;;

Monday, July 25, 2016

Dr. Chris Higgins on Clr. Whitehead's work on LRT

The Hamiltonian has received the following link (click here to go there) from Dr. Higgins, as his observsations related to Clr. Whitehead's submission, found here

132 comments:

  1. I stopped reading after point 5 that Higgins wrote. This is not the way or the method by which scholars write. Sorry, but I could not go on reading. Maybe he should rethink having sent this to you.
    Sorce

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

      too funny. this was point six "...the 'evidence' looks to be cherry-picked for maximum effect rather than to present a balanced analysis (much to my disappointment, this applies to the very small snippets of my work used throughout)." got that sorce. you stopped reading one point too soon. pretty devastating for whatever credibility councillor whitehead had. he has been called out

      Delete
  2. Thanks for the helpful feedback. I am sorry you found the point about a lack of summary section too un-academic.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You are missing the point. I am actually interested in your opinion on this matter, based on your training and expertise in the area.

    However, reducing yourself to twitter and releasing a document that seems to be have been meant for internal consumption, is not the way scholars operate. Nor is issuing snide remarks. hope this is not news to you.

    I am also now wondering about whether you can render a clinical and unbiased opinion, based on the manner in which you have engaged on Whitehead's material.
    Sorce

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

      "However, reducing yourself to twitter and releasing a document that seems to be have been meant for internal consumption.." is this true hamiltonian? was mr higgins report meant to be for internal use only? please clarify.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

      you sugeest dr higgins study is unbiased and clinical. ok. lets say for the sake of your arguement you are right and dr higgins report on lrt is junk science. it begs the question since councillor whitehead say fit to use dr higgins paper in HIS report, what other parts of councillor whiteheads report contains similiar socre identified "junk science"?

      Delete
  4. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

    I believe this is the main summary point-
    two hundred million additional dollars over the next 10 years will have to be injected in order to address the pre-conditions that he has found necessary for LRT to have a chance of success.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

      Seems like it's $200 million that council is obligated to sped on the HSR if it has any hope of hitting the transit targets established by city council in its official plans. Vision 2020 called for achieving 100 HSR rides per capita. We're at less than half that. I have trouble indulging those councillors who insist that they're pro-transit when their track record offers abundant evidence to the contrary. In this case, you don't have to dig very deep to uncover the facts of the matter.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

      "two hundred million additional dollars over the next 10 years will have to be injected in order to address the pre-conditions that he has found necessary for LRT to have a chance of success" that is an opinion. it is not data. its is not fact. its is councillor whiteheads assertion.

      Delete
  5. certainly beginning to get a better appreciation for why this proposal is so muddled, and the "holier than thou" nonsense so pervasive.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hamiltonian AdminJuly 25, 2016

    Dr. Higgins released this to us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

      did dr higgins violate any confidentiality or trust or commitment as sorce implies?

      Delete
    2. Hamiltonian AdminJuly 26, 2016

      Upon seeing that others were trying to post links to Dr. Higgins tweet, we emailed Dr. Higgins to see if he this was in fact his tweet and if he had anything he would like to send us. He responded by sending us a link to his tweet for publication, which we published. He also advisd us that he would be linking back with us in September when his work was ready. We can't comment on any other purposes that the tweet or the information had, as we were not a direct party to any other transaction of that sort.

      Dr. Higgins and anyone else who would like to share a view on this issue or others on The Hamiltonian, are always welcome and we are doing our best to ensure anyone who engages in The Hamiltonian are not treated disrespectfully.

      Thanks for your question and understanding

      Delete
  7. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

    dr higgins released a peer reviewed study. he has phd. his thesis was peer reviewed. here is councilor whitehead regarding HIS report "The work isn't meant to be scientific, but an attempt to find answers, he added: "I'm not doing a scientific study, let's be clear." ok. its just "sciencey'.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousJuly 25, 2016

    There's a similar counterpoint floating around from Brampton citizens. For someone so gung-ho about getting answers, Councillor Whitehead has apparently been scrimping on investigative legwork. To be fair, he has since told the Spec's editorial board that this paper is "not scientific," which (according to that cherished dictionary) is to say that it is not methodical or based in intellectual rigour.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is what it says on the Higgins tweet:

    .@Howard_Rabb, u never sent draft 4 peer review like u said! No worries, attached. Hope not too late b4 u go public!

    I can only conclude that Higgins' comments were meant for a guy named Howard Rabb to review prior to publishing the material. So, yes, it was meant for internal purposes, from the tweet.

    Anyway, I've not met a scholar who does things in what appears to be such poor form- at least, in this example.
    Sorce



    ReplyDelete
  10. @Higgins. I would seriously consider recalling the tweet and the attachement to it and perhaps answer the questions posed to you by The Hamiltonian. It seems to me that that would be a much more appropriate way to go.
    Sorce

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hamiltonian AdminJuly 26, 2016

      Dr. Higgins has advised us that his work is expected to be ready in Sept. and will address our questions at that time.

      Hamiltonian Admin

      Delete
    2. I hope it will be peer reviewed by an external, far from Hamilton, respected source. Nothing against Higgins- I am still deferring judgment until I read his stuff, but the reaction to Whitehead's work concerns me.
      Sorce

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 26, 2016

      dr higgins thesis which supports lrt in hamilton has been peer reviewed accepted and published and has received zero pushback in the greater academic community. yet you question the validity of dr higgins thesis. then we have councllor whiteheads report that you endorse 100% with no reservation. his report has been peer reviewed by no one. the councillors own words: the report "isnt scientific". but youre still going to continue to question the pro lrt results of dr higgins report. and youre going to critizise a report from him that hasnt been released. but you still have an open mind. ok.

      Delete
  11. Ya sort of stepped in it with that tweet

    Mr. Sarc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 26, 2016

      is that the same tweet i read? cause in that tweet, dr higgins said of councillor whiteheads report "the 'evidence' looks to be cherry-picked for maximum effect rather than to present a balanced analysis (much to my disappointment, this applies to the very small snippets of my work used throughout)." clearly councillor whitehead has "stepped in it" the author of the source material used by councillor whitehead refutes the use of and conclusions of councillor whitehead. councillor whitehead says dr diggins report says this and that. dr diggins says his report does not say what councillor whitehead says it does. and youre STILL believing councillor whitehead? ok.

      Delete
  12. AnonymousJuly 26, 2016

    and now even the provincial tories say they would build the lrt. so whos left against it now?

    ReplyDelete
  13. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    Most of Hamilton. Thats why everyone is afraid of a referendum.It's ok. They will be voted out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

      any proof of that? any evidence most of hamilton is against lrt? i will wait patiently for your response.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

      Nobody's afraid of a referendum. Go ahead, put it out there. You won't get a majority to vote on it, and as such, it's non-binding. A waste of taxpayer dollars to try and say that one side is "for" or "against" something that's already been put in motion.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

      Like for water fluoridation or deamalgamation?

