IT'S BACK! | Hamilton LRT Revived

The Hamilton LRT project has been revived! Well... maybe not in the way you'd expect.
As always, leave a comment down below if you have ideas for our future videos. Like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon so you won't miss my next video!
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): www.epidemicso...
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreet...
=PATREON & KZbin MEMBERSHIPS=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon or right here on KZbin! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
KZbin Memberships: / @rmtransit
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
(Not officially affiliated with the channel)
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: reecemartin.ca
Substack: reecemartin.su...
=ABOUT ME=
Hi, my name's Reece. I'm a passionate Creator, Transportation Planner, and Software Developer, interested in rapid transportation all around my home base of Toronto, Canada, as well as the whole world!

[@RMTransit]

Because it needs to be said, the overuse of light rail in Toronto is a major failure in transit planning, in Hamilton as I said in the video light rail might make sense - but probably not this plan (hence the poor BCR which contains all of the obvious arguments for LRT as well). I understand some might find my tone unsettling but I think it’s necessary- we are spending billions for what I would suggest is transit which could be provided by a much less expensive BRT for lower cost. If we want capacity and service we should bite the bullet and go up to a light Metro - and in some cases our projects already cost that much despite being at grade. Fin.

[@highwaysbyways4281]

LRT 'creep' happens much like BRT 'creep'. Planners can start cutting corners to save money and the end product ends up being lack-lustre, slow, low-frequency service subject to operational problems and delays. If you're going to build a tram system, then do it. Don't sell it as a high frequency, high capacity system to your residents. Realize that you'll need spend a good chunk of change to install some smart signalling to your intersections to optimize traffic flow for everyone, but in the end don't expect to be able to do much better than ten minute frequencies. Plan for increased mixed-use density all along the line to make the system worthwhile building. Otherwise, bite the bullet and do a full-on grade seperated light metro ala Skytrain or REM. It will cost quite a bit more than a tram, but it will be much more future-proof. Plan for high density surrounding your stations to take advantage of the system.

[@PSNDonutDude]

I've lived in Hamilton another year since this video was released and I am reading some of the arguments for and against LRT "trams" in Hamilton. I'm even more convinced today that a tramway is the right move for Hamilton. The LRT will run from McMaster to Eastgate, a trip currently done in 35 minutes on the express bus service. The bus comes every 6 minutes and there is a parallel local service which makes the trip in 55 minutes and comes every 10 minutes. The biggest issues with Hamilton's current service is 3 big things: 1) Capacity. The buses pre-covid were at and over capacity much of the day. Running more buses would work but they already bunch up because they drive among traffic and on such a short route of 35 minutes you could end up with 2 - 4 buses stopping at the same time at the same stop. 2) Rush hour. Hamilton's rush hour isn't half bad, and that's largely because the downtown one ways are overbuilt for the car traffic, but this will not last forever, especially once downtown starts to fill up which it already has, causing slower speeds and significantly impacting bus service. 3) Property tax revenue. Hamilton desperately needs the injection of cash from higher levels of government to build infrastructure that will attract developments that will beef up the city's tax base, a chronic issue that has led to $4 billion in infrastructure deficit in the city. LRT will ramp up development in the city which Hamilton desperately needs. Most people also don't make the trip all the way from Eastgate to McMaster. Heck many people don't even come directly downtown via the express buses. It's used more as a local service from the edges to different areas in the city along the route. A tramway makes perfect sense because they goal isn't to speed up the trip by much, and that doesn't really matter because the trip is already incredibly quick. Shortening to 30 minutes is amazing honestly, and even then, most people won't be doing that full trip. It's mostly about capacity and comfort for the most used and the only revenue neutral line in the city. That said, the line should still get signal priority, and the line should be used as a backbone to improve the rest of the bus service. I'm excited to see "BRT-lite" for the A-Line where possible signal priority may be happening as well as queue skipping lanes and beefed up stops which will connect directly to the B-Line LRT.

[@Mystro256]

100%, I lived in Hamilton for 6 years during my studies, and the B line desperately needs to be an LRT for capacity and comfort reasons. On the other hand, the A line is much more suited to a BRT.

[@PinkyThumb]

100% agree, and Hamilton's remastered bus map perfectly compliments the LRT

[@Vortexone112]

Every time we propose an LRT with an average speed of 20kph because it stops at every red light I die on the inside. Transit priority is so easy and so inexpensive and it’s not implemented only to pander to drivers who will hate it no matter what.

[@aoilpe]

In Europe the most of Tramway Networks have influenced traffic lights 🚦 to garantie a higher average speed. In my town the average speed is about 20 miles or 30 km/h. Don’t build LRT or Tramway lines under 8 miles, it isn’t worth it.

