Gallery

City staff’s Interim Report on the Western LRT

From: Lynne Bankier
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:35 PM

Light Rail was a big topic of discussion. If anyone wants to track this issue, let me know. My hands are full with development right now.

thanks.

Lynne


Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 06:35:42 -0700
From: dorsay@rogers.com
Subject: Re: Debrief on tonight’s meeting of Kitchissippi community associations

Further to last night’s meeting, attached is City staff’s Interim Report on the WLRT.

For what it’s worth, my thoughts on it:

  • Many claims made without supporting justification/data.
    Hence unable to evaluate merits of assertions.
  • The data behind the route rankings are not provided.
    Data needs to be open to public scrutiny prior to route selection recommendation.
  • Authors claim Carling requires grade-separated crossings.
  • No discussion of why signalized at-grade crossings are not a feasible cost-effective alternative.
  • Authors assert that even if it were not the costliest route, Carling would still be a poor option.
  • This attributed to need for more stops on Carling and thus an additional 3.5 minute end-to-end trip time and crossing safety risk (no risk analysis).
  • No cost/benefit analysis of time difference between at-grade and grade-separated options.
  • No evaluation of prospective building development and related revenues to the City for any of the route options.
  • Not clear why Carling LRT requires grade separation but Carling as a Supplementary rail route would not.
  • Authors assert the primary corridor must provide a competitive travel time compared to the auto mode if it is to achieve ridership targets.
  • No definition of “time-competitive”. No consideration given to “cost-competitive” vs auto mode.
  • No cost/benefit analysis.
  • Authors acknowledge need to assess “effects on vehicular traffic if travel lanes (i.e. on ORP) are converted to transit”
  • The above appears to be the only traffic impact analysis they think needs doing. If so, woefully short of what is needed.
  • Going to single lanes on Parkway = major impact in IPD/Hampton-Iona/WVCA areas if Woodroffe not reconfigured with loop exit/entrance.
  • Comprehensive traffic impact analysis needs to be done for each LRT option. Work should be done by a non-local firm.
  • Hobbs statement indicates preference for ORP route. Her statement that “LRT on Carling is critical to the rejuvenation of the southern portion of the Kitchissippi Ward” is at odds with her support for Carling as a secondary route. Evidently she is not aware that the secondary route would NOT be an LRT route.

Roland

ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0132 Western LRT Corridor EA Interim Report.pdf

Comments are closed.