Raise the Hammer
We need a solution that works for everyone. We can't just ignore the needs of transit riders just like we can't ignore the needs of drivers or businesses.
By Martin Zarate
Published January 14, 2015
I've lived in Hamilton my entire life, and I can't remember a time I have been more excited about my city's future than the last few years. The city is quickly becoming bikeable, and the new transit plans can revolutionize how we get around and develop the core.
I'm envious of kids growing up in this city because they get to see a city on the rise instead of watching it slide downwards like I did. I've started biking (even in snow) and taking transit around town myself, something I haven't done since I was a teenager.
Of course, there has been disappointment. I think we all know the bus lane hasn't gone as well as it could have. It's shown some success, but the traffic downside is higher than anybody would have liked.
But why give up? Why did we wait a whole year before even discussing improvements? Why all the fear?
The sad part of the bus lane isn't that it didn't go well. It's that we reacted to things going badly with the discussion of "keep it or get rid of it" instead of "how do we fix it?"
It took a whole year and an election before the Mayor and city staff finally started having that conversation, and that's much too long. It hasn't just harmed the commuters and the businesses, it has also jeopardized transit improvements on the whole.
We need a solution that works for everyone. We can't ignore the needs of transit riders, just like we can't ignore the needs of drivers or businesses.
I like what I hear from our new/old mayor and from the staff report, and hope that council will consider making the needed improvements so the bus lane (or HOV lane?) can work for everyone.
I know nobody likes to talk about the environmental side of this, but I have three young children. One day I hope to see grandchildren - even great-grandchildren.
And one day in the far future, those kids are going to ask us about climate change and fuel reserves and why we didn't do anything when we had the chance.
At the very least, I'd like to tell them that we tried.
This article is adapted from a letter to Council.
By seancb (registered) - website | Posted January 14, 2015 at 12:36:42
Here is Scott Duvall's transit vision (from a recent open email thread regarding the transit lane):
Council fully supported and has been acceptable to an LRT project as long as the provincial government wholly funded the capital project as they stated originally.
As time went along, Hamilton Staff did their due diligence homework and submitted the plan to the provincial government.
As Hamilton was in phase 2 of the provincial moving forward plan and praised by the government how great Hamilton plans was ahead of others, the city has not been given no provincial funding commitment to what the amount will be.
Since the provincial government has dragged their feet in making a funding announcement to Hamilton since 2007 and waving on what full capital costs mean, residents have been not so acceptable now as they were before.
To date we still do not hear any announcement from Minister De Luca who stated he would let us know in a couple of months after meeting in July 2014.
So since my original support, I still commit to support LRT on conditions the province announces they will pay full capital cost which means all construction and rail cars and the city meet other service needs.
I heard at the door we need substantial HSR service improvements on the mountain along with bus landing pads and shelters before we start going for other ideas.
I believe in the transportation vision downtown for our future children and others, however I still believe we must at least meet the basic transportation needs for all other areas of the city before we go forward with LRT downtown.
Respectfully
Scott
By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted January 14, 2015 at 12:43:17 in reply to Comment 107805
Except every time the city tries to improve mountain service, they shoot that down too. Remember Ferguson killing the Rymal improvements?
Providing a pre-condition ruins the chance of anything happening. Focus on doing everything at once, then if anybody drags their feet they're only screwing themselves.
By Rimshot (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 14:29:32 in reply to Comment 107805
"...the city has not been given no provincial funding commitment..."
By Rimshot (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 15:21:52 in reply to Comment 107805
"Residents have been not so acceptable now as they were before."
By Rimshot (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 15:22:57 in reply to Comment 107805
"We need substantial HSR service improvements on the mountain along with bus landing pads..."
By Sigh (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 17:32:06
Chad Collins is a short sighted pessimist. He can't see past what is to what could be. He's focused on few businesses on Queenston that won't get car traffic because of a no left turn option due to LRT, whilst forgetting about all the business growth potential along the King-Main-Queenston corridor that will likely be realized because of LRT. What an idiot.