[@jpsion]

euro cities are dense because of other reasons…not applicable to NA. space there is a luxury

[@aoilpe]

And you wrote it for what reason?

[@peterdrost4859]

Hamilton is a tough case. It is a small city that has many qualities of a large city. Any future transit plan needs to take into account Main and King Streets, which are one-way streets. The decision to convert these streets to one-way essentially created a highway through the middle of the city. This put the downtown core in a slow death spiral for the last few decades. Installing an LRT on these one-way streets will improve nothing. A transit plan for Hamilton should include the removal of major one-way streets. The trade-off is that traffic in downtown will behave more like a “normal” city. Yes, there will issues. It will be slower, but at the same time neighborhoods with functioning high streets will emerge again. This will by no means be a quick process. Hamilton still needs more infill and needs more people to live in its core. In the meantime, Hamilton should forgo an LRT and instead start tunneling a metro in the style of VAL system (see Lille, France) under Main Street from McMaster University to Eastgate Mall. A small, automated subway will leave precious street space for wider sidewalks, on-street parking and bicycle lanes. When complete, this kind of system would be a transit backbone for a modern, urban Hamilton.

[@jtsholtod.79]

Great ideas. I doubt they'd do it because of the cost, but I'd rather have something purposeful than a half-baked solution. I still just don't fully feel people need to travel this route with more than a bus service, but maybe done better. Maybe if Hamilton had kept its trolleys and trolleybuses things would be different (mind you, they never connected to West Hamilton or much of the mountain).

[@john15008]

Absolutely! The Hamilton LRT does absolutely nothing to encourage people to leave their cars at home. It should descend underground in the downtown area at least with a seamless interchange with the GO terminal.

[@TheSharkasmCrew]

3 years later and there has definitely been more infill and people living in the core, and they're also converting Main to 2-way! Still, I couldn't agree more that a good chunk of this corridor should be below ground. The whole route would be too cost prohibitive, I think, but at LEAST Queen to Wellington is a no brainer in my mind.

[@kevinlove4356]

At 7:50, we hear that the Hamilton LRT project will be expensive because of the disruption to underground utilities. Actually, it is the other way around. Many of the underground utilities are past the end of their useful life and need to be replaced. It is cheaper to do everything at once. Also, I am a big sceptic of the Metrolinx "Business Case Analysis." It fails to capture the value of urban renewal and having a liveable city vs. today's Hamilton. I suspect that the original 1954 Toronto Yonge Line subway would have failed the Metrolinx BCA, but today's Toronto would not exist if that subway had not been built in 1954.

[@randomcontentgenerator2331]

The intro dancing needs to be a permanent thing!!!

[@MrAronymous]

all you need for succesful suburban lrt is high speed (absolute signal priority, diverting car traffic), avoiding busy traffic (own lanes and grade seperation where necessary), decent frequency (enough to be dependable) and meaningful connections. Not being willing to put the lrt absolutely on top in the hierarchy versus the automobile seems to be north america's greatest flaw when designing these systems. They seem to be forgetting that giving lrt as high speed as possible makes it so that cars have to wait for a shorter amount of time as well..

[@RMTransit]

Sure but why not just move to a light metro and you'll get of these but better

[@edwardmiessner6502]

@@RMTransit here in the States our light metros are in Detroit (sad), Miami (best - it's a distributor from the elevated subway), and Morgantown WV (on a college campus only and it's really weird), with a lot of light metro-like conveyances at the airports which could easily be extended into the cities if our DHS permitted it

[@PinkyThumb]

You gotta come back to Hamilton and do an update. The city has changed a lot in 3 years. Downtown and surrounding areas are denser (especially along the future LRT line), big strides have been taken in bus frequency and late night buses, and the HSR's new bus plan to go along side the LRT is world class! Hamilton is more ready than any other city in Ontario for rapid transit, even if Hamilton itself doesn't know it yet. As a life long resident who knows about Hamilton's successful streetcar past, it's a long time coming!

[@jtsholtod.79]

