Rapid Transit

[crhayes]

I actually agree with everything they are saying. They are being especially lenient in going with split Main/King operations. Two way LRT on that tiny slice of King is going to kill the traffic flow. As it is in it's current configuration, traffic gets REALLY bad at rush hour, and pretty congested at other times of the day.

I really think the best course of action is putting all of the LRT on Main St with 1 lane of traffic in each direction on either side. Possibly street parking on the South side.
I agree. At first I supported LRT on King because having a line run through the middle of the city (Gore Park) would be extravagant... it would truly feel like a city center. However, the more I think about it the more I agree that Main street would be better suited for LRT. King st., IMO, is already doing better than Main street. International Village and the businesses on the south side of Gore Park are doing fairly well. Main street is a little bit of a mess, and it seems desolate and severely underutilized.

No on-street parking on King would also be a problem in the International Village. Two way traffic on Main with LRT would really help to liven the street and make it more pedestrian friendly.

Importantly I think we could also see intensification of businesses along Main between Dundurn and Hess. Some former houses along that stretch (which are, for the most part, well taken care of) are already home to Dr.'s, Spas, clothing stores and restaurants, and although there isn't a solid street wall I see a lot of potential along that stretch. It also has close proximity to Hess and Locke street and would be an excellent area for condo developments and density intensification, only made sweeter and more attractive with LRT.

[SteelTown]

Rapid Transit survey results

January 13, 2010
http://dailynews.mcmaster.ca/story.cfm?id=6566

Results of the recent rapid transit survey show the McMaster community strongly supports a proposed light rail system for Hamilton. Respondents also indicated they prefer a campus terminal that is within reasonable walking distance of main buildings, provides connections to existing transit hubs and is respectful of the Campus Plan.

More than 1,500 students, faculty and staff completed the survey which was organized by the City of Hamilton and McMaster. They were asked to share their transit practices and preferences and provide opinions about Hamilton's proposed rapid transit initiative.

Survey respondents were asked about their preferred mode of rapid transportation. Nearly two-thirds chose light rail transit as their preferred choice.

The survey also found a light rail line could change commuting habits. More than 85 per cent of respondents who don't currently use public transit to get to McMaster said a light rail transit line would cause them to re-consider how they commute.

Community members were asked to rank the importance of a variety of factors the University should consider when planning the location of a rapid transit terminal on campus. Reasonable walking distance to main buildings, connection to other transit hubs and being respectful of the pedestrian priority area as outlined in the campus plan were ranked highest.

"We are thrilled with the tremendous survey response from the McMaster community and look forward to future consultation with stakeholders throughout all phases of the rapid transit planning process," says Jill Stephen, the City of Hamilton's acting director, Strategic Planning and Rapid Transit."

During the input phase, the University received important feedback from members of the campus research community about possible terminal locations. More information is being sought about the potential impacts of light rail transit on research labs and equipment.

"The survey results clearly show the community is eager to have rapid transit service campus," says Roger Trull vice-president University Advancement. "Once the City has finalized its plans and routes, the University's next step will be to determine an appropriate terminal location that is convenient and provides connections to other transit, while being respectful of both the campus plan and needs of our research community."

The City is working with Metrolinx, the provincial body responsible for expanding transit in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. Hamilton's priority is a Light Rail Transit (LRT) system which includes a McMaster to Eastgate Square line along the present B-line corridor. The City is awaiting a final recommendation from Metrolinx for the project.

For more information as rapid transit plans evolve, please visit www.hamilton.ca/rapid-transit or contact the City's rapid transit team at rapidtransit@hamilton.ca or 905-546-2424, ext. 2553.

[SteelTown]

Rapid Transit Office letter to Downtown and International Village BIA’s

http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/02AAC3A1-A1AC-4B35-B33E-981283AA74CA/0/DBIAandIVletterlegalpaper.pdf

[omro]

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=158810

[markbarbera]

Hey welcome back to the SSP Omro! Noticed you haven't posted for a while...

[omro]

Hey welcome back to the SSP Omro! Noticed you haven't posted for a while...

Thanks! Well spotted. I'd stepped away from the forum for a while. So that this thread doesn't get off topic, I'll post some info in a thread I started when I get home from work.

I was encouraged to return when I had noticed the article in the Spec about LRT. I've always maintained that Main would be a better choice than King for LRT downtown, being that it needs the economic spin off way more than King, so I'd remind people of the poll I started way back when ;)

I've always maintained that Hamilton needs LRT and I'll have it anywhere sensible rather than not, but I still think Main makes better sense than King.

[mdsweet]

One of the funny things about traffic is that when you reduce available lanes on a busy road, congestion doesn't necessarily increase dramatically. Often drivers find alternative routes that work better. Traffic flow, congestion etc aren't linear processes that respond in a direct or indirect way. Its very organic.
Not to mention the fact that if we are serious about improving transit in the city and reducing automobile use, then half-measures aren't going to accomplish the goal. The argument being made by business owners smacks of "business as usual" despite making a big change in our transit service. Concern about traffic flow through the area emphasizes getting THROUGH the area. The downtown should be the destination rather than the route to another destination. These are all the mindsets that need to change in order for high order transit and downtown renewal to succeed.

[SteelTown]

Light rail transit line finds support on Mac campus

January 14, 2010
Danielle Wong
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/704788

A recent survey of the McMaster University community found faculty, students and staff support a proposed Hamilton light rail system.

More than 85 per cent of the respondents who do not currently use public transit to travel to campus said they would consider changing their commuting habits if a light rail transit line was available.

The survey, conducted online and in person on campus for two weeks in December, also showed about two-thirds of participants preferred light rail transit as their mode of rapid transportation.

About 1,500 people participated in the voluntary survey organized by the city and university.

The university has a student population of about 22,000.

McMaster's vice-president of university advancement said yesterday he was pleased with the results. "We were encouraged by the tremendous support for the light rail system in particular," Roger Trull said.

"I think (the proposed system) would certainly have a positive effect on efforts we're already making on sustainability," he said. "And it would be easier for students to feel part of the broader Hamilton community."

Fourth-year life science and computer science student Affaf Ahtisham agreed.

"Commuting to and from campus is pretty inconvenient as it is right now," Ahtisham said, adding it takes him 45 minutes to bus to campus from his home on the Mountain.

The proposed $650-million project is waiting approval from the province and its regional transportation authority, Metrolinx. The project would include a McMaster-to-Eastgate Square line along the HSR's present B-line corridor.

Jill Stephen, the city's acting director of strategic planning and rapid transit, said the feedback comes at a great time because the project is still in its planning and design stage.

Concern has been raised around the proposed terminal's location conflicting with McMaster's campus plan, which protects its pedestrian core and pushes transit to the perimeter.

Trull said the survey only asked students to discuss proposed locations on the edge of campus and students showed preference for one within walking distance to main buildings.

More discussion is needed about the line's exact route, Trull said, adding lab and university researchers have "sensitive equipment" on campus they need to make sure is not affected by the transit line.

[SteelTown]

Welcome mdsweet!

[highwater]

One of the funny things about traffic is that when you reduce available lanes on a busy road, congestion doesn't necessarily increase dramatically. Often drivers find alternative routes that work better. Traffic flow, congestion etc aren't linear processes that respond in a direct or indirect way. Its very organic.
Not to mention the fact that if we are serious about improving transit in the city and reducing automobile use, then half-measures aren't going to accomplish the goal. The argument being made by business owners smacks of "business as usual" despite making a big change in our transit service. Concern about traffic flow through the area emphasizes getting THROUGH the area. The downtown should be the destination rather than the route to another destination. These are all the mindsets that need to change in order for high order transit and downtown renewal to succeed.

QFT.

[highwater]

Welcome mdsweet!

QFT!

[thistleclub]

One hand clapping?

Light-rail transit study a year away (http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/708546)

January 20, 2010
By Meredith MacLeod
Hamilton Spectator

It will be more than a year before the traffic impacts of running light-rail transit through the heart of the city are known.

A detailed study of everything from the impacts on cars and property owners to where stations should be located and what kind of technology should be used, will not be complete until March 2011.

The tendering for the planning, design and engineering report will close Feb. 8.

The city’s transit group has proposed a B-Line running east and west on King Street from Eastgate Square to McMaster University be the top priority for funding from Metrolinx.

It’s expected the Metrolinx board will say yes or no to light-rail for Hamilton at its Feb. 19 meeting.

[SteelTown]

Here's the tender.....

C11-12-10

Available
1/14/2010
Closing
2/9/2010

Proposal for Professional Consultant Services for Rapid Transit Preliminary Design and Feasibility Study

OVERVIEW
Hamilton’s Rapid Transit Team anticipates initiating the planning, design and engineering stage of its rapid transit work for the B-Line and the feasibility planning for the A-Line in Winter 2010. Building on the work led by the City of Hamilton and Metrolinx to date, the key objectives outlined in this document are:

Part 1: to advance the design of an east-west rapid transit line (B-Line) from Eastgate Square/Centennial Parkway to McMaster University, taking the project to a maximum state of implementation readiness. For the purposes of this study, the work program will be based on two-way traffic with a two-way light rail transitway in the median, utilizing King Street through Hamilton’s downtown from Highway 403 through to the intersection of Main Street and King Street (the Delta).

