Rapid Transit

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Amongst the repetition and the run-on sentences of the impromptu speeches, the announcement made today has thankfully been clear on a few things.

- The route will not be impeded or altered
- The province/feds will contribute 50/50 to the construction
- The city only has to provide operating costs

I think the best thing to hear was the reply somebody made to a question about if council decides to pursue BRT instead; "then there is no deal" - Minister McKenna.

Exciting stuff.

[TheHonestMaple]

Full stream can be found here

[Innsertnamehere]

Basically the province / feds seem to be doing what they did to Toronto - doing their transit planning for them.

Recall that the province wrote off Toronto’s Relief Line plan and instituted their own. Same here. Council doesn’t have a decision or input if the plan is happening. It has input on paying for operating - which they have to agree to eventually.

Much like the province recently telling the city that they must expand the urban boundary or the province will do it for them - here the province is telling council it must accept the LRT or they will just build it anyway.

[lachlanholmes]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Basically the province / feds seem to be doing what they did to Toronto - doing their transit planning for them.

Recall that the province wrote off Toronto’s Relief Line plan and instituted their own. Same here. Council doesn’t have a decision or input if the plan is happening. It has input on paying for operating - which they have to agree to eventually.

Much like the province recently telling the city that they must expand the urban boundary or the province will do it for them - here the province is telling council it must accept the LRT or they will just build it anyway.

Hallelujah. Less opportunity for the unbelievable councillors hell-bent on destroying our LRT the better.

[SteelTown]

Thank god for someone like Catherine McKenna.

If it wasn't for her I doubt we would ever see LRT.

[SteelTown]

I'm glad McKenna right away nipped it in the bud for BRT. The City better not waste time and approve the memorandum of understanding.

[mishap]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

Yes you're right, I should've just said McMaster. The plans have always been from Mac -> Eastgate, but the 10 goes to University Plaza. Of course, we don't know the specifics yet. Not till Thursday.

There was talk of extending the 10 right into Dundas as well, but that's out now.

There has been so much... truth-bending and internally inconsistent logic during the planning process for the project that I can see why people are leery about it.
An example: There are no real plans to extend the line to University Plaza, much less Dundas. One reason told to me at a public meeting is that the creek is too difficult to cross, as is the hill into old Dundas. Which is funny considering that Osler Drive is right next to the rail trail. You know, a former rail line... running over that creek.

Another: They are insisting on spending tens of millions of dollars on a new crossing over the 403 because - they say - a sharper turn at Paradise or Longwood would slow the train down too much. Kitchener's LRT has several tight turns. Just one here would be tolerable. Meanwhile, they didn't want to build a grade separation across the rail spur in the east end (but the rail company insisted), as though that wouldn't cause delays. That tells me that the 403 crossing isn't just for function... it's a showpiece structure.

I get that they're going to do what they want to do, but at least be somewhat honest about it.

[bigguy1231]

It is all going to come down to operating costs that the city will be on the hook for. If it is 20 or 30 million a year this is dead in the water. Hell even if it's 10 million per year it's dead.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by mishap

An example: There are no real plans to extend the line to University Plaza, much less Dundas. One reason told to me at a public meeting is that the creek is too difficult to cross, as is the hill into old Dundas. Which is funny considering that Osler Drive is right next to the rail trail. You know, a former rail line... running over that creek.

Another: They are insisting on spending tens of millions of dollars on a new crossing over the 403 because - they say - a sharper turn at Paradise or Longwood would slow the train down too much. Kitchener's LRT has several tight turns. Just one here would be tolerable. Meanwhile, they didn't want to build a grade separation across the rail spur in the east end (but the rail company insisted), as though that wouldn't cause delays. That tells me that the 403 crossing isn't just for function... it's a showpiece structure.

I don't think there's any reason this could not be extended right into downtown Dundas in the future. The Osler incline between Governors Rd. and South St. is long and fairly steep, but I don't think it will be much different for LRT than the CP rail grade separation near Gage.

The ramps onto the 403 are probably the biggest complication with running the tracks along King over the highway. If that was the plan they may need to be reconfigured, or at least have another signalized crossing to allow autos to traverse the tracks to get from the north to south lanes and vice versa, which traffic engineers would be reluctant to do so close to the lights at Dundurn and the Fortinos plaza.

