The future of Hamilton's public transit

[thistleclub]

Has anyone addressed whether the arrival of rapid transit will lead to Metrolinx-driven adoption of fare levels on par with those across the GTHA? (See the MTO mandate letter: “Your goal is to create a seamless and transparent fare system across the GTHA.”) If Hamilton’s adult cash fare on the B-Line moves from $2.55 to $3.00 — a jump of just under 20% — it will match current TTC levels, but still be below York ($4.00), Brampton ($3.75), Oakville ($3.50) and Oshawa/Mississauga/Burlington ($3.25).

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

Emphasis added.

Add more buses and you'd probably see a mere blip in numbers. The best case scenario would perhaps see a return to 1980s ridership levels. Perhaps. If the City wants transformative change, they'll have to do better and that should not include adding more buses.

And aside from diehards, essentially nobody takes the bus if they can afford to drive. As has already been pointed out, it's not 🞵🞵🞵🞵 enough and it's not comfortable enough.

Personally, if LRT is a no-go, then I would hope they just stick with the status quo because the literature suggests that BRT just isn't worth the massive expense. Invest that money in bike lanes. Leave the HSR to the young and the disenfranchised.

If we “leave the HSR to the young and disenfranchised,” the enfranchised will leave the city. Living in the lower city has a lot of drawbacks and a lot of advantages, and one of the advantages is that, on paper, it has more than enough density to support very high-quality transit (not just on the B Line, but on neighbourhood lines as well). Access to transit is important, even if one uses it rarely- it is another option available, and there’s value to that. Hamilton will find it hard to continue to attract people to the core if it follows a policy to provide the least amount of transit possible to a clientele it considers “sketchy”; “poor”; ‘disenfranchised”; and the other adjectives used on this thread to describe HSR ridership.

It’s true that no one would choose to be identified that way; it’s not the way I view HSR riders when I take the bus, and I don’t know why we continue to tolerate this view of transit users in this city. You would think that riders of HSR would be a primary constituency that the pro-LRT crowd needs to sway, but they’re left out of it entirely- well, they’re disenfranchised, so naturally. That’s a problem.

Flar, you’re right that major traffic congestion and costly parking are major drivers of transit use. Dr. Awesomesauce, you’re wrong that only “diehards” take transit. I know plenty of households with cars that occasionally use transit, or use transit for certain regular trips.

[flar]

Realistically, what is the best way to improve transit in the busy east-west corridor of the city? I think adding more buses is the obvious way to go, since the immediate problem is crush loads and drive by's, which lead to unreliablity and inconvenience.

Would dedicated bus lanes on King, Main, Cannon/Wilson or Barton make trips faster? Traffic flows pretty well through Hamilton, so I have my doubts, but I'd like to see some hard data on King bus lane experiment.

Will nicer stations increase ridership? All it needs is an adequately sized shelter. Otherwise I don't think this is a significant driver in a person's decision to use transit. With a proper transit system, you don't spend more than a couple minutes at the station. As long as frequency is 5 min or less, who cares if the station is nice? Has the new(ish) station downtown had any effect on ridership?

[thistleclub]

Steer Davies Gleave’s analysis (as expressed in Option 2 of its Hamilton King-Main Rapid Transit Benefits Case) considered LRT in a single-vehicle configuration with a seating capacity of 130 per vehicle. Given that yardstick, existing ridership numbers (oft-touted 13,000 passengers per weekday) would fill 100 LRT vehicles to capacity. SDG’s Option 2 assumes 30 vehicles on the circuit, with a headway of four minutes and a passenger seating capacity of 1,950 riders per hour in each direction. If B-Line LRT were only operational for the same hours as the HSR’s existing express service (Route 10 runs 5am-7pm, or 14 hours daily Mon-Fri), LRT would have a weekday passenger capacity more than four times existing demand. If you extend rapid transit service until 1am holding to that four-minute headway, that’s 20 hours of operation and a capacity of 78,000 daily, six times the existing B-Line ridership. In light of Rapid Ready’s aside about fully utilizing available train capacity, it’s not inconceivable that thrift-driven headways could be in the 10-15 minute range during off-peak periods.

[thistleclub]

Moving Millennials: how a generation is changing mobility
(Spacing, Melissa Bruntlett, Oct 8 2014)

In the past decade, a term has been tossed around to describe a generation who began coming of age in the early 2000s. Called the “Millennials”, this group is comprised of those born between 1981 and 1999, many of which grew up in the age of technology, with little or no memory of a time before computers existed. The term is often used in a derogatory manner by generations past, referring to them as lazy, entitled and unwilling to work hard for success.