      Delete
    4. "I will wait patiently for a response" Or maybe I wont, as my word is worthless.

      Delete
    5. a referendum on LRT would produce the greatest voter turnout in the history of the municipality, which of course would make it binding, which of course terrifies anonymous advocates who lack the conviction or confidence to attach their names to their opinions. Common sense.

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "a referendum on LRT would produce the greatest voter turnout in the history of the municipality" any proof or evidence of this? cause your track record on the subject matter is not good.
      youre one of the people that predicts complete council turnover every city election. tell you what. since you say theres massive oppo to the lrt, i will donate five dollars to the anti lrt organization of your choice so they can commission a city wide polling campaign with the question of your choice and the polling firm of your choice. let me know where to send the money.

      Delete
    7. not fact, nor opinion, just more nonsense. I have never predicted complete council turnover, ever.

      since your neighborhood association was collectively unable to raise the funds to replace that vandalized children's slide-and had to illicit the support of charity to accomplish your goal-maybe you should hold on to that fiver. No one needs your assistance. Thanks again

      Delete
    8. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      "I have never predicted complete council turnover, ever." yes you have.

      Delete
  14. If transit oriented development is the goal of the B-line LRT the Province would be wiser to expedite construction of a Stoney Creek GO station and implement all-day serviced. According to experts "Heavy rail is thought to provide the largest capitalization of accessibility benefits into property values followed by commuter rail. Light rail is third..." A successful LRT project does not stand alone but compliments an overall transit strategy. Once again the experts say "For Transit Oriented Development in general, research has shown that land value increases require proactive planning, network development, and transit system maturation.... For Hamilton, one concern for B-Line LRT and the attraction of new riders is that movements along the corridor are fairly efficient with low levels of congestion for automobile commuters....In an operating sense, the cost recovery ratio for the majority of light rail systems in the United States has often been disappointing and critics of rail transit note that significant and continued subsidies are required to maintain operations. To some extent, past problems reflect the difficulty of stimulating new types of behaviour in a society that remains predominantly auto-oriented. Hamilton is no exception in this respect......"

    In 2012 Christopher Higgins and his colleague Mark Ferguson published a City-funded LRT report by the McMaster Institute of Transportation and Logistics (MILTF).http://mitl.mcmaster.ca/reports/MITL_LRT.pdf Council was not made aware of this report until I drew it to their attention following its release in a transit blog. All the quotations in this message are from this report co-authored by Christopher Higgins. The measured comments of the 2012 report stand in contrast to the zealous advocacy which seems to have emerged in the absence of the MITL founder and director, Dr. Pavlos Kanaroglou who sadly passed away in May.

    Bob Bratina
    Bob Bratina

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

      Mr. Bratina, I thought you'd be for LRT, it's almost a train, and don't you enjoy trains?

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

      Re: "the Province would be wiser to expedite construction of a Stoney Creek GO station and implement all-day serviced"(sic)

      GO Transit's own projections provide evidence that this "growth potential" is easy to overstate, with Hamilton's three train stations projected to net just 800 additional passengers a day by 2031 compared to 2011.

      Lowest among those three, the "Confederation GO Station" (aka Centennial Parkway) is forecast to contribute just 150 of those passengers. Cost to unlock that potential? $150 million.

      http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/studies/GO_Transit_Rail_Parking_and_Station_Access_Plan_EN.pdf

      http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-story/5656891-centennial-go-station-a-huge-shot-in-the-arm-for-stoney-creek/

      West Harbour GO Station, meanwhile, cost $50 million to build, and is imagined to serve a total of 450 passengers a day by 2031 — roughly $111K per 2031 passenger.

      March 2016 estimates placed West Harbour ridership at an average of 100 outgoing passengers per day — about 1/10 the level of HSR boardings at the Eastgate Square terminal alone.

      Projected ridership at the Centennial GO station would be roughly on par with rush hour boardings of the 58 Stoney Creek Local.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for brining this to our attention M.P. Bratina. It is certainly a piece of the puzzle that has been swept under the rug. We have reached a point where I believe we need to go beyond Dr. Higgins. The exchanges here have been rather revealing.
      Sorce

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      I'm neutral on LRT but this comment from our ex-mayor is scary: "If transit oriented development is the goal of the B-line LRT the Province would be wiser to expedite construction of a Stoney Creek GO station and implement all-day serviced" for 2 key reasons. One, TOD (transit oriented development) is high density mixed use development. Is there any of that in the location of the new Stoney Creek GO? Second reason, the vast majority of Hamiltonians live and work in Hamilton. Over 70%. The best place to spend funds is within our amalgamated city to meet the needs of the majority in all areas. Which is exactly the plan. One step at a time.
      City of Hamilton Girl

      Delete
    5. Thanks for the note Bob. I agree that the evidence has always shown that light rail can flourish - when done right - and that enabling the right conditions requires careful planning, consideration of all the possible positives and negatives, and strong leadership.

      Rest assured that both myself and my colleagues strive to engage in cutting-edge research with real-world applications, and continue Pavlos’ tradition of contributing to, and indeed advocating for, factual, evidence-based, and balanced policy and planning discourse in Hamilton.

      This includes our newest report on rapid transit and growth planning in Ontario, launched in May: http://bit.ly/24ZDYOx

      Thanks for your support,
      -Chris Higgins

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      Re “expedite construction”

      Mar 26, 2008:
      “Downtown Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina, a member of GO’s board of directors, says the authority — which shifted Hamilton stops from James Street to Hunter Street in 1993 — approves the idea. “They’re onside with this.” Bratina and Mayor Fred Eisenberger, who pitched the new platform plan to Metrolinx, formerly the Greater Toronto Transit Authority, some time ago, say the new platform could mean more GO trains coming to Hamilton.”
      http://www.thespec.com/news/article/167061--provincial-cash-to-add-go-train-stop-at-liuna-station

      Dec 18, 2008
      “Long given the cold shoulder for commuter rail service, Hamilton residents will have Toronto-bound GO trains to hop on every 15 minutes in rush hour and every 30 minutes the rest of the day as early as 2013. GO Transit has released its strategic plan, GO 2020, and gave Hamilton a favourable place by including it in a core area slated to get major service upgrades over the next decade. Hamilton and other communities within the core area are poised to get two-way, all-day service by 2020. Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina, who sits on the GO Transit board of directors, says multiple variables, such as a teetering economy that could see fewer commuters heading to work, make specific timelines difficult to nail down. "It may be a little soon, it's hard to say, but I would say that's a good working date," he said of the 2013 timeline. Bratina said the extra trains will be added in stages. The new trains will run from LIUNA Station on James Street North when the $3-million platform facility there is complete in 2010.” http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/113100--more-trains-in-go-plan

