LRT News

Metrolinx and the City of Hamilton have reached another major project milestone! This past Friday (May 26th), Hamilton’s B-Line LRT Environmental Project Report (EPR) Addendum was submitted to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. The EPR Addendum is available for public review and comment until June 28, 2017. The notice and the full report of the EPR Addendum are available online.

REMINDER: "LRT Ready" Workshop Series on June 6 The first “LRT Ready” workshop is quickly approaching! As shared in our last newsletter, the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce, in partnership with the International Village BIA and the Downtown BIA, and supported by Metrolinx, has launched a four-part business preparedness seminar series, “LRT Ready”. The series targets business owners that will be impacted by construction of the LRT, to better prepare them ahead of time.   What The LRT Big Picture: How to Prepare for Construction and Its Impacts Learn what to expect during construction from those who have been there. FREE TO ATTEND - Register Online When Tuesday, June 6 from 6 – 8 p.m. Where Homewood Suites: 40 Bay Street S. The evening will feature a keynote address from Rollin Stanley, General Manager of Urban Strategy with the City of Calgary, who has vast LRT experience from across North America, as well as a moderated panel discussion featuring various BIA representatives. For more information on the June 6th workshop and to register, visit the Chamber's website.

Crossing Boundaries?

The Hamiltonian posed the following questions to Mayor Fred Eisenberger and City Manager Chris Murray with an invite for them to reply jointly or otherwise.

The questions are posed below, as well as the response we received, which was sent via city staff:


Good morning Mayor Eisenberger/Mr. Murray.

We are posing the following questions for publication purposes. We realize that some of these questions may be best answered together or individually, so we are directing the questions to both of you and will accept a response to these questions as you see fit.

It is our understanding that council has elected to forgo recommendations made by a consulting firm that was hired and, instead, chose its own design of ward boundaries. It is also our understanding that the city has now hired an outside law firm to defend its decision before the OMB.

In light of this, can you respond to the following:

1. Can you advise Hamiltonians what the fee arrangements are with the firm hired. The hourly rate, or other set rate, and a range of how much this can potentially cost taxpayers, or at the very least, how much is budgeted?

2. It may seem to some odd that an outside consulting firm would be hired to do a study and make recommendations, only to have city council go their own way. Can you comment on what prompted such a departure?

3. In light of a Value for Money focus within the city, and a position in place to conduct such audits, is this matter referred for a value for money audit or will it be?

4. Is there anything else you’d like Hamiltonians to know about this matter?
Thank-you Mr. Mayor and Mr. Murray.


Response received:

We have consulted with the City’s Legal Services division, the Office of the City Clerk and Audit Services. Because this file is now before the Ontario Municipal Board, we are limited in terms of the information we are able to provide. What we can share is that the services of Steven Ferri with Loopstra Nixon LLP have been retained. Specific legal fees, fee arrangements and hourly rates are not public per the City’s normal practice.

In referring to the relevant legislation (Section 222 of the Municipal Act), Council is not prohibited from approving a ward boundary by-law that may include options recommended by councillors.

With respect to your audit question, activities conducted by staff not Council fall within the purview of our Audit Services division.

Here are links to the relevant meetings so that you have them at hand:

Feb 1st GIC: Item 7.2 is the Final (Amended) Ward Boundary Consultants Report:
http://hamilton.siretechnologies.com/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1113&amp%3Bamp%3Bdoctype=AGENDA

May 3rd GIC: Item 12.2 was the closed session item, however there was a public motion see Item 12 of the following GIC Report:
https://d3fpllf1m7bbt3.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/may3gicreport-17-010-as-amended.pdf


May 3rd GIC: Link to the agenda and livestreaming of the meeting: Item 8.4:
http://hamilton.siretechnologies.com/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1172&amp%3Bamp%3Bdoctype=AGENDA

You may have noticed that The Hamiltonian has tightened up on what gets posted on our site. We have had too many attempts of people taking jabs at one another. There are many important isues being discussed. We will continue to support thoughtful commentary. Some threads have been locked. 

You may wish to review this link as it has been updated. 

