Raise the Hammer

Wow...just wow.

This is why I skip over the "letters to the editor" section. This guy literally has no clue what he's talking about.

"With downtown being closed off, it will now be more unaccessible [sic] and more of a hangout, where crime will thrive."

He talks as if the LRT will completely block King, which is apparently the only street that leads downtown. Clearly no one will ever drive on a 2 way Main, or the planned 2-way York/Cannon, or even on King right next to those scary trains!

sigh

what is going on over there at the spec?

Opinion fail.

I love how the time calculations for these things never include stopping at the gas station or cleaning snow and ice off the car, or taking the car to the mechanic (or DIY) or whatnot. These hypothetical cars get themselves all ready, back up to the door and let you off at your pizza counter. Like magic. And the cost analysis is always this one trip I took this morning versus one ride. Forgetting maintenance, insurance, cost of buying the car, parking, and so on.

I'm also curious where he got this closed parking garage concept from. I hadn't noticed that in any of the plans floating around.

If this were any other city, such drivel could be laughingly dismissed.

But in Hamilton, it's crap like this that captures hearts and minds.

Disgrace is right ...

I'm also curious where he got this closed parking garage concept from. I hadn't noticed that in any of the plans floating around

I think he's referring to the existing u/g parking structures at some of the larger downtown buildings (Jackson Square, Copps, the "Commerce Place" buildings, etc.)

It ties into his fear that the LRT is actually some sort of monster, encircling the city and preventing any vehicular traffic through. Leading to empty parking structures which taxpayers will have to pay to repair because the parking fees won't cover the costs.

It cashes in the lofty democratic and editorial ideals of print journalism for the cheap sugar high of controversy-for-its-own-sake.

Yep. And these are the clowns who still claim they have more credibility than online media because, because, well I said so!

Nice fisking, BTW.

For the sake of clarity, Mr. Serwatuk is a business owner in Hamilton. His businesses include a car wash, a tanning salon, and a pizza parlor in the east end of the city, not simply a downtown car wash as Ben implies (as if a proprietor's opinion is somehow less important if his business happens to be a downtown car wash).

While his opinions are scattered and poorly organized, he is among the many business owners along King who will be directly affected by the proposed route of the LRT. His concerns should be recognized and addressed in a respectful manner rather than simply ridiculed and dismissed with a condescending wave of a hand. Not every business owner is gifted with prosaic abilities, but they do literally have a vested interest in the well-being of the city.

For the sake of clarity, Mr. Serwatuk is a business owner in Hamilton. His businesses include a car wash, a tanning salon, and a pizza parlor in the east end of the city, not simply a downtown car wash as Ben implies

FTFA:

Pedestrian traffic that I'm sure would be more than happy to pop into Serwatuk's other business, Little Caesars Pizza, if they weren't so scared to walk.

Sophistic comment is sophistic.

His concerns should be recognized and addressed in a respectful manner

Serious concerns should be recognized and addressed, as Ryan said, but this was an ill-informed, ill-conceived, ill-written attempt to scare and mislead his readers with scenarios that bear little connection to reality. I happen to prefer LRT on Main, and I don't like the idea of losing on-street parking on King, but the Spec had no business publishing this tripe. (Although as Ryan says, they may have inadvertently given the cause of LRT a boost.)

If he is so concerned about the "well-being" of the city, he should do what credible advocates do: do his research, refine his thinking, and present his arguments coherently with evidence to back them up. If he can't be bothered to do that, why should he be taken seriously? If LRT advocates had used the same methods to argue for LRT, do you think anyone would have taken them seriously?

While his opinions are scattered and poorly organized...

and poorly researched, and nonsensical.

It just bothers me that with all the information at his fingertips he couldn't come up with a single valid argument. He does nothing but make claims and predictions, that are at best uninformed, and at worst purposely misleading.

The Spec is clearly trying to create some controversy to drum up sales.

I think this was just called in to View Magazine's rant line but it was too long so they let the spec print it.

Comment edited by jonathan dalton on 2010-02-01 14:38:10

I LOVE THIS ARTICLE.

First he tells us that Chicago and Detroit are home to LRT failures... THEN he says the LRT should be elevated, not at-grade.

Too many golden quotes here to list!

Heaven forbid if anybody has a dissenting opinion. I agree his rant was poorly written. Last time I checked people are allowed to have an opinion. I have been routinely downvoted because the regulars do not like what I write because I am not anti car and I do not believe transit is the answer to all our problems.

