The future of Hamilton's public transit

[hamiltonguy]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I think the City is looking at an idea to close down Hughson St to cars and perhaps install those same type of tarp used at Eastgate along Hughson St to connect the two stations in the future.

That's a Hell of a Long Walk down a street with pretty much no street Life, although Maybe it would be a good route for the part of a Waterfront Streetcar south of the James Street Station.

[go_leafs_go02]

yes, those streetcars will be coming to the streets starting in the late spring/early summer. They are in the HSR garage. I can 100% confirm that, and will provide free shuttle service from downtown to the waterfront.

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

Regarding the East-West LRT, would you please repost your plan to have it access Hunter Street terminal while still providing decent service to the CBD International Village, and Downtown BIA areas without an added travel time of more than a couple of minutes. If you can provide a resonable plan to do this I will be impressed and concede this point to you.

Here's one
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...te#post3183225

But it could be as simple as coming up from main via john and then back down at bay. You seem to be hung up on the rapid transit not being able to make turns. Part of the idea is that turns and intersections will have prioritized signals so that under most circumstances the transit vehicle essentially gets an advanced green. Its not like in toronto where cars and streetcars sit fot 3 light cycles waiting to turn left.

So it seems like your main argument is that it will slow people down. I think that it may change some peoples' routes, but it's possible it will speed just as many users up. It could also feed more users into the system.

I do not think that the fear of changing routes (slowing some users down and speeding some up) is enough justification for spending to build a new structure we simply do not need.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

That's a Hell of a Long Walk down a street with pretty much no street Life, although Maybe it would be a good route for the part of a Waterfront Streetcar south of the James Street Station.

From Hunter to Gore Park for the tarp, that's what I heard. I've been advocating since day one that the city and HSR start looking at a new line from James N Station to TH&B Station along Hughson St. Perhaps using eletric trolley buses to keep the flow moving nicely and smooth back and forth all day.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

You Can't really build on top of the GO Centre?

Hamilton GO Centre (former TH&B station) is actually designed to allow for new construction above it.

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

maybe you're all more optimistic than I, but I can't get juiced up enough to even join in on this conversation.
Widening the tunnel will never happen. All day trains might never happen. I have no clue what's going on with the James North station.... again, unless I'm missing something, I see nothing to get my hopes up on any of this.
We've been hearing it for years and years now.

I would say the horse isn't dead yet, and that's why I keep beating it. The TH&B restoration was supposed to bring passenger service back to the core, and in a capacity well beyond what we have now. If its ultimate purpose was to run 7 daily trains, it was shortsighted and a waste of money. Many of us envision a future in which passenger rail is a mainstream transportation system that accounts for a high percentage of intercity travel. This may be some time away, but I don't think it's pointless to discuss it.

I would support James North as a VIA station with temporary GO service as an added bonus, but not at the expense of our longstanding plans to serve the core. If anyone is going to take local transit to catch the GO, a James North station would add an extra transfer to a trip. The TH&B is only one bus away if you live in the east end, Westdale or along many mountain bus routes.

A better long term solution to servicing Stoney Creek and Niagara would be to reinstitute the line across Hamilton Beach and the lift bridge. As someone pointed out, everyone there has the option of driving across the skyway and catching the same train in Burlington. As long as this is an option for the average commuter, there's no point even having a GO station there. For those who can't drive, a train-meet bus that ran across the skyway would be faster. If we get into the future where peak oil and everything comes into play and there's incentive to use rail instead of bus, then laying tracks across the beach strip won't seem like such a crazy idea. Then again, the whole idea of living in Stoney Creek and working in Toronto would.

[go_leafs_go02]

what would that consist of? more rail lines..elevated bus lanes? or just office/residential space?

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

I would suggest laying track back down along Ferguson, connecting the CN rail to the CP spur. GO Trains arriving from Toronto could come in via the main CN line, stop at James North, then travel south along the new Ferguson rail and loop back west into the GO Centre on Hunter. The train would then be positioned to head westward via the CP spur back to Aldershot Station to Union.

Awesome. We could restore Ferguson Station too! Forget light rail, let's bring back HEAVY rail, integrated onto the street!

[hamiltonguy]

Originally Posted by coalminecanary

Here's one
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...te#post3183225

But it could be as simple as coming up from main via john and then back down at bay. You seem to be hung up on the rapid transit not being able to make turns. Part of the idea is that turns and intersections will have prioritized signals so that under most circumstances the transit vehicle essentially gets an advanced green. Its not like in toronto where cars and streetcars sit fot 3 light cycles waiting to turn left.

