Rapid Transit

[hamtransithistory]

Originally Posted by DC83

Hmmm, I totally think Limeridge should be added to the 'C-Line' as it would obviously follow the current 41 Mohawk route. It makes so much sense. If the City is planning of creating a 'C-Line' RT route, my not just implement Limeridge Terminal into that? I bet if the City begged enough, it would get funding from Metrolinx for a 3rd line ('C-Line').

Here's my dream transit system:

You may want to consider another branch of the Downtown Xpress line-along the Chedoke Rail Trail from Ancaster to the Downtown core.

From Meadowlands, the line crosses the Linc (bridge or tunnel), crosses Iroquoia Heights Conservation area to the edge of the escarpment. A stop is put at Scenic Drive, with parking underneath the Hydro towers.

The line then runs down the side of the mountain. A stop is put at the Chedoke ski Hill/golf course/staircase, with no parking. The line reaches Dundurn, with a stop at the end of Dundurn. The line turns north towards Aberdeen, with another stop at Dundurn and Aberdeen.

From Dundurn and Aberdeen, there are two options
-run north on Dundurn to the B-line, and then east to the downtown
-run east on Aberdeen, then north on James to the downtown.

[go_leafs_go02]

so any updates on this lately? I haven't been in hamilton since april, but will be in hamilton for a few hours on saturday..what's the developments?

[SteelTown]

The next Public Works meeting is June 16 so that's when they'll narrow what kind of rapid transit the city will go for, either LRT or BRT or a mixture of both.

[SteelTown]

From the Downtown BIA....

[matt602]

No complaints from me at all.

[BrianE]

An interesting story on the front page of MSNBC.com

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25010939/

some Highlights :

RIDERSHIP ON THE RISE

Last year, 10.3 billion trips were taken on public transportation, the most in 50 years. In the first quarter of 2008, transit continued to climb by 3.3 percent. Click at left for details.

Light rail
Streetcars and trolleys had the highest percentage increase, at 10.3 percent. The biggest increases:
• Baltimore, 16.8 percent
• Minneapolis, 16.4 percent
• St. Louis, 15.6 percent
• San Francisco, 12.2 percent

Buses
Bus ridership rose 2 percent. The biggest increases:
• San Antonio, 10.6 percent
• Denver, 9.4 percent
• San Diego, 6.8 percent
• Minneapolis, 6.7 percent
• Seattle, 6.2 percent
• Phoenix, 5.4 percent

Washington-area bus riders, meanwhile, complain of standing-room-only buses at any time of the day or night, while buses are so full in Indianapolis that would-be riders are often refused entry, left to watch as buses drive off without them.

“I was standing there for about an hour,” said Ryan Taber, who rides the Fishers Express bus from his home in Hamilton County to his job in downtown Indianapolis.

“No buses ever came by, so finally we stopped a bus going to Carmel and said, ‘What’s the deal?’ And the driver said, ‘The buses were full, so they didn’t even come by this stop,’” Taber said.

Does that sound familiar to anyone here?

Wichita Transit in Kansas, which has seen a 22 percent increase in ridership, has raised its weekly fuel purchase to 8,000 gallons. One recent delivery cost 30 cents a gallon more than it had the week before, officials said.

That caused the bus service to ask the city council for $210,000 from a reserve fund, money it said was needed to keep buses on the street until July.

“The fuel prices have gone up so dramatically and drastically that even the dramatic increase in ridership is not making up as far as our fuel debt is concerned and our ability to purchase fuel,” said Michael Vinson, the system’s acting director.

It all adds up to a conundrum for government officials — high fuel prices send passengers to mass transit but drive down tax revenue and strain fuel budgets.

It would be nice if there were some form of Mass Transit that didn't need gasoline to run.... hhmmmmm, I wonder what that form of transit would look like...

[oldcoote]

Originally Posted by BrianE

It would be nice if there were some form of Mass Transit that didn't need gasoline to run.... hhmmmmm, I wonder what that form of transit would look like...

