Rapid Transit

[raisethehammer]

yes, I was in the east end today...shared lanes are only necessary from Delta - Queenston Traffic circle. East of there, it's fine.
Someday in the future, with less cars travelling on that corridor we can do ROW along the entire stretch.

[matt602]

Glad to hear the meeting went well, wish I could have been there.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Now it's all up to city council.

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1002

With the announcement by the city's rapid transit office that the public comments they've received have strongly supported light rail, we may be tempted to rest on our laurels and assume that LRT is a fait accompli.

To quote the inestimable Han Solo, "Great, kid. Don't get cocky!"

It's more critical than ever that we continue to spread the word about light rail: educate as many people as possible about what it is and how it works; counter misinformation (and disinformation) about its costs, performance and return on investment; address the negativity of people who believe Hamilton can never be a great city; work with the city to ensure they make prudent decisions about routing and system specifications; and reach out to people and groups who, until now, haven't been that interested in the subject but will sit up and take notice once they discover how big this plan is and how much it will transform the city.

As light rail gets closer to prime time, it will come under much closer scrutiny from every quarter, and it will be more actively opposed by people and groups who fear that it may hurt their interests.

Until now, we have mostly studied cities whose light rail projects have been successful. We also need to study cities that haven't enjoyed as much success, so we can understand what went wrong, avoid making the same mistakes here, and answer challenges that use these failures as examples.

We also need to continue working with the province to ensure that they keep their promise to pay the capital costs (and perhaps also provide more operations funding - possibly through the existing gas tax transfer).

In addition, we need to persuade the federal government to get on board and commit capital funding. This may be the hardest sell: over the past two years, the federal government has shown little interest in reaching out to urban voters or demonstrating an understanding of their values and needs.

Have no doubt: if we're going to do this properly, we need a federal commitment to support the project. The good news is that the feds have expressed some interest, but they seem to think the operating costs for LRT are higher than for BRT, and they remain cagey about how they will evaluate Hamilton's plan.

That means we need to communicate with our federal MPs, particularly those in the governing Conservative Party, to persuade them that this is an investment worth supporting.

In other words, our work of advocating for light rail has only just begun. The real challenges still lie ahead.

[the dude]

oh man, sweet han solo reference.

i don't understand why they're still talking about tunnels and clearance under the th&b bridges - they're non-issues! also, they haven't sufficiently explained the nuances of how the two systems are priced. it's a piss-off to hear the same misinformation or perhaps disinformation over and over again.

also, as much as i loathe jack macdonald, his point about trolley buses has some merit. not everyone will be served by lrt and trolleys could augment the system nicely - certainly better than buses could ever hope to.

[raisethehammer]

you rock McGreal:


We blew it in '81 on light rail transit -- let's not do it again
Terry Cooke
(May 10, 2008)
"Losing a fully funded light rail transit system in the early 1980s was the biggest missed opportunity that I witnessed in my entire political career. Hamilton is still paying the price for such short-sightedness."

-- Former Hamilton-Wentworth Region chair Bill Sears

Sometimes in politics it's hard to recognize the stuff that actually matters in the long term. Elected officials can get so caught up in the grind of day-to-day decision making that they literally fail to see the forest for the trees. Therefore, a quick study of recent history might help Hamilton council appreciate the lasting impact of its pending decision on the future of rapid transit in Hamilton.

In 1978, the province offered to build a light rail transit (LRT) system in Hamilton (disclosure: my grandfather Frank Cooke chaired the technical steering committee for the project until his retirement). Premier Bill Davis was convinced Hamilton was the ideal location to build a demonstration project to showcase a made-in-Ontario transit technology.

Regional government had identified the need for a rapid transit system to move people efficiently from downtown to the fast-growing suburbs on the Mountain (and ultimately the airport) and to the bustling industries of the northeast waterfront.

The province had invested heavily in developing the system and building a test-track LRT near Kingston, which it hoped would spawn a worldwide market for their technology and create manufacturing jobs here in Ontario. But it was desperate to show that it could work in a real urban environment such as Hamilton so it could get on with selling it to the world.

So Hamilton had an opportunity to receive, at provincial expense, a state-of-the art transit system that could have transformed our city.

