The future of Hamilton's public transit

[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.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by mic67

Ok you are left with 11 hours per day to sleep and eat dinner and breakfast, at best.

An hour to 1.5 hours per day extra over when we lived in TO. It's not easy, and I never claimed it was. I have told people on this board if they think Hamilton is going to fill with young Toronto ex-pats living in condos in downtown Hamilton commuting to Hamilton they are crazy.

Commuting costs = wow, = about what it cost me to live in my house in Hamilton per month.

Our commuting costs are more than our mortgage.

If you used TTC that would add about another $100 per month per person.

We paid $132 (Regular Metropass + Express Bus Service) in Toronto, so the transportation cost is net $173 more pp/month.

Did you rent in TO or own a house?

Rent, $1,100/month

Ok, so even if you could have what you want you still would now live in Ham.=WOW

I do have what I want, living in a house I love in the great city of Hamilton.

Now lets get back to the thread topic, Public Transportation.

[omro]

Originally Posted by mic67

Omro:
We shall see how much you will laugh went you live in Hamilton, if you choose to be truthful or realistic.

If I don't like it, I'll be very realistic about it, but I believe that Hamilton has potential. Once I'm settled and have a job, made friends, etc. I would like to get involved in its improvement somehow, even just by adding my voice to the crowd.

I'm a very realistic person. I've lived in East London since I was 23. I live in an area that when I said I lived there, people were gasping with horror. Now all people say is, "that's very up and coming". In the ten years I've lived here, my home has tripled in value and until the recent credit crunch, had near quadrupled. I've been burgled twice (2000 and 2003) and mugged at knife-point once outside an ATM (2006). No one has ever forced me to live where I'm living.

Originally Posted by mic67

Very simply I did not want to afford to continue to live in a $900.000 house in Toronto, which is exactly what the house I lived in Toronto is listed for right now.

Understandable, that's very expensive. I'm aware that you were originally from Hamilton, however you seem so "down" on the city - especially the tagging and the garbage. I'm sure with a little research and effort, you could have found somewhere else to live, which would also have been less expensive and would have resulted in a more pleasureable living experience for you.

Originally Posted by mic67

Omro I have read your posts and the reason why you have choosen Ham. is that it is affordable and appears to be the reason why your brother choose Ham. over Van.. And clearly not for any other reasons, reread your posts.

I don't need to reread my own posts

I was going to post a huge chunk of text here, but it is so incredibly off topic, that I've put it in the Moving to Hamilton thread.

Originally Posted by mic67

If you did read my posts you certainly did not understand them, they arent funny and werent ment to be.

I never said your all your posts were funny, just that one which I quoted and said: "this entire post made me laugh." Perhaps, you should reread what I said

Originally Posted by mic67

I think that I am in the 2nd best location that there is in Hamilton that is affordable.

Which is where? Roughly, you don't need to give your address.

Originally Posted by mic67

There is a difference from what Hamilton was to what Ham. is and what Ham could/can become.

I agree, but you seem to be obsessing constantly about what it is, not what it could be. Again, I mean no disrespect, but your posts are incredibly negative. Some of your arguments are very interesting. I like to read other people's points of view, even when I disagree with them - they help me solidify my own view point. That's what internet debate is all about and it's great, bring it on. Just lighten up the tone of some of your posts, please

[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.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by matt602

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.

Here's a suggestion;

Every 30 minutes - 12 midnight to 6am (9am on Weekends) and all day on holidays
Every 15 minutes on Weekdays - 6am to 9am and 3:00pm to 7pm (need to start at 3pm for students)
Every 20 minutes - All other times.

[omro]

Originally Posted by bornagainbiking

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....

I've always said a second east/west LRT should be on Barton, so I agree with that whole-heartedly. The area seriously needs the rejuvenating effect that an LRT would have. There are so many empty buildings and store-fronts. The whole stretch of road is crying out for some love and attention.

The other thought, one which I've mentioned before, would be to include Barton in an LRT that encircles the lower city, Barton at the North, Locke at the West, Wentworth at the East and maybe Charlton or Hunter at the North.

[mic67]

What is interesting about the LRT discussion is that there doesnt seem to be anybody with direct LRT experience, as a rider or having lived with an LRT as part of their daily life.

