Shift: London's Rapid Transit Initiative

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

I'm not going to lie, I can't get very excited about our rapid transit plans. Should the entire plan be ditched and we start from scratch? I wish we would have done what K/W has done - instead of building 2 lines of bus transit, build one LRT line at a time. Do it smaller and do it right and then build on that. We have watered down the original plans so much that avid transit proponents are not excited about it and anti-transit people will continue to try to kill it.

I honestly would prefer that, if the underpass portion of the LRT route was going to be the major cost and pain with the tunnel just say screw it and proceed with a single line from the airport to the Oxford/Wonderland mark. Then later on add a north/south route.

Short term it would not be ideal however it would still solve a major need and LTC could improve the North/South routes accordingly.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Dupcheck

Shouldn't Rapid Transit get in gear with the High Speed Rail plans? I know they are two different projects, but they do compliment each other when it comes to moving people?

There is a concept for a future underground tunnel under the CN railtracks linking Clarance where the RT could be moved to.

There may be a chance that the HSR station isn't built at the current location, but shifted either east or west. A lot is up in the air about the design for high speed rail.

[Oliverfox]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

I'm not going to lie, I can't get very excited about our rapid transit plans. Should the entire plan be ditched and we start from scratch? I wish we would have done what K/W has done - instead of building 2 lines of bus transit, build one LRT line at a time. Do it smaller and do it right and then build on that. We have watered down the original plans so much that avid transit proponents are not excited about it and anti-transit people will continue to try to kill it.

You hit the nail on the head, unfortunately I feel that London's do nothing attitude will win out in the end.

[Djeffery]

The B in BRT stands for boring. Rail is at least sort of exciting and cool. I just can't buy into half a billion dollars (closer to a billion by the time this actually happens) to have faster bus service. Where's the proof of concept that Londoners actually want to take a bus that gets you part way across town (since they aren't going all the way across) a minute or 2 faster than the current bus system does, but still manages to take double the time you can drive it? I leave my house in the southwest, go to the airport, right through downtown, in 24 minutes at 730am. BRT won't even come within miles of my house, or my job.

Really, if they are going with buses, spend the money on some overpasses at certain rail crossings, look at some select intersections that you can put an overpass at (Oxford/Highbury, Wellington/Commissioners), join up some missing links of roads like Bradley and perhaps Killaly/Windermere/Gainsborough (the northern link of a ring road if council had some balls). Make the traffic run easier for everyone, and the buses will be "rapid".

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

I'm not going to lie, I can't get very excited about our rapid transit plans. Should the entire plan be ditched and we start from scratch? I wish we would have done what K/W has done - instead of building 2 lines of bus transit, build one LRT line at a time. Do it smaller and do it right and then build on that. We have watered down the original plans so much that avid transit proponents are not excited about it and anti-transit people will continue to try to kill it.

I hate to say it but I agree. While I am in favor of rapid transit, BRT is lame. It's just (nice) bus service.

If we lose lanes for trains, that's a good trade-off, but losing it for buses what the heck man that's pavement cars could drive on!

Can we get a streetcar system instead perhaps? A good compromise between LRT and BRT.

ALSO we should look at using non-road corridors as much as possible to minimize traffic disruption. Thames Valley Parkway / power corridors / CP line parallel routes would make a lot of sense. That is somewhat similar to what Waterloo region is doing.

I'm kind of singing a sad song though. What we have approved is something, and even though it sucks it will be better than nothing. Get it funded before election time please!

[jammer139]

Sorry what HSR plans? All that has been announced is $15M to study HSR. A study does not equal HSR. It is just a Liberal election gimmick.

P.S. has any of the study even started yet?

Originally Posted by Dupcheck

Shouldn't Rapid Transit get in gear with the High Speed Rail plans? I know they are two different projects, but they do compliment each other when it comes to moving people?

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by jammer139

Sorry what HSR plans? All that has been announced is $15M to study HSR. A study does not equal HSR. It is just a Liberal election gimmick.

P.S. has any of the study even started yet?

After the election there will be another study to study the past studies at which time they will have realized they spent hundreds of millions of dollars on studies and wont build a damn thing.

In my opinion the federal government should be stepping in, all the people involved from all provincial parties sit down and come up with an agreed upon plan because as a country HSR is something we want. Make a plan, do the damn study and get building. That is the only way I see this ever happening because if NDP/Conserv/etc get voted in for example they will certainly want to do their own study and tweak this and that which creates an endless cycle of nothing.

[tyeman200]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

I'm not going to lie, I can't get very excited about our rapid transit plans. Should the entire plan be ditched and we start from scratch? I wish we would have done what K/W has done - instead of building 2 lines of bus transit, build one LRT line at a time. Do it smaller and do it right and then build on that. We have watered down the original plans so much that avid transit proponents are not excited about it and anti-transit people will continue to try to kill it.

I think we should do 2 things. Instead of BRT, we should be trying to change it to LRT. What's the point in getting faster bus service by 2030? By then, I feel it would be pretty much obsolete. LRT would require less lanes, more efficient in the long run, we could actually look at building the tunnel under Richmond and Oxford, I just think its a better idea to start with LRT.

