HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2007, 3:37 AM
the dude the dude is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,812
nothing surprises me about portland. i'd be happy with a fraction of the TOD they've enjoyed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2007, 11:33 PM
miketoronto miketoronto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,978
The funny thing though is that transit is much more popular in Hamilton then Portland. So if Hamilton even did some of these plans, their ridership would probably skyrocket, since residents already use the transit that is there.

Portland is a great city for trying to change from auto-centric to a more sustainable form. But transit use there is still very low. So Hamilton basically has a head start.
__________________
Miketoronto
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2007, 2:58 AM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Mike...you're so right about the transit in Gore. I hung out in the park today watching all the people...on both sides of King most pedestrians were there for buses.
I think the buses should be moved off the south leg, but the north leg should go two-way and the black iron fence removed from the Gore so that people can board an eastbound bus from the north side of the park and a westbound bus from the north side of King.
Still keeping all the pedestrians there, but allowing more patios on the south side.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2007, 1:10 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
a great article from Houston, TX...that's right. Sprawled out, oil addicted southern US.

If light rail can work there, it MOST certainly will work here:

http://www.hamiltonlightrail.com/art...ort_coalition/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2007, 1:44 PM
miketoronto miketoronto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,978
I was just reading a report last night(I will try to dig it up again), but it said that in Hamilton, double the amount of residents with higher education(college and university) take transit to work compared to residents with only high-school education. So basically the less educated you are, the more you drive. Interesting stat I thought.
It also said that the portion of Hamilton's population with no higher education drive more then the national average.

Current transit use in Hamilton for work trips is 8%. That is metropolitan wide, so I am sure it is higher in the core city. Just for reference, current transit use in Metro Portland for work trips is 6%. And for Hamilton's runner up, Winnipeg which is not that much larger then Hamilton, the % of of people who take transit to work is 20%. And just for fun, 15% of Mississauga residents take transit to work.
__________________
Miketoronto
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 12:53 AM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,880
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 1:26 AM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
where'd you get that map??
The mountain 'commercial node' line would make more sense using Mohawk Rd instead of Stonechurch...Stonechurch has nothing on it along it's entire length. Mohawk is higher density and lots of commercial.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 3:37 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,880
It came from Hamilton's presentation to the GTTA, which was very recent and still there pushing for a VIA Station at James St. The city predicts 10% of cars will be off the streets by 2011 and 16% by 2021 to 2031.

Current Modal Share
• single occupancy vehicle trips = 68%
• municipal transit = 5%
• walking or cycling = 6%

Near-Term (2011) Modal Share
• single occupancy vehicle trips = 58%
• municipal transit = 9%
• walking or cycling = 10%
• Annual Transit Rides per Capita (excluding GO Transit) = 60

Long-Term (2021 to 2031) Modal Share
• single occupancy vehicle trips = 52%
• municipal transit = 12%
• walking or cycling = 15%
• Annual Transit Rides per Capita (excluding GO Transit) = 80 - 100
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 3:58 PM
the dude the dude is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,812
i bet the % of cars taken off the street in the near future will be even greater than they predict. those are very conservative estimates.

mohawk has great potential as a transit corridor. lots of room for transit lanes and general intensification/infill. streetcars would do wonders for it. anyone have an extra $200M lying around? i'll check my sock drawer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 5:26 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
we HAD an extra 500million laying around....spent it all on Red Hill/Linc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 5:42 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,880
It isn't our money, it's the banks money. Now we're paying for the interest for the next 10 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2007, 6:18 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
some more great info from Portland:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=140483

When will Hamilton get it?? this type of private investment can only come when we choose specific and proper public investments in urban infrastructure. Suburbanites can call it subsidies or whatever they want (as opposed to their new highways) but the fact is, Hamilton will NEVER see 1.5 billion downtown until we get our heads out of our backside and quit listening to all these deadbeat skags from the 50's and 60's who ruined a bunch of our city then and continue to weild too much power and influence as they ruin more of our city today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2007, 2:10 PM
markbarbera markbarbera is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,050
Just back from a trip to UK and Ireland. Iwas really impressed by LRT in Manchester and Dublin. The Dublin Luas in particular could easily be used as a model on what LRT in Hamilton could be like. I was amazed at how easily it coexisted with road traffic, how quickly it worked its way through the city, and, most importantly, how heavily it was used. I rode it at both peak and non-peak times, and the ridership was obviously high at both times. The system has 80,000 riders daily, with 26 million passengers in 2006. I particularly noticed how adaptive it was to handle volume of ridership. It looks to handle up to four articulated carriages. It also happens to be a really cool-looking LRT.

