Rapid Transit

[DC83]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I'm glad to see they are considering using Claremont for the A-line. It doesn't make sense eonomically or ecologically to be drilling a tunnel through the escarpment at James. The A-Line can run north from the airport along Upper James to Fennell, west on Fennell to Mohawk College, then north on West 5th, following Claremont down to King, west on King to James, north on James looping at the base, then south on James to Charlton, east on Charlton, north on John, east on Main then back south up the Claremont to Fennell via west 5th, east on Fennell to Upper James, then south back up to the airport loop.

This is the only option that makes sense!? I don't even know WHY they were considering James Mtn Rd in the 1st place!?

Look at this map, there's already an underused right-of-way that could be converted to Light Rail Only:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...12145&t=k&z=17

And if the A-Line were take Hunter Street (turn East @ James), it could a) avoid the TH&B underpass @ James and therefor avoid the extra $$$$$$$, and b) pass right infront of TH&B connecting to B-Line @ Hughson.

Hunter is also a rediculously underused street, so it could have ROW all the way to the bottom of the Clairmont Accs.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by DC83

I don't even know WHY they were considering James Mtn Rd in the 1st place!?

When the city finalized its transportation master plan, they settled on three rapid transit corridors: east-west along Main/King, north-south on James/Upper James, and unspecified east-west across the mountain.

At the time, there was no federal or provincial capital funding framework, so they were effectively limited to bus rapid transit (BRT).

After the MoveOntario 2020 (now Metrolinx) announcement in June 2007, light rail transit (LRT) started to look like a real possibility, and the city launched the rapid transit feasibility study to compare BRT with LRT.

At the outset, they decided to compare the two modes using the routes that had already been established for BRT. LRT ended up looking comparatively poor because they were comparing it to BRT on a route that had been specifically selected for BRT.

After being challenged on this (see, for example, this critique: http://raisethehammer.org/blog/971 ), staff pointed out that the study was just at phase 1 and that subsequent phases would look more closely at different route options.

Since council voted to go to phase 2 with an emphasis on light rail, they're now looking more closely at the Claremont route.

I was at the public information centre today on the Jackson Square Plaze (about 25 people were in attendance between 12:00 and 12:30 PM), and Jill Stephen discussed this a bit more.

She didn't have a cost comparison between the more direct but invasive James Mountain Rd tunnels and the less invasive but more roundabout Claremont Access route, but said that it would be ready when they report to council in September.

[markbarbera]

IMO James and Upper James should be handled as separate LRT lines. Upper James can run from airport to downtown via Upper James-Fennell-West 5th-Claremont, joining the same east-west LRT track for B-Line at Victoria and King/Main, terminating at King/Main and James. It can even continue westward along the B-Line track to McMaster University, thereby increasing frequency on the western leg of B-Line, the highest volume portion of the current B-Line bus route.

North-South in the lower city can be its own LRT running on James Street from Charlton to Barton, then eastward along Barton as far as Centennial, then up Centennial to loop at the Eastgate terminal. It doesn't have to go sas far Centennial for the first phase, it can loop back at Centre Mall. Further expansion a few years down the road can send it to Centennial and Eastgate, then a third phase can push it farther south on Centennial to link up with the eastern terminal of the as-yet-undefined mountain east-west route.

[matt602]

I really like that idea of a split North/South route using Barton.

I went on and on about a route along Barton in the survey that I dropped off this morning at the presentation. They had also mentioned that a lot of people inquired about a future route along Barton and they're seriously considering it.

[DC83]

^^ If Barton ever needed a saviour, LRT might be it.

I think a dedicated route for Barton would be great:
Western Terminus @ Stadium Stn (Barton & Caroline)
A-Line Connection @ James North GO
East-End Terminus/ B-Line Connection @ Eastgate

[BrianE]

Good idea Mark.

I would even suggest that the A line terminate at Main (or King if they decide to put westbound LRT on King) and Victoria St. With some sort of switching system to reverse the direction of the train to go right back up the Clarmont. If you want to go downtown or Mac, you just wait 5 min until the next B line train comes by.