The Hamiltonian

Episode 10 of "As Hamilton Twists and Turns"

Due to repeated attempted abuses of this thread, it has been locked.
The Hamiltonian can be reached at admin@thehamiltonian.info


In this episode of How Hamilton Twists and Turns, dubbed as the "Cheap Shots?" episode, we find former Mayor of Hamilton and current Member of Parliament Bob Bratina publishing an opinion piece in The Hamilton Spectator that is critical of the direction LRT may potentially take, going so far as to suggest that the present focus is so wrong headed that it would occupy most of the energy of our city over the next 10 years and reverse the momentum we've been experiencing. Not being one afraid to speak his mind, Bratina added "The current direction will, if implemented, bring an important commercial corridor to a virtual standstill for several years, with a potential for new development that is speculative at best and corrosive at worst."

In a turn of dueling mayors, current Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger, took to Bratina, releasing a terse response, stating that LRT has and will continue to serve as a uniting factor, citing the support of all of Hamilton’s anchor institutions , three local chambers of commerce and the local unions. On the heels of MP Bratina characterizing this council as dysfunctional, Eisenberger threw a jab of his own stating "While Mr. Bratina seems to have grown tired of federal issues during his short tenure in Ottawa, perhaps he could re-awaken his interest by assisting the city with federal investments in our infrastructure and by helping our Stelco workers and retirees secure their pensions and benefits. Where Mr. Bratina could make a difference, he is uncharacteristically silent."

On May 12th Andrew Dreschel published a piece in The Hamilton Spectator that addressed M.P. Bratina's op ed piece. Andrew's piece (you can see it by clicking here) essentially suggested that Bratina had every right to weigh in against this version of LRT, but ended by suggesting that Bratina, while not a puppet, is a "paper tiger" for not responding to Andrew's request for answers to some follow up questions Andrew had.

The LRT squabbling didn't stop there. Ryan McGreal, editor of Raise the Hammer, published a piece criticizing the Hamilton Spectator for allegedly not fact checking properly. Paul Berton, editor of the Hamilton Spectator, responded in kind by publishing a piece that went to great pains to define what an editor for a newspaper does as opposed to an editor of a magazine, and suggested that McGreal's article would have faired poorly had a fact check been done. Berton also suggested that McGreal's criticism was really rooted in dismay over The Spec publishing pieces of those who oppose LRT.

And if that isn't enough, M.P. Bratina while taking the high road by not engaging with a tit for tat with the Mayor, released a statement to The Hamiltonian, providing clarity for his position on LRT and the history of the file.

What will the next match up be? Eisenberger vs. Whitehead round 2? Skelly vs. the pro LRT colleagues? Bratina vs. Eisenberger round 2? McGreal vs. Berton- rematch?

It's anyone's guess. Stay tuned as the contenders retire to their respective corners.

Fade to black with a picture of staff of The Hamiltonian being fitted with referee outfits and whistles. Fade ends with teaser as an unkown person is seen passing a Silence of the Lambs mask to.......?

Former Mayor and M.P. Bratina Releases Statement to The Hamiltonian re: LRT

Due to repeated attempted abuses of this thread, it has been locked.
The Hamiltonian can be reached at admin@thehamiltonian.info

Former Mayor of Hamilton and current M.P. Bob Bratina, reached out to The Hamiltonian with the following:


Biz Mag 2013 on LRT (excerpts)--two important things....I support an LRT in the right place, and by 2013 it was not a done deal...

---------
Several key players say it's not a question of if, but rather when an LRT line will be built. According to Hamilton Mayor Bob Bratina, the Province is waiting for the City to present it with its best-case scenario for a light rail route.

"We need to determine where best an LRT should be placed," says Bratina. "It seems to me there is more attention now being given to the so-called A-Line, which is a connector between the waterfront and the airport, going up the Escarpment. Whatever is ultimately presented to council, we must make sure that the province will agree that it is viable and can be supported by $1 billion in funding. They (the province) don't want to throw away money on something that may or may not work. That's been the mandate all along."

The A-Line corridor, which has a 10- to 15-year funding timeline, has desirable destinations for an LRT, including the airport, downtown, the James North GO station and the waterfront. But Metrolinx's preference has been given to the B-Line for funding within five years, since 50 percent of the existing transit ridership lies along the B-Line corridor, Hull explains. "Essentially, we would be converting the existing transit ridership from bus to light rail," says Hull.

The actual construction will not be even considered before 2015, after the Pan American Games, says Hull.

Mayor Bratina, however, sees the A-Line, "or some sort of connector between the waterfront and the airport," as Hamilton's first priority. Bratina says that to date, no rationale has been put forward to make a business case for the B-Line. Developers are not calling for progress updates on the LRT as they did for an all-day GO service, he notes. While he confirms that "Council is totally in support of the whole project," the mayor doesn't believe it's necessary for someone to jump on the LRT bandwagon. "Championing brings in an emotional element and this has to be a solid business plan," Bratina explains. 

