The future of Hamilton's public transit

[FairHamilton]

The fund was established in 2002 when the city received a $137-million hydro dividend.

The money, which was partially invested, is supposed to be used for "legacy" projects.

With all the economic turmoil, are they sure there is still $100M left? As an example, I haven't heard much about the status of the cities ABCP investment lately, even in light of a restructuring bailout.

I'm guessing Rinaldo hasn't wanted to say too much as he's been moving towards the exit door at the city, and this would be a big black mark on his record.

http://www.thespec.com/article/301564
http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/486817

[BCTed]

Light rail just started up in Phoenix a week or so ago.

[mic67]

I am not as aware of all the issue with regard to public transit in Hamilton.

But one fact with regard to the creation of an LRT system is that it must be realistic and for what is proposed, it is not realistic. The one agruement that supports no LTR is that the density along it does not justify one. Now a BRT system yep, that is the cheaper way to go and the b-line is rather effective and needs to exist on Barton Street. (brt = bus rapid transit)

That is not to say that as a Hamiltonian that I would not like an LTR, but it is not realistic. Although it would be future proofing the city, at least a Main st. line. Much like the Redhill express.

There are rail lines at the base of the mountain and south of Barton - the Barton one is rather wide and an LRT at either would be multi times more cost effective, but it would require a bus feeder system (north-south).

Mic67

[SteelTown]

Council voted no to 10 cent increase on transit fares.

Now council will vote to approve a 5 cent increase instead.

[SteelTown]

No 5 cent increase. No changes to HSR transit fares this year.

[SteelTown]

It's official: No fare hike for transit riders

November 27, 2008
Nicole Macintyre
The Hamilton Spectator

Transit riders won't need to dig for extra change in the new year.

Council rejected a recommended 10-cent fare increase last night. The decision locked on a tie vote, meaning the status quo prevails.

An attempted compromise to raise fares by only 5 cents failed 9-7.

"We're entering extraordinary times," said Councillor Terry Whitehead, who argued the city must ensure its transit system is affordable in the coming months. "This is the time that we have to show compassion."

For residents already turning to food banks, even a 10-cent increase is too much, argued Councillor Sam Merulla.

But councillors who supported the fare increase argued taxpayers also can't afford to pick up the extra costs of running the transit system.

"This is a fairness issue," said Councillor Maria Pearson. "We can't keep putting this burden on taxpayers."

The city transit system is funded 53 per cent by the fare box with the remainder coming from the general tax levy. A cash fare costs $2.40. Tickets are $1.85.

Councillor Margaret McCarthy accused some councillors of being hypocritical for rejecting a 10-cent increase because of the impact on riders when they supported a $400 tax increase for Flamborough residents last year.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger warned freezing fares will only make this year's budget increase, now close to 10 per cent, harder to reduce.

"These are tough economic times. It's a question of balance."

While rejecting a fare increase, councillors supported increasing service along Rymal Road. Council also approved two new initiatives, free rides for people over 80 and reduced passes for youth in the summer. Staff will report back on how to fund the programs.

The city is continuing a pilot project offering half price bus passes to the working poor.

[omro]

What percentage of property taxes go towards Public Transit?
Will the construction of the LRT majorly increase property taxes?

I've a vested interest as I'll soon be paying them!

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by omro

What percentage of property taxes go towards Public Transit?

As Steeltown notes, 53% of the HSR's revenue comes from the fare box and 47% comes from funding. The city also receives gas tax monies from the federal and provincial governments, but if I'm not mistaken those go into general revenues rather than being earmarked for transit.

HSR funding is somewhere on the order of $30 million. Compare other operating budget items: Police Services ($110 million), Roads and Traffic ($60 million), Fire Services ($60 million), Waste Management ($32 million), Libraries ($25 million), and Parks ($25 million).

Unlike most of these budget items, the HSR budget is paid from a transit levy whose rate varies depending on where you live (this is called "area rating"). The old city of Hamilton pays an 0.087 percent Transit levy, whereas Glanbrook pays only 0.031 percent, Stoney Creek pays only 0.026 percent, Dundas pays only 0.021 percent and Ancaster pays only 0.018 percent - or about one fifth of the highest rate.

Originally Posted by omro

Will the construction of the LRT majorly increase property taxes?

No. The capital costs will mostly be paid by the province, with the city's contribution coming from its capital budget (money that is borrowed every year for capital projects and then serviced later from operating revenues). The overall operating costs for transit will go up somewhat with the addition of an LRT, but only because ridership will be much higher. The per passenger costs will be much lower.

At the same time, LRT is proven to attract billions of dollars in new private investment along the transit corridor (approximately 400 m to either side of the line), which will generate tens of millions of dollars in new annual property tax assessments. That will more than offset the higher transit operating costs.