Thank heavens it looks like saner heads will prevail. We certainly cannot afford this boondoggle.

having a different opinion is fine. spreading lies and misinformation is not.

it's not merely an opinion that all downtown parking garages will have to mothballed if we build an LRT system. It's a blatant, fear-mongering lie. I'm sure the Spec gets garbage letters all the time. the fact that they continue to publish them is the real stunner.

"The design now proposed makes a driver pass your business or street a kilometre and do a U-turn - at certain intersections only - and backtrack. If I want to grab a coffee, stop at a variety store, get gas, a car wash, a slice of pizza, do you actually think, I'm going to backtrack?"

Funny, that's already exactly what it's like trying to find a business on a busy street ... when you're in a car! Look for street numbers or a sign? Most difficult to do in a car. Much easier on a bus/streetcar, or any other method for that matter.

"Statistics show we only walk 200 to 400 metres at best in these situations."

Statistics also show alarming rates of heart disease, obesity, asthma, high blood pressure...

Burgermeister Meisterburger:

Of course everyone is allowed their opinions. But the spec is not a democratic forum. The editors have monopolistic power to shape opinion in this town. So we see distortions....

Whether or not new urbanism and gentrification happen, this city is going to be one hotbed of social conflict in the coming years.

The author asked, "What's wrong with asking people's opinion exactly?", nothing when you position them as people opinions in an unscientific survey, but there is much wrong when you position the opinions as "fact" in position papers. And as "fact" is exactly how those running the project have positioned these unscientific self-selected, biased surveys.

Heck, a City LRT project rep didn't even know there was such a thing as a scientific survey when questioned at a meeting I attended. That in itself should be enough to question the validity of the whole project. But I won't question the whole project, as I would support a LRT on Main, but King is a non-starter.

A LRT will never be built on King.

BTW, name a Canadian PAN AM Gold Medalist from the last games without looking it up...... Better yet, stand on the street and ask 100 people to name one.

Pan Am medalists have nothing to do with it.

Surveys are, by nature, an enumeration of opinions. What opinions are being presented as fact by "those running the project"? And who exactly are those people that you are talking about?

As for the spec article, the author is so misinformed, it's absurd. For one thing, LRT has been on the table for over two years. The fact that he has not heard of it until now is a perfect example of how out of touch he truly is. Every other point he makes is based purely on assumption and imagination. There are too many inaccuracies to even begin to address in such a small comment box.

Here's a list of 14 factual errors in the original opinion piece:

http://simonwoodside.com/weblog/2010/2/1...

Enjoy and feel free to steal any of it.

Really can't add much to the torrent of (deserved) criticism of David S, here, save to say that one is left with the impression that the Spec is desperate for space fillers.

What one might expect from one in the car wash business, I wonder? (OK, maybe that is a tad condescending, and perhaps others in the same business are better informed, but you get my drift.)

Really, it wouldn't be quite so bad if his basic claims were correct - to describe the 'People Mover' in Detroit, which pointlessly goes around in a circle downtown, never going anywhere, as 'light rail, and to selectively overlook the fact that that same city is now poised to reintroduce LRT on its main thoroughfare, Woodward Avenue, does nothing to enhance the writer's (sorry, car washer!) credibility.

And are the overhead L Trains in Chicago, which he seems to look upon favourably for Hamilton, supposed to meet the definition of 'light rail'? Nothing, needless to say, about the great success of light rail in countless other cities, like Denver, for example.

Some more discretion and good editorial judgement, Spec editors, please!

Since TorStar took over The Spec a few years back, it has turned into an "Anti-Hamilton" pile of crap. Why are we allowing a far-left paper from Toronto hold a monopoly in this city? Stop paying attention to The Spec ... it had its day. Hamilton is long due for a new paper that reflects current attitudes and the positive energy to move forward.

My clear-cut differences of opinion with Ben and almost all the commenters aside...

...where on Earth is "King St. East and Queenston Road"? Or is this just another example of things getting muddled; Mr. Serwatuk is actually referring to multiple business locations, not an intersection? "Is King East and Queenston Road a tourist destination compared to Europe?" surely gives the impression that he's talking about one place. (Yes, I Googled all three businesses, and he is referring to two different locations.)

I'll admit that a person loses credibility (and much of my interest) when they can't express themselves properly. We're talking about a substantive issue here (LRT), not whether a snowless winter is a good thing.

