Rapid Transit

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

For what it would cost to implement an LRT for one of the BLAST routes, we could implement BRT that covers all BLAST routes, and actually increase the amount of development opportunity it would generate.

Even if Hamilton could bank the $1B and draw against it, the City would still need to perform EAs and BCAs on the L/S/T lines and Metrolinx would have to sign off on it. Years of study plus the time spent idling at the back of the project priority line, waiting to be blessed by a funding announcement.

And one could be forgiven for thinking that BRT just adds up to more of the same mode that council refuses to support, only run more frequently in dedicated transit-only lanes.

Then there's this caveat, from the Forbes piece:

“I don’t think we are attributing the development 100 percent to the transit investment… It’s part of the package of all of the importance given to the corridor. It’s possible that in a really strong corridor with a lot of goverment support and no transit you might get a lot of development. Probably if you add in transit you would do even better. But importantly in those situations you still need transit in order to create that kind of dense urban environment.”

[ScreamingViking]

I think the full BLAST network would likely cost far more than $1 billion just for BRT. Metrolinx's 2010 business case estimated the capital cost of BRT at $218 million (2008 dollars) for the original 14km B-Line route... the whole network is probably close to 100km altogether.

Unless the city skimps and implements express bus service on some routes instead of fully dedicated bus lanes. Which I think they should be planning to do NOW anyway, in conjunction with the B-Line LRT.


From Wikipedia

[drpgq]

Originally Posted by eatboots

There are a few problems the LRT is facing when it comes to this council, general disdain for downtown, councillors with hands out who are upset their wards are not receiving anything, conservative councillors who do not want to be known as taking Liberal money, and councillors who think that Hamilton's car centric one way highways through the city are great just the way they are. A referendum on this is useless, it's just a way to pass off the responsibility of leadership on to a public that is uninformed at best and really could care less at worst. For someone in Ward 11 the LRT might as well be in Oakville.

I suppose Skelly and Jackson could be considered conservative councilors opposed to Liberal money (although I think Jackson isn't really opposing it much), but clearly Collins and Whitehead are the ones driving the opposition bus and they're Liberals themselves (unless they've changed their spots).

For me this is holding the Liberals to account for their promises for LRT in 2007 and actually getting the money from the province spent here for a capital investment that enhances productivity. Apart from a couple of wingnut councilors and the odd contrarian, who that is knowledgeable on the issue is opposed? When you have Vranich, the chamber and Horwath all on the same side, that's something.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by drpgq

When you have Vranich, the chamber and Horwath all on the same side, that's something.

Makes one wonder the number of degrees of separation they each have from Bombardier...

Granted, it is good to finally hear Horwath take a position on LRT

[eatboots]

Even just a just a quick glance on Twitter(the place you go to tell people how much you don't like something) and you can see there is not any anti LRT rhetoric, despite what Whitehead wants people to believe. At this point though that's more likely due to the fact that most people don't have a strong opinion on it one way or the other.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

it is good to finally hear Horwath take a position on LRT

May 26, 2015
Feb 4, 2015
May 8, 2014
Feb 26, 2009

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by eatboots

Even just a just a quick glance on Twitter(the place you go to tell people how much you don't like something) and you can see there is not any anti LRT rhetoric, despite what Whitehead wants people to believe. At this point though that's more likely due to the fact that most people don't have a strong opinion on it one way or the other.

There is no organized opposition either... seems to be mostly individuals who are openly against it; aside from a few letters published in the Spec, many of the nay arguments consist of anonymous posts in the reader comments on news stories or articles at sites like Raise the Hammer. Conversely, there are groups set up that actively support LRT (e.g., Hamilton Light Rail), and the business community has been speaking up.

None of these are indicators of widespread public opinion. But I think they need to be kept in mind whenever someone says they're hearing a lot of opposition or concern.

[hotwheels]

New Renderings Showcase Proposed Hamilton LRT in Action

Recently released renderings of the proposed $1 billion CAD, 11-kilometre light rail plan for Hamilton, Ontario showcase the LRT in action as it would appear throughout various points across the downtown. Travelling east-west on Line B from McMaster University, through the heart of downtown along both Main Street and King Street, to the Queenston Road Traffic Circle, and north-south on Line A along James Street North from downtown to the Waterfront, the system would massively transform Hamilton's urban landscape and metropolitan character.

[interr0bangr]

Originally Posted by hotwheels

New Renderings Showcase Proposed Hamilton LRT in Action

Posted about a month ago here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=2974

Still look good though.

[thistleclub]

Main or King? An LRT debate that never dies
(Hamilton Spectator, Matthew Van Dongen, June 8 2016)

Three well-known International Village businesses are calling on Hamilton to run LRT on Main Street through the downtown, rather than the planned King Street route.

