Rapid Transit

[RaginRonic]

I'm going to keep banging the drum all day and exclaim...

'I WANT STREET CHOO-CHOO!!!'

...until I see it truly locked in.

The ratification vote next week better be that Master Lock, and if it is, I'm gonna post a few pics of that company's type of padlocks here.

X-)

[TheRitsman]

Now we just have to wonder if the CPC will pull funding if/when they win.

[RaginRonic]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Now we just have to wonder if the CPC will pull funding if/when they win.

https://www.thespec.com/news/hamilto...-election.html

Take a look here.

=P

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by RaginRonic

https://www.thespec.com/news/hamilto...-election.html

Take a look here.

=P

I don't trust the CPC on that at all.

[StEC]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Now we just have to wonder if the NDP will pull funding if/when they win.

I fixed your quote for you! And the answer is no the NDP won't pull funding!

[ScreamingViking]

I'm more warry of a new (or old) mayor and councillors being elected in fall 2022 who try to kibosh everything. Bratina for example would campaign on the issue, and may find enough opposition to win.

That said, there would probably be enough pro-LRT councillors to keep a vote from doing it (and it may require 2/3 of them to overturn the decision... true?)

If the project has been awarded, or significant chunks of it given that Mlx intends to split it into several tenders, there is probably nothing local yokels can do about stopping it at that point.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I'm more warry of a new (or old) mayor and councillors being elected in fall 2022 who try to kibosh everything. Bratina for example would campaign on the issue, and may find enough opposition to win.

That said, there would probably be enough pro-LRT councillors to keep a vote from doing it (and it may require 2/3 of them to overturn the decision... true?)

If the project has been awarded, or significant chunks of it given that Mlx intends to split it into several tenders, there is probably nothing local yokels can do about stopping it at that point.

So two things:

1) According to Joey Coleman and Ryan McGreal (who are both familiar with this project, and Joey has a very knowledgeable understanding of procedures, this MOU is essentially a commitment, where no party can back out. Now of course there is always a way for someone to back out, but the deal is that it would be very difficult, and the city essentially has no way to vote on the issue again (save for the technicality vote for ratification)

2) I suspect Metrolinx is very aware of the situation. I suspect they will award contracts very quickly for early works to start asap. I bet you we see work definitely start in 2022. If the federal liberals win, they'll want it to get started right away to get a quick win for those of us that are LRT supporters, and Metrolinx probably doesn't want to deal with Hamilton fudging the project again. The more work they get done sooner the better.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

So two things:

1) According to Joey Coleman and Ryan McGreal (who are both familiar with this project, and Joey has a very knowledgeable understanding of procedures, this MOU is essentially a commitment, where no party can back out. Now of course there is always a way for someone to back out, but the deal is that it would be very difficult, and the city essentially has no way to vote on the issue again (save for the technicality vote for ratification)

2) I suspect Metrolinx is very aware of the situation. I suspect they will award contracts very quickly for early works to start asap. I bet you we see work definitely start in 2022. If the federal liberals win, they'll want it to get started right away to get a quick win for those of us that are LRT supporters, and Metrolinx probably doesn't want to deal with Hamilton fudging the project again. The more work they get done sooner the better.

The feds and the provinces probably won't drop the contract again, the only route out would be municipally and even then it's pretty remote.

Presuming that Bratina runs and wins next year, he would have to 1. convince council to cancel the LRT, 2. lobby the provincial government to cancel it again. There wouldn't be a council route to deny it, he would have to rely on the goodwill of the province which I suspect would not be forthcoming due to the stage the LRT would be at by that time. I just don't see it happening.

[ScreamingViking]

I agree it would be very unlikely the city could back out now. But for me, given the history of the politics of it all and the city's dalliances with large transit proposals in the past, I won't rest easy until the thing is operating.

And this is just about the sweetest sweetheart deal ever. It would take a level of foolishness far beyond that displayed by some of our past mayors and councillors to put a stop to it all. But they've often shown they're very capable of it.

Changing senior governments do alter spending plans too though. The cancellation of funding for the Red Hill Valley Parkway by the Bob Rae NDP government in 1990 is still a sore point for many (bridges for streets crossing the route had already been built or begun, though construction on the roadway itself hadn't started). Now, they didn't say they would do that, but I also don't recall them saying they would not leading up to the election.

The city's next steps are to start planning changes to the connecting bus services (if they have not already) to maximize efficiency of the network and meet the changes in transit demand, continue with complementary land use planning, and get a move on planning and executing services on the other major transit corridors including improvements to the A-Line.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I agree it would be very unlikely the city could back out now. But for me, given the history of the politics of it all and the city's dalliances with large transit proposals in the past, I won't rest easy until the thing is operating.

And this is just about the sweetest sweetheart deal ever. It would take a level of foolishness far beyond that displayed by some of our past mayors and councillors to put a stop to it all. But they've often shown they're very capable of it.

Changing senior governments do alter spending plans too though. The cancellation of funding for the Red Hill Valley Parkway by the Bob Rae NDP government in 1990 is still a sore point for many (bridges for streets crossing the route had already been built or begun, though construction on the roadway itself hadn't started). Now, they didn't say they would do that, but I also don't recall them saying they would not leading up to the election.