Instead, the proposal was met with political skepticism. Regional councillors figured that such unusual provincial benevolence was an indication the system was technically suspect and was being foisted on Hamilton.

The Hamilton concept design unfortunately included elevated sections of the line in downtown and the Durand neighbourhood, prompting the usual opposition to change by downtown merchants and local ratepayers.

But instead of finding ways to amend the concept to address legitimate concerns while keeping the project and funding alive, Hamilton's conflict-driven political culture conspired to kill it. In 1981, regional council voted by a margin of 18-8 to shut the project down, effectively snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Hamilton's loss became British Columbia's gain. The Ontario-made LRT was ultimately built in Vancouver as the SkyTrain.

Now, Queen's Park has once again expressed a serious interest in funding LRT in Hamilton. There are likely to be some political speed bumps on the road ahead. Chamber of Commerce types are sure to question its affordability, and some suburbanites will rebel at relinquishing two lanes of traffic for transit use.

But the world has changed dramatically in the past 25 years in its understanding of the importance of transit to our urban form and our economic vitality. Local political culture is showing signs of change too. This time around not only is Mayor Fred Eisenberger committed to LRT, but much of council seems onside. They also have articulate allies such as blogger Ryan McGreal (raisethehammer.org) building grassroots support.

Hamilton has a rare opportunity to go "back to the future" with light rail transit. And just like the plot in the motion picture of the same name, this time we can choose a different ending.

[the dude]

terry cooke making a reference to ryan mcgreal and rth? so confused, so very confused. very cool, though. congratulations!

[JT Jacobs]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

you rock McGreal:


We blew it in '81 on light rail transit -- let's not do it again
Terry Cooke
(May 10, 2008)
"Losing a fully funded light rail transit system in the early 1980s was the biggest missed opportunity that I witnessed in my entire political career. Hamilton is still paying the price for such short-sightedness."

-- Former Hamilton-Wentworth Region chair Bill Sears

Sometimes in politics it's hard to recognize the stuff that actually matters in the long term. Elected officials can get so caught up in the grind of day-to-day decision making that they literally fail to see the forest for the trees. Therefore, a quick study of recent history might help Hamilton council appreciate the lasting impact of its pending decision on the future of rapid transit in Hamilton.

In 1978, the province offered to build a light rail transit (LRT) system in Hamilton (disclosure: my grandfather Frank Cooke chaired the technical steering committee for the project until his retirement). Premier Bill Davis was convinced Hamilton was the ideal location to build a demonstration project to showcase a made-in-Ontario transit technology.

Regional government had identified the need for a rapid transit system to move people efficiently from downtown to the fast-growing suburbs on the Mountain (and ultimately the airport) and to the bustling industries of the northeast waterfront.

The province had invested heavily in developing the system and building a test-track LRT near Kingston, which it hoped would spawn a worldwide market for their technology and create manufacturing jobs here in Ontario. But it was desperate to show that it could work in a real urban environment such as Hamilton so it could get on with selling it to the world.

So Hamilton had an opportunity to receive, at provincial expense, a state-of-the art transit system that could have transformed our city.

Instead, the proposal was met with political skepticism. Regional councillors figured that such unusual provincial benevolence was an indication the system was technically suspect and was being foisted on Hamilton.

The Hamilton concept design unfortunately included elevated sections of the line in downtown and the Durand neighbourhood, prompting the usual opposition to change by downtown merchants and local ratepayers.

But instead of finding ways to amend the concept to address legitimate concerns while keeping the project and funding alive, Hamilton's conflict-driven political culture conspired to kill it. In 1981, regional council voted by a margin of 18-8 to shut the project down, effectively snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Hamilton's loss became British Columbia's gain. The Ontario-made LRT was ultimately built in Vancouver as the SkyTrain.

Now, Queen's Park has once again expressed a serious interest in funding LRT in Hamilton. There are likely to be some political speed bumps on the road ahead. Chamber of Commerce types are sure to question its affordability, and some suburbanites will rebel at relinquishing two lanes of traffic for transit use.

But the world has changed dramatically in the past 25 years in its understanding of the importance of transit to our urban form and our economic vitality. Local political culture is showing signs of change too. This time around not only is Mayor Fred Eisenberger committed to LRT, but much of council seems onside. They also have articulate allies such as blogger Ryan McGreal (raisethehammer.org) building grassroots support.

