Rapid Transit

[thistleclub]

More partisan fear-mongering in this recent fact-challenged op-ed, courtesy the president of the Hamilton Mountain Conservatives provincial and federal riding associations.

Those prejudices are in step with a recent Hamilton Mountain News editorial that contained this gem:

"It seems the economic strategy to revitalize the core has trumped all other strategies to expand, innovate and assist businesses across the city. Even the light-rail transit project is being diverted along King Street — what some city advocates say is the “heart of the city” — for the sole purpose of economic benefit to the downtown core."

"Diverted" from where, exactly?

[eatboots]

This guy is misguided but he doesn't like the LAP either so he seems like a general conservative doesn't want any money spent on anything type.

[thistleclub]

International Village LRT stop possible
(Hamilton Spectator, Matthew Van Dongen, July 20 2016)

Hamilton's light rail transit planners are pitching a new downtown stop to assuage concerns of merchants in the International Village.

The city and project lead Metrolinx unveiled a draft alignment for the $1-billion planned LRT line earlier this year. The plan called for only one lane of car traffic on King Street through the narrow downtown pinch point and LRT stops at Catharine Street and Victoria Avenue.

But even downtown fans of the contentious project bridled at the idea of skipping a stop within the International Village. "Years of pain and anguish for what? ... A plan that doesn't even put us on the map," said International Village BIA head Susie Braithwaite at the time.

Planners heard those concerns, said city LRT director Paul Johnson, and are pitching a Wellington Street stop rather than one further east at Victoria.

"We looked at it and figured there was a viable way to essentially bookend the village," he said, noting the Catharine stop would be so close to Mary Street that it can be renamed for that street, which is considered the border of the BIA.

Braithwaite said she was pleased with the change — and with the way project planners consulted with the BIA.

"It was really important to us to have something within the (International Village) boundaries," she said.

At the same time, Braithwaite cautioned she can't speak on behalf of all businesses within the area when it comes to LRT support.

"There are so many different opinions out there," she said.


Read it in full here.


LRT Public Information Centres

Sept. 12, 5-8 p.m. at McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Rd. S;

Sept. 13, 3-5 p.m. and 6-8 p.m. at City Hall, 71 Main St. W;

Sept. 14, 5-8 p.m. at LIUNA Station, 360 James St. N;

Sept. 15, 5-8 p.m. at Dr. John Perkins Centre, 1429 Main St. E;

Sept. 20, 5-8 p.m. at Battlefield House Museum, 77 King St. W;

Sept. 21, 5-8 p.m. at Sackville Hill Seniors Rec Centre, 780 Upper Wentworth St;

Sept. 22, 5-8 p.m. at Dundas Town Hall, 60 Main St. in Dundas.

[thistleclub]

Hamilton reaches out to residents on LRT project
(Stoney Creek News, Kevin Werner, July 22 2016)

Hamiltonians will have another chance to jump on the light-rail transit project conversation in September.

The city will be holding seven open houses across Hamilton, encouraging residents to ask questions and seek answers about the controversial $1-billion project.

“Residents will see a lot more details,” said Paul Johnson, director of LRT project coordination. “There will be new information. We are entering a phase (of the project) that is getting real.”

Johnson says the public should expect to see preliminary work begin on the LRT project soon with workers digging bore holes along the corridor from McMaster University to the Queenston circle searching for utilities.

“This is a mammoth project for Hamilton, one of the largest in its history,” said Johnson.

In an attempt to education and prepare residents for it, he said preliminary information will be presented from the city’s traffic study, and up-to-date facts about LRT design for the public to see and comment on. In addition, there will be a wide range of staff available for residents to talk to, from HSR, real estate and the traffic departments.

“All of the solutions (to the LRT issues) will not be solved here,” said Johnson. “But we will be able to drill down on some issues that we haven’t been able to before. We are continuing to work to refine this project.”


Read it in full here.

[thistleclub]

Get ready for some next-level confirmation bias.

@terrywhitehead:

On Monday July 25, I will publish the results of the research done by my office on LRT on my website.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Done by my orifice, more like.

Go get 'em, Terry, ya big dummy.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by thistleclub

@terrywhitehead:

On Monday July 25, I will publish the results of the research done by my office on LRT on my website.

Cool Terry! Hope you engage with people about that... fully, openly, intelligently, open-mindedly....

[Gurnett71]

Originally Posted by thistleclub

Get ready for some next-level confirmation bias.

@terrywhitehead:

On Monday July 25, I will publish the results of the research done by my office on LRT on my website.

