![]() |
Hamilton's B-Line LRT construction
Starting a separate thread to organize construction-specific updates about the B-Line LRT to keep the Rapid Transit thread from getting too congested. Doing this partly from my perhaps-overly optimistic hope that the B-Line LRT will become one of only several rapid transit projects in Hamilton in coming years.
|
Good idea, I was actually thinking about this the other day.
Hopefully we can continue the conversation about the demolitions here. I don't actually think the demolitions of the existing houses at the rail tunnel/bridge at Gage will be all the noticable. If you look at the preliminary civil plans, the road will be quite wide there. I think the more noticable demolitions will be at intersections. Hopefully developers will be interested in buying up the tiny lots at those intersections. Hopefully developments like Gore Park condos will go up at those spots. |
Do we know what will start first? Or what is phase 1?
I'm guessing they'll want to start on the bridge over 403 and the tunnel in the east end at the beginning? |
Sounds like the Request for Qualifications for bidders will go out very soon, this fall. So we should know the timeline for construction then.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
1) Build the entire thing at once, with the most disruption in about 3-3.5 years. 2) Build in phases in about 5 years. I really hope they go with option 1 because I personally would like to see this done asap. I'd rather not be elderly by the time this is done. Also I don't think there's much to be saved in terms of disruption, sure construction in your area will be quicker, but the it'll sit in a 90% complete state for months or years unusable, and still not allowing as many automobiles, so it'll just be crappy for everyone for years regardless and even longer, except instead of 3 years of construction, you'll have to bear with maybe 8-15 months instead. |
How long did Ion take?
Also, although slightly biased against the construction of the LRT, this is a good website that shows exactly which buildings will be demolished. https://kingstreettenantsunited.com/...-virtual-tour/ |
The plan to split the project up into separate bids may make it easier for different parts to be done concurrently. I.e., if one company were to build it, it would have to dedicate relatively more of its resources to the project; with several firms working on it, they may not have to spread themselves as thin on other projects.
I can see Metrolinx issuing separate contracts for the maintenance facility, the guideways, the electrical, the city infrastructure that needs to be moved or replaced, etc. |
Quote:
A substantial portion of it was built on existing rail corridors though, so the comparison is a bit tricky. |
Quote:
|
Would anyone care to explain what the transit oriented corridor upzoning actually means? Also, I really hope that when Metrolinx sells off these vacant plots of land they put in some sort of stipulation to the sale that says a new development has to be built within, say, 2 years.
|
Quote:
I can go into more detail such as the aspects you should pay attention to it you'd like. I've spent an embarrassing amount of time reading through these. |
Very pleased to see this new thread :D
I haven't yet wrapped my head around everything (Ritsman enlighten us plz) and the zoning regs describe heights in metres rather than storeys, so broadly speaking the corridor will be zoned for mixed-use developments no shorter than 2.5 storeys (11m) and no taller than about 5 storeys (22m) by default, which is good. Really that should be the case for every commercial street in the city but hey, it's a start isn't it? |
I found this presentation from 2016. Little dated now, but I guess it illustrates the idea of the transit zoning with some theoretical renderings.
https://pub-hamilton.escribemeetings...umentId=122590 |
Quote:
|
When can we expect new developments to begin on the demolished plots of land? I would hope that Metrolinx is diligent and starts that process as soon as the buildings are demolished. Demolish them, sell the land with a stipulation that the new residential/commercial development needs to be built by the time the LRT is operational. That should be the goal.
|
Quote:
Agreed that every commercial street should have the TOC zoning. Much of Barton already is and actually centre on Barton is zoned for high density interestingly enough, all the malls are. The biggest issue with the heights along the LRT corridor is that they all abut 2-3 storey residential for the most part, so it has to step up. What should have been done is anything 150m off the LRT corridor was automatically upzoned to 5 storeys, and the LRT corridor should have been upzoned to 8-10 storeys. There should also be station specific zoning that allows for no parking adjacent to the station with increasing minimums the further from the station along the corridor. This would increase ridership immediately, but Hamilton is not progressive enough to reduce parking minimums to a level that actually pushes people out of their cars, instead arguing "people must need to drive so we have to force parking spots" instead of allowing developers to judge the market. (Remember developers won't build a building in a way that loses them money if they can avoid it, so if a building needs parking to sell units they'll include parking). |
Let's hope the LRT here works out a little bit better than in Ottawa.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...=&utm_content= |
Ottawa really made a mess of everything. They did tram grade cars, tried to run them as a metro, and tried to squeeze them on corners that were too tight. And used equipment that couldn’t work in winter… Since Hamilton is getting help from Metrolinx, which will have had experience running LRT already, it hopefully won’t go so badly.
|
Given that the Hamilton LRT will be using the exact same trains and infrastructure as the ION and Eglinton LRTs, I think it should be much smoother than Ottawa's experience.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 2:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.