Hamilton has a rare opportunity to go "back to the future" with light rail transit. And just like the plot in the motion picture of the same name, this time we can choose a different ending.

AWESOME ARTICLE! So sad, though.

I was once told this story by a former boss of mine in Hamilton and I was jaw-droppingly incredulous. What a loss. If Hamilton had agreed to the provincial offer of 1978, there is no doubt in my mind that it would have become one of the greatest cities in the country.

We're lucky that we have another chance now. We must fight even harder to achieve light rail.

[Berklon]

That's amazing. Hard to believe but very believable in Hamilton at the same time.

I was on the Vancouver Skytrain a couple years ago and remember thinking that something like this (elevated or not) would be so great in Hamilton. Little did I know I was riding on something that Hamilton pretty much rejected.

LRT has to happen. I honestly think it'll bring this city to life again, and without it the odds are greatly reduced.

[SteelTown]

I mentioned in another forum perhaps the city could look at using the Auchmar land to redevelop the area as a major Mountain HSR terminal for the A-Line and bus stops. Auchmar backyard is huge, demo the residence area and even more land. Might be easier to have the LRT curve into Auchmar than exit out to Fennell to connect on with Upper James.

Perhaps turn the Auchmar building as the Rapid Transit office.

[SteelTown]

Here's some of the plans from the information session....

[DC83]

^^ The LRT pricetag is over-exagerated, but that's only b/c of the tunnell & TH&B structures (tunnels under James & John tracks).

Here's my solution:
-Rather than climbing James Mtn Rd, turn East along Hunter infront of GO (avoiding the rail tunnels) and keep traveling east along Hunter all the way to the Clairmont Access, then climb Clairmont to W5th (there's already a right of way) and voila, you're at Mohawk!
That shaves off, what, approx $200million from the price?

[highwater]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I mentioned in another forum perhaps the city could look at using the Auchmar land to redevelop the area as a major Mountain HSR terminal for the A-Line and bus stops. Auchmar backyard is huge, demo the residence area and even more land. Might be easier to have the LRT curve into Auchmar than exit out to Fennell to connect on with Upper James.

Perhaps turn the Auchmar building as the Rapid Transit office.

Eek! Please tell me you're not serious. After Dundurn Castle, Auchmar is the most historically and architecturally significant property in this city. And it's not just the house itself, but the entire property. According to this Ontario Heritage Trust report on Auchmar's historical and architectural significance,

"The four-hectare property at 88 Fennell Avenue West, known as Auchmar, is situated on West 5th Street at Fennell Avenue in the City of Hamilton. The two-storey, stuccoed brick manor house was designed in the Gothic Revival style and was completed in 1855. The exterior and interior portions of the ‘Manor House’ as well as exteriors of a carriage house and other historic structures and improvements are protected by an Ontario Heritage Trust conservation easement. The property is also designated by the City of Hamilton under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act ...Auchmar is architecturally significant as one of Hamilton’s most impressive 19th century estates and for its exemplification of Gothic Revival style architecture. The focal point of the property is the ‘Manor House’, a long, ‘H’ shaped villa completed in 1855. Like the home of a Scottish laird, which Buchanan may have hoped to emulate, the house features a rough-cast stucco finish, clustered chimneys, and various Gothic details such as pointed arch windows and label mouldings. Originally, long verandas lined the central portion of the house integrating the outdoors and the residence. The interior is similarly styled in the Gothic taste with the ballroom displaying a highly decorative, plaster, strap work ceiling and corridors featuring vaulted ceilings with plaster ribbing. Interior woodwork repeats the Gothic motif with slender shafts and foliated plaster capitals lining the corridor walls and the pointed arch incorporated into doorway frames and door panels. The unique plan of the house features a narrow, 24-metre central corridor with stair halls at each end. A furnace, indoor lavatory and basement kitchen were also included in the original design, making the house distinctly modern for its amenities.