Part 2: to complete the feasibility component for an north/south rapid transit line (A-Line) from the waterfront to the Hamilton International Airport in order to identify the preferred alternative that aims to optimize ridership and corridor development opportunities, minimize project costs and provide a seamless connection to the B-line (Main/King) Rapid Transit corridor. The feasibility study may also identify the local environmental conditions within the various transit project alternatives, to aid in the selection of the preferred corridor.

Although separate and distinct corridors, where possible and where required, studies from each part of the workplan should be co-ordinated in order to ensure compatibility between systems recommended for the A-Line and the B-Line and convenient connections between each corridor.

OPTIONAL INFORMATION MEETING
Due to space the City is requesting that one representative per lead consulting firm take part in the optional information meeting.

Time: 1:00 p.m. Hamilton time
Date: Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Location: Board Room 400A,
77 James Street N Suite 400, Hamilton, ON (see location map attached)

Proponent’s not able to attend will have the option of participating in the Optional Information Meeting via conference call. Proponents are required to follow the instructions below:

JOINING A MEET-ME CONFERENCE
Local – Dial: 905-546-2424, and the 4-digit conference bridge extension 8546
Long Distance – Dial: 1-877-446-2424, and the 4-digit conference bridge extension 8546

· Buyer: Lesley Parker-Bowen - 905.546.2424, Ext. 5973
· Number of addenda issued: 1 1
· Document Fee: $40.00

[SteelTown]

Answers to LRT questions long way off
Study into downtown traffic flow won't be finished until March 2011

January 21, 2010
Meredith Macleod
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/708940

While the city has set its sights on light rail running east and west on King Street, it will be more than a year before the traffic impacts are known.

A detailed study of everything from the impacts on property owners and the potential economic uplift to where stations should be located and what kind of technology should be used will not be complete until March 2011.

A big part of the planning, design and engineering study currently being tendered will be a "microsimulation" of traffic flow through dozens of intersections, with the big question being where will traffic go if light rail transit (LRT) cuts off King at Wellington.

The study will need to look at turning patterns, traffic queues at red lights, time to clear intersections once a light turns green and impacts on emergency response times.

The city has said a light-rail line running east and west on King Street from Eastgate Square to McMaster University is its top priority for funding from the province's transit authority Metrolinx.

A part of the city's proposal is the possibility of removing all street parking along the stretch, shutting down King between Wellington to west of Mary to cars, and restricting any left turns to intersections with traffic lights.

Those changes are opposed by the two business improvement areas in the downtown core, which advocate splitting the east and west lines along King and Main.

Not only does the city want to see detailed traffic data for every intersection along the 16 kilometres of King Street, they want the successful consultant to study the impacts along all the other major routes, too -- Main, Barton, Cannon and north-south routes such as Sherman and John -- to see if the capacity is there to take cars avoiding King.

"Basically, we told them to look at everything from the base of the escarpment to Barton," said Jill Stephen, the city's director of strategic and environmental planning, who is heading the transit project.

The tendering for the report will close Feb. 8.

It's expected the Metrolinx board will say yes or no to light rail for Hamilton at its Feb. 19 meeting.

Stephen says it's projected 30 to 40 per cent of vehicles would avoid the King Street corridor, at least in part, if trains were running along it.

Close to 9,000 cars on a typical day make the trek west on King at Wellington Street, for instance.

"Traffic is so vital to this," said Stephen. "We know not everyone will take the LRT or can walk or cycle to where they want to go. King and Main are the main arteries to get across the downtown."

According to preliminary projections, LRT on King and making Main Street two-way would increase traffic on York, Aberdeen, Main and Dundurn, but it's unknown by how much.

Transportation expert Richard Soberman says neighbourhoods often object to any reduction in lanes for cars, even though transit is generally agreed to be the best, most sustainable way to deal with congestion and pollution.

He points out that the conversion of a streetcar line along Toronto's St. Clair Avenue to light rail was held up for a year because of objections to losing car lanes and parking.

Provincial legislation, such as Places to Grow, and many municipal planning policies, including Hamilton's, call for intensification in urban development.

"Everyone agrees with it unless they're the ones being intensified," said Soberman, former chair of civil engineering at the University of Toronto.

According to an opinion survey released by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities yesterday, 30 per cent of Canadians cited improving local transit as a way to improve quality of life in their cities.

That came in third behind improving local infrastructure at 57 per cent and cutting taxes at 45 per cent.

One in 10 Canadians said inadequate local transit was the top risk to the nation's economy.

[highwater]

They're really married to King St., aren't they? You'd think as they're just in the study stage, and it's such a long way off, they would at least take a sideways glance at Main.

[markbarbera]

My thoughts exactly. Months ago I emailed the Hamilton Transit task force asking for a copy of the study that determined King as more favourable than Main, and have not been given a response of any kind. I suspect this decision is being based on conjecture than hard fact, and this disturbs me deeply.

[omro]

I'm definitely disappointed that they aren't looking at alternate route options. Being obsessed with King Street solely worries me. For every decision that we make, we should always have a plan B in case our first plan isn't feasible. It's too narrow a vision.

I'm concerned about things being set up for failure...

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Letting politicians decide where transit will go is a key part of the shift from the old EA process to the new compressed one. In the past too often EAs just became multiheaded monsters, trying to be all things for all people.

[omro]

^ Letting politicians decide where transit will go is a key part of the shift from the old EA process to the new compressed one. In the past too often EAs just became multiheaded monsters, trying to be all things for all people.

While streamlined processes are great. They are. It would be nice to have a justification for the single-option approach rather than including an impact comparison across alternate routes.

[highwater]

^ Letting politicians decide where transit will go...

My understanding is this is coming mainly from staff at the moment.

[highwater]

Months ago I emailed the Hamilton Transit task force asking for a copy of the study that determined King as more favourable than Main, and have not been given a response of any kind.

Have you followed up? I'd be very interested to see that study also.

[realcity]

It should be on Main/Queenston.

[SteelTown]

The Olympic Line, started service today.

jIIKgSVuJgo

This is the model the B-Line is likely going to get so definitely watch the video. From my understanding Bombardier will be inviting Hamilton's rep to showcase the vehicle.

[omro]

I'm being told that the intention to pedestrianise King from International Village to Bay, which will result from putting the Light Rail both ways though that section of the downtown is part of a greater scheme to rebrand that zone as an inner city Mall. It isn't a new idea and is apparently one that the city has considered time and time again over the years, only to back off because I'm also told that, while this idea is good in theory and has been successful in other cities, most noteably European ones, Hamilton just isn't ready for it.

The culture and the attitude of "car is king" will just result in a belief that if King and the downtown are harder to get to by car then why bother. They believe that the downtown will, as a result, get a lot worse, before it will get better and that the LRT should go on Main, so that the fragile equilibrium that exists on King at this time, isn't disturbed to its detriment.

The true PR benefit of LRT, which is going to be lost here, at least initially, is to make people believe that their ability to get to the downtown has been enhanced: Yes they can take car, bus and now the new shiny LRT. However, by completely denying car access to a section of downtown for the LRT you'll have people complaining from the start, damn that LRT, I can't get to downtown by car anymore if I need to quickly, I'll go to "insert name of alternate shopping destination accessible by car".

That's not to say you can't one day pedestrianise parts of King around Gore Park and International Village. However, you can't do this before the area has enough "destinations" to draw peope to them, which it currently does not, and before enough time has passed for the new ways to get downtown have both sunk in to the collective consciousness and been appreciated as alternatives to taking a car to the downtown.

[flar]

I agree with what omro said, and I'll add that Ottawa is probably as ready as any city in Canada for a pedestrian mall, but it has failed miserably here. Below is a photo of Sparks St. last Saturday. Mind you it is filled with pedestrians on weekdays, but they are just office workers walking from point A to point B.

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/2010/downtown_ott/00223.jpg
the rest of downtown Ottawa: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=177688


Ottawa is a thriving city, every commercial district except Sparks St. is vibrant and filled with stores. Transit use is among the highest in the country (I see executive level people with 6 figure salaries on the bus every day). But Sparks St has abandoned stores and is almost deserted outside business hours.

[omro]

And just to note... people, who remember that far back, will know that I favour pedestrianised areas. They are very common in the UK, especially within city centres. However, this opinion has been tempered by my observations and now greater understanding of Hamilton. I don't believe King Street will be able to survive pedestrianisation until it has evolved into an 18-24hr destination that can sustain it.

To bring things back to the point. LRT should go on Main, allowing King to maintain it's status quo and benefit from the spill-off from the development dollars that LRT will bring, which would result in an evolution without harming what is currently there. And once a magnetic business, shopping and nightlife zone has been created, which can draw foot traffic to the core at all hours, then pedestrianisation could be considered.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Splitting your 'high street' and your 'transit street' works well in Calgary. The pedestrian mall on 8th there allows cars in the evenings however, and just enough parking as a teaser to get people down to the restaurants.