Regardless of their perceived behaviour, this large demographic, currently making up 32% of Canada’s population, is causing city planners and transit authorities to rethink previous mobility trends. With a large majority of the 19-34 years old migrating to city centres, we are witnessing a shift from the suburban, car-centric models to one focused on densification and multi-modal transportation. So just how is an entire generation creating new demands, specifically around how cities move people?

Read it in full here.

[bigguy1231]

The study obviously hasn't looked to the past. Young people have always migrated to downtown areas in large numbers, thats where rental accommodation is most available and where most of the nightlife is. As for their change in attitude towards public transport there has always been a certain percentage that use public transit exclusively.

From personal experience and observation most young people I know drive cars, either their own or their parents. My neighbor's kids all drive and about half of them have their own cars and we live within 2 kms of downtown Hamilton.Even the twenty somethings that work with me all have their own cars and most of them live in the lower city. The idea that somehow young people are rejecting automobiles in favour of public transit is just nonsense. The only ones that aren't driving are the ones who aren't working and can't afford to drive.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

The idea that somehow young people are rejecting automobiles in favour of public transit is just nonsense. The only ones that aren't driving are the ones who aren't working and can't afford to drive.

This does a good job of summing up most Hamiltonians’ view of the world: if you aren’t in a car, it’s because you’re a bum.

There’s a lot of info out there suggesting that we may have reached “peak driving,” and distances traveled by car are already declining. Young people are waiting longer than past generations to get their driving licenses. They are expressing desire for the ability to travel different ways, and value the ability to use other technology while taking transit, instead of having to focus on traffic. Many people want to have the option to limit the amount they drive, and a lot of those people are those of means who just prefer having a choice of whether to be behind the wheel or not.

[CaptainKirk]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

This does a good job of summing up most Hamiltonians’ view of the world: if you aren’t in a car, it’s because you’re a bum.

There’s a lot of info out there suggesting that we may have reached “peak driving,” and distances traveled by car are already declining. Young people are waiting longer than past generations to get their driving licenses. They are expressing desire for the ability to travel different ways, and value the ability to use other technology while taking transit, instead of having to focus on traffic. Many people want to have the option to limit the amount they drive, and a lot of those people are those of means who just prefer having a choice of whether to be behind the wheel or not.

Also, many youngsters have given up on the dream of a well paying, long term career, cuz they'e just not there anymore. More and more are starting their own small, modest businesses, and realize they will not be able to afford a big expensive suburban home that requires paying high taxes, and the high cost of owning a car, ( gas, insurance, etc) It just costs too damn much, and that is a major complaint of old timers now too. This complaining about high taxes and disgruntlement with city hall is all based the very expensive premise of suburban living which is very difficult to sustain.

[thistleclub]

Moving Millennials: the future of mobility in the dispersed city
(Spacing, Melissa Bruntlett, Oct 15 2014)

As I wrote in Part One of this series, Millennials are currently playing a significant role in how cities adapt to moving large numbers of citizens efficiently. Urban and transit planners are working quickly to respond to the growing need for more diverse transportation options in city centres, creating more complete public transit networks, bicycle infrastructure, and even supporting car sharing schemes. This is all well and good, and is serving a large portion of the population in urban areas, but what happens ten years down the road? Millennials are not immune to the passing of time, and there will come a point in their lives when they are no longer considered “young adults” — when they begin to settle down, possibly have families of their own, and their needs for housing and transportation will begin to change.

While meeting the needs of today’s youth is crucial in the major city centres, it is integral that city and transit planners recognize the importance of fostering habits Millennials are creating today, in order to retain them in the future. What their habits will look like can only be speculated upon, but we can look at the patterns of generations before them to get a better sense of what may come.

Read it in full here.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

This does a good job of summing up most Hamiltonians’ view of the world: if you aren’t in a car, it’s because you’re a bum.

There’s a lot of info out there suggesting that we may have reached “peak driving,” and distances traveled by car are already declining. Young people are waiting longer than past generations to get their driving licenses. They are expressing desire for the ability to travel different ways, and value the ability to use other technology while taking transit, instead of having to focus on traffic. Many people want to have the option to limit the amount they drive, and a lot of those people are those of means who just prefer having a choice of whether to be behind the wheel or not.

No, I said nothing about being a bum. I said those who aren't working and can't afford to drive. I have been unemployed numerous times in my life and money was tight. I know what it's like not to be able to afford things.

