Rapid Transit - Page 59

hamiltonguy · #**1161** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 8:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

The last 3 may be a little newer than the first but they are all streetcars anyway you look at it. Stringing a couple of them together isn't going to change that. Light rail is not rapid transit, it is mass transit. We already have that, it's called the HSR.

Spending a billion dollars to run rails down the middle of one of the busiest streets in the city and calling it rapid transit is ridiculous. Taking traffic lanes from that same busy street is also ridiculous especially when no thought has been put into where that traffic will go. It's not going to go away magically just because we have streetcars. It will only force that traffic onto other streets causing the same problems that most of the pro LRT people here are trying to fix on Main and King Sts.

To be honest I don't know where to start.

1) Transit service is exceeding capacity in this corridor all the time, to the point where not only does it limit number of passengers, but also massively slows down service.
2) Transit gets stuck trying to merge into traffic after stops, and because it does not move with the synchronized lights, often gets caught at lights.
3) LRT solves both these problems and are also far more cost efficient, spurs development, and increases ridership. These are facts only disputed by either (i) those who oppose government entirely (ii) those who make assumptions without examining the experience of other North American cities and (iii) those with ties to the auto/oil/bus industries.
4) Traffic will either (i) suck it up and deal with the slightly slower times because in reality it will still be pretty fast (ii) try alternate routes INCLUDING our fabulous ring road system (iii) switch to transit or (iv) a mixture of the three.

mic67 · #**1162** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 11:57 AM**

Rock-on BigGuy123 with the reality check....

How about some 24 hour service - more frequent service on the bline and Barton in off peak, rather than every 1/2hr.

mic67

realcity · #**1163** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 3:35 PM**

You can walk faster through IV then drive sometimes. What would be the point of taking rapid transit that gets stuck at a red light every 50 meters from Wellington to MacNab?

Main makes more sense. The road capacity is exceeds the traffic now. If it's on Main is still benefits King street, it's like a 1 minute walk north.

What will happen if it runs on King when it hits the Westdale branch in the road? continue into the village or turn onto Main? if it's the latter then just run the entire line on Main. It'll give brilliant access to Mac Medical. as well the campus. Along King it'll what? run along Stirling via the village? King street is so ridiculous for LRT when Main St is another option.

SteelTown · #**1164** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 5:35 PM**

^ It's called signal priority. The traffic light turns green as soon the LRT approaches a traffic light. So it doesn't stop until it reaches a station.

SABBATICAL! · #**1165** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 8:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

3) LRT solves both these problems and are also far more cost efficient, spurs development, and increases ridership. These are facts only disputed by either (i) those who oppose government entirely (ii) those who make assumptions without examining the experience of other North American cities and (iii) those with ties to the auto/oil/bus industries.

Hey, where would one find solid documentation of the success of LRT vs bus systems elsewhere? I'd love to do a little readin' up on it.

realcity · #**1166** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 11:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

^ It's called signal priority. The traffic light turns green as soon the LRT approaches a traffic light. So it doesn't stop until it reaches a station.

in theory. but i've been like 6 cars back at a red light and it turned green and maybe 3 cars got through before it turned red again. What's an LRT to do when that happens? The train can turn the light green but that's no guarantee in the morning rush that that will do anything to prevent it being stuck in traffic.

We'll see. If LRT happens. If it goes on King. They'll realize the mistake, and one of the reasons people will be saying so is for that stretch of King between Wellington and MacNab.

realcity · #**1167** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 11:08 PM**

Sabbatical
check this
http://hamiltonlightrail.com/

SteelTown · #**1168** Posted **Jul 19, 2009, 11:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by realcity

in theory. but i've been like 6 cars back at a red light and it turned green and maybe 3 cars got through before it turned red again. What's an LRT to do when that happens? The train can turn the light green but that's no guarantee in the morning rush that that will do anything to prevent it being stuck in traffic.

That's why LRT will have it's own separate lane with tracks and signal priority.

Jon Dalton · #**1169** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 12:36 AM**

Amazing. On page 59 we're still explaining what Light Rail Transit (LRT) means. And to the same people.

Jon Dalton · #**1170** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 12:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

The last 3 may be a little newer than the first but they are all streetcars anyway you look at it. Stringing a couple of them together isn't going to change that. Light rail is not rapid transit, it is mass transit. We already have that, it's called the HSR.

We need the tractive force of 750VDC through 6 powered trucks to pull your head out of your ass.

mic67 · #**1171** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 12:55 AM**

Jon Dalton Amazing. On page 59 we're still explaining what Light Rail Transit (LRT) means. And to the same people.