This would involve a couple transfers for passengers traveling from the mountain to get to the waterfront. So there's some inconvienience there. But I would think that would simplify the scheduling and reduce the number of trains needed to keep a 15 min schedule for the A-line.

Think of the boon this would mean to the Main, King and Victoria area. Easy transit access to all points east, west and south in the city.

[SteelTown]

LRT failed to arrive in 1981
lPlan for elevated transit system sagged under criticism

July 29, 2008
Mark McNeil
The Hamilton Spectator

If Hamilton's quest for light rail transit sounds strangely familiar, that's because it's not the first time the city has taken a hard look at running fast trains through the city.

In 1981, a plan for an elevated transit system was probably the most controversial municipal issue of the year and it deeply divided the community.

The $111-million plan, which would have been funded through the provincial government, was eventually turned down by regional council in a decisive 18-8 vote in December of that year.

The system was available as a kind of demonstration project through the Urban Transportation Development Corporation, a provincial Crown corporation created to develop transit vehicles for public transit authorities.

The UTDC plan looked at various routes between the Mountain and downtown but the preferred path would have followed Upper James Street, through a tunnel to Hughson Street and then looped along MacNab Street to an area south of Hunter Street.

That route compares with the far more ambitious current $1.1-billion plan for two lines for light rail transit. One line would run along Upper James and James streets connecting the airport and the waterfront. The other could run along Main/King streets from University Plaza to Eastgate Square. The Claremont Access instead of James Mountain Road is also being looked at as an alternative for the first route.

The 1981 plan was vehemently opposed by many residents who didn't want the lines running near their homes. Others argued it would be a white elephant that would not be used by enough riders to make it viable. While the main part of the system would have been free to the community, many noted there would inevitably be significant operating and unforeseen costs to the municipality.

Many had doubts about the experimental technology scaling the escarpment and didn't like the idea of it being built above ground.

On the other side were those who felt it would boost the city's fortunes and help revitalize the downtown.

A poll at the time suggested 61 per cent of residents were in favour of the UTDC plan. That compares with a more recent poll that indicated 71 per cent of Hamiltonians like the idea of the current light rail plan.

In 1981, then regional chairman Anne Jones championed the system whereas Hamilton mayor Bill Powell was opposed. "Thank God we live in a city where people rise in righteous anger" against the "brain-washing techniques of a multimillion-dollar organization," he was quoted as saying at the time.

Jack MacDonald, who lost to Powell in the previous election, said yesterday he believes it was a huge mistake for council to kill the elevated transit proposal in 1981. "Nobody wanted it to run on their street and not enough councillors had the courage to defend it," he says.

After Hamilton rejected the elevated transit, a version of the system was built in Scarborough as well as in Vancouver.

Councillor Bob Bratina says he was opposed to elevated transit in 1981 but he likes the new proposal. He says council's vote to kill the plan was the right decision because he feels Hamilton would have been stuck with a problem-prone system with ghastly infrastructure that would have had to have been replaced.

[SteelTown]

Enthusiasm for proposed transit system is gaining momentum

July 29, 2008
Rob Faulkner
The Hamilton Spectator

How much will it cost? Where will it run? How often will it stop? When could it all be built?

Just a few of the questions about the ambitious Hamilton light rail proposal that arose at a sun-drenched public information session atop Jackson Square yesterday.

City staff are urgently working on a bid to secure provincial approval and cash for what may become a $1.1-billion light-rail system.

Last year's MoveOntario 2020 announcement said $300 million was available for Hamilton rapid transit. Since then, the city did a rapid transit feasibility study.

It hopes that its data, public consultations and reports will result in approval and a lot more funding from Metrolinx, the transportation agency to evaluate such proposals.

Where do things stand?

The city is working closely with Metrolinx, the provincial agency to implement a Greater Toronto and Hamilton transportation plan.

Metrolinx will adjust the preliminary list of projects released with the announcement of Ontario's $17.5-billion MoveOntario 2020 plan. (Hamilton rapid transit was a project mentioned here.)