And Whitehead's report is in:

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/67...t-thumbs-down/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilt...-lrt-1.3693863

An interesting counterpoint/critique, by Professor Higgins of McMaster, who wrote some of the studies that Whitehead cites in his paper:

https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%...%21671&o=OneUp

Source was provided by Glen, one of the commenters on the Spec website.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Somebody's put a bug in Terry's ear. Somebody's got to him and asked him to derail this project. Either that or he's a complete idiot. I vote for both.

[thistleclub]

Tory leader says PC government would still fund LRT if that’s what city wants
(Hamilton Spectator, Steve Arnold, July 25 2016)

Ontario Opposition Leader Patrick Brown says he'll carry through with a provincial pledge of $1 billion for Hamilton's controversial light rail transit system.

The Conservative party leader told a Flamborough Chamber of Commerce meeting Monday if he's elected premier next year, he'll back whatever transit option Hamilton councillors decide they want.

"Being a former city councillor myself, I respect the autonomy of municipalities. If the mayor and council have stated very clearly that's where they want the provincial partnership to be, that's where it will be," he said after a wide-ranging question-and-answer session with local businesspeople. "If the mayor and council say they want that investment to be in another transportation project, then it's incumbent on the province to be flexible on what is the clear municipal will."

Read it in full here.

[thistleclub]

Whitehead's report has also received an abbreviated fisking from Brampton transit activists.

[Jon Dalton]

I guess that's good news that Patrick Brown won't yank the LRT funding but I hope that's not an excuse to drag on and delay the project. I'd still worry because Brown has claimed not to support LRT in the past and either way it's still a politician talking and you never take their word as gospel.

[markbarbera]

Notwithstanding this debate, Bombardier's recent woes trying to actually deliver their light rail trains to Metrolinxfor the routes in Toronto and Waterloo is bound to have a higher impact on delayed delivery of a LRT here.

Alternatively, we could have BRT here next year if we run it along the intended LRT route with dedicated lanes following the route planned for LRT. Should we do that, we can actually gauge the route's viability and make routing adjustments based on that experience before putting expensive track down. This is basically what OC Transpo did in Ottawa. It also gives the HSR the chance to build up feeder lines and overall ridership on the B-line route so, once converted to LRT, it will be a more viable system and much less painful a transition.

[MalcolmTucker]

Route building is a good thing, but destroying your network for an upgrade is a pretty annoying thing. There are other manufacturers than Bombardier, and there is a long time between now and when Hamilton would need a few vehicles. Calgary's system transition worked like this:

To position the city for eventual implementation of a rapid transit system, a new
“Blue Arrow” express bus service was recommended, paralleling the proposed rapid
transit lines. The Blue Arrow expresses included complimentary park and ride and feeder
bus routes to mimic the characteristics of the future rapid transit system that was
envisioned.

>

source: https://www.calgarytransit.com/sites...rb_revised.pdf

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

I guess that's good news that Patrick Brown won't yank the LRT funding but I hope that's not an excuse to drag on and delay the project. I'd still worry because Brown has claimed not to support LRT in the past and either way it's still a politician talking and you never take their word as gospel.

Slightly different shading and detail in the Stoney Creek News:

[Progressive Conservative leader Patrick] Brown accused the Liberals and Premier Kathleen Wynne of announcing infrastructure projects without the money needed to build them. Brown included Hamilton’s $1-billion light-rail transit project as among those projects.

“We have an infrastructure plan that is not funded,” said Brown. “The province has made promises to Hamilton that are not funded and that is inherently wrong.”

Under a Progressive Conservative government every infrastructure promise made to municipalities will be built into province’s budget.

Even though he didn’t want to weigh in on the current LRT debate among Hamilton politicians, Brown said if elected he would “work with the city of Hamilton on their number one transit priority.”

And he said any commitments the province has made to allocate the $130 billion in infrastructure projects to municipalities, he will honour them.

“We will keep those promises,” he said.

[matt602]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Alternatively, we could have BRT here next year if we run it along the intended LRT route with dedicated lanes following the route planned for LRT. Should we do that, we can actually gauge the route's viability and make routing adjustments based on that experience before putting expensive track down. This is basically what OC Transpo did in Ottawa. It also gives the HSR the chance to build up feeder lines and overall ridership on the B-line route so, once converted to LRT, it will be a more viable system and much less painful a transition.

I was very against this idea a few years ago but now I'm really starting to think it would be the more practical solution for the exact reasons you outlined. The only problem would be the funding of a future LRT conversion. Something the provincial and/or federal government isn't likely to pick up the tab for. Even if the B-Line BRT route ended up being highly successful, it would be incredibly difficult or even impossible to try to sell the idea of 100% municipal funding.