[SteelTown]

Sparks St doesn't have two way LRT going along it. That's potentially thousands of customers zipping on by each day. Ours will only be a small section of King St - John to Wellington (one city block).

[flar]

Sparks St doesn't have two way LRT going along it. That's potentially thousands of customers zipping on by each day. Ours will only be a small section of King St - John to Wellington.

Buffalo's does, and it's deader than Sparks. Having people on the street is one thing, having destinations on the street, as omro says, is another. Sparks is packed on weekdays, but they're just coming off the transitway and walking to their offices. They're not buying anything, it's not a destination, it's just en route to somewhere else.

[omro]

Sparks St doesn't have two way LRT going along it. That's potentially thousands of customers zipping on by each day. Ours will only be a small section of King St - John to Wellington.

True enough, but what I wrote does say that even that will be a challenge for King, especially to begin with during construction and the fall out from no car traffic until the community consciousness includes a car free zone. Hamilton's downtown isn't yet ready for that.

At the moment, the car visitors can come from all directions. The LRT is only going to bring people in from the East and West. If downtown becomes harder to access by car, the ingrained car culture in this city will result in people writing off the downtown as a destination.

It's chicken and the egg. What to do first? Build a vibrant downtown that you then make more pedestrian friendly to maintain and enhance the vibrancy or make a more pedestrian friendly downtown in the hope that is creates a vibrant place to be.

[SteelTown]

Bufffalo is basically a whole Main St and ours will be a short one city block. The rest will have cars and LRT combined just not the International Village.

[markbarbera]

Deciding to run LRT on King with exclusive LRT/pedestrian on King downtown would help maintain the City's near-perfect track record of taking a golden opportunity and completely squandering it.

The Hamilton Transit task force should be dragged by the ear to Buffalo and shown how "well" the exclusive LRT/Pedestrian zone through their downtown worked for them. Buffalo learned their lesson the hard way, and are now reintroducing automobile traffic and curbside parking in their downtown alongside the rail line. We need to take in the lessons learned there before we dig up the ground and create the same mistakes. If we don't we deserve the crap we pile upon ourselves.

[harls]

I agree with what omro said, and I'll add that Ottawa is probably as ready as any city in Canada for a pedestrian mall, but it has failed miserably here. Below is a photo of Sparks St. last Saturday. Mind you it is filled with pedestrians on weekdays, but they are just office workers walking from point A to point B.

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/2010/downtown_ott/00223.jpg
the rest of downtown Ottawa: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=177688


Ottawa is a thriving city, every commercial district except Sparks St. is vibrant and filled with stores. Transit use is among the highest in the country (I see executive level people with 6 figure salaries on the bus every day). But Sparks St has abandoned stores and is almost deserted outside business hours.

And here it is on a weekday, at lunch hour, during a hot summer day - at pretty much the exact same spot as your photo. Can you spot the difference? ;)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2661/3765693477_87e323b62b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/blix613/3765693477/in/set-72157594247296208/)

[omro]

I see your point, however there aren't a pair of LRT tracks requiring people to get out of the way whenever the streetcar trundles through. You really don't want pedestrians getting in the way of your transit anymore than you want cars getting in the way of it. A pedestrian and LRT shared King will still have a laneway for the LRT and people will have to stick the sidewalks for safety.

The LRT really should be in dedicated pedestrian free lanes on Main.

[flar]

And here it is on a weekday, at lunch hour, during a hot summer day - at pretty much the exact same spot as your photo. Can you spot the difference? ;)


I acknowledge it is filled with people during business hours, but it's still a failure as a retail street and as a destination, especially considering the large amount of tourism in the area and more successful commercial areas close by: Elgin, Bank, Rideau and the Market.

[hamtransithistory]

And here it is on a weekday, at lunch hour, during a hot summer day - at pretty much the exact same spot as your photo. Can you spot the difference? ;)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2661/3765693477_87e323b62b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/blix613/3765693477/in/set-72157594247296208/)

The difference is the words 'lunch hour':(

I've been on Sparks street on a weekday evening in June, and you could fire a cannon and not worry about hitting anyone.

I would like to have the LRT on King for sentimental reasons, but I'm forced to agree that this part of King is too economically fragile to have several years of construction followed by a ban on cars.

King is so narrow in the Int. Village that even a partial solution (i.e LRT in mixed traffic with priority signals, except during rush hours when cars are banned from King between Wellington and Mary) probably wouldn't work.

Most good pedestrian areas have some sort of combination of the following:
:cheers: :jester: :leek: (can't find one for eats)
And right now the Int. Village doesn't have enough of these

[thistleclub]

Sparks St doesn't have two way LRT going along it. That's potentially thousands of customers zipping on by each day. Ours will only be a small section of King St - John to Wellington (one city block).

Wellington to John contains five or six blocks, approximately the same distance from John to Caroline. Wellington to Mary contains three or four blocks that represent a quarter of the downtown (Wellington > Queen) length of King -- about the length of the southern face of Jackson Square from James to Bay (presumably that "short one city block").

A two-lane LRT line makes IV car-free without question, unless you remove sidewalks, that stretch is essentially two-lane as it stands. I always assumed they'd stop LRT-only at Mary because of the Crowne Plaza, and that they'd use the pedestrianized Gore as a fulcrum to extend the car-free zone to James at a later date.

[crhayes]

I see your point, however there aren't a pair of LRT tracks requiring people to get out of the way whenever the streetcar trundles through. You really don't want pedestrians getting in the way of your transit anymore than you want cars getting in the way of it. A pedestrian and LRT shared King will still have a laneway for the LRT and people will have to stick the sidewalks for safety.

The LRT really should be in dedicated pedestrian free lanes on Main.

I agree.

If LRT is on main I think they could have a "gateway" to the international village. Put a major LRT stop on Main in front of, for example, Spring St. and turn it into pedestrian only street from Main to King. Put up a nice entrance sign (like for Downtown or Hess Village) welcoming people to the international village. That way you can draw people from LRT into the international village in a friendly way.

[omro]

This line from the letter to the BIAs worries me:

It is important to note that, at this time, no decisions have been made by City Council, other than the endorsement of Light Rail Transit (LRT) over Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and to pursue 100% capital funding from the Province.

What if the province says no to 100% funding...

Again, I'm feeling that LRT on King was not thought through. There are just so many options.

These assumptions are based on numerous study findings, City staff input, consultation with experts in rapid transit planning and public input.

What if the Feasibility Study, after a year says that King is just unfeasible... or only feasible if shoe-horned into place.

I have this dread that we're being set up for a disappointment.

[harls]

Sorry.. I wasn't trying to be an ass. I know Sparks is empty most of the time.. didn't mean any ill-will. If I had taken that photo an hour later, it would be a ghost town!

[flar]

Sorry.. I wasn't trying to be an ass. I know Sparks is empty most of the time.. didn't mean any ill-will. If I had taken that photo an hour later, it would be a ghost town!

No worries, we're never sure when people are joking or being serious (or both) in the Hamilton local.

[eemy]

You have to keep in mind that Hamilton isn't saddled with the plague of urbanity known as the NCC. The failure of Sparks Street is as much a symptom of the NCC's control as it is an emblem of the failure of pedestrian malls.

[coalminecanary]

what if it ducked over to king william at wellington - that street could be a cool pedestrian/transit/cycling corridor. king could be 2 way traffic. and at jackson square, blow the LRT right through diagonally and have an indoor platform there before it hooks back up onto King in front of the convention centre.

does that make everyone happy? haha

[emge]

The Spec's milking this for all it's worth. Pedestrianization of the IV is still a tiny "maybe" in the overall plan, not THE plan.

Everyone's jumping on it as the one sticking point - because the rest of this LRT plan is too stinkin' good for the city to complain about.

A two-lane LRT line makes IV car-free without question, unless you remove sidewalks, that stretch is essentially two-lane as it stands.

This seems to be a common assumption (not to pick on you personally) but I don't think this is the case. Currently, the bump-outs for street parking are currently the only thing making the IV two-lane. Remove them and you can get one lane of traffic in either direction and LRT in the middle.

The choice will really be between
- taking out the parking bump-outs to allow LRT in the median with one lane of traffic each way
- re-routing the LRT along KW for that stretch.

You won't keep the bump-outs without cars being able to drive and park there (its nice to have that extra space for pedestrians, but they were put in for parking purposes, correct?) and you won't take the bump-outs out unless you're trying to maintain traffic flow down the street.

[omro]

I have to debate you there Emge,

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/downtown2008/00220.jpg
I'm referencing one of Flar's awesome pics again from this tour (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=144966).

The entrance to IV at Wellington will have to be lost if you put two lines of LRT down King and still want to get two lanes of traffic, you will have to have significant clearance. Plus there may have to be a huge infrastructure cost of taking down all the lights and putting them back up again and the sidewalks may have to be narrowed to allow sufficiant clearance for two lanes of traffic and LRT.

