TLC Hamilton library

road weary tax burden

2011-03-03T19:13:00.000-08:00

Roads make up the largest part of the city’s infrastructure deficit of $195 million a year.

Taxpayers get to keep a whopping $27

City hall has whittled down this year’s projected 2.4 per cent residential tax hike to 1.6 per cent — or an extra $53 on the average homeowner’s tax bill.

“That’s the lowest tax increase since amalgamation,” city finance chief Rob Rossini told councillors Thursday afternoon. “We’ve identified an additional $6.4 million in budget reductions.”

The new budget numbers come in the face of council’s resolve to achieve a zero increase to the tax levy with no cuts to service levels.

“Are we finished? No. How close we get to zero remains to be seen,” Rossini said.

The overall projected residential tax hike includes a .6 per cent increase for city departments, .6 per cent for boards and agencies, and .5 per cent for capital projects.

The total 1.6 per cent tax hike represents the weighted average of a 1.7 per cent total municipal tax hike and a .7 per cent education tax hike. Municipal taxes make up 80 per cent of the total residential tax bill and education 20 per cent. The average assessed house in Hamilton is $240,000.

“I was concerned that we would do something extreme that would put us in a difficult position next year,” Mayor Bob Bratina said. “The key question was if these reductions are sustainable or are they something we have to come back and fix next year.”

The budget process has been rife with major impact items, including labour relations, Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System issues, cost of living allowances, a 5 per cent increase in the police budget and infrastructure costs, Rossini said.

Unlike Councillor Lloyd Ferguson, who said he still has questions about the police budget’s 5 per cent increase, Bratina said he had complete confidence in Chief Glenn De Caire’s “analysis of the needs of his department and the city.”

The tax hike decrease includes an $83.6-million — .5 per cent — capital budget levy approved by the general issues committee Thursday. Staff had recommended a 1.5 per cent capital budget levy increase but had to find about $7.4 million in savings by parking some projects, deferring others, and killing some altogether.

Among the delayed and deferred projects are the Hamilton Culture and Protocol Centre at Auchmar Estate, an antismoking education and signage program for parks and recreation areas, public art, Battlefield Park’s War of 1812 site interpretation, and Hamilton’s east-end air monitoring pilot project.

“Council wanted to focus on hard infrastructure, particularly our local roads program, so we were able to accommodate an $8 million increase to our local roads, which are on a replacement cycle right now of over 100 years, which is crazy,” Rossini said.

Roads make up the largest part of the city’s infrastructure deficit of $195 million a year.

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/496070--taxpayers-get-to-keep-a-whopping-27

Burlington Roads Safer?

2011-01-15T08:20:00.000-08:00

“I personally wouldn’t ride my bicycle on the streets of Burlington. I wouldn’t feel safe doing that,” he said.

Burlington roads becoming safer

Fairview & Maple The intersection of Fairview Street and Maple Avenue has the most accidents in Burlington.

Gary Yokoyama/The Hamilton Spectator

BURLINGTON Take a population of 173,000. Give it 1,595 kilometres of road to travel on. Add cars, cars and more cars. Then hold your breath, hoping no one gets hurt.

The good news? While Burlington’s population grew by 3,000 in 2009 and the number of kilometres of road in its jurisdiction increased by 28 kilometres, the number of reportable collisions dropped by 300 to 1,656. That still equates to 4.5 collisions per day.

Since 2005, the number of collisions on Burlington streets has decreased by 10.3 per cent (190 collisions).

Burlington roads are getting safer, suggests Chris Day, supervisor of traffic services. Day’s 2009 road safety assessment will be presented to city councillors Wednesday.

Day credited the triple E effect for the safer streets: engineering, enforcement and education.

And it’s not only collisions that are down. The number of personal injury collisions has decreased 6.4 per cent from 2005 to 2009. There were 295 such collisions in 2009 and one fatality. Injuries occurred in about 18 per cent of all crashes.

Of the 1,656 collisions in 2009, 46 involved pedestrians (2.8 per cent), 38 involved cyclists (2.3 per cent) and 31 involved impaired drivers (1.9 per cent).

Day’s report outlines the top 20 locations in the city that need improvements. The most accident-prone intersection in the city remains Fairview Street and Maple Avenue which has been plagued by rear-end collisions as drivers attempt to turn right onto Fairview from the northbound lanes on Maple Avenue.

“Fairview and Maple Avenue continues to be the top intersection for collisions in the city although we have seen the number of collisions there decrease over the last few years,” Day noted.

That intersection had 178 collisions from 2005 to 2009.

Burlington Councillor Paul Sharman, who has been critical of a Burlington Transit system that is shunned by 97 per cent of residents, wonders half-jokingly whether congested traffic has led to fewer accidents.

“I think that is true. I think we are going slower,” he said, adding a crackdown on impaired driving has likely played a role as well.

Sharman said Burlington is car-friendly. Not so much for cyclists.

“I personally wouldn’t ride my bicycle on the streets of Burlington. I wouldn’t feel safe doing that,” he said.

The top five intersections Day’s report has recommended for improvements are: Fairview/Maple; Fairview between Drury Lane and Guelph Line; Waterdown Road between Flatt Road and Ireson Road; Plains Road between Francis Road and King Road; and Corporate Drive/Mainway.

kpeters@thespec.com

905-526-3388

more roadwork: more tax increases

2011-01-13T20:47:00.001-08:00

City wants more roadwork

City council wants to put more money towards updating Hamilton’s battered roads — and councillors are open to reallocating money from other departments to help pay for it.

Road and traffic infrastructure was top of mind for councillors yesterday as they discussed the city’s capital budget.

Staff are recommending a yearly hike of 1.5 per cent for three years and 1 per cent for another seven years to help cover the costs of updating infrastructure. That would add $42 to the tax bill of the average home in Hamilton in 2011 and $9.75 million to the total budget.

Councillors were on board with dedicating extra money to infrastructure, but weren’t prepared to add the 1.5 per cent on top of increases to the city’s operating budget — currently sitting at 3.6 per cent, not including any wage hikes for staff.

“I’m prepared to spend this money, but I’m also prepared to eliminate other expenditures,” said Councillor Sam Merulla.

Council voted yesterday to ask staff for a report detailing “options and alternatives to free up funds” to put towards improving the city’s infrastructure. Councillors will debate that plan on Jan. 21.

Rob Rossini, the city’s general manager of finance, told councillors that his department has already allocated $2.7 million out of the waste management budget to put towards road repair. If council votes for the 1.5 per cent infrastructure surcharge, that revenue will be over and above the $2.7 million from waste management.

The city’s roads are measured on a scale, called the overall condition index, from 1 to 100 — 100 being a perfect road and 0 being a road at the absolute end of its lifespan. The city’s average is 55.8, which is estimated to fall to 46.9 over 10 years. It would cost $640 million over the next decade to maintain the status quo and avoid that decline.

“We’re in a slide. We’re getting to a point where rehabilitation won’t be effective,” said Gerry Davis, the city’s general manager of public works. “Spending a dollar today on the rehabilitation … saves us spending the equivalent of $4 for a full reconstruction.”

Last year’s budget included a 0.5 per cent increase for capital projects, while 2009 contributed no hike to infrastructure.

ereilly@thespec.com

905-526-2452

slow down heading north

2010-11-08T18:56:00.000-08:00

North End citizens fight city for more traffic calming measures

North End residents have no problem with the rest of the city traipsing through their neighbourhood to visit the waterfront.

They just want them to be polite about it.

That’s the gist of an expected nine-day Ontario Municipal Board Hearing that began Monday at the McMaster University’s Downtown Centre. The hearing will examine whether the municipality’s Setting Sail planning document, which will lower speed limits on many North End streets, does enough to keep the area’s roads safe enough.

The North End Neighbours, who have appealed the matter being heard before OMB chair Harold Goldkind, says it doesn’t. The group, through their lawyer Herman Turkstra, want speed limit reductions from 50 kilometres an hour to 30 km/h on Burlington Street East, Wellington Street, Ferguson Avenue, John Street and James Street, a redesignation of Bay Street North from collector to local road status and other traffic measures to safeguard the neighbourhood’s 1,200 children.

The neighbourhood is bounded by Wellington Street on the east, the CNR tracks on the south, and Burlington Bay on the west and north sides.

“When you hear councillors say they don’t want people from Ancaster who come down to get a suntan to get a parking ticket, the real issue is does the city really intend to ensure the traffic calming work in the North End and will it be safe for kids to cross the street or not,” Turkstra said.

“The view of the North End Neighbourhood Association is that the present plan does not do anything to address the core issue of child and family safety,” he said.

Turkstra plans to present evidence that what the North End wants is a trade off of 32 seconds, the difference it may take a waterfront bound visitor from travelling down a major collector at 30 km/h rather than the current 50 km/h.

“What the North End is saying is: ‘If you want to come from Ancaster and drive through the neighbourhood, that’s fine. Use James Street and drive slowly. That’s all. Come. We welcome you. We would prefer if you came on foot or by bike or by bus, but if you are going to come by car the speed limit is 30 (km/h), be careful.

“It’s like coming into someone’s house and saying, ‘Do you want me to take my shoes off?’ When you’re a guest in somebody’s house, you’re kind to them,” he said.

But Brian Duxbury, representing the city, told Goldkind that there is a narrow set of issues that are in conflict between the two parties.

Duxbury said a number of traffic calming measures have been approved by city council as part of a traffic management plan included in the Setting Sail policy plan.

“It’s the city’s position that the plan contains a robust and aggressive bundle of traffic calming measures for the North End Neighbours,” Duxbury said. “The city’s position is that no further revisions are needed to Setting Sail.”

The hearing is set to continue Tuesday.

mini-mid pen proposed

2010-11-07T18:46:00.000-08:00

CATCH News – November 7, 2010

Flamborough expressway backed by city but opposed by residents

The provincial government is recommending a 35-kilometre highway across Flamborough and the Niagara Escarpment to connect the 403 to the 407. Opposition from residents to this partial mid pen highway was clearly evident at a meeting Wednesday night at the Rockton fairgrounds. City staff and business organizations attended to urge the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to extend the expressway down the peninsula all the way to Fort Erie and the US border to serve the aerotropolis.

The meeting was called by Citizens Opposed to Paving the Escarpment and Ward 14 councillor Rob Pasuta and was attended by over 75 people. It was addressed by MTO officials and consultants who are working on the Niagara to GTA corridor environmental assessment study. MTO consultant Patrick Puccini outlined a hierarchy of steps starting with optimization of the existing transportation system, followed by rail and transit expansion and widening of existing roads, and finally by construction of a new highway in the Fort Erie-Welland area and study of one across Flamborough.

However, city staff, led by Neil Everson and Alan Kirkpatrick of the economic development department, urged the MTO to make the priority the construction of a full 130 km mid-peninsula highway from Fort Erie to the 407 in Burlington. Everson noted the city’s desire to increase greenfield development, and to connect the aerotropolis (Airport Employment Growth District) with surrounding markets via the mid-pen as well as expansion of highway 6 to six lanes.

