Shift: London's Rapid Transit Initiative

[Rosso Corsa]

Originally Posted by Snark

The backlash against RT in London has started. I was listening to Craig Needles' talk radio show on AM 980 a week or so ago. I generally pass by such drivel, as talk radio is typically a right-wing rage generation machine with clear agendas - which is to trash somebody or something as the topic of each show.

Anyway, I came upon Needles' "round table" discussion during his show. It was a panel discussion comprised of the DJ "Taz" from FM96, a fellow named Stewart Blair who is a local Conservative party insider and realtor, and Cheryl Miller who is a former councilor, local conservative party candidate, and realtor (something of a trend there). The reason it held my attention was that the topic of discussion was the decision of city council to continue with the rapid transit project. All 4 of them savaged the project in the most merciless manner possible. It was a solid hour of totally trashing the idea, and the people behind it.

Listening to their arguments quickly belied the fact that none of them knew much about the topic, but that didn't stop them. Probably their stupides<script id="gpt-impl-0.6153228946545084" src="http://partner.googleadservices.com/gpt/pubads_impl_75.js"></script>t argument against building a RT system was that due to the current rate of technological change, light rail transit will be obsolete in a decade (!) - so such a system should never be built in the first place. Of course if one follows that mantra nothing will ever get built because there will always be new technology coming out in a future decade, and apparently the TTC and other cities will be junking their existing LRT transit systems, because flying cars or whatever that new technology is apparently will coming in 10 years will replace it.

The "Taz" guy (who is apparently is eminently qualified to discuss the subject by being a radio show morning man), kept hammering away at the idea that any money that was to be for LRT should instead be put into building a ring road. The idea is that no one (other than students and old folks) will use LRT in London because car is king, so all municipal efforts should be poured into servicing automobile transportation - which will of course encourage even more private cars and even more discourage public transit - which is of course is why no one should be investing in public transit because no one will use it. Circular logic.

Cheryl Miller kept hoping that the whole thing is a ruse, intended to get the higher levels of government on the hook for big grant funding. Once such funding is secured, the money could then be diverted to some other "legitimate" project that would actually be worthwhile.

So, in closing, I know that folks here are big supporters of an LRT system in London - but it's not going to be that easy. Now that it's on the public radar the opposition will rise - with the flames fanned by the likes of talk radio, and, typically, more conservative leaning individuals.

What an embarrassment. I'm cringing just knowing these opinions are being aired to the masses. Would it kill our local figureheads to spread some positivity about the whole thing?

[haljackey]

London failed at the ring road because of backlash and inaction.
-I am in favor of VMP upgrades and an extension to Fanshawe Park Road, but other than that it really is too late to get much else done. This project will get help get people and freight to and from the city, but transit will help get people from one point of the city to another.

Simply replacing transit for highways is stupid, and the same is vice versa. They both serve important purposes and in an ideal world neither should be neglected. London has neglected both, but we have a real chance here to improve one of them. Let's not squander it like we did with the whole ring road project.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Well I think the good thing is that these people don't really care one way or another. They just need a topic to "rant" about each week. It matters not that they do not know squat about the topic. They just have to get people excited and upset about something. They will not show up to the Shift meetings and they will not really influence many.

I am not sure if any of you listened to the debate at city hall the night that Shift presented their plan to the city, but there was a bit of ignorance there - especially from Harold Usher and Bill Armstrong. The old boys clearly are part of the old LTC thinking. It's hard to think why our city would not want a chunk of the $30+ billion the province is spending regardless of whether we want the money or not. It can be spent in London or the province can just spend it anywhere else. I am sure Toronto won't say no.

Hopefully councillors will be able to see the "noise" for what it is and focus on building this project.

[MrSlippery519]

"If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail" this has been London in the past, I am thankful we seem to have a counsel that are actually looking to tomorrow and how we can really improve our city.

I do not understand the uneducated backlash, that radio show sounded ridiculous. They also do not understand in the least that a proper "ring road" would be virtually impossible for London to accomplish at this point, and to do it would cost as much or more than the transit plan. I am also in favor of upgrading the VMP haljackey the same way you said but that is another discussion.

