Rapid Transit

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by mic67

Why did they build the StClair LRT on dedicated lanes on a slightly raised platform? Why not Just paint lines on the road like proposed of the Hamilton LRT? for the dedicated lanes?

Correction: That has not been proposed, in fact nothing has been proposed but there will 100% certainly be a physical barrier for the main LRT corridor, most likely a raised platform.

It seems to me that all those posting here regarding the LRT for Hamilton are mostly new commers, as am I, although I did live here in the mid 60's to mid 70's - a great time to live here, they had trolleys, Robinsons dept. store, real theatre's.....

This is the problem. The 60's aren't coming back, even though we keep planning like they are. We need to recognize what makes great cities in the 2020's and plan accordingly.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

This is the problem. The 60's aren't coming back, even though we keep planning like they are. We need to recognize what makes great cities in the 2020's and plan accordingly.

Looking forward, not backward. What a novel idea.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by mic67

There are very few white collar jobs downtown, look who the biggest employers are, and how many citizens actually work out of town.

You might be surprised at how many people come to Hamilton to work. Hamilton is not a suburb of Toronto.

Originally Posted by mic67

If there was a rapid transit link to TO. they Ham might stand a chance of getting more of those jobs.

I strongly support better rapid transit connections between cities in the GTAH. You seem to be positing a false alternative between an interurban transit link to Toronto and an intraurban link inside Hamilton. We need both.

Originally Posted by mic67

Ya sure mertolinx and all that, and ya they are going to do both, (in whose lifetime)?

The province has made an unprecedented (at least in Ontario) commitment to improving rapid transit across the GTAH - after decades of myopic underunvestment.

Originally Posted by mic67

The link to TO is way more important to this city than a local LRT.

They're both vital. It's not either/or.

Originally Posted by mic67

The B-line bus on Main/King reduces the trip time in 1/2, I think they have something simular in TO but I havent used any. LRT with dedicated lanes in Hamilton will not work, and that is why instead of a St.Clair raised model they will paint lines so that when the LRT fails they can then call it a street car -mass transit line.

Wow, there's an awful lot of fail packed into that one paragraph:

Originally Posted by mic67

The B-line bus on Main/King reduces the trip time in 1/2

And that runs in mixed traffic. Can you imagine how much more, er, rapid a vehicle would be running on dedicated lanes with signal priority?

Originally Posted by mic67

LRT with dedicated lanes in Hamilton will not work

You have yet to present a single plausible argument why that might be the case.

Originally Posted by mic67

that is why instead of a St.Clair raised model they will paint lines

You're speculating blindly. The city has not made a decision yet, though they are clearly looking at best practices - including the lessons from Toronto.

Originally Posted by mic67

when the LRT fails

You have no evidence to support this claim.

Originally Posted by mic67

Ok before they commit to any system the can try a BRT with dedicated lanes as proposed for the LRT and actually see and know how the system for an LRT will work.

Why? A BRT costs almost as much to build as an LRT, costs a lot more to operate than an LRT, and is proven not to attract nearly as many riders or property developers? You would be setting it up to fail.

Originally Posted by mic67

I doubt they will do that it makes to much sense

Actually it makes no sense.

Originally Posted by mic67

and then we will see how many hamiltonians are behind an LRT system

The number of Hamiltonians behind a BRT system does not equal the number of Hamiltonians behind an LRT system. Many people who would never ride on a bus will happily board a modern tram. [edit: thanks to adam for helpfully calling out my geek notation]

It seems you will stop at no rhetorical device to rationalize your ongoing opposition to LRT.

[adam]

For those of you who may not be familiar with the notation in Ryan's post,
!= means not equal to

this is how you might use it;

LRT DOES NOT EQUAL BRT
or LRT != BRT

[highwater]

Thanks, Adam. Us old folks need these translations.

[markbarbera]

I'd like to know how the Rapid Transit office thinks it will get buy-in from local businesses along the proposed King Street route. If it is indeed a dedicated two-way LRT running throught the core, there cannot possibly be any curbside parking on King Street between the Delta and Dundurn. If that is the case, rest assured there will be much resistance to the plan from King Street business owners whose business relies heavily on curbside parking. Also, a dedicated LRT lane leaves just one lane of traffic in either direction, which all but eliminates a local bus service along King.

Given the resulting restrictions from dedicating two-way LRT on King, I suspect that if this route is adopted, the stretch between the Delta and Dundurn will not be set up as dedicated right of way. Personally, if this is the case, this significantly limits the benefits of LRT to the city, seeing it would simply operate as a slow-moving streetcar through this large segment of its route.