I've lots to say about the discussion at hand, but I'll settle for registering this admittedly petty grumble for now. Where's my coffee...?

just to clarify one thing that I see popping up in these discussions over and over. If LRT is to be built on Main they will not keep street parking on King. King would become 2 lanes each direction 24-7. Main would become 1 lane each way with LRT down the middle. The only hope of saving street parking is to put the LRT on King. That leaves the '5th' lane on Main available for parking virtually from Dundurn to Sherman, save for turning lanes etc.....

Haha, I started reading this in the Spec on the weekend and had to read it at two separate times because I was so sick of it by the time I was halfway into it. FTR, I believe his Little Ceasars is at Parkdale and Queenston. From what I can tell, his closest business to downtown is the Wash Me Car Wash. King Street East and Queenston Road don't cross... they're parallel. I think he might have been thinking Queenston and Centennial (Eastgate Mall).

Whatever his position, the fact that the Spec printed his article belies the lack of editorial responsibility of the paper. Printing misinformation and nonsensical arguments in the interest of providing a "balanced" argument does nothing to help the naysayers and gives those supporting LRT no choice but to point to their opponents' ignorance as the reason why they don't think LRT would be a good idea.

I'm sorry he chose a car wash as his business, but expressing his concern for the welfare of the car parks downtown is laughable... I know how they can survive - eliminate some of those paved parking lots and replace them with businesses.

Jason, King downtown has bumpouts etc... if that goes to 2 lanes each direction they'd have to remove those. Didn't they just put those in a few years ago? Why can't King Street be kept the way it is with LRT on Main?

Hamilton is long due for a new paper that reflects current attitudes and the positive energy to move forward.

I agree, I just wish the Spec could be that paper. I'm sure they would like to be a part of the important conversations our city needs to have over the coming years, as would I, but when they print shite like this, serious minded Hamiltonians just shut them out of the debate.

I'm a subscriber myself. Readers like me really should demand better of our paper, but crap like this makes it harder and harder to care.

Here are some facts that many of the proponents might want to chew on.

1. David Serwatuk did attend a neighbourhood association meeting in 2009 that included a presentation from a city employee.
- I guess those who are calling him a johnny-come-lately didn't attend the local neighbourhood meeting.

2. The 20m (65ft) right-of-way comes directly from the city literature, and it includes the space for curbing and platforms.
- Note, this right-of-way quietly grew from 18.6m between March 08 and November 08

3. Sidewalks will need to be reduced/eliminated.
- The city rep clearly stated in a neighbourhood presentation, that in areas of King East sidewalks would either be narrowed on both sides, or eliminated on one side of street to accomodate LRT. WTF, you call that walkability.

4. For those that don't know the roadway along parts of King Street curb-to-curb narrow to only 12.3m (40ft).
- 7.7m (25ft) is a lot of sidewalk to simply disappear. Again, walkability?????

5. The plans presented in November 2008 showed the elimination of 2 or 3 B-Line stops (exact number not yet decided).
- When asked which stops were to be eliminated, a vague answer mentioning low-density Longwood (sorry Mac Innovation Park) as one potential place to eliminate one stop.

6. A follow-up question on support for LRT in areas where stops were to be eliminated elicted an uncomfortable deer in headlights stare.
- I guess no survey addressed that question........

BTW, Frank, he owns the Little Cesars at King & Wentworth. I believe he meant that he owns businesses on both King East and on Queenston, not at King & Queenston. He's a businessman, a taxpayer, and an employer, not a writer. I'm sure he's not perfect, but you guys feel free to keep on taking shots at him.

For the sake of clarity, I don't know him personally only met him once briefly at a neighbourhood meeting.

As stated in a different posting regarding the same subject...

If he runs that Little Ceasers at King & Wentworth, then WHY IS HE AGAINST LRT?

I pass this store every day, and see it stocked with Cathedral Students. Students who do not drive; students who currently use Public Transit.

If a Driver passes his store at present, they must actually loop around at Grant Ave, south to Main St, east to Sanford, then back to King & Wentworth... That's a WHOLE Kilometre out of the way!

OR... You could walk the 400-600m distance Mr Serwatuk seems to think will kill people. Imagine... having to walk almost a whole KM! What has this world come to!? ;)

yup, that little tidbit that he owns the pizza shop at King and Wentworth makes this even more perplexing. Has he ever seen what urban corners like that look like in TO or Portland?? Not abandoned on one side, parking lot on another, rundown building on another and pizza place on the 4th. He could have a booming neighbourhood business district there with an LRT stop surely planned for Wentworth. What's funnier is the complaint about one-way traffic flow with an LRT...ummm, take a look at King St. He should be pressing for Wentworth to go two-way with street parking so that people can:

a) drive from the north OR south to access his store, and b) then proceed to turn left OR right onto King as the LRT plan calls for 2-way King.