Hamilton wants light rail in the first five-year Metrolinx budget for 2009-13. A draft Metrolinx budget arrives Sept. 26.

Where will it run?

For now, the city is focusing on a route that would put rail westbound on King and eastbound on Main; it would send rail south on James from the waterfront, up the Claremont Access, then to the airport using Upper James.

How much will it cost?

Initially, the city estimated it will cost $1.1 billion to build light rail east-west from Eastgate Square to University Plaza, and up James via a Mountain tunnel.

This cost wasn't adjusted as the city looks at using the Claremont Access, not tunnelling under steep James Mountain Road. Hamilton hasn't consulted the Niagara Escarpment Commission yet.

What is Hamilton's share?

It's unclear. While the province hopes to fund transit infrastructure that would not otherwise be built, Metrolinx notes cities already collect development charges and other cash to operate transit. This will continue. Metrolinx expects cities will pay some capital costs, like streetscaping. The city estimates it will cost $160 an hour per vehicle to run a light-rail system, and has raised concerns about how it will afford to run a new system.

When could it start to run?

If part of the 2009-'13 Metrolinx budget, city staff say 2009 to 2010 may see the project begin study, design and approvals. Construction may start in 2011 or later.

Will it be elevated?

No. Hamilton wants street-level rail to mesh with the streetscape, said Jill Stephen, manager of strategic planning.

Would there be dedicated lanes?

Outside of downtown, yes. But from Eastgate Square to the Delta in east Hamilton, and along James Street North, stores are so close to the road that a lane can't be freed. Rail there would move like a streetcar, at the speed of car traffic.

How frequent?

Light rail vehicles are planned for a frequency of every 10 minutes. It led concerned citizen Mark Volterman to call the LRT plan a waste of money. He wants more frequent vehicles and is concerned about the environmental impact of escarpment crossings.

How is Hamilton doing?

Metrolinx CEO Michael Fenn said Hamilton is well along, citing its public consultations, compared with other cities with rapid-transit plans. Fenn said the draft budget will favour projects farther along.

Will LRT really deliver economic investments along the route?

In Portland, Ore., the LRT system had 34 million riders in 2007 and, since it was built, there has been $6 billion in development within walking distance of its stations.

City staff will start conference calls tomorrow with peers in cities such as San Diego, Minneapolis, Buffalo to hear their bus and rail rapid transit experience and find out what LRT can, and cannot, accomplish.

[HAMRetrofit]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Light rail vehicles are planned for a frequency of every 10 minutes. It led concerned citizen Mark Volterman to call the LRT plan a waste of money.

This is why we should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.

[markbarbera]

This is the same dolt that held up the redevelopment of King and Pearl for years with his frivolous complaints and appeals to the OMB. In the end the OMB fined him $250 for forcing an appeal and never showing up to attend it. Wonder if he ever coughed up the dough, a fraction of the cost laid out for the appeal he had initiated and then bailed on. Someone like this cannot be taken seriously.

Last thing we need is to get him holding things back on this now too...

[raisethehammer]

great momentum for LRT....this is awesome!
I have a really tough time with their claim that LRT can't run in it's own lane from Eastgate to at least Parkdale.
The lanes are huge, there are 5 of them and east of Red Hill there is a lot of room for use of the goofy little grass strip between the road and parking lots.
I can see the area near Delta being tight and James North.
James South is a tough one. They could send all buses on John and free up the western lane of James south for LRT only. But I'm guessing they'd use Hunter to access the Claremont, so perhaps that's not an issue. I hope they figure out a way to use Charlton to access the Claremont instead - it would give that great stretch of James South LRT, as well as Corktown.

[markbarbera]

I have a feeling that, should the A-Line use Claremont, the final James LRT route will not run on James South at all. If it does, it certainly wouldn't be a dedicated lane (unless James/John revert back to one way automobile traffic, with one-way LRT running in the opposite direction on each road)

[SteelTown]

I highlighted a few things but it shows that for the B-Line the Rapid Transit Office has pretty much nailed down that the route will go along King and Main St. Therefore it's likely Main St and parts of King St will likely stay as one way expect a lane taken away.