Flamborough residents didn’t agree with either government. They contended that the MTO and city are not considering the value of agricultural lands in the planning process and suggested that the planning projections are failing to anticipate rising oil prices.

Pete Zuzek, a member of Citizens Opposed to Paving the Escarpment (COPE) argued that MTO projections for population growth are overly optimistic and based on consultant’s opinions rather than independent peer-reviewed research. He maintained that air quality, remaining agricultural lands, and protection of the Niagara Escarpment ecology are under-valued in MTO’s planning.

In a report presented at COW on October 12, city staff recommended that a mid-peninsula highway be made a priority rather than the “last possible alternative” it was made in the MTO study. At its last meeting before the elections, council voted 15-2 – with Bob Bratina and Brian McHattie opposed – to endorse the staff recommendations.

Bratina moved an amendment to re-insert earlier staff concerns about the cross-Flamborough road. Pasuta seconded the motion but subsequently withdrew his support and voted for the staff package, but on Wednesday evening he said he now opposes the new highway through Flamborough.

Everson and Kirkpatrick foresee an increasing “north-south shift” in goods movement between Hamilton to manufacturing centres in southern US states, such as Georgia and Alabama, rather than traditional markets in Ohio and Michigan. John Best, a representative of the transport industry, and Daniel Rodrigues, a member of the transportation committee at the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce echoed the city’s submission to the MTO.

Both stated that anything less than a full mid-peninsula highway would inhibit goods movement, although Best conceded that the west Hamilton highway segment would likely not be used by truckers, who are unlikely to use the 407 toll highway. Rather, Best and Rodrigues want the highway focused on the Niagara border crossing as well as the GTA.

Best claimed the QEW through Niagara was “overbuilt.” MTO representatives and consultants however noted that the ease of widening the QEW, plus the smaller growth projections in the region, minimized the need for a new corridor in this region.

Everson noted his disappointment at the failure of previous city planners to reserve land next to the Lincoln Alexander Parkway for industrial development. Along with the AEGD, they expect the mid-peninsula and Flamborough highways to offer new opportunities for development – significantly expanding the footprint of the corridor.

When asked why the city doesn’t develop brownfields downtown, Everson claimed too few lands are available due to the unwillingness of brownfield owners to sell them, and he projected there will be a rapid decline of available greenfield sites in the AEGD and other business parks.

Residents vocally opposed any reduction in farmland, either through widening or new road building, noting that over 40,000 acres of farmland have been lost in Flamborough. Pasuta, who supported the AEGD, spoke in favour of protecting farmland.

Judi Partridge, the councillor-elect from Waterdown, was in attendance, and intends to host future community meetings in her ward to review the MTO study.

No end in sight to Toronto’s commuter pain: survey Drivers’ anger at long travel times worse than in New York, Los Angeles, says IBM

2010-06-30T15:11:00.000-07:00

Adrian Morrow

Globe and Mail Update Published on Wednesday, Jun. 30, 2010 1:01PM EDT Last updated on Wednesday, Jun. 30, 2010 1:42PM EDT

It's more aggravating to commute in Toronto than in New York, Los Angeles or Berlin – and it's only gotten worse over the past few years, according to a new survey.

IBM released the Commuter Pain Index, a study of more than 20 cities across the globe Wednesday. The report surveyed more than 8,000 commuters on a range of issues including commuting time, whether driving was hurting their health and if commuting caused them to be less productive.

While the top ranks were mostly filled by cities in the developing world (Beijing fared worst) and Toronto ranked 12th worst overall, 64 per cent of Torontonians surveyed said traffic had gotten worse in the past three years. Only commuters in Johannesburg were more likely to say things weren't improving.

Overall, 57 per cent of respondents around the world said traffic was affecting their health.

“It comes back to the trend towards more people living in urban centres,” said Pat Horgan, an IBM vice-president. “Urbanization happens faster than their infrastructure can catch up.”

The consequences are stark, Mr. Horgan said: poorer health, lost productivity and economic stagnation.

There's no easy fix. IBM advocates a wide range of solutions including better public transit, more information for commuters and flexible work hours to reduce bottlenecks on the roads at rush hours.

“We can't just afford to build more lanes of traffic,” Mr. Horgan said.

The cities doing the best job of managing traffic are the ones already implementing such multi-faceted strategies, Mr. Horgan said. Singapore, for instance, has been synchronizing traffic lights while Melbourne has rapidly expanded its light rail transit system.

Perhaps most tellingly, Mr. Horgan points out, commuters in cities with longer travel times than Toronto seem to be feeling less pain than Torontonians. The reason?

“In those cities, people can see that things are getting better,” he said.

Ranking of the emotional and economic toll of commuting in each city on a scale of one to 100, with 100 being the most onerous:

Beijing: 99
Mexico City: 99
Johannesburg: 97
Moscow: 84
New Delhi: 81
Sao Paolo: 75
Milan: 52
Buenos Aires: 50
Madrid: 48
London: 36
Paris: 36
Toronto: 32
Amsterdam: 25
Los Angeles: 25
Berlin: 24
Montreal: 23
New York: 19
Houston: 17
Melbourne: 17
Stockholm: 15

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/no-end-in-sight-to-torontos-commuter-pain-survey/article1624502/

TED talk on reversing suburbia

2010-06-30T13:44:00.001-07:00

http://www.ted.com/talks/ellen_dunham_jones_retrofitting_suburbia.html

Well worth the 20 minutes. It can't happen soon enough...

cars top industry in air pollution

2010-06-16T05:43:00.001-07:00

Air quality improving in Hamilton Cars biggest polluters

Emma Reilly
The Hamilton Spectator

(Jun 16, 2010) Breathe deeply. Hamilton's air is cleaner than you think.
Over the past 10 years, the city's air quality has improved dramatically, according to a report from Clean Air Hamilton presented to council members yesterday. In fact, it's been steadily getting better since monitoring began in the 1970s.
"There's no question we're better than we've ever been," said Brian McCarry, a McMaster University chemistry professor and chairperson of Clean Air Hamilton.
"Back in the 1960s -- 40, 50 years ago -- the air was much, much worse."
Major pollutants, like nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide, have all gone down 35 to 50 per cent in the past decade. Last year, the weather and recessionary business slowdowns also contributed to the overall decline in air pollution.
Though most people in Hamilton think the city's air pollution comes from industry, McCarry said, the majority of the problem is caused by cars and trucks.
Since cars have become much cleaner over the past few decades -- and residents are making increased efforts to get out of their cars more often -- decreased vehicle emissions are one of the main reasons Hamilton's air has gotten better.
"Industrial emissions are also going down, but they tend to go in jumps and starts," McCarry explained.
The air quality improvements are so significant that even the air quality around the Red Hill Valley Parkway -- initially expected to get much worse once the highway opened -- has improved from pre-construction levels.
"Frankly, this is a bit of a shocker," said Denis Corr, a consultant who prepared the city's Red Hill report.
The only two days the Red Hill Valley Parkway exceeded the province's air quality standards over a six-month stretch were during a region-wide smog alert on Aug. 17 last year, and during the fire at the Archmill House woodworking factory in Ancaster last Aug. 25.
ereilly@thespec.com
905-526-2452

We keep building infrastructure we can’t afford to fix

2010-06-03T17:47:00.000-07:00

CATCH News – June 3, 2010

Massive underspending on infrastructure confirmed

A new study has confirmed that the city needs to spend at least $120 million more each and every year to fix roads and other infrastructure. The report has some politicians pushing for more federal and provincial government grants, but at least one councillor is suggesting it’s time to stop building things we can’t afford to repair.

The city’s first provincially-required Tangible Capital Assets Report was presented to yesterday’s audit and administration committee. It records under-spending in Hamilton of $120.3 million last year on items such as roads, bridges, underground pipes, and water and sewer pipes and facilities.

“Based on the estimated replacement cost of $15.8 billion, an annual sustainable spending level to ensure that our assets are replaced and redeveloped in a timely manner would be approximately $333 million,” says the staff report accompanying the study. “Capital spending on asset replacement and redevelopments in 2009 amounted to $213.1 million, which resulted in a gap of $120 million.”

Similar shortfalls have gone on for years, and raising this amount from property taxes would require about a 25 percent increase in current rates or more. Last year’s deficit was actually lower than normal because the city received substantial stimulus funding from senior levels of government.

The biggest deficit ($91 million) in 2009 was in road spending, with water and wastewater facilities short $24.9 million and a deficit of $24.8 million for “underground and other networks”. The purchase of more than the average number of new buses last year meant that category had spending $15.6 million above the annual target.

Chad Collins and Terry Whitehead encouraged city staff to seek more funding from senior levels of government, with Collins proposing that road monies be the only requests made for any future infrastructure dollars. Council put road projects at the top of a long list submitted for stimulus funding, but the items actually supported were mainly for water projects and recreational facilities.

“When the programs come out at the provincial and federal level, does it make sense for us not to put anything else on the list, except for roads projects,” Collins suggested. “Maybe it’s a lesson learned for us, in light of what happened last time. I understand that we were trying to capture as much money as possible, but at the end of the day, making that list larger than maybe it should have been has probably cost us something as it relates to the infrastructure deficit related to roads and other projects like sidewalks and sort of water issues.”

Bob Bratina responded with a quite different approach.

“This looks to me like somebody’s got four clunker cars they can’t afford to fix, so he goes out and buys another car,” the ward two councillor observed. “And the comment that I hear at the table today is well the province didn’t give us enough money to fix these roads. I’m not very good at this accounting stuff, but this seems fairly simple to me. We keep building infrastructure we can’t afford to fix.”

City finance chief Rob Rossini responded that the report showed “how much stuff we actually own” and suggested that reduction is one of the objectives of the province in requiring the reports.

“Part of the rationale for the province doing this is for municipalities to look at their assets as to which ones do we still need, which ones can we surplus and rationalize on a going forward basis,” Rossini noted. “So I think that’s part of the underlying thing that the province wants us to do.”

Bratina pointed to the recent decision of well-known investor Warren Buffet who “just bought a railway” because he’s calculating its value will climb over the long haul.

“He said that the US highway system infrastructure is so broken down they can’t possibly fix it all to the level of sustaining the need for transportation. So he picked railroads. We’re not alone in this.”

Collins countered with a brief history of federal and provincial government cuts to transfers to municipalities over the last 15 years.

“While it’s all well and good that the books look a little better at the other levels of government, it’s come at the expense of municipalities, and all municipalities over the last decade have lobbied both levels of government for additional infrastructure funds to try and get back some of those historic traditional transfer payments that we were accustomed to utilizing over several decades,” he stated, urging staff to make more lobbying for increased payments a top priority.

