Rapid Transit

[SteelTown]

He's now a senior member of Wynne's cabinet. McMeekin even as a junior cabinet member did well for Hamilton. Take for example Highway 403 is undergoing a facelift and that would've not happened without McMeekin.

The extra $7 million to the Lister Block deal, McMeekin was involved. The extra $22.5 from the province for the stadium, McMeekin was involved. McMeekin is the one that's keeping Flamboro Downs alive.

And now having him as Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing should help with Hamilton's affordable housing issue and deal with the LRT issue.

[HillStreetBlues]

Implement the revenue tools recommended last year by Metrolinx (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-transit-proposal-could-cost-each-household-477-a-year-1.1343428) (HST, gas tax, parking levy, development charges) as a means of making up the approximately $20 billion gap between what the government has pledged to invest in transit and the sum required to complete the Big Move over the next twenty years.


Thanks for posting that link, Thistleclub. Good read. The Liberals have so far seemed to indicate that they will not use their majority to full effect- for instance, opting to recycle the pre-election budget even after we all spent a long time hearing in the media that it was an “NDP budget.” But it’s worth hoping that they will introduce the revenue tools necessary to ensure sustainable funding for transit in the future. One wonders how transit will be funded otherwise, particularly as they have said they are interested in reducing the budget deficit.

[King&James]

They will opt to tax the highways, claiming victory for mass transit - a way to incent the public to hop on board. Toll roads here we come.

[Jon Dalton]

I hope so but I don't think they will have the balls to do that. The liberals did not campaign on transit taxes like they said they would 2 years ago. Instead they watered down the message and kept it that way for the election campaign. So they can't claim an elected mandate to raise revenue for transit and would be seen as dishonest if they brought it back to the table right after their surprise majority. I think we're going to be stuck with 'we'll figure out a way to at least get some of this done'.

[markbarbera]

I don't see toll roads coming. Certainly not in the same form as the 407. The Wynne government already alluded to alternative 'toll-like' revenue sources like premium permits for single-occupant vehicles to use HOV lanes. I would not be surprised to see that, as well as permits for cars that use GTA roads lined with streetcar rails during rush hour. I can also see some sort of supplemental tax on parking lot rates to offset upcoming transit capital costs. Converting existing 400 series highways to toll roads is a non-starter. However, if we end up with a new mid-pen highway (which is a big if), I could see it being tolled in the same manner as the 407 (minus the private ownership).

[SteelTown]

McMeekin isn't wasting time. He's at City council.

[coalminecanary]

Bring photo radar back

[SteelTown]

Andrew Dreschel

Funding clarity for #Hamont LRT? McMeekin is bringing new Transport Minister Del Duca for council Q&A, probably in August.

[thistleclub]

Finance Minister Charles Sousa, Ontario Budget Speech (http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2013/statement.html), May 2, 2013:

“Every minute a worker spends stuck in traffic is a minute of lost productivity. Every idle transport truck on a highway is an opportunity for a competitor to find an advantage. Facing this challenge requires sound public policy and sufficient public investment.

That’s why our government will consider a range of new revenue tools to support the expansion of transportation and public transit in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. We will take action following the release of the Metrolinx investment strategy to implement revenue tools that will provide the means to ease gridlock. This will prevent the addition of further pressure on our property taxes.

As an example of the changes required, Mr. Speaker, we will turn select high-occupancy vehicle lanes into high-occupancy toll lanes. Toll-free options would continue to exist on all the highways that have these lanes. We will set out our plan and consult on the design before moving quickly to introduce this measure.”

[HillStreetBlues]

I agree that the Liberals will not do it, but I do not agree that they could not. As Lorinc points out in the article Thistleclub linked, McGuinty campaigned hard on not raising taxes, and one of his first orders of business was to implement a new one. Chretien campaigned hard in ’93 against the GST, and we know what happened. We could be here all day if we wanted to come up with examples of governments breaking campaign pledges and raising taxes. Very few campaigns involve promises to increase them…

I would be shocked if the Liberals finance more than a token proportion of the cost of transit improvements through any method other than debt. But I’d be happy to be surprised. Even tolls on the QEW and 401 would start to feel like a fact of life in four years, and if they start now, a lot of the tolls would not even be issues by re-election time. If anything, Ontarians just proved that we do not have especially long memories.

[thistleclub]

He's now a senior member of Wynne's cabinet. McMeekin even as a junior cabinet member did well for Hamilton. Take for example Highway 403 is undergoing a facelift and that would've not happened without McMeekin.

Or his federal counterpart (http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/media/news-nouvelles/2013/20130315hamilton-eng.html).

[lucasmascotto]

Dreschel: ‘Blunt’ LRT talks in pipeline
The Hamilton Spectator
By: Andrew Dreschel

New Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca expects to be in Hamilton for crucial LRT discussions with city council before the month is out.

A definite date has yet to be set, but Del Duca spokesperson Patrick Searle says the minister expects the meeting will take place before August.

"I think the minister wants to get down as soon as possible."

Regional cabinet minister Ted McMeekin hopes to accompany Del Duca for the straight talk on LRT funding.

"I want to get this sorted out and I want to have that blunt conversation because, to be honest, that's what's missing," said McMeekin, minister of municipal affairs and housing.

Council had asked former transport minister Glen Murray to come to Hamilton to clear up confusion over the province's funding commitment for a light rail system, but the visit was sidelined by the June provincial election.

The mayor's office has been working to set up a July meeting since Del Duca took over from Murray after the Liberal victory.

McMeekin says he'll give his cabinet colleague a full briefing on council's LRT position. That position has been the same since February, 2013, when it approved the Rapid Ready transit report, which includes the $811-million McMaster University to Eastgate Square LRT line.

Council's support is predicated on full capital funding from the province, the same deal several Toronto transit projects received when the Big Move regional transit plan was uncorked in 2007.

During the election, Premier Kathleen Wynne and Murray both promised 100 per cent funding, but Wynne also muddied the waters by suggesting the province still needs to hear what Hamilton's transit priorities are.

That mixed message worried LRT supporters, perhaps with good reason. McMeekin says the blunt conversation that needs to take place goes well beyond council's resolution for 100 per cent funding.

"It's one thing to write a report and pass a resolution, unanimously or otherwise, and send it on. But when you're talking upwards to $1 billion, you need to have detailed discussions about the business plan. If you want to do LRT, where are the tracks going to run? Who's acquiring property? How's it part of a comprehensive scheme? The whole bit."

That language troubles councillor and mayoral candidate Brian McHattie, a staunch LRT advocate. He says the "whole bit" has already been done, that all information the province needs is in the city's report.

According to McHattie, council followed the rules by producing a 30 per cent project design on which the province is supposed to make its funding decision.

"We followed the rules, the rules they laid out … it sounds like they're trying to change the rules."

"I can only speculate that they're trying to find a way out of this and the Liberal government is reneging on their previous promise, which would be unfortunate, particularly now they have a majority government."

Councillor and mayoral candidate Brad Clark, who favours bus rapid transit, disagrees. He says McMeekin is right.

"I don't think we're anywhere close to being prepared for LRT and I expected the government to ask those questions."

Clark, a former Tory transportation minister, says the city has a conceptual plan but has not done detailed design work.

'We have not had an adult conversation about where the tracks are going; we have not had an adult conversation with folks in terms of the impact of those tracks, what the costs are going to be, who's underwriting the infrastructure construction along the route, the purchase of property that will occur there."

McHattie and Clark also disagree on the timing of the meeting with Del Duca.

McHattie is concerned some councillors will be away on summer vacation. He thinks the meeting should be postponed till September, otherwise the province is merely going through the motions.

Clark says timing shouldn't be an issue for an important meeting like this; he would hope councillors could form a quorum.

Nine candidates have registered for the mayor's race. But it's fair to say Hamilton's transit battle lines are being most starkly drawn by the two on council.

[thistleclub]

City’s LRT meeting with province in jeopardy (http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4632705-city-s-lrt-meeting-with-province-in-jeopardy/)
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, July 15 2014)

Confusion over the LRT meeting with Transport Minister Steven Del Duca is threatening to de-rail the crucial July 25th get-together.

Del Duca and regional cabinet minister Ted McMeekin were set to meet with Mayor Bob Bratina's government relations advisory group consisting of three councillors and the city manager to clarify the province's position on LRT funding.