I have used the LRT in Toronto many years ago to get to the Scarbeeria Town Centre, and as I recall it wasnt on an urban street like what is proposed in Ham.. And the LRT seem to get people from the NE of TO to downtown or people to the town centre Scarbeeria - long distances and destination locations. I dont believe that the LRT will improve any local businesses given these facts, it will do the opposite - as no single store is considered a destination like Jackson square or Eastgate is.

Rapid trans. is not for moving many or few people short distances, but many long distances. Again there really arent any North-South bus feeder system to King/Main per say, those that use the route are going distances and to destinations and not just their local area travel.

On Bay St. in TO and I think Eglinton Ave they have bus priority lanes.

Nobody has said how much of a rider increase there would be with an LTR.....

mic67

[omro]

During my visits to Nottingham (having grandparents and the head office for the company that I work for there), I've seen the reintroduction of trams into the city centre in recent years.

Wikipedia

NET Passenger Site

University of Nottingham

Nottingham Express Transit

Unofficial NET

In London I've used the DLR for years

DLR

And there are plans again to extend the Croydon Tramlink (though I don't live near, nor never have used it)

Tramlink

[omro]

Originally Posted by mic67

Nobody has said how much of a rider increase there would be with an LTR.....

Are you asking for concrete figures based on other cities findings or a crystal ball prediction for Hamilton?

[matt602]

Trying to compare Hamilton's future LRT to rail operations in Toronto presently isn't really all that accurate. The only line that is similar to what we will have here is the ROW portion of the St. Clair route. Even still, ours will be more modern and efficient, this was simply a normal streetcar route that used to run in mixed traffic, centered to a ROW. It was not originally built for that purpose, neither are the vehicles suited for LRT in the same way that Hamilton's will be.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by mic67

Nobody has said how much of a rider increase there would be with an LTR.....

When looking at the impact LRT has had when introduced in other cities, transit ridership increased dramatically. Denver's ridership levels increased on average by more than 14% annually in the six years since it was introduced. Portland has had an annual ridership increase of 12% since it had LRT introduced. Generally speaking, ridership rates increase significantly when LRT is introduced.

You reference Scarborough LRT. Please keep in mind that the LRT concept being implemented today is much different from the 80''s style raised LRT that is SRT. The systems being introduced and proposed for Hamilton is an at-grade, priority signal LRT which is designed for more frequent stops and integration on existing road infrastructure. Consequently the manner in which it will serve Hamilton is drastically different from Scarborough, and more akin to cities like Portland and Denver.

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by mic67

My short answer is that I agree with BCTed "I cannot really imagine that LRT would be all that much quicker than what is in place now."
...
The LTR will be much more expensive to build and depending on how that is, it could be more expensive to maintain in the future like the Garbage expressway in Toronto ( Gardner xpress).
...
You say that the LTR will attract new riders? who are they and were do they work and live?

Just because you can't imagine it, doesn't make your perception true. LRT runs in priority signals in a dedicated lane. It will be faster by definition.

LRT costs more to build than BRT - but the infrastructure lasts much longer. It will NOT be elevated. Comparing it to the gardiner is completely absurdly wrong. Comparing it to subway is wrong. Comparing it to scarborough LRT is wrong. It is unlike any of those. The closest thing Toronto has to the modern LRT is the spadina streetcar lane. And even that is only a partially applicable example.

LRT as proposed for Hamilton (aka modern streetcar - NOT subway, NOT elevated train, NOT monorail) has been proven, using facts and numbers, to cost less per passenger to run than buses, and has been proven, using facts and numbers, to attract businesses and increase ridership in every single recent installation in north america.

Just because you "don't see" how it could attract riders and businesses doesn't mean it won't.

[mic67]

Thanks for the info. of Ham.'s LRT.

Dever and Portland are mutil times larger than Ham. yet the cost to build similuar systems would be the same, except in Ham., it would benefit multi times fewer people.

What are the ridership #'s on King/Main now? And how much of an anual increase (gross) regarding intake fares would there be?

I didnt want to sift through all the propaganda on the LRT but we have something to work with here.

I couldnt have imagined a raised LRT. The StClair system make this understandable for me.

I would not want to be a store front business owner, as for being a property owner on such a route is a 50-50 draw, to me at this point.

