Hamilton's B-Line LRT construction

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Hamilton has slowly been raising taxes to address the state of good repair, I believe it's at 0.5% a year, but it's not nearly enough. Still, it has a sort of 'snowball' effect which adds up over the years. Between 2020 and 2030 the city will basically double the amount of money it spends on road reconstructions.

The LRT has the bonus of paying for a lot (though not nearly enough) of those reconstructions itself by rebuilding 14km of the City's largest arterials as well as many other streets. the original LRT scope had reconstruction and resurfacing of many other streets downtown to accommodate traffic shifts from the LRT. IIRC Metrolinx was paying for York Boulevard to be rebuilt to be widened back out to 6 lanes to accommodate shifted traffic from the LRT, for example, but that was nixed with the cancellation. We'll have to see what happens with it now.

That's still part of the plan according to staff. Though in my opinion unnecessary. It will only include 3 lanes Westbound, while the eastbound will leave 2 lanes for a bi-directional cycle track.

The item I'm most interested in as a secondary project was the part of funding that was going to pay for moving the Go terminal to the corner of McMasters campus to align with the LRT.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The LRT has the bonus of paying for a lot (though not nearly enough) of those reconstructions itself by rebuilding 14km of the City's largest arterials as well as many other streets. the original LRT scope had reconstruction and resurfacing of many other streets downtown to accommodate traffic shifts from the LRT. IIRC Metrolinx was paying for York Boulevard to be rebuilt to be widened back out to 6 lanes to accommodate shifted traffic from the LRT, for example, but that was nixed with the cancellation. We'll have to see what happens with it now.

That would go a long way to explaining the massive increase in construction cost. Or perhaps costs for all that other stuff were underestimated for LRT 1.0

[Innsertnamehere]

shifting traffic lanes around is all pretty basic stuff. it adds costs no doubt but not huge ones.

The cost increase I imagine came from slow cost creep from construction inflation tied with full realization of the complexity building on old urban streets. Increased property requirements, the need for a replacement of the Longwood Road bridge, the Frid Street Extension, etc. all probably fed into the high costs of the line. The City is smartly sticking as many projects as humanely possible onto the line because Metrolinx is generally a willing payer... the line is an incredible deal for the city.. Metrolinx is basically handing them $3 billion in construction work. While much of that is LRT related, probably at least $500 million or so is stuff the city would have had to or wanted to do at some point without it.

I remember hearing at some point that the rail underpass in the Delta neighbourhood is going to cost some absurd amount and was a big driver of cost increases as well.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

shifting traffic lanes around is all pretty basic stuff. it adds costs no doubt but not huge ones.

The cost increase I imagine came from slow cost creep from construction inflation tied with full realization of the complexity building on old urban streets. Increased property requirements, the need for a replacement of the Longwood Road bridge, the Frid Street Extension, etc. all probably fed into the high costs of the line. The City is smartly sticking as many projects as humanely possible onto the line because Metrolinx is generally a willing payer... the line is an incredible deal for the city.. Metrolinx is basically handing them $3 billion in construction work. While much of that is LRT related, probably at least $500 million or so is stuff the city would have had to or wanted to do at some point without it.

I remember hearing at some point that the rail underpass in the Delta neighbourhood is going to cost some absurd amount and was a big driver of cost increases as well.

I meant the reference to "reconstruction and resurfacing of many other streets downtown", not just King and not just shifting lanes around (e.g., widening York back to 6 lanes would not be difficult, and it can probably use a re-pave but isn't in that bad a shape overall so a reconstruction can probably wait). If that stuff was in the original plan and still is, it could be a significant driver of construction cost increases and maybe the original estimates for such work were too low.

Annual escalation of construction costs usually exceeds regular inflation rates by a lot, so that's a key one too.

The Longwood bridge and the rail underpass are definitely big projects in their own right. The bridge alone will save the city major bucks.

[TheHonestMaple]

I saw this billboard this evening on Dundurn. Not sure what that first message is supposed to mean.... but apparently "Hamilton LRT it's happening".

[TheRitsman]

I also fixed the render from 206 King St W:



It looks horrible now

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Awful. Horrible. Why even bother building the LRT at all if it's going to look this bad?

[TheHonestMaple]

I guess because it reminds me of Toronto, but it gives me bigger city vibes with the overhead wires included in the render. I like it! Good work Ritsman.

[TheRitsman]

I'm a strange one. I like the look of overhead tram wires. I do wish we could move more hydro lines underground though. I like the Dutch style where literally everything is underground except for light posts and tram wires. They often even hang the wires and lights off buildings to reduce pole clutter on the sidewalk.

[mishap]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

Awful. Horrible. Why even bother building the LRT at all if it's going to look this bad?

Unless it's a one-way LRT and they decided that cars can drive on the tracks, I'd say it's going to look nothing like this.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

I was being sarcastic

Does anybody else remember when people were upset that the renderings didn't show the wires?

[SteelTown]

I remember probably when I was about six years old; I would hear those overhead lines and know I was in a big city. It was always the loudest when the bus would pass an intersection like King and James. I think they used to give off sparks too.

[TheRitsman]

The new ones are much better designed, though I do believe they still spark occasionally. The new pantographs allow for a much better constant connection and stop them from becoming disconnected constantly. I don't know how it would work for a bus as I know one of the benefits of overhead wire buses was that they could shift around traffic.

[ScreamingViking]

The trolley buses were very quiet though. I do recall them occasionally being "stalled" when they lost their connection to the overhead wires.

Pick your nuisance I guess. The LRT haters will have several from which to choose.

[SteelTown]

There's an old HSR trolley post that still exist, it's near Victoria Park. I think I have a picture of it.

[SteelTown]

Found it! https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2608...7i13312!8i6656

[LikeHamilton]

The trolley buses did not ever run that far west. They turned at McNab.

[ScreamingViking]

Maybe it's from the streetcar network?

I only recall the electrified trolley buses on the King and Barton routes, but they ran on Cannon as well. Here's a map of the routes in 1959 from http://www.trainweb.org/hamtransithist/Trolleys.html (the image from the site won't post for some reason). I recall them being routed down MacNab through the transit terminal there, and also out to Eastgate. The Barton route ran out near Grays Rd.

http://www.trainweb.org/hamtransithi...es/HSR779a.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/hamtransithi...es/HSR7815.jpg

[LikeHamilton]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Found it! https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2608...7i13312!8i6656

After looking at the picture, I think this is an old sign post for either the left of right building. It looks like it is on private property. Any street car or trolley line would be on public property and they would be using a hydro pole close to the curb.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by LikeHamilton

After looking at the picture, I think this is an old sign post for either the left of right building. It looks like it is on private property. Any street car or trolley line would be on public property and they would be using a hydro pole close to the curb.

I think you're right, but back in the day they kind of just threw things wherever. Nowadays you have all these old hydro and telephone poles in people's backyards, that would never be placed there today but were back in the day.

We have a laundry line that goes to a pole in our neighbours backyard. I think in the old days people were a little less protective of their personal land for uses of social good.