At least a couple of councillors want to discuss such a change, too — even though the province has already committed $1 billion to the existing plan.

The Black Forest Inn, Denninger's and Thompson's Pawnbrokers and Jewellers submitted a joint letter to the city Tuesday pitching a reconsideration of Main Street, arguing it is wider, close enough to King to spur downtown redevelopment and negates the need for a new light rail transit bridge over Highway 403.

"Although we support the concept of an LRT, we believe the current proposal is not the best alternative for the city," the letter states, adding downtown King Street merchants are worried about going out of business during the expected years of LRT construction.

The approved LRT route starts and ends on Main, at McMaster University and the Queenston traffic circle. But from Dundurn Avenue to the Delta, it runs on King.

arious studies over time have suggested King Street is the best LRT route to generate redevelopment and new business. A Metrolinx analysis said the ideal scenario for the project would see LRT on King and two-way vehicle traffic shifted to Main.

Metrolinx and the city are aiming to have a design-build contract signed with a contractor by 2018 — an election year for the province and the city.

That would likely be impossible if design work to date was abandoned in favour of a new study and environmental assessment on Main Street.

Nonetheless, Coun. Terry Whitehead responded to the letter by email Tuesday noting he has been researching the topic and "it is unclear why Main Street is not the preferred route. I will be providing the data to the public so a … discussion can take place."

New Ward 7 Coun. Donna Skelly has also publicly questioned why Main Street was ruled out as a route option.


Read it in full here.

[markbarbera]

Various studies over time have suggested King Street is the best LRT route to generate redevelopment and new business.

Actually, the term I have heard used most is that King offers more of an economic uplift. Personally, I would like more details as to exactly what the projected uplift is for the King route, versus the projected uplift from having it run along Main. Is it a significant difference? Has the cost of lost business along King during construction been factored into the uplift, and how does that compare to the projected cost to business if the construction took place along Main instead? Has there even been a relevant, detailed cost benefit analysis done on route alternatives?

Metrolinx and the city are aiming to have a design-build contract signed with a contractor by 2018 — an election year for the province and the city.

That would likely be impossible if design work to date was abandoned in favour of a new study and environmental assessment on Main Street.

A project of such significant impact on the city should not be rushed in order to meet an artificially created, politically motivated deadline.

[MalcolmTucker]

Ten years is rushed?

Catchment map:

[markbarbera]

The preliminary feasibility study was issued in 2012.

I have been going through all the LRT-related documentation provided at Hamilton's website, but I have yet to find any cost benefit analysis that supports the notion that a route along King has more of an economic uplift than along Main. I would appreciate it if anyone can point out where I may find this information.

[MalcolmTucker]

The province stopped requiring alternative route assessments when they changed the EA process a few years back.

And economic studies like that are pretty much bunk. Want successful transit? build it near where people already are and where they want to go. Want more 'uplift', redevelopment what have you? Build it near many empty lots or underused properties. Spend more of the project budget on making the street look pretty and not on transit.

The routes don't really vary enough to have much different catchment (edit:redevelopment potential). You just trade one residential area for another. Street improvements can be done on both streets.

[king10]

if something like this happens during the LRT construction who would cover the cost overrun and damages? I would hope its not the City and its clearly outlined in the contract.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...tawa-1.3621949

Massive sinkhole shuts down Rideau Street in downtown Ottawa

The sinkhole appeared at about 10:30 a.m. ET Wednesday near the corner of Rideau Street and Sussex Drive at a light rail construction site. It's about two blocks east of the Château Laurier hote

[lucasmascotto]

You know, back when we thought the city was only getting the B-Line route, and no spur on James Street, I was ardently against putting LRT on Main Street, especially since I thought that Jackson Square would lose out on investment since it isn't fronting onto an LRT line. However, now that we are getting the A-Line spur on James Street, I see nothing against putting it on Main. I support either arterial road, as long as it gets built.

[markbarbera]

B-Line on Main, A-Line on Hughson please. I don't like the idea of multi-year construction on James forcing out art crawls /Supercrawl for an indeterminate amount of time (and I am sure the businesses on James North feel the same)

[mattgrande]

The only positive of B-Line on King that I can see is that it'd run much closer to the stadium.

That being said, Main is wider, and straighter. I think it's the better choice, but I'm certainly no expert...

[CaptainKirk]

King is perfect. King will thrive.

I think we'll see Main converted to 2 way.

[markbarbera]

There are some banking on LRT on King guaranteeing that Main will convert to two way. What is more likely to happen is that Main will lock in at one way as a result. The interchange configuration at the 403, complicated by an additional bridge span to accommodate the LRT (an expensive element not required if LRT ran on Main), and it will make reconfiguration for two way virtually impossible. Cannon will replace King as the westbound one-way thoroughfare.