Public Information Centre #5 Summary December 9-14, 2017 and January 24, 2018 London s Bus Rapid Transit System

Transcription

1 Public Information Centre #5 Summary December 9-14, 2017 and January 24, 2018 London s Bus Rapid Transit System by IBI Group and WSP February 15, 2018

2 Document Control Page CLIENT: PROJECT NAME: REPORT TITLE: IBI REFERENCE: VERSION: the Corporation of the City of London London s Bus Rapid Transit System Public Information Centre #5 Summary: December 9-14, 2017 and January 24, 2018 DIGITAL MASTER: ORIGINATOR: REVIEWER: AUTHORIZATION: [File Location] Hailey McWilliam Marianne Alden, MCIP, RPP, Brian Hollingworth, P. Eng. Brian Hollingworth, P. Eng. CIRCULATION LIST: HISTORY: Version 1.0 Version 2.0

3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Key Findings Public Information Centre Dates and Locations Notification of Public Information Centre # Participation Where do you Live/Work/Attend School Map Information Presented Summary of Key Input from Interactive Exhibits PIC Comment Summary Stop Features Comments from the Public s from the Public Summary List of Exhibits Exhibit Bus Rapid Transit Network... 1 Exhibit 1-2 Individuals Viewing PIC Exhibits... 2 Exhibit 5-1 Live/Work/Attend School Map... 5 Exhibit 6-1 Public Information Exhibits... 5 Exhibit 7-1 Key Findings from the Interactive Exhibits for Public Information Centre #5 (December 2017)... 7 Exhibit 7-2 Key Findings from the Interactive Exhibits for Public Information Centre #5 (January 2018)... 8 Exhibit 8-1 Stop Feature Survey Results - December 9-14,

4 Table of Contents (continued) Exhibit 8-2 Stop Feature Survey Results - January 24, Exhibit 9-1 Public Comments Exhibit 9-2 Focus Area Public Comments Exhibit s Received Exhibit s Received List of Appendices Appendix A Facebook Ads Appendix B Instagram Ads Appendix C Posters Appendix D PIC 5 Exhibits Appendix E PIC 5 Presentation Appendix F Comment Sheets Appendix G Focus Area Comment Sheets Appendix H s February 15, 2018 ii

5 1 Introduction The City of London, and their consultants IBI Group and WSP, are undertaking the pre-transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP; Ontario Regulation 231/08) planning for the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) System. The 24-km BRT network (Exhibit 1-1-1) as defined in the Rapid Transit Master Plan, was approved by London s City Council on July 25, Exhibit Bus Rapid Transit Network *Based on public feedback, additional Rapid Transit stops are being considered at Capulet Lane and at Victoria Street on Richmond Street. 1

6 The purpose of Public Information Centre (PIC) #5 was to obtain feedback from the public to aid in the evaluation of the Bus Rapid Transit corridor design options. The PIC was a drop-in open house with a formal presentation and question and answer period. Individuals were invited to view PIC exhibits before and after the presentation (Exhibit 1-2). Project staff from the City and the consultant team were available to answer questions and collect feedback, which will be used to evaluate the design options. Exhibit 1-2 Individuals Viewing PIC Exhibits 2 Key Findings A number of comments and questions were raised at the PIC. Of the feedback received, recurring themes included: The presentation was well-done and informative There were varying opinions on centre-running verses curb-side running Rapid Transit There is a risk that BRT may become obsolete Recurring questions included: Will BRT improve my local transit service? How will the dedicated transit lanes impact emergency services/snow removal? What, where and how will bike lanes work? How will local transit be integrated? When and how will property expropriation occur? When will construction occur? What will be done to mitigate delays at the CPR crossing? 2

7 A full summary of the comments received through comment sheets submitted at PIC 5 and through is included in Section 8 and Section 9. 3 Public Information Centre Dates and Locations Seven PICs were held from December 9, 2017 to December 14, Two additional events were held on January 24, The same information was presented at all the PICs. The PICs were held at the following times and locations: 1. December 9, :00am 12:00pm at the Central Library 2. December 9, 2017, 1:30pm 4:30pm at the Central Library 3. December 12, 2017, 2:00pm 6:00pm at Aeolian Hall 4. December 13, 2017, 5:30pm 8:30pm at Oakridge Secondary School 5. December 13, :00pm 9:00pm at Ivey Spencer Leadership Centre 6. December 14, :00am 2:00pm at the Central Library 7. December 14, :00pm 8:00pm at Four Points by Sheraton 8. January 24, :00am 2:00pm at the Central Library 9. January 24, :00pm 7:00pm at the Central Library 4 Notification of Public Information Centre #5 Notification of the PIC was posted on the Shift website ( which is accessible to all external stakeholders and members of the public. Announcements were made on Shift s Facebook, Twitter and Instagram pages. Ads were also placed on Facebook (Appendix A) and Instagram (Appendix B) and ran from December 1, 2017 to December 14, 2017 and January 19 24, Posters (Appendix C) advertising the PIC were placed at the following locations: Boyle Memorial Community Centre; Byron Optimist Community Centre; Carling Heights Optimist Community Centre; Civic Gardens; Earl Nichols Recreation Centre; East Lions Artisan Centre; Hamilton Road Seniors' Centre and Community Centre; Kinsmen Recreation Centre; Kiwanis Seniors' Community Centre; Lambeth Community Centre; Medway Community Centre; North London Optimist Community Centre; South London Community Centre; Springbank Gardens Community Centre; Stoney Creek Community Centre; 3