Having grown up in Hamilton, it is an interesting case study. Two wide east-west streets already funnel cars from one side to the other quite efficiently in the lower section of the city. The B-Line already takes advantage of that. Not sure more BRT helps, and it exacerbates the already transient nature of the downtown core, which is more a connection point than a destination (despite recent successes with the art and restaurant scenes). I can't see LRT alone driving revitalization and growth in the downtown, but I hope I'm wrong. The Harbour GO station is just not a place where a lot of people travel to or from (they can commute faster between the mountain and Aldershot by car, and the A-Line doesn't change that), so I would continue to focus more on moving people from the downtown core to the outer parts of the mountain more efficiently. If they had thought about it decades ago they might have considered using the Radial Trail and/or Escarpment Rail Trail/TH&B rights of way as LRT routes, but those opportunities are long gone. Putting LRT or dedicated bus lanes along the Linc/Red Hill median might be interesting to move people across the mountain, but not sure if the demand is there compared to existing bus alternatives. Until he moved, my Dad was an avid user of the HSR and he felt it already did a great job of getting him around town. His concerns were about more frequent service (especially to GO and Burlington Transit transfer points) and improving the physical condition of the stops to facilitate transfers and help less abled people (most are simple signs on the narrow sidewalks of busy streets). I'm not sure an LRT adds anything, and, as you mentioned, may cause additional delays in connecting to and from its route. Ultimately they should respond to where people need to go, and I don't see by rail across Hamilton as having that need more than is already being served. Sorry for the long message.

[@tyronestreete7676]

Creators turn neighbourhoods into destinations.

[@PWingert1966]

At the other end of the spectrum, you have England's London's Elizabeth Line which according to a video made by the contractor will generate $42 Billion in Benefits for every Billion they spent! That's a little better than one!

[@RMTransit]

I kind of doubt it will be THAT good lol

[@PWingert1966]

@@RMTransit I suspect they have taken some liberties in their estimates😁 but if it's even half that it's still far better than any transit project in Ontario! I wonder what the figure is for the Eglinton LRT.

[@glenpower1677]

The tramway in Hamilton makes perfect sense. Thank you for not calling it a LRT.

[@RoboJules]

If you factor in operational costs, LRT's are often much more expensive than automated train systems like REM and Skytrain. Driverless trains are the future. If you want to put a driver on a piece of transit, make sure it holds a lot of people like regional rail or is flexible like a bus.

[@strawberry7799a]

Driverless trains are the past and the present as well. Skytrain and Docklands Light Railway have been driverless for decades now. I know it is hard and expensive to retrofit existing driver lines to be driverless, but it is a scandal that we are still building new lines that require drivers. The LRT fan club needs to get off their high horse and accept the points Reese makes in the video; LRTs are slower when they run on the street and are essentially trams.

[@BoredCapturer]

@@strawberry7799a Since I started taking the bus, I've begun to realize just how slow my city's ION LRT system is. It travels the 19 km route in 45 minutes. That's 25 km/h on average, when it could easily average 30 km/h were it built/operated differently. Instead, it is bogged down by 10 km/h city corners, and ridiculous and/or unnecessary speed reductions at most crossings along the spurs (basically the off-street ballasted sections), partially caused by late signal activations. And the region wants to start doubling the length of this line to serve a 3rd city.

[@gmbrusselsprout]

If I were to throw my hat in the ring for possible solutions, Hamilton would maybe do well to build an Elevated, Copenhagen-sized Light Metro. It would solve much of the street level conflicts for less cost, more speed and similar capacity; the only issue would be integration into the city, which may be more difficult.

[@rodericksmith859]

I agree, it would definitely resolve the issue of taking away lanes on Main and King as those streets are needed as is to funnel traffic across the city since the freeway system in Hamilton doesn't directly serve it. Having the lrt elevated, using tunnels and trenches were needed would be optimal.

[@urbanpreppie05]

I have actually visited Hamilton! I took a canadian vacation and spent a few days in the Hamilton/Burlington area before staying with friends in St. Catharines. It needs...something. I would also lean more toward a Tram/Streetcar though.

[@sarthsingh3271]

Haha Reece's dance is great

[@rebeccawinter472]

After watching Reece for many years, his physicality and expressiveness - whether it’s arm waving or funny facial expressions - are kinda what sets him apart.

[@cooltrainsinmontreal4883]

Hamilton needs BRT more, if the same money can get a corridor from the suburbs on the mountain down to the two GO stations and the airport when expansion happens to the downtown and waterfront and then to McMaster in an upside down L shape. Separate it and prepare it so if people use it enough it can be converted to LRT, but the key is to have dedicated right of way so the bus isn't stuck in traffic

[@alum6390]

Thank you for discarding the use of “light rail.” Also, yes to high level platforms for “light rail”. Please keep up the good work.

[@petitkruger2175]

yes. i find 'light rail' to sound a bit arrogant. like, face it, its a tram lol

[@nbmanifestations3699]

@@petitkruger2175 they should call it "express streetcar/tram"

[@nbmanifestations3699]

@@petitkruger2175 or tram rt/streetcar rt

[@hobog]

@@petitkruger2175 the rhein-ruhr and nottingham tram-trains disagree

[@rheaf87]

Ok, semi-related question: why do we think Canadians insist on not calling tramways tramways? Is it just because 'tramway' seems less prestigious? Maybe this is just because I grew up in Edmonton, so for me, 'LRT' means Stadtbahn-style light rail, and, sure, in the case of the Valley line, calling what is clearly a tramway 'LRT' makes some sense because that's what the network is already called, but some of these projects just need to accept that they're trams and that it's ok to be a tram! I live in London now and we have a tram and a light rail (though that's probably a light metro), but these are clearly different things. No one is going to say the Croydon Tramlink is the same as the DLR just because they're both technically 'light rail.' Perhaps Stadtbahn-style is very 1970s/80s and not very fashionable so the distinction in terms is meaningless these days.

