LRT Effects on City and Stadium

And I don’t miss you in the least if you like Toronto and want to import that ugliness here

How is yur question even relevant to the discussion?

I already live within the "magic" 800m ditsance of the B-Line.

If LRT is all it's cracked up to be, and the investment is deemed to have a positive ROI, then you should have no problem getting any offers.

We aren't getting the LRT. The entire thread is irrelevant. The blowhards that want the damned thing don't have to live with the abomination. If it is so great just buy my house and you live with it and the increased taxes for no benefit that comes with it. I really don't believe you are interested in making an offer on ANY house along the route thats going to be severely impacted. I really really don't. The problem won't be if the anticipated benefits comes its what happen when they don't and the chances are thats what will really happen for the majority along the route. Make an offer upfront or if you want Toronto, move there and leave Hamilton alone

Maybe not

The entire thread is irrelevant.
Not to those of us that find it interesting.You can always ignore the thread it if you find it irelevant.
The problem won't be if the anticipated benefits comes its what happen when they don't and the chances are thats what will really happen for the majority along the route.
On what basis do you say that?

I'm keeping an open mind by trying to read about the plans, the history of other LRTs, the benefits.

It'll probably come down to cost, financing and ROI.

More studies are being done, and I'm waiting for them to learn more.

On what basis do you say it will happen. The same as me, experience and guesswork. I won't ignore those that are advocating the death of my city. I'll face them anywhere I find them

Capn:

       Why can't the HSR just run express double/linked buses with a dedicated lane along the LRT route with the same stops? 

Moving people does not mean billion dollar technology has to be used.

Yes some good points and you are right it will come down to financing and ROI. As someone that will never get to use it I think it's a waste of money, I would have to drive to it to use it. But I'm sure if you live along it or close to it you will support it. Some one said Upper James? I don't think so, it's a train not a bus, it wouldn't make it up the escarpement.

Are you sure?

They're planning the A-line to go form the waterfront to the airport and it can't go up the escarpment?

[i]Study identified specific areas for future considerations including the escarpment grade (A-line), impacts to lane widths, impacts to existing structures, impacts to parking/loading, pros/cons of both LRT and BRT and considerations specific to each corridor, including potential cross-sections.

The Study confirmed that both LRT and BRT are feasible to implement in Hamilton along both the B-Line and the A-line, provided engineering solutions are introduced to address constraints identified[/i]

[url=http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/5CF2BA30-6283-432B-9D97-0B3F27139D33/0/RTFSPhase1and2FactSheet.pdf]http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/5CF ... tSheet.pdf[/url]

No, you';re right. Nothing needs to be done, particularly if you're happy with the status quo of the older part of the city.

But...

Light rail beats buses hands down: planners
Economic benefits are incredible

[url=http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/250802--light-rail-beats-buses-hands-down-planners]http://www.thespec.com/news/local/artic ... n-planners[/url]

[i]Paul Bedford, a planning consultant and former chief planner for Toronto, says if the goal is to reshape a city economically and socially, light-rail beats buses hands down.

...snip...

Some critics of light rail say BRT done right brings all the benefits of LRT without the hefty cost. But city planners say buses won't turn the city around.

That's why the planning, design and engineering work on a future rapid transit corridor won't be looking at buses.

...snip...

Bedford, who sits on the Metrolinx board, was unequivocal in his support for LRT in Hamilton at the agency's public meeting in February. But no decisions or commitment were made.

"If there is one place outside of Toronto in this region that justifies light rail, it's Hamilton. It has all the elements of an urban place," he said. "In my view, (light rail) is the best thing that could ever happen to Hamilton ... If another 100,000 people were living downtown, it would be a fabulous place."

But he cautions an investment in LRT has to come with a decision to end one-way streets and put cars behind transit, pedestrians and cyclists on the urban pecking order.

Tax breaks and incentives have to be part of the mix, too.

"If you don't do land use and transit right together, you'll get a half-assed solution ... But there is no one magic bullet. You have to do a bunch of things together."

Cities such as Vancouver, Calgary, Denver and Portland are using rail transit as the foundation of urban renewal. Features include pedestrian-friendly streetscapes, a de-emphasis on parking and car traffic and high-density mixed-use development.

