[mdrejhon]

Also...

Let's also keep in mind this is a LRT, not a streetcar so adding a stop at Delta will slow what's supposed to be a Rapid Transit Line!

The LRVs have to slow down at Delta for the curve, so adding a request-stop at Delta is very low impact --
The stopping impact is mere seconds as there's not much deceleration/acceleration versus having no stop there. And only if the request is triggered (the LRVs have request capability).

Having far-side platforms at Ottawa street, may save more time, than adding a Delta stop! Far-side means countdown crosswalks can finish, and light automatic green by the time LRVs coast through. Delta likely can't use the far-side platform technique, but that means Ottawa street can remain far-side, so that may cancel-out this argument.

Shifting such platforms slightly eastwards to one side, will negetate some time savings for one direction, due to unpredictable embarkation/disembarkation delay for eastwards LRVs -- traffic priority signalling does not work well for that.

The average slowdown to the B-Line for having a Delta station, will be mere seconds -- due to LRVs needing to run slow at Delta anyway. Might as well have them stop at Delta. And the critical traffic direction (morning peak where you're rushing to work/school on time) can continue to behave as far-side.

Having two far-side-platform stations, with a properly-tuned traffic priority system, actually can outperform one non-far-side station, in certain cases, during heavy traffic, on schedule perspective. It all depends, but the point is -- far side makes a big difference on traffic-prioritized rapid transit surface lines. Your suggestion would eliminate the far-side-ness of Ottawa St. You can't easily predictably traffic-prioritize a green light for non-far-side stations with countdown crosswalks. There are length limits for green lights and red lights. I have personally witnessed this with some of the good traffic-prioritized LRT routes...

You have good arguments. But it's not as simple as station count.

 

[DC83]

Politics/theatrics aside, here's the Scott Park plan:
https://www.thepublicrecord.ca/2016...-school-and-bernie-morelli-recreation-centre/

(This is based on old 2011 plan -- the 2016 September PIC's will show something different)

.

Is that supposed to convince me that a stop here is good?
Where's the increased residential density?!
The City flopped on this site, as well as the Queenston Traffic Circle site, by refusing to incorporate housing into the projects.

If Scott Park looked like North Toronto Collegiate, maybe I would support a stop here.

Instead we get a plain high school, typical rec centre, and a sub-par stadium that could potential be abandoned in 25 years.. Especially considering our school board.
Not worth a million-dollar LRT stop, when it should be a few meters east and connect with transit riders trying to get to the B-Line from Gage & Beach Rd or Cumberland Ave without having to walk to Scott Park!

 

[DC83]

My favourite part of the Scott Park HS/Rec Ctr Plan *sarcasm alert* is the parking lot that feeds directly into the LRT tracks/stop...
Like, that's a joke right?!
(top left of image, you can even see an LRV)

https://www.thepublicrecord.ca/2016...-school-and-bernie-morelli-recreation-centre/

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Brown Says Tories Will Honour LRT Funding Commitment
https://raisethehammer.org/article/3040/brown_says_tories_will_honour_lrt_funding_commitment

"It's incumbent on the province to be flexible about what the clear municipal will is," Brown said.
"But I think in this case, we have to respect the fact that there's a commitment to LRT, and I would honour that."

 

[mdrejhon]

DC83 (or others?) maybe you should write an article for one of the Hamilton sites (TheHamiltonian, RaiseTheHammer, or others). Help get the conversation started.

 

[drum118]

LRT crew scanning and drilling to prepare for construction

 

[rbt]

Section 5.1 of the Metrolinx 2016/2017 budget (http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pd...60909_BoardMtg_2016-2017_Business_Plan_EN.pdf):

The Technical Advisor for the Hurontario and Hamilton LRT projects is working to advance the design and technical specifications for the projects in preparation for the AFP process. The RFP for the Hurontario LRT is expected to be issued in November 2016 and close in June 2017. Design and construction is expected to begin in winter 2018. The RFP for the Hamilton LRT is expected to be issued in April 2017 and close in December 2017.

Little bit more detailed timeline on Hamilton LRT. Looks like construction would start a couple of months before the next Ontario election.