[omro]

We all like the idea of LRT attracting investment

[adam]

... rather those of us who can see past the end of our nose like the idea!

[SteelTown]

53% from fare box and 47% from HSR leevy (property tax).

[SteelTown]

LRT would be a good legacy project.

[flar]

Seriously mic67, most of the statements you are making are demonstrably false, such as "the largest employer is the city itself" or "the entertainment scene is way limited in Hamilton." Arm yourself with some basic information before you post. You seem down on Hamilton and like to point out the negatives. We're aware of Hamilton's negatives, we have enough people that think Hamilton is not good enough.

[SteelTown]

With the addition of new buses the B-Line is suppose to go 24hrs. Dunno if that will happen this year or 2010.

[matt602]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

With the addition of new buses the B-Line is suppose to go 24hrs. Dunno if that will happen this year or 2010.

This rumor excites me greatly. Even normal full day, every day service would make me very happy, but the B-Line as the first 24 hour route would be simply amazing. It's definitely a good candidate for it. I could see it running on half-hour frequencies after midnight, 20 minute or less the rest of the day. Same for Barton and possibly Upper James as a pilot project for 24 hour service. The TTC has had 24 hour service via. Blue Night routes for a long time now, I reckon we're long overdue for the same kind of service.

[emge]

Getting back to discussing Hamilton's public transit, I agree. It's also rather exciting that the entirety of the lower-city can be well-served by a King/Main and a Barton route -- that simplifies the planning and allows people easy access almost anywhere.

The Mountain presents more of a challenge, but the relatively well-spaced and symmetrical/perpendicular roads will allow good night routes there as well.

[flar]

I would kill for night service. I could make good use of that service

It would cut down a lot on drunk driving and also allow more people to be out and about at night--good for night life. Taxis can get expensive further out from downtown. The only problem would be dealing with drunks on the buses, but there are ways of dealing with that too.

[omro]

Originally Posted by flar

I would kill for night service. I could make good use of that service

It would cut down a lot on drunk driving and also allow more people to be out and about at night--good for night life. Taxis can get expensive further out from downtown. The only problem would be dealing with drunks on the buses, but there are ways of dealing with that too.

Slightly higher ticket fees "out of hours", still way cheaper than a taxi, and hiring a bus conductor.

[bornagainbiking]

Seems we get off track. What should be the future of public trasit vs what will be.
I saw the top employers in Hamilton and if you wanted to get the major players into the fray what do you offer them. They would want a direct benefit to them and their employees, maybe include personal transportation into the next collective agreement as a way to help the city, employee, environment and themselves. A reduced fare buspass for say Hamilton Health Sciences would save the employee gas money, car payment, maintenance, $60 parking fee and the walk from the lot to the hospital on a rainy day.
Too bad they just put in a new parking lot, Maybe it could be used by the Go transit/Via at Luiuna two blocks away.
So just for a second consider the LRT as the Barton Line from Centenial to Locke Street.
Some of the advantages are:
Cater to the big companies with the most employees, a block from Stelco, Dofasco, the hospital and all it's expansion and a direct link to the #11 Burlington bus at parkdale and the Go parking lot at Queenston and Nash.
It would be an opportunity for people to grab up businesses off one of the worst areas in Hamilton. Also tie into Ottawa Street and the new Centre Mall.
Maybe help Parkdale and add life to all the apartments along Melvin.
Initially the Barton would address the biggest companies add encourage some corporate buy in.
As it stands now the "B" Line and it's expansion with the bigger buses would be sufficient.
If not, when the Barton LRT catch on it will draw traffic away from Main Like the Red Hill really reduced the volume on Centenial Parkway.
People have some great input here but it's like a cake mix all the ideas for everyone and come out with what is best for all.
Figure this Main and King are VERY busy and Barton is deserted and it would be a good fit.
It would link the lower city and join the new waterfront with all those older solid homes that many have raved about and makes sense.
One bonus would be you could take the bus to Lowes and all the reno work on the older homes. Draw people back to the lower city from the urban sprawl.
As we draw in the people from Toronto, Brantford and Binbrook are drawing our's.
Remember that almost very one here is Pro LRT, but like buying a car we are just set in our opinion on the colour WE want....

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by flar

I would kill for night service. I could make good use of that service

It would cut down a lot on drunk driving and also allow more people to be out and about at night--good for night life. Taxis can get expensive further out from downtown. The only problem would be dealing with drunks on the buses, but there are ways of dealing with that too.

Yeah, drunks are problems on late night buses, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpyFybGE-y0, so something would need to be done to ensure civility.