So it seems like your main argument is that it will slow people down. I think that it may change some peoples' routes, but it's possible it will speed just as many users up. It could also feed more users into the system.

I do not think that the fear of changing routes (slowing some users down and speeding some up) is enough justification for spending to build a new structure we simply do not need.

But it doesn't speed things up for anyone. All the buses that would terminate at the Hunter Street terminal already have a stop at Hunter, so making it a terminus improves connections for noone. Yet I've already shown, and you admit, that it inconveniences anyone traveling north of Hunter.

I am opposed to this plan proposed since there is no benefit to terminating buses short of downtown.

Also it was said that the GO Centre was designed to be built on top of.

This confuses me. The building was built in the depression, long before anyone thought of building on top of rail lines. I see almost no possibilities on building on top of a Heritage Building, while the new MacNab street terminal is easy to build on.

And yes I know about signal priority, but with our politicians I doubt that it will be implemented as it should be.

[DC83]

^^ I'm just curious as to whether you regularly take the HSR, HamiltonGuy?

Your points all seem to cater to business people only. The City is trying their asses off to bring more residents downtown. So why would we centre our transit around business people only? Wouldn't you want to make it more and more convenient for those living downtown to get to their houses/condos/apts?
How would a terminal in the centre of the CBD benefit those that live in Durand, or in Corktown, etc?

[coalminecanary]

I'm also curious if you live on the mountain and work near macnab?

You are totally hung up on this "delay" which I think you are blowing out of proportion.

Most routes pass Hunter already. And all routes pause somewhere. All I am saying is that the "pause" should happen at Hunter instead of at MacNab. None of the routes are slowing down, just getting rearranged.

You say that it will benefit no one. But it will benefit every single rider who connects to or from GO/Greyhound. It is really stupid that right now you get off a GO train and have to stand out on the street waiting for a bus and hope the timing is right. Not to mention easing the timing for anyone transferring. You are less likely to miss your transfer if you don't have to walk for it, and if it pauses right there instead of stopping for only a second.

And in the end, we are talking about a geographical difference of like 3 blocks. It's not that big a deal. And it's not worth wasting money on it. We don't have that money to spend!!!!

Here's a question: is this new terminal worth higher fares? Cause it could cause that to happen...

[markbarbera]

Exactly! SOmeone has to pay the $2 million to acquire the extra land for the McNab proposal, and we know how council feels about HSR and taxpayers!

Being a daily HSR commuter, I have to say that I would definitely prefer the terminal at the Hunter Street location rather than McNab. But when do the opinions of actual HSR riders matter for anything in this city?!?

[hamiltonguy]

Yes I do ride the HSR everyday. No I don't work downtown. The routes I use are usually the 41, 43, and 16.

I go downtown by bus maybe once a month at most.

The thing is even with a terminal you won't walk out and automatically have your bus waiting for you. It's complete nonsense that just because the terminal is there that the bus that operates every 15-20 minutes will be sitting right there for you.

Have you ever been on the bus when an operator stops to take a leak? I am all the time and I sit there thinking "I should just get a car and stop trying to be the good, environmentally conscious citizen."

For someone at the Go Centre this offers a very slightly increased chance that your bus will be waiting. But on the flip side anyone bound for points north of there will be delayed.

The same number of buses will stop there, the same routes, and the same frequency. How does this improve service?

I also don't get the argument that this will improve service for people in Durand and Corktow. This doesn't mean anymore buses will use James and John.

I'm not hung up over this delay, I'm hung up over the argument that someone by ending the buses at Hunter street that this will make service better for them.

This also disadvantages anyone living North of King Street, such as at future residential developments on King William, who will have to walk further or add a transfer.

As I said, I go Downtown by Bus once a month or so. Maybe two people get on or off at the Hunter Station. The vast majority get off at Jackson or Gore Park which would require a longer walk or a transfer if the buses just ended at Hunter instead.

[hamiltonguy]

I would also like to mention that the Metrolinx Survey also changed my opinion on fare increases. While I obviously think we should toll the Highways and remove area rating, the Metrolinx study shows that people in GTAH would be willing to pay higher fares for better services. Considering our fares are already low I think they could afford to increase fares to at least 2.50.

As I said though, we should also be improving service (like a new terminal), not lengthening walks to destinations, going after the suburbs for their fare share, and really improving services in the central city with real light rail lines.