The second thing is the LTC needs to completely redo all of their routes. The NIMBYism of this city caused some of these unnecessary and screwed up routes that never sync with each other. I used to take the bus a lot and I always hated it, the way the buses were timed and the way the routes are, its hard to get anywhere on time. To give you an example, when I went to college, It took me an hour to get to school. When I bought a car, it turned to 20 minutes. In fact, while writing this I got the idea to draw up my own routing system here in the city, so I'll have to come back and show you guys. But basically I feel the routes need to be on main roads only, with some side routes connecting to the main ones, but they all should be syncing with each other.

[haljackey]

Great video by forum member Kokkei Mizu showing the C train in Calgary

• Video Link

Something that could have been in London. An eye opener.

[Dupcheck]

These studies are like the "carrot", once they get elected, then they show you the stick. People forget and keep falling for the same lies over and over again. The video above is great by the way. It takes almost no time to get to downtown.

[jammer139]

Must have missed this estimate increase.

http://www.lfpress.com/2018/01/05/brt-master-plan-numbers-suggest-too-little-benefit

When did it balloon from $500M to $615M?

[Stevo26]

Originally Posted by jammer139

Must have missed this estimate increase.

http://www.lfpress.com/2018/01/05/brt-master-plan-numbers-suggest-too-little-benefit

When did it balloon from $500M to $615M?

Bear in mind that the LFP article was written by a London resident who may not have access to all of the facts. Remember too that the increase is just an estimate and not yet written in stone and that if the extra funds are required, they won't come out of the pockets of London ratepayers.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Stevo26

Bear in mind that the LFP article was written by a London resident who may not have access to all of the facts. Remember too that the increase is just an estimate and not yet written in stone and that if the extra funds are required, they won't come out of the pockets of London ratepayers.

So far, London ratepayers are the only ones committed to paying anything on this. The Feds and Province haven't committed to it yet, and now they are being told their contribution has already gone up over 30% before the first shovel is in the ground?

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Stevo26

Bear in mind that the LFP article was written by a London resident who may not have access to all of the facts. Remember too that the increase is just an estimate and not yet written in stone and that if the extra funds are required, they won't come out of the pockets of London ratepayers.

The writer doesn't know what they're talking about. Anyone who claims students don't pay taxes isn't worth listening to.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Stevo26

Bear in mind that the LFP article was written by a London resident who may not have access to all of the facts. Remember too that the increase is just an estimate and not yet written in stone and that if the extra funds are required, they won't come out of the pockets of London ratepayers.

This mindset expressed in the LFP article epitomizes all that is wrong with London, and why I am very tempted to leave.

[kaiserLDN]

Rapid transit lines bring in development along the corridor which is not mentioned in the article unless I misread. Developments bring in a lot of money for the city.

I wonder what the people against this project propose on how to move the people of London around in future decades to come. I wouldn't mind seeing some proposals from the people against this project. They only complain or say negative things with no alternatives.

I don't want them to say widen roads and build a ring road because we need that on top of the rapid transit line, not build rail over passes because that's already happening and should have been done 30 years ago. Lets hear the proposal's from them that carry us 30-40 years into the future. But I don't think you'll hear much.

[jammer139]

I suspect what was meant is that Students don't pay property taxes which is valid.

Originally Posted by manny_santos

The writer doesn't know what they're talking about. Anyone who claims students don't pay taxes isn't worth listening to.

[Pimpmasterdac]

You hit the nail right on the head kaiser. All these public info sessions seem to attract for the most part complainers who have no constructive input whatsoever. They don't like this or that, and usually it's how it's going to impact them. NIMBYism is alive and well in the forest city.

I foresaw this years ago when BRT was still in its infancy that the expropriation required would be one of the largest in London's history and would lead to alot of noise. Obviously no one wants property impacts but they propose the status quo as an acceptable solution.

The only thing not on the radar that IMO London needs to start doing is plan for another east-west Thames River Crossing. The North end is growing and traffic will be even more horrendous in the years to come, London needs either Sarnia-Huron or Gainsborough-Windemere-Killaly to be completed to help with traffic circulation, especially is UWO is going to be a car free campus in the near future.

Originally Posted by kaiserLDN

I wonder what the people against this project propose on how to move the people of London around in future decades to come. I wouldn't mind seeing some proposals from the people against this project. They only complain or say negative things with no alternatives.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by jammer139

I suspect what was meant is that Students don't pay property taxes which is valid.

they live somehwere. Those apartment buildings pay property taxes, which students pay indirectly through their rent.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by kaiserLDN

Rapid transit lines bring in development along the corridor which is not mentioned in the article unless I misread. Developments bring in a lot of money for the city.

So, we are going to strip Richmond St and Oxford St bare of houses and build apartment buildings, I guess?

Why do you want opponents to come up with alternate ideas, but then limit what those ideas are? Why can't we just be opposed to the idea of spending what will amount to almost a billion dollars on something that shows barely any time saving, and also doesn't even go to large parts of the city where people with cars live? At 730 in the morning, I drive from the extreme southwest to the extreme northeast, right through downtown, in 25 minutes, a trip that would be well over double that, and even longer than that on BRT because of where BRT is and the extra bus transfer that would be required. What incentive is there for people like me who live south of Oxford and west of Wellington in the BRT forgotten zone to stop using our cars?