Also you'll notice that the city could end up fitting the bill for streetscaping. So it sounds like the City will pay for streetscaping King and Main St. This is where we hope and pray the city will include traffic calming measures and wider sidewalks.

Another thing as I predicted construction could begin in 2011. I say this because the province would like to bid for the 2015 Pan Ams, it'll be important to link McMaster to downtown with mass transit. The A-Line will be close to drop people off to the waterfront stadium. It's likely the current arch buses will relocate to Barton so it'll pass right along the proposed stadium.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I have a feeling that, should the A-Line use Claremont, the final James LRT route will not run on James South at all. If it does, it certainly wouldn't be a dedicated lane (unless James/John revert back to one way automobile traffic, with one-way LRT running in the opposite direction on each road)

Indeed, it's sounding more and more like the Rapid Transit Office will avoid James St South for the A-Line and turn along Hunter Street to Claremont.

[raisethehammer]

they could use Charlton to eastern Corktown - Ferguson for example, and then down to Hunter/Claremont.
It would be a shame for the potentially awesome shopping district of James South to miss out. Although, trains on Hunter is still darn close.
King/Main isn't a done deal by any means. There's still a good group in city hall hoping for two-way LRT on Main. They will have a mess on their hands trying to run all the other bus routes on Main/King if they do LRT on Main/King.
Two-way LRT on Main is much easier and IMO would allow better flow of overall traffic. All buses are moved to a two-way King and that's the end of it....no buses competing with LRT trying to pull in and out for stops at every block etc..... LRT needs to be given priority so that it's a fast option for moving across town. If cars are still whizzing past on 4 lanes of one-way street instead of 5 lanes, it will kill LRT.

[markbarbera]

It's a double-edged sword. If you put both LRT tracks on Main, Main will remain one-way. Main simply cannot function with just three lanes available for two-way automobile traffic. However, one westbound LRT track on King and one eastbound on Main would allow for a traditional two-lane two-way roadway running on Main alongside a dedicated LRT line.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

They will have a mess on their hands trying to run all the other bus routes on Main/King if they do LRT on Main/King.
Two-way LRT on Main is much easier and IMO would allow better flow of overall traffic. All buses are moved to a two-way King and that's the end of it....no buses competing with LRT trying to pull in and out for stops at every block etc.....

If we have LRT on King/Main and with the planned frequency of every 10 minutes all current buses on King/Main will disappear, there will be no more King/Beeline, etc.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

If we have LRT on King/Main and with the planned frequency of every 10 minutes all current buses on King/Main will disappear, there will be no more King/Beeline, etc.

what about all the 5 buses and 52, 51 etc....


Mark's point is a good one - King and Main could go two-way with LRT on each street. I'd propose that the LRT run on the north lane of Main, westbound. And on the south lane of King, eastbound. Then, any buses using these street would be on the other side of the street using their stops there.
Plus, it means less street crossings necessary for anyone using LRT. Right now the B-Line is a nuisance in my neighbourhood (Strathcona) since you have to cross both King and Main to get the downtown-bound bus. I've missed buses before standing on the wrong side of Main waiting for a break in the freeway so I can cross. No such luck in rush hour.
Using the 'inner lanes' of King/Main would help keep the tracks closer together. I still worry about this option in central Hamilton where King/Main are quite a distance apart. I know it's only a couple of stops - Sherman/Gage, but it would hinder the EcDev spinoffs in that area since someone north of king or south of Main probably won't want to make the long walk to the other LRT track when a Delaware or Cannon bus goes right past them. But whatever...it can't be perfect I guess.

[raisethehammer]

I guess there will also be no more 27-Upper James bus too.

[SteelTown]

Yea, all buses that goes along King, Main and Upper James will disappear.

Imagine the bus improvements you'll see once these buses are relocated to other routes/new routes.