[coalminecanary]

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

The thing is even with a terminal you won't walk out and automatically have your bus waiting for you. It's complete nonsense that just because the terminal is there that the bus that operates every 15-20 minutes will be sitting right there for you.

No, but if you get off the GO at the layover point then there is a higher chance of your bus being there because the bus actually pauses there. And you don't have to wait out on the street.

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

Have you ever been on the bus when an operator stops to take a leak? I am all the time and I sit there thinking "I should just get a car and stop trying to be the good, environmentally conscious citizen."

Well no matter where the terminal goes, at least you'll know about the pee stop because it will be part of the schedule, and you can plan your trip around it. This has little to do with the Hunter terminal discussion...

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

For someone at the Go Centre this offers a very slightly increased chance that your bus will be waiting. But on the flip side anyone bound for points north of there will be delayed.

The "points north of hunter" you talk about are only spanning two blocks (from hunter to gore essentially). You are talking as if there would be a huge delay in the middle of a route. The reality is that it's a short delay near the end of a route. If you are really concerned about delays en route then you should be talking about a terminal at the waterfront. Honestly, macnab vs hunter is practically spitting distance. It's probably a 6 minute walk.

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

I also don't get the argument that this will improve service for people in Durand and Corktow. This doesn't mean anymore buses will use James and John.

Well it puts the terminal closer to these neighbourhoods, but I don't think that it's a valid argument for Hunter... I mean, if that's the reasoning then it's simply favouritism toward those neighbourhoods.

Originally Posted by hamiltonguy

I'm not hung up over this delay, I'm hung up over the argument that someone by ending the buses at Hunter street that this will make service better for them.

Not ENDING them... just having that as a common layover spot for all routes. Some might turn around there, others might continue on.


I'm still not convinced that there's a need to spend on a new terminal. We are talking a matter of a few blocks difference geographically, and of course some people will be a bit more inconvenienced but others will benefit. But I guess in your mind the expense is justified... I just don't see it... we'll have to disagree I guess. But if there was a vote, I'd vote no to a new terminal and yes to GO ;-)

[SteelTown]

BRT at Vancouver, which got replaced with Canada Line guideway.



Notice how the street is one way like our Main St and it's even B-LINE like ours haha. The only difference would be that ours would have a single BRT lane instead of two as the other lane would be on King. Hopefully the province will approve $17 million for West/East rapid transit funding in the next provincal budget (part of Metrolinx priority funding).

[oldcoote]

February 04, 2008
The Hamilton Spectator
(Feb 4, 2008)

The city is looking to up the cost of bus passes for McMaster students -- but not as high as it would like.

An annual pass will cost students $94.80 next year and increase to $110.60 by 2010. The three-year phase-in will bring the annual cost to 140 per cent of an adult monthly pass for city transit. The price is among the lowest in the country.

A report heading to councillors today states staff wanted a higher increase, but that the university's student's union cautioned it might lead students to reject the transit program in a referendum. Staff endorse the lower increase as a compromise that students can support and helps the city recoup more costs.

Students currently pay $71.50 for the academic year -- in total they take about 2.5 million trips a year. The city generates $1.7 million a year from its university and college bus pass program.

Across Canada the average fee for similar student transit programs is $110 to $130.

[DC83]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

BRT at Vancouver, which got replaced with Canada Line guideway.



Notice how the street is one way like our Main St and it's even B-LINE like ours haha. The only difference would be that ours would have a single BRT lane instead of two as the other lane would be on King. Hopefully the province will approve $17 million for West/East rapid transit funding in the next provincal budget (part of Metrolinx priority funding).

Great find, Steeltown!! That depicts Main St pretty accurately. Only problem is that it's BRT rather than LRT. But I'm sure LRT could fit in there. Most trains are skinnier than buses, no?

[raisethehammer]

actually, that is a two-way street in Vancouver. I assume it's in the suburbs given the huge width. The grass median blocks your view of the opposing traffic.
Regardless, I agree. Take that half of the street and use it as an example for LRT.
Don't quote me on this, but I think the lanes for LRT could be even narrower than those bus lanes above. Buses usually need a bit of extra room since they aren't fixed on a rail.
The fact is, we could do LRT easily here. Sadly, our city hall is still stuck in the 50's. And proud of it too!

[raisethehammer]

here's a neat little video from Eugene, Oregon. Yes, that's right. A tiny little west coast city that is ahead of the Hammer in terms of new transit.
I could see this being used along Upper James and even Mohawk until a modern streetcar can be used along Mohawk.

http://newflyer.com/docs/investor_re..._FlyerBRT.html