Something is way off here....makes no sense at all.

Hmm, 3 negatives for clarifying what store David owns and that I'm not a personal friend.

You guys are too funny, and BTW biased. Gotta love those survey results.

What's The Spec?

"grab a coffee, stop at a variety store, get gas, a car wash, a slice of pizza," hilarious, judging by Hamilton's retail it seems that's all we do in this city.... and go to Money Marts.

Thanks Ben for this. Total Win .... (I can't stand when people say "no pun intended", I love how you treated that)

Not to mention...

1. David Serwatuk did attend a neighbourhood association meeting in 2009 that included a presentation from a city employee.

So when he asks, "Who has really heard about the LRT?" he's being just a little bit disingenuous, isn't he?

Comment edited by z jones on 2010-02-02 15:29:48

You guys are too funny, and BTW biased.

Downvoted because you don't pass the sniff test. Your comments are apologia not honest debate.

Comment edited by z jones on 2010-02-02 15:32:32

Correction, my comments are fact. 20m is the right-of-way currently in the city presentation, 12.3m is width of King Street curb-to-curb at it's narrowest. Look it up.

Next time you see a city LRT rep ask them which B-Line stops are they proposing disappear, and what surveys with that knowledge did they do in the areas of those stops.

Peel back the onion, take a look. Again, to reiterate I support the LRT on Main, but King is a non-starter.

The ROW is different for Queenston than it is for King. I too have attended the public meetings and read every word on the city's LRT website. Along King St, through the booming, bustling, vibrant central Hamilton area the design is slated to have one westbound lane, one westbound LRT lane, one eastbound LRT lane and one eastbound lane. In other words, they'll be using all 4 lanes that are currently there.

Comment edited by jason on 2010-02-02 16:59:32

Jason, isn't King downtown 2 lanes with parking on either side? Why can't they run one direction down King and the other down Main through there? That'd make the area of influence bigger and keep sidewalks on King, no?

Even keeping both directions on King, why the frig does one lane of LRT need 20m? I think it's more likely that an LRT line requires a 20m ROW rather than one direction being 20m wide. A 20m ROW would fit inside the existing 12.5m (as sniffer says) King street turning part of the sidewalk into the platform for the rail line...

and 18.6 to 20m is about 4'-7" feet, not something to make a stink about there snifftest...

[quote]and 18.6 to 20m is about 4'-7" feet, not something to make a stink about there snifftest...[/quote]

It is when the original 18.6m was still more space then provided by King Street.

Removing a sidewalk, or narrowing both sidewalks in a neighbourhood destroys walkability. And a neighbourhood that is a 6 minute B-Line ride to downtown, will not accept the lose of sidewalk space for a 5 minute, 30 second LRT ride downtown.

@TheSniffTest: can you provide some kind of citation for your claims? I just reviewed the documents on the city website and there is nothing that I could find to support your claim.

On the other hand, the drawings clearly show LRT vehicles using one lane each.

http://www.hamilton.ca/rapid-transit

I would appreciate it if you could share the documents you are looking at.

Rapid Transit FAQs From initiation to Preliminary Design November 2009

At least the Spec's editorial board is still on board.

Ryan, makes sense. I just thought it might be nice to have it both places because you'd have people walking between and outside both streets which would theoretically increase the area of influence.

Sniffy, an increase of 4' isn't a big deal assuming that we're talking ROW widths (which we in fact are). I've designed roads with 30m ROW and left the outside 10m on each side untouched. Just because it says that's the width doesn't mean there will be a track at the those numbers. Using my own common sense and having seen some drawings and pictures of LRT in other places, I can see how a 2 way line can run on King Street. Reading the Rapid Transit FAQs, it says "Rapid Transit Team staff is considering various ways that the corridor design can be modified to minimize impacts. This includes considering single tracks in some areas, minimal platform widths, minimal lane widths, minimal boulevard treatments and sidewalk widths. In some cases, substandard lane widths and sidewalk widths may be required when property acquisition opportunities are restricted by heritage and archeology features."

In the same document, they state that current ROW widths are minimum 17.3m in the downtown corridor, minimum overall is 15.8m around Sherman Ave. Take a look here... http://www.lrta.info/photos/Germany/de-m... From the Hamilton Rapid Transit site, plans here are to use vehicles with a width of 2.65m and a minumum required clearance of 1m. That means a minimum 6.3m is required for the actual rail lines and cars - the actual visible part of the rail line. The rest is boulevards, sidewalks and treatments.