By MattM (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 18:20:44 in reply to Comment 107805
If Mr. Duvall has a proofreader, they need to be fired. That was terrible.
By Groan (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 18:35:20 in reply to Comment 107812
Yeah, he's an idiot for listening to existing businesses and not banking on " business growth potential along the King-Main-Queenston corridor that will likely be realized because of LRT" hypotheticals. What an imbicile!
By Groan (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 18:37:06 in reply to Comment 107806
"Focus on doing everything at once"
That's a recipe for disaster. Projects are never done in that manner. "Ready, Fire, Aim" is already not getting us anywhere.
Do the low hanging fruit. Put in the landing pads, the signal prioritization, and bus shelters. Those are quick and easy. Then start ramping up for a major project.
By Jeet (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 18:58:56
Short of acts of God, there's really no reason to not bank on business growth potential due to LRT. So yeah, he is an imbecile! Seriously though, our political leaders are supposed to lead, as the mayor pointed out, for the greater good sometimes do thinks people don't like. Chad doesn't seem to get that.
By Groan (anonymous) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 19:27:41 in reply to Comment 107818
I'd disagree. The bus lane seemed to be rushed in, then had clear shortcomings, then was just left in place. We've been provided the tweaks, but it looks like it's going to be a nail biter next Wednesday to see what happens with it.
By fmurray (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 20:28:47 in reply to Comment 107814
I agree. This piece was almost unreadable for me. If writing is not your thing, have someone proofread and copy edit!
By DowntownInHamilton (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 21:49:10
In related news, Mississauga can't afford LRT if they even have to pay a third of it. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/01/...
By jason (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 22:23:09
anyone have any simple way to find out how everyone voted today on all these votes??
By DowntownInHamilton (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 23:11:41 in reply to Comment 107824
I'll believe it when the money is in our hands. With the massive deficit the province is in, and Mississauga needing about 2 billion (and we need 1 billion), and K-W needing money too, where is it all going to come from?
By DowntownInHamilton (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 23:25:34 in reply to Comment 107823
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/n...
Who voted consistently in favour of the lane:
Aidan Johnson, Jason Farr, Matthew Green, Sam Merulla, Mayor Fred Eisenberger
Comment edited by DowntownInHamilton on 2015-01-14 23:26:43
By jason (registered) | Posted January 14, 2015 at 23:33:29 in reply to Comment 107826
Thx...I saw this on their article. I'm hoping to find an actual break-down of each vote.
By PublicRecord (anonymous) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 00:22:11 in reply to Comment 107827
Best to watch the coverage on Joey's site.
By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 09:56:23 in reply to Comment 107819
Everyone agrees that the execution was botched, but not everyone on council believes in improving things.
As for being rushed in, I beg to differ. Transit priority lanes were proposed in the HSR's March 2010 operational review (4.3 - ) The HSR's five-year capital budget as described in the review included "$5.0 million for Transit Priority Measures and $100,000 for a Transit Priority Strategy study").
That 2010 report specifically noted the beneficial effect on ridership that TPM would have: "The success in implementing this strategy and continuing to improve transit services in those nodes and corridors by enhanced frequencies and implementation of transit priority measures for improved reliability will influence future transit market growth and ridership." That would be page 5 of the report that councillors Collins, Whitehead, Jackson, Duvall, Pearson and Pasuta received almost five years ago.
The King bus lane was first proposed in 2011 in a more compact form, and was originally to have launched in April 2012.
By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted January 15, 2015 at 10:36:25 in reply to Comment 107827
Iirc the surprise was Conley who voted "yes" on making improvements.
By ItJustIs (registered) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 11:06:18 in reply to Comment 107824
The list of election promises made and then reneged on by every level of government from Confederation forward in Canada would stretch from here to Portland, Oregon.
And back.
