Has LRT Gone Off the Rails?
July 16, 2011 Meredith MacLeod
While Metrolinx awaits signs the city is keen for an $830-million investment in LRT, city politicians are backing away from a project that many business leaders say represents the city's future.
Is light rail being derailed in Hamilton?
The idea, just a few short years ago, seemed to be zooming along. Council was on board, unanimously backing LRT for Hamilton's rapid transit future and parking the idea of buses. Polls showed a good chunk of the public was supportive.
The business community was united in support and environmental and transit advocates were celebrating the idea of getting people out of cars and onto electrically powered trains.
Then along came Metrolinx, the regional transit authority, which showed in 2010 that light rail, at a price tag of about $800 million to $830 million, was a much better economic and social choice for Hamilton than buses. Its studies showed an $852-million savings in commuter costs over 30 years and economic benefits of $50 million to $144 million.
A few months later, then Metrolinx CEO Rob Prichard (now the agency's chair) was speaking at the Hamilton Economic Summit.
He said the city had a “big head start on being the next major project to be announced. I personally think it's Hamilton's to lose, rather than Hamilton's to win.”
All the tracks seem to have been laid, metaphorically at least, for a shiny, sexy train line criss-crossing the lower city. All there was left to do, it seemed, was to knock on provincial and federal doors and lobby for funding. Former mayor Fred Eisenberger took up the charge, making light rail one of the linchpins of his leadership.
But he was defeated in last fall's election.
Since then, there have been repeated calls from various quarters for a political champion to take on the LRT cause, saying it's crucial to landing funding and to project a fresh image for a city striving to find a place in the knowledge economy.
That hasn't happened. Instead, the voices from the upper offices of the city in recent days are throwing some mighty cold water on the dream of LRT.
Mayor Bob Bratina, a supporter of LRT when he was the downtown Ward 2 councillor, has recently said all-day GO train service is a bigger priority and that there is no public “clamour” for LRT. He has questioned whether Hamilton taxpayers can afford the project and said there is “no convincing argument” for dense economic development along the corridor.
Both Bratina and city manager Chris Murray have said they haven't fielded any calls from developers interested in investing along the proposed east-west LRT route.
Other councillors have publicly worried about whether the city can afford LRT, and Brad Clark says that city planning is being “backed into a corner” over LRT.
Business leaders and other advocates now fear there is little political will to chase a project they say is vital to bringing more people to the city's core, spurring downtown development, carving a new future for Hamilton and building the kind of city today's young and skilled workers want to live in.
Some say we will lose opportunities to Waterloo, which after nine years of controversy, finally bit the bullet to approve a light rail linking the downtowns of Kitchener and Waterloo. The $818-million project, shared between all three levels of government, will hike local property taxes by up to 7 per cent over seven years.
In contrast to what appears to be flagging political momentum in Hamilton, the city's staff and consultants continue to work full steam ahead on planning and engineering work for the 13.4-kilometre route from Eastgate Square to McMaster University. By the end of the year, the city is expected to have finished about 60 per cent of the necessary design work.
Will Hamilton end up with very nice drawings of a project that never gets built?
Mark Chamberlain sure hopes not.
The successful entrepreneur and tireless civic advocate says LRT is an “absolute necessity” for Hamilton.
The city is aiming to become a knowledge based economy based on high-tech, green energy and creative clusters but it simply won't attract those kinds of companies or workers without a modern transit system, he says.
Ottawa, Toronto and Waterloo are all investing in train systems and if Hamilton doesn't, “it will preclude us from participating in the next wave of prosperity.”
The “do nothing” option is more expensive, says Chamberlain, and could have a “drastic” impact on the future of the city. “We already aren't competing. Businesses will leave for competitive cities … We need to invest in the city product if we want people to buy it.”
Others back that call. Business and community leaders talk about a lack of political will or courage, the city's reluctance to change or think big, the tendency to make decisions and then waffle over them later.
Chamber of Commerce chair Demetrius Tsafaridis is concerned the mayor's comments will be perceived by provincial decision-makers as “backing off” on LRT. He says the provincial election should be the time to push for commitments from all three parties.
“You always need to have big plans and push big projects forward … We can't sit back and let ourselves get behind. Hamilton and Ontario is already so far behind the rest of the world on mass transit.”
Big pension funds are looking to invest in infrastructure projects, says Tsafaridis. “If we don't get talking about it, other cities will beat us to those dollars.”
So if LRT is so important to the city's economic development, why aren't developers swooping in with plans and cash in hand?
That's easy to explain, says developer David Blanchard, whose company owns a lot of property along the line.
“No one is going to run in and buy up all this stuff on a dream.”
Until there are commitments and timelines in place, developers won't sink money into buying property, he says.
Blanchard isn't particularly hopeful LRT will materialize, but thinks it would be a good thing, overall. But he says it would have to come with serious incentives to developers, including lowered or waived development charges, eased parking requirements and a cut to red tape.
Ross Godsoe, CEO of the Realtors Association of Hamilton-Burlington, says his group and Hamilton Business Leaders, a coalition of a number of major business organizations, fully supports LRT because the evidence from cities around the world is definitive about trains spurring economic development.
He doesn't understand the political uncertainty and says any hesitation in the development and real estate community would disappear if the mayor and council announced they will pursue LRT.
“It always appears they're going for the small step. It's time for this city to step up to the plate and go for a big win.”
Light rail lines in other cities have attracted dense residential and commercial pockets around stations. While buses are cheaper and very effective in moving people, the systems don't bring investment dollars because routes can easily be changed.