But when it became clear the meeting would be held in private without public attendance, things began to go awry.

Councillor Sam Merulla, a member of the advisory group, says he intends to boycott the gathering because of the "optics" of a secret meeting,

Merulla, who earlier had encouraged the public to attend, believed the meeting was with the Fairness to Hamilton subcommittee, which he chairs.

He's worried the restricted meeting may breach open-meeting policies.

Merulla blames the mayor's office for "haphazard, verbal communications" in setting up the private meeting and creating "mass confusion."

"We have to wipe the board clean and take a new approach."

Councillor Scott Duvall, also a member of the mayor's group, agrees "it all seems mixed up."

Duvall says he thought Del Duca would be meeting with all councillors, not a select group.

"If we're talking about LRT it should be all councillors involved," Duvall said.

Duvall intends to talk with the mayor and city manager Chris Murray to find out how the mayor's advisory group was chosen to be the conduit.

The advisory group consists of the mayor, Merulla, Duvall, Russ Powers and Murray.

Peggy Chapman, Bratina's chief of staff, says the group was chosen on the advice of Murray and Bratina and to accommodate the minister's busy schedule.

"The mayor's office is always the direct contact for the province and federal government to meet with city issues," Chapman said, noting the mayor is allowed to meet privately with anyone at any time.

The advisory group was formed in late 2011 as an attempt to rein-in what was seen as Bratina's go-alone style of pushing GO transit at the expense of LRT with the province.


Read it in full here (http://literary-devices.com/content/foreshadowing).

[markbarbera]

There is a classic 'create a crisis' move at play here on Merulla's part. Why boycott the meeting? If transparency was truly a concern, why not attend to participate in what is discussed and report back to the council in whole at the next council meeting. All that is occurring is a discussion so that the province and the city fully understand each other. No decision is being made and it is not an in-camera meeting.

The advisory committee was created for this very reason. Council decided they didn't want the mayor meeting with the province on his own, specifically on matters related to LRT, so they decided in 2011 that future meetings would involve these members and not just the mayor. Now that the meeting is going to take place, Merulla wants to change the rules again on his own? Council voted for this format unanimously. Merulla voted for it, as did Duval. Thy both agreed to sit on the advisory group. Now all of a sudden they don't like the idea, and Merulla will boycott the meeting because of 'optics'? What optics have changed since 2011?

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Merulla gets antsy if his name doesn't get into the paper every couple weeks.

[bigguy1231]

The Minister should be meeting with the whole council. Whether it's public or in private doesn't really matter as long as they get the information they need to proceed.

[markbarbera]

The Minister of Transport didn't meet with the entire council of Toronto to discuss the Scarborough subway expansion. The Minister did not meet with the entire K-W council to discuss their LRT plans, nor did the Minister meet with the entire Ottawa council to discuss their rapid transit plans. In all their cases it was either a one-on-one discussion with the mayor or with members of an advisory committee. Why should Hamilton's meeting with the Minister of Transport be any different?

[markbarbera]

The Minister of Transport didn't meet with the entire council of Toronto to discuss the Scarborough subway expansion. The Minister did not meet with the entire K-W council to discuss their LRT plans, nor did the Minister meet with the entire Ottawa council to discuss their rapid transit plans. In all their cases it was either a one-on-one discussion with the mayor or with members of an advisory committee. Why should Hamilton's meeting with the Minister of Transport be any different? The only difference I see is the desire by certain councillors to jockey for attention in the weeks leading to the next election.

[movingtohamilton]

Ryan McGreal gives pretty compelling reasons why there should be no private meeting.

http://raisethehammer.org/article/2241

[Jon Dalton]

In Hamilton given our recent history with Council there is a particular need for accountability. The public deserves to know what is going on in that meeting since we've been jerked around for so long on this issue. And we can't trust our leaders to tell us what was actually said.

[markbarbera]

Ryan McGreal gives pretty compelling reasons why there should be no private meeting.

http://raisethehammer.org/article/2241

This more about his dislike for the Mayor than what is scheduled to transpire on the 25th. The meeting is not secret. It is not a council meeting. It was never intended to be a council meeting. The meeting is exactly what Premier Wynne said it would be: between the Mayor and the Minister of Transport. The invitation has been extended to include the advisory group that Council mandated for these kinds of meetings. The group is supposed to be present to ensure the Mayor stays on message. Are you suggesting Councillors Duvall, Merulla and Pasta are incapable of handling that role? Although I suppose by his own admission via his boycott, Merulla is not up to the task.

Let's be honest. The call to scuttle the meeting is from those who fear what may be said. Not by the Mayor, as his 'chaperones' will be there to keep him on message, but by the Minister of Transport.

[ScreamingViking]

While I would have preferred the meeting be held with council or a larger committee (doors open), I think Merulla needs to suck it up and do what's best for the city and not for himself. The best way to represent the city's interests, and keep Bratina on message, is for him to be there too. Also, having another voice there raising questions in a candid conversation is even more important, as is having that perspective when council later discusses what went down at the meeting.

If he feels this strongly, perhaps he should excuse himself from the advisory group altogether and someone else should take his place.


Does anyone know how many times this advisory team has actually been used? There likely won't be other opportunities before the election, especially if the MPPs take their summer break from the legislature once completing some of the unfinished business.

[Jon Dalton]

I want the meeting to take place but would far prefer it to be public. If it is closed do they at least take minutes? I just want to have an actual straight answer on LRT going into the municipal election. We can bet that whatever is said, Bratina will have a different interpretation of it as always.

[markbarbera]

I want the meeting to take place but would far prefer it to be public. If it is closed do they at least take minutes? I just want to have an actual straight answer on LRT going into the municipal election. We can bet that whatever is said, Bratina will have a different interpretation of it as always.

You will have Councillors Duvall and Pasuta there to corroborate what was discussed at the meeting. You would have had Merulla there as well, but he has abandoned his duty to council in this regard. For what it's worth, no mayoral candidates will be present, and all others present (save for Duvall) are not seeking re-election, which should minimize the potential for the meeting taking a downward-spiral into a campaign event.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

I don't want this info filtered through City Councillors > It's more likely to come out muddy and nuanced and reeking of BS.

[MalcolmTucker]

Since a contract isn't ready to go for the fall, no real reason for all the hubub. New city council passes a motion endorsing something, and it goes from there. Scope is finalized and goes to Metrolinx or Infrastructure Ontario for its place in the cue.

[bigguy1231]

It doesn't look too promising. The Minister has basically said yes we will fund it 100%, but don't expect it to happen soon. In other words they were trying to buy votes in the city, it didn't work so we are no longer a priority.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4690566-province-not-ready-to-commit-to-811-million-hamilton-lrt/

[Gurnett71]

[QUOTE=bigguy1231;6669421]It doesn't look too promising. The Minister has basically said yes we will fund it 100%, but don't expect it to happen soon. In other words they were trying to buy votes in the city, it didn't work so we are no longer a priority.

McHattie seems to think otherwise as he was "blown out of the water"!:haha:

[Innsertnamehere]

Its essentially "we don't know what we are spending our money on yet".

The official announcements will come in December once GO RER is priced out and metrolinx has figured out what to do with the rest of the money.

[bigguy1231]

[QUOTE=bigguy1231;6669421]It doesn't look too promising. The Minister has basically said yes we will fund it 100%, but don't expect it to happen soon. In other words they were trying to buy votes in the city, it didn't work so we are no longer a priority.

McHattie seems to think otherwise as he was "blown out of the water"!:haha:

He also thinks he has a chance of becoming Mayor.

[ScreamingViking]

Its essentially "we don't know what we are spending our money on yet".

Agreed.

[thistleclub]

Steve Munro touched on Metrolinx's Draft Benefits Case Analysis for Hamilton LRT in February 2010 (http://stevemunro.ca/?p=3304), relating that:

After a great deal of number crunching (which I will leave to my readers’ copious spare time), the report concludes:

Overall, the results indicate that an investment in LRT in Hamilton will generate significant benefits and support the City’s broader objectives to revitalize, redevelop and reshape its most significant east-west corridor. While the lowest cost option, Option 1, produces the highest benefit-cost ratio of 1.4, both LRT options generated benefit-cost ratios that are greater than 1.0. The highest cost option, Option 2, also produced the greatest benefits in all accounts, all of which make an important contribution towards achieving the objectives and goals of both the City and the Province. (Page 51)

This is a straightforward, unambiguous conclusion. However, there is a covering report on the Metrolinx agenda, and it is not quite so clear in supporting LRT.