Also, do you really want, what is essentially a two lane road in places, turned back into a 4 lane road? Even with the car parking spaces, the moving cars are a good distance away from pedestrians. Your suggestion will have the cars and pedestrians right next to each other again.

Just curious, would you be happy to see LRT on Main?

I have to point out I'm still not a fan of LRT in the centre of a roadway. That means people have to cross both sides of a road to stand in the middle of traffic waiting for the streetcar. Plus to build the stops in the centre of a road will take up space from the road, which could easily be incorporated into the space used on an existing sidewalk.

[thistleclub]

Currently, the bump-outs for street parking are currently the only thing making the IV two-lane. Remove them and you can get one lane of traffic in either direction and LRT in the middle.

The choice will really be between
- taking out the parking bump-outs to allow LRT in the median with one lane of traffic each way
- re-routing the LRT along KW for that stretch.

You won't keep the bump-outs without cars being able to drive and park there (its nice to have that extra space for pedestrians, but they were put in for parking purposes, correct?) and you won't take the bump-outs out unless you're trying to maintain traffic flow down the street.

Certainly not taking it personally. Appreciate the courtesy, though.

I overlooked the southern bumpouts. I concede that by tearing out all of the streetscaping and trees along that half-kilometer stretch, that you could make IV more respectful of traditional traffic flow. Preferable to this -- and I would think no more complicated than a dogleg along KW -- might be reducing twin lines to a single for that six-block stretch, and sorting the schedule so that that corridor would only ever be frequented by a single train. That way you might even be able to broaden the sidewalks and make the neighbourhood more consumer-friendly.

[highwater]

I'd prefer to see LRT on Main, but if having it on King means we lose that embarrassing arch, then I'm all for King.

[crhayes]

I'd prefer to see LRT on Main, but if having it on King means we lose that embarrassing arch, then I'm all for King.

What's wrong with the arch? I don't see anything wrong with it...

[emge]

As long as we get LRT, it can go on either street :)

Main has advantages for traffic flow and revitalization through parts of the downtown and proximity to MacNab. (And probably just having a node on the outside of McMaster, not having to be routed through, which I think is quite unnecessary).

For King, I like the visibility and connection it has to Gore and King/James, and there's significantly more retail improvement that could happen on the downtown stretch, though I concede east/west of downtown that point loses value.

I'm not sure what's the best in the end for the city as far as LRT route, but I wouldn't find the IV to be my main consideration in where it goes.

The arch... I'm OK with losing the arch - in the big picture I don't think it matters much. CRHayes, I believe Highwater was speaking to the "boundary" it creates between downtown and not-downtown (am I correct?) I also find that pigeons also crap all over the sidewalk on the north side from the arch, which is more than a little unpleasant.

The bump-outs... I wasn't here when the bump-outs were put in, so I can't speak to it before - but from what I understand, the bump-outs were a relatively new addition - so losing them doesn't faze me. The relative losses from removing the curb area/trees/etc would be regrettable, but I think more than counterbalanced by the benefits of LRT (and some creative new streetscaping - all is not lost without that space). It can't handle pedestrianization at this point IMHO but that's pretty much a moot pouint.

I live a couple minutes' walk away, and IV is still in one of the poorest neighbourhoods in Canada, and what thrives in the IV is largely destination businesses, not locally-frequented ones. An influx of new customers at a node will help them more than anything else.

[realcity]

I prefer Main too. Look on a map, Main is perfectly straight and turns into Queenston. It'd be the fastest and most direct route from Mac to Centennial.
Main St needs the help more the King. And King will still benefit 100 meters away. Main could have 2-way dedicated LRT rails, two-lanes of traffic each direction and bigger side-walks.


ANd I also hate that stupid arch.. so bush league. Can't people see that's downtown?

[highwater]

ANd I also hate that stupid arch.. so bush league. Can't people see that's downtown?

Bingo.

It's parochial, patronizing, and far from adding to the streetscape, it just calls attention to what our downtown is still lacking, starting with confidence.

It's out of scale, a giant waste of resources, and was done with little or no public consultation.

I could go on, but I think you get the drift. :yuck:

[Jon Dalton]

Here's what Sparks Street looked like when I was there.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4302296693_25010b4197.jpg

I'm not convinced one way or the other on pedestrianization at this point but a few points to add to the debate:

Where's the residential around Sparks? It's surrounded by government and office buildings and far from any residential neighbourhoods but I'm not sure of the state of condo development in the vicinity. How about upper floor apartments?

King Street on the other hand, as far as the buildings that are occupied, is mostly residential upper floors and has residential neighbourhoods immediately to the north and south. Not high income neighbourhoods, but a source of pedestrian traffic and good housing stock to fuel a resurgence in middle income homebuying if LRT kickstarts the investment cycle.

The fervency of some of these business owners' objections also begs the question - is your business really worth saving? We do have some gems in the IV but for the most part the retail is pure bottom of the barrel. If pedestrianization may fail, there might not be much to lose in trying. Either way, LRT construction won't happen without a few casualties.

King St. between Catharine and Wellington already has a pretty good streetscape: Ample sidewalks, only two traffic lanes, curbside parking, street furniture, mostly continuous streetwalls, and a reasonable ratio of building height to street width. It already has enough urbanity points that we can't blame its design for its lack of business success. This particular stretch of King has the exact same layout as thriving commercial streets in other Canadian cities - two lanes of one-way traffic, two lanes of street parking, and mostly three storey buildings. Yet it struggles, and demographics are the only reasonable answer as to why.

The question in my mind is whether the full transit / pedestrian mall treatment would offer enough improvement aesthetically and functionally to alter the demographics enough for this district to finally turn the corner.

[coalminecanary]

Demographics could be one reason for the struggle, but there's something else... I live closer to IV than to any other downtown "area", but I rarely shop there. Meanwhile, I do shop at other downtown destinations.

A serious problem with IV is that there are no essentials offered there. How about a small grocery store? Hardware store? Drug store? Bank? These kinds of places could draw people form the surrounding neighbourhoods who are currently more likely to go east or west to get their day-to-day errands done.

Many of our downtown strips have the same problem, but others (especially locke, and to a lesser extent james north) have built a marketable "theme" that draws people in, where IV has not (yet).

Another problem is that IV is a little too far from the major employers which surround king and james. So the people that live near IV probably do not work there. This would intensify the problem with the lack of essential services because people may be more likely to do their shopping near work than near home.

I'm certain it's not just demographics, though that probably does play a role as well.

Part of the hope for LRT is that as people are drawn toward living near the line, the need for services increases and we see a better spread of these essentials along the line..

[SteelTown]

What are council members saying about running LRT down King Street?

January 30, 2010
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/714880

The following responded to a request for comment:

Councillor Brian McHattie, Ward 1

"I'm very supportive of the staff direction to go with two-way traffic on King. Think of all the European examples where they have the pedestrian areas ... and I think we can get there, too."

Councillor Bob Bratina, Ward 2

"My personal belief is that Main Street is a better route and I would have to hear more arguments to convince me otherwise."

Councillor Bernie Morelli, Ward 3

"It will create some issues we need to deal with. Although I believe in light rail, I'm not about to do anything at any cost."

Councillor Sam Merulla, Ward 4

"I support and endorse the LRT, but the fine details still need to be worked out. The BIAs are speaking pretty vocally against it. I don't think council should be in the business of putting business out of business."

Councillor Chad Collins, Ward 5

"I understand the importance of LRT and the benefits that come with it -- but I think that most people feel there need to be some design changes."

Councillor Tom Jackson, Ward 6

"I am just keeping an open mind. I think the two keys for me will be the business community's overall consideration and the general public's that we're trying to entice downtown."

Councillor Scott Duvall, Ward 7

"I'm not very comfortable with closing down King Street. Everybody should be working together to figure out whether these negatives can be turned into positives."

Councillor Terry Whitehead, Ward 8

"There's no question that there's going to be unhappy people. The question is, 'What plan can we put forward that has the least amount of negative impact?'"

Councillor Maria Pearson, Ward 10

"I still support it going down King -- it's a question of whether it becomes only on King. That basically eliminates any vehicular traffic. That affects the businesses."

Councillor Lloyd Ferguson, Ward 12

"It's already very difficult to get downtown during rush hour. If they take it down to two lanes, it's going to be more congested. That part really worries me."

Councillor Russ Powers, Ward 13

"The first thing is we have to get the determination from Metrolinx that we're getting LRT. If it's BRT it changes the dynamic. We all realize there is a strangulation point between Wellington Street and James Street and there are some challenges and major decisions that need to be made."

[SteelTown]

Metrolinx ruling won't mention money
Bus-or-train decision expected Feb. 19

January 30, 2010
Emma Reilly
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/714882

When Metrolinx decides next month whether Hamilton should receive dedicated bus lanes or light rail, it won't be doing so based on the city's controversial route proposal.

