09-30-2017, 08:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2017, 11:53 AM by Pheidippides.)
New report on IHT to Hub trail with same recommendation.
I would encourage anyone with an interest in seeing alternative 1 or 1A realized to contact your regional councillor before Tuesday and at least have them insert an addendum to the motion that his a defined timeline.
i.e.
Instead of:
Direct staff to pursue planning opportunities in the future to realize the Alternative 1/1A and Alternative 2 alignments as properties in the vicinity are redeveloped.
Do this instead:
Direct staff to report back annually on the pursuit of planning opportunities in the future and to realize the Alternative 1/1A and Alternative 2 alignments as properties in the vicinity are redeveloped within 5 years.
Also, for alternative 1/1A why is the AirBoss property considered a potential full property taking? It looks like a 5m right of way and a 3m trail would fit between the CN right of way and the building. It seems odd that they are willing to bend over backwards to make the staff recommendation "work," but similar obstacles for other alternatives are deemed impossible situations.
Finally, can someone remind me why the MUT is on the north side of Waverly and not the south? That introduces an unnecessary additional crossing at the tricky curve at Gage/Waverly. Fewer property owners to deal with for expropriation?
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.