Although full LRT is the highest-cost option, it also generates the highest transportation user benefits in terms of travel time savings, ridership attraction and overall “qualitative” travel experience. LRT also carries a stronger potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and generate more significant economic development impacts such as employment, income and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth for the city and region. The BCA also identifies LRT as having greater potential to shape land uses and uplift land values along the King-Main corridor.

BRT is considerably less expensive to build and thus generates a strong benefits-cost ratio. At the same time, however, BRT delivers less total benefits and its secondary benefits are less extensive.

On the other hand, the significantly higher investment required for the full LRT option will require careful attention to the partial LRT option to increase affordability – and even to the BRT option if sufficient funding is unavailable for either LRT option. (Page 2, italics added)

[thistleclub]

Hamilton’s LRT dream hangs in the balance (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/hamiltons-lrt-dream-hangs-in-the-balance/article20317222/)
(The Globe & Mail, Adrian Morrow, Sept 2 2014)

For seven years, the Ontario government and the City of Hamilton have discussed it, studied it and planned it: a 14-kilometre light-rail line between McMaster University and Eastgate Square, passing through the heart of the industrial city.

Council has voted overwhelmingly in favour of it. Citizens have endorsed it in public consultations. City staff completed extensive design, engineering and environmental work 18 months ago. Provincial transit agency Metrolinx has been working steadily to sort out its technical details.

But the Liberal administration still has not put up the estimated $1-billion required to get the project built.

Now, the LRT is shaping up to be one of the first major tests of Premier Kathleen Wynne’s promise to end the province’s history of dithering on transit. And the project’s advocates say that, armed with her newly won majority government, she has no reason to delay.

“We’re all set to go in terms of our position in Hamilton,” said Councillor Brian McHattie, who is also running for mayor in the fall election. “It’s time for the province to step up.”

In an interview, Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca was non-commital. He said he hoped to announce “significant funding” for Hamilton transit before the end of the year. But he appeared to leave the door open to scrapping the LRT in favour of something cheaper and less ambitious – expanded bus service, for instance.

“I’m not in a position to specifically say right now,” he said when asked if his government would build an LRT. “We’re still in the process of going through the analysis.”


Read it in full here (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/hamiltons-lrt-dream-hangs-in-the-balance/article20317222/).

[LikeHamilton]

On CHML's web site today

Featured Poll

Are you for or against LRT in Hamilton?


I'm for it
I'm against it
I'm still undecided


http://www.900chml.com/

Right now it is


I'm for it (25%)

I'm against it (57%)

I'm still undecided (18%)

[matt602]

Not really surprising considering the target audience. It would be completely reversed if CBC Hamilton did the same poll.

[drpgq]

Those polls for CHML are pretty frustrating. I'm guessing that those voting against somehow don't know that we're trying to get the province to finance the vast majority of the capital costs. And that if we don't get it, the province isn't going to give us that money for something else.

[thistleclub]

More pot-stirring.

McMaster study says LRT no magic bullet for Hamilton (http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4872957-mcmaster-study-says-lrt-no-magic-bullet-for-hamilton/)
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, Sept 20 2014)

Hamiltonians should tone down their expectations about the city-building powers of LRT, according to the co-author of a new study (http://www.scribd.com/doc/240546620/McMaster-Study) by McMaster University researchers.

PhD student Chris Higgins, the study's lead hand, says there's been "a bit of an oversell" in positioning the project as a catalyst for economic development.

"Just temper your expectations," he said in an interview.

Based on an extensive review of LRT land use literature, the study found Hamilton falls short of the conditions necessary to transform the city along the proposed 14-kilometre route between Mac and Eastgate Square, particularly the east part.

The study is significant because the $811-million project is a key municipal election issue among council and mayoral contenders.

Higgins and his co-authors with the McMaster Institute for Transportation and Logistics identified six factors that need to be in place for LRT to have an appreciable impact on shaping development.

Hamilton meets three of the yardsticks: availability of building land, supportive government planning policies and good local economic conditions.

But it comes up short on three other markers. The necessary positive social and physical conditions for attracting developers, financiers and residents are not in place. And LRT doesn't provide "increased accessibility" compared to other modes of transportation.

The latter essentially means that because there's no traffic congestion along the route, there's no incentive for luring new transit riders or developers.

Social and physical conditions refer to things like income, education and health levels, the prevalence of crime, safety perceptions, and area housing, all of which are issues along sections of the corridor, all of which impact the appeal to developers, money lenders and potential residents.

Higgins says the case for LRT is much stronger in the west end of the city and downtown than in the more challenged east end.

Read it in full here (http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4872957-mcmaster-study-says-lrt-no-magic-bullet-for-hamilton/).

[HillStreetBlues]

Higgins says the case for LRT is much stronger in the west end of the city and downtown than in the more challenged east end.
Read it in full here (http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4872957-mcmaster-study-says-lrt-no-magic-bullet-for-hamilton/).

Wasn’t there a phased-in option, first an LRT Downtown to McMaster with BRT east, followed by LRT to the east later?

[SteelTown]

^ Yes, it was one option from Metrolinx business case study.

[thistleclub]

Chris Higgins expands on the Dreschel conversation in a Raise the Hammer essay, Some Context on the 'LRT is No Magic Bullet' Article (http://raisethehammer.org/article/2297/some_context_on_the_lrt_is_no_magic_bullet_article).

[thistleclub]

Minister Del Duca's mandate letter has been released (https://www.ontario.ca/government/2014-mandate-letter-transportation) along with those of his cabinet colleagues (https://www.ontario.ca/government/mandate-letters). Key details:

As Minister of Transportation, you will continue to build better transit and transportation infrastructure across the province. You will support Moving Ontario Forward, our 10-year transit and transportation strategy, which will build better public transit in congested cities and better roads to connect towns and rural and remote communities. Your goal is to make transit and transportation investments that promote economic productivity, enhance quality of life and improve the natural environment — including reducing greenhouse gases.

Your ministry’s specific priorities include:

Building the Next Generation of Transit and Transportation Infrastructure
• Collaborating with partner ministers, municipalities, local governments, transit agencies, citizens and experts to build a seamless, provincewide transportation network.
• Working with the Minister of Finance, the President of the Treasury Board and partner ministers to support Moving Ontario Forward. This strategy will invest $29 billion in transit and transportation and other critical infrastructure through two new dedicated funds. The funds provide up to $15 billion toward transit projects in the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA) — and nearly $14 billion toward projects elsewhere in Ontario.
• Bringing forward a proposal to implement high-occupancy toll lanes to supplement the dedicated funds allocated in Moving Ontario Forward.
• Building critical transit expansion projects currently underway in the GTHA, including the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit line and the Union-Pearson Express.
• Working to transform existing GO commuter rail into a Regional Express Rail rapid transit system over the next 10 years, with the support of Metrolinx and Infrastructure Ontario. The system will provide 15-minute, two-way electrified service and is the cornerstone of our government’s transit plan. Your goal is to manage congestion and move people throughout the GTHA.
• Working with Metrolinx to prioritize other rapid transit projects contained in The Big Move, the regional transit plan for the GTHA, for investment consideration under Moving Ontario Forward.
• Developing customer-focused solutions to integrate fare and service. Your goal is to create a seamless and transparent fare system across the GTHA.
• Leading the review of the Metrolinx Act, as set out in the act itself.
• Supporting other priority transportation initiatives outside the GTHA through dedicated funding under Moving Ontario Forward, such as local and regional transit, roads, and bridges and strategic highway improvements.
• Continuing to support transit initiatives outside the GTHA, through investments such as the existing provincial gas tax program, the Ottawa and Waterloo rapid transit projects and other programs that further mobility in communities across the province.
• Advancing environmental assessments for high-speed rail — building on the GTHA’s forthcoming Regional Express Rail network — which will link Toronto, Lester B. Pearson International Airport, and Waterloo Region and London, as well as London and Windsor.
• Engaging with other provinces and the federal government to support Ontario’s transit strategy.
• Investing $2.5 billion in highway rehabilitation and expansion projects across the province in 2014-15. I ask that you continue to make progress on Highway 407 East Phase One and the Rt. Hon. Herb Gray Parkway, and on key projects — including Highway 407 East Phase 2 and the widening of Highway 69 between Parry Sound and Sudbury.
• Proceeding with several planned projects such as a new four-lane alignment on Highway 7 between Kitchener and Guelph and extending Highway 427 from Highway 7 to Major Mackenzie Drive in York Region.
• Ensuring that provincially supported transportation infrastructure projects are clearly identified with appropriate signage.