It's all about driving up density, bringing more residents and jobs into the central city and making transit the most attractive option.[/i]

Cap'n: Thanks for the quotes etc. I have read a lot about the LRT.
However some of the "benefits" seem very, very pie in the sky to me. "Another 100 thousand people living downtown..." ????
I would be very afraid that all those people who took the LRT would ALL be heading right back to where they lived each night. So where is the benefit?
Buses would cost a fraction of the LRT and could be in place very quickly....without a several year wait.
If I was living on the Mountain, I would be very unhappy about seeing all that tax money going for a hugely expensive transportation system that would be of no benefit to me at all.
But....I have never been accused of being a clairvoyant. So who knows. :slight_smile:

I still don't understand LRT for a city the size of Hamilton. I don't get it but hey, that's just me. Hamilton is just a slightly larger version of London, Ont and I got around fine in London on the buses there when I was a student and London hasn't grown dramtically since way back then, annexed other towns outside to inflate the population like Hamilton has but buses worked.

Could very well be pie-in-the-sky, but for me, it's too early in the process for such declarations.

Rather than pie-in-the-sky, the way I see it right now is that this is a massive investment, for the long term future. I don't think it's wise to look at what we have right now and say this works and that works. It may work for now, but what about the future. Shouldn't we plan for a better future if the opportunity exists?

Besides just transporting people. LRT is supposed to trigger massive change and development within the older part of the city. One thing I think we might agree on is that the status quo needs to change for a large part of the lower city (see code red reports)

We have to keep in mind that this is not a city plan. This is provincial, and the B-Line LRT has been deemed by the province to be a top 15 priority in the GTHA and they want to study it and put forth tons of money for this. This is good, no?

We also have to keep in mind that the metrolinx initiative is one of the largest infrastructure projects in the history of Canada in terms of money invested. Hamilton's $800m B-Line LRT is a fraction of the $17B the province is planning on investing in the GTHA with federal help.

With billions of dollars being planned to be spent on world class public transit that has the potetntial to transform our city and our province, should we not at least engage in the process, learn all we can learn and wait for the reports, planning, costs and benefits to come out before we make our judgments?

If this massive provincial plan can deliver what it is supposed to, isn't Hamilton's b-Line worth a mere 4.7% of that $17b investment?

I suppose if it's part of an overall provincial plan as part of a greater GTA then certainly it needs to be considered here.

MoveOntario 2020 is a 12-Year Building Plan That Will Deliver 52 Rapid Transit Initiatives In The GTA And Hamilton
The Ontario government is launching a multi-year $17.5 billion rapid transit action plan for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton that will deliver jobs and investment by reducing congestion

[url=http://www.news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2007/06/mcguinty-government-action-plan-for-rapid-transit-will-move-the-economy-forward.html]http://www.news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2007/ ... rward.html[/url]

And that $17b is just for planning up until 2020.

The plan is to spend a total of $50b over the next 25 years. From where that money is coming, I don't know.

They want to spend $7b on two lines right now. These are huge numbers, compared to the B-line's projected cost of $800m.

[i]Metrolinx is recommending two major rapid transit projects for immediate construction funding beginning in 2009/10.

As part of its 5-year, $7 billion Capital Plan, Metrolinx is proposing construction funding to achieve groundbreaking on the Sheppard East Light Rail Transit (LRT) and York Region’s VIVA rapid transit projects in 2009
[/i]

[url=http://www.metrolinx.com/mx/en/strategy/investmentstrategy.aspx]http://www.metrolinx.com/mx/en/strategy ... ategy.aspx[/url]

MoveOntario 2020 is a 12-Year Building Plan That Will Deliver 52 Rapid Transit Initiatives In The GTA And Hamilton
The Ontario government is launching a multi-year $17.5 billion rapid transit action plan for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton that will deliver jobs and investment by reducing congestion

[url=http://www.news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2007/06/mcguinty-government-action-plan-for-rapid-transit-will-move-the-economy-forward.html]http://www.news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2007/ ... rward.html[/url]

And that $17b is just for planning up until 2020.

The plan is to spend a total of $50b over the next 25 years. From where that money is coming, I don't know.

They want to spend $7b on two lines right now. These are huge numbers, compared to the B-line's projected cost of $800m.

[i]Metrolinx is recommending two major rapid transit projects for immediate construction funding beginning in 2009/10.

As part of its 5-year, $7 billion Capital Plan, Metrolinx is proposing construction funding to achieve groundbreaking on the Sheppard East Light Rail Transit (LRT) and York Region’s VIVA rapid transit projects in 2009
[/i]

[url=http://www.metrolinx.com/mx/en/strategy/investmentstrategy.aspx]http://www.metrolinx.com/mx/en/strategy ... ategy.aspx[/url]

Oh yeah, Earl, a huge plan! It's nice to see them refer to it as the GTHA.

Just persue the metrolinx website to get an idea of the massive scope.