Contextual Value:

Located at the north-east corner of Fennel Avenue and West 5th Street, the four-hectare walled property exemplifies the Picturesque movement of design with the architecture and landscape forming a coherent whole. The property’s placement atop the escarpment, the informal arrangement of plantings, and vestiges of a long, tree lined driveway contribute to this Picturesque character. Contributing to the context of the property are limestone structures and improvements such as a carriage house, a dovecote with lancet windows, and a high, buttressed wall enclosing parts of the property and garden. Originally the property was part of Buchanan’s larger 35-hectare estate, known as Claremont Park, and was accessed off Claremont Avenue at the brow of the escarpment, marked by an extant gatehouse...

Characteristics that contribute to the contextual value of Auchmar include:

- Its elevated placement upon the plateau (‘The Mountain’) overlooking the City of Hamilton;
- Its high, random-coursed limestone wall with buttresses and pointed arched openings encircling the property and garden;
- Its entrance off Fennel Avenue with limestone gateposts and curved walls;
- Its vestiges of the terraced landscaping on thenorth side of the manor house;
- Its dovecote of limestone construction with lancet windows, pyramidal roof, and central, peaked gables;
- Its 1 ½ -storey, limestone construction carriage house with cross gable roof;
- Its vestiges of a pine tree-lined driveway;
- Its vestiges of quince and apple orchards;
- Its informal, picturesque arrangement of mature plantings."

And that's just for starters. Check out the rest of the report:

http://www.auchmar.info/documents/Auchmar%20-%20OHT%20-%20SOS.pdf

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by DC83

^^ The LRT pricetag is over-exagerated, but that's only b/c of the tunnell & TH&B structures (tunnels under James & John tracks).

Here's my solution:
-Rather than climbing James Mtn Rd, turn East along Hunter infront of GO (avoiding the rail tunnels) and keep traveling east along Hunter all the way to the Clairmont Access, then climb Clairmont to W5th (there's already a right of way) and voila, you're at Mohawk!
That shaves off, what, approx $200million from the price?

I said the same thing to one of the rep and she knew all about this idea of going up Clairmount instead and using the West 5th off ramp, it wasn't like the idea was completely foreign to her. They had to stick with orginal route mapped out. They will probably go with Clairmount once it's time to submit the plan to council in June.

[flar]

Originally Posted by highwater

Eek! Please tell me you're not serious. After Dundurn Castle, Auchmar is the most historically and architecturally significant property in this city. And it's not just the house itself, but the entire property. According to this Ontario Heritage Trust report on Auchmar's historical and architectural significance,

"The four-hectare property at 88 Fennell Avenue West, known as Auchmar, is situated on West 5th Street at Fennell Avenue in the City of Hamilton. The two-storey, stuccoed brick manor house was designed in the Gothic Revival style and was completed in 1855. The exterior and interior portions of the ‘Manor House’ as well as exteriors of a carriage house and other historic structures and improvements are protected by an Ontario Heritage Trust conservation easement. The property is also designated by the City of Hamilton under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act ...Auchmar is architecturally significant as one of Hamilton’s most impressive 19th century estates and for its exemplification of Gothic Revival style architecture. The focal point of the property is the ‘Manor House’, a long, ‘H’ shaped villa completed in 1855. Like the home of a Scottish laird, which Buchanan may have hoped to emulate, the house features a rough-cast stucco finish, clustered chimneys, and various Gothic details such as pointed arch windows and label mouldings. Originally, long verandas lined the central portion of the house integrating the outdoors and the residence. The interior is similarly styled in the Gothic taste with the ballroom displaying a highly decorative, plaster, strap work ceiling and corridors featuring vaulted ceilings with plaster ribbing. Interior woodwork repeats the Gothic motif with slender shafts and foliated plaster capitals lining the corridor walls and the pointed arch incorporated into doorway frames and door panels. The unique plan of the house features a narrow, 24-metre central corridor with stair halls at each end. A furnace, indoor lavatory and basement kitchen were also included in the original design, making the house distinctly modern for its amenities.

Contextual Value:

Located at the north-east corner of Fennel Avenue and West 5th Street, the four-hectare walled property exemplifies the Picturesque movement of design with the architecture and landscape forming a coherent whole. The property’s placement atop the escarpment, the informal arrangement of plantings, and vestiges of a long, tree lined driveway contribute to this Picturesque character. Contributing to the context of the property are limestone structures and improvements such as a carriage house, a dovecote with lancet windows, and a high, buttressed wall enclosing parts of the property and garden. Originally the property was part of Buchanan’s larger 35-hectare estate, known as Claremont Park, and was accessed off Claremont Avenue at the brow of the escarpment, marked by an extant gatehouse...