      Feb 28, 2014:
      Transportation Minister Glen Murray made the business case for light rail transit in Hamilton, saying it's the best option for growing the city's tax base and attracting young people.…Murray was the guest of honour at a Hamilton Chamber of Commerce luncheon Friday and had earlier announced the successful bidder for the $44-million contract to build the new GO station on James Street North.… Mayor Bob Bratina, who has continually questioned the value of LRT for the city despite council's unanimous endorsement of the project, did not speak during the luncheon.”
      http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4390779-metrolinx-announces-44-million-go-station-on-james-street-north/

      June 4, 2013:
      “Provincial transportation agency Metrolinx said Tuesday it cannot confirm whether Hamilton will have all-day GO service by 2020, now that getting it in time for the 2015 Pan Am Games won't happen. Though Metrolinx says it is still "committed" to full service —running GO trains between Hamilton and Toronto every 15 minutes during rush hour and every half-hour during the rest of the day — the agency can't provide a specific time frame. However, MPP Ted McMeekin says Hamilton can expect "a further expansion" beyond the extra four trips a day by 2017. Beyond that, he said GO officials would have to provide specific details about timing and service levels.… GO Transit CEO Gary McNeil, who was not available for comment, has said in the past service is expanded to meet passenger demand, not on speculation.” http://www.thespec.com/news-story/3255259-no-all-day-go-by-2020-/

      Delete
  15. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    "Heavy rail is thought to provide the largest capitalization of accessibility benefits into property values followed by commuter rail. Light rail is third..." too bad the province wasnt offering to fund a new go station in stoney creek. they were offering to fund a municipal rapid transit system. what bob bratina thinks is the best choice isnt relevant since there was no offer from the province to fund go transit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no offer from the province to fund a Go-station because the city didn't petition this idea. I agree with Bratina in that there needs to be an overall transit strategy and the city ought to have petitioned the province for funding towards implementing a transit strategy, instead of being so narrow minded. There is also the possibility that the province approved the funding for LRT because they knew that Hamilton would not be able to implement it - for various reasons - one being feasibility and the other being logic.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "There is no offer from the province to fund a Go-station because the city didn't petition this idea."

      Mayor Bratina did, during one of his improv sessions.

      http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2138578-mayor-bratina-may-be-going-rogue/

      FWIW, the Centennial GO *is* being funded by the province. The project will cost three times the amount of the West Harbour Go Station and is anticipated to serve half as many passengers.

      http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-story/5656891-centennial-go-station-a-huge-shot-in-the-arm-for-stoney-creek/

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "I agree with Bratina in that there needs to be an overall transit strategy."

      Like the 2007 Transportation Master Plan?
      Or like 2006's The Big Move?
      Or 2015's Ten Year Transit Strategy?
      Or the 25-year horizon of the city-wide rapid transit network, of which the B-Line is phase 1?

      Delete
  16. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    "For Transit Oriented Development in general, research has shown that land value increases require proactive planning, network development, and transit system maturation.." good thing the city and province are doing exactly that. we have been planning proactively for over ten years, we have an existing network of buses to service the lrt, and we are planning on how to expand the lrt system with among other things something called blast.

    ReplyDelete
  17. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    "For Hamilton, one concern for B-Line LRT and the attraction of new riders is that movements along the corridor are fairly efficient with low levels of congestion for automobile commuters" good. since the current road network is so effecient, it will easily be able to accommodate losing one existing lane without any significant increase in congestion for car users.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. wrong again, and even you know better

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      do you have any data or prof to back up your statement? cause the traffic flow studies are public.

      Delete
    3. the traffic flow studies are the proof. The simplest of minds can grasp that reducing lanes increases congestion. Strange that you would be advocating for that in your neighborhood. Fill your boots, wise one.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      im just agreeing with mp bratina. do i think there will be more much more or very much more congestion? dont know, dont care to know, dont care in general. theres going to be a rapid transit lrt down king street and the drivers can suck it up buttercup. deal with it. there is very little congestion in hamilton outside of rush hour, and hamilton drivers have a warped sense of "congestion". i mean they have to slow down a bit, thats hamilton congestion. so if they have to slow down a bit more, traffic moves more slowly, people leave cars at home and take shiny new lrt same place they presently drive to. if they dont like those options wah wah wah all the way somewhere else. theres always new people and different cars to take the place of any that leave the lrt corridor or downtown.

      Delete
    5. closest to the truth you have been in some time. Considering congestion is a prerequisite for success-according to your expert-you thought it time to blow some holes in the bottom of your boat. And you wonder why no one wants to ride with you?

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      show me the words from doctor higgins thesis on hamilton lrt congestion has to be a "prerequisite" to lrt success. i know you wont show me cause you cant, but at least show me the passage you THINK is correct.

      Delete
    7. as easy as picking cherries.

      Delete
    8. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      if its so easy then do it. do a search, find your facts, cut, paste. say "i told you so" and we can go from there. you cant do it cause the passage isnt there. maybe you should work with mr robb and councillor whitehead. same style.

      Delete
    9. did a search, found my facts, told you so, and still find no reason to cooperate with your foolishness

      Delete
    10. bad news jim graham. first doctor higgins says lrt will have a negligible impact on congestion. you said otherwise. now ANOTHER expert says the same thing. whats your opinion on the new traffic study that says your wrong about congestion and the lrt?

      http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6793951-lrt-would-have-mixed-results-on-car-traffic-study/

      Delete
    11. "..did a search, found my facts, told you so,..." jim doesnt say what facts or where these facts are from. you would think if he had access to different facts than the two experts he disagrees with, he might want to look reasonable and provide these facts. you would think.

      Delete
    12. congestion does not exist now, so you want to create it. Bravo. 10 years of careful planning on the part of a truly unique perspective. Thanks for your help.

      Delete
    13. but that wasnt the point jim. mp bratina said lrt will cause significant traffic congestion. doctor higgins thesis said it wouldnt. you said mp bratina was right and doctor higgins was wrong. and that this was common sense that everyone knew. now ANOTHER expert agrees with doctor higgins and says jim graham and mp bratina are incorrect on lrt causing significant congestion. but you wont admit being wron. you will just continue to deflect. deny. distract.

      Delete
    14. I will continue to confront, correct,and confuse. I will point out when you are wron. My public duty

      Delete
  18. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    "In an operating sense, the cost recovery ratio for the majority of light rail systems in the United States has often been disappointing and critics of rail transit note that significant and continued subsidies are required to maintain operations." the exact same holds true for our current hsr system. as is the same for almost every urban transportation network. they arent money makers and are all subsidized in some way. the lrt will be no different except it has many benefits traditional buses dont.

    ReplyDelete
  19. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    "To some extent, past problems reflect the difficulty of stimulating new types of behaviour in a society that remains predominantly auto-oriented. Hamilton is no exception in this respect......" so we better make transit as modern effecient effective and responsible as possible. the lrt does this. the status quo does not.

    ReplyDelete
  20. AnonymousJuly 27, 2016

    i wonder if bob bratina sent a copy of this to doctor higgins before he published it here?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Chris Higgin's peer review of Terry Whitehead was rather respectful, compared to a lot of the fierce LRT debate that occurs on Facebook/Twitter.

