HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:00 AM
FairHamilton FairHamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
The city is working on a new rapid transit system that it hopes will pull upwards of 20 per cent of cars off the road over the next few decades.
My guess is the cost of fuel will do that more than the development of any transit option. Once gas hit's 1.50/ltr - 1.75/ltr we'll see some adjustment to peoples driving patterns.

I think we'll see 1.30/ltr - 1.35/ltr before the end of 2008 (perhaps as soon as this summer), and that means we'll be getting closer.
__________________
The jobs, stupid!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:03 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, ON
Posts: 2,386
I'm worried about something kinda unrelated.

A recession. I have a feeling that it is going to be BIG, like big big big, almost comparable to the 1930s. If that happens, we'll be once again, focusing on paying out welfare cheques to even more unemployed people in Hamilton. That money will be gone, and I doubt transit will be a priority to Hamiltonians if alot of ppl don't even have a job.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:09 AM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18,618
If 1930s happened again, which I doubt it (especially not this year), transit funding will have a better chance of happening. Government projects create jobs.

There are countless of projects that happened in Hamilton during the 1930s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:22 AM
JT Jacobs JT Jacobs is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by FairHamilton View Post
My guess is the cost of fuel will do that more than the development of any transit option. Once gas hit's 1.50/ltr - 1.75/ltr we'll see some adjustment to peoples driving patterns.

I think we'll see 1.30/ltr - 1.35/ltr before the end of 2008 (perhaps as soon as this summer), and that means we'll be getting closer.
It's $1.26 right now in Kelowna, so your projection of 1.30, to my mind, isn't all that far off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:28 AM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
If 1930s happened again, which I doubt it (especially not this year), transit funding will have a better chance of happening. Government projects create jobs.

There are countless of projects that happened in Hamilton during the 1930s.
yup...some of Hamilton's best landmarks were built in that era - LIUNA Station, Pigott building and High Level Bridge.

We'll be making this decision in the next few months so I don't think a 1930 will happen that quickly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:29 AM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Jacobs View Post
It's $1.26 right now in Kelowna, so your projection of 1.30, to my mind, isn't all that far off.
Bring on LRT and bring on $2.00 a litre baby!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 4:02 AM
HAMRetrofit's Avatar
HAMRetrofit HAMRetrofit is offline
Pro Urban Degenerate
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto-Hamilton Mega Region
Posts: 839
Lobby the steel and concrete manufacturers for support. With the construction economy this stands to generate, they will be the primary benefactors. The way to get most of Hamilton on board is to talk about the construction market the system will generate.

The St. Clair streetcar line in Toronto has already generated millions in new construction and it is only part finished.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 5:00 AM
RePinion's Avatar
RePinion RePinion is offline
Bobo in Purgatory
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London (Islington), UK
Posts: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisethehammer View Post
yup...some of Hamilton's best landmarks were built in that era - LIUNA Station, Pigott building and High Level Bridge.

We'll be making this decision in the next few months so I don't think a 1930 will happen that quickly.
Neither the Pigott nor the high level bridge were depression era make-work projects. Both were conceived and initiated during the 1920s, well before the reality of the stock market collapse hit home.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 5:48 AM
hamiltonguy hamiltonguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by RePinion View Post
Neither the Pigott nor the high level bridge were depression era make-work projects. Both were conceived and initiated during the 1920s, well before the reality of the stock market collapse hit home.
But they missed the TH&B grade separation...
__________________
My Blog:

http://forwardhamilton.blogspot.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 6:57 AM
beanmedic's Avatar
beanmedic beanmedic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
I'm worried about something kinda unrelated.

A recession. I have a feeling that it is going to be BIG, like big big big, almost comparable to the 1930s. If that happens, we'll be once again, focusing on paying out welfare cheques to even more unemployed people in Hamilton. That money will be gone, and I doubt transit will be a priority to Hamiltonians if alot of ppl don't even have a job.
It is sure to happen if people keep saying things like that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 1:32 PM
Jon Dalton's Avatar
Jon Dalton Jon Dalton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,734
I have some issues with the report. First, they claim "LRT vehicles can carry approximately double the amount of passengers that BRT vehicles can." This in conjunction with their operating cost estimates of $80 and $175 per vehicle hour, puts LRT costs per passenger mile slightly higher than BRT.

I trust that in further analysis they will also consider rising fuel prices vs. electricity prices and the longevity of electric rail vehicles vs. diesel buses. Also multi-vehicle LRT's carrying 3 or 4 times as many passengers as an articulated bus are quite common and realize greater efficiency due to mechanical coupling and still only requiring one operator.

The report also states that while the James Mountain Rd. acces is a 10.7% maximum grade, an LRT tunnel up the escarpment would need to be limited to 5%. There are LRT vehicles that handle well over 5% grade, for example the system in Sheffield, England has a maximum grade of 10%. During one severe winter storm, traffic was halted throughout the city but the LRT kept running up and down those hills.
__________________
360º of Hamilton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 1:46 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
yes, you can tell that they added the 'research' on LRT at the last minute and didn't really do much research.
that's fine though...this is just opening up the conversation...now is where we come in to play and help educate them on proper numbers, other alternatives, EcDev spinoffs, operating costs etc.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 2:24 PM
FairHamilton FairHamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Jacobs View Post
It's $1.26 right now in Kelowna, so your projection of 1.30, to my mind, isn't all that far off.
Yeah, that's pretty close to my prediction price.

But, right now in Southern Ontario it's 1.11 - 1.12/ltr, so we still need a 16% - 21% increase to hit the $1.30 - 1.35/ltr range. I think that could be a reality in Southern Ontario in the next few months.