Characteristics that contribute to the contextual value of Auchmar include:

- Its elevated placement upon the plateau (‘The Mountain’) overlooking the City of Hamilton;
- Its high, random-coursed limestone wall with buttresses and pointed arched openings encircling the property and garden;
- Its entrance off Fennel Avenue with limestone gateposts and curved walls;
- Its vestiges of the terraced landscaping on thenorth side of the manor house;
- Its dovecote of limestone construction with lancet windows, pyramidal roof, and central, peaked gables;
- Its 1 ½ -storey, limestone construction carriage house with cross gable roof;
- Its vestiges of a pine tree-lined driveway;
- Its vestiges of quince and apple orchards;
- Its informal, picturesque arrangement of mature plantings."

And that's just for starters. Check out the rest of the report:

http://www.auchmar.info/documents/Auchmar%20-%20OHT%20-%20SOS.pdf

Poor Auchmar. It escaped demolition once but the city can't even afford upkeep on it now. I was there at Door's Open and it is crumbling. It should be a museum like Dundurn and Whitehern but it seems there's just no money for that. I really hope that some use is found for it soon, otherwise it will join the list of buildings in the landfill (or "the list of missed opportunities").

[DC83]

^^ At the couple of Info Sessions I've been to, Clairmont was brought up. No details, simply that the grade is do-able for LRT.

Jill Stephen is the city rep that I have always dealt with (she seems to know the most, and is rather excited about LRT), but she keeps saying they aren't thinking about route details, but rather which technology they should choose.
This is silly IMO as price is a huge factor when making this type of decision, and the route (esp for A-Line) can determine that price... I mean, $200 million is a BIG difference, especially if it puts the whole capital cost below that $1 Billion mark!

[the dude]

incidentally, the gatehouse still stands at the foot of arcade crescent [formerly the laneway to auchmar].

i don't hold out much hope for its future either. why would you?

[ryan_mcgreal]

Eek! Please tell me you're not serious. After Dundurn Castle, Auchmar is the most historically and architecturally significant property in this city. And it's not just the house itself, but the entire property.

Is restoration and adaptive reuse an option - perhaps as part of a new structure?

It seems somehow appropriate, given how old is the new new, that a modern light rail system might revitalize as noble and long-neglected a building as Auchmar.

[highwater]

I just don't see how it could be done without doing too much damage to all the features that make this such a significant property. Check out the report I linked to. It doesn't take too long to skim it, but it gives you an idea of how much historic interior detail is involved. Also, it's not just the house itself, but the property, and how the house is situated on it. There's no way you could turn it into some kind of transit hub without destroying the unique elements of the surrounding grounds.

[highwater]

Thanks for the photo, the dude. I'm pretty familiar with the property but I had no idea that gatehouse was there.

[BrianE]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

So lets say there's a vote for approval for the Rapid Transit Office to officially endorse LRT for the B-Line which councilors do you think would support it?

For sure definitely.....
Bob Bratina
Brian McHattie
Sam Merulla
Mayor Fred

Likely support LRT for B-Line
Chad Collins
Bernie Morelli
Tom Jackson
Brad Clark

Unsure
Scott Duvall
Terry Whitehead
Maria Pearson
Russ Powers
Robert Pasuta

Likely against LRT
Margaret McCarthy
David L. Mitchell
Lloyd Ferguson

Need 8 votes to pass a majority.

Sorry to drag to this quote from about 10 pages ago.

I spoke to Councillor Morelli recently, I emailed asking him to support LRT and he actualy phoned me to discuss my email... I was quite surpised.

Anyways he seemed to be of the opinion that now was not the right time for LRT. I couldn't get any further clarification for what he meant by that so I won't speculate.

If anybody else in Ward three reads this, I would suggest sending an email to Mr. Morelli. I think he can be persuaded that this is the right time for LRT if enough of his constituents let him know that they support LRT.