Hamilton Roads

[ScreamingViking]

Yeah, aside from at Upper James it's as if the future "S-line" has been all but forgotten.

[catcher_of_cats]

The crazy bends of the sidewalk along most of Rymal really grinds my gears, as does the inconsistent design from one phase to another, plus the complete lack of right hand turn lanes at major intersections like westbound at Upper Wentworth that was previously mentioned.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by catcher_of_cats

The crazy bends of the sidewalk along most of Rymal really grinds my gears, as does the inconsistent design from one phase to another, plus the complete lack of right hand turn lanes at major intersections like westbound at Upper Wentworth that was previously mentioned.

The sidewalk bends are actually in some places best practice. They shift pedestrians into a 90° context from turning vehicles. In places like Netherlands and many European and American cities with more progressed street design policies, shifting pedestrians back from the intersection is common and recommended. It does cause for longer weirder routes and is annoying especially on huge intersections, but it is safer technically.

The inconsistency in the design is bizarre though. You'd almost think they are completely different projects. I don't understand Hamilton's desire to build every intersection as a bespoke design. Like to a degree I understand you have to, but they could just select a standard design based on the ROW and just copy and paste and deal with the occasional awkward spot.

[SFUVancouver]

Compared to a very similar project, the upgrade of Plains Road in Burlington, the proposed design for Rymal is very disappointing. Burlington did a solid job incorporating fully separated or buffered cycling lanes on both sides of Plains Road, but, more importantly, they designed proper best-practice intersections. It seems clear that the brief for Dillon from Hamilton wasn't serious about bringing the road up to a modern design standard, such as the removal of central suicide lanes and following best-practice to incorporate high-quality cycling infrastructure. This design does not show that the City is prepared to make tough decisions that would improve safety for all users, but particularly vulnerable non-vehicle users that would genuinely benefit from a reduction in the number of driveway crossings, especially where a site is served by multiple practically adjacent driveways. Couple central suicide lanes with so many driveways and you end up with a situation where a driver will be solely focused on finding a gap in oncoming traffic to whip over for a turn into a driveway, usually without adequate regard for pedestrians. Throw in the higher speeds of cyclists using the proposed multi-use path and it is simply a matter of time before a driver hits a pedestrian or cyclist as they barrel into a driveway when a narrow gap in traffic presents itself.

[Innsertnamehere]

I will comment that the lane widths are also generally excessive, especially assuming it will have a 50km/h speed limit. 3.3m wide lanes and a 4m wide centre turn lane.

The centre through lanes should be dropped to 3m and the turn lane dropped to 3.3m.

[ccheck7]

Agreed with all of the above. I'd encourage everyone to submit comments to staff on the Engage Hamilton project page.

[TheHonestMaple]

Anyone else notice how peaceful the roads have been without the busses lol. James South (possibly the busiest area in the city for public transit), is so much nicer right now without 3-4 busses flying up it every 2 minutes.

[Innsertnamehere]

Between the bus strike and the reopening of the Claremont Access, John St is straight up dead compared to the last 6 months.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Anyone else notice how peaceful the roads have been without the busses lol. James South (possibly the busiest area in the city for public transit), is so much nicer right now without 3-4 busses flying up it every 2 minutes.

At the cost of mobility.

Buses are not an externality.

[TheRitsman]

I definitely am excited for electric buses. While I love transit and think it should expand, buses are quite loud and smelly. It will help the perception of transit a lot when we transition away from diesel buses surely.

[Innsertnamehere]

I think Hamilton is waiting on it's new bus garage to bring in electric buses. The ones I've seen in Toronto are definitely a lot quieter.

Most other 905 municipalities either already have or are actively planning to have electric buses. Hamilton is sort of the odd one out which doesn't seem to really have real plans for them.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I think Hamilton is waiting on it's new bus garage to bring in electric buses. The ones I've seen in Toronto are definitely a lot quieter.

Most other 905 municipalities either already have or are actively planning to have electric buses. Hamilton is sort of the odd one out which doesn't seem to really have real plans for them.

I've seen the occasional electric school bus go by, and holy hell are they quiet compared to the diesel ones.

[mishap]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I think Hamilton is waiting on it's new bus garage to bring in electric buses.

I think you're right. It's way more cost-effective to build new than retrofit, and the new garage is hopefully breaking ground in the next two months.