All it would take is one or two things to happen, i.e. Hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico, heightened Nigerian unrest, renewed Chavez rhetoric, etc.
__________________
The jobs, stupid!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 2:47 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
Cause A-Line goes along James to James Mountain Access. Unless you want A-Line to turn on Main from James and up along Wellington.
Well, the A line doesn't go anywhere right now. They have the power to plan it wherever it makes the most sense. So my answer is, yes, I'd like to see it take main over and access claremont. Actually, that might be cool because b line can be on king, a line on main (or b line on main and a-line uses king to get over to utilize calremont) -- then both major through streets benefit from LRT going through the core!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Millstone View Post
The bridges have historic value, I kinda like them.
Me too :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
My predicition is that council will support two phases for the East-West corridor. First LRT line from McMaster to Downtown. Then Downtown to Eastgate. BRT for A-Line.
My main worry is that this report really paints LT as an economic loser which is entirely inaccurate. It may be too expensive for the A line, I'll concede to that. But by lumping them together under one budget amount as an "all or nothing", they are setting us up for status quo as usual!

They should have put in numbers for a third option... LRT for B, BRT for A and that oculd be the intro of lrt into hamilton. and once it blows main street ec dev through the roof, then the case for conversion of a-line is that much stronger.

i'm glad they are mentioning lrt, but in all i think this report is brt-centric and kind of lame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raisethehammer View Post
It's time for letters to the editor people. you know the car-addicts will be out in full force like they have been lately with the one-way stuff.
Keep pumping EcDev numbers and stats....nobody can argue that stuff. And it's exactly what the Hammer needs.
Agreed! i'm going to be writing some doozies!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:02 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by coalminecanary View Post
Well, the A line doesn't go anywhere right now. They have the power to plan it wherever it makes the most sense. So my answer is, yes, I'd like to see it take main over and access claremont. Actually, that might be cool because b line can be on king, a line on main (or b line on main and a-line uses king to get over to utilize calremont) -- then both major through streets benefit from LRT going through the core!
Yea it would be a lot cheaper if A-Line turned on Main from James and link up with B-Line rail lines along Main Street then exit out making a right turn to Wellington from Main.

Coming down Wellington, heading North, and turn left on King to again link up with B-Line rail line along King and turn right on James from King.

Doing that you'll save a lot of money and share parts of the B-Line rail line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:22 PM
HAMRetrofit's Avatar
HAMRetrofit HAMRetrofit is offline
Pro Urban Degenerate
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto-Hamilton Mega Region
Posts: 839
Another possible routing of the A-line North

The A-line would start at the Bayfront GO station. It would run south along Hughson St. where vehicle traffic can be reduced or eliminated. It would connect to the Downtown GO station. From there it would head east along Hunter with reduced or eliminated vehicle traffic. It would connect directly to the Claremount Access. The space necessary to accommodate LRT on the west side of the access would be converted for LRT use. The east side of Clairmount would be for vehicles with a barrier between. The LRT would continue up the escarpment using the Claremont Access Rd. to West 5th St. The LRT would travel south to Fennel with a terminal at Mohawk. It then would head east along Fennel and turn heading south onto Upper James.

EDITED.

Last edited by HAMRetrofit; Apr 11, 2008 at 3:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:30 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18,618
I know your from Toronto but your North is different from our North, other side of the Lake. North for Hamilton is going towards the waterfront.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 3:33 PM
markbarbera markbarbera is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,048
The cost of LRT would be greatly reduced if it was bidirectional on the same route. Construction of the B-line along one-way streets would have a total cost of about $420 million, while a two-way route would cost $350 million. I really think the east-west line should run two-way on Main.

As far as the A-line goes, I would love to see it LRT as well. Tunnelling is way too cost prohibitive. I'd prefer a route that I have suggested in other threads (and mentioned recently here) where it uses the Claremont to cross the escarpment. Ideally, I would like to see that line come down from the airport via Claremont then join the B-line track to run to the city centre and continue west along the B-line track to McMaster terminal.

I would also suggest another line (hey, let's dream big!) that could run along James heading north from Charlton to Barton, then continue east along Barton to Centennial, then north along Centennial to link up with the Eastgate Terminal. This would be a terrific boost for the whole Barton Street stretch, and could act as a quick connect between the GO train stations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 4:49 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
perhaps the A-Line could come up James and go east on Charlton with a stop in front of St. Joes. Another stop at Ferguson and then have it curve onto the Claremont Access into an LRT-only lane. It could take that vastly empty rampway that leads to West 5th (perhaps that could be closed to transit and emerg vehicles only instead of James Mtn. Road) off the Claremont and then voila - right to the college, along Fennell to James and up to the airport. I would love it if we could get LRT on both lines...the tunnels and James Mtn Rd ideas seem to costly. This routing would be beneficial to the businesses/residents along James South, Corktown and Durand and would add one more stop in the heart of Corktown at Ferguson.
Hunter is too close to King/Main to run another rail line...Charlton would be great servicing the high density neighbourhoods along the base of the escarpment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2008, 7:01 AM
the dude the dude is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,812
i've tweaked a map i posted a few months ago. i've got lrt routes on barton, main, james north, james south/charlton to MIP, mohawk, claremont/upper james and i've thrown in a route from the th&b to the east moutain using an old radial line. not necessary but it's fun to think about just the same. there are a million different ways to lay out our routes but at the very least i think it's a nice visual.

Last edited by the dude; Apr 12, 2008 at 9:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:14 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.