Rapid Transit

[raisethehammer]

running LRT down King through Rosedale is a bad idea....it's way too far to walk between the east/west-bound lines. I'd love another LRT line someday that takes King all the way into downtown Stoney Creek, though.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by flar

Main St. in Buffalo is dead, and I believe King would end up the same if we pedestrianized it. There is virtually no retail on Buffalo's main downtown shopping street and the streetlife is pretty weak too, lots of bums. If we closed King St. in downtown Hamilton in its current state, there would still be streetlife, but it would be the same bunch of scraggly characters that hang around in Gore Park and on the corner by Right House. Except it would be worse because there would be fewer eyes on the street. That's why I was against Eisenberger's plan to close both legs of King around Gore Park. Those people "own" downtown, it's theirs, and until that changes, not even LRT is going to help.

100% in agreement.

[adam]

I thought LRT's goal was to create a downtown that was less car-centric and encouraged people with jobs to live downtown and encouraged businesses to open up next to the line.

Cars and roads are not necessary to encourage positive downtown growth. Otherwise we are screwed and wasting billions of dollars on LRT.

[DC83]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I understand your concern, but there would be negligable adjustments to actual stops along the rotue under this scenario. The stop by the Delta wouldn't be impacted greatly. I imagine it being moved slightly west and making the actual Delta Parkette the boarding area for the LRT. Otherwise, we could stick with the stop at Ottawa street seeing that King and Main are a very short walking distance apart at Ottawa.

The only signifcantly displaced stop on the B-Line would be the eastbound stop at Main and Kenilworth. Westbound would still be there, so there really is no significant change in traffic patterns. As far as Delta High goes, the curerent B-Line isn't designed to service it directly anyway. Catchment for high schools can easily be handled by local bus routes such as 1 King and 5 Delaware.

Delta kids walk to Kenilworth & Main, a quick 1.5min walk, to catch the B-Line. There are dozens of them every day. Students make up probably about 65% of bus capacity during the morning, and right after school lets out. LRT @ King & Kenilworth would not allow these Delta students to use this awesome service, and they'll continue packing onto buses making them uncomfortable for those non-students who are on it.

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

running LRT down King through Rosedale is a bad idea....it's way too far to walk between the east/west-bound lines. I'd love another LRT line someday that takes King all the way into downtown Stoney Creek, though.

I agree, 100%! Possibly on a Barton LRT. Goes all the way into Stoney Creek, loops around @ King/Hwy8 into Stoney Creek Village, then continue along King all the way to The Delta. Connect it with B-Line.

[omro]

Originally Posted by DC83

I agree, 100%! Possibly on a Barton LRT. Goes all the way into Stoney Creek, loops around @ King/Hwy8 into Stoney Creek Village, then continue along King all the way to The Delta. Connect it with B-Line.

I'd love to see a two-way LRT on Main and a two-way LRT on Barton and the north/south connecting the two stations somehow to the bayfront and the airport.

I think Main and Barton need the most investment dollars. King street has the bones for the shopping, so will come up naturally as the city does.

I've love it if I go back to the UK to visit family, and then on my return can fly into Hamilton airport and get on the LRT and change at the James/Barton interchange and travel eastwards to where I'll probably be able to afford to live

[mishap]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

That's what I was thinking, omro. Make Hughson dedicated to LRT only.

I've thought about it as well. Personally, I like the idea, but it never gets much consideration. I think people look at the constraints, and just forget about it. Some businesses (and even the courthouse) have driveways along Hughson, but that can be taken into consideration. If you absolutely can't access your property any other way, fine, use Hughson. However, force cars to turn off at the end of every block with "straight-arrow, circle-slash" signs. Transit is excepted, of course. And no stopping. All blocks along Hughson in the core are short, so deliveries can be made from side streets. That can even include King and Main once buses are moved away.

If they're willing to tunnel from the base of James St up the escarpment, why can't they look into going under the TH&B station? You could have a very impressive multimodal terminal there. If the line went back to ground level by Main St, it's not really a subway line, and you've solved the train bridge issue. Climbing southwards on Hughson St might be an issue. The line might surface from the station just in time for the tunnel up the hill, but the overall idea should still be considered.