[@Bureaucromancer]

Honestly, while I don't come down as hard on trams as Reece, the point is valid. As far as what the best solution for Hamilton is, I have long though that UTDC had the right idea, with light metro on the Mountain (though I'd reroute their plan to hit Mohawk College) and improving the trolleybuses in the city. 30 years on from the trolley abandonment I'll take the current plan, but I also keep thinking that a dedicated corridor up the mountain is one of the very few places I can think of that a guided busway actually makes sense. Imagine the UTDC/ICTS tunnel with O-Bahn style curb guided trolley buses, built on a timeline that would have preserved the lower city lines.

[@mathewevans5690]

Hi. As I'm sure you know Europe is full of LRT's and simular sevices. From my experience the best services are those which have ground level, street rail and elevated railway in the suburbs which then submerged into tunnels in the busier built up city areas. This is allows the flow of traffic above to continue and optimises services for the LRT below. I'm aware you probably know all this. However they don't have to be deep bored tunnels. One very old technique for submergeing an LRT is a called cut and cover which has many benefits. One is that you can have access to services from the tunnel such a sewer works, water, gas and electricity, meaning you don't have to dig up the road every time there is a burst pipe. Another is as cut and cover usually follows a road, there are less land rights to deal with and will have far less effect on large building foundations reducing legal and building fees. I recently visited Vienna who uses cut and cover tunnel for their trams which was not only efficient but meant you could enjoy the architecture and more peaceful streets above ground. I would say to any governing body planning a new transit system if you're going to do it, do it properly. City's will grow and putting more traffic above ground, on the road, will eventually be a hindrance. As you say why have a train that can basically only go as fast as a bus. If you're going to spend a large sum of money on a system, better to spend a little more to ensure the system is the most efficient and beneficial system to the city now and in the future.

[@DanielBrotherston]

I'm not sure exactly what they include in "benefits"....but the Waterloo ION line has already seen multiple times it's contruction cost in development along the line, we're talking multiple billions of dollars of development, with billions more planned.

[@dpoulin-tan6927]

I would just put water cells and trees along the corridor. Miami has something like that along major roadways and it makes everything more comfortable. Walking, biking, bus rides, drives... At the same time fix the underground utilities. Theres probably a study that would support backing from the government.

[@seanlucat]

I keep thinking back to the plans in the 1970's and 80's for hamilton to have an ICTS system put in, similar to Skytrain in Vancouver and the Scarborough RT.

[@jtsholtod.79]

Great point. I fear the LRT will suffer the same fate as ICTS, in that the intent and concept will get boiled down to the worst plan with the least impact. IMO ICTS was correctly voted down at the time, but only because the ultimate proposal was too compromised and cautious, and, as a result, terrible for the city and its people. But then afterwards people completely lost sight of using that momentum to create a transit plan that worked for Hamilton and instead pretty much did nothing. Now as Hamilton has grown it's become a landing spot for people who travel elsewhere (Toronto, Niagara) by car and don't really rely as much on transit within the city. They could really make Hamilton a destination if they come up with an aggressive plan (for example, pedestrian/cycle/transit only downtown), but LRT would have to be only be one component of a much larger plan - and there isn't one.

[@haute39234]

It makes zero sense if the LRT doesn't fully replace the current B-Line so you can redeploy those buses and drivers elsewhere; there is a big problem with cancelled/late trips in Hamilton, and areas on the mountain and suburbs being underserved. I still think the proposed alignment is garbage though :) And predicting the future is a fool's errand, 2020 should prove that.

[@petitkruger2175]

nice. they could just upgrade those 2 bus routes instead by adding more dedicated lanes and more frequent service. this will be better overall, as it will increase the practicality of the network as a whole.

[@michaelvavala3088]

I wish we were more enthusiastic about elevated rail in Ontario. I'm a little skeptical about the route running through downtown on King as there are only two lanes around Wellington Street. but there is more development there. There are 5 lanes running through downtown on Main. Remove the two left lanes and run an elevated guideway from Dundurn to Victoria. This will guarantee frequent service through the downtown core at least. West of the 403 it can run at grade along Main St W to McMaster. Then east of Victoria it can also run at grade along Main E. to East Gate. It's a shame that we can't use the rail corridor that the downtown GO station uses. It' runs so close to the proposed route. I get an elevated guideway would be more expensive to build but Hamilton is always growing especially as it and Toronto grow closer to each other so I think it would have a better return on investment.