[thistleclub]

LRT and King St. route reaffirmed
(Hamilton Spectator, Carmela Fragomeni, July 26 2016)

Planning for Hamilton's light rail transit project is rolling full steam ahead despite a recent councillor's report challenging it, another councillor suggesting a lack of public support, and a business leader decrying the confusion over whether it is proceeding.

The LRT, and its route on King Street — which continue to be debated notwithstanding repeated approvals — were reaffirmed at Tuesday's five-hour LRT committee meeting. But not before there were heated discussions caused by disagreement by Mountain councillors Terry Whitehead and Donna Skelly.

Whitehead released a report Monday challenging the $1 billion lower city project from Queenston Traffic Circle to McMaster, but on Tuesday, said it was a political report meant to promote careful oversight.

"To make it work, we better understand the good, the bad and the ugly," he said about the construction impacts on businesses and traffic, and if there will be enough ridership.

Skelly said she is hearing "a tremendous amount of opposition" and questioned the support the committee has been shown. "If you really want to gauge public support, put it to a referendum," she said.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger reminded everyone the committee's purpose is to implement the LRT.

Committee member Susan Braithwaite of the International Village BIA, however, said businesses on King Street are unsure the project is going ahead.

"There is confusion based on what we hear and read in the media," she said, adding businesses need better leadership on preparing for the impact of the street dug up for an extended time. "We need to hear that the LRT is happening — 100 per cent."

Debate then ensued among councillors on whether the project was "a done deal."

Ancaster Coun. Lloyd Ferguson urged the committee not to go "down that track."

"We've been having this debate for several years. This train has left the station," he pleaded. "A majority of council supported this … so please, can we get on with this …"

City manager Chris Murray said the city has an agreement with Metrolinx to build the LRT.

Businessperson Mary Aduckiewicz of Denninger's told the committee her store and others wanted the LRT to go on Main Street where construction won't hurt as many businesses as it will on King.

"We've weathered a lot of storms, ups and downs over 62 years," she said of Denninger's. "We're not sure if we can weather another extended construction period."

City LRT project manager Paul Johnson said King is the approved route since 2011, when the province approved an environmental assessment on the city's original LRT route that extended to Eastgate Square. Among the reasons for rejecting Main is that it is a truck route, and that the LRT is incompatible with the 403 interchange in the west end.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Alternatively, we could have BRT here next year if we run it along the intended LRT route with dedicated lanes following the route planned for LRT. Should we do that, we can actually gauge the route's viability and make routing adjustments based on that experience before putting expensive track down. This is basically what OC Transpo did in Ottawa. It also gives the HSR the chance to build up feeder lines and overall ridership on the B-line route so, once converted to LRT, it will be a more viable system and much less painful a transition.

I don't think Ottawa is a fair comparison -- they may have built up ridership over several decades but OC Transpo basically built their own road network for a large part of their system.

But I might agree with you if the short bus-lane experiment had not been prematurely killed off the way it was. I think there would be lots of fear, trepidation, and endless debate about reserving TWO lanes across the whole 11km route (or more).

Plus I think the construction is at the root of a lot of worry -- people hear and read that it will be implemented between 2019-2024 and think the entire stretch will be dug up for 5 years of constant construction work. One of the next things the city and Metrolinx should be doing is explaining how the construction staging is likely to actually happen, and allay some of those fears.

That aside, there is no reason why B-Line bus service cannot be improved in the next few years, reserved lanes or not. This should be combined with improvements to connecting routes, with a vastly increased service ramped up on the A-Line. But it will take local municipal money to do it, because the province is not likely to buy new buses (and has basically told the city it needs to use its gas tax funding to do that, when the ask for buses and a new barn was added to the list of wants). Perhaps some federal money can be applied toward the broader transit network, though there will be an expectation the city will ante up too.

If city councilors are actually serious about alternative ways to spend transit money and actually believe in budgeting for them, there is no reason many of those improvements can't happen as well. But given council's track record, that's a very big if.

[markbarbera]

Among the reasons for rejecting Main is that it is a truck route, and that the LRT is incompatible with the 403 interchange in the west end.

This is a new spin with little merit. Why is maintaining Main as a truck route a bigger precedent than LRT on Main? What makes the two mutually exclusive anyway?

The alleged interchange issue is a bit of a red herring too. The same could be said about the King route, which already calls for a new bridge to be constructed because of the current interchange incompatibility there.

[NortheastWind]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

This is a new spin with little merit. Why is maintaining Main as a truck route a bigger precedent than LRT on Main? What makes the two mutually exclusive anyway?

Trucks are a necessary evil in this day and age. They have to be routed somewhere.