[matt602]

HSR actually tested a few different electric models a couple years ago and I think the reception was good but yeah, the new garage needs to be up and running before they can order any. The current one is way over capacity so I don't think they can even retrofit it with charging equipment until the new one is built and things can be shuffled around to make room.

[SteelTown]

Electric buses for Hamilton? Likely, at some point
City officials say desire is there but cite funding and logistics as barriers

https://www.thespec.com/news-story/9...at-some-point/

There will be space for 100 electric buses to charge in Hamilton's future transit garage.

To read the article: https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8810979&postcount=2699

[ScreamingViking]

Not surprising. I think they could easily pare it down to 3 lanes -- one southbound and two northbound (which, just based on my anecdotal experience, may serve the auto travel demand)

But $10 million to replace it? I think that's a huge underestimate.


Longwood bridge rebuild put off until 2032 after LRT route change
Reconstruction is now a long way off, but the city is exploring temporary safety improvements for pedestrians this year.

https://www.thespec.com/news/council/lon...1901e16-9824-5243-98ff-379307114b6d.html

Matthew-Van Dongen
The Hamilton Spectator
Wednesday, February 7, 2024


Replacement of the aging Longwood Road bridge will wait at least eight years now that the highway-spanning structure is no longer part of Hamilton’s LRT project.

But Ward 1 councillor Maureen Wilson says the city is planning “temporary” improvements aimed at making the single-sidewalk-only bridge safer for the walking public ahead of the next school year.

“It’s a pretty narrow slice of sidewalk, and we know quite a few students are on it every single day,” said Wilson, who noted “long-standing” concerns from area residents, students and parents about both walking and cycling safety on the bridge.

“We’re looking to temporarily reallocate space and make that (pedestrian) passage safer and roomier.”

Ambitious rebuilding plans for the bridge have suffered repeated setbacks alongside Hamilton’s off-again, on-again light rail transit project.

The province first offered to replace the 55-year-old bridge as part of LRT construction as far back as 2015, pitching a wider span with dedicated biking and walking paths.

The rapid transit project was then famously cancelled over budget woes in 2019, axing the bridge replacement cash — but funding for both projects was resurrected in 2021 with a joint LRT commitment from the provincial and federal governments.

Most recently, a route change announced by LRT project manager Metrolinx last fall means the Longwood replacement will no longer be covered by the $3.4-billion light rail construction budget.

That means the city must find an unexpected $10 million or so in funding to replace the bridge. That rebuild is now tentatively slated for 2032, with design work slated for 2027, according to city engineering head Jackie Kennedy.

The longer wait is considered safe because of rehabilitation work the city did in 2022 as part of a “holding repair strategy” designed to extend the useful life of the existing span, said Kennedy in an update memo issued last week after The Spectator asked to see the latest bridge inspection report.

That 2022 bridge condition inspection report for Longwood, now posted online, says the structure condition has improved to “fair to good” following repairs. But it also recommends full replacement within six to 10 years.

In the meantime, the city is looking at options like narrowing existing car lanes to widen the pedestrian space on the bridge. Wilson said transportation staff will report back with a strategy in time to make physical changes ahead of the next school year in September.

...

[Innsertnamehere]

I believe MTO would still be responsible for at least some of the cost as it passes over it's corridor. The $10 million is likely 50% of the total replacement cost or something.

Personally, I think it would be great if the City took the opportunity to do something a bit more unique with the bridge like St. Catharines did with the St. Paul St bridge over the 406.

[ScreamingViking]

Possibly, but even $20M seems low.

I also expect debate about having a "signature" structure. The Burgoyne replacement in St. Catharines ended up costing ~$100 million... I don't think something that elaborate is necessary, but we all know how politicians want to make their mark.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I believe MTO would still be responsible for at least some of the cost as it passes over it's corridor. The $10 million is likely 50% of the total replacement cost or something.

Personally, I think it would be great if the City took the opportunity to do something a bit more unique with the bridge like St. Catharines did with the St. Paul St bridge over the 406.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Personally, I think it would be great if the City took the opportunity to do something a bit more unique with the bridge like St. Catharines did with the St. Paul St bridge over the 406.

Yes, the City was looking forward to a unique bridge design. I have an old proposal, but obviously the proposal is dead. If I remember correctly, the City considered renaming the street to Innovation Drive with a swanky, innovative bridge design.