Ryan, while I admire your optimism and faith in what our Premier has promised, I can't help but wince every time you (and others here) wheel out sentiments such as what you've offered here.
(And for the record, I'm not an 'LRT skeptic'.)
Comment edited by ItJustIs on 2015-01-15 11:09:14
By Cultosaurus (registered) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 11:13:53 in reply to Comment 107818
Very relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t93PJlv3...
By CharlesBall (registered) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 12:06:26
I agree with the headline. A dedicated bus lane is a good idea. The problem is that the current configuration creates a bottleneck between Wellington and James (even though the bus lane does not really start until John, the traffic back-up mid day backs traffic up down to Wellington.)
We either need to move the buses such that they do not block King by crossing over to McNab, or get rid of people driving through downtown.
The merchants on King want the auto traffic but we have removed the Gore Park "station" in favour of McNab because we did not like the buses at Gore Park so I am not sure what the answer is.
Comment edited by CharlesBall on 2015-01-15 12:07:01
By bikehounds (anonymous) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 13:29:34 in reply to Comment 107833
the answer is 1) a turn signal for buses and 2) for drivers to realize that 12 minutes to get thru the core of a top ten Canadian city at the height of rush hour (and 7 minutes the rest of the time) is really not an emergency
By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted January 15, 2015 at 13:29:41 in reply to Comment 107821
whew When I saw that in the "recent comments" box I was worried you were talking about my article, not Duvall's email.
By DowntownInHamilton (registered) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 18:22:26 in reply to Comment 107829
From the time it was approved by council and put in, it was rushed. There was little public awareness prior to go-live, then they painted the lines when the ground was wet and the paint came off. That's rushed.
By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 19:13:26 in reply to Comment 107829
November 2011
Drivers, take note: your commute downtown is about to get a bit more complicated.
The city’s public works committee approved a pilot project Monday that will see a lane of King Street between John and Bay streets dedicated solely to buses during rush hour.
The one-year pilot, set to launch in April, will ban drivers from the curb lane along King between 7 and 9 a.m., and 3:30 to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
It also means drivers won’t be able to make right turns during peak traffic hours at several intersections, including at Hughson, James and Locke streets. Delivery vehicles and taxis will also be prohibited from idling in the bus-only lanes at peak hours.
Gerry Davis, head of public works, said the city will let drivers know about the changes well in advance.
thespec.com/news/local/article/621424--life-in-the-bus-only-lane
By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 19:16:33 in reply to Comment 107857
May 2013
A long-planned experiment to test a dedicated bus lane on King Street has hit a major speed bump — but not necessarily a dead end.
The transit-only lane, proposed to run from Mary Street to just east of Dundurn Street, was meant to speed up bus travel — and evaluate the traffic impact of a hoped-for light-rail line along the busy corridor.
The $300,000 pilot project was approved in principle by council in February as part of a larger Rapid Ready transit plan. But Thursday, a sparsely attended public works committee voted three to two against going ahead with the bus-only lane, which was scheduled to go live in October.
thespec.com/news-story/2877329-councillors-scrap-bus-only-lane-on-king-street/
By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted January 15, 2015 at 19:18:49 in reply to Comment 107858
It's full speed ahead for a bus-only lane on King Street.
At Wednesday night's council meeting, city councillors voted to move forward with the $300,000 pilot project.
The move reverses a decision to scrap the proposal made at last Thursday's public works committee meeting.
The go-ahead means a bus-only lane of King will be enforced between Mary Street to just east of Dundurn Street during peak hours. According to city transit director Don Hull, the move is "an absolute fundamental requirement" for the city's future rapid-transit plans....
Still, several councillors had concerns with the project. Five of them — Chad Collins, Brad Clark, Brenda Johnson, Lloyd Ferguson and Robert Pasuta — voted against the move for various reasons, including the argument that the project should run the whole length of the LRT route and not just downtown.
thespec.com/news-story/2883176-bus-lane-pilot-project-gets-green-light/
You must be logged in to comment.
There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?