Hamilton Downtown Streets: Convert Main & King to 2 way? Discuss

[Wigs]

Since it wasn't my intent to clog up the Apex project thread, how about we discuss it here?

Have you guys seen this?
• Video Link
One of the key takeaway points is that while downtown Hamilton doesn't have a cross-downtown freeway, the city certainly created one with the King St and Main St one-way speedways that are anti-urban/not pedestrian family

[Beedok]

I think people in Hamilton get too focused on one way vs two way. Wider sidewalks and lower speed limits are more important. Metcalfe in Ottawa is one of the nicer streets to walk down in the downtown, and it's one way. But it has wide sidewalks and trees, making it quite pleasant. While Bronson on the other side of the downtown is two way, but has thin sidewalks and people zipping along fresh off the highway or excited to get onto the highway, and is a significantly less pleasant experience as a pedestrian.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

We're all more or less in favour of the same thing, based off of how much I hear them called urban highways rather than just one-way streets. Nobody's complaining about the International Village's stretch of King, the problem are the stretches where the road is 4, 5 or at some points 6 lanes wide, its near impossible to discourage speeding and keep pedestrians alive with a road that wide.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I think people in Hamilton get too focused on one way vs two way. Wider sidewalks and lower speed limits are more important. Metcalfe in Ottawa is one of the nicer streets to walk down in the downtown, and it's one way. But it has wide sidewalks and trees, making it quite pleasant. While Bronson on the other side of the downtown is two way, but has thin sidewalks and people zipping along fresh off the highway or excited to get onto the highway, and is a significantly less pleasant experience as a pedestrian.

Agreed.

Richmond and Adelaide in Toronto have become quite pleasant streets in Toronto despite still having 3 one-way lanes as the bike lane has been installed buffering pedestrians.

It's more important to cut Main St to 4 lanes from 5 and give that lane over to extra pedestrian space than it is to change it to a two way street if you ask me.

[ScreamingViking]

Main could probably even be just 3 lanes. The lanes seem full when there's a "wave" of traffic, but when there's not the street is empty.

Keep some parking along one side, devote a lane on the other to a protected cycling lane, and widen the sidewalks.

[matt602]

Main should absolutely be cut to either 4 lanes with wider sidewalks and more street trees or 3 lanes with protected bike lanes. In either scenario the synchronized traffic lights also need to go so that traffic flows more smoothly and predictably instead of in platoons. Either of these scenarios would drastically decrease noise along that entire corridor and improve street life. Cannon is a great example of what that would look like even with way less commercial than what Main has.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Main could probably even be just 3 lanes. The lanes seem full when there's a "wave" of traffic, but when there's not the street is empty.

Keep some parking along one side, devote a lane on the other to a protected cycling lane, and widen the sidewalks.

I like this idea.

If possible both Main and King should each have a protected bike lane through the heart of the downtown core.
Even if one of the streets installed them it'd be better than the "urban highways" that currently exist

[TheHonestMaple]

I imagine something that could resemble University Ave in Toronto. Two lanes in each direction with landscaping down the centre and periodic turning lanes where needed.

[jonny24]

I think, unrelated to traffic calming, it needs to go 2-way because King is going to lose it's trough-traffic, at one point even completely switching to eastbound instead of westbound, and will only have 1 lane for a lot of it.

But part of the 2-way project should absolutely be addressing the urban highway effect. Most point I can think of have been mentioned:

- bike lane
- parking, potentially set up as a barrier between traffic and the bike lane a la Charlton
- Unfortunately I don't think that leaves a lot of room for wider sidewalks / boulevards. its 5 lanes up to Sherman, then 4 lanes to the Delta. If you lose one lane to create two bike lanes, and one to parking / barriers, you've got 3 traffic lanes from 403 to Sherman, basically one each way and turn lane in the middle. Then no more turn lane after Sherman.
-The synchronized lights definitely contribute to the unpleasantness on the street (as much as it does make driving convenient) but I don't think you could even have synchro lights on a 2-way the same as you can on a 1-way so it might be a moot point?

Perhaps you forgo the parking lane, and use narrower planter barriers for the bike lane, but I don't think you want a bare bike lane.

Another thought is that maybe Wilson and Canon also switch to be fully 2-way? If there are multiple 2-way streets traversing the city there won't be so much pressure on Main to handle it.

