Shift: London's Rapid Transit Initiative

[ssiguy]

Yes it would be very similar to Vancouver's very successful B-Line system but an improved one. The London one would have complete BRT stations with level platforms, real time arrival display, and ticket vending machines.

As for North London being tony and precious that is very true but Richmond is already a very bus bus roadway and it goes to Western and the north of the city. West Van is a little separate island to itself and is far less connected, physically and emotionally, to the central city.

[haljackey]

Interesting CBC article about the BRT changes... if you can even call it BRT.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/london-transit-projects-1.5052808

-----

EDIT: And another one from the Freep

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/city...s-as-brt-dismantling-effort-pushes-ahead

[Djeffery]

This whole thing is turning into a mess and we are going to lose out on any of the money. What are those things in the list of transportation projects put out today? "Adelaide Underpass Active Transportation Connections", for $18 million? What the hell does that even mean? And they want to have one public meeting next week and then vote the following week and finalize this whole thing?

And breaking down the BRT into 5 segments, but the downtown loop is a segment on its own? Don't you really need the downtown if you have any of the other segments? What if they decide to do White Oaks to Fanshawe, 2 segments? But not downtown, because they want to spend that 28 million on some of those other things. Then what? In listening to a couple councillors this morning on the radio, it sure sounds like the north leg has very little support. Lehman and Lewis were the ones on there and they had zero interest in being told by UWO that the city has to build them a new bridge and take over snow removal on campus in perpetuity.

[haljackey]

London seems to be a good cash cow for upper levels of government.

We pay for projects for other cities but apparently don't get much ourselves because we don't want it.

[haljackey]

double posted by mistake Sorry!

[haljackey]

Looks like 3/5 components of the BRT system may actually be saved.

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/coun...o-put-brakes-on-london-transit-decisions

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/brt-london-transit-1.5070330

...For this city I will take this as a win. We can always revisit the other routes in the future as well.

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Looks like 3/5 components of the BRT system may actually be saved.

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/coun...o-put-brakes-on-london-transit-decisions

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/brt-london-transit-1.5070330

...For this city I will take this as a win. We can always revisit the other routes in the future as well.

Honestly I agree, better than nothing at this point...and in a perfect world the 3 routes will be highly successful which will push expansion

[Djeffery]

I was never in favour of the Richmond St idea, I always thought Western Rd would have been the better alternative to going north. But either way, how does this thing even remotely make financial sense without Western service?

Sucks that they are leaving $100 million of fed/prov money on the table.

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I was never in favour of the Richmond St idea, I always thought Western Rd would have been the better alternative to going north. But either way, how does this thing even remotely make financial sense without Western service?

Sucks that they are leaving $100 million of fed/prov money on the table.

Agreed about Richmond being a bad option but there was no other choice. Wharncliffe was too far out of the way.

You'd have to expropriate an entire line of houses to build a new 6 lane artery from downtown London to Western. That is the only way to avoid Richmond.

It would be more expensive and environmentally sensitive, but I've envisioned a bus-only road running along the Thames River from Harris Park to the Oxford Street bridge. There it would run under the bridge and CP overpass before crossing the river on it's own bridge at Gibbons park or nearby and continue to run on the other side of the river to Western.

This would avoid Richmond losing a lane as well as create the grade-separation for rail which is needed for true rapid transit.


-----

They are going to try to get the extra $100 million from other projects - hopefully we qualify for full funding or else London is a massive loser.

[Djeffery]

They were already planning to run the west route up Wharncliffe from Riverside to Oxford, in mixed traffic I assume. I wouldn't have actually been against the idea of expropriating one side of the road to make it 6 lanes in that stretch, and with the all the work that was just done north of Oxford, it would have been pretty easy to add road width for it up there. And no railroad issues this way either. Also, with all the future work coming up on Wharncliffe south of the river, they could incorporate the future potential of a southwest London BRT route into that design as well.

Compare that to what we would have paid to do the Richmond work, as well as a new bridge in Western, as well as whatever other costs the university was trying to pawn off on us and still have that damn CP crossing on Richmond to contend with. I think the bulk of riders going to Western would be going to the west side of campus anyway.

I wonder if this means we aren't going to get that realigned intersection at Western and Richmond now, because I really liked that idea.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

This whole thing is turning into a mess and we are going to lose out on any of the money. What are those things in the list of transportation projects put out today? "Adelaide Underpass Active Transportation Connections", for $18 million? What the hell does that even mean? And they want to have one public meeting next week and then vote the following week and finalize this whole thing?

And in answer to my own question, I've been told this $18 million is for the sidewalk and bike lane infrastructure of the new underpass already factored in to the $59 or whatever million it was. So this effectively shifts $18 million of the cost of the underpass to the upper level governments and saves London that amount.

[Stevo26]

As usual, London comes up with a half-arsed 'solution' because the politicians can't stand the heat coming from anti-progress types, the business community and a vocal but shrill minority who love to say 'nay' to anything because it's the only way they can acquire a tiny scrap of power for themselves and liven up their dreary little lives.

BRT will not work as well as it was envisioned without university students making use of it.

I find it amazing that the city went against the advice of its own engineers and planners that have studied a BRT system for a decade plus and said that a northern and eastern line was workable.

I hope Holder isn't seeking re-election, because I think once all the BRT supporters get wind of the ultimate decision, they are going to be mightily unhappy and may not vote for him when the next election is held.

The stupidity of leaving $100 million on the table just so city council wouldn't have to deal with controversy or complaints is flabbergasting.