The city's next steps are to start planning changes to the connecting bus services (if they have not already) to maximize efficiency of the network and meet the changes in transit demand, continue with complementary land use planning, and get a move on planning and executing services on the other major transit corridors including improvements to the A-Line.

As much as I think the land use planning along the corridor doesn't go far enough, especially when just off the LRT route, they do have transit corridor specific zoning. I do think they should have included transit oriented development zoning for stations that was a bit more intense, especially on perpendicular streets like Ottawa, Kenilworth and Parkdale.

The now discussed vacancy tax should apply to the TOC zoning as well, but with a more intense tax. If you leave a unit or property vacant along the multi-billion dollar LRT you should be taxed out of existence.

Parking requirements are also still too high along the corridor. They reduce the typical 1:1 ratio in most of the city to the downtown requirement of 0.8:1 which is still too high for downtown and the LRT corridor if we want to move people out of cars.

According to the census, 82% Hamilton's residents get to work by an automobile. How can we claim to want to change that mode to reduce car trips when the parking minimums are 0.80 at the LOWEST and only in transit heavy areas.

[RaginRonic]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The feds and the provinces probably won't drop the contract again, the only route out would be municipally and even then it's pretty remote.

Presuming that Bratina runs and wins next year, he would have to 1. convince council to cancel the LRT, 2. lobby the provincial government to cancel it again. There wouldn't be a council route to deny it, he would have to rely on the goodwill of the province which I suspect would not be forthcoming due to the stage the LRT would be at by that time. I just don't see it happening.

Then it's simple...and I'm seriously speaking to all the possible voters in next year's local election here.

DO. NOT. VOTE. FOR. ANYONE. BORN. BEFORE. JAN. 1, 1980. FOR. ANY. REASON!!!

Only elect 40 years or younger for mayor, and between 25-40 for councillors.

That's it.

That'll stop Bratina's constant whining on the LRT file, and terminate his participation in the debate.

=)

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

As much as I think the land use planning along the corridor doesn't go far enough, especially when just off the LRT route, they do have transit corridor specific zoning. I do think they should have included transit oriented development zoning for stations that was a bit more intense, especially on perpendicular streets like Ottawa, Kenilworth and Parkdale.

The now discussed vacancy tax should apply to the TOC zoning as well, but with a more intense tax. If you leave a unit or property vacant along the multi-billion dollar LRT you should be taxed out of existence.

Parking requirements are also still too high along the corridor. They reduce the typical 1:1 ratio in most of the city to the downtown requirement of 0.8:1 which is still too high for downtown and the LRT corridor if we want to move people out of cars.

According to the census, 82% Hamilton's residents get to work by an automobile. How can we claim to want to change that mode to reduce car trips when the parking minimums are 0.80 at the LOWEST and only in transit heavy areas.

Downtown parking minimums in Hamilton are much lower than 0.8 - it's a sliding scale based on the size of the building so it's not a clear number but most projects end up closer to 0.6 or so. It's probably the lowest parking requirement in the province outside of Downtown Toronto or maybe Ottawa.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Downtown parking minimums in Hamilton are much lower than 0.8 - it's a sliding scale based on the size of the building so it's not a clear number but most projects end up closer to 0.6 or so. It's probably the lowest parking requirement in the province outside of Downtown Toronto or maybe Ottawa.

Sorry, you are correct, but it's still too high. According to the census, downtown 50% of people get to work by car, yet the parking requirements are higher than that. Doesn't really instill the idea that the city is trying to convince people to get out of their cars and take transit or bike when they're forcing incredibly expensive parking spots on developers and therefore on purchasers.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Sorry, you are correct, but it's still too high. According to the census, downtown 50% of people get to work by car, yet the parking requirements are higher than that. Doesn't really instill the idea that the city is trying to convince people to get out of their cars and take transit or bike when they're forcing incredibly expensive parking spots on developers and therefore on purchasers.

oh I'm not disagreeing. The high parking rates make development downtown challenging too as the sites are small and inefficient for parking layouts. This works in Toronto as they have low parking rates and high prices meaning some unusual solutions can work out, but in Hamilton you need a low-cost solution to get a lot of parking in, and that's challenging.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

As much as I think the land use planning along the corridor doesn't go far enough, especially when just off the LRT route, they do have transit corridor specific zoning. I do think they should have included transit oriented development zoning for stations that was a bit more intense, especially on perpendicular streets like Ottawa, Kenilworth and Parkdale.

The now discussed vacancy tax should apply to the TOC zoning as well, but with a more intense tax. If you leave a unit or property vacant along the multi-billion dollar LRT you should be taxed out of existence.

Yes, the "nodes and corridors" guidelines they developed a while back, and the designations for "transit oriented" zones. I don't know much about the details, but now that higher-order transit is going to happen they need to continue getting the planning into gear (and there hasn't seemed to be much built implementation of it, aside from the development we've all been talking about downtown and at a few places along Main and King). And if there's to be a focus on affordable housing along the LRT route, which the feds indicated they want, hopefully that's already covered -- e.g., greater intensification allowed near the stations in exchange for a proportion of units deemed affordable.