Not surprisingly, RER15 (http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf/board_agenda/20140626/20140626_BoardMtg_Regional_Express_Rail_EN.pdf) is identified as being "the cornerstone of our government’s transit plan." It's disappointing, however, that the government's Big Move ambitions otherwise tend to be qualified or tentative. Hamilton, for example, is presumably one of the nameless "other rapid transit projects contained in The Big Move," which Minister Del Duca will be expected "to prioritize... for investment consideration."

[thistleclub]

Hamilton votes: Dundas residents anxious about LRT (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/hamilton-votes-dundas-residents-anxious-about-lrt-1.2791998)
(CBC Hamilton, Samantha Craggs, Oct 8 2014)

It was supposed to be a discussion with Hamilton's mayoral candidates about social justice issues, but in Dundas on Tuesday, the debate revealed a town anxious about light rail transit (LRT).

The audience at the event held by the Association of Dundas Churches posed many questions, from affordable housing to how to keep transit accessible for everyone.

But the main curiosity was LRT, which led to Brad Clark and Fred Eisenberger trading barbs. Eisenberger accused Clark of flip-flopping on the issue, while Clark charges that Eisenberger is trying to sit on the fence until after the election.

LRT is a complex issue for Ward 13 residents, said Marc Risdale, one of nine council candidates.

Some link it to the town’s forced amalgamation 14 years ago, when the perception is that residents were saddled with higher taxes to support the inner city, he said.

“That’s the history of amalgamation,” he said. “Ever since amalgamation, people’s taxes have gone crazy. I talked to a guy today who paid $8,000 for his house — now mind you, that was in 1957 — but his taxes are $5,000 a year. We pay a lot of taxes.”

Council candidate Pamela Mitchell summed up that sentiment during the meeting, when her chance to ask a question turned into a rant against LRT.

“I don’t want the taxpayers in Dundas paying for Hamilton’s stupidness,” she told the candidates.

“There really is no consensus on LRT in Dundas,” Risdale said. “It really is a 50-50 issue, I think. Half the people want it. Half the people don’t want it. The main concern is getting stuck with a gigantic bill.”

Read it in full here (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/hamilton-votes-dundas-residents-anxious-about-lrt-1.2791998).

[thistleclub]

LRT dominates Hamilton election debate for Ward 5 (http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news/lrt-dominates-hamilton-council-debate-for-ward-5/)
(Stoney Creek News, Mike Pearson, Oct 9 2014)

Hamilton’s proposed $811-million light rail transit line was the hottest topic during a municipal election debate for Ward 5, with all candidates voicing concerns for the project.

Challengers David Brown, Larry Storm and George Rusich squared off with incumbent Chad Collins at the Cable 14 debate, which airs again on Oct. 15 at 4 p.m.

Collins, who has represented the Ward 5 area since 1995, sought clarity from his opponents on LRT after indicating he still has serious concerns for the project, despite supporting the Rapid Ready transportation report along with a majority of council.

After holding community meetings and consulting with business owners in the Queenston Road area, Collins said the current LRT design will not work for Ward 5. The 14-kilometre B-Line as it’s referred to, is proposed to run along Main and King streets between McMaster University and Eastgate Square.

“The first thing (business owners have) said to me is they’re not interested in LRT,” said Collins.

The councillor noted current LRT designs would prohibit left turns in and out of some businesses.

“I’ve raised those design concerns at council and I’ve said ‘If you cannot resolve those issues, LRT will not work in Ward 5,’” he said.

Instead of LRT, Collins prefers an enhanced GO Station on Centennial Parkway.

Brown, a land use planner, hopes the city will enhance bus service, boosting ridership in the suburban areas, before jumping on the LRT bandwagon.

“I think that LRT will be something that’s necessary and valuable for our city, long term. I do think we need to lay the ground work and work with the province to figure out an appropriate ground work and timeline to implement that. I don’t think it’s today. We can’t afford it today,” Brown said.

Read it in full here (http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news/lrt-dominates-hamilton-council-debate-for-ward-5/).

[HillStreetBlues]

In Waterloo Region, one of the latest opponents to the Ion (it's a done deal with shovels in the ground, but that doesn't stop some people from continuing to try to derail it) was the owner of a fencing company that would lose left-turn access as a result of the LRT. He and others actually tried unsuccessfully to challenge the project in court, and he is now running for Regional Council.

I am shocked that some people would be short-sighted enough to oppose the thing based on a left-turn restriction, but I guess it happens.

[Beedok]

I think if LRT were extended to downtown Dundas they'd feel less like they were paying for a Hamilton thing.

[oldcoote]

Love how all these politicians who supported it previously are now on the fence. Must be silly season. Fools.

[HillStreetBlues]

I think if LRT were extended to downtown Dundas they'd feel less like they were paying for a Hamilton thing.

Maybe. But then everyone else would be paying for some real stupidity.

[MalcolmTucker]

I can't believe how small ball this is - complaining about the operating costs as unaffordable? Ridiculous.

[flar]

Maybe. But then everyone else would be paying for some real stupidity.

The real stupidity is not extending it to Dundas.

[mattgrande]

Agreed with flar, I'd love to see it extended down there. There a bit near Osler where the density doesn't support it, but it's worth building through that dead zone to connect the two downtowns.

[HillStreetBlues]

That bit is actually the majority of the added distance. You would be talking about two additional stops, I guess, University Plaza and downtown Dundas. I guess that University Plaza would serve a fair few students going grocery shopping, but the density in the area rapidly decreases west of Cootes, and there isn’t much again until downtown Dundas- the area around University Plaza could not be called dense.

Was Dundas ever seriously considered? I’ve heard people mention it, but never thought it was part of planning in any significant way.

[thistleclub]

Was Dundas ever seriously considered? I’ve heard people mention it, but never thought it was part of planning in any significant way.

From Steer Davies Gleave's Hamilton King-Main Rapid Transit Benefits Case (http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/benefitscases/benefits_case-hamilton.pdf) (Feb 2010):

The Hamilton B-Line Rapid Transit initiative is one of the projects contemplated in MoveOntario 2020 and was identified as a Top 15 priority project in The Big Move. The project involves the provision of a higher order rapid transit service along the existing B-line corridor which currently runs from a western terminus at University Plaza, a privately owned retail mall west of McMaster University, eastward via the King Street / Main Street corridor to an eastern terminus at the Eastgate Square shopping mall.

[bigguy1231]

Love how all these politicians who supported it previously are now on the fence. Must be silly season. Fools.

Most of them supported studying the idea, they didn't necessarily support proceeding with it. I have been saying all along that supporting it in principle and actually voting to proceed with it are two totally different things. I wouldn't count on getting majority support from council.

[thistleclub]

Meanwhile, in a municipal election with two former Liberal MPs as mayoral frontrunners (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/hazel-mccallion-endorses-bonnie-crombie-in-mississauga-mayoral-race/article21076110/)...

Province will pay for Mississauga LRT: Crombie (http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/09/mississauga-mayoral-candidate-bonnie-crombie-vows-beefed-up-transit-for-mississauga)
(Toronto Sun, Shawn Jeffords, Sept 9 2014)

Mississauga mayoral candidate Bonnie Crombie says the province told her it will pay for a $1.6-billion light-rail transit line.

In rolling out her campaign platform Tuesday, Crombie pledged to build the Hurontario LRT by 2020 and offered assurances that the provincial government will put up the cash for the project.

“I’ve been assured as a result of the new revenue tools we will not have to put up the funding ourselves,” said Crombie, who unveiled her platform at Mississauga’s Living Arts Centre. “Mississauga will be included in the next wave of funding of the next Big Move (wave) at Metrolinx.”

The province estimates it will take five to eight years to build the Hurontario LRT if work starts in 2015, she said.

Crombie insisted the LRT will “form the spine” of a regionally integrated transit network in the city and must be completed by 2020 — if not sooner.

But she stressed that Mississauga property taxpayers can’t afford a special levy to pay for the project.

