Rapid Transit

[bigguy1231]

I hate to say it, but I am going to anyways, I told you so.

I told you in my posts back in the summer that once people realized what was being proposed there was going to be alot of opposition and this is just the beginning.

This proposal just isn't going to fly. You cannot essentially close a main street and expect people living in those areas to go along with it. The article in todays Spec is going to alert alot of people to just what is being proposed. Until now it's been easy sailing for the pro side. But you can't keep the public in the dark forever, or was that the idea, keep them in the dark until it was too late to stop.

Once councillors, start hearing from their constituents, this proposal will be dead it the water. The overwhelming support that councillors initially gave the proposal will evaporate and it will be back to the drawing boards.

[highwater]

Take the poll:

http://thespec.com/

[matt602]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

I hate to say it, but I am going to anyways, I told you so.

I told you in my posts back in the summer that once people realized what was being proposed there was going to be alot of opposition and this is just the beginning.

This proposal just isn't going to fly. You cannot essentially close a main street and expect people living in those areas to go along with it. The article in todays Spec is going to alert alot of people to just what is being proposed. Until now it's been easy sailing for the pro side. But you can't keep the public in the dark forever, or was that the idea, keep them in the dark until it was too late to stop.

Once councillors, start hearing from their constituents, this proposal will be dead it the water. The overwhelming support that councillors initially gave the proposal will evaporate and it will be back to the drawing boards.

The article doesn't mean jack shit. It's just a classic slanted opinion piece by one of the Spec's infamous. The people who make the decision (Metrolinx, City Council, Public Works) are all on side with LRT. It's going to happen. This time the uninformed, suburban whiners won't get their way.

Ironically another top article on the Spec's site today: "Gridlock costs GTA billions a year: OCED"

Yah, definitely can't afford to take away any precious road lanes for public transit. Gotta get more cars on those congested highways and roads.

[SteelTown]

Plus the way the reformed EA is set up for public transit the public can't stop it from happening. Some poeple in Toronto hate Blue 22 and protested it but it's going through no matter what. If Metrolinx and the province support it, it'll go through no matter what.

[Gurnett71]

Originally Posted by highwater

Take the poll!

http://thespec.com/

Looks like some of us here have taken the poll and have moved the "good for the city overall" choice to number 1, slightly over "will not work" (40.78% to 39.08%). I checked earlier today, before highwaters post, and "will not work" was by far the number 1 choice at that time. Sigh.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

I'd like to see the report too. The report I read, and probably most people here did, indicated two lanes of vehicle traffic through International Village. The spec could have at least gave a reference for these drastic changes.

From Mary to Wellington (ie. Int'l Village), King East has two lanes of auto traffic and maybe a couple dozen spots for north-side on-street indent parking. I haven't compared reports, but installing two LRT lines and two lanes of traffic along that strip seems like it could be a little snug under the current configuration. Maybe they've decided to widen the sidewalks rather than narrowing them?

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

I hate to say it, but I am going to anyways, I told you so.

I told you in my posts back in the summer that once ignorant people realized what was covered in the local media for over a year there was going to be alot of opposition and this is just the beginning.

Really, is anyone here surprised? That a few business owners predictably opposed a drastically altered RT proposal in a grossly spun Spectator article doesn't come as any surprise nor does it contradict any previous claims of public support for LRT. It's called selling newspapers.

Might I remind you that city councillors, neighbourhood associations, BIA's, the Home Builder's Association, the Realtor's Association, the Chamber of Commerce, McMaster University, the Spectator and almost every well informed citizen support this. If it's killed it won't be because Swiss Chalet doesn't like it.

[hamiltonguy]

I too would like to read where pedestrianizing the IV area came from.

I would not agree with doing that for the sake of saving the project from certain doom.

Also, the thing about the left turns... could not have been communicated worse...

The Spec is trying to kill it.

City Council will now do anything it can to oppose it.

I predict it will go down in flames like everything else in this stupid god forsaken town.

[Jon Dalton]

The Spec isn't trying to kill it, they're trying to sell papers. The Hamilton + Halton Home Builders' Association, which represents the Spec's biggest advertisers, supports LRT.

[DHLawrence]

At least your NIMBYs are using semi-logical excuses. In KW they want to block it because it will block the route of the Oktoberfest parade

And then there's the genius at the last public meeting who said that it wouldn't run properly in winter. Fortunately someone was quick to write into the paper to remind readers of Calgary and Edmonton.

This is why we can't have nice things!

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

Really, is anyone here surprised? That a few business owners predictably opposed a drastically altered RT proposal in a grossly spun Spectator article doesn't come as any surprise nor does it contradict any previous claims of public support for LRT. It's called selling newspapers.

Might I remind you that city councillors, neighbourhood associations, BIA's, the Home Builder's Association, the Realtor's Association, the Chamber of Commerce, McMaster University, the Spectator and almost every well informed citizen support this. If it's killed it won't be because Swiss Chalet doesn't like it.

You and the others can whine and cry about the Spec and it's spin all you want, the reality is many in this community rightly or wrongly take what is written in the Spec as gospel.

As for all the groups that support rapid transit, they support the principle not neccessarily the proposed route. Unfortunately for the supporters of this route the uninformed out number the supposed well informed and it's usually the uninformed that get out to vote on election day.