Neither will it be handing out any money to fund the proposed $650-million project.

Metrolinx, the provincial agency that oversees transit throughout the Toronto-Hamilton region, is expected to make a decision about what kind of rapid transit the city will get at its Feb. 19 board meeting. Its staff will present a business case analysis that will take a "high-level" look at how rapid transit will integrate into the city, as well as its social, economic and environmental impacts.

That decision won't be a verdict on the city's rapid transit plans, said Metrolinx spokesperson Jacquie Menezes.

"This will be information that will feed into design, construction and funding decisions in the future," Menezes said.

The report also won't include information about what kind of funding the city can expect for rapid transit. That decision will be the sole responsibility of the Ontario government and will come at a later date, Menezes said.

The city has told Metrolinx that a light rail line running east and west on King Street is its top priority for funding.

The city's plan for rapid transit has received mixed reaction from the community. The proposal includes the possibility of removing all street parking along the route from Eastgate Square to McMaster University, eliminating traffic on King between Wellington and Mary, and restricting any left turns to intersections with traffic lights.

Though council has endorsed light rail, several councillors have expressed concern about the current plans. Some details of the proposal -- particularly the pedestrian-only area -- have been unpopular among council. It is also not popular with both downtown BIAs.

Jill Stephen, the city's director of strategic planning and rapid transit, said it's too early for council members to make a call about the proposed transit details.

"It is very soon for council to be able to say whether or not they like King Street or Main Street, because they don't have the businesses case analysis. Nobody does," she said.

Menezes said council's lukewarm response to the city's plan will have "no effect" on Metrolinx's decision on the 19th.

[highwater]

January 30, 2010
David Serwatuk
The Hamilton Spectator
(Jan 30, 2010)

I have been a business owner for 15 years at King St. East and Queenston Road -- Hollywood Sunspot, Little Caesars and Wash Me Carwash. The currently proposed light rail transit (LRT) route will have a huge impact on my businesses and other businesses and homeowners along the way.

Who has really heard about the LRT? The city has not done any scientific surveys. They have all been random, via the Internet, mall surveys, tables at McMaster etc. Demographics have not been taken into consideration.

I do not see the need for the LRT. Is there a congestion problem? Are we a metropolis catering daily to 100,000 jobs downtown? ( Chicago and Detroit, are both home to LRT failures and there many more worldwide.)

Is King East and Queenston Road a tourist destination compared to Europe? It seems that the catalyst is the Pan Am Games. Please, how many people have watched the Games before? Can you name five events?

LRT in Hamilton would not exist if the Games were not coming. Metrolinx (the provincial transit agency) has not determined how much it is putting toward the project. Guess who is going to flip the rest of the millions and millions? Us, local taxpayers.

Let's look at reality. Do you think people are going to walk or drive to the LRT and jump on it? Most people will not give up a car in Hamilton. Twenty per cent of the area's employment is within 800 metres of the LRT line, which means if you take the LRT, you may have to walk almost a kilometre to work through rain and snow. Statistics show we only walk 200 to 400 metres at best in these situations.

You can drive to downtown and park without a problem. As for time savings -- yes you will save five to seven minutes from Centennial to downtown, but how much time do you save getting to the LRT and then waiting for it -- still having to park somewhere before you get on).

We do not pay European gas prices (double ours or more), therefore savings is not an issue. The cost to ride the LRT in other cities for 19 kilometres is $5, more than double the bus and very comparable to the 407.

With downtown being closed off, it will now be more unaccessible and more of a hangout, where crime will thrive. How do you feel about driving to the outskirts of downtown, then walking in or paying $5 to ride six blocks?

What about all the downtown underground parking garages? Do they have to be rebuilt at cost of the taxpayers? They won't be accessible by cars anymore, nor will our downtown hotels and new condos. I guess our tourists will catch the LRT with their luggage after they are dropped off on the outskirts.

Let's talk about business. Business is built on 25 per cent convenience and 25 per cent impulse, that leaves you with a 50 per cent customer loss. The design now proposed makes a driver pass your business or street a kilometre and do a U-turn -- at certain intersections only -- and backtrack.

If I want to grab a coffee, stop at a variety store, get gas, a car wash, a slice of pizza, do you actually think, I'm going to backtrack? No, I go on. Do you actually think jewellery, and fashion stores a la Versace are going to pop up at King and Wentworth because of the LRT?

What about the four-to-five-year construction time with streets closed, traffic nightmares, business loss? Here come the lawsuits. What about the noise and vibration from the construction and the LRT itself? How about our sidewalks and street parking being taken away?

I'm sure residents near the LRT line will love the overflow on their streets. The residents won't even be able get home properly. They have to once again drive past their street and make a U-turn only to come back. Talk about fuel wastage.

Oh, wait. They can pay $5, take the LRT home only to go past their street get off and walk back six blocks.

Bylaws will have to be changed. Is it fair that a store on the Mountain requires parking spots according to the city and the same store along the LRT route does not? We cannot make provisions for some and not the others.

In conclusion, the design is terrible. If you think the LRT has merit then redraw it. Make it overhead (since we are paying for it) or put it on Main Street which is much wider (five lanes) and we don't have to close downtown. LRTs require 20 metres in width; King Street is only 15 to 17 metres.

Better yet make the LRT go north/south from the city to the Mountain, to Upper James or our growing airport. Maybe that will help our tourists. Or how about a route to serve our factories.

The design now will flop. I think they are trying to fasttrack the LRT (no pun intended).

Let me leave you with only one question: What would be the worst thing that could happen if we did not go through with this LRT? EXACTLY.

David Serwatuk is an east Hamilton business owner and city resident.

[FRM]

wow great perspective from someone who doesn't live or do business anywhere near downtown :sly:. I wish all these idiots making comments about our downtown would stay out of it.:hell:

[coalminecanary]

Wow. This "article" is so full of misinformation, I don't even know where to begin. How can they print these lies with a straight face?

"How do you feel about driving to the outskirts of downtown, then walking in or paying $5 to ride six blocks?"

Huh?

They are talking about MAYBE, POSSIBLY closing a few blocks of ONE STREET to traffic. Not putting ropes around the entire downtown and making it all pedestrian only.

The spectator really sucks. If they hate Hamilton so much they should MOVE THE F OUT!

[coalminecanary]

Let's cancel LRT.. the owner of a suburban car wash is against it!

AAARGHHH

[Jon Dalton]

Just read this, it's easier:

LRT works in good cities. But we're a crappy one. And that's the only reason I make money running a crappy business. So please lets not change.

[bornagainbiking]

please get real. The downtown with its sub-sonic throughfare will be reduced. So what? how many people from the mountain come downtown. Do they shop at jackson Sq or Limeridge. The downtown will become the urban hub and the LRT will feed the downtown.
We need normal traffic downtown not a speedway thru.
If you want a viable liveable home town you need 2 way traffic and public transit.
You need to promote the downtown and make it a destination.
Let the study speak for the city not self interest groups.
Hamilton needs LRT as does the environment.

[bigguy1231]

Read the comments from the councillors again. Just as I predicted months ago. they are hedging their bets.

Don't get your hopes up, it's going to be an uphill battle getting anything up and running. If Metrolinx goes for the bus option, city council will turn down the whole proposal. They are not going to commit millions of dollars to get people on buses through the city 5 or 10 minutes faster, especially if it means reducing traffic lanes and tying up vehicular traffic.

Even if LRT is approved, it's going to be a battle. This is an election year and anything that is going to get the majority riled up will not get approved. People are already upset about the mess created when James St. went 2 way, trying to do the same with King St. or Main St. will cause a revolt.

[SteelTown]

The B-Line design won't be finalized until 2011, after the municipal election. But 2011 will be re-election year for Premier Dalton good timing for funding and construction activity and to try to hem down the NDP support in Hamilton.

[crhayes]

Read the comments from the councillors again. Just as I predicted months ago. they are hedging their bets.

Don't get your hopes up, it's going to be an uphill battle getting anything up and running. If Metrolinx goes for the bus option, city council will turn down the whole proposal. They are not going to commit millions of dollars to get people on buses through the city 5 or 10 minutes faster, especially if it means reducing traffic lanes and tying up vehicular traffic.

Even if LRT is approved, it's going to be a battle. This is an election year and anything that is going to get the majority riled up will not get approved. People are already upset about the mess created when James St. went 2 way, trying to do the same with King St. or Main St. will cause a revolt.

Most people are too short sighted to see the potential benefits. They see the construction as being a mess, and when the street doesn't SPRING to life within 3 years they get upset.

James St. is starting to thrive since it's 2-way conversion. Half these people complaining probably haven't even driven down it since it converted.

[bigguy1231]

Most people are too short sighted to see the potential benefits. They see the construction as being a mess, and when the street doesn't SPRING to life within 3 years they get upset.

James St. is starting to thrive since it's 2-way conversion. Half these people complaining probably haven't even driven down it since it converted.

