Rapid Transit B-Line (Eastgate Square to McMaster University) Corridor Options Survey Spring/Summer 2009

The B-Line rapid transit options being reviewed by Metrolinx include both Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Both technologies have been proven to bring redevelopment and positive economic impacts to cities that invest in transit. Technologies such as monorail, subway etc are not being considered by Metrolinx as a result of their capital cost and high ridership requirements for efficient operation.

BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT)

LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT)

A rubber-tired rapid transit service that combines stations, vehicles, running ways and a flexible operating plan into a high quality, customer focused service that is frequent, reliable, comfortable and cost efficient.

LRT is a lightweight metropolitan electric railway system characterized by its ability to operate single cars or short trains along exclusive right-of-way at street level. These vehicles are usually powered by overhead electrical wires, and offer a frequent, reliable, comfortable and high quality service that is environmentally sustainable.

East limits extend from Eastgate Square to Delta (Main/King intersection). West limits extend from Paradise Road South (west of Highway 403) to McMaster University*. Presently, both of these sections operate under two-way traffic.

3.1  The Rapid Transit Feasibility Studies, Phases 1, 2 & 3 and Metrolinx Benefits Case Analysis have confirmed that a full rapid transit system, in either the east or west sections of the study area, could operate in a median transitway (middle of road).

* Although the City of Hamilton supports the extension of the B-Line to University Plaza, funding is only available from the Province for rapid transit from Eastgate Square to McMaster University. This does not preclude future extensions of this corridor.

If the recommended scenario is a median transit (median of road) way for both the east and west sections I would support this option for

Centre limits extend from the Delta (Main/King intersection) to Paradise Road (west of Highway 403), through the Downtown core. Presently, this section operates under one-way traffic.

The Rapid Transit Feasibility Studies, Phases 1, 2 & 3 and Benefits Case Analysis have identified two viable options for rapid transit through this section.

3.2  Alternative 1 (centre): Rapid Transit Contra-flow (two-way rapid transit/one-way traffic) In order to maintain the one-way traffic operation of both Main Street and King Street and ensure access to the rapid transit system is as convenient as possible (in one corridor), rapid transit could operate in both directions on King Street, in the south side curb lanes, with the remaining lanes continuing to operate one-way traffic westbound. Main Street would remain one-way traffic eastbound. This scenario would address the day to day operational issues of LRT and would be more convenient for passengers by utilizing one corridor for rapid transit.

Some considerations related to this scenario include:

• Limited vehicular crossing of rapid transit lane
• Local side street closures on the side of the rapid transit curb lane (cul-de-sac)
• Left vehicular turning movements would take place at signalized intersections only
• As a result of removing two westbound traffic lanes, traffic congestion would be expected on certain sections of King Street.

If the recommended scenario is contra-flow (two-way rapid transit/one-way traffic) for the centre section I would support this option for

3.3  Alternative 2 (centre): Two-way (two-way traffic/two-way transit operation) In order to maintain as much roadway capacity as possible and provide rapid transit along one corridor through the centre section, rapid transit could operate on King Street in a median transitway. Both Main Street and King Street would be converted to two-way for traffic operation.

Some considerations related to this scenario include:

• Local side streets would operate as right turn in/ right turn out only access
• Left vehicular turning movements & U-turns would take place at signalized intersections only
• Limited vehicular crossing of rapid transit lanes

If the recommended scenario is two-way (two-way traffic/two-way transit operation) for the centre section I would support this option for

Hamilton City Council has requested that any funding received for rapid transit implementation cover 100% of the associated capital costs. Metrolinx has since indicated that although the Province would cover the “Lion’s Share” of capital costs, it is anticipated that municipalities would be required to contribute to some of the capital costs of implementation.

4.1  Would you support the implementation of rapid transit in Hamilton if the City was responsible for funding:

5.1   It is anticipated that in order to implement rapid transit in Hamilton there may be impacts on how the corridor looks and operates today from a land-use, pedestrian, transit and traffic perspective. While there may be significant changes, rapid transit will bring tremendous benefits to the city, such as economic development and sustainability. Given the potential for these changes, although every effort will be made to minimize the impacts, rapid transit will benefit the City of Hamilton and every effort should be made to move this process forward.

6.1  If you are already on our Rapid Transit Mailing List, do you find the project updates and project newsletters informative?