Rapid Transit

[omro]

Originally Posted by emge

This pic made me laugh

[omro]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

How much more expensive will this route be to implement rather than running the LRT along Main, which looks like a much shorter, straighter route and therefore faster and cheaper to build route?

BTW: I am biased towards LRT solely on Main. However, I'm also biased towards LRT in Hamilton in general. This city needs it!

[adam]

So let me get this straight, we are NOT getting a high speed rickshaw lane?? Mic? BigGuy? Are you disappointed now?

[mishap]

Originally Posted by omro

How much more expensive will this route be to implement rather than running the LRT along Main, which looks like a much shorter, straighter route and therefore faster and cheaper to build route?

Apparently, it's $25M/km for two-way, and the King routing is 1km long than Main, so an extra $25M. Given the size of the project, not a huge difference if it better suits the city's objectives.

For one-way, the difference would have been about $45M more, given $15M/km each way where the rails are split. Costs east and west of the split would remain the same. That's getting a bit expensive.

BTW: I am biased towards LRT solely on Main. However, I'm also biased towards LRT in Hamilton in general. This city needs it!

I prefer Main as well, but King is the next best thing. At least it's not the one-way split.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

From RTH....

Rapid Transit Office now has a perferred B-Line route....



Two way LRT for it's entire route, using King St instead of Main St from Paradise Road to the Delta Square. Convert Main and King St back to two way car traffic.

did they ever consider then the major upgrades changes needed to the 403/King/Main interchange if it is to be put through there, and traffic direction is 2-way?

I totally am in favour of using King Street over Main, and of course, 2-way traffic for both.

EDIT: Actually looks like that map has some 'new' ramps in that location.

[SteelTown]

You can read the entire report, LRT FUNCTIONAL PLANNING ANALYSIS:
B – LINE CORRIDOR......

http://www.myhamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyre...ngAnalysis.pdf

You can see the map more clearly on page 14. Page 23 is the best overview.

[bigguy1231]

Everything in the previous post about streetcars is misinformation. Whether this was done deliberately or out of ignorance is anyone's guess

What misinformation, if you run rails down a main street and put streetcars on it thats exactly what it is, a streetcar. It is not rapid transit. It will be subject to the limitations of the current and future traffic patterns. It doesn't matter whether you sychronize traffic lights or not. Just because a light is red doesn't mean traffic is going to move to give these streetcars the right of way, they will still have to pass through intersections. If you think traffic is bad now just wait until King and Main Sts become 2 way, then we will see traffic congestion like we have never seen before in this city.

Just because you build something and tell people its a better way to do things doesn't make it better. The reality is 80% of the people in this city will never use these streetcars just as 80% don't use the HSR now.

[emge]

Glad a few posters found the picture funny. I had a little fun making it.

Re: the differences between streetcars and light rail.

The differences are a bit bigger than just signal priority, there's also capacity, speed, and frequency of stops. I'm sure there's more but that's what immediately comes to mind:

Signal priority
Typically streetcars work with the current turning and passing lanes, sometimes with signal priority.

In addition to signal priority, light rail has an active barrier from the street and an exclusive lane. Cars have to flow around them, it's not a shared right-of-way.

Frequency/design of stops
Streetcars stop much more often than light rail and are designed for lighter corridors. For streetcars, speed isn't a priority, like it is with light rail. Streetcars function like buses - light rail goes between hubs. Light rail generally has dedicated platforms, not just posts with signs.

Capacity
Streetcars are single vehicles, while light rail operates with multiple cars linked together, significantly increasing capacity. The individual cars also usually hold more people than a streetcar. The difference in design affects speed as well.

Vehicle design and speed
The vehicle design is different, and top speed is higher for light rail than streetcars: along with less frequent stops, higher capacity, and a much better priority system, light rail is a far faster system

There's more differences, but that's a start. And for drivers that's a good thing, because a fast, efficient system like light rail will get lots of other cars off the street and enable you to zoom down King just fine One line of light rail has about 8x the capacity of a line of freeway traffic in peak hours, so a well-used light rail system will actually help traffic quite a bit.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

If you think traffic is bad now just wait until King and Main Sts become 2 way, then we will see traffic congestion like we have never seen before in this city.

Simply put, people will have to alter their driving patterns.

With the opening of the Red Hill Parkway drivers who are west of the 403 should not be driving through Hamilton to get the east end of the city, i.e Stoney Creek. They should be taking the 403, Linc, Red Hill. And vice-versa.

I live in Ward 3, and it's a drive-thru Ward. So much so, that Tim Horton's is replacing sit down locations with drive-thru's. Anything that reduces drive-thru's in my Ward is a positive in my opinion.