Check out their website: www.luas.ie

BTW, Luas is an Irish word which translates loosely in English as "speed"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2007, 2:32 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
very cool....yep, Hamilton could have one of these. We all need to keep riding our council and mayor in order to get them to make the right decision. the money is there, but so far, the will is not (of course, it's not a road).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2007, 9:16 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
more light rail news:


Starter Route in Kansas City Could Inspire a Regional Light-Rail System
In almost every major metro area that builds a downtown light rail line, suburban commuters get interested and the city ends up with a regional system.
By Brad Cooper, Last Updated Sunday, November 04, 2007

(Originally published in the Kansas City Star on November 3, 2007.)

Open your mind to the seemingly impossible

Kansas City builds a hip new light-rail line. Suburban commuters wonder: How can we get that?

Suburban leaders, long unconvinced that light rail is worth the cost, get interested. And Kansas City ends up with a regional system.

It could happen — it has in almost every other major metro area.

Other cities have proven over and over that once an area gets a taste of the transit high life, there's no stopping it.

Building a starter line "would inspire people and make them feel that this is something that can happen," said Lee's Summit Mayor Karen Messerli.

Last week, based on a consensus found in four months of interviews, The Kansas City Star offered a proposal for how a starter line could be built soon with local funding.

This week, the newspaper examines a number of ideas for how a starter line might grow into a regional system.

Possible routes include following State Avenue in Kansas City, Kan., along Interstate 35 into Johnson County and tracking Interstate 70 into eastern Jackson County.

None of these various expansions, based on interviews and transit studies, is favored by everyone or is certain to be built.

And many key factors will need to be decided in years to come, especially funding. Paying for such a massive system is costly and complex, especially because regional funding can so far only be approved on the Missouri side of the metro area.

Rail lines could end up being commuter trains driven by locomotives running long distances, electric streetcars running short distances, high-speed light rail — or a combination of all three.

Unlike the consensus that is building behind a starter route in Kansas City, little agreement has formed yet on a regional system, and many Kansas suburban leaders think light rail may simply cost too much.

But a starter line of some sort in Kansas City seems more certain all the time. City Hall is trying to decide how to tackle an effort to repeal the Clay Chastain plan that voters approved last year, while a citizens task force is expected to propose a replacement plan this week.

And some leaders are already looking ahead to a regional system.

Since taking office earlier this year, Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhouser has been working mayors on both sides of the state line, trying to woo them to the benefits of regional light rail.

So vital is the issue to the area economy, Funkhouser recently told an audience, that he has practically bet his political career on moving the region toward light rail.

Mariner Kemper, chairman of UMB Financial Corp., has seen how light rail works and can grow in Denver, where he is based.

"It's an important infrastructure item for the region as it continues to grow," Kemper said. "Having light rail will become very, very important."

Obstacles

For sure, there will be difficulties, and even optimists think it will be at least 20 years before the region sees a built-out light-rail system.

For example, there are a number of ways rail could branch out from a Kansas City starter line, but many of them pose challenges, including a spread-out employment base that's not easy to reach with one route.

"I don't think we have any corridors that are no-brainers," said Mell Henderson, director of transportation for the Mid-America Regional Council, which is now updating the region's official transit plan to account for rail and other ongoing projects.

"Any corridor we consider, there is work to be done," Henderson said. In fact, low density — the number of residents concentrated in one area — is the single biggest reason transit planners and elected leaders say rail won't work in the region right now.

They say there's just not enough of the type of development that mixes residential living with retail and offices that will create riders for a suburban rail system.

"We just don't have that type of housing out here," said Olathe Mayor Mike Copeland. "People pay a lot of money to own ground. They like their yards."

But cities are starting to move toward the kind of plans that can support light rail.

Mission has approved new laws for encouraging higher-density development and it's working to redevelop the old Mission Center Mall site into something geared for serving transit.

Overland Park is working on a plan to encourage higher population densities on Metcalf Avenue that would be coupled with a rapid bus route similar to the MAX line in Kansas City.

Meanwhile, Blue Springs has developed a downtown master plan that includes a transit village for residents who walk or frequently use public transit.

Charlotte, N.C., is cited as an example of how this area might increase density and expand rail into the future.

There, planners identified five highway corridors radiating from the central city. Along those routes, the city required developers to pack more residences, offices and retail onto land near proposed rail stations. Between those corridors, in the wedges, there was room for your more typical suburban development.

In Dallas, light rail actually created density, said Doug Allen, the chief planner for Dallas Area Rapid Transit. Dallas started with a 20-mile line in the mid-1990s. By 2013, it will cover 90 miles.

"I wouldn't get up hung on, 'Boy, this is what our urban form is now,' " Allen said. "One of the reasons you do a rail system … is to increase density."

Local politics

Building a regional system will require leaders on both sides of the state line to decide that light rail is important. So far, Missouri leaders seem far more receptive.

