HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2010, 6:52 PM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, ON
Posts: 2,406
As one of the major proponents of this pass, I have to laugh so hard. I started the facebook group in August 2008, and while due to co-op and the like, I have been in BC for 8 months, I was indirectly involved with the process, although Matthew Sweet took over from myself.

I was told in November, directly by MSA president Alan Griffiths that Mohawk students will NEVER go for a Mandatory Pass, and yet 2 months later, almost 66% of voters voted for the pass. They didn't seem to see the need or desire to address the issue, so they made sure we gathered up a petition, where we received over 1600 signatures (they required 1500), and then forced the referendum.

I was quite shocked at the level of support. I wasn't sure if it would pass or not. There wasn't really a major NO side to the issue. Even out of towners can figure out the system to address their need to avoid parking on campus if they really want to.

Curious now to see what changes to the routings around Fennell/West 5th for September, as there will be a HUGE spike in ridership most likely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 12:25 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
Separate transit group is the ticket: chamber

February 08, 2010
Meredith Macleod
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Business/article/718055

The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce wants to see an independent transit commission operate the city's bus system and a potential future light-rail line.

The chamber's transportation committee is arguing the Hamilton Street Railway should be divorced from politics and be overseen by a corporation that includes voices from business and users.

"Whenever there are transit enhancements or changes made, they are politically motivated, rather than business-case oriented," said Dan Rodrigues, chairperson of the chamber's transportation committee.

The chamber began this debate with the city close to two years ago. A staff report last month argued the current model of integrating transit fully as a city department is the best for Hamilton.

Currently, the transit system, and its operating budget of about $87 million this year, is overseen by councillors who sit on the public works committee.

The chamber made another pitch for a commission to that committee last week.

Rodrigues says the city hasn't cut Hamilton Street Railway service in underused areas or rationalized routes because councillors don't want to suffer political heat.

"Since amalgamation, the HSR has been increasingly subject to undue political influence," reads the chamber's position paper.

"New routes are assigned, not based on need or maximized ridership or access to employment lands, but on specific interests. The existing plans are vague and aspirational rather than well documented with data and annual ridership targets and review of the impact or initiatives."

The chamber contends that Metrolinx is a model for city transit governance, saying the province removed politicians from the board to rise above parochial politics in planning transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area.

But Councillor Lloyd Ferguson says outside boards, including conservation authorities and police services, don't have the incentive to closely watch budgets.

He says Hamilton's transit system is efficient and cost-effective.

"There are good reasons to try (a commission) and good reasons to keep the status quo ... I'm not prepared to jump into it."

Don Hull, director of transit for the city, says many municipalities, including Hamilton, have dissolved transit commissions because they aren't accountable to the taxpayer.

Out of close to 100 transit systems belonging to the Canadian Urban Transit Association, only 19 have transit commissions, he says.

And in the case of Toronto, the entire Toronto Transit Commission board is made up of councillors, making it a de facto council committee.

John Dolbec, chamber CEO, counters that Hamilton city council should be focused on strategic planning rather than the details of operations.

"Let council focus on the forest, not the trees," Dolbec wrote in an e-mail.

Barry Wellar, a transportation consultant and retired professor at the University of Ottawa, was surprised to hear Hamilton's transit system is completely swallowed up in the public works department.

"That's right out of the 1800s. It's an engineering mentality ... The people who are focused on moving cars, are they the same people you want working on your light rail? Likely not. They don't have the mindset," he said.

"It's just like the old joke, why do transportation departments build roads? Because they've always built them and they have no other ideas."

While Ottawa abolished its transit commission, there is a citizens advisory committee providing input to staff and council, says Wellar.

Peter Hutton, spokesperson for the Hamilton Transit Users Group, also wants to see the concept of a transit commission explored.

He agrees that planning and good sense has taken a back seat to politicking.

"Any route changes go back to council and they inevitably become a political football."

Councillor Brian McHattie says there are ways to improve the governance of transit without resorting to an independent commission and he's asked public works director Gerry Davis to take a look.

"The HSR used to have a seat at the table with corporate management," said McHattie. "I think we need more focus on transit, especially as we try to reach target ridership numbers."

Rodrigues says transit is more than a social service. It's an economic enabler vital to business and industry and building a city.

That's even more important as the city lobbies for an east-west light-rail transit line, he says. Metrolinx is expected to release its recommendation Feb. 19.

Applying a business approach to transit service would cut the reliance on subsidies from the general tax levy, says Rodrigues.

But the city's Hull says transit has always straddled the divide of social service and business.