Now, exactly where the TH&B stop is located would depend on where the B-Line runs. If the B-Line is on Main, you might want a single stop at Jackson with a nice walkway in either direction. If it's on King, you might consider separate stops at King and the station. If it's a King/Main split, I'm just not sure.

I'm calling it TH&B to avoid confusion with CN/LIUNA. "The GO Station" is going to be a confusing term in the future...

[go_leafs_go02]

Hmmm....I kinda like that tunneling idea to be honest. A station right underneath with direct access up a few stairs or an escalator and boom, you got a bus, and keep going up another level, and boom, you got a GO train.

I think the costs and removing and relocating services is too expensive, and an idea that Hamilton will refuse to consider due to just the price tag. I will always do my best to support the idea of making the GO Centre the central hub or Union Station of Hamilton. The closer we can get all buses to stop there, the closer we can get the LRT line to go (both B-Line and A-Line. The happier we'll be.

OK, another fun dream kinda made from yours. Have the B-Line tunnel underground around Bay St, dip south towards Hunter St, and then have a Yonge-Bloor type of LRT station under the GO centre. 4 level station. B-Line below, A-Line, HSR/GO bus, and GO train on top. After that, have the B-Line go back up to main, meet up around Walnut and Main. of course, I want the B-Line to be 2 way on Main, instead of 1 way on King, 1 way on Main.

$$$ an issue..yep..will this happen? Absolutely not. I just love the T,H & B station more than anything in Hamilton to be honest, and yeah, creating a "union-type station" would be awesome.

Here's a google-map proposal. http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...,0.019226&z=16

[omro]

Would an LRT actually be able to make those 90º turns though?

[SteelTown]

New homes on the Mountain, especially West Mount, are using James street corridor as a selling point.

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by BCTed

What is wrong with synchronized traffic lights? If you travel at the speed limit, you will catch the wave and proceed smoothly. If you go over the speed limit, red lights will get you.

This is only true if you strat from a red light. If you start on Main by catching the tail of a green (or running a yellow), you are free to blow through the city at 70 easily, sometimes faster, bevoer you are either stopped by a red or you catch up with the front of the wave. The timed lights are a disaster for anyone not in a car - and even become disasters for those who ARE in cars but arriving to Main from a side street with no lights....

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

...placing LRT on the north side of say Main, and the south side of King will make traffic a nightmare if/when the city comes to its senses to go back to two-way, since the trains will be running against opposing traffic, so if you're driving east on King, you'll have a LRT heading west on your right, and traffic heading west on your left.

But if they DID convert - easy - switch the train directions and leave everything the same. No more opposing traffic problems.

But in the long run, I think twin tracks is the way to go, regardless of which street you choose. For one thing, it makes it easier for newcomers to figure out - you can choose your direction while you stand on the platform. If you make a mistake, you just turn around and face the other way. If you make a mistake with separated lines, you have to walk to a whole other street to correct yourself...

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

So you would have say 5 lanes heading east down Main and King, and then 2 lanes heading westbound on simply King? that makes no logical sense to me, since I don't believe traffic is any higher on Main compared to King, although Main being slightly busier wouldn't surprise me.

Don't forget Canon. The city views Main as the major Eastbound corridor and Cannon as the major westbound. King, as far as through traffic is concerned, is considered secondary to Cannon.

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Now back to my original point, if LRT means eliminating the conversion of King & Main Streets to 2 way, I'd prefer BRT and 2 way streets.

I'm sorry but I think this is wrong-headed. As much as I'd like to see both, if given a choice of just one, I'd take LRT in an instant. As has been posted many times, one way can still work - it's not ideal - but the benefits of LRT are so huge - bigger than any 2 wat conversion could ever be. You really would choose cars over train, just to get 2 way on main? That IS crazy!

Originally Posted by markbarbera

That's what I was thinking, omro. Make Hughson dedicated to LRT only.

Same thing east-west - the downtown section could run dedicated on king william... solves the international village lane problem and makes a nice cobblestone transit/pedestrian corridor. Heck, tear down part of jackson square to let it link back up to king and kill 2 birds with one stone! (removal of JS eyesore from james north being the second bird by the way haha)

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by omro

Would an LRT actually be able to make those 90º turns though?

Here's an LRT in the French city of Bordeaux making tight 90º turns.

[omro]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

Here's an LRT in the French city of Bordeaux making tight 90º turns.

