It's probably going to take experts a good year to do a cost-benefit analysis on whether Hamilton should get new bus or light-rail transit lines as part of our share of Metrolinx's stunning $50-billion regional transportation plan.

But there's already no doubt what's best for Hamilton.

For a city desperately in need of rejuvenation, light rail is really the only way to go.

Fixed rail is not only more glamorous and image friendly than a bus system, it also offers a more attractive alternative to the car -- for some of the same superficial reasons I've just noted.

Popular and political sentiment is already demonstrating a marked rail-bias in this town.

Preliminary feedback to city surveys suggest the public is overwhelmingly in favour of rail over bus.

And after his eye-popping summer tour of light-rail systems in Calgary, Charlotte, N.C., and Portland, Ore., Mayor Fred Eisenberger is in danger of mutating from acolyte to prophet.

Along with many other devotees, Eisenberger sees light rail as a transforming agent that will promote economic growth, civic pride and inner city intensification.

But that doesn't mean we should bet this month's gas money that in 15 years we'll be riding the rails from McMaster University to Centennial Parkway, and from James Street to Munro airport.

After all, it's estimated that a light-rail system would cost about $1.1 billion as opposed to about $480 million for an express bus system using dedicated traffic lanes.

And a rapid bus system is not only cheaper to build than fixed rail, it's obviously more flexible as far as future expansion and contraction of routes.

What it doesn't remotely have is sex or snob appeal.

Light rail has both.

Studies show that one of the main drivers in getting more people out of their cars and onto public transit is image.

But like it or not, people who use buses are frequently seen as wanting in, well, let's say, status.

In the eyes of our privileged car culture, buses are for the disabled and the disenfranchised, the elderly and working poor, struggling students and generic losers.

Light rail doesn't appear to have that stigma.

Anecdote after anecdote suggests that hopping onto electrically powered street trains is generally regarded as more urbane and sophisticated than clambering onto buses.

Although this high-nosed perception is hard to quantify as a factor in light rail's popularity, studies routinely show that rail does take the lead when it comes to growing ridership on public transit.

It's not only seen as more modern, stylish, spacious and enviro-friendly than bus travel, it's generally regarded as a safe, reliable and comfortable alternative to the passenger car.

Opting for a light rail over an express bus service would certainly be a big, bold and costly step.

But it would elevate this city's image and transform its inner transportation patterns like nothing else short of a subway system.

It's good to know that making a recommendation on which system to adopt is one of the priorities in Metrolinx's overarching plan for co-ordinating transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.

Let's just hope there's scope within the cost-benefit analysis to incorporate a vision for this city as well as the region around it.

Andrew Dreschel's commentary appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. adreschel@thespec.com 905-526-3495