“We’re ready to go ... Now we need action. We need our fair share and we need to get it built,” she added.

Patrick Searle, spokesman for Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca, would not say if the province had committed to pay the entire cost of the Hurontario LRT.

“The province will work with Metrolinx and municipalities on how best to prioritize transit investments through the use of rigorous business-case analyses,” he said in an e-mail.

Crombie, meanwhile, also promised in her 64-page platform that she will hold property tax increases to the rate of inflation. She also acknowledged that the city must find operational efficiencies and she did not rule out service cuts.

Steve Mahoney, the other main contender in the race to replace outgoing Hazel McCallion, said Crombie’s claims to have had talks with the province about LRT funding are simply an attempt to take credit for the work of the current mayor and council. City staff have told him $200 million will be required from the municipal coffers to fund work on surface areas and the stations, he said.

“Thinking pie in the sky that the province is just going to cut a blank cheque is not the case,” he insisted.

[SteelTown]

Yet, we have a candidate that voted for LRT, wants BRT but now doesn't want dedicated bus lanes but just more buses along the B-Line.

Hello people, we're going to pay for public transit (via province) either we like it or not.

I really don't understand why people are debating LRT/BRT/more buses. The real issue here is the province new revenue tools for public transit, yet no one is talking about it. Are we going to send the transit cheque back to Queen's Park each time?

[thistleclub]

I really don't understand why people are debating LRT/BRT/more buses. The real issue here is the province new revenue tools for public transit, yet no one is talking about it. Are we going to send the transit cheque back to Queen's Park each time?

Agreed. It's not a matter of accepting or refusing LRT funding, as some have suggested. It's a matter of accepting or refusing public transit funding. The province is in the position to determine what capital investments/enhancements are warranted based on its "rigorous business-case analyses." The City has assembled and submitted what it feels is its strongest case for LRT in Hamilton, Rapid Ready (http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/76D38C17-DC96-4C54-8E55-3A6EA1C71D73/0/Feb25EDRMS_n414203_v1_5_1_PW13014.pdf). The MTO is "still in the process of going through the analysis (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/hamiltons-lrt-dream-hangs-in-the-balance/article20317222/)." Debating LRT/BRT/more buses as if council had a defining say in the matter (beyond the preference articulated in Rapid Ready) is misleading and does not improve the public conversation around needed transit infrastructure. The provincial government will decide how it will generate transit funding and where/when/how it will allocate those funds.

This was essentially made clear about a year and a half ago. Hamilton Spectator, May 2 2013 (http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2550340-hamilton-council-says-it-s-all-or-nothing-on-lrt-funding/):

...city councillors say they’re not willing to accept any extra fees. Instead, they want the province to pay the full cost of Hamilton’s east-west LRT line — estimated to cost about $800 million — without facing any extra fees.

“It really is creating a tax,” said Councillor Sam Merulla. “How in God’s name would I ever support that?”

But Councillor Brian McHattie, the lone opposing vote in Wednesday’s decision, says that’s a dangerous move. He argues there are other municipalities vying for transit dollars that will be more than willing to “play ball” with the province when it comes to additional fees. He also says it makes him question whether his council colleagues are truly on board with LRT.

“I think what we’ve seen from council is that support for LRT is about a centimetre deep,” McHattie said. “While they support the reports, the concept of LRT, when it comes to taxpayers funding the programs with new dollars, there’s no support.”

Metrolinx is asking municipalities to comment on their proposed revenue tools in advance of its May 27 board meeting. Hamilton city staff recommended accepting all but four of the proposed fee avenues: local transit fare increases, property tax hikes, development charges and parking space levies.

Councillors say because the province paid 100 per cent of the capital costs for the first wave of its so-called Big Move projects, it should do the same for Hamilton. Council has always maintained that the province should pay the entire capital cost of the B-line LRT.

City manager Chris Murray says he’s received no indication from Metrolinx that Hamilton will be penalized for rejecting the proposed funding tools, as McHattie suggests.

“I appreciate his fears. But at the end of the day, Metrolinx was seeking input. And I believe that the committee has provided that funding.”

Still, Murray also pointed out that Hamilton council has little control over what, if any, fees the province ultimately decides to impose to pay for transit upgrades.

“The simple answer is, we’re in their hands. They can do what they want.”

[thistleclub]

Clark shifts gears in LRT debate, reveals his BRT vision (http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4913936-dreschel-clark-shifts-gears-in-lrt-debate-reveals-his-brt-vision/)
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, Oct 15 2014)

[HillStreetBlues]

It’s true that we could learn a lot from Viva, it’s a great system. But it has little to do with the way transit in the lower city works. One of the main things that Viva does is to get suburban commuters to TTC and Go Stations. It would be a great model for us to use on the mountain, with routes along the Linc and RHVP, and from the suburban communities to Go facilities. That kind of express bus/BRT doesn’t make nearly as much sense in a built-up urban area.

[markbarbera]

As a regular transit user, I tend to relate more to the stance that Brad Clark is presenting here. It is no secret that I have said here for quite some time that it makes no sense to try to introduce LRT when so much of the transit system meant to feed it is providing embarassingly substandard service.

For me, I would support the idea of enhanced express bus service city-wide if it was paired with a dedicated BRT route that follows the current B-Line. However, if a dedicated BRT route is to be successfully, the dedicated bus only lanes need to be altered drastically.

The solution to make a BRT bus-only lane compatible with existing automobile traffic is to remove the bus lane from the northernmost lane on King, and replace it with a contra-flow eastbound bus-only lane along the south side of King, ideally divided from the westbound lanes by a median. This would achieve a dedicated bus lane that eliminates the potential of it being used by unauthorized single occupant vehicles. It also would allow for safer left and right turns for westbound automobile traffic. Parking could be returned to the entire length of the north curb lane, and, during non-peak travel periods, parking could also be allowed in the south lane of westbound traffic. Passengers can board the buses from the sidewalk on the south side of King and the bus traffic can be regulated by priority traffic signals. Main street would be configured in a similar style, with its northernmost lane reserved as a contra-flow bus only lane for westbound BRT.

If we adopted this model, we could use the Metrolinx cash earmarked for higher order rapid transit in Hamilton to provide dedicated BRT along the B-Line as well as express bus service for the remaining four lines of the envisioned BLAST express routes in place in short order, with enough money left over to enhance service offered by regular transit routes to boot. This would provide immediate improvement to the transit experience in Hamilton and set the framework to move to LRT when the city is better positioned to do so by strengthening and enhancing the transit network required to make LRT successful.

[thistleclub]

In Steeltown, a familiar refrain on light rail transit (http://nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=200085)
(NOW, Paul Weinberg, Oct 20 2014)

It is a rite of passage for newcomers to Hamilton to head to hip James Street North, the heart of the art district.

The downtown is rather depressed but there is an exciting arts scene on James North – it always comes up in discussion of a changing Hamilton with its galleries, clubs, independent restaurants; the popular well-attended monthly art crawl and the fall “Supercrawl” music festival, which attracts 100,000 attendees.

The city of half a million is far more than that. Greater Hamilton is also blessed by accessible Greenbelt surroundings like the Niagara Escarpment and the Cootes Paradise waterfront sanctuary.

I moved with my wife to the rust belt city in May 2013 after living in Toronto almost all my life, following other younger Torontonians moving here as well because of the cheaper housing. The local realtors’ association cannot say how many former Torontonians are buying up the reasonably priced building stock.

The Transportation Tomorrow Survey (http://dmg.utoronto.ca/pdf/tts/2011/regional_travel_summaries/Hamilton.pdf) offers a clue. It reports that more than a third of working Hamiltonians are commuting daily outside this city by car or GO Transit, with about 82 per cent of them headed directly for the GTA.

The migration to Steeltown has picked up to the point that locals complain of recent arrivals infecting the political culture of working-class Steeltown. The current municipal elections have provided flashpoint for that debate over an issue familiar to Torontonians – the car versus light rail transit (LRT).

Brian McHattie, a planner and local councilor since 2004 who is originally from Etobicoke, is running on a progressive platform and has the support of urban activists who want to see more streets like James North in Hamilton. His slogan: A New Mayor For A New Hamilton. To that end he’s released a four-part plan for improving neighbourhoods that he’s dubbed, wait for it, Transit City (https://mchattie2014.ca/posts/26-mchattie-outlines-transit-city-plan).

