Once the RFP is awarded the proponent will likely go into detailed design for a year-ish. I would expect prelimary works (tree removals, third party utilities, etc) to start in 2026 and full construction not long after.

The current RFP is only for the civil works, not the rails/stations/trains so its somewhat less niche work. I'm curious to see how the interface between the phases will work and when they'll start procurement on that phase.
 
I don’t think this has been posted yet. Updated roll plans for the Hamilton LRT dated April 2025. Read it here!

Also, a cool mid-line train storage track(s) near Scott Park.
IMG_7060.jpeg
 
Ugh, there's some real interesting choices here.

A truely bizarre amount of slip lanes.

Bike lanes just... end at Longwood until Macklin for no particular reason.

Delta looks like an absolute mess.

Why isn't the international village just made pedestrian only? Centre the tracks, widen the sidewalks and allow deliveries with smaller vehicles at certain hours.
 
BrenWilson said:
Ugh, there's some real interesting choices here.

A truely bizarre amount of slip lanes.

Bike lanes just... end at Longwood until Macklin for no particular reason.

Delta looks like an absolute mess.

Why isn't the international village just made pedestrian only? Centre the tracks, widen the sidewalks and allow deliveries with smaller vehicles at certain hours.
Click to expand...
Bike lane gap at Longwood is definitely odd.

Agreed on Delta- cars on Main st are going to want to go straight onto Queenston and will have to a weird jog around Dollarama in the current plan. They need to try to address that somehow.

International village isn't busy enough with pedestrians for full pedestrianization. It needs some sort of vehicle traffic. We've seen in many smaller cities across Canada where pedestrianization doesn't work in lower pedestrian volume areas. Just down the QEW in Buffalo had a similar situation (centre running LRT in a pedestrianized environment) and the City converted it back to vehicle traffic since it killed the street.
 
They absolutely have to figure out some way to close the two-block gap in the bike lane between Longwood and Macklin. There must be some way around the space constraints. Expropriate a strip of land? Go with a multi-use path instead of separate bike lanes and sidewalks? I dunno. But the existing arrangement is useless and dangerous.

On a more positive note, I think the way they've handled Dundurn is smart, with the LRT and bike lanes to the west of the roadway. Having the Dundurn stop in that location will be especially handy if the Fortinos plaza ever gets redeveloped into something higher-density and mixed-use.
 
I do have to say that the number of signalized intersections is.. problematic as well. I count 41 signals across the alignment - most of them on the west end of the alignment - plus another 18 pedestrian crossings.

That is a substantial increase from the 2017 reference design, which had 35 signals and 13 pedestrian crossings. A total increase of 11 new signalized crossings across the LRT corridor, or 22% more.

How much slower is this design over the 2017 design?
 
innsertnamehere said:
International village isn't busy enough with pedestrians for full pedestrianization. It needs some sort of vehicle traffic. We've seen in many smaller cities across Canada where pedestrianization doesn't work in lower pedestrian volume areas. Just down the QEW in Buffalo had a similar situation (centre running LRT in a pedestrianized environment) and the City converted it back to vehicle traffic since it killed the street.
Click to expand...

I mean, a) its getting an LRT line, and b) the proposed car lane is a single non-through travel lane so it wouldn't really do anything to provide customer access to the businesses. My concern here is they are going 90% of the way where most business will need to come from pedestrians (even if they are just parking nearby) and the LRT but by maintaining a single dedicated travel lane it'll be a shittier non-inviting pedestrian experience that will *definitely* fail.

Make it like Gore park with even more controls on vehicles and it has potential.

Also just, what the hell is this:
1748360679298.png


Why is paradise not getting cut down, and at the very least why is it maintaing a massive slip lane westbound. Like, did Aecom dig up some transportation engineers from the 1970s for this RCD?
 
Let's hope they can fix some of these things in the absurdly long development phase. If not, I honestly think it might be better for the whole thing to just die. An LRT that's not much faster than the bus and that also creates shitty conditions for pedestrians and cyclists is not going to entice anyone to ditch their car. I can't see how the LRT is worth the cost and the loss of road capacity unless it actually delivers high-quality transportation alternatives—which it definitely could deliver, but only if they improve the design.
 
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if this current iteration is slower than existing bus services. the 10 B-line express currently does the route in ~34 minutes, depending on time of day.

The 2017 iteration of the LRT, with 11 fewer signalized crossings than the current iteration, was projected to have a 32-minute travel time. Infer what you will with that.
 
