Rapid Transit

[Dr Awesomesauce]

.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Originally Posted by BriniaSona

Canada takes far too long to approve and build crap. This would happen within a year in any east-asian city.

^Decisions are made quicker, it's true. But the corruption tends to even things out...

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by BriniaSona

Canada takes far too long to approve and build crap. This would happen within a year in any east-asian city.

We've always been that way. Toronto and Montreal spent decades arguing over subway designs before anything got built.

[thistleclub]

I gather that the plan under discussion is technically not 100% final. Much of the B-Line thinking seems to have been transferred more or less directly from Route 10 stops… and while the case for B-Line LRT is compelling, it’s presumptuous to imagine that the HSR status quo is optimized.

The A-Line case is even less well-defined. Unlike the B-Line route, which has been studied and reviewed since shortly after it was floated in 2007, the truncated A-Line as it is represented was not an evidence-driven initiative (it entered the project mix just under a year ago).

The most fine-grained case for that line I’ve found has been a 2011 cost-benefit analysis of the A-Line. That document envisioned a two-phase A-Line, with the first “core” phase running along James from the Waterfront to Mohawk College. This is not that, however. As part of the aforementioned study, boardings on the constituent HSR routes were itemized, with the James North leg representing around 2-3% of the B-Line’s ridership (in 2011, an average of 211 boardings per day on James North vs. 9,301 on the B-Line).

[drpgq]

"As part of the aforementioned study, boardings on the constituent HSR routes were itemized, with the James North leg representing around 2-3% of the B-Line’s ridership (in 2011, an average of 211 boardings per day on James North vs. 9,301 on the B-Line)."

Yes I'm not sure why the push for a big service to the waterfront. There's just no demand. Even with the new development there's no real reason for it.

[thistleclub]

Especially striking when you consider that the capacity of a Flexity Freedom LRV is 251 passengers and the goal is a headway of 4 to 6 minutes.

If A-Line LRT runs only in the six rush hours that correspond with West Harbour GO rail service, that’s 60 to 90 circuits a day — on seated capacity alone, enough space for upwards of 3,000-5,000 passengers. Run the service for 12 hours, like the 20 A Line bus, and you have even more legroom: up to 10,000 seated passengers a day. (Perspective: In Nov-Dec 2015, UPX was operating at around 12% capacity.)

There is also the matter of where the ridership is coming from. Unlike the B-Line, which will retire 18 buses and replace routes like the 1 & 10, there is no indication that A-Line LRT will supplant any HSR routes (in fact, it will be sharing the lane with them), so it cannot be presumed to capture any existing ridership. They're effectively starting with empty LRVs.

Plus, convenience is relative when you’re considering the dynamics at play on a coffeehouse-abundant street that has already established its bona fides as a pedestrian- and cycling-friendly neighbourhood.

And again, if you live south of York/Wilson you’re technically closer to the Hunter GO. If you live north of York/Wilson, you can walk to a stop at Cannon and wait for LRT (or the 4 bus, or the 20 bus) to show up every 4-6 minutes, then travel 3 minutes north to the West Harbour GO. Or you can just walk for 7 minutes from Cannon to the station.

Via Metrolinx:

"Employed early in the project planning process, and subsequently updated as projects evolve, the BCA examines several different high-level transit options within the context of a spectrum of considerations: transportation user benefits compared to the financial impact; good value for tax-payer dollars; environmental, economic and social benefits of the various alternatives; the impacts that a project has on communities; and alignment with the current policy objectives.

This type of standardized project analysis is not meant to be a replacement tool for decision-making, but rather a point of reference for decision-makers, providing an informed view of the project and possible alternatives. It is imbedded and part of the guiding principles of The Big Move, goals, objectives and policies we have in place."

Any guesses as to the ETA on James North LRT BCA?

[thistleclub]

LRT still fuelling tensions
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, May 4 2016)

Arguably the best question that came out of the LRT subcommittee meeting dealing with the design of the $1-billion project was asked when it was over.

What's the level of support for the project at council? inquired Jamie Robinson, Metrolinx director of community relations and communications.

I honestly couldn't tell Robinson how many councillors really support the project and how many are just unwilling to turn their back on the $1 billion provincial windfall.

But I get why Robinson must have been wondering.

