The future of Hamilton's public transit - Page 75

coalminecanary · #**1481** Posted **Apr 5, 2010, 2:47 PM**

My 2 cents on my favourite 2 options:

1. just use claremont. It is gently sloped, unbelievably wide, and horribly underused.

and/or

2. a terminal at st. joe's (LRT), and a terminal at southam park (old mountain view hotel site/incline railway site) for upper james buses - or eventually upper james LRT, with terminals linked by a transit-grade aerial tramway (gondola):
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?oe=UT...e52da3fd691839

Bureaucromancer · #**1482** Posted **Apr 5, 2010, 3:15 PM**

The other option I've considered, and sort of like is going to BRT for the mountain line. Dig a tunnel substantially along the lines of the direct line that the ICTS proposal used, with dual mode trolley buses for the tunnel, downtown and possibly some portion on the mountain.

The mountain seems like an appropriate application for BRT, with basically a short section of busway bypassing the existing mountain routes being a substantial boost to local services all across the mountain. Rapid bus style improvements on James, Fennel and/or Mohawk would seem to be enough for the rest of network to operate well, without the expense of a full rail right of way. Trolleys, meanwhile, would be perfect for the kind of heavy grade you would have in a tunnel straight up the mountain, and if the wires are extended downtown and out James (I'd suggest wires on James from LIUNA to Mohawk and then across to Lime Ridge) would get you the same environmental advantages as rail, and modern dual mode doesn't require manual rewiring, so through service is actually practical.

It also gets conveniently around the fact that all the discussion to this point have been for a line to the airport, which is just not going to fly (no pun intended) as a rail line but would be badly compromised by a forced transfer somewhere on the Upper James if a shorter rail line was built.

Assuming some kind of guidance is used in the tunnel (probably not a huge expense once dual mode vehicles are assumed) the tunnel could even be built to dimensions closer to a rail than conventional road tunnel. It certainly wouldn't do anything to compromise a future rail conversion (assuming the grades are kept within reason, which they really should be even for buses), but would be much cheaper in capital terms, and actually works from a service perspective (i.e. it's not a clear example of BRT being poor man's rail given the network structure).

coalminecanary · #**1483** Posted **Apr 5, 2010, 4:34 PM**

I just don't understand the tunnel case. It is completely unnecessary - especially considering the underused capacity at claremont:
http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=UTF-8...01794&t=k&z=19

Bureaucromancer · #**1484** Posted **Apr 5, 2010, 4:53 PM**

To me the problem with Claremont is that the north end just doesn't go anywhere. The best case scenario for routing I can see is with LRT, in which case it could turn onto whichever of King or Main ends up being used for the B-Line, and presumably turn north again at James since it really does have to connect the new GO station (which by all indications will a the same location as LIUNA, even if we don't get the building back) to downtown, and the existing station.

My feeling is that the the benefits of a tunnel route are such that if we go BRT they should probably just eat the cost (I'd suggest funding it by limiting ROW construction elsewhere, instead emphasizing dedicated and HOV lanes), while if we go LRT James Mountain makes more sense. At least James Mountain has a shorter detour, and one that includes a significant trip generator (Mohawk College).

Jon Dalton · #**1485** Posted **Apr 5, 2010, 8:20 PM**

I don't think the Claremont route would fly because it would add too many non-revenue miles. It would bypass alot of ridership while making the whole trip longer. Probably cheaper in the long run to build the tunnel.

SteelTown · #**1486** Posted **Apr 5, 2010, 9:14 PM**

I dunno why they just don't copy the 1981 plan for the mountain access for either BRT or LRT...

Have it elevated and go ground level once at James St and St Joseph's Drive.

Bureaucromancer · #**1487** Posted **Apr 6, 2010, 12:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I dunno why they just don't copy the 1981 plan for the mountain access for either BRT or LRT...

Have it elevated and go ground level once at James St and St Joseph's Drive.

Exactly my suggestion for BRT, with the addition that you electrify the buses in the tunnel and build the tunnel itself, implementing other private ROWs over time as and where needed, rather than as a one off complete rapid transit line.

coalminecanary · #**1488** Posted **Apr 6, 2010, 2:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

I don't think the Claremont route would fly because it would add too many non-revenue miles. It would bypass alot of ridership while making the whole trip longer. Probably cheaper in the long run to build the tunnel.

I think that's an exaggeration. The only major ridership hub it would bypass would be st joe's (which is easily walkable from the hunter station), and it would connect the communities around hunter/victoria to the downtown a little better. It's just a slight eastern detour. The stretch that actually climbs is non-revenue no matter which method is used to mount the escarpment...

miketoronto · #**1489** Posted **Apr 14, 2010, 4:19 PM**

I know this may sound bad to say a route should be cancelled.

But do you guys think the route 7 Locke bus should be cancelled?

Everytime I visit Hamilton, and ride that bus to get to the restaurants on Locke, it is always empty. Even when I was on it yesterday during rush hour, there was four people on the bus. Sitting in the restaurant, every number 7 bus that went by had one person on them. When we got on the 7 after dinner, it again only had one person on it.

If the number 7 was taken out of service, all residents in the area would still be within a 500 meter walk of a bus stop, which is the basic standard most Canadian transit systems use when planning routes.

By removing the number 7, the bus allocated to the interlined 6-7-8 service, could be allocated to provide more frequent service on the number 6 route, along Aberdeen.
Then residents could either walk to Main, and board frequent services, or Aberdeen and board a more frequent service. Or even board north south buses on Queen/Hess.

Service during off peak hours could be improved to a bus every 15 minutes on Aberdeen instead of every 30 minutes. I suspect that at the moment many bus riders in the area do just walk to Main Street to get a bus, as we noticed a number of people doing that. So if the 7 is going empty, and there are better options there, why keep it running?