Whitehead closed out the discussion by recounting Prime Minister Harper’s speech last weekend to the meeting of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities where the federal leader warned the focus of his government is on deficit reduction, not more stimulus funding. He said the city should expect to continue to get federal gas tax monies, but not additional funds.

That grant totals nearly $32 million a year – two-thirds of which was allocated to roads with the remainder helping pay for city hall renovations.

Councillors were told in January that the city is adding an average of 50-70 kilometre lanes of roadway each year and that annual maintenance costs for each kilometre lane are roughly $10,000. That report estimated that the infrastructure spending deficit is about $150 million a year.

CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) updates use transcripts and/or public documents to highlight information about Hamilton civic affairs that is not generally available in the mass media. Detailed reports of City Hall meetings can be reviewed at www.hamiltoncatch.org. You can receive all CATCH free updates by sending an email to info@HamiltonCATCH.org.

The Unintended Consequences of Cul-de-sacs

2010-05-11T10:19:00.000-07:00

Though suburban cul-de-sacs have long been attractive as quiet, safe places for families, their disadvantages are becoming clear. One of the biggest problems is interference with motor- and foot-traffic flow. Research by Lawrence Frank, Bombardier Chair in Sustainable Transportation at the University of British Columbia, looks at neighborhoods in King County, Washington: Residents in areas with the most interconnected streets travel 26% fewer vehicle miles than those in areas with many cul-de-sacs. Recent studies by Frank and others show that as a neighborhood’s overall walkability increases, so does the amount of walking and biking—while, per capita, air pollution and body mass index decrease.

Last year, the Virginia legislature took action against the municipal costs of cul-de-sacs and passed a law limiting them in future developments; the new policy was highlighted in the New York Times Magazine’s “Ninth Annual Year in Ideas.” Along with such moves to more-accessible street systems will come an economy that rewards businesses’ proximity to customers and employees. —A.W.

About the Maps

These images compare a one-kilometer walk in the Seattle suburb of Woodinville with one in Seattle’s Ballard neighborhood. The former is limited by a disconnected street network and few destinations within walking distance, while the latter offers easy access to parks and shops.

Click here for a larger image of the graphic.

http://hbr.org/2010/05/back-to-the-city/sb1

Tolls, taxes, fees for transit? John Tory aims to lessen the stigma

2010-04-28T05:44:00.000-07:00

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/tolls-taxes-fees-for-transit-john-tory-aims-to-lessen-the-stigma/article1549090/

John Tory, like the policy battle he’s about to join, has evolved since 2003.

In the mayoral race that year, he “rose up in great indignation” at David Miller’s suggestion that Toronto’s roads be tolled.

Now, seven years later, Mr. Tory intends to use his platform as chairman of the Toronto City Summit Alliance to ratchet down the public indignation that often greets five ideas for funding public transit: road tolls; a Greater Toronto sales tax; a parking tax; a gas-tax hike and a property-tax increase.

“The notion that it’s none of the above is not on,” Mr. Tory said. “This is a test of leadership because otherwise to say you’re going to build all this transit without saying how you’re going to pay for it is, to me, a meaningless promise.”

The Toronto City Summit Alliance, which Mr. Tory took over after the death of founder David Pecaut, has quietly formed a working group of about 25 top minds to pore over five options for funding transit, along with other issues of transportation and infrastructure in Greater Toronto. Members have been drawn from the Toronto Board of Trade, regional transportation agency Metrolinx, and the prominent planning firms Urban Strategies, Inc., and IBI Group, among other organizations.

The official goal will be to recommend ways to raise the approximately $2-billion a year Metrolinx has said it needs to crisscross the GTA and Hamilton with new rapid-transit projects over the next 25 years.

More important, the TCSA, the city-building organization that helped conjure Luminato from thin air, intends to make it possible for candidates to utter the words tolls and taxes without being crucified.

“What’s going on right now is a bit of denial in the populace at large,” said Joe Berridge, a partner at Urban Strategies, Inc. and member of the TCSA subcommittee. “They feel we should just build this transit and get on with it. But we’re looking at a very big build and governments that are not flush with the cash. In some way or another we’re going to have to tax ourselves in the region – whether that tax is in the form of a gas tax, sales tax or various kinds of road pricing.”

Beating congestion has so far dominated the race to replace David Miller. His light-rail plan, Transit City, has been temporarily derailed by the province, which postponed $4-billion in transit funding in its budget in March.

Although the delay made the transit-funding question more urgent, all but two major candidates have rejected road tolls as a means of raising new revenue. Women’s Post publisher Sarah Thomson has pitched a rush-hour toll on the Gardiner Expressway and Don Valley Parkway to pay for more subways, while George Smitherman has said he’s open to discussing tolls.

“Any mayoral candidate who says you can have your cake and eat it too on transit is just not telling the truth,” Mr. Berridge said.

The TCSA group, which has met twice, intends to hold public roundtables this summer, Mr. Tory said. He said it was too early to say whether members would have firm recommendations in time for the Oct. 25 election. The TCSA’s next formal summit is not until February, 2011 – less than a year before provincial politicians face the electorate. Most of the funding options would need Queen’s Park’s approval.

The Toronto Board of Trade, meanwhile, intends to unveil separately its recommendations for funding transit in plenty of time for municipal voting day. “We may take it down to a short list [of funding options],” said Carol Wilding, president of the board. “We’ll ask the candidates to do the same thing, recognizing they may not want to go there. But we’ll be pushing.”

auto show stimulates violence? only in NYC?

2010-04-05T15:36:00.000-07:00

http://thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/748284

4 shot, 33 arrested in Times Square melee

NYPD blames auto show crowd

Colleen Long
NEW YORK — Hundreds of young men spilled into midtown Manhattan near Times Square early Monday, brawling and shooting guns after the New York International Auto Show in an annual night of mayhem the mayor called “wilding.”

Four people were shot and 33 were arrested, mostly on charges of disorderly conduct on the streets not far from the Jacob A. Javits Center, where the auto show is held.

Three men and a woman were arrested later Monday on gang assault charges related to one of the shootings, police said. It wasn’t clear whether anyone who fired shots was among those arrested. Another 21 were issued summons for disorderly conduct or were given juvenile reports and released.

Additional officers were on patrol over the night because similar problems have happened during past auto shows, dating at least to 2003, chief spokesman Paul J. Browne said. Last year, there were 27 arrests on the same night. In earlier years arrest numbers ran in the low 20s, Browne said. A teenager was stabbed in a similar ruckus in 2006, and in 2007, another teen was slashed in the arm.

Browne described those arrested Monday as “young men looking for trouble” after the auto show.

Most of the people arrested were men in their 20s from boroughs other than Manhattan. At least two were known gang members, Browne said; the four people arrested on gang assault charges — three men ages 17 to 23 and a teenage girl — were not believed to have fired any shots, police said.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg described the night’s events as “wilding,” using a word created by the media during the notorious 1989 rape of the woman known as the Central Park jogger. Five men were charged with gang-raping her, but their convictions were thrown out in 2002.

“We loaded the area up with police, but they can’t be everywhere,” he said. “We’re not going to tolerate it. ... This is just a bunch of people who shouldn’t be on the streets if they behave this way, and we’re not going to stand for it.”

Really good article on why people take transit

2010-03-18T06:11:00.000-07:00

The fundamental attribution error in transportation choice

Original link: http://psystenance.com/2010/03/15/the-fundamental-attribution-error-in-transportation-choice/

Posted by Michael D on March 15, 2010

In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error refers to the tendency for people to over-attribute the behaviour of others to personality or disposition and to neglect substantial contributions of environmental or situational factors. (Actually it isn’t quite fundamental, as collectivist cultures exhibit less of this bias.) People are generally more aware of the situational influence on their own behaviour.

Thus, the fundamental attribution error in transportation choice: You choose driving over transit because transit serves your needs poorly, but Joe Straphanger takes transit because he’s the kind of person who takes transit. This is the sort of trap we find ourselves in when considering how to fund transportation, be it transit, cycling, walking, or driving.

Let’s say you live in a suburban subdivision. You can afford to drive, and it’s the only way you can quickly and easily get to your suburban office and to the store, and pick up your child from daycare. How do you interpret the decision of other people to take transit? Is it something about the quality of transit where they are? More likely you are going to attribute it to something about those people themselves — they’re poor, or they’re students, or they’re some kind of environmentalists. It’s difficult for people to realize the effect of the situation, e.g. one with frequent transit service to many destinations along a straight street that is easy to walk to. (I’d also point out that students, the poor, and even environmentalists do drive as well.)

Why do Europeans walk more, cycle more, and take transit more? Surely it is something about their culture? But this is an excessively dispositional attribution. I won’t deny that culture plays some role in transit use, especially in the decisions that lead to the creation of transportation infrastructure. But that infrastructure itself and the services provided on it are a strong influence on the transportation choices people make. The European infrastructure situation facilitates those other modes of travel much more so than does typical North American transportation infrastructure.

Where our infrastructure gets closer to the European model, so does the transportation mode choice, and conversely, where Europe is more like the North American model, Europeans turn out to drive more. If culture were really the driving force, you wouldn’t expect to see much fluctuation in transportation choice. But just as North America suburbanized and fell in love with the private automobile, so did Europe, albeit to a lesser extent. Only recently has Europe started again building new tram lines and clawing back space from the car. Copenhagen, now viewed as an urban cycling mecca, wasn’t always one. The rise of the car drastically lowered cycling there in the 1960s. Copenhagen owes its recent fame to restrictions on parking and to its dedicated cycling infrastructure, which have led to a cycling renaissance.

Consider how North American visitors travel in Europe. How do they get around London? The Underground. How do they get between London and Paris? The train. How do they get around Amsterdam or Copenhagen? Quite possibly they rent a bike. When in Rome, they do as the Romans do: they walk, take the subway or tram, or maybe ride a Vespa. What do European tourists do in North America? Generally they rent a car, because that’s the only realistic way to travel in most places. There are exceptions, of course: tourists to New York City or Washington, D.C. take the subway because that’s the most convenient way to travel in those cities.

We’re not so different from tourists in how we choose to get around. We may have our own preferences, but the biggest influence on our choice of transportation mode is what modes are available to us and how useful they are. Above all this is determined not by culture and personality but by the kind of infrastructure and transportation service provided.

Addendum: Jarrett Walker has some great commentary on this post at Human Transit. More context was given in the Streetsblog write-up.

traffic and pedestrian fatality rates in Canada

2010-03-07T09:08:00.000-08:00

January 27, 2010

How pedestrians, cyclists and drivers can get along a little better

By CBC News
CBC News

Drivers, pedestrians and cyclists can all take some simple precautions to reduce the risk that they will be involved in an accident. While road fatalities have steadily declined in Canada since the early 1970s, the number of pedestrian deaths has remained at close to 400 for the past decade.