And yes, like the plan of the same name pushed by former lefty Toronto mayor David Miller, LRT. The $1 billion line proposed would run from McMaster University to Eastgate Mall across the lower part of the city below the forest-laden Niagara Escarpment to Lake Ontario. The plan also includes more space for walking and cycling on city streets.

For local activists who have long been fighting uphill battles for two-way, pedestrian-friendly “complete streets” here, McHattie is a bit of a godsend. They see his LRT plan as an opportunity to transform whole swaths of an economically stagnant lower city into neighbourhoods that will attract smart development.

But there’s a major roadblock: the suburban residents on Hamilton Mountain above the Escarpment who find these lower city roads handy for zipping in, out or around Hamilton in their vehicles. That sentiment is often expressed by their political representatives on council who oppose the LRT even with the province potentially willing to pay for it.

Hamilton is an industrial town with its own culture,” says veteran activist Don McLean, co-ordinator of municipal watchdog group, Citizens at City Hall (http://hamiltoncatch.org/index.php). But that's changing. “A lot of people moving into the lower city want walkable neighbourhoods.”

Kim Arnott, the co-author of the Hamilton Book of Everything, argues that “some Toronto transplants” to Hamilton are pushing “ideological, anti-car,” solutions like light rail on reluctant locals for “problems that may or may really exist.”

She says the advocates, including architects, comprise “the same 20 people” whose names and quotes pop in the Hamilton Spectator, the local daily newspaper, which recently published a series of pro-LRT op ed pieces.

Apparently, Toronto is not the only city where an urban/suburban divide is messing with transit plans.

Read it in full here (http://nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=200085).

[CaptainKirk]

... it makes no sense to try to introduce LRT when so much of the transit system meant to feed it is providing embarassingly substandard service.

If LRT was greenlit today, it still might take up to 10 years for it to be up and running. Surely we can do both concurrently and expect the greater HSR service to be upgraded within a decade.

[markbarbera]

If LRT was greenlit today, it still might take up to 10 years for it to be up and running. Surely we can do both concurrently and expect the greater HSR service to be upgraded within a decade.

Are suggesting there is enough money being made available by Metrolinx to build LRT and ramp up the city's under-served transit routes concurrently right now? If you truly believe this to be the case, why has the entire debate been framed as "LRT or nothing" up until this point?

[ScreamingViking]

Rapid Ready covered a lot of bus service improvements too, didn't it? Improvements that did not hinge on provincial investment in local transit?

Whether the next council has any appetite to finally agree to a substantial long-term increase in the HSR's budget is an open question though. The current council couldn't do it when it came down to making the decisions.

[CaptainKirk]

Are suggesting there is enough money being made available by Metrolinx to build LRT and ramp up the city's under-served transit routes concurrently right now?

No, but why not go after it, or have the city upgrade it's own HSR service?

Once LRT goes online, it will free up buses and drivers, and provide more revenue to support better HSR service.

If you truly believe this to be the case, why has the entire debate been framed as "LRT or nothing" up until this point?

I don't see the entire LRT debate framed like that at all. Maybe by a few that resort to FUD politics, but not the entire debate.

This "either/or" BS has got to stop. Get on with leading, and lobbying for our city.

[markbarbera]

It is those who have been militant-like with their pro-LRT position that have framed it as a "LRT or nothing" discussion. They have equated those who want to explore alternative uses for the Metrolinx cash to saying "no thanks" to the money Metrolinx is offering, implying the Metrolinx cash is for LRT only, which simply is not true.

[HillStreetBlues]

Markbarbera, I’m with you that the “very pro” LRT crowd has mischaracterized the Metrolinx money, and framed the debate (as you correctly say, as “LRT or nothing”) in a very negative way. We have no idea about the Metrolinx money, none. We can negotiate hard for it in any way we like- if we decide we want LRT, we can push for that; if we want expanded transit across the city, we can push for that. The provincial government has given little solid reason to believe they will only fund LRT.

You asked “Are suggesting there is enough money being made available by Metrolinx to build LRT and ramp up the city's under-served transit routes concurrently right now?” I think that, if we were serious about rapid transit along certain corridors with local bus lines designed to feed those corridors, we could make a lot of improvements with the municipality’s own resources. The 10 itself should be fed by lines specifically designed to connect with it- instead, we have a jumble of neighbourhood lines whose routings cannot be explained without a history lesson, and are not useful for most riders. Correcting those is low-cost, and can be done quickly. Improving service (adding more frequency) is something that the city of Hamilton should be doing (and should have been doing), with or without Metrolinx.

[markbarbera]

Markbarbera, I’m with you that the “very pro” LRT crowd has mischaracterized the Metrolinx money, and framed the debate (as you correctly say, as “LRT or nothing”) in a very negative way. We have no idea about the Metrolinx money, none. We can negotiate hard for it in any way we like- if we decide we want LRT, we can push for that; if we want expanded transit across the city, we can push for that. The provincial government has given little solid reason to believe they will only fund LRT.

You asked “Are suggesting there is enough money being made available by Metrolinx to build LRT and ramp up the city's under-served transit routes concurrently right now?” I think that, if we were serious about rapid transit along certain corridors with local bus lines designed to feed those corridors, we could make a lot of improvements with the municipality’s own resources. The 10 itself should be fed by lines specifically designed to connect with it- instead, we have a jumble of neighbourhood lines whose routings cannot be explained without a history lesson, and are not useful for most riders. Correcting those is low-cost, and can be done quickly. Improving service (adding more frequency) is something that the city of Hamilton should be doing (and should have been doing), with or without Metrolinx.

I agree wholeheartedly. This should be the case, yet council could not even agree on expanding the much needed Rymal service a couple months ago, one very small piece of the overall transit inefficiencies. If they can't even get that right, how can anyone seriously be considering adding the responsibility of designing, implementing and operating a LRT system into the mix and expect success?

[thistleclub]

Once LRT goes online, it will free up buses and drivers, and provide more revenue to support better HSR service.

In theory. Then there's the default scenario laid out in Rapid Ready (page 3 of PW13014 (http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/76D38C17-DC96-4C54-8E55-3A6EA1C71D73/0/Feb25EDRMS_n414203_v1_5_1_PW13014.pdf)), which assumes that 18 buses currently operating on the B-Line corridor would simply be removed from service as an operating cost efficiency.

There may be room within the RT funding envelope to address two fronts of transit modernization. Going back to the 2007-era election promises, whatever they're worth, consider a hypothetical scenario wherein $1 billion has been earmarked for capital investment in public transit within the City of Hamilton (over and above GO Transit enhancements). If B-Line LRT were to cost $850 million, that might leave $150 million that could be redeployed to enhancements elsewhere in the HSR.

The City may be shuffling in this direction already. As noted by Hamilton Transit earlier this year ( http://www.hamiltontransit.ca/staff-looking-towards-articulated-cng-buses/):

Purchasing articulated buses will allow the HSR to increase capacity on several routes that continue to experience overcrowding and bypassing of intending transit users, most notably 2 Barton and in the King-Main corridor. Articulated buses allow for extra capacity without the extra expenditure of more buses on the road and more drivers.

Renewing rolling stock on the most heavily trafficked routes in this way allows the HSR to increase ridership, and the accompanying rider revenue might in turn support the increased operating costs that go hand in hand with service expansion elsewhere in the system without requiring much additional budget bravery from staff or council.

Again, hypothetical. But such investment is overdue. It's worth noting that back in 1996, a decade before Metrolinx was formed, the City aimed to reach 100 rides per capita by 2021.

[thistleclub]

Wynne cabinet builds in option to drain Ontario transit funds (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/wynne-cabinet-builds-in-option-to-drain-ontario-transit-funds/article21154051/)
(The Globe and Mail, Adrian Morrow, Oct 17 2014)

Ontario’s Liberal government has created a legal loophole that would allow it to divert money away from transit construction.

During the June election, Premier Kathleen Wynne repeatedly promised to sell off government assets – such as buildings, land and parts of government-owned electricity companies – and put the money into the Trillium Trust, a new fund dedicated to paying for transit.

But the legislation governing the Trillium Trust gives Ms. Wynne’s cabinet and Treasury Board the executive power to decide how much revenue from asset sales, if any, is actually put in the Trust. This allows the government to choose to redirect the money away from transit and into other spending files.