[@imaastronaut111]

I agree with a BRT grid! Then upgrade it to SkyTrain in 20 years

[@rebeccawinter472]

As noted above, provided there isn’t a tonne of “LRT-Creep” that takes place and the final updated plan (which I’ve not yet seen) tries to maximize grade separation as a way to increase speed and shave a bit of time to make the business case more attractive. It needn’t be a 100% grade separated line but could have portions where it does run grade separated between stops to allow for increased speeds. I don’t think BRT & LRT is an either or. Hamilton is a city that makes a tonne of sense to have a network of busways, in particular - at a minimum - 1 going up the mountain and branching off in 3 different directions (towards Mohawk, towards Upper James/Airport, and towards Limeridge/Upper Wentworth areas, respectively). I see it as a modified “A Line” which is a bit of a stretch when you compare it to the ridership on the E/W B Line route and the related bus routes along King/Main. In a dream world the project ends up 500 M under budget letting them kick start the A Line Hydra Busway. Most of the Mountain routes (Upper Kenilworth etc…) can use the bus access. I would suggest converting the Claremont Access and its associated exits as busways, given its central location and ability to connect to potential busway routes. Moreover, with modifications, the most expensive part of the busway - the part up the mountain - can be done by modifying an existing access road. The city has overbuilt access roads up the mountain (especially after building the unnecessary Red Hill Creek Expressway) and could dedicate an access road for use as a busway. It would offset any future demand driven by growth in the foreseeable future. Lived in Hamilton for a long time before moving back to Toronto recently so am very invested in this.

[@dsilva7583]

Eglinton LRT line in about 40 years time will be replaced just like the scarborough RT when it gets filled to capacity and more money will need to be spent a subway makes more sense for long term but these people who thought about this line never bothered to look at it long term they should have learned the lesson from the line in scarborough

[@breadandwater918]

3:55 “i like the attitude" lmao

[@RMTransit]

It's good, gotta agitate for those transit funds!

[@m.curtis7366]

Having never been to Hamilton personally but given what Reese mentioned about tight corridors which the LRT may operate through. Would it then be advisable to look to European cities and how they managed to work transit services through their original cores or around it for best practices on how to work higher-order transit into the fold? Is the corridor where the LRT would be present viable enough to do a pedestrian/bike and transit-only model and push vehicles outside the core a bit?

[@jtsholtod.79]

The rights of way are actually not that tight for most of the route. Main Street currently has five to seven lanes of one-way traffic, King Street has four to five lanes of one-way traffic for most of the new-proposed route. No major turns at any point except maybe to the maintenance facility. I've seen more done with less space, while also building other pedestrian/cycling accommodations at the same time. But sacrifices would have to be made as these are the major thoroughfares through the city, and currently also have street parking in many sections. I love LRT when applied properly, but I'm not sure this is it (and I'm from Hamilton). Maybe I'm wrong, but it's already served by multiple local bus routes and an effective express bus service, none of which are honestly that busy except at rush hour, largely with university students.

[@RamblingJosh]

I lived in Hamilton for 27 years, and worked at multiple locations along the route where the LRT will go. Personally, I've always thought it was kind of a weird project. I'm sure it could be great one day when there are more stops and connections. But in the short term, I've kind of always leaned more on the side of "why do we need to massively disrupt the downtown and probably kill many small business along the route it's meant to revitalise, just to replace a few bus stops on an already narrow-yet-high-volume road". I always found that the HSR bus service has quite good coverage, and kind of just wished there were more buses on some of the more under-served routes. I don't have a super amazing grasp of all the moving parts in play, but I've never really seen an argument that has moved my opinion on this.

[@JordonMcConnell]

Hopefully Legault stops holding up the Québec Tram too... That one I think is also an important and good trajectory for a tram, including the underground section through the centre of Québec.

[@adamwrestch8944]

When I visited Kitchener, I was really impressed with the LRT system. King Street (the main street) in Downtown Kitchener did not have the LRT line, but instead the LRT tracks were on the parallel streets of Charles and Duke; the Charles LRT goes east, and the Duke LRT goes west. I feel they should do the same thing with Hamilton: There should be a LRT line on Main St. going east and an LRT on King St. going west. They can connect eventually to share the same street. However, I feel an LRT would work best that way if they had one-direction travel. Eventually, in the future, Hamilton could develop some sort of elevated rail. I would love if the TTC subway eventually extended all the way to Hamilton, but that will probably never happen.