I don't disagree with you. I am just repeating things I have heard and passing on a little wisdom learned from years of being involved in politics and with politicians. Never believe what a politician tells you, especially in the initial stages of planning. They always wait to see which way the wind is blowing before casting their votes.

As for people being short sighted, I don't think it's short sightedness as much as it is selfishness. If it isn't going to benefit them directly then they want no part of it. Lets face it LRT is only going to benefit the few who happen to live close to it. The rest of the city will view it as an unneccesary expense, that will leave taxpayers footing the bill.

[bigguy1231]

The B-Line design won't be finalized until 2011, after the municipal election. But 2011 will be re-election year for Premier Dalton good timing for funding and construction activity and to try to hem down the NDP support in Hamilton.

The proposal is out there already. It doesn't have to be finalized to become an issue.

As for Dalton trying to buy votes in Hamilton. It hasn't worked in the past and never will work in this city. We are very cynical voters when it comes to provincial and federal elections. We have been promised too much in the past only to see those promises broken. We aren't as easily fooled as other may think we are. The last I looked we only had 2 NDP MPP's in this city out of 5 seats here.

[BrianE]

Councillor Lloyd Ferguson, Ward 12

"It's already very difficult to get downtown during rush hour. If they take it down to two lanes, it's going to be more congested. That part really worries me."

Does Lloyd even live in this City or go into work at all anymore? I drive on Main St. from the 403 to Sherman Ave at 4:30 - 5pm almost everyday. 25% I don't have to stop once, on rare occasions I've never had to TOUCH MY BRAKE PEDAL during rush hour. Most days I get stopped at James or John St. On Rare occasions I get stopped at James and again at Wentworth.

2 or 3 times a year, A YEAR! there is an accident that blocks 2 of the 5 lanes and I have to wait a whole 5 minutes to get through downtown.

To many people in this City are out to lunch, don't even get me started on that opinion piece in the Spec from the Carwash owner. It's sad, but I can actualy feel 60% of Spectator readers reading that piece and nodding their heads and saying to themselves, "Now here's a guy who's got it right! Tell it like it is!"

It's official, this thread has ruined my day... possibly my week.

[realcity]

A proper functioning city SHOULD be difficult to get downtown in rush hour. Too bad that's not the case.


"many people in City are out to lunch, don't even get my started on that opinion piece in the Spec from the Carwash owner. It's sad, but I can actualy feel 60% of Spectator readers reading that piece and nodding their heads and saying to themselves, "Now here's a guy who's got it right! Tell it like it is!" "[/I]
BrianE
Love it... so true

[Jon Dalton]

Noone should be surprised at these assholes just because they're getting airtime now. The only reason they weren't before is that they were too ignorant to know about it until the proposal has been in the news for over a year. The vast majority supported LRT in every survey conducted and they still do.

[markbarbera]

Seriously, plot it down Main, the most logical course, and everyone is happy. Why must this city manufacture a crisis for every proposal?

[DHLawrence]

Seriously, plot it down Main, the most logical course, and everyone is happy. Why must this city manufacture a crisis for every proposal?

Maybe it's a decoy. They get everyone up in arms about putting it on King so that when it's put on Main the opposition sees it as a compromise.

[omro]

Maybe it's a decoy. They get everyone up in arms about putting it on King so that when it's put on Main the opposition sees it as a compromise.

I'm more worried about the, "Well, we couldn't put it on King Street, where we wanted, it was just so darned expensive and no one wanted it there and metrolinx wouldn't give us enough money, so we've decided not to bother with an LRT"

What's Hamilton Light Rail's position, if they have one, do they prefer King or Main or a King/Main split, these days?

[SteelTown]

LRT will motivate us to ditch cars: HSR chief

February 02, 2010
Meredith Macleod
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/716331

Does Hamilton have the ridership to justify light rail transit?

There are plenty of people in this city who think the answer is no.

In letters to this paper, blog posts and opinion surveys, they say not enough people want or need to go downtown and that Hamiltonians are too attached to their cars.

Critics point out that most cities with successful light rail have much larger populations than Hamilton.

Even Don Hull, director of the Hamilton Street Railway, says based on sheer numbers alone, Hamilton probably doesn't cut it.

But he says that's only part of the equation.

Present-day transit ridership doesn't account for changes coming down the road that will push people out of their cars: increasing congestion, growing concern about pollution and climate change, and the inevitability of soaring gas prices.

Light rail transit will transform the city's transit network, attract new riders and be the critical component that gets people out of their cars, Hull says.

And it brings investment and tax dollars to struggling neighbourhoods, he adds.

"More than population or density or ridership, the key to whether LRT is successful and viable is the support of all three levels of government."

The B-Line from Eastgate Square to McMaster University -- the city's proposed corridor for a light rail line -- affects four of the HSR's major routes, Hull says.

Collectively, they account for about 50 per cent of the system's riders.

That adds up to 25,000 to 30,000 trips a day, half or more in peak periods.

Hull says that's not far off the usage that would be hoped for on an LRT line. In fact, a consultants' report into the economics of LRT in Hamilton projected the system would need about 34,000 riders a weekday (8.9 million a year) to break even on its operational costs.

Hull says many cities, including Portland, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City and Denver, quickly exceeded ridership forecasts.

Hamilton is unique in that the ridership is already there, it just has to be shifted from bus to rail. Most North American systems, he says, run on an entirely new line and have to build from nothing.

That's a big advantage, says Antonio Paez, an associate geography and earth sciences professor at McMaster, who specializes in transportation.

"There is only the potential to gain. It's a relatively low-risk transition in that corridor."

The objective is to make transit the most attractive option for getting around, says Paez. Choosing to run rail lines along the busiest routes in the city -- King and Main -- and cut into, or eliminate, car lanes will achieve just that.

"The goal is to make traffic less problematic for those who choose transit but not necessarily better for those who don't choose it."

Once B-Line buses are replaced by light rail, Hull hopes capacity can be boosted in other areas of the city.

In day peak periods, HSR is having trouble meeting demand on many routes, he says.

Another important element is the city's official plan, which aims to see 100 transit trips per year per capita by 2030. That number now sits at 48 and the target simply can't be reached without LRT, says Hull.

The beauty of choosing the B-Line for the first leg of an overhaul of the city's transit system is that about 80 per cent of routes already intersect with the corridor.

"Everything off the Mountain as well as the North End and Bayfront routes meet up with King. It would be virtually an entirely intersecting system.

"That's very desirable."

Metrolinx has identified two rapid transit corridors in Hamilton to be developed in the first 15 years -- the east-west line that's on the table, and north-south on James Street from the airport to the waterfront.

Three other routes -- Eastgate to the Ancaster business park, the Centre Mall to the Meadowlands and downtown Hamilton to Waterdown -- are part of a 25-year vision.

Metrolinx has made no commitment to whether Hamilton will receive light rail or bus rapid transit.

A recommendation on the B-Line corridor is expected Feb. 19.

[omro]

Well, he believes it's going to be on King.

[coalminecanary]

What's Hamilton Light Rail's position, if they have one, do they prefer King or Main or a King/Main split, these days?

HLR does not hold a position on routing (yet?)

Their main focus so far is just making sure we get LRT instead of buses, without taking sides on routing, funding, or any other political details. in reality, it's up to staff studies to determine the best route, not up to HLR, not up to the mayor, not up to the business owners. it will be (or at least should be) about actual traffic patterns, resident and business assessment data, usage statistics, etc - not hunches or opinions

[thistleclub]

Well, he believes it's going to be on King.

I'm sure that Hull pointed out that "four of the HSR's major routes" are shared by Main.

[bigguy1231]

I'm more worried about the, "Well, we couldn't put it on King Street, where we wanted, it was just so darned expensive and no one wanted it there and metrolinx wouldn't give us enough money, so we've decided not to bother with an LRT"

Your statement probably isn't much off the mark. Thats exactly what is going to happen. Metrolinx will offer us buses and the city will say not a chance.

[thistleclub]

I'm sure that Hull pointed out that "four of the HSR's major routes" are shared by Main.

As to relative demand on those lines, a totally unscientific survey:

SCHOOLS ON/ADJACENT* TO MAIN
Post-Secondary: McMaster, McMaster Continuing Ed
Secondary: Columbia International College, Westdale, Delta
Elementary: Dalewood (6-8), St. John The Baptist (JK-8), Adelaide Hoodless (JK-8), Memorial (JK-8), AM Cunningham (1-5)

SCHOOLS ON/ADJACENT* TO KING
Post-Secondary: McMaster
Secondary: Cathedral, Parkview
Elementary: Prince of Wales (JK-8), King George (JK-6), George R. Allan (JK-5)

*Within two blocks

A dogleg along Paradise south might double Westdale in the King column, but you'd remove GRA.

[highwater]

A dogleg along Paradise south might double Westdale in the King column, but you'd remove GRA.

With the exception of FE kids bussed in from Dundas, virtually all GR students walk, so no great loss there.

