<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Eleanor,<div><br></div><div>I hadn't realized how active your are in our community until I did a web search. -- great work!<br><div><br></div><div>Your Record letter, 'LRT is needed"</div><a href="https://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/4049542-lrt-is-needed/">https://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/4049542-lrt-is-needed/</a><div>is at least very well written -- your expressive talents are extraordinary. But your key "facts" and personal views are somewhat flawed at least because of these statements or yours -- and I indicate why:</div></div><div><br></div><div>1. "... it would cost as much to break a contract as to fulfill it." -- check out the reatively low LRT contract breaking cost in Ottawa;</div><div><br></div><div>2. "... I'm sorry to see so much suspicion and even resentment about it." -- most people correctly sense this project will serve them little but they will be burdened by the excessive tax increases;</div><div><br></div><div>3. "Cambridge should not feel slighted." -- Cambridge knows that the Region's current LRT plan is grossly unfair because it must pay the full tax increase for an LRT that they are excluded from initially and may never get;</div><div><br></div><div>4. "All these improvements will benefit car drivers too ... ." -- few middle class car drivers will be inspired to use a poorly designed LRT-centred transit system which is too slow, too circuitous, and insufficiently extensive;</div><div><br></div><div>5."Cambridge ... is still too sprawling for the LRT to be practical now." -- </div><div>i) an LTR Intensification Corridor is needed <b>now</b> on Hespler Road to spur the much greater change required to transform it into the Region's preferred type of streetscape (multi- story, multi-use buildings, retail on 1st level, close to the road, etc.) and </div><div>ii) LRT ridership success -- and LRT project success -- requires their section of the the Region's historic rail corridor be used <b>now</b> to create a very inexpensive Northfield+ to Ainslie Terminal LRT Commuter Corridor <b>(like Portland actually does</b>) so as to attract longer distance commuters by its great time savings over an extended length (no time consuming, uncomfortable, stigmatizing, ... aBRT buses thank you).</div><div><br></div><div>6. "But even 10 years from now, we'll be glad we built it." -- for the reasons already stated, and many more, people will realize (even before the 2014 election) that the design of the current LRT plan would birth a creation so far from the great innovative expectations that Ontario, Canada and the World has for us and that we have for ourselves -- the people will act accordingly when they next vote!</div><div><br></div><div>At least because of the project's complexity -- and the time scarcity of our technologically competent -- not many realize the many faults in cost-effectiveness that the current design of the LRT plan suffers. Even fewer realize how few innovative technological precedents from the transit (Portland, Ballard, ...) and energy (Hydrogenics, Enbridge, ...) sectors would be required to<b> </b>integrate into the design of the current LRT plan so as to create a World Class (ultra-cost-effective, ultra-sustainable, ...) LRT-centred transit system.</div><div><br></div><div>And yes, "an LRT is needed" but one enhanced by proven innovative technologies that insufficiently knowledgeable and fearful staff seem eager to block -- and mostly one person, Transportation and Environmental Services Commissioner Thomas Schmidt. (I have recommended in one of my very detailed LRT articles to Regional Councillors that both he and Nancy Button be fired -- Nancy is gone but Thomas continues to captain our regional titanic). </div><div><b><br></b></div><div><b>Unrecognized by most CTS- mesmerized Regional Councilors (and LRT cheerleaders), this looks like a case of the "wrong person's" unacceptable self-interest and lack of sufficiency competency putting at risk the whole region's public, environmental and economic interest!</b></div><div><br></div><div>I do have great regard for those who put forth much effort to improve our society & environment. But in very complex technological projects, much time must be spent at least in analysis, otherwise one can naively be doing in effect public relations for a poorly designed LRT plan.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div>Robert</div><div><br></div><div>PS: Somehow a miracle is required to help the "blind" see -- I told Regional Council in a delegation presentation about two years ago that I can empathize with the little boy who kept trying to tell everybody that the Empereur has no cloths. Today I might be more specific in saying, "Empereur Thomas Schmidt is riding the white elephant LRT plan (even though he lacks the clothes of LRT knowhow and experience) where an elite few would garner most of the benefits while the rest would pay most of the costs -- and these costs would be higher than estimated because much smaller numbers of full-fare users would necessitate not only greater subsidization of operations but also subsidization of capital loan repayments. "</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></body></html>