Then I'm even more convinced that both lines east/west should go on Main and perhaps turn onto Hunter for access to the station. If one east/west line goes on King that's an impossibility. However, considering how close Main is to Hunter Street, it's no big deal if it doesn't deviate onto that street.

However, if the all day service is going to be from James North, then maybe the idea of east/west LRT downtown should be on Barton, as both Main and King are a little bit of a trot from there, though I guess you can interchange between north/south and east/west if the sync trains up so that one meets up in the central "nexus" exactly halfway between the intervals of the other set of trains.

Or maybe a revisited "Belt Line" could encircle the downtown, Barton, Wentworth, Locke, Charlton for example. Which would link up with the north/south and east/west lines in various places.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by coalminecanary

You really would choose cars over train, just to get 2 way on main? That IS crazy!

Never did I say the I was choosing cars over LRT, if you read my post again I stated I would choose buses (BRT) and 2-way, over LRT and one way.

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Call me crazy (I'm sure many will), but if LRT means never having 2 way traffic on Main & King Streets, I'd gladly give up the LRT for buses and 2 way streets.

And after walking King Street from Sherman to Scott Park and back last night my opinion on one way traffic is unchanged. I'm 100% against the LRT if it means no 2-way, and 100% for 2-way traffic with buses (or LRT if possible).

[omro]

Just gonna throw this out there as a compromise between the BRT and the LRT argument. I'm for LRT btw, but...

When I was in San Francisco, all the buses ran from overhead electric power-lines. Didn't HSR buses also operate in this fashion once upon a time.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Never did I say the I was choosing cars over LRT, if you read my post again I stated I would choose buses (BRT) and 2-way, over LRT and one way.



And after walking King Street from Sherman to Scott Park and back last night my opinion on one way traffic is unchanged. I'm 100% against the LRT if it means no 2-way, and 100% for 2-way traffic with buses (or LRT if possible).

how did you determine this?? Was the LRT going to fast??
You need to envision the future, not just focus on how horrible that street is currently.

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Never did I say the I was choosing cars over LRT, if you read my post again I stated I would choose buses (BRT) and 2-way, over LRT and one way.

BRT is dedicated right of way so it would have the same effect as LRT on possible future 2-way conversions.

And after walking King Street from Sherman to Scott Park and back last night my opinion on one way traffic is unchanged. I'm 100% against the LRT if it means no 2-way, and 100% for 2-way traffic with buses (or LRT if possible).

What is the root cause of the one way street problem, is it the fact that cars can only go one direction, or is it the scale and speed of traffic? As a pedestrian trying to cross the street, are 3 lanes of traffic moving one way scarier than 3 lanes of traffic moving both ways? Keep in mind that LRT would mean no more green wave for cars and fewer traffic lanes.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

What is the root cause of the one way street problem, is it the fact that cars can only go one direction, or is it the scale and speed of traffic? As a pedestrian trying to cross the street, are 3 lanes of traffic moving one way scarier than 3 lanes of traffic moving both ways? Keep in mind that LRT would mean no more green wave for cars and fewer traffic lanes.

I completely agree with you here. This is a point I have tried to make in the past. It is not so much one way streets themselves that are detrimental to the downtown core, it is the way the one-way streets have been designed to behave like highways that have the negative impact. You can have a one-way street that is pedestrian friendly.

Main Street would benefit equally from having the speed limit reduced to 40, reducing to two lanes of one-way traffic and the LRT, and broadening the walkways as it would from a two-way conversion.

[SteelTown]

^ I agree as well. Two-way conversion in my opinion is just a short cut solution.

[HAMRetrofit]

Anyway you slice it one way streets are bad for Hamilton and should be systematically eliminated. It is just the nature of one way streets. They do not support healthy retail activity. Please just accept this reality and move on to more productive things. It does not matter if the lights are synced or not. Two way streets are better for business plain and simple.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

how did you determine this?? Was the LRT going to fast??
You need to envision the future, not just focus on how horrible that street is currently.

Always with the comments.

The speed and noise level of traffic makes the street one to avoid as a pedestrian at all cost. The atmosphere is one of peaceful tranquility until the light at Gage goes green. Then forget trying to have a discussion with the person you are walking with.

Walking westbound leaves one with an uneasy sense as all sound sensory approaches from the rear.