By the end of Monday's sometimes tense two-and-half hour meeting. Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Coun. Terry Whitehead were openly bickering in the hallway, accusing each other of spinning information.

And Coun. Matthew Green had just finished lecturing Whitehead for trying to poke holes in the project.

On top of that, Coun. Chad Collins, who is not a member of the subcommittee, dominated the meeting, setting a wary show-me tone by asking staff a string of pointed questions.

Like a tank gunner oscillating his turret from target to target, Collins dispassionately fired skeptical shell after shell at the project's underpinnings, doubtless giving vent to the distrust and suspicion of others besides his own.


Read it in full here.

[thistleclub]

Should Hamilton have 'trial road closures' to prepare it for LRT?
(CBC Hamilton, Samantha Craggs, May 3 2016)

The city is looking at trial road closures – shutting down a street even when there's nothing happening on it – to prepare Hamilton residents for light-rail transit (LRT) construction.

Metrolinx and city officials are looking at closing down streets just ahead of the 2019 construction to get people used to taking a different route.

The anticipated five years of LRT construction will cause massive disruptions to people's daily lives, said Sam Merulla, the Ward 4 councillor who pitched the idea. So people should get used to it.

After experiencing trial street closures, "they'll understand what's coming," Merulla said.

The change is "going to be disruptive for a very significant period of time."

Trial street closures would give people a chance to understand "what route would best suit their needs," Merulla said. It'll also give the city an idea of how traffic patterns will flow.

"We're just trying to expose them to what they're going to be faced with," he said.


Read it in full here.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Remove all these clowns from office and let the big boys and girls play. It's embarrassing. Feckless, illegitimate, ignorant sheep...

[thistleclub]

Merulla floats motion to vote on provincial LRT funding, gauge council support
(Hamilton Spectator, Matthew Van Dongen, May 4 2016)

City councillors are being offered a chance to vote on whether they want the $1 billion promised for LRT — nearly a year after the province announced the cash.

Coun. Sam Merulla has circulated a planned motion for next Wednesday that would have council "reaffirm acceptance" of the promised $1 billion for light rail transit, plus $300 million for a GO train extension to Stoney Creek.

"The perception out there is growing that we as a council are not committed to this project," he said Wednesday, several days after a testy LRT subcommittee meeting dominated by questions about the viability of the route and effects on residents and businesses.

"There's a difference between raising concerns to make the project better and trying to derail the project," he said. "I don't want to go through a dog and pony show … if (council) members want to end up pulling the plug."

While council has twice voted to ask for LRT funding in the past, there was no formal council vote last spring endorsing the amended, fully funded project offered by the province. The announced project is shorter east-to-west than the original council-requested LRT line and includes a spur to the James Street GO station.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger said it's "time to put up or shut up."

"Lets' find out where council is at," he said, adding he thought a majority of councillors remain committed to the project. "Let's reaffirm, and if not, let's not waste our time spending all kinds of money and not have the support of council at the end of the day."


Read it in full here.

[matt602]

This is pointless. Agreements have been signed and we're already well into the process with Metrolinx. Whether any councilors are onboard or not doesn't matter: its getting built.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by matt602

This is pointless:....its getting built.

Exactly! It's happening. I love this FB comment yesterday: (emphasis mine)

"Maybe not unique to hamilton, but we seem to be the only city taking two steps back, and giving ourselves a drop kick every time we decide something. If we had to build a water tower to survive, we would die of thirst deciding why we decided to build it in the first place. Then a couple folks would still come out of the wood work declaring it was news to them, and they should have consulted with the citizens."

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Graham Crawford made a funny on the Twitter machine.

The gist of it is whether or not little Chadwick Collins would turn down Bill Gates' money if he came to town and offered to pay for LRT, etc.

It was funny...

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by BriniaSona

Canada takes far too long to approve and build crap. This would happen within a year in any east-asian city.

When you build crap, approval doesn't really mean much... aside from how quickly you've greased the palms that matter

I don't see the point of Merulla's motion either. An official re-endorsement when there is so much unofficial re-endorsing going on with planning staff as detailed design is under way? What the hell is the point?

Merulla would be better to motion re: transportation and land-use planning advancements that at least align with and at best support LRT.