Metrolinx appears enthusiastic about the progress..

With Mayor Eisenberger- on ATU and LRT

Mayor Eisenberger

Due to repeated attempted abuses of this thread, it has been locked.
The Hamiltonian can be reached at admin@thehamiltonian.info


As part of our series that seeks to better understand how ATU will or will not fit into a potentiual LRT implementation in Hamilton, and in addition to our chat with Erik Tuck, ATU President Local 107, and Metrolinx, we also reached out to our Mayor.


1. The Hamiltonian recently interviewed ATU Local 107 President Eric Tuck. Mr. Tuck’s responses to our questions can be read here: http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2017/05/with-eric-tuck-on-atu-and-lrt.html
It appears as though ATU and its interests may be on a collision course with aspects of the possible LRT implementation, specifically as it relates to the privatization of services that would otherwise be provided by ATU members. Understanding that stakeholder management and inclusion are a vital part of any initiative, what measures have you taken, or will be taking to ensure that the right conversations are had and that ATU feel valued and included. We do appreciate that some of this will fall on Metrolinx, but as Mayor of our city, can we have your views on how this situation should be handled.

2. On the onset, did you accept that ATU and their members may be adversely impacted by an LRT implementation as it is currently being envisioned, or is this something that you are now turning your mind to?

3. What message do you have to Hamiltonians and to ATU supporters who may agree with Mr. Tuck’s assertion that public transportation is a staple that should remain within the control of local authorities?

4. Is there anything else you would like to add, relative to the cross section between ATU and their interests and direction that the city may be going in in relation to LRT?

The Mayor responded with the following: 

“We know this project is being delivered as a Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain (DBFOM) Council has made it very clear that if ATU can be involved in any way we should consider it. I will continue to encourage conversations between Metrolinx and ATU.”

While the Mayor's reply was brief, we acknowledge that it's been a busy time for him, and appreciate his time. 

With Metrolinx- On ATU and LRT

Due to repeated attempted abuses of this thread, it has been locked.
The Hamiltonian can be reached at admin@thehamiltonian.info

As a follow up to our interview with ATU President Eric Tuck, we reached out to Metrolinx to get their perspective.

The questions we posed were as follows:

1. Does Metrolinx see ATU local 107 as a significant stakeholder in transit matters related to Hamilton and specifically with respect to LRT?

2. What efforts has Metrolinx made to establish a working relationship with ATU Local 107, and is this something that you would deem appropriate at this juncture?

3. What provisions are you making, if any, to recognize the men and women who are unionized members who currently support transit in Hamilton. Will there be any measures to bring them into the fold as service providers?

4. The following is an interview we conducted with ATU Local 107 President Eric Tuck. http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2017/05/with-eric-tuck-on-atu-and-lrt.html Do you have any comment on Mr. Tuck’s responses?

5. Is there anything else you ’d like our readers to know about a potential LRT implementation in Hamilton, from Metrolinx’s perspective?

The response we received from Metrolinx is as follows:

ATU local 107 is recognized as an important stakeholder in the Hamilton LRT (LRT) project. Metrolinx is working closely with the City of Hamilton to integrate HSR with Hamilton LRT, further enhancing the connectivity of the system and ensuring seamless integration.

We are aware that ATU has expressed interest in beginning the dialogue with the City of Hamilton and Metrolinx on its role in the LRT project. We look forward to further discussions with the City in the coming months on potential options.

The Hamilton LRT project will be delivered using a Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain procurement model. This means the consortium responsible for designing and building the project will also be responsible for operating and maintaining it for a set period of time (typically 30 years). This approach transfers risk to the consortium and provides a strong incentive for high quality design and construction since the same people building the project will be responsible and accountable for operating and maintaining it after it is complete.

To be clear, the project will remain publicly owned by Metrolinx once complete and the consortium will operate it on our behalf. This is similar to the way a number of transit lines are currently operated across the region today, including the entire GO Rail network, York Region Transit, and the York VIVA Bus Rapid Transit project.

It is also consistent with the delivery model used for the Waterloo LRT, and Hurontario LRT in Mississauga and Brampton.

Thanks to the folks at Metrolinx for your response. 

SaveSave

Media Release from Mayor Eisenberger

STATEMENT FROM MAYOR EISENBERGER

May 10, 2017, Hamilton, ON – Bob Bratina does Hamilton a great disservice with his column of May 10 published in the Hamilton Spectator.