"I think it is an idea whose time is coming," said Independence Mayor Don Reimal. "People are thinking about it and are trying to make it work."

It helps that they already have one head start. The Missouri General Assembly has given Jackson, Clay, Platte, Cass, Ray and Buchanan counties the ability to raise up to a half-cent sales tax to pay for transit with a public vote.

A similar measure was killed in the Kansas Legislature in 2006, partly out of fear the Kansas tax money would fund Missouri transit.

For Missouri, it might pay off to move ahead as it tries to gain a competitive edge on its Kansas counterparts.

"Absolutely," said Mark Huffer, general manger of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority, the lead planning agency on light rail.

"We have two states competing against each other for jobs, even offering incentives to move jobs a matter of blocks. Light rail is going to be part of that."

Johnson County leaders don't flatly dismiss rail but talk more in terms of improving transit in general and building what's the most cost-effective.

They say that polling shows that residents want rail on I-35, but say that same data show a reluctance to support something so costly.

Johnson County Commission Chairwoman Annabeth Surbaugh says she supports light rail if Johnson County residents want to pay for it.

"I want a public transportation system," she said. "It doesn't have to be light rail."

That's the view of some other Johnson County leaders as well, especially if they can build a jazzed-up bus line that looks like light rail but runs at a fraction of the cost.

"Cost-effective isn't saying no transit," said Overland Park Mayor Carl Gerlach. "But it's not jumping onto something that's popular."

David Warm, the executive director at MARC, said he just doesn't sense that rail is a priority for Johnson County right now as county officials grapple with several needs, including new jail facilities.

"I just think that a decision to invest a lot of tax capacity in rail in Johnson County is an idea that's just not yet ripe," he said.

Over in Wyandotte County, however, rail is gaining prominence, said Unified Government Mayor Joe Reardon.

The Unified Government is already looking at a rapid bus line similar to the MAX on State Avenue, and some residents have suggested light rail on State.

Wyandotte County needs to be open to light rail, Reardon said. "Ultimately, light rail can fit into the transit plan for our community," he said.

Many suburban leaders think that if light rail is to grow, it will have to succeed in Kansas City. Get people excited about rail, and it's bound to spread.

Said Tedrick Housh, a Johnson County civic leader and a member of the Regional Transit Alliance: "I think a key to this in a nutshell is building small successes one at a time."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2007, 12:39 AM
markbarbera markbarbera is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,050
Another thing about Dublin's Luas. Its ridership far exceeds expectations. And it is a profitable system. It made nearly 1 million Euro last year (planners projected it to run a 2.5mil deficit for that year).

Yet another example of how the demand for LRT is grossly underestimated.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2007, 1:48 AM
matt602's Avatar
matt602 matt602 is offline
Hammer'd
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamilton, ON
Posts: 4,755
Well personally, when I make a visit to Toronto, I always prefer to trundle along downtown in a steetcar instead of a bus. It's quieter, more comfortable and more aesthetically pleasing. As well, nearly EVERY neighbourhood any of the streetcar lines passes through is well developed and bustling with activity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2007, 2:52 AM
Jon Dalton's Avatar
Jon Dalton Jon Dalton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,778
re: Toronto streetcars: Oh man, I am so looking forward to the St. Clair LRT when it's completed. I'll be taking it instead of the Bloor subway and saving time by using LRT plus a short walk vs. the subway plus one bus (and a long wait). Riding the streetcar I'll see the shops along the way and stop for food if need be. Some business owners along St. Clair are angry about this project, in fact I think the BIA was against it, but lets see what happens in the long run. Probably, much like the Spadina ROW, it will brighten up the whole stretch. This could be yet another example for Hamilton.
__________________
360º of Hamilton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2007, 4:29 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,880
New law requires DARTS to match HSR hours, fares
The Hamilton Spectator
Users of Hamilton’s Disabled and Aged Regional Transit System (DARTS) can look forward to the same service hours and unlimited-ride passes as Hamilton Street Railway bus passengers enjoy, starting in 2009.

DARTS service now ends at 11:30 p.m., but buses run until 2:30 a.m., and DARTS doesn’t sell passes, so users must pay per ride.

Transit director Don Hull told city council’s public works committee this week he agrees with the changes required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, but thinks the province should pay the estimated $1.1 million a year in extra costs resulting from the law.

“Regulations are being forced on the municipality without associated funding,” he complained, predicting that with the advent of DARTS passes, “demand would escalate quite dramatically.”

Fare parity is forecast to add $200,000 a year, and extending DARTS hours $600,000.

The committee voted to ask the province to take over DARTS or pay more of the costs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2007, 9:04 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,421
hoping to get some of these shirts printed up this weekend:
http://hammerboard.ca/viewtopic.php?t=85
__________________
no clever signoff.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:10 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.