A light rail transit system can make sense in cities London’s size for economic development reasons that have nothing to do with transportation, a U.S.-based transit expert says.

As city hall’s rapid transit proposal came into sharper focus Wednesday — light rail is proposed for a main corridor through north and east London — an immediate lightning rod is the construction cost: at least $850 million.

But Jarrett Walker, a transit consultant based in Oregon, says projects like this, particularly in cities like London, are never just about moving commuters more quickly.

“If you wanted to just optimize people’s ability to get there (faster), you’d use bus rapid transit,” he said of the option that costs about one-third as much as light rail.

Light rail projects, he added, “often don’t make sense on purely transportation grounds.”

“But they have benefits in the areas of emissions and civic emotional response, and they can be a strong signal to the real estate market, which can alter how a city develops,” Walker said.

“It’s common for a city your size for (light rail) to be justified on a range of benefits. Those certainly include economics and real-estate outcomes.”

Walker’s view echoes the staff report that was published Wednesday and will go to council’s strategic priorities and policy committee next week.

In it, four “guiding principles” for the transit-system overhaul are listed, and two go far beyond transportation: community building/revitalization and economic development/city building.

The report spells out four options for rapid transit, the cheapest of which, using just buses, would cost roughly $260 million. The third-costliest, the bus-light rail hybrid that staff is proposing, is at least $850 ­million.

The report references the “image” benefits of going with light rail.

“(Light rail) can have a greater impact on the city’s image as a top-tier city in North America,” it reads. “The city image benefits of (light rail) can also apply to our institutions, helping them to present a world-class image.”

For city officials, moving people more efficiently could be done for $260 million. But the other ­benefits — particularly spurring the kind of compact development trumpeted in the London Plan — are only likely with some light rail.

That, however, turns this into what will surely become the biggest infrastructure project in city history. If apporoved and funded, construction would likely take 10 years to complete.

patrick.maloney@sunmedia.ca

twitter.com/patatLFPress

--- --- ---

RAPID TRANSIT

City hall has proposed two L-shaped rapid-transit corridors to bisect London, each changing direction downtown. One would go from Masonville Place to Fanshawe College, the other from White Oaks Mall to the Oxford Street-Wonderland Road intersection. The routes would run along King Street in the core, taking transit off Dundas Street. So-called transit villages, where more intense development is planned, would pop up along the two paths. Other routes throughout London would be designed to feed those two main corridors.

--- --- ---

THE TECHNOLOGY

A staff report released Wednesday recommends a hybrid system of bus and light-rail rapid transit: bus-only for the south and west corridor, and light rail for the north and east corridor.

--- --- ---

THE PRICE

It’ll cost between $850 million to $900 million, making it the biggest infrastructure project in London history. Bus-only rapid transit would cost roughly $260 million, while light rail along the entire corridors would cost more than $1 billion. With any option, London’s share is projected to stay at $125 million, most of which will come from development charges on new construction during the next 20 years, with the rest coming from Ottawa and Queen’s Park. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau supported London’s plan while campaigning and the Ontario government has $15 billion earmarked for transportation projects outside the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton.

--- --- ---

EARLY QUESTION

The Waterloo Region light-rail project, expected to be operating by 2017, is being built, financed and eventually run by a public-private partnership, dubbed Grandlinq. Will that be considered here? That’s the question from Jim MacKinnon of the London District Building and Construction Trades Council. “It’s (about getting) senior bureaucrats to understand it as a money-saving, risk-(avoiding) way of getting work done faster, on budget and with no overrun risk.”

--- --- ---

WHAT’S NEXT

City council must OK the light rail/bus option and kick-start public consultation before giving it final approval, likely in January. Then it’s a matter of continuing efforts to secure the more than $700 million needed from Ottawa and Queen’s Park, combined.

--- --- ---

WHAT THEY SAID

"If we’ve got buses or rail running at five-minute frequency along (the rapid-transit) corridors, but all the supporting routes are running at 15 or 30, how are people going to get there? Chances are the frequency near you will be improved . . . so everybody will see an improved transit system."

London Transit general manager Kelly Paleczny

"This is going to be one of the biggest decisions I’m going to have to make. It’ll potentially change the landscape of our city. That’s why I’m entering it with an open mind."

Coun. Virginia Ridley

"The fact is, London is the largest city in Canada without a rapid transit system. This is an important milestone for our community because we’re that much closer to implementing one."

Mayor Matt Brown

"I think a hybrid system does make a lot of sense. The light-rail systems are best when supported by bus rapid transit systems. Trying to capitalize on the benefits of both is a good route to go."

Coun. Josh Morgan