8 Stronach Community Recreation Centre; Dearness Home; City Hall; and All London Public Libraries. Mobile signs advertising the December PIC events were placed at the following locations around the City of London: McKillop Park; Ross Park; Gartshore Park; and Greenway Park. The PIC was advertised on local radio stations from December 4, 2017 to December 9, The Notice of Public Information Centre #5 was also ed to those on the public mailing list by the City on December 1, 2017, January 11, 2018, and January 23, The PIC started in an open-house format with a presentation and question and answer period scheduled an hour after the PIC began. An independent facilitator moderated the December PIC events and the question and answer period. City staff moderated the January 24 th PIC events. The presentation and question and answer period lasted approximately an hour in length and was followed by another hour of the open-house format. Members of the Project Team were available to answer questions and address concerns during the open-house segment of the PIC. There were a number of interactive exhibits for the public to engage in. The interactive exhibits included: Where do you live/work/attend school map Richmond North from Oxford to University: Thoughts Richmond Row from Central to Oxford: Thoughts Wellington Road Base Line to Bradley: Thoughts Wellington Road Curve: Thoughts Oxford Street from Platt s Lane to Wharncliffe Road: Thoughts A summary of public comments, arranged by exhibit, are in Section 7. 5 Participation A total of 555 individuals signed-in at the December PIC events. Mayor Matt Brown and a number of members of City Council attended the PIC events. Members of the Project Team were available to facilitate the understanding of information presented at the PIC events. A total of 234 people signed-in at the two PIC events hosted on January 24, Acting Mayor, Councillor Hubert, and some Councillors also attended the January 24 th PIC. 4

9 5.1 Where do you Live/Work/Attend School Map Upon registering at the welcome desk, participants were given coloured dots to place on the map, depicting where they live (red dot), work (yellow dot) and attend school (blue dot) (Exhibit 5-1). Exhibit 5-1 Live/Work/Attend School Map The map illustrates that PIC attendees included residents, employees and students from all areas of the City. 6 Information Presented The exhibits were organized in a manner which effectively presented project information. The exhibits listed in Exhibit 6-1 were on display at the PIC and can be viewed in full in Appendix D. A PowerPoint was used during the presentation component of the PIC. The PowerPoint is included in Appendix E. Exhibit 6-1 Public Information Exhibits 1. Welcome Board 32. Richmond Street North: Comparison 5

10 2. Approved Bus Rapid Transit Network 3. TPAP 4. Project Process 5. What is Bus Rapid Transit 6. We Want Your Input 7. Where do you Live/Work/Attend School? 8. What We Heard During the RTMP Review Period 9. City-wide benefits of Bus Rapid Transit 10. BRT Specifications 11. Electric Buses 12. Accessing Median Stops 13. Integration with Local Transit 14. Integration with Cycling 15. What is New Mobility? 16. Role of BRT in New Mobility 17. Focus Areas 18. ITS 19. Changes to Traffic Circulation 20. Centre-running vs. Curb-running 21. Transit Lane Options 22. Heritage and Archaeology 23. Natural Environment Map 24. Natural Environment 25. Next Steps 26. Stay Connected 27. North Turnaround 28. Western University 29. Richmond Street North: Options 30. Richmond Street Design Board #1 31. Richmond Street Design Board #2 33. Richmond Street North: Thoughts 34. Richmond Row: Options 35. Richmond Row Design Board 36. Richmond Row Comparison 37. Richmond Row: Thoughts 38. Richmond Street North and Richmond Row: Traffic 39. Richmond Street North and Richmond Row: Traffic Impacts 40. Richmond Street North and Richmond Row Traffic Impacts #2 41. Downtown Design Board 42. Dundas Street 43. Dundas Street Design Board 44. East Turnaround 45. Wellington Baseline to Bradley: Options 46. Wellington Road Design Board 47. Wellington Curb vs. Centre: Comparison 48. Wellington Baseline to Bradley: Thoughts 49. South Turnaround 50. Wellington Road Curve: Options 51. Wellington Road Curve Design Board 52. Wellington Road Curve: Comparison 53. Wellington Road Curve: Thoughts 54. Oxford Street from Platt s Lane to Wharncliffe Road: Options 55. Oxford Street Design Board 56. Oxford Street from Platt s Lane to Wharncliffe Road: Comparison 57. Oxford Street from Platt s Lane to Wharncliffe Road: Thoughts 58. West Turnaround 6

11 7 Summary of Key Input from Interactive Exhibits Exhibit 7-1 and Exhibit 7-2 summarize the key input received from the interactive exhibits for all Public Information Centre #5 events. These comments are provided based on text written on sticky notes. Exhibit 7-1 Key Findings from the Interactive Exhibits for Public Information Centre #5 (December 2017) INTERACTIVE EXHIBIT TOPIC Richmond Street North from Oxford to University KEY THOUGHTS Cyclist connections Heritage impacts Protect as many trees as possible Centre-running has best functionality Prefer Option 1 Richmond Row from Central to Oxford Delivery space required Traffic impacts Emergency vehicles Where will the snow go? Pedestrian crossing distances Minimize property impacts Plant more trees Consultation with BIAs/Neighbourhood groups Cost is same without tunnel? Can HOV lanes be considered? Why route through Western University? What about the CPR tracks? Curb-running buses may get stuck behind taxis and delivery trucks Do not install raised medians Will BRT buses accommodate bicycles? Distances between stops is too great Traffic Impacts to Victoria Park Downtown Couplet Cyclist connections Wellington Baseline to Bradley Will cyclists be able to use BRT lanes? Centre-running makes most sense Curb-running is less disruptive 7