[SteelTown]

McGuinty: Pan Am bid won’t help Hamilton’s LRT odds

February 04, 2010
Emma Reilly
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/717346

Premier Dalton McGuinty says the successful Pan Am Games bid won’t influence Hamilton’s chances of getting provincial funding for rapid transit.

“I see them as two separate issues,” McGuinty said during a day-long visit to Hamilton today.

The premier added that Hamilton is “obviously at the top” of the list of cities that warrant an investment in transit infrastructure.

“We’re going to continue to find ways to invest in public transit,” he said. “It’s up to Metrolinx to review the reports and studies and then to provide their advice.”

The city is still waiting to hear whether it will receive light rail or dedicated bus lanes, a decision expected from transportation agency Metrolinx on Feb. 19.

However, the province will decide later whether Hamilton will get funding for the $650-million project.

Rapid transit was among several issues the premier addressed during his visit to the city. His itinerary included a CHML radio interview with former city councillor Bill Kelly, a talk with political science class at McMaster University, and a conference of United Nations water experts at McMaster Innovation Park.

Though he didn’t meet with the Mayor Fred Eisenberger or any city representatives, McGuinty said he’s having an “active conversation” about the city’s chances of receiving a $16.5-million injection to offset the costs of social services.

However, he warned the province’s own financial woes could affect Hamilton’s request.

“Our revenues have plummeted. We are carrying a $25-billion deficit, so we have to factor that into any requests for support.”

[SteelTown]

Listen to the interview yourself

http://www.900chml.com/Channels/Reg/NewsLocalGeneral/Story.aspx?ID=1192631

Premier McGuinty talks about LRT during the last 4 minutes. He never mentioned about how the Pan Am bid won’t help Hamilton’s LRT odds. He simply said he'll wait for the business case from Metrolinx regarding the B-Line before deciding about funding.

[SteelTown]

City looks to Europe for light rail plans

February 05, 2010
Meredith Macleod
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/717530

City planners don't want to follow in the tracks of other North American cities when it comes to light rail.

The consultant hired to figure out how Hamilton should move forward with a hoped-for rail line will be expected to have experience in designing a modern European-style rapid transit system.

That's a clear indication of the direction city planners intend to take with a proposed LRT corridor stretching 16 kilometres from Eastgate Square to McMaster University.

The vision is to emulate the way European cities built their LRT systems.

That means:

* giving priority to transit, pedestrians, cyclists and service vehicles rather than cars;

* making LRT fit the existing streetscape and adapting the design to fit each neighbourhood;

* having minimal or no property acquisition;

* putting the transit line close to buildings and sidewalks.

Jill Stephen, Hamilton's acting director of strategic planning and rapid transit, says the typical North American approach has been to try to give priority to both traffic and transit and drastically change the streetscape. Often LRT lines have been built on abandoned rail corridors or greenfield space at the periphery of the city.

"We have a lot of similarities to European cities," Stephen said. "We don't have a greenfield corridor or an old highway or a rail corridor like some North American cities have used."

Instead, Hamilton must contend with a set right-of-way and a streetscape built alongside. In some areas of the proposed route along Main and King, the corridor is narrow.

"European cities have used what they had available and maximized it," Stephen said. "There are models for making this work."

The tendering for the year-long planning, design and engineering study to lay out the details of an east-west LRT line will close Monday.

A team of city and Metrolinx staff will choose a consultant based on a scoring system and bid price.

Metrolinx, the provincial agency charged with transportation planning in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, is expected to make a recommendation about whether Hamilton should get LRT or bus rapid transit Feb. 19.

Stephen says Hamilton's transit team has studied transit systems from around the world.

"We're trying to get a sense of what has worked, what hasn't and what lessons can apply to Hamilton."

A delegation from Hamilton visited Portland, Ore., Charlotte, N.C., and Calgary about 18 months ago to see transit systems in action and talk to the people who built and use them.

The team is studying the types of vehicles in use elsewhere, how they're powered, the routes they take, and how other municipalities have built ridership and consulted with the community.

Stephen said a goal of the Hamilton system will be to reflect the character and history of individual neighbourhoods through the design of vehicles and stations and the use of public art.

"This is a chance to celebrate Hamilton," she said.

"It gives people a sense of ownership."

MODEL TRAINS

Here are some of the city transit systems Hamilton is looking to emulate and some it wants to avoid.

THE GOOD

DUBLIN, IRELAND

* Sleek trains

* Boarding at street level

* Building entrances built specifically for LRT users

* Stations integrated into existing streetscape and landscape

LYON, FRANCE

* Branded car, made to look like a silkworm, to represent Lyon's silk industry

PORTLAND, ORE.

* Cars, buses, LRT mingle together

* System reflects history and character of individual neighbourhoods

STRASBOURG, GERMANY

* LRT runs down the middle of a busy street

* Stations are located where people are anywayy

EDMONTON (future plan)

* Low-level boarding

* Runs at curbside on well-travelled road

THE BAD

EDMONTON (present)

* Runs on fenced-off tracks behind residential neighbourhoods

* Concrete platforms

* Doesn't mingle with city life

* No opportunity for economic development alongside stations

TORONTO

* Streetcars can't be joined together to increase capacity

* Streetcars don't have priority within mix of traffic

* Don't run on dedicated tracks

SACRAMENTO, CALIF.

* Boxy, chunky vehicle

* Raised platforms for boarding

* Stops have nothing around them

CALGARY

* Boxy train

* Barren, concrete stops

* Away from main streets

SAN DIEGO, CALIF.

* LRT is on periphery, not on main streets

[bigguy1231]

If they even think of giving priority to pedestrians, transit, cyclists and service vehicles the proposal is dead in the water. These people at city hall are clueless when it comes to what the public in this city will accept. They will not accept closing either of the 2 busiest streets in the city. This is not Europe.

I like the present Edmonton option. Thats the only way it is going to get supported in this city. King or Main Sts. will cause too many problems. It has to be a dedicated transit corridor.

[mdsweet]

City looks to Europe for light rail plans

DUBLIN, IRELAND

* Sleek trains

* Boarding at street level

* Building entrances built specifically for LRT users

* Stations integrated into existing streetscape and landscape


Having lived in Dublin in 2004-05 when the first two lines of Dublin's LRT opened, its very popular, runs at street level and occasionally in mixed traffic, and outside the centre runs separated and more like commuter rail in spots. But in the centre its not that fast, yet is still packed all the time. Imagine that! Their expansion plans are very exciting too. A good model to look at! Another interesting point, they help pay for it by adding development levies along the lines.

[sofasurfer]

Having lived in Dublin in 2004-05 when the first two lines of Dublin's LRT opened, its very popular, runs at street level and occasionally in mixed traffic, and outside the centre runs separated and more like commuter rail in spots. But in the centre its not that fast, yet is still packed all the time. Imagine that!

Sounds like Metrolink in Manchester, too. Which is worth mentioning because the area around Manchester Victoria train station and Shudehill (which aspired to becoming a sh1tty part of downtown, prior to Metrolink and the consequent redevelopments that went in hand with it) may have some analogies (if not parallels) to what could happen in Hamilton.

btw, bigguy1231 - indeed, this may not be Europe: but given the macroeconomic trends and consequent strong opportunity that Hamilton's more likely as not gonna have staring in its face in the next decade or two (IMO, at least), some planning that reflects good ideas had elsewhere in the world in general are probably worth considering!

[bigguy1231]

btw, bigguy1231 - indeed, this may not be Europe: but given the macroeconomic trends and consequent strong opportunity that Hamilton's more likely as not gonna have staring in its face in the next decade or two (IMO, at least), some planning that reflects good ideas had elsewhere in the world in general are probably worth considering!

I am not opposed to the idea of LRT, I just don't like the options or should I say option being presented to us. Using King St. or Main St. for that matter are totally unacceptable the way the concept has been presented. The proposal as it stands right now will basically close King St. . We cannot have one of our main thoroughfares shut down to vehicular traffic. Where is that traffic going to go. Advocates of this proposal can't be nieve enough to believe that people are going to give up their cars to use the LRT. The same people that use buses now will be the ones that use LRT and maybe a few percent more.

[mdsweet]

The proposal as it stands right now will basically close King St.
For a block and a half.
Where is that traffic going to go
Meanwhile Main will be converted to two-way operations, therefore alot of traffic can divert to Main. Nevermind Cannon, Hunter, Wilson and Burlington. Note another of the indirect goals is to make downtown more than just a thoroughfare.

[BrianE]

The same people that use buses now will be the ones that use LRT and maybe a few percent more.

You say this with such authority and confidence but seem to be unaware that this statement is contrary to the vast majority of LRT projects that have been undertaken by other cities.

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to be insulting or sarcastic, It's just the number of cities that have seen ridership increases above and beyond the predicted 'few percent more' is quite stagering.

[turner]

For a block and a half.

Meanwhile Main will be converted to two-way operations, therefore alot of traffic can divert to Main. Nevermind Cannon, Hunter, Wilson and Burlington. Note another of the indirect goals is to make downtown more than just a thoroughfare.