Clearly, the politicians went right down the middle on this one - agree to build half a system to keep the pro-BRT faction happy and shut down the squawking from others who think that because they don't need or want BRT, nobody else should need it or want it.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Does it bother me that we got a half-baked brt system? Yes. Who is to blame? The new council, the old council, London residents, all of the above? I'd like to say the new "old boys club" killed the plan but to be fair to them, they campaigned on killing it and they got the votes they needed. What bothered me the most is when Mattress Brown all of a sudden changed his mind from LRT/Hybrid to BRT without really ever explaining why. Then the rest of council followed suit. The whole public imput exercise they had for years and where citizens picked full LRT as the preferred option seems like a total waste of time. Let's spend millions having these public meetings and let the public decide and then the public gets the exact opposite of what it wanted. What a sham and a shame.

[inimrepus]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

They were already planning to run the west route up Wharncliffe from Riverside to Oxford, in mixed traffic I assume. I wouldn't have actually been against the idea of expropriating one side of the road to make it 6 lanes in that stretch, and with the all the work that was just done north of Oxford, it would have been pretty easy to add road width for it up there. And no railroad issues this way either. Also, with all the future work coming up on Wharncliffe south of the river, they could incorporate the future potential of a southwest London BRT route into that design as well.

The entire point of a transit system is to go where people want to go. Running it along there means that BRT wouldn't have been servicing the northern part of downtown or St. Joseph's Hospital.

[Stevo26]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

Does it bother me that we got a half-baked brt system? Yes. Who is to blame? The new council, the old council, London residents, all of the above? I'd like to say the new "old boys club" killed the plan but to be fair to them, they campaigned on killing it and they got the votes they needed. What bothered me the most is when Mattress Brown all of a sudden changed his mind from LRT/Hybrid to BRT without really ever explaining why. Then the rest of council followed suit. The whole public imput exercise they had for years and where citizens picked full LRT as the preferred option seems like a total waste of time. Let's spend millions having these public meetings and let the public decide and then the public gets the exact opposite of what it wanted. What a sham and a shame.

And in the end, not a thing was learned. I guess now I won't be retiring in London. Tired of living with a do-nothing council that cowers in the face of controversy.

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

The whole public imput exercise they had for years and where citizens picked full LRT as the preferred option seems like a total waste of time. Let's spend millions having these public meetings and let the public decide and then the public gets the exact opposite of what it wanted. What a sham and a shame.

Democracy ain't a pretty or efficient system. This is what happens sometimes. Local government is probably the best example of this sort of thing, especially single-tier cities like London.

In Waterloo Region, there is an extra layer of filtering since things the cities want have to be approved by the region as well. More scrutiny.

-----

I am just happy we might get something out of this. We can always complete the other legs at a later date. Maybe the two routes will get LRT instead... who knows?

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by inimrepus

The entire point of a transit system is to go where people want to go. Running it along there means that BRT wouldn't have been servicing the northern part of downtown or St. Joseph's Hospital.

And with a rail crossing in the middle of it, nobody is going to those places any quicker than just using regular transit.

[tyeman200]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

Does it bother me that we got a half-baked brt system? Yes. Who is to blame? The new council, the old council, London residents, all of the above? I'd like to say the new "old boys club" killed the plan but to be fair to them, they campaigned on killing it and they got the votes they needed. What bothered me the most is when Mattress Brown all of a sudden changed his mind from LRT/Hybrid to BRT without really ever explaining why. Then the rest of council followed suit. The whole public imput exercise they had for years and where citizens picked full LRT as the preferred option seems like a total waste of time. Let's spend millions having these public meetings and let the public decide and then the public gets the exact opposite of what it wanted. What a sham and a shame.

Yeah, I blame the previous council. They were talking about this way before that election, and I was hoping they would have something that was ready for construction in like a year in a half/two from when they took office. But, they let the Londoners control them (why do we even have a council if every london resident wants to make their own decisions), and all the business on richmond and whatnot. Then it didn't help too that Brown had his little affair. Just a whole shit show.

Even this council is starting to look like it. I mean, I guess it's something we're getting parts of it, but here's how I picture the whole situation. Let's say you (city council) have an old car, that could use a lot of repairs (LTC Transit). Someone (The Government) comes up to you and says, 'Hey, you look like you could use a new car, so here's full funding, pick whichever car you want.' But then you go 'ehhhh, I'd rather take some money instead, and lets just fix up parts of the car.' Doesn't that sound stupid? But that's basically what councils doing, they're not going to fix the full problem, just parts 'here and there'. If this is how they're going to be like, I'm worried. In fact, I'm worried about the federal election. I notice all we've done for the municipal and provincial elections is elect people just cause we didn't like the previous people. So far, it looks like 2 strikes. Probably a big 3rd coming in October.

But on another note, why didn't council ever look up like putting a northbound route on the one road, and have the southbound go the other way? The way I see it, extend richmond 1 lane, have the northbound bus go all the way up, and then have the southbound bus come back down, but go onto western road instead, and from there the bus has multiple ways back downtown.

[Dupcheck]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Where do people come up with such bullshit?

Ottawa had 96.5 million riders in 2016.

http://www.octranspo.com/about-octranspo/reports_and_stats

Ottawa will probably break 100 million when the LRT opens in 2019.

Dated data. But the point is very much valid. Ottawa has exceptional modal share for a city of its size:

https://humantransit.org/2010/10/further-cause-for-canadian-triumphalism.html

It is very true! I remember the days of going to college there. The transit system was always full and well utilized and well managed. I think it is a great system to look at modeling after.

[Dupcheck]

Business as usual. We as a city love to do "studies after studies" on everything, pay those consultants get the reports and shelve them. Job done!
Bravo we made a hole in the water!!!

Great job city leaders, Great job. You suck!!!