[omro]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

I live in Ward 3, and it's a drive-thru Ward. So much so, that Tim Horton's is replacing sit down locations with drive-thru's. Anything that reduces drive-thru's in my Ward is a positive in my opinion.

I've walked past that TH they've bulldozed on Main (forget the cross-street) in favour of building a drive-thru. Sad. Very sad. It's a sign that that Main is seen more for cars than for people, which is one of the reasons why I want LRT on that Main, as it needs the biggest change in focus. More so than King. Hopefully, when Main is less of a highway through the city, whether thanks to LRT or two-way conversion, they'll change it back to include seating or it'll become something else.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

Simply put, people will have to alter their driving patterns.

With the opening of the Red Hill Parkway drivers who are west of the 403 should not be driving through Hamilton to get the east end of the city, i.e Stoney Creek. They should be taking the 403, Linc, Red Hill. And vice-versa.

I live in Ward 3, and it's a drive-thru Ward. So much so, that Tim Horton's is replacing sit down locations with drive-thru's. Anything that reduces drive-thru's in my Ward is a positive in my opinion.

I totally agree with you, people will alter their driving patterns. They won't go anywhere near downtown Hamilton. But just remember, if people don't go downtown we will not have a downtown. You cannot force people to use public transit if they don't want to.

All this will do is shift traffic from one area of the city to another. The reason that people just drive through the downtown now is that there is nothing there to stop for. There are no department stores, very few chain stores and basically very little commercial activity. Adding streetcars is not going to change that. The only difference is going to be the noise of empty streetcars passing through the same areas of empty storefronts. Maybe they can build a drive through Timmies that the streetcars can pull up to. At least they would have a reason to stop there then.

[bigguy1231]

Emge, I do understand the difference between the 2. My point is the system as proposed will have to pass through hundreds of intersections along the route. It does not matter if they have a dedicated right of way East and West. They still have to cross the North/South streets.

What you are assuming is that people will yield the right of way in those intersections. We all know that is not going to happen. All it's going to take to throw a monkey wrench into the whole system is for a car to breakdown on the tracks or an accident to happen. Even traffic getting backed up through an intersection will slow the system down.

I am not opposed to rapid transit, but to me this just isn't rapid transit. To me rapid transit would be trains on rails with dedicated thorough fares, no cross streets, no obstructions. The only way that is going to happen in this city is to either go underground, my preference, or elevate it.

I cannot see wasting a couple of billion dollars for something that is essentially no better than what we already have. The other concern I have is who is going to pay to operate this system once it is built. The people who are advocating this system are assuming that there is going to be a 30-40% increase in ridership. What if that does not happen? Who is going to pay? I know I am not willing to subsidize something that will be a moneypit if the projections are wrong.

[mic67]

bigguy1231

Regardless you still have it right.

Like you said you are NOT against rapid transit, it would be great for Hamilton, and I would embrace it. but right of way or not it can not be considered rapid transit. The StClair line in toronto is dedicated, that will probably work?

If they can create something like the new center mall just imagine how they can mess up a rapid transit system.

I have no bias, but what they are trying to justify as rapid transit in Ham. is about as close to retarded as you can get - for an LRT rail system. Too many falsely believe or have bias.

bigguy1231 - Right On.

Mic67

[omro]

Originally Posted by mic67

If they can create something like the new center mall just imagine how they can mess up a rapid transit system.

I thought Centre Mall was built by a big box development corporation, not a regional transporation authority.

[SteelTown]

I'd suggest you read this report, LRT Technology Analysis for B-Line......

http://www.myhamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyre...gyAnalysis.pdf

[emge]

Perhaps there's some confusion on right-of-way and signal priority? (Read page 28 in the aforementioned document if need be).

Of course, if it were up to motorists to yield, those problems identified would be correct, and it would be silly to hypothesize an LRT like that would be "rapid." You can't depend on the goodwill/patience of drivers to make your transit system work.

But the percentage of drivers that fail to understand one can't drive through an intersection when facing a red light is pretty minimal, and I imagine it might decrease further when driving through means being obliterated by a train, not "just" T-boning by a Honda Civic.

[bigguy1231]

I read the information regarding the signal priortization and thats fine for signalled intersections which only represent about 10% of the intersections along the proposed route. What about the other 90% that are not controlled.

If the proponents of this system are suggesting that all other intersections be closed then this system is dead in the water. It will never be approved. It would essentially divide the lower city in half which would not be acceptable to people who live in those neighborhoods or others who have to travel in those areas for whatever reason.