It's war out there as an ever-increasing number of drivers, pedestrians and cyclists compete for space on the world's roads.

Motor vehicle-related fatalities have been a fact of life since Irish scientist Mary Ward fell under the wheels of her cousin's steam-powered automobile in August 1869. She fell out of the vehicle as it hit a sharp curve - long before cars came with seat belts, air bags or even doors and drivers were distracted by GPS devices, cellphones or hot coffee spilling in their laps.

Thirty years later, Henry Bliss stepped off a trolley in New York City, turned to help the woman he was accompanying and was hit by a taxi. He died later in hospital, becoming the first pedestrian to be killed by a motor vehicle.

The World Health Organization estimates that more than a million people die each year on the roads. In Canada, 2,889 people were killed in traffic accidents in 2006. More than 1,500 were drivers of cars or trucks, approximately 635 were passengers in cars or trucks, 375 were pedestrians and 87 were cyclists.

While the number of Canadians killed on the roads has been falling steadily since the early 1970s, the percentage of fatal accidents involving pedestrians killed has remained around 13 per cent. According to Transport Canada:

419 pedestrians were killed in 1999.
335 pedestrians were killed in 2001.
374 pedestrians were killed in 2006.

In the city of Toronto, eight pedestrians were killed in the first 26 days of 2010 compared to 31 for all of 2009. Six others died during the same period of January in the suburbs surrounding the city.

Pedestrian fatalities
Vancouver (2007)	13
Edmonton (2007)	13
Toronto (2007)	23
Montreal (2007)	24
New York City (2006)	157
Los Angeles (2006)	99
Chicago (2006)	48

Most pedestrian and cyclist deaths occur in urban areas, often during rush hour or at night. Most victims - more than 60 per cent - are male.

Gil Penalosa, transportation activist and the executive director of the agency 8-80 Cities [http://8-80cities.org/index.html], has been vocal in trying to make cities safer for pedestrians and cyclists.

Penalosa has advised organizations around the world on how to reduce the rate of accidents in urban areas. Among his recommendations are:

Create speed bumps and more signs to increase driver awareness.
Install more lights on city sidewalks.
Ban right turns on red lights.
Reduce speed limits.
Give pedestrians a five-second head start over cars on green lights.

Worst countries for pedestrian fatalities
Country	Population	Year	Total road traffic fatalities	Pedestrian fatalities (% of all traffic fatalities)
Peru	27,902,760	2007	3,510	78
Mozambique	21,396,916	2007	1,502	68
El Salvador	6,857,328	2007	1,493	63
Ukraine	46,205,382	2007	9,921	56
Ethiopia	83,099,190	2006	2,517	55
Statistics from other major countries
Russian Federation	142,498,532	2007	33,308	36
China	1,336,317,116	2006	89,455	26
UK	60,768,946	2006	3,298	21
Mexico	106,534,880	2007	17,003	21
Germany	82,599,471	2007	4,949	14
Canada	32,876,047	2006	2,889	13
Australia	20,743,179	2007	1,616	13
France	61,647,375	2007	4,620	12
U.S.A.	305,826,246	2006	42,642	11

Source:World Health Organization [http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241563840_eng.pdf]

Angelo DiCicco, general manager of Young Drivers of Canada for the greater Toronto region, says changing the number on a sign won't change anything unless speeding laws are better enforced.

"You have to change the driving culture in our society," DiCicco said. "The best way to do that is through education, making the driver more aware of pedestrians and cyclists."

DiCicco notes that an advanced green for pedestrians and cyclists could be helpful because it would make drivers more aware of - and better able to see - others on the road.

[For the interactive CBC page go to http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/01/27/f-road-safety-pedestrians-drivers.html) ]

drivers complain

2010-03-02T09:18:00.001-08:00

[this from 2007, i like the suggestion that drivers complain all the time, bad roads, and then construction...]

Mountain mayhem!

Extensive road construction leaves drivers feeling they have nowhere to turn

Carmela Fragomeni
The Hamilton Spectator

(Oct 5, 2007)

Hurry up and wait. That's the mantra for motorists as Hamilton ramps up its road construction on the central Mountain.

Lime Ridge Mall is all but cut off. Major arteries -- Upper Wentworth, Garth, Stone Church, Mohawk and West 5th -- have all been torn up. Even the Wentworth exit from the Linc has been shut down at times.

The delays are driving motorists nuts as they try to find alternate routes -- and end up sitting in long lines. Rush hour is mayhem.

City staff say the construction is needed, and yes, all at once. These are major roads needing major work as soon as it can be done and with the roads budget being slashed next year, it's important to do the repairs now.

They say drivers can't have it both ways -- complain about the condition of the road and then also complain when it's getting fixed.

Some Mountain residents and drivers disagree with the city starting a project like the one by the mall before finishing another.

"I don't know what the urgency was to get it done while we're tearing up everything else," says resident Tony Tirone. "It's frustrating, time consuming and it just seems unnecessary."

cfragomeni@thespec.com

905-526-3392

http://thespec.com/article/259634

vanishing traffic

2010-02-22T11:52:00.000-08:00

Roadblocks ahead

24 January 1998 by Mick Hamer
Magazine issue 2118. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
For similar stories, visit the Cars and Motoring Topic Guide

CLOSING roads cuts traffic, according to a report due out next month. The study, commissioned by London Transport and the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, suggests that the computer models used by urban transport planners produce the wrong answers.

The report is also bound to lead to calls for the British government's White Paper on transport, due later this year, to include a radical programme of pedestrianisation and expanded public transport.

Computer models used by transport planners effectively assume that closing one road moves traffic elsewhere, causing congestion. But researchers led by Phil Goodwin of University College London, the government's adviser on transport policy, found that this is not what happens. The team analysed 60 cases worldwide where roads had been closed-or their ability to carry traffic significantly reduced.

Goodwin's draft report shows that on average 20 per cent of the traffic that used a road seems to evaporate after it has been closed. In some cases up to 60 per cent vanishes. The examples studied by Goodwin's team were mostly in urban areas. However, the same arguments may also apply away from major cities.

"There is more scope for traffic restraint," says Steve Atkins of London Transport, who was involved in commissioning the study. He described the results at the Institution of Highways and Transportation in London earlier this week.

The report is the logical extension of the finding that building new roads generates traffic, accepted in 1994 by the government's Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment. "If extra road capacity generates more traffic, then the closure of roads is bound to cause less traffic," says Keith Buchan, a London-based transport consultant who advises the government on traffic forecasts.

Many of the road closures studied by Goodwin's team were forced on the planners. In the summer of 1994, for instance, structural problems forced the City of London to close Tower Bridge temporarily. It is a good example of "traffic evaporation", says Joe Weiss, the City's assistant engineer. "Three years later the traffic had still not returned to its original level."

One of the best documented cases is London's Hammersmith Bridge, which has been closed to all traffic except buses and cyclists since February 1997 after routine tests found that the bridge was not strong enough to cope with its load of 30 000 vehicles a day. London Transport surveyed people using the bridge a few days before it closed, and were able to contact the same individuals in the following weeks. Of the commuters who drove to work across the bridge at the beginning of 1997, 21 per cent no longer drive to work (see Figure). Again, congestion in neighbouring areas has not markedly increased.

But where does the traffic go? The report reveals that the commuting habits of individuals can vary enormously, even when their journeys are not disrupted by road closures. On different days, the same person may drive, use public transport or work from home. This flexibility allows people to cope with road closures.

Experts suggest that the report could have an immediate impact on policy. "It's quite interesting for the proposed pedestrianisation of Parliament Square and Trafalgar Square," says Hugh Collis of the transport consultants Ove Arup. "They should just do it."

-30-

[The report has been around for over a decade, but I get the feeling it would make traffic "planners" nervous here...]

The article is from http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15721180.200-roadblocks-ahead.html

Walkscore site

2010-02-09T13:26:00.000-08:00

This likely isn't a perfect indicator, but I think that it's a useful tool when assessing a neighbourhood: http://www.walkscore.com/

building past the budget lines

2010-01-22T10:02:00.000-08:00

*CATCH News – **January 21, 2010*
*Infrastructure deficit: What was said*

This week the Public Works committee formally received a report http://www.hamilton.ca/CityDepartments/PublicWorks/CapitalPlanning/Asset+Management/SOTI/2009+SOTI+Report.htm> on the state of the city’s infrastructure warning that the spending shortfall for roads, pipes, facilities and other structures exceeds $150 million a year. That led to the following exchange between downtown councillor Bob Bratina and the general manager of public works, Gerry Davis, transcribed by CATCH.

Bratina: Gerry, how much does it cost to maintain a lane kilometre ?

Davis: Summer and winter included, it’s approximately $10,000 per lane kilometre.

Bratina: How many lane kilometres have we added in the last ten years, roughly?

Davis: We’ve added, I would say, probably upwards 500-700 lane kilometres.

Bratina: A year, on average?
Davis: On average about 50 or 70 a year, Rick? So 60.

Bratina: So if we can’t afford to maintain these lane kilometres of road, why do we add them? It begs the other question. It’s a bit rhetorical but we’re providing – do the development charges that we apply to development recover the costs?

Davis: Through the growth component, when a developer – they’ll pay for the hard services, the capital cost, primarily. There may be a local component – roads, water, sewers. And then that road is handed over to the municipality to maintain. And other services are then required by the municipality – and that’s public works, policing, fire. But what happens in areas – we have assessment growth generated by the property taxes. That doesn’t come specifically to the police or fire or public works for waste collection, road maintenance, but there is a growth in revenues. I’m not saying it covers everything but that is, the capital cost is, primarily paid by the developer.

Bratina: Okay, so the evidence is that this so-called growth isn’t working because we’re $145 million a year short. So who should pay for that? And what I’m suggesting is that we’re building cheap houses for people who work in other communities. We hear this constantly shoved down our throat about how many people leave the city every day to go to work somewhere else. Well that’s because somebody who’s got a job in Peel can’t afford, at his wages a house there, so they get a nice taxpayer-subsidized house in Hamilton.
A good example is Maple Leaf , because the average, the 900 or so on the production line, mostly live in Hamilton, because they can’t afford on the wages they get to live there.
So we have to consider as a council, and get the accurate information. It’s fine to say well we’re going to get all these new taxes from all these new houses. There’s your proof that we’re not getting the money back. And if you look at a growing community – like let’s say Alberta – Edmonton and the oil boom – they’re desperately short of houses. And there’s new jobs, there’s new people moving in. They’ve got to build houses. We don’t. We don’t have all these new jobs being created. All we’re doing is subsidizing residences for people who work elsewhere.

CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) updates use transcripts and/or public documents to highlight information about Hamilton civic affairs that is not generally available in the mass media. Detailed reports of City Hall meetings can be reviewed at www.hamiltoncatch.org . You can receive all CATCH free updates by sending an email to info@HamiltonCATCH.org

electric cars shock to gas tax

2010-01-20T05:03:00.000-08:00

Susan Tusa, Detroit Free Press

Tax cash cow turning a corner?