I hope the counsel continues to be forward thinking and does not let a few uneducated people deter their thinking. A good transit system is a huge thing for London, today and for tomorrow.

[haljackey]

Blurry, but interesting graph



https://twitter.com/ShiftLdnOnt/stat...61110737760257

[manny_santos]

I also noticed a lot of complaining about LRT/BRT on AM980's Facebook page. I'd like to believe London isn't the only major Canadian city where people would actually oppose mass transit. I'm curious if there was ever any major opposition to Ottawa's Transitway or K-W's LRT. Or Toronto's first subway in 1954.

Originally Posted by haljackey

Blurry, but interesting graph



https://twitter.com/ShiftLdnOnt/stat...61110737760257

And Kingston has something resembling BRT, even if it doesn't have separate lanes (yet).

London has no choice but to embrace LRT/BRT. As the Baby Boomers retire and more young people forego drivers licenses, it will be more important than ever for cities to market themselves to young people and immigrants. Even if LRT primarily serves students as Taz asserted, that could help market London to these students for after graduation.

The comment I once heard from a Western student 8-9 years ago, "I hated the TTC until I moved to London, I can't wait to move back to Toronto" always stuck with me. While that was an anecdotal situation, it's symbolic of the unmet need students visiting London experience right now. BRT/LRT is just one of the pieces of the puzzle to market London for future generations, and current Londoners need to learn how to accept change like people in other cities seem to be able to do. Hopefully City Council will have the balls to ignore the armchair traffic engineers who think they have all the solutions when in fact they know little or nothing about how transportation works.

[Rosso Corsa]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I also noticed a lot of complaining about LRT/BRT on AM980's Facebook page. I'd like to believe London isn't the only major Canadian city where people would actually oppose mass transit. I'm curious if there was ever any major opposition to Ottawa's Transitway or K-W's LRT. Or Toronto's first subway in 1954.

Manny, I hope you and GreatTallNorth are right. Aside from residents having their land expropriated by the city, I don't see many legitimate reasons to oppose this plan. Would the resulting tax hike really be that material? Would the tax savings really be worth potentially hindering the city's economic development for the next 25 years? I can only assume this proposal would improve the property values of most who own properties downtown.

Maybe I'm just me being ignorant. In these Shift meetings, what have the main arguments against LRT/BRT typically been?

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I'm curious if there was ever any major opposition to Ottawa's Transitway or K-W's LRT.

There was fairly significant opposition to Ion in Waterloo Region. At one point, the mayor of Cambridge was opposed, and there were groups and politicians outspoken about the plan who seemed at times to be well-funded. On the ground, many locals didn't agree with the need for rapid transit.

I consider London to be more conservative (I mean reactionary, resistant to change) than Waterloo, having lived in both towns. Waterloo seems on the whole to be more open to new ideas and thinking, and that might be way it accepted the idea of an expressway before it became obvious it was needed (when it would have been too late for it). But this is just my prejudice and might not be accurate.

You're going to have opposition to plans like this everywhere. The car is king in London, as in most places in North America. I personally feel that the arguments against are born of entitlement: motorists feel that non-motorists (if they exist at all) should be given no consideration. They'll claim that we can't afford Shift, but in reality roads with single occupant vehicles are what we can no longer afford. They'll claim that the lanes taken away will cause congestion, but really this will mean more efficient use of finite rights-of-way.

[Pimpmasterdac]

This backlash was to be expected. Many aren't educated on the benefits of RT in long term planning and attracting business. All they see is their property being affected and a lane of traffic that they cannot use for their cars. They don't think about the future and how areas along and near (though not all) the RT will see increased property value, and how it will help get more people off the road and make transit a move viable alternative. They think here and now, that this project will be rolled out tomorrow.

I said years ago the level of expropriation and backlash were expected. It's how council handles it and how quickly they can implement the plans over these objections that will be important. Otherwise the NIMBYs and status quo'ers will get people to obstruct the RT plans.

[Doady]

LRT/BRT is a waste of money for London anyways because London is located in the Snowbelt. London shouldn't be building transit. London is better off building a ring highway, something people can actually use.

