Raise the Hammer

I have to agree there's a heavy straw-manish quality to the Brassington Op-Ed. Overcrowding on the King and Main express buses is a pretty good operational reason to consider LRT on that corridor -- a really strong reason.

The question that bus-riders on other east-west low-city corridors might consider is how the B-Line LRT might reconfigure service for them. We might acknowledge that #2 bus on Barton Street might not operate as frequently if there were greater emphasis placed on moving riders north-south to ride on the LRT. That would impact some riders negatively, perhaps.

I haven't really seen detailed plans on what would happen to routes once the LRT is operational, and i don't mean this to be a reason to oppose LRT. All would depend on what HSR and the City decides to do ... if they opt for a ridership growth strategy, then we would see a general enhancement of service across the system. If they decide to use LRT to drive cost-efficiencies as first priority, then bus service on some routes could suffer as ridership patterns change based on the LRT service and the potential changes it drives via private investment and redevelopment, etc. Again worth discussing, but not a reason to oppose LRT.

I also don't think UMC new urbanists are the main target for the LRT (or at least the rationale for LRT vs enhanced bus service). For the foreseeable future Hamilton is attracting young families who might be broadly characterized as marginal gentrifiers ... i.e. those that possess high levels of cultural capital, but modest economic capital (they have longer-term income growth potential, however, and also include what might be called cultural entrepreneurs). There are various reasons why older urban neighbourhoods appeal to this group of in-movers.

Comment edited by RobF on 2015-01-06 13:59:11