Electric cars will zap fuel revenue stream

Ross Marowits
The Canadian Press

MONTREAL (Jan 20, 2010)

The eventual popularity of electric cars will force governments to consider alternative revenues as they prepare to wean themselves off fuel taxes, industry observers say.

Canada's three levels of government share about $15 billion in taxes from fuel annually. But some of that revenue could be at risk if consumers turn en masse to plug-in electric or hybrid vehicles.

"What is being talked about is taxes on electricity, taxes on other modes of transportation like highway tolls," said Al Cormier of Electric Mobility Canada.

But the founder of the organization that promotes electric cars says taxation shouldn't be a major issue for at least five years. It will depend on fuel prices and electric car purchases.

The industry has forecast that there will be 500,000 plug-in electric cars in Canada by 2018. That's a small fraction of the 20 million vehicles on the country's roads today.

HEC business school professor Pierre-Olivier Pineau said governments have to rethink their tax intake as society looks to rid itself of its oil consumption habit. He said the most likely option is to implement carbon taxes or increase ones already in place in B.C. and Quebec.

Part of the government's tax solution might also involve charging higher rates to recharge a car than for residential uses.

Existing networks only charge one price for each household.

But "smart grids" that could be available in a decade would permit variances.

"It's becoming a buzzword and people think it will change a lot of things," he said.

Growing interest in electric cars has Canada's provincial and municipal electric utilities conducting pilot projects to get ready.

Hydro-Quebec recently announced a partnership with Mitsubishi to test the performance of 50 plug-in i-MiEV electric cars in the town of Boucherville over the next three years.

The $4.5-million project provides the public utility with another window on the electric car market. It is also testing a Ford Escape hybrid and a hybrid pickup truck, while batteries developed by its TM4 subsidiary are being tested overseas in vehicles being developed by Indian carmaker Tata.

Spokesperson Stacey Masson said the Mitsubishi project is part of the energy giant's overall strategy and will help it evaluate the impact of electric vehicles on its vast network.

B.C. Hydro launched its own trial of the cars in November and is also awaiting delivery of the Nissan Leaf in 2011.

Toronto and Calgary are also looking to test electric cars.

The vehicles are seen as part of the solution to global warming as they emit no greenhouse gases.

http://www.thespec.com/

Hamilton-Toronto corridor

2010-01-09T08:59:00.001-08:00

http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/701840

Rush-hour blues reach Hamilton

QEW, 403 are both slowing drivers down

Meredith Macleod
The Hamilton Spectator

(Jan 9, 2010)

As congestion continues to trudge outward from Toronto, Hamilton is now the western front.

Morning rush hour drivers cruising into Hamilton, either on the QEW from Niagara or the 403 from Brantford, find their speeds dropping 15 to 20 kilometres an hour upon hitting the city limits.

When commuters hit Burlington, it gets much worse, with speed dropping another 30 km/h.

Traffic on the Toronto-bound QEW slows to 57 km/h on the QEW, from Fairview Street in Burlington to Royal Windsor Drive in Oakville, and then to 52 km/h from Erin Mills Parkway to Hwy. 427 in Mississauga.

The drive home is worse.

Speeds drop to 43 km/h from Royal Windsor to Fairview, before picking up again past Hwy. 20.

Drivers on the 403 heading east from Brant County are moving at an average of 105 km/h in the morning until they hit Wilson Street in Ancaster. As a crush of cars from the Lincoln Alexander Parkway inch onto the highway, mean speed drops to 86 km/h from Wilson Street to the QEW/407 split, hitting as low as 40 km/h at the Linc.

The story during the evening commute is almost exactly the same, only in reverse.

The Travel Time Study by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, a mammoth 1,700-page document that helps guide planning for the province's major highways in the Golden Horseshoe, found that generally, congestion is getting worse, travel times are growing and drivers can count on long commutes more of the time.

That's no surprise to local commuters who say they are leaving earlier to get to work.

"It's slowly gotten longer," said Marshall Craft, who has been driving to Toronto from Hamilton and now Grimsby for 10 years.

It leaves commuters like Craft looking for that sweet spot -- a quasi-scientific formula of latest departure time without running the risk of arriving late.

He heads out the door at 6:30 a.m. Tuesday to Thursday but at 7 a.m. on Mondays and Fridays when he says traffic is lighter.

That generally gets him to work at 8:15 a.m., 45 minutes early. But if he leaves any later, he doesn't have a hope of sitting at his desk at 9 a.m.

In MTO jargon, Craft is building in buffer time -- the extra minutes needed to consistently arrive on time. The ministry's study found that commuter trips in 2008 could be expected to take 13 to 24 per cent longer than the same trip in 2002.

Craft, a graphic designer for a Toronto newspaper, says the biggest change he's noticed is heavier traffic heading west through Oakville and Burlington in the morning.

MTO data bears that out. Gone are the days of watching jammed lanes pouring into Toronto in the morning and out at night from free-flowing lanes in the opposite direction.

Bustling development and job growth all across the Golden Horseshoe means rush hour now cuts both ways.

For instance, a stretch of the Niagara-bound QEW in the morning takes 15-20 minutes to travel. The same stretch heading to Toronto takes 16 to 25.

Goran Nikolic, head of traffic planning for the MTO's central division, says given the huge tracts of housing built around Burlington and Hamilton, local commute times are staying relatively stable.

"We're talking minutes here or there ... There are problems on the QEW during peak hours but that's not new for anybody," he said.

"There has been phenomenal development and it's phenomenal we're still moving."

The MTO study included 4,270 kilometres along 13 major 400-series highways and 92 arterial roads in the GTA.

Nikolic says about 61 per cent of the studied highways didn't see a significant change in travel times and average speeds between 2006 and 2008.

But those that did, including segments of the QEW, Hwy. 404 south, the 410, and 401 eastbound, got markedly worse.

The biggest drop in speed came in the 401 collector lanes between Mississauga Road and Dixie Road, which fell from an average of 95 km/h in 2006 to 50 km/h in 2008 during the morning rush.

The eastbound QEW between Erin Mills Parkway and Hwy. 427 gained speed, from 48 to 52 km/h between 2006 and 2008, but the stretch is still considered the fifth slowest 400-series segment.

Overall, the survey, which used a fleet of GPS-equipped "probe" vehicles covering 141,000 kilometres, found congestion is a problem in the core GTA but is growing in outlying areas as well.

Marilyn Walden of Hamilton has racked up a sizable 407 bill thanks to her long commute to Oakville and Brampton.

The drive to two campuses of Sheridan College where she works as an IT technician is taking longer all the time.

"It's chaos anytime ... if I try to leave here after 3 p.m., I'm stopped on the QEW."

The hike to Brampton where she works two or three days a week takes 3 1/2 to 4 hours daily. And that's with $160 a month in highway tolls. According to Mapquest, it should take her more like 90 minutes two ways using the 407.

"I dread those days... the drive is just brutal."

On the plus side, improvements on the QEW, 401 and other highways boosted average speeds between 2006 and 2008. As well, high-occupancy vehicle lanes cut travel times by as much as 43 per cent in morning rush hours on the eastbound 403.

But Nikolic acknowledges that when capacity in those lanes is reached, the benefit will be cut.

mmacleod@thespec.com

905-526-3408

Commuters

* Total number of workers (over 15) in Hamilton, Burlington, Grimsby census metropolitan area: 324,650

* Number working in own municipality: 180,815

* Number working in CMA: 13,970

* Percentage travelling outside CMA: 30 per cent

* Percentage of Ontarians leaving CMA to work: 20 per cent

* Number in local CMA travelling to work by private vehicle: 274,705

* Number taking public transit: 28,340

* Number walking or biking: 19,010

Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census

Where Hamiltonians are going to work:

Hamilton: 145,480

Burlington: 24,270

Oakville: 7,090

Toronto: 6,925

Mississauga: 6,810

Brantford: 1,925

Milton: 1,860

Cambridge: 1,850

Guelph: 1,105

Haldimand: 1,070

Brampton: 1,055

electric warrior?

2009-12-30T10:06:00.000-08:00

Hybrids in more collisions with bikes in cities

Submitted by herb on December 28, 2009 - 4:47pm

Pedestrians and bicyclists have ended up in more crashes with quiet hybrid cars than with typical vehicles with noisy internal combustion engines (ICE). The new National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report, titled "Incidence of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crashes by Hybrid Electric Passenger Vehicles", studied crashes between pedestrians/cyclists and vehicles finding that the lack of noise for new hybrids was linked to an increase in crashes. These crashes were more prevalent at intersections, interchanges, parking lots and other places where cars traveled at slow speed, the places where the hybrids were most likely to be quietest. It found that hybrids were twice as likely to be in a crash with a pedestrian in these areas.

According to ConsumerReports.org:

NHTSA looked at state-level crash files to compare crash rates on these two types of vehicle engines. Out of 8,387 hybrids 77 (or .9 percent) were involved in crashes with pedestrains. Out of 559,703 conventional vehicles studied, 3,578 (or .6 percent) were involved in crashes with pedestrians. In crashes involving bicyclists, 48 (or almost .6 percent) were involved in crashes with a hybrid vehicle whereas conventional vehicles were implicated in 1,862 (or .3 percent) of crashes.

The study (pdf) found that these incidences were more likely to occur in areas with low speed limits. The hybrids had a higher incidence—two times more likely to have a pedestrian crash—when they were slowing or stopping, backing up, or going in or out of a parking space. Most hybrids employ their electrical motors only at these situations, making these cars eerily quiet. However, there was no difference in rate of pedestrian crashes between these two vehicles when they were going straight.

In 2007, there were 70,000 pedestrians injured and 4,654 deaths due to crashes. A number of organizations, including the National Federation for the Blind, are pushing for legislation that would require all hybrid and electric vehicles to emit a sound. A number of car makers are looking into warning systems, as well.

In the meantime, hybrid drivers need to be aware of their stealthy approach and use extra vigilance and possibly look into installing a backup alert warning device or even a backup camera to be able to see pedestrians and bicyclists around their vehicle. Likewise, pedestrians need to be vigilant as electrified automobiles will become increasingly common.

National Post transit discussion

2009-12-18T09:02:00.000-08:00

This article ran in the National Post on 7 December:

When the Toronto Transit Commission announced in November it would hike fares a 25¢ in the new year -- a roughly 10% increase -- it blamed the usual suspects: rising costs of fuel and wages.

The system, said TTC chairman Adam Giambrone, faced a $100-million shortfall in next year's operating budget.

When the bad news broke, the Torontoist.com, compared the inflation of the TTC's 21 fare hikes in the past 30 years against the price of gasoline and against the inflation rate.