Has this changed? The last I read, in the Rapid Transit FAQs from Public Works last month, Main and Cannon will remain one-way pairs and King and York would be two-way pairs. It says "The issues of conversion of Main Street to two-way traffic will be reviewed in the future, once rapid transit on King Street has been implemented and changes in traffice patterns established."

[coalminecanary]

The proposal as it stands right now will basically close King St. .

This is absolutely wrong. There is a possibility of removing vehicular traffic from a tiny stretch of King Street. This is not the same as "closing king street".

I am about as pro-LRT as they come, and I am actually opposed to the removal of cars on that small stretch because I think it is unnecessary. For that small stretch, the cars and transit can share the lanes.

Let me explain the reality to you as it stands right now: King narrows to 2 lanes at wellington and it is already a bitch to get through there in a car during rush hour. The vast majority of drivers have ALREADY CHANGED THEIR HABITS. They take Cannon if they need to get to the west from the east. They take king if they know they are going to head south on wellington.

People find a way through - and there are SO MANY ways through, it will not be a problem.

Those that use king and main to get from stoney creek to the 403 will no longer do so - they will take the purpose-build highways which will only cost them a couple of minutes compared to the old way of using the through-town through-streets. Their trips are supposedly the reason we built the highways in the first place. From where I am standing, it makes total sense to change traffic patterns to put more through trips on the underused highways that we already built and paid for.

Fear of LRT based on "where will traffic go" is completely unfounded. We have a mind boggling number of traffic lanes through the city, and reducing 2 lanes of King to one, or even to zero for those short blocks will have absolutely no effect on anyone's ability to get through town.

But it will have a huge positive effect on the shops along the line who will now have a new wave of customers coming through their business district at a more human speed and a more human scale.

[SteelTown]

Hopefully I can get an advanced copy on Friday. Usually Metrolinx release advanced copies a week before the meeting. Though I'm not sure since the big shake up at Metrolinx. Things are more private and less open to the public.

[Jon Dalton]

We cannot have one of our main thoroughfares shut down to vehicular traffic. Where is that traffic going to go. Advocates of this proposal can't be nieve enough to believe that people are going to give up their cars to use the LRT. The same people that use buses now will be the ones that use LRT and maybe a few percent more.

http://simswyeth.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/fud.jpg

[mdsweet]

http://simswyeth.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/fud.jpg
This.

[Jon Dalton]

If ridership only goes up a few percent I will shove all those Mexican hot dogs down my throat. Raw.

[crhayes]

If ridership only goes up a few percent I will shove all those Mexican hot dogs down my throat. Raw.

Can we sticky this thread/post please? :haha:

[bigguy1231]

If ridership only goes up a few percent I will shove all those Mexican hot dogs down my throat. Raw.

I wouldn't want to see you hurt yourself.

[bigguy1231]

I am about as pro-LRT as they come, and I am actually opposed to the removal of cars on that small stretch because I think it is unnecessary. For that small stretch, the cars and transit can share the lanes.

According to the plans cars will not share the transit right of way.


Those that use king and main to get from stoney creek to the 403 will no longer do so - they will take the purpose-build highways which will only cost them a couple of minutes compared to the old way of using the through-town through-streets. Their trips are supposedly the reason we built the highways in the first place. From where I am standing, it makes total sense to change traffic patterns to put more through trips on the underused highways that we already built and paid for.

There are no highways to get people into the downtown. As for the purpose built highways being under used, check out the usage statistics. They are already exceeding the projected numbers.

Fear of LRT based on "where will traffic go" is completely unfounded. We have a mind boggling number of traffic lanes through the city, and reducing 2 lanes of King to one, or even to zero for those short blocks will have absolutely no effect on anyone's ability to get through town.

We have the number of lanes we do because there is a need for them, thats why they were built.

But it will have a huge positive effect on the shops along the line who will now have a new wave of customers coming through their business district at a more human speed and a more human scale.

Prove it. It's all speculation at this point.

[SteelTown]

Dundas will have to wait for LRT
Not included in physical and financial plans detailed in current phase

February 10, 2010
Meredith Macleod
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/719115

If Hamilton lands light rail, Dundas will have to wait to jump aboard.

The current design of a proposed line along Main and King streets starts at Eastgate and ends at McMaster University.

But the current B-line bus route to be replaced by a future light rail line ends at University Plaza in Dundas.

That has some valley residents wondering why they're out of the light rail loop.

Well, they're not out entirely, says Councillor Russ Powers, who represents Dundas.

The first phase of the light rail line will stop at Mac, but the design clearly calls for an extension along Main Street and down through Binkley Hollow to the plaza, he says.

"The challenge is that there is only a certain envelope of money," said Powers.

"It requires, in the opinion of staff and engineers, a substantial investment to get across there," Powers said of the incline on Osler Drive.

"I would love nothing more than to have it happen all at one time but it's not physically or financially viable."

Jill Stephen, director of strategic planning for the city, says Metrolinx's Big Move plan outlining transit priorities for the next 25 years, calls for Hamilton's rapid transit corridor to run from Eastgate to Mac.

She said the line will be designed so that it can easily be extended east into Stoney Creek and west into Dundas.

"It's certainly not off the table, but it's not in this phasing."

Powers said it will be important to have bus service increased into Dundas to take riders to and from the LRT.

Metrolinx, the provincial agency charged with transportation planning in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area, is expected to make a recommendation about whether Hamilton should receive a LRT line or bus rapid transit on Feb. 19.

Funding decisions will come later.

The city is strongly advocating for an investment in LRT.

Darlyne Mills, a Dundas realtor, says she would be happy to see better bus service to the former town.

"It would be much easier for people to move into a lovely community like Dundas with good transit. A lot of people don't want to have two cars and would use transit more often."

James Gaulton would hop on a bus more often to get to his job in Hamilton if they came more regularly to Dundas and weren't always so packed.

"It's a half-hour between buses in the morning ... They have to improve services to improve ridership. The B-Line stops at University Plaza but most people live in town.

"That's a long walk to the plaza," he said.

[BrianE]

We have the number of lanes we do because there is a need for them, thats why they were built.

I'm just going to take a second here and blow your mind! What if it's really like this:

We have the number of cars we do because we built a large number of lanes to encourage their use.

I think this is probably the fundamental issue that separates most of us on this board and Raisethehammer.org with yourself and many other Hamilton residents.

I believe in psychology this is called cognitive dissonance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance) someone else can maybe find a better term.

Noticing and acknowledging this way of thinking could lead to negative emotions. I've seen and heard many comments like this: "I NEED my car to get around in this town, there's just no other options." or "I NEED to drive from Stoney Creek to Dundas everyday so there has to be enough lane capacity to accomodate me at all hours of the day." To acknowledge that this isn't true would be very embarassing for many people.

Surely everyone that drives on Main St., King ST, Cannon Etc. must realize that their style of driving is identical to when they're on the Highway. So they must realise that living near these streets would be akin to living next to the QEW. And surely everyone who's ever bought a house or rented a place knows that when they're too close to a highway it lowers the value of the property and ruins their enjoyment of said property. Yet there's this disconnect where if there is ever a proposal to fix these obvious problems with 4 and 5 lane highways through a dense urban city. There is a knee jerk reaction of but where will the traffic go?

[coalminecanary]

So it's come down to a point-by-point breakdown I guess...

According to the plans cars will not share the transit right of way.
I was just stating my personal opinion - never claimed the plan called for shared lanes. But the plan is so far just a proposal. It is not set in stone. It is totally appropriate to discuss potential changes to the plan, and inappropriate to take any of it as gospel, like you have with the "removal of cars" hot button.

There are no highways to get people into the downtown.
Well, actually, we essentially have two: Main and Cannon. But my point was not about highways to downtown. What percentage of drivers on Main/Cannon/King/Wilson are going to downtown as a destination versus simply driving through? My point was that our true highways can be utilized for getting across town. Currently, the downtown is being used as a giant through-access which is entirely inappropriate. We need to make it less convenient to drive through the core, and more convenient to get to it. Which enhanced transit will absolutely do.
We have the number of lanes we do because there is a need for them, thats why they were built.
Wrong. It's possible there was a need for them at one time, but the need has long passed. These lanes were built in a completely different era. If you want an extreme example of this, look at claremont... 7 lanes built for an era where thousands had to get to the industrial sector - now virtually barren of cars day and night... map link (http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=clarence+access&sll=49.891235,-97.15369&sspn=76.945098,58.798828&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Clarence+Access,+Hamilton,+Hamilton+Division,+Ontario&ll=43.245566,-79.869087&spn=0.002643,0.001794&t=k&z=19)
Prove it. It's all speculation at this point.This has been proven time and again in every city that has implemented light rail. Pick a city that has installed it and you will see financial success along the line. Here is a list to get you started. (http://www.lightrailnow.org/success1.htm) Please feel free to share with us your list of LRT financial failures. Remember that elevated lines, grade-separated lines, dedicated right of ways and old fashioned streetcars are not light rail, so cherry picking a failed monorail is not going to help your case.