I am afraid the those of you who are proponents of this system in your zeal have forgotten that the majority of people in this city will not use this system and will not take kindly to being inconvenienced for the benefit of the few who will use it. Votes matter, and when it comes right down to it politicians will do what their constituents want. I can guarantee you something that will disrupt peoples lives as much as this will, will not be approved.

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

I totally agree with you, people will alter their driving patterns. They won't go anywhere near downtown Hamilton. But just remember, if people don't go downtown we will not have a downtown. You cannot force people to use public transit if they don't want to.

These people don't go anywhere near downtown now, so downtown is losing nothing. They drive through with no intention of ever stopping, period. I'd argue even as they drive through in their cars they are not in downtown. They are in fact in their insulated 60+km/hr car on a road. And that road could be anywhere in the country to their mindset.

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

All this will do is shift traffic from one area of the city to another. The reason that people just drive through the downtown now is that there is nothing there to stop for. There are no department stores, very few chain stores and basically very little commercial activity. Adding streetcars is not going to change that. The only difference is going to be the noise of empty streetcars passing through the same areas of empty storefronts. Maybe they can build a drive through Timmies that the streetcars can pull up to. At least they would have a reason to stop there then.

I agree, that adding streetcars will not miraculously attract new commercial activity. I think it will be one part of a greater change, and 2 way street conversion is also part of that greater change.

What the changes will do is set the foundation for change to occur, and the streetcars will not be empty, just as the buses are not empty today.

I'll extend an invitation to you, and anyone else, to walk large stretches of King/Main Streets between Gage & Wellington to observe and talk about what works and doesn't work along those streets.

[BrianE]

Where's McGreal when you need him?

Someone needs to inform Bigguy and Mic67 that this "Streetcar" system that they're so opposed to is not even what is being proposed. Wake up guys. Read the some of the previous 50 pages in this thread and get an idea of the Rapid Transit that is in the planning stages right now.

"The reason that people just drive through the downtown now is that there is nothing there to stop for."

This reasoning is unfortunately shared by many people in Hamilton. Nobody stops to think that maybe the opposite is true.

-The reason there is nothing to stop for downtown is due to a road network that is 100% geared towards driving through.-

Also, consider the outmoded idea that downtown's are only possible when suburban residents have easy access by car. This was widely believed to be true in 1950's and 1960's, hence the whole sale conversion to one way streets. Given the decline of Hamilton's downtown since then I think partial blame rests on this philosophy. (Yes I know, socio economic factors, migration to the suburbs throughout North America... all true as well).

How about trying this idea on for size? How about if businesses downtown made a living off of the people that actualy live downtown? I know! Crazy isn't it? Who would want to live downtown? It's so cramped and all that through traffic and road noise and nowhere to park your car (need that car you know, its the fastest way to get where you're going in this town). It's Terrible!

What if you could get somewhere in Hamilton by public transit faster than you could by car? Everybody knows that's impossible! But nobody stops to consider why? The reason is 40 years of building a road network with the single purpose of getting Car "A" from McMaster to Eastgate in 20 minutes flat. A feat that would take twice as long in any other city in North America.

One last thing. Like FairHamilton, I live in Ward 3. This means that of all the people in Hamilton we will be affected most by lane reductions on Main and King St. And yet I'm 100% in favor of LRT and or converting Main to 2 way. Sure I won't be able to blast through downtown from the 403 to my house in 5 minutes during rush hour anymore. But a calmer Main St. will most likely mean I'll eventualy be able to walk to a decent restaurant along Main or do some other shopping at future businesses that don't have to contend with a roaring 4 lane highway just feet from their doors..

[adam]

LRT at street level is a big plus. Isolating one element in the city from others was tested out in the 1970's when they built Jackson Square. Big failure. If we want a vibrant downtown then the model we have to look at is in Europe. Seldom will you find more than 2 lanes of automobiles, but you will find bike lanes, wide sidewalks and cars that YIELD to pedestrians. Transit brings you to the city centre where there are all the amenities including grocery stores, department stores, markets, theatres, etc, etc. The city has life and it is impossible for cars to go above 50km/h. The time of the automobile is gone, check out Chrysler, they are mothballing, heck, even Honda is going to barely break even this year. The younger generation that is coming up to the work force isn't buying cars in droves. They want to be close to amenities, be able to walk to get a bag of milk, they want to run into friends downtown. Different mindset. Either teach yourself a new trick or be considered an old dog.

We have to remember that automobiles that overrun all of our public space is a relatively new phenomenon. It hasn't always been that way, and it won't always be that way. People are still people... everyone is miserable in traffic jams. People who are on the street walking past shops and tree lined streets are living a lifestyle that is conducive to some kind of culture. You can buy a $60k car but you'll still be sitting in traffic, you'll be disconnected from your environment. That model is out of date.