    For those not familiar, Howard Rabb was the person hired by Terry Whitehead to do the report for his office.

    The Hamilton LRT Citizen Advocacy (of which I'm a lead/volunteer of) referenced Mr. Higgins' presentation yesterday when presenting as a delegation to the LRT sub-committee yesterday -- we begin talking at 2h34m45s into Joe Coleman's video, and our slide referencing Chris' critique begins at 2h40m23s.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHaeJZl2nto&t=2h34m41s

    ReplyDelete
  22. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

    "Chris Higgin's peer review of Terry Whitehead was rather respectful, compared to a lot of the fierce LRT debate that occurs on Facebook/Twitter." true that. exactly how many lawsuits has councillor whitehead had to settle after exchanging angry words? one that i recall, that fella in flamborough. then there was the public apology to the police board member. and the chief of police? then his public apology last month for his choice of the word rape to describe a internal transfer of city resources. so according to sorce and jim doctor higgins cant be trusted cause his tweet crossed some imaginary subjective line in the sand. but councillor whitehead, he of the hatrick of unprofessional over the line statements he has had to apologize for multiple times, with one having legal consequences, we are supposed to believe and applaud him? after one of the sources he uses in his self described "its not scientific" report says that councillor whitehead is misusing his data for questionable purposes? ok then. just checkin.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Higgins says:

    I agree that the evidence has always shown that light rail can flourish - when done right - and that enabling the right conditions requires careful planning, consideration of all the possible positives and negatives, and strong leadership.


    "When done right is a key qualifier here. So, let's look at Whitehead's list

    we don't have a destination to destimation model- that's just a fact
    we dont have park and ride provisons- fact
    We don't have a congestion problem (see Tom Tom data) fact
    We don't have feeder lines- fact
    we don't have the riodership numbers- fact
    we are not land assembling- fact
    we dont have job centres around stations- fact

    So, it seems like Whitehead and Higgins agree after all. It must be done right- Higgins. But it's not being done right- Whitehead.
    Sorce


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      Zing

      Delete
    2. also, we need the maturity that someone like Bob Bratina brings.
      Sorce

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "also, we need the maturity that someone like Bob Bratina brings."

      Yes, ultra mature. Maybe he can throw a pen in the house of commons?

      Delete
    4. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      Fourth row and time to kill.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "we dont have job centres around stations"

      “In Hamilton, 17% of the existing population and 20% of employment opportunities are located within 800m of the B-Line Corridor. 80% of the city’s population is serviced by HSR transit routes that connect directly with the B-Line.”

      https://www.hamilton.ca/sites/default/files/media/browser/2015-07-19/rr-appendix_a_-_lrt.pdf

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      Annual Change to City Levy

      2015 0.00%
      2016 0.00%
      2017 0.21%
      2018 0.15%
      2019 0.43%
      2020 0.38%
      2021 0.37%
      2022 0.36%
      2023 0.40%
      2024 0.39%

      City levy will increase by 0.33% annually , on average, over the next 8 years.
      https://www.hamilton.ca/sites/default/files/media/browser/2015-07-19/transit-strategy-report-march-6-2015.pdf

      Delete
    7. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "LRT will be located within 800 metres of 20% of Hamilton residents and employment"
      https://www.hamilton.ca/sites/default/files/media/browser/2015-07-19/rr-appendix_a_-_lrt.pdf

      Delete
    8. AnonymousJuly 28, 2016

      "see Tom Tom data"

      "It’s meaningless for a number of reasons including:

      1. It measures the difference in speed between free flow and congested periods. That means cities with lots of all day congestion there isn’t as much of a difference between peak and off peak times and therefore they get recorded as having less congestion.

      2. It doesn’t take into account the speeds at which roads most efficiently move traffic – which is not in free flow conditions

      3. It doesn’t represent all trips on the transport network. We know that even though only about 10% of all trips to work (which excludes trips for education) are made via PT, it still represents a lot of people. For trips to the City Centre more than half of the people arrive by means other than a private vehicle and many of the PT users arrive via the train, ferry or a bus that has travelled along bus lanes. The people on those services or walking/cycling are doing so often completely free of congestion and so their experience isn’t counted.

      http://transportblog.co.nz/2014/06/04/tomtom-latest-meaningless-congestion-report/

      4. The data only comes from people with a TomTom device and who have obviously had it on. Many people making the same trip on a daily basis or running a regular errand like going to a supermarket are likely to simply leave their GPS systems off. That is likely to distort the overall figures as they may use routes that have less congestion on them than the route the GPS would select.

      5. It can disproportionately impact on smaller cities. As an example if you’re in a larger city and have a 45 minute commute however congestion delays you by 30 minutes that equates to a 67% congestion rate however if you are in a smaller city and you’re commute is only 15 minutes and you get delayed by 15 minutes that’s a 100% delay despite the hold up being half of what the bigger city experienced."

      http://transportblog.co.nz/2014/06/04/tomtom-latest-meaningless-congestion-report/

      Delete
    9. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      Maybe Dr. Higgins is an expert and maybe Terry Whitehead is not. But Terry Whitehead is making a lot of sense. It sounds like Whitehead hit a few nerves.The list rings true to me. Sorry, not for or against LRT but leaning to against.

      Delete
    10. "10 years of careful planning"?

      Delete
    11. I see from my click tracker that no one has bothered to click the report link. See some details for yourself on pg 50 and ch4, might help answer that 'no job centres' and population question in particular.

      Delete
    12. I read page 50. The statement was we don't have job centres (plural). If I read you correctly, you are saying that B line phase 1 is the highest density in the region. I guess what you take from that is that it has the characteristics needed to perhaps be useful. Whereas, the A line density is lower, troubled by the harbour.

      IF all stations were constructed -that's a big IF.

      Are there any plans for all stations to be constructed? What do those stations need to look like if they are to be effective. Does anyone know and more importantly, did anyone plan for the construction of these stations- not only in the goodness of time, but at the right time? Show me where this is?

      I appreciate Dr. Higgins work and knowledge. I think he would do well to simply tell it like it is and not try to put a face on it. If I were he, I would not put my academic rep on the line for the sake of a lobby group who is counting on me to put a certain veneer on a bad picture.
      Sorce

      Delete
    13. Sorce, I will wait for you you read pages 51, 52, Chapter 4, and perhaps the full report and the earlier one, and will answer any questions you may have. I find it troubling that on the one hand you criticize me for not 'telling it like it is' and putting a 'face on it' and questioning my reputation, and then make no effort to read my writing. It is not my job to summarize it for you. Please emerge from internet anonymity and find me in the future when you would like to engage in an intelligent conversation.
      -Chris

      Delete
    14. BTW..I don't mean stations that just geographically can be found on a map. I mean stations that have the requisite characteristics to be effective supports to LRT.
      Sorce

      Delete
    15. Thanks for the conversation stopper. It's not what this place is about.
      Sorce

      Delete
    16. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      Past facts. Running on gut feelings.