12 INTERACTIVE EXHIBIT TOPIC Wellington Road Curve Cyclist connections KEY THOUGHTS Traffic backs up at Commissioners and Wellington I prefer Option 1 Heritage impacts Oxford Street from Platt's Lane to Wharncliffe Road Expropriation budget No comments received Exhibit 7-2 Key Findings from the Interactive Exhibits for Public Information Centre #5 (January 2018) INTERACTIVE EXHIBIT TOPIC Richmond Street North from Oxford to University Richmond Row from Central to Oxford KEY THOUGHTS Remove the rail lines (3 comments) Project is not worth losing property frontage and trees (2 comments) Minimize tree impacts (2 comments) Expropriate property Removing trees reduces oxygen levels Younger trees produce more oxygen than very old trees I m excited for the reduction drivers and therefore in emissions I am excited for the reduction in traffic The loss of trees and property is worth it for extra traffic lanes Where will you put everything? The time savings for traffic is not worth taking the extra property frontage Richmond and Oxford is very busy Road widening is required Bike lanes needed (2 comments) Option 1 will work better (2 comments) Will the Victoria Park entrance be restored? Improving transit will add to London s emerging innovation culture Centre-running is preferred Downtown Couplet There should be a stop between Central and Oxford No comments received. 8

13 INTERACTIVE EXHIBIT TOPIC Wellington Baseline to Bradley Wellington Road Curve KEY THOUGHTS Drivers are already doing U-turns Looking forward to the cycle track No lefts mean that people will divert to High Street and Ridout (3 comments) #6 bus gone? (2 comments) I prefer Option 2 High Street area property values will decline due to traffic Too many houses will be taken out Loss of houses and trees for a minimal gain Lots of property impacts when there is green space that remains untouched in 2/3 options Too many trees will be taken down Have the local traffic impacts been studied at High Street and Ridout? Snow removal costs for BRT lanes Oxford Street from Platt's Lane to Wharncliffe Road Is the retaining wall from the Church being considered with the same weight as property impact? Do not cut down our trees (2 comments) I prefer Option 2 (2 comments) I prefer Option 1 Do not bring buses into the residential area of Capulet Lane What about Byron? What expansions will occur? Plant 3 trees for every 1 cut down Reduce the number of trees that will be cut Plant more trees to absorb CO2 emissions Heritage property north side of Platt s Lane I do not want this increase in traffic so close to the children s park at Capulet Lane The school buses disembark at the intersection of Capulet Lane and Capulet Walk. 8 PIC Comment Summary The following sections summarize the public comments received at both the December 2017 and January 24 th, 2018, PIC events. 9

14 8.1 Stop Features A survey was handed out at the sign in desk that asked attendees to check three features they considered most important for a BRT stop. The features respondents could choose from included: Fully enclosed shelter; Partially enclosed shelter; Benches; Leaning bars; Rapid Transit arrival information; Connecting bus arrival information; Heating; Wi-Fi; Charging station for mobile phones; Area map with landmarks; and Other. There were 234 surveys submitted over the December PIC events. Overall, 21% of respondents identified Rapid Transit bus arrival information, 19% identified connecting bus arrival information, and 16% identified a fully enclosed shelter as the top three most important stop features. The two least popular features were the leaning bar and the charging station for mobile phones, which were both only identified as an important feature by 2% of respondents. The results from the December PICs are presented in Exhibit 8-1. Exhibit 8-1 Stop Feature Survey Results - December 9-14, 2017 Stop Features Total Responses Rapid Transit bus arrival information 145 Connecting bus arrival information 133 Fully enclosed shelter 112 Benches 81 Partially enclosed shelter 63 Area map with landmarks 57 Heating 43 Wi-Fi 38 Leaning bars 14 Charging station for mobile phones 12 At the January PIC events, 91 surveys were submitted. For the top three features, 21% of respondents identified Rapid Transit bus arrival information, 20% identified connecting bus arrival information, and 13% identified a fully-enclosed shelter. The results are presented in Exhibit

15 Exhibit 8-2 Stop Feature Survey Results - January 24, 2018 Stop Features Total Responses Rapid Transit bus arrival information 59 Connecting bus arrival information 55 Fully enclosed shelter 35 Benches 33 Partially enclosed shelter 32 Area map with landmarks 18 Heating 12 Leaning bars 12 Wi-Fi 11 Charging station for mobile phones 8 9 Comments from the Public The public were encouraged to submit comments by filling out the comment sheets provided at the PIC events. Those who provided contact information were added to the project contact list to receive future notifications relating to the study. In total, 193 comment forms were submitted to the Project Team during the December PIC events. A total of 71 comment forms were submitted during the two events held on January 24, 2018 and 3 comment forms were sent to the Project Team via after the PIC, during the public comment period (January 24 February 7, 2018). Exhibit 9-1 Public Comments summarizes all written comments/concerns received. All comment forms are available in Appendix F. Exhibit 9-1 Public Comments HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE TRANSIT IN LONDON? (DECEMBER 2017) 60 Often (31%) 79 Sometimes (42%) 51 Never (27%) HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE TRANSIT IN LONDON? (JANUARY 2018) 26 Often (36%) 30 Sometimes (42%) 16 Never (22%) PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (CENTRAL LIBRARY - DECEMBER 9, 2017) Interesting and informative material (9 comments) 11