[thistleclub]

Secure money for LRT before 2018 election
(Hamilton Spectator, Andrew Dreschel, May 9 2016)

Coun. Sam Merulla is trying to lock-in the $1 billion for Hamilton's LRT to protect it from the unpredictable results of the 2018 provincial election.

Merulla says he's consulting with LRT co-ordinator Paul Johnson and Metrolinx staff to develop a way to legally secure the money before the province goes to the polls.

He intends to put it into a motion soon after Wednesday's vote to reaffirm council's support for building the 11-kilometre rail line through the centre of the lower city.

"Once we have confirmation from council that we do want LRT… then the second phase is to nail down a point-of-no-return with the province."

Nobody expects the governing Liberals — who announced the $1 billion funding last May — to pull the rug from under the project.

But with Premier Kathleen Wynne's popularity fading with voters, concerns about the impact of a possible change of government have been raised repeatedly at City Hall.

City manager Chris Murray included the awarding of the LRT contract to a private sector builder before the June, 2018, election as one of his short-term performance goals.

And Coun. Lloyd Ferguson has often urged LRT planners to get the contract signed and construction begun as early as possible in order to make a funding reversal more difficult.

The city expects the contract to be awarded in mid-2018, with major construction starting in 2019.

Coun. Chad Collins, who intends to vote against the LRT reaffirmation motion, notes that former Ontario Conservative leader Tim Hudak didn't support the Hamilton project and that new leader Patrick Brown has yet to make a statement. The party is currently developing its 2018 election platform.

"Can you imagine all the blood, sweat and tears of two years to only change government and they pull the plug on it," said Merulla.


Read it in full here.


Infrastructure Ontario FAQ:

Q1. What is Alternative Financing and Procurement (AFP)?

AFP is an innovative way of financing and procuring large, complex public infrastructure projects. It makes the best use of private-sector resources and expertise to provide on time, on budget project delivery.

Under AFP, provincial ministries and / or project owners establish the scope and purpose of a project while design and construction work is financed and carried out by the private sector. Only after a project is completed will the private sector company be repaid by the province. In some cases, the private sector will also be responsible for the maintenance of a physical building or operation and rehabilitation of a roadway.

AFP allows large, complex infrastructure projects to be delivered more efficiently and cost effectively than traditional procurement. AFP also protects taxpayers from cost overruns by transferring project risks to the party who has the expertise, experience and ability to handle that risk best.

[Jon Dalton]

The decision to run a spur line on James is looking more and more dumb. It won't be rapid transit if it runs in traffic and that traffic on James is always heavy in rush hour. Imagine being on the LRT stuck in traffic wondering if you'll miss the GO train because of it. Also the majority of increase GO service is now slated for Hunter Street rather than West Harbour. The money would be better spent linking LRT all the way to Eastgate with the eventual extension planned for James.

[markbarbera]

From Metrolinx' perspective, LRT is higher order transit, which they require to directly connect to regional rail. Without the spur, there is no direct connection to GO Transit.

Sending it down James in mixed traffic is dumb. I have suggested here before that a better approach would be to pedestrianize Hughson between Hunter and Murray and run the spur along that stretch of Hughson.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

From Metrolinx' perspective, LRT is higher order transit, which they require to directly connect to regional rail. Without the spur, there is no direct connection to GO Transit.

There's connection to GO Transit, just not RER. And if the priority is connection to a station that's mostly disconnected, it's a little perverse.

But yes, James North LRT appears very much to be an investment predicated on politics. In the conspicuous absence of a Metrolinx BCA, ridership data in a Dec 2011 study of the A-line suggests that James North LRT could have dramatic surplus capacity.

This spectre also haunts a Sept 2011 study by Steer Davies Gleave, in which the stretch between King and the Waterfront is forecast to have some of the lowest line flow on the entire full-length A-Line, rivalled only by the leg south of Stone Church or Twenty Road. (And those are 2031 predictions, with the benefit of a full-length A-Line.)

[lucasmascotto]

I think the A-Line would be much more successful if it were to be initially expanded south of King Street to Mohawk College or at the very least St. Joesph's hospital just before the escarpment.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^Agreed. But the escarpment presents some pretty big financial challenges.

Rather than building a tunnel, I'd run it past the GO down Hunter to the Claremont and up the Mountain that way.

Very expensive either way but, ideally, it would connect to Mohawk...