      Delete
    17. your clicker must be defective Chris, read the report, front to back.

      Delete
    18. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      "Please emerge from internet anonymity and find me in the future when you would like to engage in an intelligent conversation." not gonna happen.

      Delete
    19. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      @Sorce. Thanks for making something stand out. Yiou know what I mean. Very useful to know

      Delete
    20. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      drat! they found the hidden data that shows the lrt is doomed to failure. we would have gotten away with it, if it werent for you meddling kids!

      Delete
  24. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

    obvious to anyone is that we should not look first to councillor whiteheads checklist in his report. we should look at doctor higgins checklist in his thesis. councillor whitehead is not an expert in mass rapid transit. doctor higgins is. councillor whiteheads report in his own words "I'm not doing a scientific study, let's be clear.". doctor higgins thesis was peer reviewed and accepted. that is why he is "doctor" higgins and councillor whitehead is "councillor" whitehead. doctor higins checklist for lrt says conditions, with execution of existing in place strategies, presently support lrt in hamilton. councillor whithead says no to lrt. matters such as a mass rapid transit system, obviously one looks to the experts, like doctor higgins. not councillor whitehead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      "councillor whitehead is not an expert in mass rapid transit"....

      and yet, he nailed some great points

      Delete
  25. I too have read the report and concur that Higgins list of qualifications for success are not met on the Blind LRT. So what's wrong with pointing out that a very smart man who wrote a paper really didn't make as strong a case for LRT in Hamilton as against it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 29, 2016

      "So what's wrong with pointing out that a very smart man who wrote a paper really didn't make as strong a case for LRT in Hamilton as against it?" because almost every point councillor whitehead raised in his report has either been addressed by now, or has a timetable in place as to when these questions will be answered. take some of councillor whiteheads questions he says are unknowns, and google them. viola! so many answers to so many of his questions. will people take those answers from whoever gives them. no, probably not. councillor whitehead hasnt. but just cause councillor whitehead or sorce or allan or jim doesnt LIKE the answers, it doesnt mean the questions are "unanswered".

      Delete
    2. I disagree with your assessment of what was addressed or that concerns that will be addressed can be considered so now when a decision is being made. I have done the research and say advocates cherry pick data to make their case.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      oh well. you say one thing, hundreds of experts say another. there is literally NO expert, NOT ONE professional in hamilton that has taken a anti lrt stance. just angry allan and angry jim and angry sorce.

      Delete
    4. Not true and ad hominem is not acceptable

      Delete
    5. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      if its not true prove me wrong. what expert and professional in hamilton is anti lrt? i will wait forever, as we always do with allan.

      Delete
    6. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      are you going to back up your statement and provide and example of ONE expert or professional in hamilton that is anti lrt?

      Delete
    7. not true. laughably so. and your continued failure to produce one expert or any professional in hamilton that has publicly opposed lrt is further proof of your weak position.

      Delete
  26. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

    I read pages 51 and 52. I'm not sure how a port Credit implementation would answer questions about job centres being constructed/developed in the Hamilton implementation. Maybe I'm dense

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

      This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. Hamiltonian AdminJuly 30, 2016

      Comment removed as it violates our site policy on respectful discourse.

      Delete
  27. Bob BratinaJuly 30, 2016

    "However, constant political obstructionism from then-Mayor Bob Bratina sent the Province a signal that Hamilton was not ready for a funding commitment. A project as big and transformative as LRT needs a political champion to ensure success, and Hamilton did not have that champion in the mayor's office." The statement regarding funding is false and renders much of the RTH advocacy useless. At no time did I make any representation to the Province or Premiers that contradicted Council's position. Furthermore the only "champion" required is clarity regarding implications for the City with regard to a significant transit investment. In fact the former director of transit was either excluded or ignored by the subsequently disbanded LRT office. The departure of his successor underscores the irrelevance of sound transit planning in the current context. LRT was not contemplated in the transit planning that preceded the "Big Move" announcement of 2008. Hamilton was included in my opinion to become part of the "funding tools" that were ultimately abandoned in favour of the Hydro One sell-off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 31, 2016

      Re "At no time did I make any representation to the Province or Premiers that contradicted Council's position."

      Oct 12, 2011:

      City council has stripped Mayor Bob Bratina of his power to lobby the upper levels of government.

      In an unprecedented move, council passed a motion Tuesday barring the mayor from meeting with senior levels of government, making financial commitments and negotiating — unless he is in the company of other councillors and the city manager.

      The motion, introduced by Councillor Terry Whitehead, also says all communications from upper levels of government regarding “potential funding” must be copied to the mayor, city manager Chris Murray, and all councillors within 48 hours. It passed almost unanimously, with Bratina and councillors Russ Powers and Maria Pearson opposed.…

      While councillors say the motion is only intended to strengthen its intergovernmental relations protocols, the move is an unofficial indictment of Bratina’s behaviour during the recent provincial election campaign. Bratina allied with the Liberals, appearing alongside Hamilton’s Grit candidates at several media conferences and delivering an official endorsement for the party the day before the election — all without council’s knowledge or approval.

      During the campaign, Premier Dalton McGuinty also credited Bratina’s influence with the province’s decision to back away from its 2007 promise to fund light rapid transit in Hamilton in favour of funding all-day GO service to Toronto — another development that took council by surprise.

      “Mayor Bratina worked closely with Ontario Liberals and made it clear to us that his first priority for transit in Hamilton is a two-way, full day GO service,” McGuinty wrote in an email to The Spectator.

      “We have a great relationship with the mayor, we heard him loud and clear and we are happy to say that we can deliver his transit priority for Hamilton.”

      https://web.archive.org/web/20140922110843/http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2188125-council-muzzles-mayor-bob-bratina/


      http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/2245470-bob-bratina-is-his-own-worst-enemy/

      http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2138578-mayor-bratina-may-be-going-rogue/

      http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/2549959-dreschel-bratina-off-the-rails-with-lrt/

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 31, 2016

      Re "At no time did I make any representation to the Province or Premiers that contradicted Council's position."

      April 13, 2013:

      Councillors are planning to officially reiterate their support of an east-west LRT line, in light of recent comments by the mayor.

      Councillor Brian McHattie says he’ll introduce a motion at next Wednesday’s council meeting “to make it clear that our No. 1 priority is LRT on the B-Line.”

      McHattie says he’s still working out the specifics of his motion, but his intention is to clarify council’s support of LRT and remind Mayor Bob Bratina he must endorse that position.

      The motion is in response to comments Bratina made Wednesday. The mayor said he was informed by Premier Kathleen Wynne’s office that Hamilton will have to choose between LRT and extending all-day GO service to Stoney Creek. However, soon after Bratina made those comments, the premier’s office said that wasn’t the case.