As far as any studies or reports are concerned find out who is funding them before taking anything they say as gospel. Most studies and reports are usually biased towards the point of view of those funding them and that goes for both sides of most political issues.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

...Most studies and reports are usually biased towards the point of view of those funding them and that goes for both sides of most political issues.

Now that's a little too much. There would be no advances in good decision-making if that were true. "Seat belts save lives": there's a biased slogan based on no evidence.

[HillStreetBlues]

There are plenty of people outside of whichever Hamilton suburb you happen to live in who choose not to drive. There are, for that matter, plenty of people in Hamilton who choose not to drive even though they can afford it, and plenty of others who would like the option. I couldn’t say for sure whether it is a widespread phenomenon, but the statement “The only ones that aren't driving are the ones who aren't working and can't afford to drive” is wrong.

[flar]

I've always been one of the people who chooses transit rather than driving (daily transit user for 15+ years in three different cities despite owning a car) and I would say Ottawa is the only place I've lived where I'm not a rarity. Even many of the more progressive people I know in places like Hamilton/Windsor/London/KW never take a bus. Why would they when there is little traffic congestion and cheap parking? The only reason I'm not a rarity in Ottawa is because there is heavy traffic congestion, lack of parking, and transit options to many destinations are convenient and reliable.

[interr0bangr]

I own a car and barely ever use it. I can walk pretty much anywhere in downtown Hamilton without too much effort and I commute to Toronto via the GO Train in the morning (walk 15 mins to Hunter station). The joys of living downtown. The only reason I have my car is for occasional trips to visit my family north of Toronto and for drives to the harder to get to outdoors spaces in Hamilton (the beach, a bunch of waterfall trails, etc).

[Jon Dalton]

My neighbours, a family of 4, don't have a car. My work neighbours on both sides don't have cars. 30 to 50% of my customers don't - people take equipment in cabs all the time. As for my friends who live downtown, east end or west end age between 20 to 40 most don't have a car.

When I worked in Burlington though everyone drove including from lower Hamilton where most of the lower paid employees came from. The higher paid came from the GTA. People who work in the suburbs drive because the transit is horrible. Within lower Hamilton it is completely usable.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

There are plenty of people outside of whichever Hamilton suburb you happen to live in who choose not to drive. There are, for that matter, plenty of people in Hamilton who choose not to drive even though they can afford it, and plenty of others who would like the option. I couldn’t say for sure whether it is a widespread phenomenon, but the statement “The only ones that aren't driving are the ones who aren't working and can't afford to drive” is wrong.

I live within a 15-20 minute walk to King and James and I live on the mountain. It would take me longer to get downtown by bus. The only time I use my car is to get to work out of town or to get to places not within easy walking distance. On weekends my car rarely leaves the driveway. Everything I need is within a few blocks of my home.

The number of people who either cannot afford to drive or choose not to drive is still probably less than 10% of the adult population if bus usage is any indication.

This is just anecdotal, but from my memories and current observations it seems more people used the bus when I was a young person than do now.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

This is just anecdotal, but from my memories and current observations it seems more people used the bus when I was a young person than do now.

I think the massive cutbacks in service in the late 1980s really did a number on ridership, especially among those who had/have other transportation choices.

So the idea of improving transit city-wide is a great one.

But it should be able to co-exist with rapid transit across the lower city.

[LikeHamilton]

This is in Toronto but I like the way he articulated his plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwACHSV2jRo

[thistleclub]

Reinforcements are on the way.

Hamilton to roll out 55 new buses: MPP
(Flamborough Review, Mac Christie, Oct 25 2014)

The City of Hamilton will be getting new buses – as part of a partnership with 12 other Ontario municipalities.

According to a press release from Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale MPP Ted McMeekin, the buses – 46 clean diesel or compressed natural gas 12-metre buses and nine 18-metre buses – will be delivered in 2015 and 2016.

“This is great news for transit riders in Hamilton,” McMeekin said in the release. “With this partnership, Hamilton will be able to save money and provide better service, making transit better for the environment and for the entire community.”

The deal will save the city more than $1.4 million on the new buses, said the release. Each 12-metre bus will carry up to 70 passengers and be fully accessible.

However, McMeekin said he’s not sure if any of the buses will see service in Waterdown, as the roll out will be decided by the city.

The joint purchase of 203 buses will save more than $4 million over three years. Other municipalities taking part include Burlington, Milton, Oakville, Barrie and York Region.

[matt602]

I believe that order is for a mix of 40 and 60 foot CNG buses, the latter of which are supposed to go to the Barton route to ease the passenger loads. They're also mostly marked for replacement, as the 2002 and 2003 CNG 40 foot buses are up for retirement.