Consistently, the analysis found, TTC fares had risen faster than inflation, and far faster than the price of gas. Between 1980 and 2010, the cash fare, adjusted for inflation, soared more than 80% and token prices are up 50%. The price of a litre of unleaded gas? Up about 30%, without inflation. As for wage increases, Statistics Canada reported last year that the median full-time, full-year salary of average Canadians has hardly increased at all since 1980.

Although it is charging more than ever, getting heftier federal, provincial and municipal subsidies than at any time in its history, although fuelling a car is pricier; and though its customer base has never been larger or keener to reduce its carbon footprint, the TTC, the largest system in the country, is struggling as much as ever to stem its losses. If this is the future of public transit, it does not look bright.

As other major systems across the continent strain in similar circumstances, the strategy of public transit system boosters has been to promote the service as an environmental necessity. In the name of Mother Nature, North American transit systems have received billions in subsidies in recent years - even though they were never developed for environmental purposes in the first place.

If the goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, air pollution and gas consumption, and maximize the environmental impact of sustainability spending, we may be better off without publicly funding transit at all.

"Subsidized transit is not sustainable by definition," says Wendell Cox, a transport policy consultant in St. Louis, and former L.A. County Transportation commissioner. "The potential of public transit has been so overblown it's almost scandalous."

It's not that environmentally minded transit promoters are being dishonest when they argue that city buses are more efficient than private cars: It's that they're talking about a fictional world where far more people ride buses. Mass transit vehicles use up roughly the same energy whether they are full or empty, and for much of the time, they're more empty than full.

For the bulk of the day, and on quieter routes, the average city bus usually undoes whatever efficiencies are gained during the few hours a day, on the few routes, where transit is at its peak.

Last year, policy analyst Randal O'Toole ran the numbers for the CATO Institute, where he is a senior fellow, comparing mass transit vehicles to private vehicles, ranking each based on how much energy they consume and how much CO2 they emit. The average motorized city bus, he reports, burns 27% more energy per mile than a private car and emits 31% more pounds of CO2. The U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics confirms that the average city bus requires 20% more energy per passenger than the average car.

"Unfortunately, right now the state of the art is that you're generally better off with private automobiles when you're talking about energy utilization. About the only way that transit can be competitive for energy or for environmental quality is if the transit lines gets an incredible amount of use, far higher than is now normally the case," says Tom Rubin, a transit policy consultant in California, and former chief financial officer of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. But crowded systems are a turn-off for riders, he says, so more passengers means even more buses and rail cars. "It's almost impossible to make transit more attractive without spending a huge amount of money."

The bus may be the most inefficient part of any major city's transit network, but they're the most vital part. Wider use of subways and light rail relies utterly on a feeder system of buses, says Michael Roschlau, president of the Canadian Urban Transit Association. "You can't just run [Calgary's] C-Train by itself and expect everyone to drive to the stations," he says. "Same thing for the subway in Toronto or Skytrain in Vancouver."

Without buses to carry them from their neighbourhood to the train stations, even fewer citizens would ride the trains, making trains, in turn, less efficient per passenger. Already, when trains, subways and streetcars are combined, the average public transit system is still no more efficient that private cars, according to the CATO study. All transit together does emit less CO2 than passenger cars carrying the same number of people the same distance (about 13% less) but even that gap is disappearing -- fast.

The U.S. Department of Energy's Data Book shows that while transit's energy efficiency has worsened in recent decades -- transit buses today consume 4,315 BTUs per passenger mile, or about 50% more energy than in 1980 -- the trend in cars has been the opposite direction: Today's cars are already nearly 20% more efficient than they were 25 years ago, down from 4,348 BTUs per passenger mile in 1980 to 3,514 in 2007.

The environmental case for public transit is falling just as fast, now that hybrid cars are achieving mass market status, with 65 models set to hit North American roads next year, Chevrolet planning to launch its electric Volt by 2011 and manufacturers rolling out super-high efficiency vehicles. In the next few years especially, the average energy consumption of passenger vehicles, and their emission levels, will only improve, with projections by the International Council on Clean Transportation showing the average auto could beat all public transit modes for efficiency and CO2 within the next five years.

"At this point, a Toyota Prius is less greenhouse-intensive than New York City Transit," Mr. Cox says. "Whatever advantage that transit has at the moment is going away very quickly."

Once eco-conscious urbanites realize the bus is worse for the planet than cars, they'll have little reason to keep riding, making transit's comparative per-passenger environmental footprint look even worse. And while transit system operators talk of "greening" their fleet, the fact is they face substantial limits. Whatever green gains transit can make, automobiles can probably do better, Mr. Rubin says.

When the federal government, the B.C. government and BC Transit revealed plans to run 20 hydrogen-powered buses in Whistler, B.C., in February for the Olympics, even the hard-green David Suzuki Foundation balked at the preposterous $2-million-per-bus price tag -- four times the price of a standard diesel -- arguing that the money would have been better spent on traditional transit initiatives, which "are on life support as far as the financial needs go," Ian Bruce, the group's climate-change campaigner, said.

He's surely right about the pointlessness of what will amount to a four-year, $90-million showpiece of technology not even remotely realistic for actual, financially strapped public transit systems.

And more money for diesel-powered buses may be hardly more worthwhile: The fact is that despite best efforts of transit planners and funding governments, and surveys showing a public keen on environmentalism, most commuters simply will not, or cannot, ride.

Last year's census data confirmed that the vast majority of Canadians have little use for transit. Just 216,000 more people rode at least once than did in 2001, a half-a-percentage increase, but that's actually a decrease relative to the 5.4% population growth over the same period. At the same time, Statistics Canada shows that operating costs for Canadian transit system has ballooned, up 30% from $3.7-billion in 2003 to $4.8-billion in 2007. In the United States, public transit's market share for travel has fallen by a third since 1980, from 1.5% to 1% in 2005. If anything were to get people out of their cars to stand at a bus stop, it would be the severe pain of soaring gas prices. But even as fuel in the United States. approached the unseen price of $4 a gallon in 2008, public transit ridership rose a mere 3.3%.

Transit boosters insist that we must go further, and redesign our cities to support transit systems. "Our cities continue to approve the suburban sorts of development that are very difficult to serve using public transit," Stephen Hazell, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada, told reporters upon release of last year's disappointing ridership data. But the thousands of delivery trucks, taxi drivers, emergency vehicles, service trucks, car-bound workers and buses mean even high-density cities will keep needing highways, ring roads, bridges and flyovers. Meanwhile the massive cost of overhauling cities is just more billions to address an automobile environmental problem that is already on the way to resolving itself -- money that might be better, and more effectively deployed toward other earth-friendly measures, such as reducing traffic congestion.

A congestion charge toll implemented in Stockholm in 2007, for instance, reduced CO2 emissions in that city by roughly 16% last year, cut traffic by 18%, and, because it exempts low-emissions vehicles, led to a tripling of purchases of so-called green cars. Best of all, it sustains itself.

More roads, and more efficient roads, still won't address public transit's original, non-environmental purpose: providing mobility for citizens who lack their own. But where public transit is absent, or impractical, solutions for the small minority totally lacking other means have readily sprung up. Ridesharing applications for smart phones -- users enter their location and desired destination and a cost-conscious carpooler responds -- are already in wide use, Mr. Rubin says. Self-sustaining, small-scale private jitney systems have successfully operated for years in Atlantic City and Puerto Rico (all North America's early public transit systems were privately operated until they were nationalized). And with billions freed up from public transit funds, it appears entirely feasible to simply offer subsidized Prius taxis, or even car subsidies, to the small portion of the public entirely reliant on public mobility. A study last year by HDR Decision Economics, commissioned by the Canadian Urban Transit Association, found that Canada's public systems will need $78-billion more in infrastructure spending and $3.6-billion in annual subsidies to reach optimum capacity. For that kind of money, Canadian governments could, if they wanted, hand out $16,000 car or taxi allowances to every single Canadian who rides transit even casually, and still have $50-billion left over at the end of the decade. That plan wouldn't please the public unions and other transit-reliant lobbies pressing for more green-related transit funding. But it would relieve Canadians from having to perpetually prop up a system that's increasingly unsustainable -- financially and environmentally.

National Post

klibin@nationalpost.

Kudos to letter writer Patrick Condon for writing this response:

Re: Save The Environment: Don't Take Transit, Kevin Libin, Dec. 7.

Kevin Libin gets it all wrong. He uses average transit ridership figures from cities in the United States that are falling from a market share of 1.5% of all trips to 1% of all trips. If you have ever been to Atlanta or Phoenix you can see why. In the Vancouver area, however, transit trips to work increased from 16%t oover 17% during the same period, seventeen times more trips per capita than in sprawling U.S. cities.

More misleading still is the claim from the Cato Institute that a Toyota Prius produces less greenhouse gas per passenger mile than a diesel bus. But for this to happen (according to analysis by the University of British Columbia Design Centre), the Prius would have to have five people in it and the diesel bus no more than 10. I don't remember ever seeing a bus with less than ten people in it, or a Prius with more than two, do you?

Professor Patrick M. Condon, University of British Columbia, James Taylor Chair in Landscape and Liveable Environments, Vancouver.

This letter went unpublished:

While Kevin Libin is entirely correct to challenge the generally uncontested conclusion that public transit is necessarily clean and efficient, he draws some unjustified conclusions based on some statistical sleight of hand. First, his comparisons present a distorted picture: on the one hand, he compares the per kilometre transportation cost between cars and public transit while on the other hand, he compares the energy consumption per passenger between cars and city buses. Far more costly light rail, included in the cost comparison, is excluded from the energy comparison, where the higher cost pays dividends, using less energy than the buses he identifies. Furthermore, the per kilometre cost referenced in the first figure is based on amortising all kilometres driven by the total cost incurred. This does not accurately represent the cost associated with driving in a grid-locked metropolis. In this regard, I commend Libin for his praise for Stockholm's congestion charge toll, though it is worth noting that Stockholm's official report indicates that the majority of diverted car occupants opted for public transit over the purchase of a low-emission vehicle.

Second, the graph that compares CO2 emissions per passenger mile is similarly misleading. On consulting the CATO policy analysis referenced, it is evident that the vehicle fuel efficiencies used are the ideal values from the American Environmental Protection Agency which represent driving new cars (this study used the 2008 model years) under ideal city conditions which do not represent typical, rush-hour city driving. However, the transit values used are the actual energy consumption values from the Federal Transit Administration. Furthermore, as rail runs on electricity, it is only as clean as its source. The translation of energy consumption to CO2 emissions for this study is based on the 2006 U.S. State energy profiles though CATO did not elaborate on how it selected a value of CO2 emissions per unit energy produced. While we are certainly stuck with decades old electricity plants, sources including nuclear, hydro, solar, and wind offer the potential to reduce these emissions numbers to zero. The vehicles in question may have been built in 2008, but the power plants certainly were not.

It is important that the viability of public transit options be examined, but, as a starting point, I believe that better-researched studies should be employed.