Has anyone heard directly from the Rapid Transit Office as to why they did not even consider Main Street for the route? Main could be 100% dedicated right of way LRT and still allow for sufficient curbside parking, it would not impact on the existing local bus service that runs along King Street, and, with Main Street's wider roadway allowance, the construction phase would be much less disruptive for the city.

I hold out hope that the Metrolinx BCA will do a more thorough route option analysis that is more objective in nature.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I'd like to know how the Rapid Transit office thinks it will get buy-in from local businesses along the proposed King Street route.

I have since learned that the report we have been discussing here is a consultant's recommendation but has not yet been endorsed by staff, the public works committee or council. They will not make any decisions on routing until after the Metrolinx Benefits Case Analysis (BCA) is ratified by the Metrolinx board (expected to take place in July).

Originally Posted by markbarbera

If it is indeed a dedicated two-way LRT running throught the core, there cannot possibly be any curbside parking on King Street between the Delta and Dundurn.

There are certainly stretches where that is the case (International Village comes to mind), but King gets extremely wide in other places.

Originally Posted by markbarbera

If that is the case, rest assured there will be much resistance to the plan from King Street business owners whose business relies heavily on curbside parking.

They'll come around once their (significantly improved) business relies more heavily on pedestrians and transit.

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Also, a dedicated LRT lane leaves just one lane of traffic in either direction, which all but eliminates a local bus service along King.

So? Why run a bus on the same road as an LRT line - especially when Main will be two-way?

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Has anyone heard directly from the Rapid Transit Office as to why they did not even consider Main Street for the route?

Again, staff have not yet made a recommendation on the route. However, I know that the consultant report did consider Main Street but concluded that it has less potential for economic development through the downtown core.

[adam]

Originally Posted by highwater

Thanks, Adam. Us old folks need these translations.

Hey don't feel bad, its computer science speak

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

They'll come around once their (significantly improved) business relies more heavily on pedestrians and transit.



So? Why run a bus on the same road as an LRT line - especially when Main will be two-way?

I'd like to address these two assumptions which are actually directly related to each other. First off, the impact LRT will have on local retail business is directly proportional to the location of the LRT stations. The further a business is from a LRT station, the less significant the impact will be on that business. Simply having a pair of LRT tracks running in front of your business will not improve retail business flow. An establishment would need to be within short walking distance of the LRT station to notice a significant increase in business.

If the current LRT system adopts station locations in alignment with the current B-Line route, the downtown stops will likely be at Wentworth, at James, and at Queen. While additional stops could be introduced, each additional stop slows down the system and makes the rapid transit, well, less rapid. I expect businesses in close proximity to these stations would enjoy the most impact from the LRT, but impact will diminish as the distance from the station decreases.

This is why local bus service should (must) remain on King Street. There is a disproportionate amount of lower city residents with mobility issues who will still need transit service that can get them closer to their destination. A local bus route has many more intermediate stops than a LRT designed as a rapid transit service. That's why the TTC, despite having a subway running below Yonge Street in Toronto, also has a local bus service running along the surface of Yonge Street. And that is also why we should still have local transit service along with LRT on King.

[omro]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

They'll come around once their (significantly improved) business relies more heavily on pedestrians and transit.

I really don't know what the issue Hamilton has with pedestrianisation. Lots of British cities have pedestrianised areas purely to improve the shopping experience for people walking from shop to shop.

[emge]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I'd like to address these two assumptions which are actually directly related to each other. First off, the impact LRT will have on local retail business is directly proportional to the location of the LRT stations. The further a business is from a LRT station, the less significant the impact will be on that business. Simply having a pair of LRT tracks running in front of your business will not improve retail business flow. An establishment would need to be within short walking distance of the LRT station to notice a significant increase in business.

If the current LRT system adopts station locations in alignment with the current B-Line route, the downtown stops will likely be at Wentworth, at James, and at Queen. While additional stops could be introduced, each additional stop slows down the system and makes the rapid transit, well, less rapid. I expect businesses in close proximity to these stations would enjoy the most impact from the LRT, but impact will diminish as the distance from the station decreases.

This is why local bus service should (must) remain on King Street. There is a disproportionate amount of lower city residents with mobility issues who will still need transit service that can get them closer to their destination. A local bus route has many more intermediate stops than a LRT designed as a rapid transit service. That's why the TTC, despite having a subway running below Yonge Street in Toronto, also has a local bus service running along the surface of Yonge Street. And that is also why we should still have local transit service along with LRT on King.

Assuming the option is 2-way LRT on King, the secondary buses could instead go on the now-2-way Main Street and function fine. That would probably be the option, would it not?

