability and speed. Don't forget that many bus routes will intersect with the LRT route, so people from various parts of the city may benefit from the improved service prodivded by LRT even if they don't live and work directly on it.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

While obviously not a panacea, LRT will act as a higher capacity, reliable main line linking several major nodes including Square One/MCC, Trillium Health, Port Credit, and 2 GO stations. It will improve the commutes for those already taking transit, and induce some people at the margin to switch from driving thanks to improved reliability and speed. Don't forget that many bus routes will intersect with the LRT route, so people from various parts of the city may benefit from the improved service prodivded by LRT even if they don't live and work directly on it.

Indeed - it is the busiest line in the MT system for a reason.

AoD

 

[TOareaFan]

Indeed - it is the busiest line in the MT system for a reason.

AoD

Is the 103 an anomaly then or have I just been incredibly un/lucky? As noted a little bit up thread I have used the 103 a few times lately and have yet to be on a bus that was more than 25% full at any point on the journey (between Courtney Park and Port Credit). Could just be dumb luck and a small sample size of rides....but with each ride the sample size gets more significant.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Is the 103 an anomaly then or have I just been incredibly un/lucky? As noted a little bit up thread I have used the 103 a few times lately and have yet to be on a bus that was more than 25% full at any point on the journey (between Courtney Park and Port Credit). Could just be dumb luck and a small sample size of rides....but with each ride the sample size gets more significant.

Considering 103 is just one of the multiple lines serving the Hurontario corridor, I think one'd have to consider ridership figures from that perspective.

AoD

 

[TOareaFan]

Considering 103 is just one of the multiple lines serving the Hurontario corridor, I think one'd have to consider ridership figures from that perspective.

AoD

That was, sorta, the question I was posing....is it the lower/lowest ridership? For a very comfortable, semi-express, bus it has been surprising to me how underused (again, in a very small sample size) it has been.

Is there something about the route itself? Perhaps what appeals to me about it (bypassing SQ1 and going straight down Hurontario) impairs its ridership....I dunno.

 

[georgevicbell]

So I still don't fully understand the need for this project - it just doesn't seem practical to how most of us live in Mississauga, this just seems like a new toy.

I lived in Mississauga until I was 27 (Mississauga Rd), at one point our family had 4 cars...and I totally get what you are saying...however having now lived in Toronto for 8 years with no car (by choice, I could easily afford a car) and living only 10 minutes from my office on transit I see the other side much clearer now...

The only way Mississauga can increase employment density is by having office towers around the core and to do that you can't have everyone be driving to square one...I know a lot of people downtown who reverse commute, but when they get to burlington or oakville they are forced to take taxi's or get picked up...LRT from the Go-Trains will help with this...it will allow densification along Hurontario, which is the only way you can get development charges and keep taxes low...

For people in the low-middle class having good transit is a way to get rid of the car - and increases the amount of money they can spend on other things...most of this class is living in apartments - and so density and transit go well together...it also can be a way for higher income families to not have to have more than one car - for kids etc.

For the transit system there is a positive benefit to having a strong core, and higher orders of transit is necessary to do this. This one line will not change mississauga overnight, but when dundas, winston churchill and erin-mills get added to this (maybe lakeshore as well) it will transform the city...

 

[drum118]

The ridership for 103 is all over the place depending on the time of the as well direction, but up over time.

I have been on crush load buses going north from Dundas between 4-5 pm and on peak load at Eglinton going south.

Hurontario saw 25,000 riders a day before Brampton 502 came into service.

The city is calling for huge office development in the core, but not going to happen for decades as long there is free surface parking outside the core.

I have asked for a 5% increase for MT compare to 3% by the city including 10 artic's buses and 7x24 service 7 days a week. The city is now asking the residents if they are willing to see a 5% increase for both MT and the Fire Department.

The forecast I have for Hurontario by 2030 is 75,000-100,000 riders and the LRT is needed to move them. This depends on development and it can be higher.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Mississauga, and the other GTA regions, should start charging (renting the real estate acreage?) a tax or fee for parking. As long as there's free parking, the solitary automobile user will continue being the norm in Mississauga and other outer GTA regions. The revenue may help them in building the needed transit.

 

[TOareaFan]

Mississauga, and the other GTA regions, should start charging (renting the real estate acreage?) a tax or fee for parking. As long as there's free parking, the solitary automobile user will continue being the norm in Mississauga and other outer GTA regions. The revenue may help them in building the needed transit.

I think the problem with taxing parking is that those same municipalities are the ones imposing minimum parking requirements on the property owners. So on the one hand the municipality would be saying "you MUST have X number of spots" and on the other hand "now that you have X number of spots you have to pay X number of dollars for having them".

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I think the problem with taxing parking is that those same municipalities are the ones imposing minimum parking requirements on the property owners. So on the one hand the municipality would be saying "you MUST have X number of spots" and on the other hand "now that you have X number of spots you have to pay X number of dollars for having them".

Fair point, though I'd be curious to know how many of said developments actually wouldn't have gone above and beyond the required number of spots just as a matter of need.

AoD

 

[TOareaFan]

Fair point, though I'd be curious to know how many of said developments actually wouldn't have gone above and beyond the required number of spots just as a matter of need.

AoD

for a living I finance commercial real estate....don't think I have ever seen a newly developed property where the developer/proponent did not at least attempt to get the municipality to allow lesser parking. Parking, as you note, takes land and if that land could be used for more rentable space that is the preference.

EDIT...I should clarify that....of course I have seen places where parking was not "fought" but that would be where parking can generate renenue (either rented out or sold) but in the kind of suburban setting you and I are discussing....the parking minimums are always challenged.....typically unsuccessfully

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

for a living I finance commercial real estate....don't think I have ever seen a newly developed property where the developer/proponent did not at least attempt to get the municipality to allow lesser parking. Parking, as you note, takes land and if that land could be used for more rentable space that is the preference.

Perhaps, but even in that case, such a scenario can be adjusted by some kind of fudge factor on a per rata basis.

AoD