[@98rolyaTnaeS]

Hey Reece, is the trip time/time saved the main benefit of upgrading bus to LRT or LRT to Subway? I know here in Ottawa I used to take 1 bus to work and now I take a bus to the LRT which takes me to work and it is no faster. I believe the overwhelming benefit for Ottawa is the amount of buses that have been removed from the downtown core. How is that weighed vs. trip time?

[@Absolute_Zero7]

Its important to note that Ottawa's LRT is basically a subway. It is fully grade separated with fully built stations, with the only difference being the vehicles. The reason why the LRT has failed to increase speed by a significant amount is because the line isn't finished yet. Especially if you're travelling from the west, because the LRT only terminates at Tunney's Pasture, everyone has to do what Reece said here, take the bus down a corridor, then change modes at some point and wait for 3 minutes for a train, all to ride a few stops down to where you need to go. Doesn't help that the station is overcrowded because every commuter from Western Ottawa is basically bunching up at this one transfer station. When the Line is extended to Moodie and Algonquin in 2025, things should be much better.

[@lovehandr]

Where I live in Ottawa, the Confederation Line has created a two transfer trip to reach downtown in off-peak hours. This is ridiculous for a city this size. And then they reduced bus frequency on top of everything. Trip times and reliability, the supposed selling point, have suffered. All the talk has been train wait times, forgetting that outbound trips don't have the same convenience when you might wait 30 minutes for your bus (and this has happened to me multiple times)

[@RMTransit]

Will be better when the service is expanded

[@98rolyaTnaeS]

@@RMTransit I wasn't complaining, just curious if you'd grade the current phase 1 as being beneficial or not seeing as how it's not really faster per se but has other benefits. I remember before the LRT even opened OC Transpo came out with a trip planner app that would tell you how your commute would be affected and I think it was a pretty even split between ~5 mins slower, no change and ~5 mins faster .I transfer to/from bus at Blair and will eventually use the future Trim station in 2024-2025 when it's built.

[@RMTransit]

@@98rolyaTnaeS I think the main benefit for many people will be capacity, but if you live near a train station it should be a lot better

[@peepthezoobazz]

Hamilton has 2 rail corridors that run parallel to the LRT Line. And a single track spur that runs right through the Delta and past Gage Park, connecting the 2 main lines. It infuriates me that not a single peep has ever been uttered about using these.

[@robmausser]

I honestly think due to the layout of Hamilton, the lack of any sort of corridors to use for LRT like ION, that a really nice BRT is the way to go. Something like VIVA, not like the TTC BRTS. As in totally dedicated lanes, etc. For the same cost of this small LRT you could build a really comprehensive network in Hamilton with BRT, maybe even do the A line all the way from St.James North to the Airport, and the B line from McMaster to Gateway. Build in such a way that allows for easy upgrade to LRT in the future. Use articulated battery buses as well if pollution/noise is a concern.

[@RMTransit]

I don’t ont know if I’d call anything the TTC has “BRT”

[@neolithictransitrevolution427]

In terms of Hamilton's limited GO service, this should really be upgraded. Once the GO network centered on Toronto is complete and the new Electric (hope EMU) trains are in use, GO will have a huge number of Diesel locomotives and cars out of circulation. These should be used to boost service in Niagara, London, and Guelph/Kitchener, and all three areas should have regular service to Hamilton (using CN Grimsby, CN Dundas, and GJR Goderich+CP Hamilton Subs respectively). And by doing that, you provide 4 directions of travel for Hamilton on GO trains, all with existing track and trains. A commuter line on CN Hagersville + CN Dundas also might also make sense, and provide very high peak frequencies in Brantford (with the trains being used to increase frequency from Hamilton - Niagara and Hamilton -Kitchener in the day)

[@hirofox85]

I live in Hamilton, and I absolutely hate the LRT. King St. is the busiest, most congested street in the city, and they want to put two train tracks smack dab in the middle of it, and above grade. This pushes everyone over to the far one or two lanes that will remain on the street. The LRT also has only 14 stops compared to the dozens of established bus stops. If people want quick transit service with high rider capacity, and clean electric motors, then they can spend half of the budget on electric bendy buses. The blueprints that they released for the plan shows that they will create a bizarre array of east-bound streets coming up from Main St., up to King, turning East at the tracks, going one or two blocks, and going south again to Main just so that the businesses on the South side of King can get some car traffic. I hope this garbage doesn't go through.

[@pingpong3311]

The LRT is not garbage. It should go through, should happen and SHOULD BE BUILT!!!