There was also some doubt about existing bridges being strong enough to support the LRT. This was examined for RHVP overpass on Queenston... I believe it was found to be ok, but perhaps that's an issue with the bridges over the 403? (though they were rehabbed not long ago); if there's a need to be beef up the structure to support railbeds and trains it could be a costly project, with large construction impacts to traffic flow on a very busy stretch of road.

[mishap]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I don't think there's any reason this could not be extended right into downtown Dundas in the future.

I don't either, but they seem to want to find reasons.
What might actually be better is to run a future phase to the Meadowlands. The Hydro corridor that passes the Main and Osler area has been flagged as a potential, if unlikely, transit route. The escarpment crossing could be a shared bus-rail roadway for HSR and GO that would outperform an overcrowded Highway 403, and open up Park-n-Ride options at an intermodal terminal in the Meadowlands.

The ramps onto the 403 are probably the biggest complication with running the tracks along King over the highway.

With 3.4 billion, the whole interchange should be redone, and Main and King should be converted to two-way streets. Under the current plans, it will be very easy go travel eastbound, and hard to get westbound. I expect that will change, but the info shown at public meetings acts like it isn't going to happen. Where (looking west) the LRT shifts from Main to King, traffic should be diverted from King to Main. Forget eastbound and westbound streets; basically, between the Delta and the 403, Main should be the traffic corridor, and King should be the transit corridor.

There was also some doubt about existing bridges being strong enough to support the LRT. This was examined for RHVP overpass on Queenston... I believe it was found to be ok,

If they want to really tout the environmental benefits of light rail, the Queenston/ RHVP interchange should be rebuilt as a SPUI (Single-Point Urban Interchange) as part of the project. Look up 406/ Fourth Ave as an example. It uses less land and would free up some valley space at one of its narrowest points. The current bridge would be close to 40 years old by the time LRT is ready to go.

[TheHonestMaple]

Do the LRT stops have enclosed shelters? Or are these more like bus stops? I haven't really seen any details. What was the need to demolish all those buildings along the route?

[ScreamingViking]

The design will likely change, but here are some concepts from past news stories.


Source


Source


Or look to KW's Ion system... ours will probably be similar.




Source


Source

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Do the LRT stops have enclosed shelters? Or are these more like bus stops? I haven't really seen any details. What was the need to demolish all those buildings along the route?

There isn’t space for the stations areas, road lanes, LRT lanes, and sidewalks on some parts of the route so some buildings needed to be demolished. The stations will be fairly simple as you can see in the images above, but they still need space.

They are also going to build a rail to rail grade separation near Gage, which takes up a lot of space so a bunch of properties there were needed.

Most of the land needs will just be the first couple of metres of most properties. They will be put back on the market in their slightly smaller form after the LRT is complete for redevelopment.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

There isn’t space for the stations areas, road lanes, LRT lanes, and sidewalks on some parts of the route so some buildings needed to be demolished. The stations will be fairly simple as you can see in the images above, but they still need space.

They are also going to build a rail to rail grade separation near Gage, which takes up a lot of space so a bunch of properties there were needed.

Most of the land needs will just be the first couple of metres of most properties. They will be put back on the market in their slightly smaller form after the LRT is complete for redevelopment.

Can you expand on this rail to rail grade separation near Gage? Is the LRT going under the existing train tracks?

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Can you expand on this rail to rail grade separation near Gage? I havn't heard about that.

CP doesn't want the LRT to cross their track at grade. So they will have to dig down and create an underpass for the transit line.

[TheHonestMaple]

Do we have any pictures of what that may look like?

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Do we have any pictures of what that may look like?

I don't have pictures for the tunnel, but I have the Environment Assessment design plates for the entire line. Subject to change by the company that builds LRT though. These are considered draft.

[ScreamingViking]

This report has some drawings, but no renders. I don't recall ever seeing an illustration but this underpass will be one of the more complex parts of construction. The plan was to keep the road and sidewalk at grade so this would just be for the LRT; I imagine that could change too.

https://www.hamilton.ca/sites/defaul...cal-report.pdf

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

I don't have pictures for the tunnel, but I have the Environment Assessment design plates for the entire line. Subject to change by the company that builds LRT though. These are considered draft.

Where can I find that, i'd like to check that out.

Edit: nice, thanks

[ScreamingViking]

The city's LRT webpage has a lot of info. Take a wander through, you'll probably find details you're interested in seeing.

https://www.hamilton.ca/city-initiat...il-transit-lrt