Bratina didn't directly address questions put to him by The Spectator or agree to a request for an interview. He offered an email response that read, in part:
“LRT for Hamilton is in its conceptual stage. The immediate transportation priority for Hamilton is all-day GO train service between here and Toronto, which has almost unanimous endorsement.
“I'm not sure what council is being asked to do with regard to LRT because we continue to work on our strategy.”
Richard Koroscil, president of Hamilton's airport and a member of the Metrolinx board, says he's disappointed with some of the messages coming out of city hall. He has urged city residents and leaders to champion LRT, saying Hamilton has to be heard among all the voices lobbying for government transit funding.
He says all-day GO trains shouldn't be pitted against LRT as an either/or proposition. Both are included in Metrolinx's Big Move plan and both are crucial to the city's future, he says.
“GO can be done in a shorter time frame at a lot lower cost. The province doesn't have a lot of money so it's wise to chase GO … But my suggestion is not to stop on LRT. We have to continue to advance on the project.”
Koroscil says Hamilton should be lobbying Metrolinx for funding for the next phase of funding to study and plan for LRT. An initial grant of $3 million for the preparatory work runs out at the end of this year.
“It's legitimate to ask if the project is too expensive but there has to be the work done on analyzing whether it's a good investment … If we choose not to do LRT, what is the cost of that? Waterloo did that kind of analysis and found out it would cost more to do nothing.”
Chamberlain, chair of the Jobs Prosperity Collaborative and president of idea commercialization firm Trivaris, says big discussions in Hamilton are always based on the wrong questions.
Instead of focusing on value and looking at spending money as an investment to build revenues and quality of life, Hamiltonians, powerful and not, are solely focused on cost, he says.
“This city doesn't have a business plan. So there is no link between investment and return. Everything then appears as a cost only. It's disconnected and appears chaotic.”
Without attracting business and residential investment and intensifying development, particularly in the lower city, the city's pressing issues of poverty and a large residential tax burden will only worsen, argues Chamberlain.
“We need to ask, ‘How do we increase revenues while keeping the city livable?'”
Frank Mercuri, president of the Hamilton-Halton Home Builders Association, says LRT “would be a decisive indicator to the investment community that (city hall) is serious about changing the face of the city.” He says a political champion is “an absolute must” both to implement the system and to lead redevelopment that justifies its cost. He says LRT and all-day GO train service should be pursued together.
But he adds there may have been other corridors in the city more ripe for redevelopment than the chosen B-Line route that would produce more attractive returns for investors.
Rail advocate, blogger and Raise the Hammer editor Ryan McGreal has urged his readers to contact their councillors and the mayor and tell them to keep pushing for LRT. “The big problem with council's approach is that it punts instead of charging, by ceding the political ground of advocacy with the province,” McGreal wrote July 8.
After Bratina and city manager Murray appeared on a local radio talk show, McGreal came out charging himself on a number of statements they made, including whether there is sufficient developable land on the route, the success of the LRT system in Charlotte, N.C., and the density of Hamilton's population versus that of Portland, Ore., where LRT has been wildly successful.
“If you look at Hamilton's population along the B-Line, it's exactly the same density as Portland. We already have the ridership along the B-Line to justify light rail,” he said in an interview.
There are dissenting voices on the LRT debate. The Spectator has published many letters from residents who say the system is expensive, inflexible and will cause traffic headaches. And not all developers are on side with LRT, either.
Vince Molinaro, whose Hamilton company has focused on building highrises in Burlington, says it's a lot of money to spend “just to say it's cool and will bring more riders … It's a lot of money to hope intensification will come.”
He thinks the city would be better off looking at increasing densities along the waterfront, the escarpment, and in Ancaster.
Tyler McDiarmid, chief financial officer with Vrancor Group, the company behind a proposed $100-million condo, hotel and retail complex in the block bounded by Bay, Hess, King and Main, says LRT is not a significant factor for its projects.
“We're much more focused on James Street North and all-day GO service,” to lure buyers from the GTA. McDiarmid says Hamilton's bus service does a relatively good job.
Home builder Jeff Paikin says Hamilton is a very tough market because costs are high and property values are low.
He believes in the short to medium term, an LRT line would spur condo development in neighbourhoods where it would happen anyway. Longer term, rail transit could bring vertical intensification where it would never come without the investment, says Paikin, president of New Horizon Homes.
“People won't ever come first. You have to do LRT and take the chance.”
Canadian real estate expert Don Campbell says it might appear that developers are not interested in whether the city gets LRT or not, but that's not the case. They are waiting for station locations to be finalized and for a commitment to be made.
“Once that happens, you will see lots of purchases around stations. That happens everywhere in North America exactly the same.”
Campbell is president of the Real Estate Investment Network, which ranked Hamilton the best place to invest in Ontario this year. Part of that ranking was based on existing and planned transportation projects. He couldn't say whether Hamilton's placement would slip if LRT was off the table, but he did say the city cannot reach its goal of attracting good jobs and skilled young professionals without it.
“The question Hamilton has to ask is, ‘Do we want to be a world-class city or do we not?' If the answer is yes, then it's a matter of finding a way to fund LRT.”
Campbell was not the only person to bring up the vestiges of the Pan Am stadium debate in the possible unfolding of what will is sure to be a long discussion about LRT.
“Hamilton really didn't look good in any of that. The city was laughed at during the Pan Am Games debate. I hope they don't have a reason to laugh out of this decision.”