16 Effective materials (8 comments) The presentation was well done (6 comments) The staff were helpful (4 comments) Great visualizations (2 comments) Use centre-running BRT lanes and avoid mixed traffic (2 comments) This is long overdue (2 comments) I would like a noise barrier along Wellington Road from Frank Place to Moore Street (2 comments) Sunningdale is not connected to this system and therefore we will not use it Update the traffic simulation What is the goal of Rapid Transit? Concern about property impacts I am opposed to LRT Concerns about construction Do not like the UWO route, I would prefer that the bus continue on Richmond Street Would be nice if the boards showing the various options referred back to each other Extend pedestrian signal times Intelligent discussion Question was not addressed It was interesting to see the options Make sure the eastern route extends to the airport With improved frequency and BRT, I would hope to use public transit more frequently CPR crossing is a major issue I am concerned with expropriation of land and how shaking will be minimized Let s get this project implemented and operational ASAP I want truthful facts Richmond Street is going to be a mess for cars, trucks and commercial tenants I would like a park and ride at the north terminal I am concerned with the destruction of trees on Richmond This seems like a reasonable proposal to mitigate the problems of a growing city Misleading I wanted to see projections of expected ridership This will ruin Richmond Street The facilitator really helped make this productive This plan is flawed if its goal is to remove drivers 12

17 This provides an economical option to driving for many Londoners This is a waste of money There is no justification to widen Richmond to accommodate 4 lanes of general traffic BRT will be a good addition to London s transit system Be cautious of scope creep I am concerned about single lane flow in a 4 lane system Service all areas of London I feel we have not been able to speak our minds DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? Will BRT improve my transit service? (4 comments) More dialogue on local transit integration (2 comments) Will the system be designed to be readily converted to LRT? (2 comments) What, where, and how will bike lanes work? (2 comments) Where and when will expropriation occur? (2 comments) When will construction occur? (2 comments) Is property expropriation part of the $500 million cost? How will fares work? Please consider Presto. How are we engaging with the actual LTC ridership? Why don t you address the health benefits of walking? Underground station for central hub? Why can t two car lanes be provided on all of Richmond Street? What is the projected cost of BRT? Has the City considered above ground and below-ground alternatives to BRT? Does the commute time published include the time on the local bus? Are there going to be safe storage areas for bicycles? What will the service hours be? Can I use my seniors pass on BRT? What is the total amount of money going to IBI? How will the CPR crossing be addressed? What happens if funds are not committed by the Federal and Provincial governments? How will you work with affected neighbourhoods to minimize traffic impacts? What options are in the plan to expand routes? PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (AEOLIAN HALL DECEMBER 12, 2017) 13

18 Information was presented well (2 comments) Informative material Missing maps BRT is not looking forward enough Would like more information on local transit integration with BRT at stops and hubs With the current plan, I will not be able to park in front of my home Show how buses are better than cars There are no statistics on transit riders This will make traffic worse DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? What are the parking arrangements? (2 comments) Why hasn t a real life mock-up of Richmond Street been done? How will BRT service times work? How will consultation continue after implementation? How will you excite those that oppose the project? Will there be Wi-Fi in shelters and on the buses? Can we bring sample buses to the City to show the public? PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (OAKRIDGE DECEMBER 13, 2017) Very good presentation (2 comments) Good diagrams Was given a questionnaire regarding transit stops but it sounded like these designs are already done I am glad I came to the presentation. I am a senior and do not adjust easily to change. I can now see and understand the need for a transit system like BRT. The bus doesn t go where I want to go Appreciated hearing more detail about the project DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? No questions received. PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (IVEY SPENCER DECEMEBER 13, 2017) Staff were very helpful (2 comments) From listening to comments and concerns, I think many people do not realize this plan is the beginning plan for moving people years in the future I am concerned about my property being expropriated 14

19 I think the disadvantages of the plan outweigh the advantages. We should pause and reconsider Richmond Street will become very congested and it will result in overflow to residential areas Please ask the citizens for their vote on the final plan before implementation Nice brochures but no details as to actual costs regarding labour, buses etc. This project would appear to be pushed through regardless I opt for centre-running, which looks safer for pedestrians Great displays More coverage on BRT system If buses ran every 10 minutes, you wouldn t need to spend any money on changes to roads, expropriation etc. Putting a curb between north and southbound lanes is a waste and will impede emergency vehicles Cabs stopping on Richmond Street will slow traffic to a crawl I am not convinced London requires BRT. I am concerned about construction for 10 years There should be an alternative to BRT considering an elevated system of Rapid Transit Let s get BRT on the road DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? Where will parking spots be lost? (2 comments) How will property expropriation work? If we leave the present system intact how much will ridership go up? Why was LRT ruled out for London? Will BRT be a P3 partnership? Who will own/run BRT? Who will cover cost overruns? Will there be other buses on Richmond Street besides BRT? If so, will there by laybys for buses to pull in so as not to block traffic? Do you think this plan will ease congestion on Wonderland Road? How much will this cost? How much will taxes go up? How will delivery drivers deal with Richmond Street changes? Will the Old North neighbourhood have to deal with an increase in traffic on side roads? Where are the double left lanes in the plan? What priority will BRT have at signalized intersections? PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (CENTRAL LIBRARY DECEMBER 14, 2017) Very good presentation and materials (4 comments) 15