What do you guys think?

SteelTown · #**1490** Posted **May 17, 2010, 10:56 PM**

Presto will roll out for HSR fall of 2011.

mishap · #**1491** Posted **May 18, 2010, 6:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Presto will roll out for HSR fall of 2011.

Where'd you hear that? Every indication has been that it'll be this fall. The HSR says this. Presto says this. They've even started installing the readers in buses.

SteelTown · #**1492** Posted **May 18, 2010, 11:40 AM**

Perhaps it was just a typo from the Toronto Star.

mishap · #**1493** Posted **May 18, 2010, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Perhaps it was just a typo from the Toronto Star.

Oh, thank goodness. I was afraid that was the "major announcement" from Metrolinx we were warned about.

matt602 · #**1494** Posted **May 18, 2010, 9:49 PM**

Definitely a typo. Presto's site says Hamilton is getting it in Winter 2010/2011. The HSR site says "Coming in 2010".

https://www.prestocard.ca/StaticContent/Faq#Q4

Winter 2011:

* • Durham Region Transit
* • York Region Transit
* • Hamilton Street Railway
* • GO Transit's Stouffville GO Rail line and GO Bus routes

Burlington Transit already has the equipment. Not sure if it's fully functional but the readers print their transfers. I'm wondering if the Presto machine will do the same for HSR or if the HSR will opt for a separate machine to do it.

mishap · #**1495** Posted **May 19, 2010, 8:13 AM**

But not according to this page:

https://www.prestocard.ca/StaticContent/Gtafs

Fall 2010. And I would believe that because the HSR is telling people it's coming this fall. At least, that's the plan. And if they had planned on winter, they wouldn't be installing the machines right now.

So two different dates on the same website. And the Star probably got their date from somewhere. I'm a little leery as to how on the ball the Presto team is. Even the information in the "how-it-works" videos is not how I originally heard the system would function.

matt602 · #**1496** Posted **May 19, 2010, 11:05 AM**

Well then, thats confusing. I'll trust the info from you though.

LikeHamilton · #**1497** Posted **May 31, 2010, 6:05 PM**

Smart transit card coming to Hamilton

TheSpec.com

PRESTO is coming to Hamilton.

The tap and go smartcard fare card will be available in the city June 7.

GO Transit staff are on hand at the Hamilton station during rush hours this week during rush hour to explain the use and benefits of the cards.

The card allows riders to travel on and between different transit systems and pay the correct fare by tapping their pre-loaded card on a reader. Hamilton’s buses will join the system next winter.

Riders will be able to load dollar value onto their card and tap on the green readers at stations and on buses to have the correct fare deducted on each leg of their trip, including their municipal bus, GO Transit and 12 Toronto Transit Commission stations most GO commuters use.

The Ontario government has a 10-year, $250 million contract with Accenture, until 2016, for the design, build and operation of the Presto system.

Unlike current monthly passes, Presto cards must be tapped on a reader before riders board, but they can be replaced if they’re reported lost or stolen and they allow the user to board and exit anywhere on the system, so riders don’t have to buy a separate ticket if they’re not going to their usual stop.

Once Hamilton is aboard, the cards can be used on the Lakeshore west corridor from Hamilton to Long Branch; on all Burlington and Oakville Transit buses; TTC stations at Bloor, College, Dundas, Queen’s Park, St. George and St. Patrick. Mimico and Exhibition will be added in July.

markbarbera · #**1498** Posted **May 31, 2010, 6:15 PM**

Unfortunately it is available on June 7 for GO Transit only and not for HSR. I always get the monthly GO Pass with the HSR add-on, and it would be more expensive for me to move to Presto as it stands today (by the tune of about $50 a month!). Hopefully once Presto is on the HSR system it will be economically advantageous to use it, but the way it stands now I am better off staying old school with my transit pass. Quite the disappointment.

thistleclub · #**1499** Posted **May 31, 2010, 7:09 PM**

I've seen the readers on some buses but not as many as you'd think given an intended June 7 roll out... Halton put their units through a month or two of field testing before the early May launch.

c@taract_soulj@h · #**1500** Posted **Jun 13, 2010, 3:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I know this may sound bad to say a route should be cancelled.

But do you guys think the route 7 Locke bus should be cancelled?

Everytime I visit Hamilton, and ride that bus to get to the restaurants on Locke, it is always empty. Even when I was on it yesterday during rush hour, there was four people on the bus. Sitting in the restaurant, every number 7 bus that went by had one person on them. When we got on the 7 after dinner, it again only had one person on it.

If the number 7 was taken out of service, all residents in the area would still be within a 500 meter walk of a bus stop, which is the basic standard most Canadian transit systems use when planning routes.

By removing the number 7, the bus allocated to the interlined 6-7-8 service, could be allocated to provide more frequent service on the number 6 route, along Aberdeen.
Then residents could either walk to Main, and board frequent services, or Aberdeen and board a more frequent service. Or even board north south buses on Queen/Hess.

Service during off peak hours could be improved to a bus every 15 minutes on Aberdeen instead of every 30 minutes. I suspect that at the moment many bus riders in the area do just walk to Main Street to get a bus, as we noticed a number of people doing that. So if the 7 is going empty, and there are better options there, why keep it running?

What do you guys think?

I don't really ever see the Locke bus but it makes total sense to take away the route if there aren't too may people riding it. I wonder if the bus driver cranks the music on the empty ol' bus. I think if they do remove any route for that matter, they should place it somewhere else that's all. I haven't rode the HSR in quite awhile but I'm glad they have the Rymal and Waterdown routes in place.