[SteelTown]

LRT route needs more debate, councillors say

November 11, 2009
Emma Reilly
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/670379

City councillors whose wards surround a proposed rapid transit route say there needs to be more debate and public education about the plans.

Preliminary plans for the rapid transit route include a two-way line running down the centre of King Street, a pedestrian-only area downtown, and restrictions on parking and left turns along the entire Eastgate-to-McMaster line.

The city predicts businesses will flourish along the RT route and foot traffic will increase.

Metrolinx is expected to announce if it will fund a rapid transit line for Hamilton early next year.

Councillor Bob Bratina, whose downtown ward includes a proposed pedestrian-only stretch along King Street, said he's worried about the tolerance for change of this magnitude in Hamilton.

"I'll support what needs to be done, but we don't want to lose the public enthusiasm on this," he said.

Councillor Bernie Morelli said he's "not so sure the final solution is on the table."

Councillor Sam Merulla said he's a "strong proponent" of RT, but called for "a thorough and complete public consultation process to examine the concerns of both business and residents prior to finalizing the design."

Councillor Brian McHattie said Hamiltonians will adjust to any traffic constraints created by the RT line.

"You have to make these kinds of choices. If people think we're going to get LRT and it's going to be business as usual, they're wrong."

Jill Stephen, the city's director of strategic and environmental planning, said there will be public information sessions and open houses after the Metrolinx decision. In the meantime, she's happy to make presentations to community groups.

Councillor Chad Collins said initial reactions from many businesses in his ward were negative.

Dave Serwatuk, who owns a car wash, a tanning salon and a Little Caesar's restaurant on King Street and Queenston Road, is an example.

"I don't serve people in my immediate area," he said. "People stop by because it's on their regular route. They'll see there's no access and they'll drive by."

Nicholas Kevlahan, co-founder of the citizens' group Hamilton Light Rail, said though LRT will cause some initial headaches, the long-term benefits and economic gains far outweigh the costs.

"It's a bit the same as when people complain about potholes on the road, then complain about the construction that arises," he said

[flar]

It's almost universally agreed that Hamilton sucks. King St. is lined with decaying empty buildings.

When the status quo is failure, nobody in their right mind should fear change. Change is needed. Too bad for the handful of businesses that might hypothetically be negatively affected. Nothing stays the same.

[11thIndian]

What's amazing is that all these shop owners see NO UPSIDE. If it affects the way their business currently works, it's bad. And yet, I'd imagine you'd gain much more in pass-by business than you'd loose in drive-by business.

People in this town are stuck in a "good enough" mindset- and it's time to shake them out of it.

[11thIndian]

Originally Posted by rousseau

This confounds me, too. What the phuck is wrong with us? There should be restaurants and night spots and all manner of attractions all along the west mountain brow to take advantage of the views (along the west, so the mills don't dominate the views). There should be restaurants and night spots and all manner of attractions all along the harbourfront wherever you look.

There seems to be a distinct disbelief that conservation green-space and commerce can live together in a pleasant and effective way- which is stupid.

The key is good design. Yes, if you put up lowest common denominator stucco building in a park it will look like crap. But an integrated and well designed structure doesn't detract from the surroundings. The Waterfront Trust's James Street plan is a great example of good ideas we need to have in place by 2015.

I wouldn't say we have "too much" greenspace. But I would say that we have enough that we should be investigating developing some "marquee" businesses- destinations in Hamilton where when someone comes here from out of town you say, "You've gotta go up to Sam Lawrence park. There's a beautiful restaurant there with an astounding view- after dinner, you can go for a walk after dinner though the park, it's beautifully landscaped."

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by 11thIndian

What's amazing is that all these shop owners see NO UPSIDE. If it affects the way their business currently works, it's bad. And yet, I'd imagine you'd gain much more in pass-by business than you'd loose in drive-by business.

People in this town are stuck in a "good enough" mindset- and it's time to shake them out of it.

I think a bunch of the businesses likely aren't property owners, so in the end they won't benefit that much since most of the additional surplus generated by the line will be absorbed by the the landlords. Not that I am saying that their position should stop the line.

[realcity]

Nothing happens in this city because people don't like change and council just cares about getting re-elected...so they cater to those people that don't like or fear change.

Hamilton sucks because we can't move forward into the future... and lack any imagination or political will. It's only a matter of time before we start to have population decreases like Buffalo, Detroit and Cleveland. I know for sure, my kids will NOT be living here. I'm going to tell them to get the hell out of Hamilton after you get educated. No point in putting down roots in a dying city.

[highwater]

Originally Posted by 11thIndian

There seems to be a distinct disbelief that conservation green-space and commerce can live together in a pleasant and effective way- which is stupid.

Actually there seems to be a distinct belief that conservation 'greenspace' (God, how I loathe that mindless term) ought to be an end in itself, which is really stupid. This belief is so unquestioning, that proponents see no need to defend their calls for more 'greenspace' with actual evidence of its benefits. This mindlessness is clearly what prompted Thomas Beckett's anti-urban opinion piece in the Spec. The fact that it often comes from people who claim to "love" Hamilton only makes it worse. With friends like them, Hamilton doesn't need enemies.

[realcity]

exactly.... most of what we call green-space is useless space and only serves to sprawl a city out

[Jon Dalton]