Honestly, there is an element to electric generated transit that scares me. Ontario's approach to electric generation is rather archaic. We continue to derive a bulk of our energy through burning coal for goodness sakes. Outside of Texas, Ontario is the worst polluter in North America.

Ontario needs to look to Quebec as an example of a government that has shown great leadership in this area. (Mind you, they also have the benefit of raging rivers in the north, and probably wouldn't be so advanced had the ice storm not crippled their infrastructure.)

Perhaps Hamilton should use Bullfrog to pay their bills.

[flar]

If Ontario shuts down its coal fired generating stations, we will not have enough capacity to power the province. We will then buy power from the US, where there are hundreds of coal fired plants and they are building more all the time. So we end up paying extra, and we get the pollution anyway. And the American plants will cause more pollution. To give an example, Lambton Generating Station, located along the St. Clair River south of Sarnia, just spent millions to install scrubbers that eliminate virtually all of the toxins from coal smoke. Most of what you see coming from the stacks is steam. Directly across the river in Michigan there are two huge coal fired plants belching smoke into the prevailing west winds. That's where we'll be buying our power when they shut Lambton Generating Station down in a few years. Lambton could also be outfitted with clean coal technology. Another benefit of coal is that it is an on-demand source of power. When demand is high, shovel on more coal; when demand is low, it can be turned off completely. That is not the case with other forms of power generation, and electricity cannot be stored efficiently and thus goes to waste with other nonflexible power generation sources.

[matt602]

Even still, Nanticoke GS right here in SW Ontario is the most polluting coal-fired generating station in North America (supposed to be closed at some point but the government hasn't come up with any alternatives to raise it's share of power generation).

When Lakeview GS was taken off the grid, a lot of added stress was thrown around the grid. It was not a good idea in my opinion. More of a political move than anything.

Anyway thats completely off topic anyway, I think this deserves a thread in General or something.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by oldcoote

(Mind you, they also have the benefit of raging rivers in the north, and probably wouldn't be so advanced had the ice storm not crippled their infrastructure.)

Not to mention the steal of a deal they got from Newfoundland 40 years ago (Churchill Falls), which even Danny Williams hasn't been able to 'fix' to Newfoundlands liking......

[SteelTown]

Got the Downtown BIA, Home Builder Association, Chamber of Commerce, McMaster and private developers all supporting LRT for Hamilton. Has there been any serious opposition out there for LRT in Hamilton?

[FairHamilton]

Montreal's getting a LRT, though they call it a tramway: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/08061...aymontreal0612

[DC83]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Got the Downtown BIA, Home Builder Association, Chamber of Commerce, McMaster and private developers all supporting LRT for Hamilton. Has there been any serious opposition out there for LRT in Hamilton?

As far as I can tell, no? Everyone I have spoken to thinks it's an awesome idea. But then again, most people I associate with have the same general views as me.
The only opposition I have encountered is re: the reduction in lanes downtown from 5 to (probably) 2.

But this isn't 'that' big yet... wait til the plans are revealed. Then you KNOW there'll be opposition from the Jack Macdonald's out there! Then it's our turn to shine haha

[DC83]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Montreal's getting a LRT, though they call it a tramway: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/08061...aymontreal0612

That's awesome! What a great bandwagon to jump on!

Theirs seems significantly cheaper than ours, though?
- 3 lines, one as long as 20km, for approx $985 million.
(SOURCE)

I really hope the public works dep't really over-shot w/ their $1.18 billion estimate. If Mtl can build 3 lines for under $1B, we can definately do the same w/ two lines.

[the dude]

subtract the costs of the unnecessary tunnels and bridge repairs and the cost will be well below $1B. i'm hoping they're working out those details as we speak. we must be patient, they're not terribly bright.

[SteelTown]

Enjoy the read........the report to council

http://www.myhamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyre...16PW08043a.pdf

That staff be directed to continue the Rapid Transit Feasibility Study (Phase 2) with a focus on Light Rail Transit;

YAY!!

