Rapid Transit - Page 26

ryan_mcgreal · #**501** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 5:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

I heard Bill Kelly interview a host of city folks today (Ferguson, Powers, Fred etc...) about LRT.
Kelly of course went on and on about the massive 'gridlock' that already exists at King and Wellington and Main/Dundurn etc....and how will we ever sacrifice a lane for LRT without sheer pandemonium. Lol. Could only shake my head listening to him.

Don't hold out on us! What did the others have to say?

flar · #**502** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 5:54 PM**

Massive gridlock

You have to wonder if these guys have ever been to another city.

raisethehammer · #**503** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 5:59 PM**

the rest of them were downright giddy about LRT. I didn't hear much from Ferguson (which I guess, is good).
Fred said "we ARE doing this". They talked about EcDev, spinoff, density, new businesses coming etc....
Kelly said that the Chamber is concerned about traffic lanes downtown too - big shock.

Jill Stephen said it looks like we'll do one rail westbound on King, one eastbound on Main and still keep the local bus service that serves every few blocks. They want LRT in it's own lanes.
Apparently they've done costing analysis and they can 'easily' afford to run the system once it's built. They need the province to ante up the capital up front to build it and bob's your uncle.
It was an exciting interview, despite Kelly's BS.

Millstone · #**504** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:18 PM**

Main and Dundurn needs to be reworked. The intersection is pretty low-standard (in typical Hamilton fashion).

omro · #**505** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:31 PM**

Sounds cool :-)

I still wonder if it would be cheaper and simpler, surely, to just have both east/west lanes on Main?

go_leafs_go02 · #**506** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by omro

Sounds cool :-)

I still wonder if it would be cheaper and simpler, surely, to just have both east/west lanes on Main?

I thought main and king were eventually going to be two-way down the road. What's the point to building LRT like that if eventually it'll be converted. Simply doesn't make any sense. Put it down Main street completely if you can.

DC83 · #**507** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:44 PM**

Would one-lane LRT have the same economic spinoffs as two lanes?

I had always thought of EB on Main, WB on King... but always thought the spinoffs wouldn't be as big?

SteelTown · #**508** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:52 PM**

King and Main has never been planned to be converted two way. Only a small section of King St West has been planned for two way. But with LRT that could change.

Personally I have no problems with one way. But the current one way for Main and King needs to be fixed. Current set up is a mess.

raisethehammer · #**509** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:54 PM**

Portland has their LRT lines a block apart downtown on one-way streets. Same with their streetcar. Mind you, their one-ways are better than most of our two-ways. Not highways in the slightest. Other than stops at Sherman and Gage which are more like 2 blocks in between King/Main, the rest of the line would be a short walk between lines. I think Dundurn would be the next widest distance between King/Main and it's only about a 3 minute walk.

Main both ways would certainly be cheaper, but it seems as though city hall feels like they'd be biting off more than they can chew in this car-addicted town to lose 2 traffic lanes on Main! heaven forbid. I still hope they do lose 2 lanes by adding parking on the curb lane. Although, Jill made it sound like local bus service wouldn't be affected, meaning the 1-King would still be trundling along Main and King. Not very smart IMO.

If they do decide to use King and Main, I suggest they put the LRT lines on the north curb on Main and south curb on King. Parking can go on the 'right lanes' and local buses can still use the 'right lanes'. Keep LRT separate. And they had better add a few more stops, like Wellington, Gage and perhaps Reid (Red Hill area).

SteelTown · #**510** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 6:56 PM**

So I suppose city buses like 1 King won't be able to ride along the LRT lane?

SteelTown · #**511** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:00 PM**

Remember though with LRT on King and Main they'll have priority and it'll be the end of current street light system. When the LRT approaches a street light it'll turn green. So that will help end the highway feel of King and Main.

raisethehammer · #**512** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

So I suppose city buses like 1 King won't be able to ride along the LRT lane?

no way! That would suck the 'rapid' out of rapid transit! Lol.

DC83 · #**513** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:01 PM**

I'd still prefer both directions along Main, but it seems like the City and Staff have their minds set on one way each.

So hopefully the positive spinoffs aren't affected by this :s Although some spots along King are in more need of redevelopment than some places along Main... so I guess it's a win-lose situation.

Paying extra attention recently, I think the ONLY area where the B-Line would have to run mix-traffic is in The Delta between The Delta Block & Queenston Traffic Circle... everywhere else has plenty of room for dedicated lanes.

SteelTown · #**514** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

no way! That would suck the 'rapid' out of rapid transit! Lol.

Well no. When the LRT isn't using the lane the buses could ride on the lane to skip all the car traffic. Share the lane for LRT and city buses.

I know in Ottawa the transit lane is shared by buses, taxis and emergency vechicles.

omro · #**515** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:22 PM**

It's still early days yet. This is all still pie in the sky.

Hopefully they will do a cost/benefit analysis of:

- one route on King and one on Main.
vs.
- both on Main.

I can't see them putting both on King, as that's the narrower road, in places, right?

At the end of the day, money talks and if it's a lot cheaper to put both on Main, then both will end up on Main.

FairHamilton · #**516** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:33 PM**

My biggest concern with LRT is that we'll lose the option to ever make King Street & Main Street two-way. City politicians change, so even if it's not desired now who knows what the future will hold.

Call me crazy (I'm sure many will), but if LRT means never having 2 way traffic on Main & King Streets, I'd gladly give up the LRT for buses and 2 way streets.

SteelTown · #**517** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 7:37 PM**

C-r-a-z-y!!!!!

omro · #**518** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 8:16 PM**

I have to admit, from a British perspective, I have to laugh whenever I read about people getting upset about a five lane road being reduced to three lanes or being made into four lanes, two each way.

Two lane roads are the norm here in cities, sometimes up to four lanes here and there. This includes big cities which have serious traffic.

If a road is at least two lanes, it can support two way traffic.

And.... If LRT goes ahead and people actually use it (

), that should, in theory, mean fewer cars on the roads, which should mean fewer car lanes are required. Thus, if all goes well, two car lanes, one each way, may be all that is needed in the end.

highwater · #**519** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 8:32 PM**

That's the norm in Canada too. Hell, just about anywhere. Hamilton's 'special', and so are many of our local political and media 'leaders'.

raisethehammer · #**520** Posted **Sep 25, 2008, 8:51 PM**

Fair Hamilton - CRAZY! I've seen calm one-ways in Portland and elsewhere. 2 lanes of traffic with an LRT lane and parking lane would be good with lots of trees, wider sidewalks, and NO timed lights (other than LRT lights).