 

[mdrejhon]

LRT proposal now includes east end underpass
(to go under CP railroad tracks that are literally used only a few times a week max... ugh)

It looks like some changes,
-- Underpass under CP tracks near Delta (wow -- I need to study this more)
-- MSF will be near McMaster Innovation Centre

 

[mdrejhon]

SuperCrawl 2016 has several booths relating to LRT:

-- LRT demo vehicle on King William
-- CBC's
-- Our shared booth (Hamilton LRT Citizen Advocacy, Hamilton Light Rail Initative, and Graham Crawford's Logo Posters)

From: https://twitter.com/NotMyTypewriter/status/774708088981057536

From: https://twitter.com/cassdambrosio/status/774652159837089792

From https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154081161548386

 

[Markster]

LRT proposal now includes east end underpass
(to go under CP railroad tracks that are literally used only a few times a week max... ugh)

It looks like some changes,
-- Underpass under CP tracks near Delta (wow -- I need to study this more)
-- MSF will be near McMaster Innovation Centre

What I heard, as part of the Region of Waterloo's Phase 2 discussions, is that all crossings of these kinds of freight tracks, regardless of how frequently used they are, need to be grade separated because double-stacked container trains can't fit underneath LRT catenary wire. If you can guarantee that all freight will be single-height, then you can make it work. That's probably not an option for Hamilton.

 

[ShonTron]

What I heard, as part of the Region of Waterloo's Phase 2 discussions, is that all crossings of these kinds of freight tracks, regardless of how frequently used they are, need to be grade separated because double-stacked container trains can't fit underneath LRT catenary wire. If you can guarantee that all freight will be single-height, then you can make it work. That's probably not an option for Hamilton.

That's ridiculous. Those tracks were crossed four times by trolley bus wires (at Barton, Cannon, King and Main) until 1993.

The Hamilton Belt Line spur doesn't carry double stack cars (autoracks or intermodal containers), but the CP spur in Cambridge does, as it serves the Toyota plant. The excuse works for ION phase II, but not for the Hamilton LRT.

 

[muller877]

That's ridiculous. Those tracks were crossed four times by trolley bus wires (at Barton, Cannon, King and Main) until 1993.

The Hamilton Belt Line spur doesn't carry double stack cars (autoracks or intermodal containers), but the CP spur in Cambridge does, as it serves the Toyota plant. The excuse works for ION phase II, but not for the Hamilton LRT.

In the future it COULD carry double stacked. So makes total sense the CP is provisioning for potential future use. That is unless Hamilton agrees to permanently remove the catenary wire with 30 days notice (and halt LRT service). ...not going to happen!

 

[mdrejhon]

I wonder what precedent elsewhere in the world exists -- a small battery and a catenary gap.... Or two pantographs and a catenary gap smaller than the distance between the two.

I have mixed feelings about the underpass. But this could strengthen the GageRd/Delta station advocacy: If we put up with an underpass, then put station(s) nearby to make the underpass deal less bitter. Or even in there (a well lit station at bottom of underpass, as a few at supercrawl apparently suggested)

 

[ShonTron]

In the future it COULD carry double stacked. So makes total sense the CP is provisioning for potential future use. That is unless Hamilton agrees to permanently remove the catenary wire with 30 days notice (and halt LRT service). ...not going to happen!

It's a spur. The Belt Line is served from the CP Hamilton Yard, and there's no way an auto plant or a major container port will go in, served by the Belt Line. There will never be double stack trains crossing King Street.

 

[drum118]

I wonder what precedent elsewhere in the world exists -- a small battery and a catenary gap.... Or two pantographs and a catenary gap smaller than the distance between the two.

I have mixed feelings about the underpass. But this could strengthen the GageRd/Delta station advocacy: If we put up with an underpass, then put station(s) nearby to make the underpass deal less bitter. Or even in there (a well lit station at bottom of underpass, as a few at supercrawl apparently suggested)

One only has to go to Detroit Next year to see the long section downtown that will be on battery.

Nice is over a mile long from what I saw for Battery use.

The distance various for other systems to the point whole lines are going battery.

In all my years driving in Hamilton as well working there, rarely saw a freight train on the spur and no auto racks, since there is nothing down on the waterfront for them in the first place. Only saw box, tank, hopper, steel coil cars on these trains. Take a look a the various yards to see what in them these days.

Someone is trying to do a fast one for the underpass as well trying to kill the line.