20 Detailed and easy to follow (3 comments) Very informative (3 comments) I support this plan (2 comments) Centre-running BRT is my preference (2 comments) CPR crossing makes Rapid Transit less rapid Park and rides are important Boarding the bus in a centre median is very dangerous Dividing streets impedes emergency vehicles and snow removal Contradictory information Please do more to communicate how BRT may be a preferred option for many who now commute via personal vehicle The 6 lane proposal for Richmond Street is alarming Materials are very comprehensive I would have liked to see the full Clarence Street run particularly next to Victoria Park I do not believe we need to add extra lanes of traffic, as the idea is to reduce the number of vehicles on the road Good that you got an outside facilitator Good use of simulations Rapid transit stops should be extremely visibly Added more detail which creates more possible issues I am concerned that any option for Richmond Street north of Oxford Street that does not include 4 vehicle lanes will create significant traffic issues There should be a info session at Western Fanshawe students live near Fanshawe and Western students live near Western - BRT won t help Sounds like were becoming Little Toronto Thank you for taking Clarence Street my thoughts too. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? How will local transit be integrated? (2 comments) How much study has been done on the collapse of ground/soil and replacing old deteriorating infrastructure? What is shift s relationship to LTC? Who sets shift s budget and management structure? Who does shift report to and how? Is peer review part of the process? How can we make the 2 traffic lane proposal as efficient as possible? Why eastbound across the river between Wharncliffe and Ridout? Why not existing eastbound bridge? What property impacts will result from expropriation? 16

21 What about cycle lanes from Downtown to Old East? Will LTC consider letting passengers off between stops at night for safety reasons? How can any solution not address our level rail crossing issues? Will arrival times be guaranteed? PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (FOUR POINTS BY SHERATON DECEMBER 14, 2017) Great information (2 comments) Everything was explained very well (2 comments) I prefer centre-running BRT (2 comments) We re excited for expanded bike lanes (2 comments) Great presentation More trees and plantings around BRT stations to improve travel experience More info is needed about when things are going to be moving I think this is a poorly thought-out plan too expensive for London I look forward to driving with reduced traffic with BRT and increased accessibility and times to travel to entertainment etc. with a late ride home BRT should be in the curb lane there would be less pedestrian accidents. People shouldn t have to walk across 2 lanes to get on a bus. The people of London should decide the lane in which Rapid Transit will be placed DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? Why doesn t the BRT service Wonderland and Southdale? Is electric powered buses a requirement? How is the CPR crossing being handled? What bicycle parking will be available for BRT transit users? How permanent is the route, given that developers may increase density near BRT stations? Why was this project forced on the people of London? PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (CENTRAL LIBRARY JANUARY 24, 2018) MORNING Good materials (2 comments) Well done (2 comments) Poor alternatives The plan is trying to make Downtown the focus of London again, those days are gone. I m not certain this plan address our major transportation issues The cost is too high 17

22 Snow is a big concern No information on mobility scooter accommodation Increased traffic on High Street resulting in property value loss. I rely on bus service and I consider this a waste of money, a great inconvenience in the construction phase. I expect businesses to be pressured financially. I am considering moving out of the City rather than paying for all the increased taxes BRT should not have employees or and office. It should not be at this point of progress based on partial analysis of traffic Let s do this! We re in top 10 biggest cities in Canada lets act like it It appears from the diagrams that taking out the west side of the Wellington curve makes the most sense so why is there also thoughts of taking out the east side? 10 years is a long time for this project, which will have lots of problems Kind of same-old, same-old We should have gone with LRT The information is a lot to take in which is good that it is comprehensive, but could be easier to find relevant info. Would love an info session for riders more specifically. I fully support BRT, including the original tunnel under the railway Nice displays No handouts for public to take home and study I appreciate the displays and the opportunity to speak to those involved with the project Can t wait for the new system! BRT should cross at Queens Ave to Wharncliffe, then up to Western Road and on west side of University campus. Avoid CPR tracks on Richmond Vehicles should be electric Well organized Please spare the trees. We will be losing our Forest City designation. Very informative DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? Why isn t there going to be a referendum on this issue? (2 comments) Will anyone contact us regarding our property? (2 comments) Why is there no west bound on Queens Ave? How much will the cost overruns be? What kind of education do you plan to explain the benefits of Rapid Transit so that more people will take the bus and get out of their cars? Why not one way north of Waterloo and one way south on St. George? Will the #6 bus still run? 18