Totally agree with you about taxing vacant buildings and land. Not just along the B-Line corridor either, though it will probably have the most ripe properties for speculation and flipping in the coming years.

[TheHonestMaple]

https://globalnews.ca/news/8193393/l...ncil-mou-vote/

Key LRT decision ratified by Hamilton city council

Light rail transit (LRT) supporters can look forward to shovels in the ground as soon as the middle of next year now that Hamilton city council has ratified a key milestone.

In a repeat of a Sept. 8 decision by the general issues committee, council voted 11-3 on Wednesday to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Metrolinx and the provincial government.

“It’s going to provide employment and opportunity,” says mayor Fred Eisenberger, “the kind of intensification and housing development, and commercial development, that talks about the renewal of our city.”

The MOU says that the provincial and federal governments will pay the $3.4-billion cost of building the 14-kilometre LRT line from McMaster University to Eastgate Square.

The city will keep farebox revenue, once the line is up and running, and will be responsible for operating costs and day-to-day maintenance, which have been estimated between $6 million and $16 million each year.

Another 30 properties still need to be purchased or expropriated by Metrolinx, prior to the start of construction.

“I know that MTO and Metrolinx are ready and poised to start moving aggressively,” says Eisenberger, “to fulfill this project and get some of this underground preparatory work done, so that we can get shovels in the ground,” hopefully by the middle of 2022.

[ScreamingViking]

[RaginRonic]

I said I would do it once the ratification vote for LRT happened/passed...so...here's 10 of them. X-)





















So there....LRT is now locked in. And MasterLock abides. =)

[matt602]

I'm still not considering it locked in until actual construction has started. This whole thing has been such a shitshow.

[ScreamingViking]

From The Ancaster News letters to the editor (I saw it in the Spec first; mind the paywall) Is this a parting shot from Bobra, or an opening salvo?


HAMILTON DESERVES BETTER

Re: Hamilton’s LRT journey, Sept. 12

My sincere thanks for the very important and insightful points of view on the LRT proposal. It’s unfortunate that those involved in the decision have gotten to this point without fully considering the implications so clearly stated in your editorial. Since there is no rationale for this as a transit project and no guarantee of significant development resulting, the suspicion falls on those who will directly and immediately gain as the influencers on elected officials. The benefits flow to them while the costs are borne by taxpayers. How that was accomplished is so far veiled in secrecy. Hamiltonians deserve better.

Bob Bratina,
Outgoing MP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek

https://www.thespec.com/local-ancast...r-letters.html



This is the editorial piece he's referring to, from Sep 13 in the Spectator:
https://www.thespec.com/local-stoney...e-unknown.html.

It was printed Sep 12 in the Stoney Creek News. It's not all wrong, but not all correct either. Sneering transit advocates and city dwellers... read at your own peril.


Hamilton's LRT begins a journey into the unknown

For some Hamiltonians, Sept. 8 will be looked upon as a landmark date in the city’s history after the $3.4 billion light rail transit project was finally approved.

For others, the 11-3 committee vote in favour of signing a memorandum of understanding to begin building the 14-kilometre line from McMaster University to Eastgate Square will continue to be a vexing financial, economic and social problem for the city.

While under the memorandum of understanding Metrolinx will control and own the LRT, the city will still be responsible to cover the operating and maintenance costs, which have been estimated at between $6.4 million and $16.5 million per year. To offset those costs, the city can keep the fare revenue.

However, there remain too many unknowns to the project. Fans have painted a glorious picture of the impact LRT will have on the city — environmental sustainability; affordable housing projects; economic renewal; a resurgent Hamilton; and a unified community.

But the uncertainties of the project remain plainly visible through those rose-coloured glasses. During construction, traffic and the city’s downtown transportation patterns will be chaotic. Cost overruns are a virtual certainty and running the system will stretch the city’s budget, putting pressure on councillors to raise taxes.

The improvement in transit service is still considered to be a pie-in-the-sky hope. Ridership continues to be an issue and no LRT will change that significant fact, especially given the limits of the project.

And the idea that LRT will eventually create a more unified committee also remains more hope than reality. Those taxes that will eventually power the LRT will come from suburban households who will have limited access to use it.

One of the significant benefits of the LRT has been the push by transit officials and councillors to improve what is an abysmal bus service within the suburban areas. It is simply incomprehensible that while transit advocates extol the benefits of public transit for the downtown, they sneer at creating a proper transit service in parts of the city — suburban areas of Waterdown, Binbrook, across the Mountain and in Winona — that are actually growing.

The reality is Hamilton growth is occurring in the suburban areas while downtown has been shedding population for years despite decades of politicians pouring millions of dollars into the area.

The initial goal of the LRT back in 2007 was based on the idea that improving public transit was better than depending upon a car-centric transportation system.

But that goal was transformed into a panacea to cure all the city’s myriad problems. Hamilton’s use of the moniker “Ambitious City” is usually adopted because of its second city inferiority complex. By investing in a controversial transit project, it is hoped that this once-in-a-lifetime project doesn’t because a white elephant that will further divide an already separated community.