I can only assume you enjoy the status quo but I have to ask, what are you so scared of?

Comment edited by frank on 2010-02-04 08:57:30

At least the Spec's editorial board is still on board.

Sounds to me like they want to eat their cake and have it too.

I'm glad 2 others found that report BS. Or is it just no matter what I post even if it's only the title of a City FAQ it gets the "childish" negative? Yeah, that adds credibility to your point-of-view........

@frank. Totally understand the 20M includes; track lane, curbs, platforms, poles for overhead wires, etc. The issue remains that Jill from the City stood in front of the group and said point blank, that where ROW is restricted sidewalks will need to be narrowed, or eliminated on one side of King Street. Even if the lanes grow from their existing 10' to 11 feet, which they will to create the separated tracks, sidewalks will be narrowed.

This is shown in the answer of that FAQ where it states that property will need to be expropriated where sidewalks are unable to be made "substandard". Sorry, but the neighbourhood will not stand for substandard sidewalks, the sidewalks should be expanded not made substandard.

And the neighbourhood will stand and advocate for those facing expropriation, because that's what neighbours do.

My prediction is they'll end up moving the LRT to Main where these issues do not present themselves.

@frank. http://www.lrta.info/photos/Germany/de-munich05_std.jpg.

Yeah it's a relatively narrow LRT lane, but it neglects showing additional space needed for platforms. That will expand the 6.3m won't it.

Also, with 2 lanes drive lanes for cars in each direction, and a lane for parking I see they were wise enough not to squeeze it into a tight corridor, like King Street.

Sniffy, downtown the platforms are relatively unnecessary as the sidewalk would be the platform. They won't be squeezing traffic into the downtown area, they'll be closing that area down to traffic. That same website(just delete the picture part of the web address) has numerous pictures showing platforms and sidewalks integrated, traffic with LRT in narrow corridors... It doesn't take much of an imagination to see how it would work.

My prediction is that you're wrong... very wrong. Many people see advantages to making changes downtown and will support it. My question again is, what are you afraid of? (aside from feeling inadequate when people downvote your comment)

Please do a lot more research before posting about something. Read all the material on the LRT websites you can find, then come back with an informed opinion. You're coming dangerously close to making the same sort of vague statements and accusations rife with unsupported arguments that other naysayers have already done.

@frank. Not talking about downtown, I'm talking about King Street East of Downtown. You were the one who pointed out the constrained space at Sherman, 15.8m.

I've attended 3 open sessions, seen the "this, not this" presentations, have different printed incarnations of presentaions and FAQs, and my opinion is informed.

We'll see who's right. And guaranteed I'll come back and tell you where right if you are. Please extend the same courtesy.

I will...

Even a constrained space at Sherman of 15.8m is adaptable considering the fact that many of the properties on the north side of the street have giant parking lots in front of them... If they can fit 4 lanes of traffic in there, they can fit an LRT... There currently is a rather large sidewalk on the North side of the street there along with a concrete boulevard and sidewalk on the south side. Even at the most constrained place (looks to be around Appollo Restaurant) there's ample room for 4 lanes of traffic with great separation.

I don't think the problem here is whether or not it'll fit, the problem remains that the old Hamilton way of thinking is deeply ingrained in the minds of too many people here. The status quo idea: "It has 'worked' for so long, why change it now?" or "You mean that there's another way to get downtown than use a car?". That needs to change...otherwise there will be resistance no matter which way you turn - new ideas require open minds.

Comment edited by frank on 2010-02-05 08:16:31

As an aside, since most or all of the utilities in the area will be affected it'd be a great time to take out the hydro poles and put in duct banks. Make it so the only things seen are the wires for the pantograph (which I hope doesn't become bulky...or maybe Bombardier will have their new system up and running by then) and the skyline will be much better looking...

To all of my critics 3 years later,
LRT
Nobody has addressed the the most obvious problem... Construction time... google Minniapolis St.Paul.. LRT CONSTRUCTION NIGHTMARE. Look at how many closed .
Most businesses cannot survive being closed 4 to 5 months, as opposed to years. Who's going to pay the rent. I'm sure the city will still collect taxes. People and traffic stay away from construction nightmares.
What I really plan on doing if LRT goes through is sell my property for 10 million to a condo developer, move south and send you all that cut me up a post card. And yes I know who most of you are.
So as you see I win either way.

David Serwatuk
Peace