In an interview, Finance Minister Charles Sousa suggested asset sales are too complicated to handle with a single hard-and-fast law. For instance, some asset-sale proceeds must be used for other purposes, such as to pay transaction costs, and cannot be put into the Trust. Mr. Sousa said handling such things is best left up to cabinet.

“Most everything that we sell as an asset goes to the Trillium Trust; that’s the intent,” he said.

But critics charge the law still gives cabinet too much freedom to do what it wants with the money. And the cash-strapped government could be tempted to use some of the funds to erase its $12.5-billion deficit instead of building transit....

On top of asset sales, Ms. Wynne also promised to divert 7.5 cents per litre of the gas tax to transit.

It is not clear, however, how this will work. Mr. Sousa said the gas tax is not going into the Trillium Trust, and he was vague on what mechanism the province will use to ensure it gets put toward transit.

“That’s at our discretion already,” he said. “We put it in the budget, we made clear what it is that we’re dedicating.”

Read it in full here (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/wynne-cabinet-builds-in-option-to-drain-ontario-transit-funds/article21154051/).

[thistleclub]

Election melting away council support for LRT (http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4926501-election-melting-away-council-support-for-lrt)
(Hamilton Spectator, Matthew Van Dongen, Oct 21 2014)

[SteelTown]

Election melting away council support for LRT (http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4926501-election-melting-away-council-support-for-lrt)
(Hamilton Spectator, Matthew Van Dongen, Oct 21 2014)

And that's the scary part. It's council not the Mayor who will pick LRT/BRT/more buses option for the B-Line.

[Jon Dalton]

Metrolinx is funding rapid transit lines whether BRT or LRT. I don't believe we can buy $200 million or whatever worth of buses and stick them anywhere and call it rapid transit. It wouldn't qualify for the funding.

That said, I would rather see a Brad Clark type plan than full BRT on the B-line. This approach would improve service everywhere while leaving the door open to LRT in the future with a smarter council.

LRT is not dead though. We are almost certain to have a pro LRT mayor as well as pro LRT ward 1 and ward 3 councillors. If the Metrolinx funding comes through, it's not hard to imagine enough of those flip-flopping councillors to fall in line.

We aren't the only municipality to eff up on LRT. Ottawa is finally getting their system underway after it was canned back in 2007. That's when Hamilton started the debate. http://www.raisethehammer.org/article/468/downtown_update

[markbarbera]

Metrolinx is funding rapid transit lines whether BRT or LRT. I don't believe we can buy $200 million or whatever worth of buses and stick them anywhere and call it rapid transit. It wouldn't qualify for the funding.



I don't think Metrolinx funding is that strictly qualified. I think it is much more fluid. They have proven themselves rather flexible as to what qualifies for funding in the past, and there is no readson to think that flexibility is no longer there. They have financed the purchase of articulated buses for the (non-BRT) B-line in the past, and it was Metrolinx funding that paid for the bike share project in Hamilton. The interpretation of higher order transit seems rather loose.

By the way, does anyone know where we are on the implementation of the bike share program? It was supposed to be in place this summer, wasn't it?

[CaptainKirk]

I would rather see a Brad Clark type plan than full BRT on the B-line. This approach would improve service everywhere while leaving the door open to LRT in the future with a smarter council.

3 major problems with this:
BRT will be more costly for the city to operate
Upgrading to LRT later would create a huge disruption to the b-Line BRT during "retrofit"
Upgrading to LRT creates a much bigger expense


I'd rather see a scaled down LRT, perhaps a T-shape, Mac to King @James, and up and down James from the waterfront, past both GO stations to St Joes / future mountain access point.

[Beedok]

Upgrading Ottawa's BRT to LRT is proving to be somewhat of a nightmare because there's huge numbers of buses that need to be redirected while their corridors are being upgraded.

[HillStreetBlues]

I'd rather see a scaled down LRT, perhaps a T-shape, Mac to King @James, and up and down James from the waterfront, past both GO stations to St Joes / future mountain access point.

One of the arguments against the proposed LRT line is that it is a stub (people have argued that here)- I can’t agree with that since it seems to be on par in length with many lines elsewhere. But this ‘T’ really would be short, and would not serve that many riders- I don’t think the Bayfront is a big trip generator. The Go stations would be only at very specific times of the day.

4 Bayfront has really low ridership for a lower city line. I don’t have much idea about the A-Line, but the few times I have taken it at rush hours, the loads were not even comparable to the 1 or the 10.

[CaptainKirk]

One of the arguments against the proposed LRT line is that it is a stub (people have argued that here)- I can’t agree with that since it seems to be on par in length with many lines elsewhere. But this ‘T’ really would be short, and would not serve that many riders- I don’t think the Bayfront is a big trip generator. The Go stations would be only at very specific times of the day.

4 Bayfront has really low ridership for a lower city line. I don’t have much idea about the A-Line, but the few times I have taken it at rush hours, the loads were not even comparable to the 1 or the 10.

Keep in mind, if LRT were to be greenlit now, it wouldn't come on line for about 7-10 years. Would GO service be upgraded enough by then to warrant such connections? Would we have all day and express GO service by then?

[thistleclub]

City Issues: Hey, Toronto! Transit Isn't Just Your Issue (http://theagenda.tvo.org/blog/agenda-blogs/city-issues-hey-toronto-transit-isnt-just-your-issue)
(The Inside Agenda Blog, John Michael McGrath, Oct 21 2014)

The City of Toronto's transit issues are well-known: the region's choking congestion costs the city anywhere from $6 billion (http://www.bot.com/advocacy/campaigns/Pages/break-the-gridlock.aspx) to $11 billion a year (http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/Commentary_385.pdf), but consensus on the solution is elusive: Toronto's transit plans were changed in each of 2010 (http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2010/03/26/miller_outraged_as_budget_sideswipes_gta_transit.html), 2011 (http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/03/31/funding-questions-linger-after-new-transit-plan-announced/), 2012 (http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/08/future-of-transit-expansion-in-toronto-comes-to-a-head-wednesday/) and 2013 (http://globalnews.ca/news/818726/murray-to-announce-details-of-scarborough-subway/). And 2015 could bring further changes (http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-story/4925305-toronto-votes-fate-of-sheppard-east-lrt-depends-on-results-of-city-election/).

But cities across the province are working on their own transit plans, both inside the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (in concert with Metrolinx, the regional transit planning body) and beyond.

Hamilton voters might have the starkest transit choice this election cycle, where the incumbent Bob Bratina has opted out of the race in favour of a federal run next year. That's left former mayor Fred Eisenberger and councillors Brian McHattie and Brad Clark (a former Tory MPP and Minister of Transportation) battling for the open mayor's seat. Eisenberger and McHattie back a proposed light rail transit (LRT) line through Hamilton's downtown (the B-Line), while Clark says the city can't afford it.

"For Hamilton, it's not primarily a congestion issue right now. It's primarily about the economic uplift that comes with investment all along the line. That's where the big win is for Hamilton, but it's different in every community," Eisenberger says. A recent McMaster University study noted that Hamilton's relatively-uncongested streets pose "challenges" for the B-Line LRT (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/80913404/Higgins%20-%20LRT%20Paper.pdf), as commuters may be unwilling to abandon their cars for the line.

That study struck a more cautious, but not dismissive, tone than the City of Hamilton's "Rapid Ready" report in 2013 (https://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/1EF0629C-3003-4FC2-A286-8ECACE07BB0E/0/RR1_Rapid_Ready_Report.pdf) or Metrolinx's 2010 business case assessment (http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/benefitscases/Benefits_Case-Hamilton.pdf), which were both bullish on the project.

Clark says Hamilton's transit ridership isn't high enough to support the proposed LRT, and worries that Hamilton is pursuing something because of a mistaken idea of what a growing mid-sized city "should" have, instead of what he says is a more realistic assessment of Hamilton's needs.

"It's an aspiration that's not grounded with financial support, that's not grounded with the ridership that's required to make it a success," Clark says. "I've argued we should increase our ridership first. We've put together a smart transit plan that does just that."

One hitch in the entire plan to date is that even Eisenberger says his support is conditional on the province paying for 100 per cent of the LRT line's roughly $800 million construction cost (with Hamilton paying to operate the new line.) While the province paid the full cost of some major transit projects in the GTA (notably Toronto's Eglinton Crosstown LRT, currently under construction) more recently the provincial Liberal government has said they're looking for more "clarity" from Hamilton....