23 Why no curbside running option? How will traffic on High Street and Ridout be impacted? Has there been a survey on local traffic impact? Who is going to pay when businesses are closed during construction delays, and cost overruns? Why did Londoners not have a real opportunity to participate in decision making? Where are the City maintenance going to put the snow? Are we going to have diesel buses or hybrid buses or electric buses? When will a decision on centre vs. curb-side be made? Why use one-way streets in the wrong direction? What is the expected increase of Londoners that are going to use BRT in 10 years? How are you going to persuade people to use buses when it is not a popular option today? PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TODAY (CENTRAL LIBRARY JANUARY 24, 2018) AFTERNOON Very organized and professional (14 comments) I never use London transit since I m from St. Thomas and there is no vehicle parking Feeling better about the proposal still concerned about the system not extending to the airport I was pleased to hear of the many benefits that BRT will provide beyond a slight increase in travel time for buses. I am impressed bike routes will be considered. I think the dissemination of this material will be a major hurdle, as many vocal Londoners are misinformed The sickest point of view Increase passengers from 2015 to now. Some routes already changes and they were much better and easy access to somewhere I am happy different options of the road designs are being looked at. Looks like it will be a good design, which can be adapted or expandable in the future Good materials Ensure snow removal at stops and on paths to stops Option 1 works best for me Excellent improvement of communication Transit options well explained and chances for feedback were plentiful. The City needs better transit. I hope now that Council has approved BRT the routes and infrastructure changes reflect the needs and wants of an informed public Not for or against this DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT ANSWERED TODAY? What is considered heritage property? 19

24 In addition to the general comment sheets, focus area comment sheets were provided at the PIC. These sheets differed from the general comment sheets. The intent of the focus area comment sheets was to obtain feedback from the public specific to the design decisions at 5 areas along the BRT network: Richmond Street north of Oxford Street; Richmond Street north of Central Avenue; Wellington Road from Base Line Road to Bradley Avenue; Wellington Road south of the Thames to Base Line Road; and Oxford Street West from Platt s Lanes to Wharncliffe Road. Exhibit 9-1 Public Comments summarizes all written comments/concerns received on the focus area comment sheets. All comment forms are available in Appendix G. Exhibit 9-2 Focus Area Public Comments RICHMOND STREET OPTIONS: OXFORD STREET TO UNIVERSITY WHICH OPTION DO YOU MOST PREFER AND WHY? Option 1 (2 comments) Sunningdale as north hub. 2 lanes no expansion of car lanes. Bicycle lanes on all routes. All terminals to be located at the malls, not in their lots. Need to prioritize Pride of Place. What is proposed, ridership, cost of use, net operating cost impact? Option 1, but remove the right-turn lanes. The less road widening the better. Only need to convert the two middle lanes to BRT-only Will there be enough park n ride hubs for people at each end of line? Option 4 although it will hurt Richmond Street, it will keep the Old North neighbourhood fairly intact Option 3 lowest cost option to maintain 4 general traffic lanes 2 centre lanes, 2 lanes of traffic because more residential Old North feel is maintained, less expressway like barrier through residential area and Western University Area, encourage more pedestrian traffic and pedestrian friendliness, centre BRT lanes won t make Old North residents feel they have people waiting on their front lawns Option 2 or Option 1. I believe it is better to have only 1 lanes of traffic each way. The whole idea is to have less cars. Also it is important to not take down too many trees and not take out properties. Option 2 would be safer for pedestrians and cyclists, although where is the cycling lane? Option 1 requires fewer trees to be taken down. We don t need too many lanes because more people will be taking bus and we don t need more lanes for cars Option 2 best compromise between the need for BRT and cars to somehow co-exist. Fewest trees cute; more front yard space maintained Option 3 at a minimum / Option 4 least disruptive to Richmond traffic Option 2 safest I prefer Option 1 or 2 because they seem more consistent with the purpose of BRT to shift people from cars to transit. Given this laudable aim, it seems contrary and indeed 20

25 nonsensical so construct a system that allows continued freedom will come at the expense of homeowners along one of London s more gracious neighbourhoods whose destruction will entail a loss for the City as a whole My preference is for Option 1 centre-lane BRT designated lanes seem most efficient and safe, less need for road widening than 3 or 4 or for Option 2, which would require less road widening and tree destruction at intersections WHICH OPTION DO YOU LEAST PREFER AND WHY? 6 lanes #2 and #4 Option 4 Options 1 and 2 destroy most other streets from a residential perspective Option 1 constricts general traffic Option 3 or 4 we do not need more lanes of traffic. The idea is to have less cars, not more Option 3 too many trees will be taken away too many lanes, we need less cars, not more Option 3 more trees and property taken with the R.R. overpass on Adelaide and the widened space for vehicles on Wharncliffe at the R.R overpass these streets will provide N/S spaces for cars which formerly might have been on Richmond Option 1 and 2 reduction to 1 lane each way will have an impact to traffic. This will get worse as the City grows in the north and the plan has to take this into account. The statement that other improvements to traffic flow will improve flow and that other alternate routes will be improved doesn t have credibility with me Option 3 and 4 for the reasons stated above. Furthermore the systemic improvements in mobility as a result of the shift process may well remove me need for 4 vehicular lanes on Richmond I am absolutely against either Option 3 or 4. The destruction of trees and property necessitated by either of these options would outweigh the benefits of BRT (which I otherwise support). Additionally, I don t see why either option is necessary given the measures taken by the BRT planners to enhance both Adelaide and Wharncliffe/Western Road as viable north/south routes and the efforts of UWO to reduce cut through traffic from Sarnia Road to Richmond. These measures will eventually reduce traffic RICHMOND STREET OPTIONS: CENTRAL AVENUE TO OXFORD STREET WHICH OPTION DO YOU MOST PREFER AND WHY? #1, Centre-lane is best Neither Curbside to prevent pedestrians from being hit by cars I am tired of tie up traffic between Pall Mall Street and Oxford Street. CPR can interpret the bus schedules. I am tired of delayed area and CPR brings very slow. Oxford Street and Richmond is one of worst traffic jam zone in London and it put more traffic jam and CPR interruption during peak hour. More pollution is answer WHICH OPTION DO YOU LEAST PREFER AND WHY? 21