For the current B-line, it has seemed strange to me that there's no stop between Wentworth and James - Wellington and Bay would make good stops too and make it much more functional through the downtown - also it would mean I actually USE the B-line - but with the many buses that still run we don't need those stops right now. I'd really hope they add one or two more stops on an LRT, but I'll admit I don't know if that would significantly interfere with its functionality. It making more frequent stops through the downtown and speeding up/making longer stops outside the downtown seems to be how it works in other cities though (I think)

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by emge

It making more frequent stops through the downtown and speeding up/making longer stops outside the downtown seems to be how it works in other cities though (I think)

Exactly. Through the dense city centre, stops are closer together, typically aorund 500m. This brings everything within walkable distance. We would have a stop somewhere between King and Wellington.

If you google map other cities with LRT, you can see how the stop spacing changes according to the area. For example: http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=...,0.054932&z=14

[sofasurfer]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

Exactly. Through the dense city centre, stops are closer together, typically aorund 500m. This brings everything within walkable distance.

This is certainly the case in Manchester, England.

[adam]

Originally Posted by omro

I really don't know what the issue Hamilton has with pedestrianisation. Lots of British cities have pedestrianised areas purely to improve the shopping experience for people walking from shop to shop.

I think it has a lot to do with people living on the mountain who want nothing to do with the downtown and only see it as a conduit to get to work and back (in their cars)

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by adam

I think it has a lot to do with people living on the mountain who want nothing to do with the downtown and only see it as a conduit to get to work and back (in their cars)

Actually, this state of mind is not specific to residents of any given area in Hamilton, or even Hamilton as a whole. This is a North American mentality. For the most part, North American cities were built during the heydey of the automobile and are designed with the car in mind, while European cities were founded centuries before the invention of the internal combustion engine, and are therefore designed with the pedestrian in mind.

Why must we blame the state of our downtown on the mountain all the time?

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Why must we blame the state of our downtown on the mountain all the time?

Agreed, the mental walls that divide downtown and all the surrounding areas, i.e. Dundas, Westdale, Stoney Creek, Mountain must be torn down.

The saying; "Together we stand, divided we fall", holds a lot of truth to Hamilton's being.

[emge]

Couldn't agree more with the last two posts.

Division seems to be the sad status quo in Hamilton - everything's framed in "us vs them" mentality so much of the time, and not just on urban planning topics.

One thing Hamilton has going for it is that we have a lot of great old architecture, and great pedestrian-scaled streets. That gives us a great advantage as we move forward as a city instead of having to artificially introduce that type of scaling in future development or "new urbanist" communities. The stuff we need to do - wide sidewalks, lower speed limits, etc. are all relatively minor and easy to do - once they get going.

[SteelTown]

The Community Update Meetings are scheduled at the locations and dates noted below and on the Notice attached as Appendix D. This notice will appear in the Hamilton Spectator, View Magazine, Hamilton Magazine and all six Hamilton Community Newspapers on May 22nd and May 29th, 2009.

West B-Line Location
Date: Monday, June 1, 2009
Time: 3 pm to 8 pm (brief presentation at 4 pm and 6pm)
Location: St. Paul Anglican Church
1140 King Street West

East B-Line Location
Date: Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Time: 3 pm to 8 pm (brief presentation at 4 pm and 6pm)
Location: Church of the Nativity
1831 King Street East

Central B-Line Location
Date: Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Time: 3 pm to 8 pm (brief presentation at 4 pm and 6pm)
Location: Sheraton Hotel
116 King Street West

[SteelTown]

Public input on proposed line

June 04, 2009
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/577232

City staff are recommending King Street and Main Street revert back to two-way traffic for the new rapid transit line proposed to cross Hamilton between McMaster University and Eastgate Square.

Staff prefer a typical transit system running along the median of King Street, with vehicle traffic in the north and south curb lanes. The two main arteries would convert to two-way traffic between Paradise Road in the west and the Delta in the east.

Council and citizens have overwhelmingly backed a Light Rail Transit (LRT) for the line, but that still has to be decided by the provincial agency MetroLinx and it could support a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system.

Residents can learn more about the staff preference at an open house next Tuesday at the Sheraton Hotel, between 3 p.m. and 8 p.m.

The city wants to hear what residents think about the proposed operation and also to confirm support for a LRT. It held two open houses this week, one held in west Hamilton Monday that was attended by 20 people.

Lisa Zinkewich, senior project manager, said a transit line running down the median would disrupt the least traffic and has also been shown to boost economic development.

One resident, Larry Berberick, said at an open house last night he prefers to have the system in the south curb lanes and keep Main and King as one way streets.

"My thinking is this would be safer."

[omro]

Could they not have included more than one member of the public's opinion?

Writing it like this makes it sound like: bureaucrats want it "this way" and residents want it "that way". And of course the resident wants to keep the one-way system! It's like priming the public opinion subliminally. Ah the power of the press. They can take down banks, you know.