[@Jasoncw87]

The UTDC ITCS plan from the 80s seems silly at first glance but it probably makes more sense. The route would have been a small one way loop downtown (one way is easier to fit the guideway and stations), and then done some zig zagging up to Lime Ridge Mall. It's a short route that wouldn't do much by itself, but it would greatly improve bus operations in Upper Hamilton (it would be changed to a really simple grid of bus routes since they wouldn't have to go downtown anymore) and would overcome a geological bottleneck. It would use frequency to enable painless transfers from buses to improve the entire network, instead of superficially boosting one portion of one route. Lower Hamilton is denser and it's linear which makes it seem like a better target for improved transit, but I think it's actually not. It being linear means that you need to do the whole stretch or else you're just introducing needless transfers, like you said, and even aside from its urban constraints, the long length prevents you from being able to afford a mode that would actually improve travel times and reliability. In other words, to me it seems like buses are capable of effectively serving Lower Hamilton, but by themselves aren't capable of effectively serving Upper Hamilton.

[@cyborgsheep6077]

I would spend that 2 billion on some rail corridor buyouts and establish some local passenger service on the routes

[@historybuff1812]

We did it KZbin! We saved the light rail!

[@floxy20]

I knew from the beginning this project would fail, for reasons too numerous to detail. Well, for one: they wanted to build a bridge over Highway 403 to service 2 stops! (I'm not even sure about the grade change.) Or, using the main artery into to the downtown core which is two lanes at its choke point and plunking a railway on it! Sheer genius! A revised cost estimate of 5.5 Billion dollars might have something to do with it.

[@bl_leafkid4322]

Please tell me how to get to GO stn on Bay St Hamilton or on Centennial by HSR BUS or LRT?

[@wawapuffe]

Instead of wasting money on incredibly slow, inflexible trams, they should be improving the bus system to provide more frequent service as a means of improving transit in Hamilton. Big cities like Toronto need rapid transit much more than small cities like Hamilton, where it is much more feasible to drive. If they didn't waste so much money on LRTs that don't have much benefit, they could be building subways in Toronto that would actually be useful and reduce travel time significantly. Small cities don't need rapid transit; big cities like Toronto really need it, and have been denied it for decades.

[@PWingert1966]

The other question is: Is there enough population density for an LRT? In Toronto, we have substantial numbers of condominium's pushing density to sustainable levels. I don't believe that Hamilton is anywhere near as dense so I don't think you will ever get an AvRevPerRider that makes it a sustainable solution that does not require excessive government support to operate (I didn't say self-funding. that is not the issue here)

[@RMTransit]

You don’t necessarily need a ton of density for higher order transit, but yes it definitely helps!

[@PWingert1966]

@@RMTransit But it does help reduce the supplement per rider by spreading the pain!😉

[@easymarks1637]

@@PWingert1966 Also helps for tourism and incentivising small local trips via transit rather than private vehicle, something that southern ontario desperately needs.

[@daveconiam1251]

WOW you Toronto people have no idea. Toronto was a rundown town of 300,000 when the Yonge subway was built in 1954. That subway slowly transferred Toronto to a world class city starting with the TD bank centre. Look to the future, not what Hamilton can support today.

[@maxwellepstein5706]

bro u good in ur intro

[@nicholasciviero7289]

McMaster to Eastgate Square is the original plan and feel it should be kept as such. Comparison sake is that the BLine is more like Yonge whist the ALine is line Bloor-Danforth, which can be more built like a Zum line.

[@theoverloader5110]

This man looks like a young Giger.

[@jefferyyoung2580]

My city 💙 has lrt

[@jacktattersall9457]

The business cases at Metrolinx also miss somethings, like transit-oriented development. Even the Ontario Line had a sub-1 benefit cost ratio (BCR).

[@matthewireland1917]

There should be a new transit study done for Hamilton. They need to determine if the LRT in its currently-planned routing is still a good investment given travel patterns and other infrastructure, buses, etc. as well as what transit service in Hamilton on the whole will look like if the LRT is built. Also the province needs to figure out what GO train service in Hamilton is going to look like into the future. They're building new GO stations along the CN Grimsby sub to extend regular service to St. Catherines/Niagara, but the only LRT connection in Hamilton will be at Hamilton GO Centre on the CP tracks? That seems like a mistake if you ask me.

[@hirofox85]

And the LRT wouldn't even go directly to the GO station, either. Anybody who wants to transfer from the LRT will have to walk down a few blocks.

[@pierresihite8854]

could you please do a video on the Jakarta MRT? Also lol that dance

[@futurerails8421]

The cost to benefit thing is misleading as you get a ton of lines which make sense if they were never torn down but seems not worthy rebuilding. Cities should rather see the high rebuilding cost as a penalty for having dismantled the line in the past and just look at the operation cost and maintainence cost as if the line still exists. North America torn down too much to go this way you should instead go the French way.