      During an appearance on the Bill Kelly Radio show Thursday, Bratina categorically denied speaking to Wynne about LRT and accused The Spectator of fabricating the story.

      McHattie says the motion will also include a stipulation that Bratina must include members of the Chamber of Commerce LRT task force — McHattie and fellow councillors Lloyd Ferguson and Jason Farr — in any LRT meetings he has with the province.

      “It’s my feeling that we need to get the record straight,” said Ferguson, who supports McHattie’s plan. “In my view, it is straight, but let’s say it one more time.”

      This incident is the latest in a string of episodes revolving around Bratina’s tendency to backtrack, speak off the cuff or communicate a position that differs from council’s corporate stance.

      “The only consistency Bob is displaying is inconsistency in communicating and following council’s will,” said Councillor Sam Merulla. “Bob’s antics are a distraction from the real issues we are working on, and it is becoming an epic embarrassment. I implore him to seek out guidance to facilitate the necessary action to prevent this from happening in the future.”

      http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2550337-council-pushing-back-against-mayor-s-lrt-gaffe

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 31, 2016

      Re "At no time did I make any representation to the Province or Premiers that contradicted Council's position."

      April 13, 2013:

      An erroneous comment by Mayor Bob Bratina about how the premier views the future of Hamilton transit left city politicians aghast Wednesday, prompting one to question whether Bratina was being “wilfully stupid.”

      Bratina told Metroland News Service that Premier Kathleen Wynne made clear at a private event last weekend that Hamilton will have to choose between a light-rail transit line through the lower city and extending all-day GO service to Stoney Creek.

      During the interview Wednesday at a transit forum in Toronto, Bratina also said Wynne’s senior staff confirmed Hamilton will have to make that choice.

      “I think we would have to look at that,” Bratina told The Spectator. “GO trains stopping on Centennial Parkway could take 5,000 cars off the road.”

      But it emerged later Wednesday that Bratina did not attend the event where Wynne spoke last Sunday — a $500-per-ticket fundraiser for Hamilton cabinet minister Ted McMeekin at the Hamilton Golf & Country Club.

      McMeekin said the premier spoke about transit in general, but did not convey any expectation that Hamilton would have to make such a choice.

      “I’m a little confused because he (Bratina) wasn’t at the fundraiser,” McMeekin said Wednesday, noting only a member of the mayor’s staff attended.

      Bratina did not respond to The Spectator’s requests for a second interview to clarify his comments.

      http://www.metronews.ca/news/hamilton/2013/04/18/hamilton-mayors-comment-on-lrt-takes-wrong-turn.html

      Delete
    4. April 25, 2013:

      A motion intended to deliver a slap on the wrist to Mayor Bob Bratina spiralled into an emotional, highly charged conflict Wednesday night that ended with councillors accusing the mayor of bullying and threatening the city manager.

      Councillor Sam Merulla is calling for an in-camera session to debate Bratina’s behaviour after the mayor was seen speaking aggressively to city manager Chris Murray at Wednesday’s council meeting.

      “I heard you yell at our city manager. What did you bully the city manager with?” Merulla asked. “I want to go in camera, I want another investigation, and I think the integrity commissioner should be involved as well.”
      After a defiant Bratina refused to explain the exchange to councillors — and after the mayor put Murray on the spot, asking the bureaucrat whether he was bullied — Councillor Jason Farr accused the mayor of being “nasty.”

      “I heard you,” Farr yelled at Bratina, before packing up his notes and hastily leaving council chambers. “You’re being awfully nasty. This is terrible what you are doing.”

      At issue was a motion from Councillor Brian McHattie reaffirming council’s support of light rail transit (LRT). McHattie put forward the motion in response to recent comments from Bratina which several councillors said cast unnecessary doubt on the city’s commitment to LRT.

      The mayor told The Spectator he was informed by Premier Kathleen Wynne’s office that Hamilton will have to choose between LRT and extending all-day GO service to Stoney Creek. However, soon after Bratina made those comments, the premier’s office said that wasn’t the case. During an appearance on the Bill Kelly Radio show the following day, and several times during Wednesday night’s council meeting, Bratina said the story was not accurate.

      Bratina did not return The Spectator’s calls for clarification that day, nor has he requested a correction. After Wednesday night’s meeting, he walked away from a Spectator reporter and refused to stop and answer questions.

      http://www.metronews.ca/news/hamilton/2013/04/25/council-meeting-goes-off-the-rails-with-angry-outbursts-accusations.html

      Delete
    5. Re "In fact the former director of transit was either excluded or ignored by the subsequently disbanded LRT office."

      The City's Rapid Transit office was of course disbanded in the fall of 2011, under then-Mayor Bratina.

      Delete
    6. Re "At no time did I make any representation to the Province or Premiers that contradicted Council's position."

      Oct 1, 2011:

      “Mayor Bratina worked closely with Ontario Liberals and made it clear to us that his first priority for transit in Hamilton is two-way full-day GO service. We have a great relationship with the mayor, we heard him loud and clear and we are happy to say that we can deliver his transit priority for Hamilton.”

      Those are the words of Premier Dalton McGuinty, responding to a series of questions asked of all three major parties by The Spectator’s editorial board in preparation for our pre-election editorials. We asked the premier about his previously stated Light Rail Transit commitments, expressed in 2007 and again in 2009, to the effect that Hamilton was on the LRT priority list, and the province would assist in paying for capital costs associated with LRT. He didn’t really answer the question, instead praising the recent GO expansion announcement. About LRT he said: “The City of Hamilton is also working with Metrolinx on its Preliminary Design and Engineering Work Plan for Light Rail Transit in Hamilton. Ontario Liberals provided $3 million toward that work. That work is ongoing and we look forward to the results toward the end of this year.”

      Yes, the landscape around LRT in Hamilton has changed. And if you want to know why, reread the premier’s own words. There’s a problem there. It’s not that the mayor mistakenly believes, and has said repeatedly, that GO and LRT is an either/or proposition. It is that the mayor unilaterally, without city council’s endorsement or support, took it upon himself to tell the premier’s office GO is the immediate priority, with LRT coming a distant second, if at all. But that’s not what city council said in its 2008 endorsement of pursuing LRT. In effect, the mayor misrepresented the position of council. He certainly knew council’s position, since he was there when it was adopted.

      For better or worse, the mayor is the political leader and spokesperson for our city. Fair enough. But he is not city council. He is one vote. He should not be allowed to usurp council’s stated will. And yet that is what he did, and did so, apparently with impunity.

      http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/2218058-bratina-wrong-to-usurp-council-on-lrt/

      Delete
    7. "but he is not city council. He is one vote. He should not be allowed to usurp council's stated will." I wonder if this train of thought is universal in its application, or if it only refers to Bob's time in office?

      Delete
    8. I think it's universal. He just bumbled across that line repeatedly.

      Delete
  28. AnonymousJuly 30, 2016

    Can you imagine if we cared as much about poverty and our children as we do about this nonsense. Shame

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 31, 2016

      Can you imagine if government were capable of dealing with more than one issue at the same time? That would be amazing.