Rather than de-railing Hamilton’s renaissance, as Mr. Bratina alleges, our LRT project is propelling it forward. Never before has a project united all of Hamilton’s anchor institutions with such passionate support - three local chambers of commerce, and the local unions - the way that LRT has. Construction cranes are dotting the downtown skyline, many being driven by the certainty that LRT will bring to the city. Expansion of the city’s tax base will further translate to a rebalancing and lower taxes in suburban areas.

Mr. Bratina used to understand this. When ran for Mayor in 2010, he ran on a pro-LRT platform. His commitment to LRT was in his campaign document under the heading “Economic Development”. On this, I could not agree more. Economic development is exactly the point!

While Mr. Bratina seems to have grown tired of federal issues during his short tenure in Ottawa, perhaps he could re-awaken his interest by assisting the city with federal investments in our infrastructure and by helping our Stelco workers and retirees secure their pensions and benefits. Where Mr. Bratina could make a difference, he is uncharacteristically silent.

As Mayor, I have experienced a great deal of co-operation and assistance from MPs and MPPs from all three political parties. Our representatives at Queens Park and in Ottawa see the value in a Team Hamilton approach and have never disappointed, with one notable exception. It is not too late for Mr. Bratina to join the team.

Note: To read the column that the Mayor is referring to, click here or purchase today's Spec.

With Eric Tuck- On ATU and LRT

Local 107,
ATU President, Eric Tuck

As ATU is a major stakeholder in the potential LRT implementation in Hamilton. we thought we'd reach out to its President of Local 107, Eric Tuck. Enjoy our chat with Eric.

1) On behalf of your membership can you summarize any concerns you may have about the potential implementation of LRT in Hamilton and how it may impact your members?

Our primary concern is the impact on the rest of our transit system. Essentially though the Province's/Metro-linx procurement practices, they are attempting to Privatize Public Transit by insisting that the bid process is restricted to a design, build, operate and maintain for 30 years through the 3Ps (Public Private Partnership). 

There's been numerous examples that show 3ps procurement policies actually cost taxpayers 30% more over public implementation/operations and often result in greater interruption and diminished services.

By adding private for profit partnerships to a public service eventually those added costs get passed

LRT- The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

You may recall that in anticipation of the vote on LRT, Mayor Eisenberger asked staff for a paper to guide councillors through the pros and cons of LRT.  And while the Mayor asked for the good and the bad, it appears as if he didn't ask for the ugly. Clr. Donna Skelly recently took some heat for expressing concerns over the, in her view, poor aesthetics that overhead lines have had on a neighbouring town's installation of LRT and was concerned over what overhead lines might look like in Hamilton. 

We touched base with Paul Johnson , on this topic. Enjoy our chat with Paul:

Recently, at least one councillor expressed concern over the potential poor aesthetics overhead lines may have in a LRT implementation in Hamilton. What can be known at this point in time as to how many overhead lines will be in place, where these locations will be, how many are needed and what they might look like. In the LRT considerations, to what extent was this considered and discussed and are there any realistic artistic renderings that may give us a visual of how these lines would present in Hamilton?

Paul replied as follows:

Thank you for your question about the Overhead Contact System (OCS) used to provide power to Hamilton’s LRT system. By way of background, light rail vehicles are electrically-powered, and the electricity is delivered from power substations located along the corridor to an overhead wire running above the tracks. Overhead wires are suspended through different methods, depending on the characteristics of the corridor.

· Centre poles are located between the tracks with the wire suspended on either side.
· Side poles are located at the side of the road or sidewalk, with arms or support wires extending across the roadway and LRT tracks.
· Building mounts can be used in narrow corridors where appropriate mounting locations are available.
· Both side and centre OCS poles can be combined with street light poles to minimize intrusion.

The design of the OCS is not finalized at this time but I can share that our goal for the OCS is to employ design improvements to lessen the visual impact. Examples include:

· Poles shall be spaced as far apart as possible and maintain approximately equal spacing along the line.
· OCS poles will be coloured to match other street elements and blend with other city street furniture that contribute to the character of the corridor.
· Where possible, OCS poles will not be located on platforms.
· OCS poles shall be designed and located to not impede pedestrian flow.
· Support poles shall be slender, tapered and as visually unobtrusive as possible.
· Poles shall be consolidated where possible (i.e. shared OCS and street lighting poles).
SaveSave