Raise the Hammer

Let me state first that I realize plans change, and considerations might arise which result in a difference between initial plans and the final outcome. However, in the face of the overwhleming evidence cited in Hamilton RT's own documents, I would like similalry substantial evidence demonstrating that we now need to head in a new direction.

It's difficult to track this response, because while Jill begins her timeline with dates (2008 and 2009) the timeline abruptly stops in 2009, leavinv me still unclear as to what exactly transpired in 2010. Additionally as there are no references to the documents I quoted, including the Spring 2010 FAQ, the March RT newsletter, and the Metrolinx study, I can't try and construct a timeline either.

I'd still like to know more about why there was a change in opinion between March 2010 and December 2010. This can't be the first time they looked at the corridor widths. I seem to remember them having cross sections of various parts of King drawn up back when LRT was first being seriously proposed, and I'm sure Metrolinx would have had these for their study - I doubt they would support something that was going to be technically impossible.

All in all, I still feel unsatisfied with the explanation. I understand the corridor has constraints, but city staff understood that too, from day one (or they should have), and they still recommended, as late as spring 2010, two-way transit and two-way traffic. If we accept Jill's response above, the only conclusion we can come to is that Hamilton RT did not take all the relevant facts into consideration when they recommended, in spring of this year, two-way transit with two-way traffic (a setup which they now tell us is not feasible). This is a serious oversight in my opinion, and leaves me with concerns about the rest of the planning process going forward.