Not only do they mention B-line (Eastgate to McMaster) and A-line (Upper James to waterfront) for Hamilton, they also talk about LRT for Mohawk Road in the next 16-25 years, and LRT for Rymal Rd and Centennial Parkway in 25 years.

Its never too early to declare pie in the sky Jimmy. I'd really appreciate it if you didn't corrupt the boards with this in the same overbearing fashion you did on the Rheem site. Let people voice their opinions without the neverending preaching and BS quotes over and over and over again. Some don't buy that no matter how many times you say it. Simply put there is no reason to believe there will be a net increase in employment from 20,000 to 100,000 in the core and no reason to believe that auto transportation won't be critically harmed cutting off lower east from lower west and cutting off lower central from everything

As the Mayor of Toronto said a while ago, why the war on cars? During the election campaign he said he wanted to get rid of the steet cars and just expand the subway undergroud. In Ottawa the plan is to build a tunnel under the city, to keep the LRT off the city streets. But still a lot of people are saying forget the LRT and just build the tunnel for busses under Ottawa.

We should be building more lanes on the highways and more highways.
Let's not forget that the most important industry in Ontario is the Automobile - as car sales go so does Hamilton. Steel is made in Hamilton for the Honda, Toyota, Ford, GM and Chrysler plants.
When I hear the Liberals and NDP telling us to give up our cars I get worried.
For many people the car is the only way to get to work. Thousands of commuters are sat in traffic jams heading towards the Toronto area from Hamilton, they aren't heading to downtown TO, but to jobs all around the GTA, including around the airport in Miss, and all them industries either side of the QEW, 403 and 401, you just can't get there by train or bus.

There is no war on cars.

There are plans to better the highways and roadways.

The problem is that car use is growing faster than the population and there simply are not, and will not be, enough roads to accomodate so many cars.

Alternatives are required. It’s ridiculous to think that the province is trying to eliminate cars.

[i]Population Growth

The GTHA will continue to be one of Canada’s fastest growing areas over the next few decades. Today, the population is just over six million people. By 2031, the population is estimated to grow to 8.6 million people, all of whom will need to move around. Clearly this growth will require a massive increase in transportation infrastructure; the issue is what form this infrastructure should take.

Increasing Reliance on Cars

The GTHA has become increasingly dependent on private automobiles for mobility. The number of car trips on the GTHA’s roads is increasing at a faster rate than that of the population: between 1986 and 2006 the number of trips made by automobile in the GTHA grew 56 per cent compared to a population increase of 45 per cent.[/i]

Cars are here to stay, the province knows that. That’s why they just spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the QEW HOV lanes and have widened QEW Niagara recently. War on cars? Sheesh!

[i]Years of Under-Investment

The GTHA transportation system has not kept pace with population growth. Construction of rapid transit, which averaged approximately 135 kilometres per decade from the 1960s to the 1980s, all but ground to a halt over the past two decades.

This lack of investment contrasts sharply with what is happening elsewhere in the world. In the United States, most large cities have invested heavily in rapid transit. Madrid, Spain ( only slightly smaller than the GTHA ) has built more rapid transit facilities during the past decade (88 km) than all of our subway and light rail lines (77 km) combined.

The roads, highways, subways, streetcars, buses and regional rail services in the GTHA are being pushed to their limits, and customers are suffering with crowding and poor reliability. The current system does not offer the traveller a high level of customer service or assurance that they can get where they need to go on time and comfortably.

Inefficient Use of the Existing Road and Highway System

Years of under-investment in infrastructure aside, we are not even using our existing transportation infrastructure as efficiently as we could be. The average car on the GTHA’s roads transports just under 1.2 people during the peak period, in essence, consuming a tremendous amount of energy and wasting significant amounts of road space to transport empty seats. At full capacity, a standard 40-foot bus is about 10 times as space-efficient as a typical North American car. Research also suggests that a significant percentage of trucks circulate empty or not fully loaded. Unlike what is the case with almost every other scarce resource, road users receive little information and few price signals that would help them optimize their use. As a result, demand often exceeds supply, even when supply is expanded.

The costs associated with building roads, highways and transit are considerable and the financial resources available to build them are limited. It is in everyone’s best interests that we ensure we are using our existing infrastructure as efficiently as possible, while at the same time we invest in more.[/i]

[url=http://www.metrolinx.com/mx/thebigmove/en/introduction/1_3_GTHA_challenges.aspx]http://www.metrolinx.com/mx/thebigmove/ ... enges.aspx[/url]

Exactly right. This is the whole point for massive pl;anning and public transit infrastructure investment.

If we create better alternatives for the others, then those that must use cars will be much better served by reducing congestion.

If we don't, then the traffic jams, which are already very bad, are going to become way worse.