26 #2 Both Not worth to build tunnel because of a lot of pipes under street. Computers control traffic light signals and train light signals which would help to trains and vehicles move WELLINGTON ROAD OPTIONS: BASE LINE ROAD TO BRADLEY AVENUE WHICH OPTION DO YOU MOST PREFER AND WHY? No comments received WHICH OPTION DO YOU LEAST PREFER AND WHY? No comments received WELLINGTON CURVE OPTIONS: SOUTH OF THAMES RIVER TO BASE LINE ROAD WHICH OPTION DO YOU MOST PREFER AND WHY? Option 2 the other two options shift the buses. The centre options works for me, as I have developing mobility issues; I m hoping to see how pedestrians, especially those with mobility issues will have ease of access to the new routes Option 1 has much less impact to St. Andrew Memorial Anglican Church, including the old church/parish hall building next door. That building provides services to the community My concern is the public parking spaces being eliminated on King Street. [Redacted text] with very limited parking spaces for guests. As well, there is two funeral homes that use public parking on King Street I m very strongly against BRT General comment: plans needs to be abandoned and rethought. Not rapid transit at all, if serious should be elevated electromagnetic system. Business plan is an airy fairy plan and should be redone and use real numbers. Start over Option 2 - lengthen curve will improve sightlines currently as you head north, there is a blind spot Option 3 affects properties on one side only. Nobody uses that park anyways This is a very important project. I would just ask you to save as many trees as possible Option 1 is the most preferred option for my property. With this option, it will have least disruption for 2 businesses which are customer oriented and need a lot of parking. If any other option is selected we will lose all tenants and the businesses will be ruined Option 1 I would prefer my property be purchased as the other options will mean an extensive reduction in my property, and require living with months or years of construction Curve is very dangerous. It is time to change now. BRT will add new 2 lanes. Curve will change dangerous to smooth Option 1 our home would be affected by a total acquisition, however I would prefer this to years of construction, additional (noisy) bus traffic and partial acquisition WHICH OPTION DO YOU LEAST PREFER AND WHY? Options 2 and 3 (2 comments) This is a ridiculous proposal 22

27 None of the 3 options take into account cyclists don t take space with landscaping: put it towards cycling! Less maintenance cost to City in long run and improved health for residents Option 3 More traffic light signals zone Option 3 has the greatest impacts to the church property, as well as Gartshore Park OXFORD STREET WEST OPTIONS: PLATT S LANE TO WHARNCLIFFE ROAD WHICH OPTION DO YOU MOST PREFER AND WHY? Your Wellington Street corridor is totally unworkable and destructive to commercial areas None. We need mini buses more often eventually all small buses will be self-driving and people will use smartphones to get a mini-bus None. Why not simply change the bus routes so that buses are running N-S or E-W on the major roads. BRT seems to be an expensive option that offers no benefits to a large part of the City. The City has expanded so that now the major shopping areas are on the outskirts in standalone buildings. A car is needed. What is there Downtown that I would need a BRT for? Option 1 mixed use least cost and easiest to go back to normal when BRT fails None, make your turnaround in Byron. As usual, Byron gets left out of the picture Option 2 while I understand trees, property, etc. are important, if we are going to do this right, it should be done to make the BRT the fastest and most efficient This plan is a waste of money considering the advances in technology this plan is outdated before there will be a shovel in the ground. Look what s going on in south Michigan that is what planning is about. Look at how technology is being developed to make transit better. The future is just around the corner Other lanes are keeping and new added lanes for BRT will be nice. Oxford and Wharncliffe Rd N traffic jam is increasing fast since 1980s WHICH OPTION DO YOU LEAST PREFER AND WHY? BRT gross waste of money. This will obliterate Downtown and Richmond St. North This BRT would be great for 1970, but now it is too late. Your population projections are nonsense Dedicated lanes makes no sense financially Byron needs access to Talbot Centre on Southdale and Colonel Talbot. Please extend to Talbot Centre Option 2 the point of rapid transit is to by-pass stopped traffic. To merge all traffic will cause buses to be delayed when stuck in the general traffic. It will also create a bottleneck, furthering the delays Don t bring additional bus traffic into the residential area of Capulet Lane and Capulet Walk Least preferred would be LRT. Thankfully that is not happening. BRT will be an archaic form of municipal transit by the time this project is shovel ready. Where are the bike lanes? 23

