Shift: London's Rapid Transit Initiative

[Spicol]

Also wondering if they've considered an elevated route instead of a tunnel - again, might be best from Wellington/Pall Mall to Richmond/Oxford.

I wish I was free to go to the Public Participation Meeting.

[ssiguy]

There is a slight incline on Richmond starting north of Oxford so an elevated route might be more doable and less visually intrusive than one might think.

BTW.........If they go thru with a tunnel will Oxford be the only underground tunnel or would there also be one at Central/Victoria Park?

[jaradthescot]

Tunnel begins North of Oxford (Grosvenor I believe) and there's an underground station at Oxford & Richmond. It continues all the way to Central and goes above ground near where the William's parking lot currently is.

[Dupcheck]

Might as well send the tunnel all the way to the Via Rail station, why stop at Williams? This would be laying the groundwork for Light Rail/ later on.

[Dupcheck]

I think maybe Wellington is a better option than Richmond for a tunnel or above ground. It is more East (more ridership), no problems with DownShift retailers, less cost involved, Does not change Richmond st. which is already perfect as it is.

[manny_santos]

Anyone going to tonight's meeting?

[Stevo26]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Anyone going to tonight's meeting?

I was there from 4.30 until about 7.30. Very surprised at the considerable negative sentiment towards BRT. I'd say there might have been 600 - 800 people in attendance, certainly not enough opposition to deep-six the project.

A lot of the opposition seemed to centre on a few themes:

- cost
- destruction of businesses and neighbourhoods, lost business revenues, lost heritage properties
- concerns about technical and engineering issues (e.g., building a tunnel in the sandy soil of Richmond Street)
- concerns about BRT disrupting traffic due to reduction of lanes on Richmond Street

I wonder how many of these people considered the possibility that the city and its engineering/technical staff as well as various consultants had already considered all of these issues? And stated that the BRT project was technically and financially feasible.

[Underground100]

I was there from 3:45 to 7:30. I was going to speak, but was a mixture of impatient, hungry, and a bit scared.

I think about 1 in 5 speakers were in favor.

Originally Posted by Stevo26

I was there from 4.30 until about 7.30. Very surprised at the considerable negative sentiment towards BRT. I'd say there might have been 600 - 800 people in attendance, certainly not enough opposition to deep-six the project.

A lot of the opposition seemed to centre on a few themes:

- cost
- destruction of businesses and neighbourhoods, lost business revenues, lost heritage properties
- concerns about technical and engineering issues (e.g., building a tunnel in the sandy soil of Richmond Street)
- concerns about BRT disrupting traffic due to reduction of lanes on Richmond Street

I wonder how many of these people considered the possibility that the city and its engineering/technical staff as well as various consultants had already considered all of these issues? And stated that the BRT project was technically and financially feasible.

I read the geotechnical report. I can't speak for Golder Associates (who drafted it), but it's not like they said don't build the tunnel.

[go_leafs_go02]

I was there from 4:00 to about 5:20 or so, mostly for the presentations. Looking on twitter, there definitely was some sentiment from pro-BRT people feeling scared or nervous to talk at the meeting given the situation.

One count had 70 speakers, with 17 in support of BRT.

[Dupcheck]

Here are the details of the meeting from LFP:

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/05/03/if-cou...londoner-as-more-than-900-attend-meeting

The tunnel under Richmond will be the main problem...

Note: Farhi might sue the city if they build an underground tunnel under Richmond st. And probably others would jump in with him. This would hit the city/taxpayers with litigation bills to pay, and therefore the cost of the whole project would be a lot more than 560$ million anticipated.

[database]

Originally Posted by Dupcheck

Note: Farhi might sue the city if they build an underground tunnel under Richmond st. And probably others would jump in with him. This would hit the city/taxpayers with litigation bills to pay, and therefore the cost of the whole project would be a lot more than 560$ million anticipated.

Farhi spent time last night expressing his dismay at how empty and shuttered the downtown core is. I thought the opinion was a bit rich coming from him...

[haljackey]

I was there. (Did not speak)

I think people need to do a little more research before speaking. Much of the issues people had was with the existing inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of the current system.

I'm sorry but no, this BRT system isn't going to Hyde Park. If you don't understand why it is not going to Hyde Park, you need to educate yourself.

-----

If only London had the guts 100 years ago to move the CP rail. Now, it's too late.

George Georgopoulos said he'd make a killing for all the expropriation this system may require however

[MrSlippery519]

I was not able to attend unfortunately but that is a general theme with most speakers unfortunately, they simply have not taken the time to actual read and interpret all of the information. A large percentage of negative comments or concerns were already well laid out in the data the city has provided if they just took the time to read it.

This is the problem with our world today, people love to complain with little to zero information and then a bunch load of other people jump on board with the uneducated or incorrect comments lol.

Fahri...what can I say about that guy. He wants to sue the city for what exactly?? Again a perfect example of a guy with lots of money who loves to open his mouth...but do NOTHING at the end of the day. If he is so concerned with downtown London why has he not made an attempt to work with the city and developers on the properties he owns to actually add something to the core?

[tyeman200]

Honestly I don't get why people are so against the Richmond tunnel. We might as well do it now and get it over with, not wait another 20 years when the city has way more people. Fuck Farhi, he's a selfish prick who doesn't even care about the city at all, if I could I would expropriate all of his property in the city and tell him to fuck off somewhere else. I hope city council does the right thing and doesn't listen to any of these people. If this plan gets scrapped, I can guarantee you I'm looking for another place outside the city because this city lacks any potential to get anything done.

I'm just sick of all the negativity I read about BRT, and the media never posts anything for it, or never talks to people who ride the bus.. the sad part is I doubt anyone who is against BRT actually uses the bus.

[ssiguy]

I'm not against a BRT, what I think is stupid is how London decreased he price tag.

If the original price was about $800 million with LRT and now $600 million for BRT, the city should have told senior goverments that the price tag is still $800 with BRT but the BRT will hence be larger ie extended west to Byron and east to the airport.

[Dupcheck]

BRT = Bike Rapid Transit, Pedal Power Wins!!!

at the end we will ride our bikes and dream off what LRT or the other BRT would have been if it was built. yey!
RT was supposed to be a study, what you guys believed it was going to be build? Nonsense!

[database]

Originally Posted by Dupcheck

BRT = Bike Rapid Transit, Pedal Power Wins!!!

at the end we will ride our bikes and dream off what LRT or the other BRT would have been if it was built. yey!
RT was supposed to be a study, what you guys believed it was going to be build? Nonsense!

You know... it's kind of painfully true. I don't drive and use my bike to get around most places since transit is so abysmal.

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

ie extended west to Byron and east to the airport.

I think not extending it to the airport off the start is a little short sighted to be honest. The amount of added cost to extend it that far should be minimal.

[Dupcheck]

Originally Posted by MrSlippery519

I think not extending it to the airport off the start is a little short sighted to be honest. The amount of added cost to extend it that far should be minimal.

You have a good point. Look at the LRT in Toronto, it now connects downtown to the Airport.

[Underground100]

Paul Paolatto, who served on London's Police Services Board and is president of Western's Research Park, is mulling a ward council or mayoral run next year with a pledge to scrap the current BRT plan.

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/05/05/london...n-with-pledge-to-scrap-bus-rapid-transit