Yours sincerely,
N Ellens

roads sinking Hamilton into debt pothole

2009-12-18T08:10:00.000-08:00

Hamilton councillors are taking a wait-and-see view of capital projects

Kevin Werner, News Staff

Published on Dec 11, 2009

Hamilton’s skyrocketing debt has prompted councillors to curtail its 2010 capital budget, despite the city’s deteriorating infrastructure problems that amount to over $60 million every year.

Councillors approved a 0.5 per cent increase, or $2.9 million, in capital spending for 2010, and reserved the right to bump it up to one per cent, or $5.8 million before the budget is approved early next year. The 2009 capital budget was set at $77.5 million. With a one per cent approval, the budget will jump to $83.3 million. The increase to the capital budget will remain until council decides to remove it.

The difference is that for a full one per cent, there will be an additional $4 million for road construction, instead of $40 million that would be allotted under a 0.5 per cent budget. For that extra $4 million, an additional $6 million will be added to this year debt, making it $34.2 million.

The city’s overall consolidated debt is expected to balloon from $590 million in 2010 to $810 million in 2011. The city’s debt is expected to reach a high of $1.26 billion in 2017 before dropping slightly in 2018 and 2019.

“We are caught between a rock and a hard place,” said Robert Rossini, the city’s corporate services general manager.

Despite its high debt and the potential for the city’s credit level to affect how it finances projects, Hamilton still desperately needs to spend on infrastructure projects, Rossini said. Hamilton’s infrastructure deficit for major projects is projected to be about $62 million each year for the next 10 years.

Just under half of Hamilton’s capital budget will be directed to road construction. Money will also be used for park acquisition and development, economic development proposals and waterfront development.

A few of the projects proposed for next year include $21 million for the West Mountain Recreation Centre, $15.4 million for city hall renovations, $13 million for the Stoney Creek recreation centre, $11.7 million for the Trinity Church Arterial Corridor to open up the North Glanbrook Industrial Park, $10.3 million to twin the Morgan Firestone Arena and improvements to Woodward and York roads, and Randle Reef rehabilitation.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger urged councillors to accept the extra 1 per cent funding for infrastructure. He said both the federal and provincial governments are looking at how the city pays its share of infrastructure projects.

“Some time we will have to get our heads around that the federal and provincial governments will not fund our infrastructure,” he said. “We need to keep pace. This signals to other governments we are doing our bit.”

He said there have been complaints made by provincial officials that Hamilton has used provincial and federal monies to cut its taxes rather than direct the money to needed capital projects.

Stoney Creek councillor Maria Pearson, who supported the one per cent, said her greatest fear is the potential for safety problems for residents who are injured due to the city’s crumbling sidewalks and roads.

Ward 1 Councillor Brian McHattie suggested councillors wait early next year when councillors have more information about the city’s financial situation.

Councillors are scheduled to approve the 2010 budget at the end of February.

“I’d like more time to understand our situation,” he said.

http://www.dundasstarnews.com/news/article/196907

Stockholm's congestion tax

2009-12-08T09:40:00.000-08:00

http://www.stockholm.se/PageFiles/70349/Sammanfattning%20eng%20090918_.pdf


This report details the findings of Stockholm's decision to implement a congestion tax on vehicles entering the city from
beyond a cordon during certain hours, similar to that in London, England.

C02 emissions fell, transit ridership increased, and low-emission vehicle purchases increased
(as they are exempt from the tax).

US Highways Increasingly More Subsidized

2009-12-03T07:51:00.000-08:00

Original link: http://www.subsidyscope.com/transportation/highways/funding/

Interesting - this study shows that the US highway system is more subsidized than both GO Transit (80% fare revenue) and the TTC. (70%)

Analysis Finds Shifting Trends in Highway Funding: User Fees Make Up Decreasing Share

The way America's roads are funded is changing. Revenues that predominantly come from users of roads (“user fees”), including fuel taxes, vehicle registration fees and tolls, pay for a decreasing share of road costs. Taxes and fees not directly related to highway use (“non-user fees”) and bonds are making up the difference.

Using Federal Highway Administration statistics, Subsidyscope has calculated that in 2007, 51 percent of the nation's $193 billion set aside for highway construction and maintenance was generated through user fees—down from 10 years earlier when user fees made up 61 percent of total spending on roads. The rest came from other sources, including revenue generated by income, sales and property taxes, as well as bond issues.

Source: Highway Statistics, forms HF-10 and HF-210, Federal Highway Administration.

Going back further, the trend is more pronounced. Forty years ago, user fees amounted to 71 percent of revenues spent on roads. Today, user fee revenue as a share of total highway-related funds is at an all-time low since the Interstate Highway System was created in 1957. A complete data set of highway revenue by source is available for download. In 2007, non-user revenues contributed $70 billion to the highway system. By comparison, this contribution totaled $26 billion in 1967 (in 2007 dollars).

Not all user fees collected are made available for highway purposes. Of the 18.4 cent per gallon federal tax on gasoline, 2.86 cents are allocated specifically for mass transit projects. Another 0.1 cent per gallon is used to pay for environmental cleanup resulting from leaking fuel storage tanks. From 1990 to 1997, the federal government also set aside a portion of taxes on gasoline, diesel and other fuels to reduce budget deficits.

However, even if those funds were fully devoted to highways, total user fee revenue accounted for only 65 percent of all funds set aside for highways in 2007, according to Subsidyscope calculations. This is down from 84 percent in 1997 and 77 percent in 1967. Subsidyscope provides a complete data set of user fee revenues and allocations for download.

Various factors account for the shift in funding away from users fees. Fuel taxes lose their buying power unless adjusted to keep pace with rising highway construction and maintenance costs. The amount of federal fuel tax allocated to highway purposes has not increased since 1997 and states have had trouble increasing fuel taxes to keep up with inflation. Further, changes in driving patterns and fuel consumption can lead to unexpected dips and peaks in user revenues. For instance, increases in fuel prices at the pump can cause vehicle owners to cut back on driving, reducing revenues. Similarly, changes in vehicle efficiency can reduce revenues available from fuel taxes while vehicle usage remains constant.

Another major funding source for roads is borrowing through bond measures, which made up almost 13 percent of highway funds available in 2007. This number has fluctuated over the years. Moreover, the use of bonds to fund roads varies widely from state to state. Subsidyscope considers bonds separately from user fees and other revenue because it is not clear which sources of revenues will be used to repay the bonds.

In addition to a decline in user fee revenue, federal dollars have gradually declined as a share of total highway funding. As a result, state and local governments have taken on a higher share of road costs and are increasingly reliant on alternative sources of revenue.

All data are from Highway Statistics, forms HF-10 and HF-210, Federal Highway Administration. All figures adjusted for inflation using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index.

Updated November 25, 2009

The Pew Charitable Trusts is driven by the power of knowledge to solve today’s most challenging problems. Pew applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic life. We partner with a diverse range of donors, public and private organizations and concerned citizens who share our commitment to fact-based solutions and goal-driven investments to improve society.

Time for the TTC to get smart cards

2009-11-30T07:29:00.000-08:00

http://v1.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/GAM.20091128.GEE28ART1710/TPStory/TPComment

Marcus Gee
28 November 2009
The Globe and Mail

Time for the TTC to get smart cards

To pay your fare on a Toronto subway is to step into a bygone era. You approach the grumpy guy in his little glass cubicle and drop some coins into a little glass box, just as your father or grandfather once did. Or you put a little metal token into a slot in a turnstile. The sole concession to the 21st century is a slide reader for the Metropass. The basic system has remained the same since the Beatles were playing Hamburg.

There has to be a better way - and there is. Cities from Shanghai to Atlanta use a microchipped miracle called the smart card that does everything from getting you on the subway to paying for your fried-chicken takeout. While Toronto ponders the idea, it is already old hat in many places.

Hong Kong's Mass Transit Railway introduced its Octopus smart card in 1997. Riders simply wave it past an electronic reader at the turnstile. A computer deducts the cost of the ride from the monetary value in the card's microchip. Riders can recharge their cards at an easy-to-use machine. They can even use them to pay for groceries or movies.

In North America alone, at least 17 cities have smart-card systems in operation or in the works. Chicago discontinued tokens and took sales agents out of their booths a decade ago. Today riders can reload their Chicago Card Plus online. Seoul transit's T-money can be embedded in stuffed animals, key chains or cell phones. Four out of five riders on London transit use the blue Oyster card, allowing the system to redeploy many ticket takers to other jobs.

The TTC swears we are going to get smart cards too - in a few years, if it can find the money. But, like so many things in this city, the idea has been kicked around and around and nothing ever seems to happen. The TTC has shrugged off the Ontario government's PRESTO smart-card system, which is rolling out for GO Transit and other systems but will appear in the TTC only as a pilot project.

Why the hesitation? Cost is one answer. The estimated price tag has risen from about $140-million a decade back to $450-million today. That's a lot of money for a network that has just raised fares to help cover a $100-million budget shortfall. On the other hand, it pales beside the $10-billion budgeted for new light-transit lines to the suburbs.

The TTC also claims it already has a functioning fare-collection system that does not cry out for immediate replacement - the turnstiles turn, the tokens come out of the machines. Functioning, perhaps, but hardly consistent with a modern transit network. Look at the mess over token hoarding in advance of the fare increase. It wouldn't happen with a smart card.

Smart cards have many other advantages. Riders no longer have to line up for tickets or tokens. And they can board buses or streetcars through several exits, waving their card past a reader as they enter. Bus and streetcar drivers no longer have to check every rider, which reduces dangerous disputes with suspected fare dodgers. Transit systems can track how many people travel, where and when, allowing planners to add more buses to overcrowded routes and stop sending empty buses past deserted stops. They can also bring in new pricing systems, charging riders for how far they travel or when they travel. New York is looking at a smart-card system that would charge riders less in off-peak hours, easing the rush-hour crush.

The former head of the Chicago Transit Authority, Frank Kruesi, once said that to succeed, transit systems have to overcome defeatist attitudes that lead to stagnation and decay - just the sort of decay that has afflicted our own system in recent decades. The best way to do that, he said, is to embrace innovations that make the transit experience easier and more enjoyable, changing people from mere riders into valued customers. The smart card is the ideal way to kick start that change. Bring it on.

walk don't talk

2009-11-19T19:34:00.000-08:00

No walk in the park

A hands-free cellphone makes crossing street riskier: studies

Andrea Gordon
Toronto Star

(Nov 19, 2009)

It may be the modern version of walking and chewing gum at the same time.

But walking and talking on a hands-free cellphone is a lot riskier, according to researchers at the University of Illinois.

Two new studies found that pedestrians engaged in hands-free cellphone conversations had more difficulty navigating traffic and ran a higher risk of getting hit by a vehicle.

"We assume that walking is very automatic, and it is," said lead researcher Art Kramer, a professor of psychology and neuroscience.

