Quote:
Originally Posted by markbarbera
RePinion, in response to your points, I have to disagree with your suggestion that there presently aren't enough people living around the Gore to fill the place on weekends or most evenings. I am not sure when you were last downtown, but I live in close proximity to the downtown core and pass through it on a daily basis, and visit it often on weekends. There is much more existing pedestrian traffic than you might think. In fact, the sidewalks along King are often filled with pedestrian traffic. And a lot of that is from people who live downtown. In 2001, nearly 64000 lived in the downtown area. Perhaps someone has a more current figure, but I believe this has been trending upward in the current decade, along with the median income of those living downtown.
You also state that complete pedestrianization will effectively shut down King St. to visitors (especially short term visitors) who may not be able or willing to navigate Hamilton's transit system. This would be true if King Street was the only road handling automobile traffic downtown, but we know this is not true. There are many alternate routes into the core running parallel to King Street, and all roads intersecting King will remain open (except possibly Hughson), so accessibility to downtown will not be impacted in any significant way. While the transit system is a great way to get downtown, driving to the core is not being removed from the equation at all, save for a two-block stretch. I am sure even the least adventurous visitor can navigate these two blocks easily.
You also say that the vast majority of shoppers even in the lower city still prefer to drive. Even if this is true, no one is stopping them from driving downtown. Shoppers in the lower city can still drive to their destination. Once they get there, there will be a stretch restricted to mainly pedestrian traffic, making the shopping experience safer and much more enjoyable. Again, we are talking about a two-block stretch easily accessible by intersecting roads and parallel routes. Geographically speaking, that is a walking distance equal to about half the length of Lime Ridge Mall's main shopping arcade, or about equal to the distance one normally has to walk from their parked car to the entrance of shops like Costco or Walmart.
Opposition by downtown businesses can be described as anything but universal. I would also suggest you try not to assume the opinions of the Downtown BIA as reflective of downtown business owners as a whole. I have had conversations with several downtown business owners who are not in agreement with the BIA's vision of the downtown core. Having said that, even the BIA has expressed support of pedestrianization of at least the southern leg of King, the portion currently used as a bus drop-off zone.
Out of curiosity, which businesses along the north side of King Street do you think would be adversley affected by restricting traffic between James and John? I would challenge anyone to name one business along this stretch that would suffer from restricted traffic along these two blocks. Seeing as there is no curbside parking along this stretch as it is, all current business traffic comes in by foot as it is.
By making this stretch more pedestrian friendly, you are enhancing the environment of the business' principle demographic: the pedestrian shopper. It will provide a quieter, cleaner and safer environment more integrated with the positive features of our current Gore Park. By widening the pedestrian walkway, you can also attract restaurants and cafes who are seeking out locations with large available outdoor spaces for patios. You also can provide a space condusive to offering special events to attract people downtown such as the summertime concerts, fairs and open-air markets, and an expansion to the successful Christmastime attraction and other holiday events.
I'm glad to hear you support the idea of complete pedestrianization in principle. I am certainly not in agreement with your belief that the conditions necessary for its success are not present in Hamilton at this time. On the contrary, I believe the timing is perfect. The conditions present in Hamilton today are almost identical to those in Halfax when they introduced pedestrian enhancements in their downtown. A decade later, those initiatives have had a significant positive impact on downtown Halifax, particularly along Market and Argyle Streets. The same can be said about Montreal and Quebec City where they have introduced pedestrian areas in thier cities.
|
I certainly do support the pedestrianization of the south leg of King.
All of your points, I'm afraid, rely a little too much upon anecdotal observation to be genuinely compelling.
I can respond by offering a bit of anecdotal evidence of my own.
I work downtown ... and live in the lower city. I have lived in Toronto, London (UK), and for a short time in Paris and New York. All of these cities have pedestrian traffic of an absolutely incomparable scope to that of Hamilton. And yet, the idea of completely pedestrianizing a major thoroughfare and centre of business in any one of these cities would be virtually unimaginable. There are exceptions - Wall Street in New York and Paternoster Square in London, amongst a few others. But these exceptions exist, it must be said, more for reasons of security than they do for pedestrian friendliness. And they're not very popular spots outside of business hours. Other than that, successful pedestrian areas in major cities tend to be in areas which were always pedestrian dominated (e.g. Covent Garden Market in London). This is certainly true in Old Montreal and Quebec, where the narrow cobblestone streets have always been unfriendly to vehicle traffic anyway. And besides, these are tourist areas, not real business centres. I can't speak for Halifax, never having been there, but I know (from both first and second hand sources) that many of its important businesspeople and real estate developers consider the downtown to be in a very serious decline.
Even if 64,000 people live in the "downtown", 64,000 people do not live on the edge of Gore Park, or even in the very close vicinity. I simply do not accept that there is at present sufficient residential concentration in the area to justify the complete closure of King street to all traffic except transit (and possibly delivery).
As for visitors, I agree with others on here who have pointed out that shutting down King will force these visitors to drive down less desirable streets like Cannon or Main. It seems silly to come to Hamilton and not be able to drive down its primary thoroughfare. Imagine going to New York and finding that a big chunk of Fifth Avenue had been shut down for pedestrians only? It seems ridiculous. Much of our finest architecture is on this stretch of King. To turn it into a pedestrian mall seems to rob it of real life and to disconnect it from the city proper.
I also reject intuitively the proposition that total pedestrianization will cause little in the way of inconvenience. There is such a thing as natural traffic flow and to stick an island of pedestrians in the middle of it will surely disrupt things seriously. Let us not pretend that we can build a city with complete disregard for automobiles. I'm all for traffic calming and even shared usage as between pedestrians and motor vehicles, but cars should be able to reach their destination in as straightforward a path as possible (although not necessarily as quickly as possible).
As for the businesses along the north side of King, I would be happy to see most if not all of them wither and die (or simply move elsewhere). There is not a first rate retailer amongst them and their presence does injustice to the downtown. This stretch of King should be populated by top tier retailers, not junk shops, second hand CD stores and shitty fast food outlets. I simply don't think any top tier retailer would buy into the idea of making a major capital investment on a pedestrian only frontage. The perception of a busy street is very much important to location decisions made by such organizations.
I think it is only fair to allow that the BIA speaks for the majority of its members - or if not all of its members, then at least its most important and prominent ones. As with any representative body, there is an implicit endorsement of its policies and statements by its members short of hard evidence to the contrary. All of the businesspeople I've spoken to affirm that the idea of complete pedestrianization is laughable. Mind you, I'm not in the habit of speaking to any small businesspeople on a day to day basis, but rather lawyers, bankers, insurers, commercial real estate brokers, and so on. I think it is far more important not to alienate these people - who could quite easily move their operations to an office park in Stoney Creek or more likely Burlington - than to cater to the largely uneducated whims of small businesspeople who think their two-bit operation might somehow benefit from a pedestrianized King Street. I quite firmly believe that the business establishment in this city is strongly opposed to the complete pedestrianization of King. That is enough to settle the matter for me.
I'm all for making things pedestrian friendly and certainly even for prioritizing the needs of pedestrians over drivers. I just don't believe a compelling enough case can be made out for total pedestrianization at present.
Prev
Linear Mode