[jaradthescot]

Originally Posted by Doady

LRT/BRT is a waste of money for London anyways because London is located in the Snowbelt. London shouldn't be building transit. London is better off building a ring highway, something people can actually use.

LRT/BRT doesn't operate in snowy conditions now? Someone had better tell Hamilton, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa... okay, continuing to list the great many cities in Canada let alone the world that have these systems despite negative temperatures is about as useless as the previous post. What are you on?

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by Doady

LRT/BRT is a waste of money for London anyways because London is located in the Snowbelt. London shouldn't be building transit. London is better off building a ring highway, something people can actually use.

There is a zero percent chance that London will be building a ring road seeing that the north end of he city is built up and the backlash and cost would be impossible to overcome.

The Shift BRT/LRT is the best project London could ever hope for with the demographics making transit more desirable to invest in...and seeing as Santa Wynne is handing out buckets of cash for rapid transit, we best ask for our fair share instead of dithering.

[Pimpmasterdac]

London badly bungled proposed ring roads, it's unfortunately too late for any feasible solution. No way a new highway would be built in the north end through established areas, and north of London it becomes useless to in city commuters, plus Middlesex County wants no part of any highway.

There are road fixes the city needs to serious contemplate (widen Riverside, Sarnia-Huron connector, Adelaide/CP grade separation) that would help traffic in the city much more that a ring road at the extreme margins of London.

Originally Posted by Doady

LRT/BRT is a waste of money for London anyways because London is located in the Snowbelt. London shouldn't be building transit. London is better off building a ring highway, something people can actually use.

[Rosso Corsa]

Originally Posted by doady

lrt/brt is a waste of money for london anyways because london is located in the snowbelt. London shouldn't be building transit. London is better off building a ring highway, something people can actually use.

Can't tell if troll or srs

[MolsonExport]

rhymes with droll

[haljackey]

There's a PIC on Wednesday, December 2: http://www.shiftlondon.ca/events

I'll be there, see what kind of info/pics I can gather.

-----

From an email:

You are invited to attend the third Public Information Centre (PIC) for the Rapid Transit Master Plan study.

The purpose of the PIC is to present the preliminary preferred Rapid Transit system including the corridors, vehicle technology, and station locations.

The session is a drop-in open house, with panels displaying information on the preliminary preferred Rapid Transit system, cultural and environmental impacts assessment, and potential impacts along each corridor. Project staff from the City and the consultant team will be available to answer questions and collect your feedback.



Rapid Transit Corridors EA

Public Information Centre #3

Wednesday December 2, 2015

Noon – 8:00 pm

London Public Library Central Branch

251 Dundas Street, London



Formal presentation and discussion at 6:00 pm

In the Wolf Performance Hall






The meeting information will also be available at City Hall on selected days.

Additional Drop-In Times

Shift Office, City Hall Lobby, 300 Dufferin Avenue

Saturday December 5


10:00 am – 2:00 pm

Tuesday December 8


Noon – 6:00 pm

Thursday December 10


Noon – 6:00 pm

Saturday December 12


10:00 am – 2:00 pm

[HillStreetBlues]

Calm down, fellas. Toady was obviously joking.

Anyway, the real reason London can't build transit is 'cause of the Thames. If you look around, cities with rivers can't build transit. And the ones that did are different from London in other ways. London's London. It's special. Transit won't work in London.

[MolsonExport]

Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton, New York City (etc.) all have rivers and transit systems. Montreal's challenge is far greater, given the width/depth of the Saint Lawrence river. Riviere des Prairies to the North (separating Laval) is no slouch either; far wider/deeper than the muddy Thames.

Transit will work in London. It will allow this city to become of age, and finally shed its deserved reputation for being a provincial backwater. LRT+HSR = game changer.

[HillStreetBlues]

Whoa. I guess I gotta make the sarcasm drip even heavier next time.

For the record, I was just poking fun at Toady's assertion that snow (or whatever) makes LRT impractical for London (the snowiest place on Earth, more sarcasm).

[GreatTallNorth2]

Just wondering if anyone attended the Shift Meeting last night? Care to give us a recap?