      Delete
    2. Hamilton- The Best place to force LRT- for get the child thing

      Delete
  29. Bob BratinaJuly 31, 2016

    The statement regarding a discussion with Kathleen Wynne was false at the time it was published and therefore remains false, and should be seen as ridiculous in suggesting that someone could put words in the Premier's mouth that would avoid immediate scrutiny.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. cars are bad Bob. Is it any wonder that unreasonable and irrational fears turn vindictive when challenged? Thank-you for your leadership on the issue, your opinions become increasingly important as this progresses.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousJuly 31, 2016

      Excited to see the transit funding commitments MPP Bratina will be bringing on behalf of the federal government.

      Delete
  30. AnonymousJuly 31, 2016

    Team Hamilton LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Bob BratinaAugust 01, 2016

    The information shared with Premier McGuinty came from the Senior Management Team (SMT) 2011 Work Plan (CM11005) of April 11, 2011. Council unanimously approved the plan which included: "Aggressively pursue all-day GO Service to a station on James Street North". During the meeting among the enthusiastic supporters of this plan was Brian McHattie who encouraged the Mayor (me) to make a strong representation to the premier. The details are available on-line with the link below. On August 20, 2012 we met with the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation Bob Chiarelli and members of his staff, including the Deputy Minister. Mr. Chiarelli initiated the conversation by asking whether we had pursued LRT funding with the Federal Government. On the question of LRT funding, he stated that a number of approaches are being considered in preparation for the Metrolinx budget presentation scheduled for June 2013, and that we should look at the Waterloo model as one example of how different levels of government might participate. There is to date, no specific funding formula but the clear message from the minister was that all municipalities are expected to be contributors. This was a departure of course from the understaning we had from the original 2008 Big Move announcement of whatever 100 per cent funding was supposed to mean. All of this is old news, well covered at the time by The Hamiltonian and other blogs.
    http://www2.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/1EABC250-0907-4350-8A26-4BC59F8C5594/0/Apr11EDRMS_n156810_v1_7_2__CM11005_SMT_2011_Work_Plan.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a question for Bob Bratina. If you read some comments on TH, some people insist that it is LRT or nothing for Hamilton. Based on your experience in government, is that ever really the case that governments would dig in like that?

      Delete
    2. Bob BratinaAugust 01, 2016

      It seems that this provincial government is pushing an aggressive timeline to put tenders out for the LRT project before the current term ends. It suggests change from the McGuinty era, perhaps based on Premier Wynne's personal vision. Remember that she was moved from transportation to municipal affairs in the 2011 Cabinet shuffle. Upon winning the election Steve Del Duca was given Transportation with the mandate of "transforming GO Transit into a regional express system that “will provide 15-minute, two-way electrified service, manage congestion and move people through the GTHA. In my meeting as mayor with him he stated that our transit planning would need to match up with the Regional Express Rail designation. Since then however, with the current mayor, we have been told different things, especially with regard to 100 per cent funding that former Minister Chiarelli did not offer. So it would seem that the government may indeed be digging in on a transit plan that many on council might not fully support. Certainly the debate continues among members of the public.

      Delete
    3. Spending money before an election is business as usual, as is locking in "milestones" that confer political advantage or improve electoral profile. Like investing $7M in the Lister Block 4 months before the 2007 polls. Or cancelling a Mississauga gas plant two weeks before the 2011 polls.

      Moreover, there is no "personal vision" about implementing The Big Move. "Political vision", perhaps, but in a broader sense: Announced in 2008, this is a bold plan that was largely unfunded under Premier McGuinty, even as the clock on the 25-year plan kept ticking. Implementing a funding strategy is not about personal preference but merely responsible governance — walking the walk, not just talking the talk.

      “The Liberals seem to be thinking that if they say the right things, it’s somehow the same as doing the right things.”

      http://www.desmog.ca/2016/07/29/trudeau-just-broke-his-promise-canada-s-first-nations

      http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/kelly-mcparland-trudeaus-first-broken-promise-to-natives-is-a-whopper-but-wont-be-the-last

      https://ipolitics.ca/2016/07/27/ndp-mp-to-table-bill-to-repeal-c-51-says-liberals-dragging-feet-on-reform/

      http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/03/03/harper-20-trudeau-says-canada-needs-more-tar-sands-pipelines

      Delete
    4. MP Bratina has evidently run up against The Hamiltonian’s 4,096-character limit.

      Minister Del Duca's Mandate Letter, which is more expansive and comprehensive than the above comment would have readers believe. MP Bratina has selected just one of 22 “specific priorities” detailed in the letter, which also includes rapid transit projects such as Hamilton’s proposed LRT:

      “• Working with Metrolinx to prioritize other rapid transit projects contained in The Big Move, the regional transit plan for the GTHA, for investment consideration under Moving Ontario Forward.”

      Premier Wynne expands the 22 mandate priorities in the letter’s concluding paragraphs, saying:

      “We have an ambitious agenda for the next four years. I know that, by working together in partnership, we can be successful. The above list of priority initiatives is not meant to be exhaustive, as there are many other responsibilities that you and your ministry will need to carry out. To that end, this mandate letter is to be used by your ministry to develop more detailed plans for implementation of the initiatives above, in addition to other initiatives not highlighted in this letter.”

      I would invite readers to review the letter, linked here:

      https://www.ontario.ca/page/2014-mandate-letter-transportation

      Delete
    5. Re "some people insist that it is LRT or nothing for Hamilton"

      The suggestion as I see it is not that it is "LRT or nothing," but rather that Hamilton's best chance at securing $1B in transit infrastructure investment is currently in hand. The City is not being handed $1B to spend on transit; the province has earmarked $1B based on council’s preferred outcome of B-Line LRT. We can't just suggest that they fund the HSR or a handful of BRT lines.

      If council decides to decline the offered LRT investment, the funds would return to the Moving Ontario Forward dedicated funding pool, and Hamilton would be welcome to reapply with projects that we thought represented a stronger business case, for consideration and possible funding. That fund could potentially be dissolved by another government or drained before we can reapply for funding (just as Brampton is being allowed to do so) and in that sense there is a possibility of a “nothing” outcome.

      Council's calculus might also involve unquantifiables such as the “cry wolf” clause — the injury to the City’s reputation that it would petition senior government for hundreds of millions in infrastructure investment that, when it came down to it, it wasn’t sure that it really needed.

      Delete
    6. Except Premier Wynn has said otherwise

      Delete
    7. allan taylor continues to provide half the story. premiere wynne did say in apress conference with no further detail or clarification that its not only lrt the province would fund. her government ministers and spokes people have said on the record again and again hamilton is welcome to pass on the 1 billion in lrt funding, but we will need to submit another proposal for consideration. timeline? unknown. amount being offered? unknown. is there any guarantee we will get funding? no. will we get full funding like for lrt or will hamilton have to contribute and if so how much? unknown. so the anti lrt brigade can say what they want but they cant answer ANY questions about who where what when or how much or even if any future funding will come from premiere wynne.