On the bike lane gap, I expect they are leaning on the existing cycling master plan which also didn't have a plan to address the paradise road crossing. King is the primary cycling route across the 403 and it leads nicely through Westdale and into Mac. With Longwood being the primary connector between King and Main West. The Main st crossing of the 403 is a bit of a bike lane stub and it seems they don't have a good plan to address to the gap in the cycling master plan currently. Hopefully this gets noted and worked on during the development phase so they can close that gap.

I like the use of the side stop at Scott Park to reduce pedestrian crossings when coming from the stadium or school. But the Gage Park stop requires 3 independently controlled crossings to get from the LRT to the park entrance. Seems like a recipe for jaywalking and conflict I wonder if they could take advantage of some of the land at Delta Park, and the short unused section of Rosslyn to better manage traffic and relocate the stop. Putting the stop adjacent to Delta Park could provide an improvement overall.
 
Maybe the plan would be to extend the cycle track along the north of main from Macklin to Longwood eventually? The clinic and Westdale have a strip of land that's just grass that could be used, would only end up clipping the corner of 1 residential property apart from those 2. Imo it's a mistake to have the cycle track on the north side of Main st anyways, having it on the south side would provide better connections to the new cycle track on Main, Frid St, and the Hunter St cycle route, minimizing the number of crossing a cyclist would have to do when traversing the neighborhoods.

Having a cycle track entirely on the west side of Dundurn is a mild annoyance when cycling north from main to York (having to crossover 4 times instead of twice). But it provides better access to the plaza and LRT stop + separation from vehicle traffic, so more of a fair trade off imo.

Also think that the intersection of King/Dunsmure here is huge missed opportunity. If a pedestrian bridge is going to be built by the tracks may as well make it a MUP or add a cycle track so cyclists can continue on Dunsmure which could serve as a great side street alternative to Main st. Although maybe that is the plan cause the legend doesn't separate pedestrian-only facilities from shared facilities.
 

Attachments

  • image_2025-05-27_132216441.png
    image_2025-05-27_132216441.png
    557.5 KB · Views: 33
  • image_2025-05-27_132344358.png
    image_2025-05-27_132344358.png
    175.1 KB · Views: 31
innsertnamehere said:
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if this current iteration is slower than existing bus services. the 10 B-line express currently does the route in ~34 minutes, depending on time of day.

The 2017 iteration of the LRT, with 11 fewer signalized crossings than the current iteration, was projected to have a 32-minute travel time. Infer what you will with that.
Click to expand...
And we're spending how much on this?
 
innsertnamehere said:
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if this current iteration is slower than existing bus services. the 10 B-line express currently does the route in ~34 minutes, depending on time of day.

The 2017 iteration of the LRT, with 11 fewer signalized crossings than the current iteration, was projected to have a 32-minute travel time. Infer what you will with that.
Click to expand...
I would love to know how exactly this many signalized intersections came to be, among other peculiar choices. I mean, in theory all of our LRTs should have signal priority- but that's TBD. And, this many crossings is going to at the very least dictate the timing of signals and hence LRV speed...

There's tons of little things we are all rightfully calling out. Personally not a big fan of moving the ROW from N/S/centre-running constantly, especially the latter on Main W; if there's 2+ lanes on each side, I don't see the point in exposing users to both.

King through Intl village looks to be handled carefully, and I understand the maneuvering was probably necessary here. Please don't waste that effort by cutting the trees anyway!

The pocket track by Gage seems to be for additional trains to serve ticats games. I really don't think this is the best use of land at that intersection, and I especially don't buy this was the only way to do it. The space used by the new Balsam-Connaught connector is right there. Same with Fairview/East Bends'. Failing that, Bernie Custis has ample parking...

I find it funny Cllr Danko said we'd all be happy with the changes a year ago.
 
BrenWilson said:
I mean, a) its getting an LRT line, and b) the proposed car lane is a single non-through travel lane so it wouldn't really do anything to provide customer access to the businesses. My concern here is they are going 90% of the way where most business will need to come from pedestrians (even if they are just parking nearby) and the LRT but by maintaining a single dedicated travel lane it'll be a shittier non-inviting pedestrian experience that will *definitely* fail.

Make it like Gore park with even more controls on vehicles and it has potential.

Also just, what the hell is this:
View attachment 654221

Why is paradise not getting cut down, and at the very least why is it maintaing a massive slip lane westbound. Like, did Aecom dig up some transportation engineers from the 1970s for this RCD?
Click to expand...
The introduction of a westbound slip lane at Queen Street is a surprise, too.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top