"But walking while scanning for pedestrians and cyclists and other vehicles is less automatic."

Add a Bluetooth-style earpiece and it makes too many distractions to manage safely.

Listening to iPods, however, did not increase danger, Kramer said.

The first study, published in the current edition of the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention, involved 36 young adults walking on a treadmill in a virtual streetscape.

Those walking while they talked on a hands-free cellphone took 25 per cent longer to cross the street than peers without phones. They were also more likely to take longer than the 30 seconds designated for crossing.

The second study, involving adults aged 60 and older walking in the simulator, showed more striking differences.

Those on phones were hit by virtual vehicles 15 per cent more often and fell more frequently, Kramer said in an interview.

That study has not yet been published.

Neither group showed increased safety risks while listening to music, even though many members of the older group didn't use iPods regularly.

Kramer, an expert on driver distraction, says that's because listening to familiar music doesn't demand the same attention and concentration as engaging in a conversation.

He said the studies provide more evidence in the quest to understand the real-world impact of humans multitasking using technology.

Kramer's bottom line: Pedestrians should think twice about when and where they use their cellphones.

"I wouldn't if I was walking across a busy street in Manhattan."

rapid talk

2009-11-11T06:06:00.000-08:00

LRT route needs more debate, councillors say

Emma Reilly, The Hamilton Spectator
(Nov 11, 2009)

City councillors whose wards surround a proposed rapid transit route say there needs to be more debate and public education about the plans.

Preliminary plans for the rapid transit route include a two-way line running down the centre of King Street, a pedestrian-only area downtown, and restrictions on parking and left turns along the entire Eastgate-to-McMaster line.

The city predicts businesses will flourish along the RT route and foot traffic will increase.

Metrolinx is expected to announce if it will fund a rapid transit line for Hamilton early next year.

Councillor Bob Bratina, whose downtown ward includes a proposed pedestrian-only stretch along King Street, said he's worried about the tolerance for change of this magnitude in Hamilton.

"I'll support what needs to be done, but we don't want to lose the public enthusiasm on this," he said.

Councillor Bernie Morelli said he's "not so sure the final solution is on the table."

Councillor Sam Merulla said he's a "strong proponent" of RT, but called for "a thorough and complete public consultation process to examine the concerns of both business and residents prior to finalizing the design."

Councillor Brian McHattie said Hamiltonians will adjust to any traffic constraints created by the RT line.

"You have to make these kinds of choices. If people think we're going to get LRT and it's going to be business as usual, they're wrong."

Jill Stephen, the city's director of strategic and environmental planning, said there will be public information sessions and open houses after the Metrolinx decision. In the meantime, she's happy to make presentations to community groups.

Councillor Chad Collins said initial reactions from many businesses in his ward were negative.

Dave Serwatuk, who owns a car wash, a tanning salon and a Little Caesar's restaurant on King Street and Queenston Road, is an example.

"I don't serve people in my immediate area," he said. "People stop by because it's on their regular route. They'll see there's no access and they'll drive by."

Nicholas Kevlahan, co-founder of the citizens' group Hamilton Light Rail, said though LRT will cause some initial headaches, the long-term benefits and economic gains far outweigh the costs.

"It's a bit the same as when people complain about potholes on the road, then complain about the construction that arises," he said.

ereilly@thespec.com

905-526-2452

http://thespec.com/News/Local/article/670379

transit expansion report

2009-11-11T05:58:00.000-08:00

CATCH Articles:

Study says HSR should be expanded

Nov 09, 2009

A comprehensive operational review says the HSR needs to add ten to fifteen buses a year to achieve the city’s transit goals. It also suggests ways to improve Hamilton’s transit system and offers ideas on modifying existing bus routes and service frequencies.

The year long study by IBI Group was commissioned by the city and tracked ridership at all 2264 stops on the HSR’s 32 routes and compared the results to other communities. A summary was given verbally to councillors in a slide presentation on October 29, but the full document has not yet been made public.

The slides say that the HSR is “performing well … given financial and other constraints” but warn councillors that “there are no magic bullets to grow transit ridership without incurring increased costs”. The consultants argue strongly that more spending is what is required.

“A paradigm shift is needed in city thinking and decision making to make transit a priority,” said IBI presenter Brian Hollingsworth. “The HSR is at a crossroads. All policies and plans call for continued growth, but continued financial constraints are a barrier.”

Hollingsworth pointed to the Vision 2020 goal of 100 rides per person per annum by 2020, and the target of the city transportation master plan to reduce vehicle use by 20 percent by 2030. The provincial and federal governments are also supporting transit improvements with gas tax monies.

He noted that HSR ridership is currently at 45 rides per capita per year, down from 47 in 2008. To achieve the 100 target “would require a doubling of service hours and associated funding increases”.

“HSR should be adding 10-15 buses per year to meet this target by 2021,” says the summary, but notes that “concentrating future population and employment in existing transit corridors and other transit supportive policies can reduce the need for service expansion” in meeting city targets. These policies include promoting infill and higher density, reducing parking requirements, and “controlling sprawl of commercial (i.e. big-box) development”.

The study also contends there are good reasons to improve transit services including the “high cost of owning and operating private automobiles” and the fact that gas tax funding for the city “is tied to demonstrated progress on ridership growth.” It also notes that transit promotes economic development because “increasingly companies are seeking to locate in cities that have high levels of transit accessibility.”

While praising the overall efficiency of the HSR, IBI notes that average fares are low because of the large number of riders getting discounted or free trips. They calculate that “44 percent of all passengers have a discounted fare other than an adult monthly pass” and note that “free boardings for persons with personal mobility devices are potentially subject to abuse.”

Reducing this fare “leakage,” IBI suggests, could be an alternative to fare increases. And they urge “discounts for social programs should be treated as such and not funded entirely from the HSR budget.”

Other ideas for savings include “implementing transit priority in the King-Main corridor” which IBI calculates could significantly reduce the number of required buses – each of which costs the HSR $300,000 a year to operate.
Maps in the presentation show possible changes to bus routes and service frequencies as “for discussion”. At the request of city staff the IBI findings have been referred to the transit department for review and a future report to committee of the whole.

Gridlock costs GTA billions a year: OECD

2009-11-10T10:20:00.000-08:00

Gridlock costs GTA billions a year: OECD

Lost productivity putting brakes on growth

TORONTO — Traffic congestion in the Toronto region costs Canada $3.3 billion in lost productivity a year, the result of urban sprawl, decades of underinvestment in public transit by Ottawa and a disjointed system, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development says.

In a first-of-its-kind review of the region’s economy, the OECD said transit service in the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area has not kept pace with population growth, with 71 per cent of commuters still dependent on the automobile — one of the highest rates of car use among cities in the organization’s 30 member countries.

The result is air pollution, some of the longest commutes among OECD countries, and “a direct hit on productivity,” especially in economic sectors that depend on rapid delivery such as retail, logistics and food.

A pair of minor accidents on Hwy 403 east in Hamilton brought the morning commute to a near standstill for more than an hour today. A fender-bender near the Hwy 6 exit and a rollover between King Street and York Boulevard backed up eastbound traffic as far as Fiddler's Green. It was a perfect example of how even minor problems have major effects.

To curb traffic jams, the Toronto region should consider measures such as toll lanes, local fuel and parking taxes, and a Singapore-style congestion charge in which roads in the city centre and major routes such as the 400-series highways would be subject to fees that vary according to peak hours, the OECD says.

Although the Toronto region is one of Canada’s “chief economic powerhouses,” the report says the area’s gross domestic product per capita is middling compared to other OECD countries, while its rate of labour productivity is lower than most U.S. and European cities with comparable income levels, the report says.

That’s due in part to the decline in manufacturing jobs, weak investment in innovation, a failure to capitalize on the skills of its immigrant population and a lagging regional transport network, the 200-page report notes.

Toronto Mayor David Miller said the OECD identified several concerns long expressed by Canada’s mayors, including the need for a national transit strategy and revenues that grow with the economy.

“The OECD report makes it clear that if Ontario and Canada are to thrive, its largest urban centre a must not be taken for granted,” he said.

http://thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/669904

The Rapid Transit Squeeze - The Spec, 10 Nov 09

2009-11-10T08:25:00.000-08:00

http://thespec.com/News/Local/article/669682

Emma Reilly
The Hamilton Spectator

(Nov 10, 2009)

Rapid transit and traffic are competing for limited space on city streets. The city is beginning to map out how rapid transit will operate in Hamilton, revealing dramatic impacts on the way traffic moves along the entire east-west corridor.

Potential changes include the creation of a pedestrian mall in the downtown core and conversion of King Street to two-way traffic with restrictions on left turns from Eastgate to McMaster.

According to a new report, Hamilton will see two rapid transit (RT) lines running along the centre of King Street -- one eastbound, one westbound. These plans are in place whether the city receives light rail or buses. That decision is expected from transportation authority Metrolinx in January.

The heaviest impact will be downtown, where the proposal sees the International Village area of King Street closed to traffic. Vehicles will be routed away from King Street at Wellington Street to either Main, Cannon or Wilson streets, then merge back onto King in a proposed "transition zone" between Mary and John streets.

Drivers could lose on-street parking and loading zones from Eastgate Square to McMaster University, and face restrictions on left turns along the entire route.

Cars won't be allowed to cross the centre lanes in order to maintain the speed of RT and to ensure the safety of motorists.

That means residents and owners and employees of businesses along King Street will only be able to make right turns in and out of their driveways. Left turns and U-turns will only be permitted at traffic lights.

The city chose median RT lines because they ultimately offer traffic more freedom than curbside RT, said Jill Stephen, director of strategic and environmental planning. Since there would be the same restrictions on cars crossing the RT tracks or lanes, curbside RT would mean side streets and driveways would have to be dead-ended.

Stephen says she's aware city residents will need time to adjust to the proposed plan.

"Change can be difficult, but there are lots of good reasons for this change," she said.

News of the traffic restrictions came as a surprise to Councillor Chad Collins. He first heard of the plan at an information update for council members in late October.

Since then, he says, he's been discussing the plans with businesses in his ward and reactions haven't been positive. Few businesses he spoke to were even aware of the direction of the RT plans.

"I'd like to see a system that the community can support," he said. "I'd hate to see a design that turns people off of LRT to the point that they don't want it."

Manny Rebelo, the general manager and soon-to-be owner of Swiss Chalet on Queenston Road, says he's worried about how the traffic restrictions will affect his business.

"It could slow down our service, certainly to delivery guests, and of course our patrons will suffer as well because it will be very inconvenient for them."

Denninger's spokesperson Norm Legault said he's very concerned about plans to close King Street -- the eatery and food store is in the middle of the proposed pedestrian zone.

"I would say this worries us," he said after hearing of the plans for the first time yesterday.

"I don't think that would be in the best business interest for this location."

ereilly@thespec.com

905-526-2452