--------------------------------------

What it means vs what it is are 2 different things....BigGuy provides a reality check.

Maybe, just maybe LRT isnt for hamilton? Or at least in the manner in which some choose to define it.

But to spend a billion on a street car system is totally retard and seems to suit many in Ham.---- go figure. Me, I no longer bother.

What it means is vested interests and those that figure that ....oh this is so stupid, response seems to be just a means to justify it.

It would not suprise me that there are individuals that have a vested interest in and LRT sytem that they are "shilling" for it, which is apparently standard proceedure these days - FU - we know who you are.

mic67

FairHamilton · #**1172** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 1:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by realcity

in theory. but i've been like 6 cars back at a red light and it turned green and maybe 3 cars got through before it turned red again. What's an LRT to do when that happens? The train can turn the light green but that's no guarantee in the morning rush that that will do anything to prevent it being stuck in traffic.

We'll see. If LRT happens. If it goes on King. They'll realize the mistake, and one of the reasons people will be saying so is for that stretch of King between Wellington and MacNab.

In practice the signal priority for an LRT is 100% separate from the light you know in your car.

realcity · #**1173** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 3:10 AM**

^ Well that's good to know. King IV is two lanes right now. I would hate to see the sidewalks and streetscape destroyed to widen the road.

Does that mean there will be two dedicated lanes, one westbound one east bound? As well two lanes of vehicle traffic? I can't see that happening in IV, without dinky sidewalks like there is on Main. That would wreck IV, LRT or not. Since the vehicles will be in the curb lanes right? Pedestrians will feel unsafe walking.

realcity · #**1174** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 3:11 AM**

Elevate the train like Chicago, that would be cool.

SteelTown · #**1175** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 11:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by realcity

^ Well that's good to know. King IV is two lanes right now. I would hate to see the sidewalks and streetscape destroyed to widen the road.

Does that mean there will be two dedicated lanes, one westbound one east bound? As well two lanes of vehicle traffic? I can't see that happening in IV, without dinky sidewalks like there is on Main. That would wreck IV, LRT or not. Since the vehicles will be in the curb lanes right? Pedestrians will feel unsafe walking.

There's actually 4 lanes, 2 lanes for traffic and 2 lanes for parking. The parking lanes will be eliminated for the LRT lanes for East and West bound. That's the only major issue and really it shouldn't have to be a major issue.

If you ever go to Portland check their LRT. Some of their LRT track is levelled with the sidewalk so it's shared.

You can kinda tell from this picture...

MalcolmTucker · #**1176** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 2:07 PM**

^ You have to be careful with pictures from Portland, since that is not their LRT. That is their streetcar. The streetcars have no signal priority or exclusive ROW unlike the LRT which runs in reserved lanes and exclusive ROW.

realcity · #**1177** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 4:15 PM**

Eliminating the curbside parking is WRONG. It'll make it feel like Main St. That parking is very convenient and the best type of parking, because it acts as a barrier between pedestrians and vehicles.

I'm not walking down that sidewalk if it's level with the street. This is Hamilton. Drivers will think they can drive on the sidewalk to pass the LRT.

I understand the benefits of accessibility with level grading but there better be traffic bollards if it's level.

adam · #**1178** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 4:26 PM**

This is exactly why LRT should be on Main St.... King St is simply too narrow for 2 lanes of traffic, a sidewalk befitting of a downtown, LRT and curbside parking.

SteelTown · #**1179** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 4:34 PM**

I believe the plan for International Village area is to have.....

| sidewalk | Westbound LRT lane | Westbound traffic | Eastbound traffic | Eastbound LRT lane | sidewalk |

Now remember the LRT lane won't be used constantly like a traffic lane. I believe the plan is to have a frequency of every 10 minutes for LRT. So really you've doubled the space for the sidewalk. The LRT will take what 10 seconds to pass and it won't return for another 10 minutes.

Hope that helps to understand it better.

Jon Dalton · #**1180** Posted **Jul 20, 2009, 5:15 PM**

LRT vehicles tend to have pretty loud bells (or are those gongs?) that they ring when approaching a pedestrian area. In cities I've seen with pedestrian crossings allowed on the LRT tracks this isn't an issue. But of course that's other cities. This is Hamilton and everyone knows our average IQ is so much lower not to mention so many more of us are overweight, deaf, blind, or too spaced out on drugs to know there's a train coming.