About 52 per cent of the HSR's operating budget, close to $46 million in 2010, will come out of the general tax pool.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 4:26 PM
mishap mishap is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
Curious now to see what changes to the routings around Fennell/West 5th for September, as there will be a HUGE spike in ridership most likely.
Maybe we'll see plans for that long-discussed terminal at W5th and Fennell. That could be a very important transit hub to connect mountain routes to the downtown. It would certainly give the A-Line a boost.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 4:51 PM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
Curious now to see what changes to the routings around Fennell/West 5th for September, as there will be a HUGE spike in ridership most likely.
I seriously doubt that you will see a huge spike in ridership. There may be a small blip but those who drive will for the most part still drive. It's just another added cost of going to Mohawk. People looking at going to the college may just decide to go elsewhere if faced with the added expense. Why should people who live close by have to pay for something they don't want or need.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 5:02 PM
mdsweet mdsweet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguy1231 View Post
I seriously doubt that you will see a huge spike in ridership. There may be a small blip but those who drive will for the most part still drive. It's just another added cost of going to Mohawk. People looking at going to the college may just decide to go elsewhere if faced with the added expense. Why should people who live close by have to pay for something they don't want or need.
Seems the majority who bothered to vote disagree with you. If they live close by, might as well take the bus since they've already paid for it.

And to add a bit of a jerky comment, those who drive can probably swing the equivalent of an extra insurance payment whereas transit users are going to save in the neighbourhood of $500.

As if people are going to stop enrolling at Mohawk in droves because there's a bus pass now. It sure hurt McMaster's enrollment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 5:25 PM
flar's Avatar
flar flar is online now
..........
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 15,677
Nobody will pick another college because of this. A bus pass is usually considered a "pro" when you're selecting a university or college. Besides, the cost is a drop in the bucket compared to other fees/expenses of post secondary education.
__________________
RECENT PHOTOS:
TORONTOSAN FRANCISCO ROCHESTER, NYHAMILTONGODERICH, ON WHEATLEY, ONCOBOURG, ONLAS VEGASLOS ANGELES
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2010, 8:02 PM
Jon Dalton's Avatar
Jon Dalton Jon Dalton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,778
Maybe people will pick the college with the FREE BUS PASS. Seriously, not everyone sees transit as a constant negative.
__________________
360º of Hamilton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Feb 9, 2010, 4:01 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
Mohawk is suppose to have a single transit terminal facing Fennell. Perhaps they'll work on the terminal once the new Fennell campus building is complete. The City has reserved the money for years and Mohawk is suppose to chip in with funding as well.

The amount is the same for the cost of building the Eastgate terminal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2010, 9:50 PM
Bureaucromancer Bureaucromancer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 106
Mountain Access?

Has there been any real discussion about mountain access for the A-Line yet?

Honestly, none of the options look great at this point. My biggest question is what would be the viability of closing James Mountain Road for a transit corridor? Widening doesn't look like an option, nothing else is even in vaguely the right place and a tunnel seems unlikely with funding as it is (and I wonder if the James route isn't better than a straight shot tunnel like ICTS was going to have anyway, which would miss Mohawk College)... How much might it change the equations about James Mountain if the connection from 5th to the Clarence access could be made two way?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2010, 2:28 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
That's why I support an independent HSR transit commission. We should have professionals selecting routes and improvements instead of politicians having the final word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2010, 11:06 AM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
Mohawk students would get big HSR break
City transportation plan calls for fewer cars - more buses, bikes

March 22, 2010
Dana Brown
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/740473

Mohawk College students will pay a lot less for bus transportation under a new plan being looked at by city councillors.

McMaster University, Redeemer University College, and students at the Mohawk/McMaster Institute for Applied Health Sciences are already covered under the University/College Transit Pass program.

It provides students with a pass for a fraction of regular rates.

The current cost for undergraduates is $102.70, which covers the eight-month academic year.

That compares to $87 it costs for a monthly adult pass.

In September, when 8,500 Mohawk students join the program, the cost will increase to $121.80 for the academic year as part of a pre-arranged hike.

"It kind of rounds out all the major post-secondary institutions in Hamilton," said Paul Thompson, manager of fare administration and ATS with the city.

"I think we're one of the few cities in Canada who could say that. And we expect it'll have both positive ridership and hopefully some good revenue impacts."

City staff estimate the new enrollments will generate about $940,000 in revenue. Not all of that will be new, however, as many students currently ride the HSR and pay regular rates.

Alan Griffiths, president of the Mohawk Students' Association, said last year a group of students formed a club to raise awareness about the pass. They worked with the association and together were successful in getting enough petition signatures for a referendum.

More than 35 per cent of students voted -- the highest turnout ever experienced in a referendum -- and about 60 per cent supported joining the program.

"We hope students that have the ability to take public transportation or use active transportation to get to school will pick up this pass - will use it, will stop driving," Griffiths said.