One of the running themes in all discussions of local transit improvement, at least in Metrolinx's jurisdiction, is where the money will come from. Premier Kathleen Wynne led her Liberals to re-election this summer in part on a promise to spend $15 billion on transit infrastructure over 10 years in the GTHA.

That's a lot of money, but the Liberals have said their priority is shifting GO Train service to all-day, two-way, electrified service. The estimated cost for the transformation of GO train service? $12 billion, according to an estimate earlier this summer (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/go-improvements-will-eat-up-most-of-the-money-for-toronto-area-transit/article19355532/). The Liberals hope that number will come down as Metrolinx refines its planning, but there are still big-ticket projects like Toronto's proposed downtown relief line (http://urbantoronto.ca/news/tags/downtown-relief-line) or mayoral candidate John Tory's SmartTrack plan (http://www.johntory.ca/smarttrack/) that could eat up much of the remainder.


Read it in full here (http://theagenda.tvo.org/blog/agenda-blogs/city-issues-hey-toronto-transit-isnt-just-your-issue).

[thistleclub]

Kevin Werner ( https://twitter.com/WerkHCN/status/526914047900672001) tweets ( https://twitter.com/WerkHCN/status/526913381312512001):

Liberal MPP Ted McMeekin says Hamilton needs to decide which way to go on LRT. He says he knows Eisenberger and can work with him.#HamOnt

"Hamilton needs to clarify just where it stands on" LRT," says McMeekin. #HamOnt

[matt602]

Here we go with this song and dance again. Fred is going to have to fix the mess that Bob created at council if LRT is going to go forward.

[oldcoote]

Kevin Werner ( https://twitter.com/WerkHCN/status/526914047900672001) tweets ( https://twitter.com/WerkHCN/status/526913381312512001):

Liberal MPP Ted McMeekin says Hamilton needs to decide which way to go on LRT. He says he knows Eisenberger and can work with him.#HamOnt

"Hamilton needs to clarify just where it stands on" LRT," says McMeekin. #HamOnt

McMeekin must be simple.

[Jon Dalton]

I expect the LRT issue to be resolved in the coming year now that we have someone in the drivers seat on council. Fred's citizen's panel will come the same conclusion as the other one, the new council will reaffirm a choice for 100% funded LRT. The province will counter with 95% or whatever and it will be a close council vote.

[HillStreetBlues]

I expect the LRT issue to be resolved in the coming year now that we have someone in the drivers seat on council. Fred's citizen's panel will come the same conclusion as the other one, the new council will reaffirm a choice for 100% funded LRT. The province will counter with 95% or whatever and it will be a close council vote.

I think this is a good guess, except for the last part: even with 100% funding, I’m not sure that the council vote will not be narrowly opposed to LRT rather than narrowly in favour. If the province does not provide 100% funding (I think that’s a good guess, too), I would expect council to vote against it and a lot of councillors to claim they don’t have the mandate to spend that money (particularly given Eisenberger’s middle-of-the-road stance on LRT during the campaign).

[thistleclub]

Kevin Werner (https://twitter.com/WerkHCN) has been tweeting a recap of yesterday's City Manager's Breakfast at the Waterfront Banquet Centre. Transit-specific takeaways:

Murray says the city needs to make "investments in transit. We have not seen fare increases in transit." #HamOnt.

Murray says Hamilton needs a "different" transit system. LRT, he says, is only one part of the system for Hamilton. #HamOnt.

Hamilton made it "clear" to the province it needs 100 per cent capitial funding for LRT, Murray says. The province has to respond.#HamOnt.

Mayor-elect Fred Eisenberger, who attended Murray's speech, said agreed with the city manager's points. "We are aligned," he said. #HamOnt

Eisenberger says he expects his citizens' forum on LRT will be done in 7 months "with a clear answer from the city. #HamOnt.

[SteelTown]

Mississauga has no money to pay for planned $1.6-billion LRT

http://www.mississauga.com/news-story/5258338-mississauga-has-no-money-to-pay-for-planned-1-6-billion-lrt/

Mississauga’s mayor and city manager made a stunning admission Wednesday, stating that a planned $1.6-billion LRT along the city’s main thoroughfare is likely to be cancelled if the province can’t pay the full cost.

“I think there would be a very serious review of the feasibility of that project, from our perspective,” city manager Janice Baker said after Wednesday’s council meeting when asked why no money was being set aside for the project in the city’s 2015 budget, currently being presented to council.

If the province decides Mississauga must pay for even one-third of the cost, a common model, “I would say as the city manager my recommendation to city council would be that the impact of that on the property tax payer would be so onerous as to be impossible,” Baker said.

Mayor Bonnie Crombie said that “at the very least, it would be significantly delayed.” If the LRT isn’t 100 per cent externally funded, “There would be a very serious discussion with our council on if we want to proceed with it.”

[Beedok]

So, will it be a battle between Hamilton and the Sauga for the 100% coverage? If I were the betting type I'd probably put my money on the latter getting it.

[drpgq]

How much will Hamilton save in terms of labour and not having to refurbish buses if we had an LRT? With that number, we should put the ball back in the province's court by pledging a similar amount for capital funding.

[mattgrande]

".@FredEisenberger says @Kathleen_Wynne has committed full provincial capital funding for Hamilton LRT #onpoli"
https://twitter.com/AdrianMorrow/status/559762183710855168

"Eisenberger says the province will pay full price of LRT, no matter the cost. So if cost goes up, province will cover that #onpoli"
https://twitter.com/AdrianMorrow/status/559763114930237440

"Eisenberger said province also wants Hamilton to integrate LRT with GO, likely via a spur from B-line to James North station #onpoli"
https://twitter.com/AdrianMorrow/status/559768214268571651

[SteelTown]

Adrian Morrow ‏@AdrianMorrow

.@FredEisenberger says @Kathleen_Wynne has committed full provincial capital funding for Hamilton LRT #onpoli

[Beedok]

Something is happening! Yay! (Not totally sure what form it will take, or when it will be finished, but we seem closer at least).

[durandy]

OK! Time to see how serious council is about screwing up our transit future.

[SteelTown]

I'd not waste any time and send a motion to council requesting a LRT cheque ASAP.

[SteelTown]

Premier Wynne guarantees Hamilton LRT funding

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5276107-premier-wynne-guarantees-hamilton-lrt-funding-report/

Ontario's premier has committed to pay 100% of the capital costs for Hamilton's LRT project no matter the final price tag, the Globe and Mail is reporting.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger met with Premier Kathleen Wynne for the first time Monday morning since his reelection and said he intended to ask about the province's commitment to rapid transit in the city.

Wynne has promised 100% funding for rapid transit in the past, but never specified for what project.

A Globe reporter on Twitter quoted Eisenberger after the meeting saying "we've got a firmer commitment on funding than we've ever had before."

It's unclear where Hamilton stands in the queue for rapid transit funding, since several other cities are competing for cash.

More to come.

[LikeHamilton]

:fireworks

[LikeHamilton]

:fireworks

[flar]

The province is buying, how can they say no?

Will Hamilton council figure out a way to screw this up?

[SteelTown]

The province is buying, how can they say no?

Will Hamilton council figure out a way to screw this up?

All this and more....stayed tuned for the season premiere of next Hamilton council session.

[HillStreetBlues]

The province is buying, how can they say no?

Will Hamilton council figure out a way to screw this up?

At least a few will vote against it on the basis that lanes will be eliminated on King or Main.

[ihateittoo]

This is not going to be as clear cut as it seems. Matt Jelly already contacted Chad Collins and asked if he would still vote no based on today's announcement. He said he would still vote no.

Predicted new arguments, what does the mountain get? / we don't want to deal with the long construction / what's LRT?

[flar]

This is not going to be as clear cut as it seems. Matt Jelly already contacted Chad Collins and asked if he would still vote no based on today's announcement. He said he would still vote no.

Predicted new arguments, what does the mountain get? / we don't want to deal with the long construction / what's LRT?

That's exactly it. Just like the stadium fiasco, they will grandstand and play a game of brinksmanship until everything good gets pissed away.

Hopefully someone can learn from the past mistakes, nip that type of behaviour in the bud, show some leadership and get everyone on board.