28 No left turn between Platt s Lane and Wharncliffe Road N. U-turn zone will put lane and traffic light signals 10 s from the Public A total of 68 s were received over the December Public Information Centre #5 comment period, which was open from December 9, 2017 to January 15, A summary of the s received is provided in Exhibit All s can be found in Appendix H. Exhibit s Received SUMMARY OF S RECEIVED DECEMBER 9 TH JANUARY 15 TH Questions regarding impacts to property/business (8 s) The BRT system is not forward-thinking thinking enough (7 s) This money could be spent on a better traffic light control system, railway overpasses, improved bus stop pull offs and additional bus routes for far less money (4 s) I am totally against this plan because bus use will not increase and traffic will become worse (3 s) The BRT system will cater to students and not London residents (3 s) Please consider connecting BRT to high-speed rail (2 s) Hold a referendum regarding this project (2 s) I prefer Option 1 along Wellington Road (2 s) I am supportive of transit and like how your team has implemented the project so far. Can you meet with me to discuss how bikes could be incorporated into the BRT design? Autonomous vehicles should be allowed to use dedicated BRT lanes When will a noise wall be built? The BRT system should not run down Richmond Street There are not enough buses on the road right now. The current routes are busy and get bogged down by rush hour traffic Implement curb-side running BRT down Wellington Road to minimize impacts to small businesses and prevent traffic problems that will be caused by U-turns Public feedback is expressed on social media these days. I will attend a PIC to see what is proposed Implement BRT without reducing current road capacity. Look at cities in Europe and Asia for inspiration Provided responses to BRT stops features survey I prefer centre-running BRT Please construct idling bays on Capulet Lane Since the BRT system will not service Sunningdale and Adelaide, I do not support it 24

29 Question regarding current LTC operations The London Plan is written in evasive political terms. Who came up with the idea of BRT? Will this be a make work project? Do not proceed with this plan because of the destruction it will cause to Richmond Street and Wellington Road I would like to know how BRT will impact the basic human functions of housing, transportation, commercial and/or businesses and the physical environment How will property expropriation work? I strongly support BRT. The proposed rapid transit routes, improved frequency on connecting routes, and planned upgrades to other city infrastructure will make my life easier Please implement the centre-running BRT with 2 general traffic lanes in each direction on Richmond Street north of Oxford Please review impacts to residents accesses on King Street I am opposed to the cost of this project. Fix current transit problem by adding frequency on some routes and taking away others Make city employees ride the BRT Extend the BRT service to areas that are currently without LTC service Please explain how BRT will impact traffic in the Old North area Please fix line work to make drawings easier to read How will emergency vehicles stop on King Street with the BRT lanes running in both direction? Consider implementing a horseshoe over the CPR tracks Park and rides should be implemented at each terminal Have you considered having one dedicated flexible lane? When are the Public Information Centres? Insert space into the road, sidewalk, bridge designs for snow storage How many cars will fit in the northbound left hand turn lane on Richmond Street at Oxford? How many Western University and Fanshawe College students remain in London after graduation? The proposed system will not service factory workers who work in outlying areas The plan for dedicated lanes on Richmond Street will destroy Old North The proposed BRT system will impact my small business by only allowing right-in/right out traffic You should ask the public if they want BRT or to simply improve the LTC I do not believe the public s input has changed the design at all. Many people need public transit that will not be serviced by the BRT Time savings are too minimal and not worth the expense The LRT or BRT system should be elevated above the City 25

30 Reorganize the north BRT route to run along Wharncliffe Road Main terminal should be between Richmond and Wellington to integrate with rail and intercity bus Are the buses electric, gas, or diesel? I am under the impression that there has not been a lot of thought given to how the existing routes will interface with BRT to maintain and grow ridership I would like to meet with a representative in person to discuss impacts to my business A total of 20 s were received over the January Public Information Centre #5 comment period, which was open from January 24, 2018 to February 7, A summary of the s received is provided in Exhibit All s can be found in Appendix H. Exhibit s Received SUMMARY OF S RECEIVED JANUARY 24 TH FEBRUARY 7 TH This plan is unneeded and should be put on hold. All we need is fewer stops, more bus pullovers, more express buses, better signal timing, etc. (4 s) Comment sheet submission (2 s) Questions regarding impacts to property We should get the federal government to restrict the times of service of CP There was no information about cost per passenger at the PIC and no pilot project was announced The information I received at the PIC was very helpful and appreciated The presentation was disappointing because it was unclear which decisions the team was seeking input on I would like information regarding the anticipated construction timeline I would like separated bike lanes included in the system Since the buses will still be help up at the CP crossing, the system will not be rapid Can you send me information related to automobile use after a rapid transit system has been built in comparable jurisdictions? Please send me a map of the BRT route through Western University and what is the timeline for BRT to go into effect? If my property is expropriated I will be against this project Snow hinders pedestrians and every effort should be made to clear sidewalks after snowfall events. If this was done less people would need cars Preserve one side of Wellington Road and get developers opinions on the potential redevelopment of the properties on the other side of Wellington Road Submission of feedback from Old East Village community 26

31 11 Summary The PICs events were well-attended, with representation from all areas of the City. Input was received through surveys and comments sheets handed out at the registration table at the PIC events and through s sent to the Shift account and Project Team members. Comments and questions still largely focused on the rationale of the project. Some input was received on specific alignment and design issues. These comments will be used to refine design concepts and identify mitigation measures. Comments will also inform the evaluation of design alternatives. 27