He said there have been complaints from students who commute and buy a parking pass. The association is working with the school to offer a discount for them.

Mohawk's inclusion in the plan is in the process of getting approval from city council.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2010, 6:31 PM
drpgq drpgq is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hamilton/Dresden
Posts: 1,859
Does the city publish HSR ridership numbers anywhere?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2010, 8:35 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
The EA will deal with the tunnel issue for the A-Line. The EA has begun already. We should know by the end of the year what the final plan is.

Personally I don't understand why they just don't consider building an above track along the Escarpment from James St to West 5th.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2010, 2:47 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,421
My 2 cents on my favourite 2 options:

1. just use claremont. It is gently sloped, unbelievably wide, and horribly underused.

and/or

2. a terminal at st. joe's (LRT), and a terminal at southam park (old mountain view hotel site/incline railway site) for upper james buses - or eventually upper james LRT, with terminals linked by a transit-grade aerial tramway (gondola):
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?oe=UT...e52da3fd691839
__________________
no clever signoff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2010, 3:15 PM
Bureaucromancer Bureaucromancer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 106
The other option I've considered, and sort of like is going to BRT for the mountain line. Dig a tunnel substantially along the lines of the direct line that the ICTS proposal used, with dual mode trolley buses for the tunnel, downtown and possibly some portion on the mountain.

The mountain seems like an appropriate application for BRT, with basically a short section of busway bypassing the existing mountain routes being a substantial boost to local services all across the mountain. Rapid bus style improvements on James, Fennel and/or Mohawk would seem to be enough for the rest of network to operate well, without the expense of a full rail right of way. Trolleys, meanwhile, would be perfect for the kind of heavy grade you would have in a tunnel straight up the mountain, and if the wires are extended downtown and out James (I'd suggest wires on James from LIUNA to Mohawk and then across to Lime Ridge) would get you the same environmental advantages as rail, and modern dual mode doesn't require manual rewiring, so through service is actually practical.

It also gets conveniently around the fact that all the discussion to this point have been for a line to the airport, which is just not going to fly (no pun intended) as a rail line but would be badly compromised by a forced transfer somewhere on the Upper James if a shorter rail line was built.

Assuming some kind of guidance is used in the tunnel (probably not a huge expense once dual mode vehicles are assumed) the tunnel could even be built to dimensions closer to a rail than conventional road tunnel. It certainly wouldn't do anything to compromise a future rail conversion (assuming the grades are kept within reason, which they really should be even for buses), but would be much cheaper in capital terms, and actually works from a service perspective (i.e. it's not a clear example of BRT being poor man's rail given the network structure).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2010, 4:34 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,421
I just don't understand the tunnel case. It is completely unnecessary - especially considering the underused capacity at claremont:
http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=UTF-8...01794&t=k&z=19
__________________
no clever signoff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2010, 4:53 PM
Bureaucromancer Bureaucromancer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 106
To me the problem with Claremont is that the north end just doesn't go anywhere. The best case scenario for routing I can see is with LRT, in which case it could turn onto whichever of King or Main ends up being used for the B-Line, and presumably turn north again at James since it really does have to connect the new GO station (which by all indications will a the same location as LIUNA, even if we don't get the building back) to downtown, and the existing station.

My feeling is that the the benefits of a tunnel route are such that if we go BRT they should probably just eat the cost (I'd suggest funding it by limiting ROW construction elsewhere, instead emphasizing dedicated and HOV lanes), while if we go LRT James Mountain makes more sense. At least James Mountain has a shorter detour, and one that includes a significant trip generator (Mohawk College).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2010, 9:14 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
I dunno why they just don't copy the 1981 plan for the mountain access for either BRT or LRT...



Have it elevated and go ground level once at James St and St Joseph's Drive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2010, 12:59 AM
Bureaucromancer Bureaucromancer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
I dunno why they just don't copy the 1981 plan for the mountain access for either BRT or LRT...

Have it elevated and go ground level once at James St and St Joseph's Drive.
Exactly my suggestion for BRT, with the addition that you electrify the buses in the tunnel and build the tunnel itself, implementing other private ROWs over time as and where needed, rather than as a one off complete rapid transit line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2010, 3:50 PM
c@taract_soulj@h's Avatar
c@taract_soulj@h c@taract_soulj@h is offline
"Pow! Right in the kissa"
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Welland, ON
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
I dunno why they just don't copy the 1981 plan for the mountain access for either BRT or LRT...



Have it elevated and go ground level once at James St and St Joseph's Drive.
For a 1981 plan, that looks kinda sexy if you don't mind me saying. I could see this
__________________
Fawdie (n): Forty ounces of urine-flavored beer
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:46 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.