[@heidyalvarado6017]

They should scrap this idea and use the money to upgrade the go line to electric. That would include the Hamilton section. If they did that they could also add more stations in Hamilton.

[@RMTransit]

It’s not so simple, GO doesn’t own the tracks

[@heidyalvarado6017]

@@RMTransit I am sure they could work something out.

[@d.j.el-magnifico3511]

It needs more stops than just 3

[@anthonygagne8520]

Hey Reece can you talk about the Quebec tramway. Looks like the CAQ is trying to sabotage it.

[@RMTransit]

I will eventually haha!

[@fernbedek6302]

More bus lanes would be good. Improve the whole system.

[@scooter4143]

New York received money from the feds,and used it to build exactly one quarter of the overall cost of an eighth mile subway. Meaning New York built three Overenginered, overbuilt,underused stations under Second Avenue for five billion dollars. The second section presently under "pre construction"..will include subway tunnels previously constructed in the 1970s but never used. This section will house a new station,out of three more to be built,at the overall cost of a little over six billion dollars. This, with far less construction work. Pound foolish? The MTA has padded construction work in the past..what's stopping them from doing the same here? Oversight doesn't exist. Six billion dollars for three stations.. with ten blocks of subway tunnels already built..a design that actually drives up costs, instead of lowering it..no crosstown stations,or Crossriver connection to the Bronx...which would make more sense than Not building one. Less is More..is the MTA bible...and Telling the riders that this is a take it or leave it situation is jacked

[@JosephKleingebbinck]

The The

[@danielbartley516]

Do Singapore!!

[@RMTransit]

I don’t usually “do” videos when people ask this way, just a heads up!

[@ontariofirs7347]

If anyone doesnt like the idea of Hamilton becoming a big city, you shouldnt be living here. Go move to the damn boonies 😂😂

[@RMTransit]

To be fair, big cities don't really build LRT

[@ontariofirs7347]

@@RMTransit A big city can have both LRT and subways/undergrounds.

[@JohnNorton86]

Your wrong for a few reasons. First and foremost LRTs run in a dedicated ROW. Eliminating the congestion which slows buses. And which buses exacerbate. You save labour costs and generally LRTs last longer and require less service then a bus. They are quieter and improve livability in the corridor they operate. In Toronto the finch and Eglinton lines will see parts of the city which were hostile to pedestrians and unwelcoming transformed into more walkable communities. LRT s can also get priority signaling. You can serve many more people over a far larger area with an LRT then you can with the same money you would spend on a short subway line . And lastly LRTs are higher order transit. So are streetcars.

[@RMTransit]

1) BRT can run in a dedicated ROW, this reduces road space for cars and trucks. 2) Yes LRTs may have lower labor costs but less service is NOT a good thing. 3) Nothing about an LRT makes a place more walkable, look at Highway 7 in York, it got a dedicated transitway and is still a pedestrian hell. Thank you for your comment, I am happy for civil debate!

[@johndavey8354]

you started off saying the Hamilton LRT makes good sense, and is doable...by the end of this video you were saying that a BRT would be better...the whole time was tangenical and had little to do with Hamilton...by and large this was a rally bad job...stick to the subject, stop going off on tangents!

[@RMTransit]

I don’t agree, the whole point of the video was it was a journey from one topic to another

[@rfmckean]

The tunneling of the Eglington LRT is a huge waste. You make no comment about the Miller proposal which was very LRT centric. I am surprised that LRT on separate ROWs are the same as buses. I do not believe it! I can see this is true for the Carlton car but is it true for King or Harbourfront? Wasn't the King experiment a test of your theory?

[@RMTransit]

Um not sure what the question here is

[@lovehandr]

If you can have a separate LRT ROW, you can do the same with buses and without the need of rail and electrical infrastructure. I think that is the point. On-street LRT does not offer big benefits that can't be delivered by BRT.

[@rfmckean]

@@lovehandr Good point but LRTs have greater capacity. A LRT with a ROW is an intermediate step between buses/LRT (no ROW) and subways.

[@guldukat2453]

You are right - Eglinton LRT was a huge waste. Should’ve been a subway from the get go given how dense Eglinton corridor is.

[@RMTransit]

Yes but it’s such a niche middle step that it rarely makes sense given the cost to implement.

[@pixxx7315]

Once again, "You have talked a ton" BUT have said nothing that adds any substance to the issue. Broad generalities and sweeping conclusions result in an extremely disappointing commentary. Ten minutes after you began your rambling discourse, I'm at a loss to determine the gist of your talk. You really know precious little about transit planning. And virtually nothing about the situation in Hamilton.

[@RMTransit]

Ah yes, because everyone is going around talking about BCR's and why they are the way they are for LRT projects.

[@MetroGaming75]

Yes it's back