From what I can tell so far to travel the same distance to similar destination in TO and in Ham. like to downtown, the HSR is 1/3 faster and 2/3 faster with the b-line than TTC. And Ham needs an LRT? How much faster would and LRT be than the existing b-line, certainly not as much as 1/3 faster?

Couldnt the same thing be achieved with bus priority lanes?

There does not seem to be a consenses regaring E-W LRT on one street or two? Nor whether the oneways will beome 2ways, but a ground level system ought to make those determinations easy so I shall not discuss them yet. But then again, common sense isnt so common.

Again and LRT would be future proofing Hamilton.

Mic67

[adam]

Originally Posted by mic67

What is interesting about the LRT discussion is that there doesnt seem to be anybody with direct LRT experience, as a rider or having lived with an LRT as part of their daily life.

mic67

What makes you say nobody has LRT experience? I've used LRT in Europe as a part of my daily life when I lived there for several weeks and have friends who use it EVERY DAY to this day to get to work and do errands. Amenities are built up all around the stops/hubs. They only need to use their car when they travel outside of the city or have a long grocery list. Hamilton is even more suited for LRT than most cities because it is very linear - The B-line would get you pretty much anywhere in the city proper within a few blocks.

[coalminecanary]

Now i have another question/proposal...

1. What is the advantage to the HSR to print tickets, distribute tickets to stores, collect money fomr the stores, and thrrow the tickets away only to print more? And (more of conjecture rather than looking for figures), how much does this system cost in time, materials and red tape?

2. how do tickets help riders? from what i can tell, other than the obvious cash savings, all tickets do is reduce the weiight if coins in your pockets

3. What if we got rid of tickets altogether and made each ride one loonie?

Drawbacks:
HSR loses money on per-fare cash and ticket rides
HSR cannot "suck people in" to buy 5 tickets when maybe they only need one

Positives:
Save money on printing tickets
No more distribution of tickets
No more counterfeit tickets
No more adminstration of collecting money for sold tickets
Make riding the bus really easy - no need to fumble for small change, no need to find a ticket agent
Make riding the bus so easy and cheap that more people do it

Under the loonie plan, if I'm walking in a rainstorm and have a loonie in my pocket and see a bus coming, now I can make an impulse purchase of a bus ride. Under the current system, $2.40 is a rather large impulse and I probably don't have that exact change. It is much more likely i have a loonie in my pocket than a two, a quarter and a dime. Plus, knowing that a ticket is significantly less than $2.40, I am less likely to ever pay a cash fare because it's stupid to pay so much more than you have to- this means I will never impulsively take the bus because by definition I must plan in advance to have a ticket on me.

The "impulse purchase" factor alone may make the ridership increase enough to cover the lost income from lower cash fares

I think they should do a 6 month "loonie per ride" trial and see what happens. Make cash fares and tickets all cost a loonie and watch ridership soar and ticket purchases plummet.

I'd even be happy to see it be $2 across the board and no more tickets.

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by mic67

Couldnt the same thing be achieved with bus priority lanes?

Buses can possibly reach similar speeds using priority lanes and signals, but those solutions do not address other problems with buses:

-Snow clearning - LRT clear their own tracks with rail based plough. Buses must wait for city clearing.
-infrastructure. Rails last 40-60 years. roads under buses deteriorate surprisingly fast. Look at the asphalt at any major bus stop - they must be resurfaced every 3 or 4 years and completely rebuilt in, I beieive 10-15 year increments
-fuel prices. we have seen how crazy fuel spikes can be - to tie our major transit routes to the whims of the oil industry is a stupid move. LRT running on provincially regulated electricity prices makes budgeting the operation of the vehicles much easier
-wear and tear: rail cars again last 40-60 years and, while they DO require maintenance, they require much les sthan buses (tires, oil changes, etc)
-one LRT vehicle carries many more passengers than a bus. SO we can move more people in a LRT car while still maintaining only one vehicle and paying one operator.
-future expansion. To double the capacity of the line, we hitch a second car to the first. With buses, to double the capacity you need a whole new bus, and all the costs and maintenance involved, PLUS a new driver.

So, we cna pay a little more now to build a system that will save us a ton of hassle and money down the line - or we can go with BRT and save, what, 40% off our installation cost now and pay through the nose over and over as the buses wear out and as we need to buy more buses and hire more drivers

there's a lot more to the LRT question than capital infrastructure costs!