      Delete
    8. And you continue to twist the truth. Fact is it's never been LRT or nothing according to Wynn. Of course she could be lying.

      Delete
    9. heres the ministry of transportation disagreeing with you. hamilton uses the 1 billion on lrt, or it goes back into the fund and we wait and see what happens. fact.

      We can use the funding for transit improvements in general,” said Collins, recently speaking to reporters. “Every community is seeing an investment from the province. We could fund LRT, or something else.”

      That “something else,” said Collins could include repairs to sidewalks, roads, and expand the city’s bus system.

      But the Ontario Ministry of Transportation is saying Hamilton has to use the money on the LRT.

      “Investments under the Moving Ontario Forward – Inside the GTHA fund are directed to rapid transit projects that will help improve mobility and manage congestion in the region,” stated Bob Nichols, senior media liaison officer in an email.

      He stated the province has “committed” $1 billion for the capital construction of Hamilton’s LRT. The province and Metrolinx respects the “importance” of the city’s decision to support transit improvements and will “work collaboratively” with Hamilton to “advance work on the project.”

      http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6555261-ontario-says-hamilton-must-use-1-billion-for-lrt/

      Delete
    10. Mississauga could put Brampton’s share of LRT funding to good use, according to Mayor Bonnie Crombie.

      But with the Province’s 2016 pre-budget consultations underway, neither she, nor city staff would say whether or not the city plans to formalize a request through council for the cash.

      Crombie said the argument could be made that the $400 million was part of the original Hurontario-Main LRT project scope and, even though Brampton opted out, it should remain in the budget.

      City manager and CAO Janice Baker tempered expectations, saying Metrolinx representatives have told her a lot of municipalities are looking to get a portion of the money.

      “(Metrolinx) made it clear that they’re not going to be making any ad hoc decisions about where that money goes. It will go back into the pot and sit there until they make decisions around the next round of projects,” said Baker.…

      According to Bob Nichols, senior media liaison officer for the MTO, the money will remain in the GTHA portion of the “Moving Ontario Forward” fund, a 10 year $31.5 billion plan to build an integrated transportation network across the province.

      “This funding could potentially flow to other priority transit projects in the GTHA, including Brampton,” he said, stressing these investments are dedicated to projects, not cities.

      http://www.mississauga.com/news-story/6193926-mississauga-reluctant-to-request-brampton-s-share-of-lrt-funding/

      Delete
    11. Or it's not about LRT only. How can you keep ignoring that. Everything is negotiable

      Delete
    12. "Or it's not about LRT only." despite the proof i and others have provided showing you are wrong. public quotes from government officials that say we pass on lrt, the money goes back into the kitty, other projects with green lights and no funding get to spend this kitty. then we can "negotiate" so you have been proven wrong on the subject again, you have no way of knowing anything about what, when form who, how much and under what conditions. reject 1 billion sure dollars coming for the province for ????? that comes ????? from ???? under ??? conditions. thats the allan taylor plan.

      Delete
  32. Dec 18, 2008
    Long given the cold shoulder for commuter rail service, Hamilton residents will have Toronto-bound GO trains to hop on every 15 minutes in rush hour and every 30 minutes the rest of the day as early as 2013. GO Transit has released its strategic plan, GO 2020, and gave Hamilton a favourable place by including it in a core area slated to get major service upgrades over the next decade. Hamilton and other communities within the core area are poised to get two-way, all-day service by 2020. Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina, who sits on the GO Transit board of directors, says multiple variables, such as a teetering economy that could see fewer commuters heading to work, make specific timelines difficult to nail down. "It may be a little soon, it's hard to say, but I would say that's a good working date," he said of the 2013 timeline.
    http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2089998-more-trains-in-go-plan/

    April 22, 2015
    The province isn't committing to all-day GO train service for Hamilton before 2025. And only four trains will run between Toronto and the city through the new $58-million James Street North station by the end of 2016. Those additional trips will bring the total Hamilton trains to 12 per day, with eight running through the existing Hunter Street GO hub. Beyond that, the Ontario government made no other guarantees Tuesday for what frequency of rail service the city could see in the foreseeable future. By the end of a 10-year "regional express rail" (RER) plan, city commuters can expect: •15-minute rush-hour service in the peak direction between Hamilton GO Centre (Hunter Street) and Union Station; • Hourly rush-hour service in the non-peak direction between Hamilton GO Centre and Union; •30-minute rush-hour service in the peak direction between the new James North station and Union; •Hourly service both ways for the rest of the day (not including rush hours), during evenings and weekends between Hamilton GO Centre and Union… Former mayor Bob Bratina said Tuesday the commitment has been a "little slower to actually achieve than we would have hoped," but called the James North station a "really big gesture" for the city.

    http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5568570-15-minute-go-train-service-for-city-up-to-10-years-away-province/

    But commuter rail service to Hamilton is just political theatre. GO's projected ridership for Hamilton's three stations pale next to that of Aldershot. And GO Transit’s Regional Express Rail Initial Business Case suggests that for the foreseeable future, West Harbour GO, Centennial GO appears destined to be a weekday-only, rush-hour-only train station. All-day service will be limited to an hourly train out of the Hunter Street station.

    http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/benefitscases/GO_RER_Initial_Business_Case_EN.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  33. I will not get into specifics as I believe Mr. Bratina is in the best position to speak to them. What I will say though is that Mr. Bratina is a good and decent person and as mayor, he got treated very poorly. this treatment of the mayor was more a poor reflection on that council, than it ever was on Bratina.
    Sorce

    ReplyDelete
  34. "Bratina said since the LRT issue remains in question, he didn’t want to have the federal government influencing another government’s decision..."

    ttp://www.flamboroughreview.com/news-story/6750198-hamilton-east-stoney-creek-liberal-mp-bob-bratina-says-lrt-should-be-built-to-support-growth-areas/

    Which is why he has never been able to resist playing playing backseat mayor. (And, consequently, why the internet will forever define him as Former Mayor of Hamilton.)

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are welcome. Please abide by the blog's policy on posting. This blog facilitates discussion from all sides of issues. Opposite viewpoints, spirited discussion and even pointed comments are welcome, provided they are respectful. Name calling is not allowed and any posts that violate the policy, will simply not be authorized to appear. This blog also reserves the right to exclude comments that are off topic or are otherwise unprofessional. This blog does not assume any liability whatsoever for comments posted. People posting comments or providing information on interviews, do so at their own risk.


Comments posted on this blog, may be used as excerpts in whole or in part, in other media sources .
This blog believes in freedom of speech and operates in the context of a democratic society, which many have fought and died for.

Views expressed by commentators or in articles that appear here, cannot be assumed to be espoused by The Hamiltonian staff or its publisher.