"Staff consistently heard that the time is now for LRT and that the City must seize the opportunity to move forward and to not miss out on the opportunity at hand to construct a rapid transit system the would compete with other world class cities, all of which have some sort of rail oriented transportation system, particularly with the Province supporting this initiative and proposing funds towards its capital costs. Those in support
of an LRT system believe that by pursuing this option, Hamilton would be considered a leader through the development of an innovative system, particularly through bridging the gap between the distinct areas of the City, particularly lower Hamilton with the Mountain."

[ryan_mcgreal]

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog/1028

Fantastic news: the city has just published a public consultation update [PDF] on its rapid transit feasibility study that recommends moving to phase 2 of the study with a focus on light rail transit.

The update, which will be presented to the public works committee on June 16, also recommends directing staff to report back to the committee in September with a proposed work plan for studies, consultation, design and construction of the rapid transit system.

It further notes that the city should work to ensure that the Hamilton Rapid Transit project is included in the first five-year round of funding from Metrolinx, the provincial body authorized to coordinate rapid transit projects across the GTA and Hamilton.

Strong Public Support for Light Rail

After noting the two public consultation meetings in May, the Hamilton Light Rail panel discussion, and various discussions in local mainstream and independent media, the report states:

At all of the public sessions and through the media blogs the overall public opinion of those responding to the Rapid Transit Feasibility Study is that there is support for the implementation of a rapid transit system, particularly for an LRT system.

71 percent of respondents to the city noted a preference for light rail transit, compared to four percent for bus rapid transit. Overall, 91 percent of respondents support building a rapid transit system.

When respondents stated what they feel are the most important criteria for choosing a rapid transit system, 70 percent identified economic development, 70 percent identified ridership growth, and 65 percent identified environmental impact.

Only 17 percent argued that the capital cost is an important criterion, with most arguing that the capital cost should be shared by all three levels of government.

86 percent of respondents supported the proposed corridors (an east-west corridor from McMaster University to Eastgate Square and a north-south corridor from the waterfront along James to Upper James). 96 percent supported extending the corridors or adding new routes.

A Sense of Urgency

The report also noticed the very high level of public interest in the rapid transit initiative, particularly its timeliness given the provincial capital funding commitment and the positive impact that light rail would have on economic development, revitalization, improving air quality, and city image.

A recurring theme was an awareness that investing in light rail would demonstrate political leadership, showing Hamilton to be an innovative city willing to invest in economic revitalization.

The respondents feel that these advantages can come from light rail transit but not from bus rapid transit, which has not demonstrated an ability ot attract ridership or economic development the way light rail can.

The report also cautioned that based on ongoing consultations with Metrolinx, it's important to ensure that Hamilton's rapid transit plan be included in the first five-year provincial funding commitment, due to be released in November 2008.

That means a deadline of September 2008 for staff to present a proposed work plan for studying and designing the system, subject to council approval.

Policy Objectives

The report also notes that the small opposition to rapid transit tended to emphasize the cost of the plan or a sense that transit improvement is not necessary. However, it states:

The idea of status quo however is in contravention of the City’s Transportation Master Plan and Metrolinx’s draft Regional Transportation Plan Green Papers and White Papers. Particularly, in regards to the continuing issues related to peak oil prices and the demand for environmentally sustainable transportation options, the general sense from the public is that the time is now for Hamilton to do something bold and innovative.

Hamilton has a goal of doubling transit ridership and intensifying the city via the nodes and corridors finalized in the Growth-Related Integrated Development Strategy (GRIDS), which emphasize the Main-King and Upper James corridors.

[oldcoote]

Great news!!

[holymoly]

Yay!!!

[LikeHamilton]

Originally Posted by DC83

The only opposition I have encountered is re: the reduction in lanes downtown from 5 to (probably) 2.

I believe the lane reduction is becoming a non-issue and people are starting to resolve themselves to this. From what I have heard from people at the chamber meeting is that rapid transit is coming and has to come to this city to move forward. BRT or LRT you will most likely lose the same amount of lanes. So the decision becomes simple, BRT or LRT? LRT easily wins on everything but the capital start up costs. But since the capital cost are born by the upper levels of government, it wipes that out.