[Corktowner]

If Main gets converted to two-way, I don't think it will be possible to do any of the traffic-calming road diet stuff that people on this thread would like to see. Right now Main is five lanes from the 403 to Sherman, but the lanes are undersized. If it were two-way, the lanes would have to be wider and I'm sure the traffic engineers would insist on two lanes in each direction (i.e. four lanes total). That would leave at most a couple of metres for things like wider sidewalks or boulevards. Definitely not enough space for protected bike lanes or parking. I think the best you could hope for would be something like John Street South.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Corktowner

If Main gets converted to two-way, I don't think it will be possible to do any of the traffic-calming road diet stuff that people on this thread would like to see. Right now Main is five lanes from the 403 to Sherman, but the lanes are undersized. If it were two-way, the lanes would have to be wider and I'm sure the traffic engineers would insist on two lanes in each direction (i.e. four lanes total). That would leave at most a couple of metres for things like wider sidewalks or boulevards. Definitely not enough space for protected bike lanes or parking. I think the best you could hope for would be something like John Street South.

Even that would be preferable to the existing street design. They'd probably try to put some turn lanes at major intersections, but a 4-lane bi-directional road with wider sidewalks would be a good change.

[Corktowner]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Even that would be preferable to the existing street design. They'd probably try to put some turn lanes at major intersections, but a 4-lane bi-directional road with wider sidewalks would be a good change.

I totally agree! I just think it's important to be realistic about what's possible in the context of Hamilton politics and our actually existing transportation system. Main Street could be a lot better than it is now, but it's still going to be a major artery for cars, not a Copenhagenized, traffic-calmed urbanist paradise.

[matt602]

I wish Hamilton could also stop being so obsessed with left turn lanes. Many of them are incredibly unnecessary on so many of the main arteries through the urban centre of the lower city. Touching your brake pedal every once in awhile isn't the end of the world.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by matt602

I wish Hamilton could also stop being so obsessed with left turn lanes. Many of them are incredibly unnecessary on so many of the main arteries through the urban centre of the lower city. Touching your brake pedal every once in awhile isn't the end of the world.

left turn lanes are actually huge, huge vehicle capacity additions without taking up much space.

There is a reason road design over time has shifted from 4 lane roads with no turn lanes to 2 lane roads with turn lanes on medium volume roads. A two lane road with left turn lanes and an occasional right turn lane has basically (probably about 80%) the same capacity as a 4 lane road without turn lanes.

I get the problem with them from a pedestrian perspective as they increase crossing distances a bit, but if you want to cut vehicle lanes across a whole road they are essential to not completely screwing up traffic.

Roads like Parkdale Avenue are probably overkill to be a 4 lane + turn lane road, for example, but roads like Queenston Rd in East Hamilton would be complete traffic disasters without them.

[Innsertnamehere]

A reminder of traffic level changes from the LRT.

Green means a traffic level reduction over today, brown means an increase.

It looks like most of the traffic shift will occur onto Barton St through the east end. Same with Aberdeen taking a lot of the load for access to the 403. The city should probably reconsider narrowing that street.

Interestingly, Main St E loses a lot of traffic. All the more reason to convert it to two-way.

I'm quite confused by why York Blvd loses so much traffic. I would have figured it almost certainly would have increased in traffic. Same with King East near Rosedale, and Burlington St.

Interestingly, the LRT shows a cut in traffic levels on the 403 going up the mountain, as well as on the RHVP.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I'm quite confused by why York Blvd loses so much traffic. I would have figured it almost certainly would have increased in traffic. Same with King East near Rosedale, and Burlington St.

Interestingly, the LRT shows a cut in traffic levels on the 403 going up the mountain, as well as on the RHVP.

I wonder if the models are showing that more people will use the LRT to access the downtown GO service, resulting in fewer driving to Aldershot or Burlington. So in the PM peak, as shown, there are fewer of them returning to Hamilton via York; the impacts on the 403 and RHVP may have similar reasoning.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I wonder if the models are showing that more people will use the LRT to access the downtown GO service, resulting in fewer driving to Aldershot or Burlington. So in the PM peak, as shown, there are fewer of them returning to Hamilton via York; the impacts on the 403 and RHVP may have similar reasoning.

I suspect that as well, but it doesn't explain the much lower outbound volumes on York towards Burlington as the LRT wouldn't help that trip pattern.

The LRT plan recall plans to re-widen York Blvd to 6 lanes from Queen to Dundurn and widen Dundurn to 2 southbound lanes by removing the bike lanes to accommodate traffic shifted off King St. I had figured that if you were going towards Waterdown / Burlington that you would simply stick to York to access the 403 instead of trying to go back up Dundurn to King St, which would result in increased volumes there, but the projection shows significant losses in traffic volume on York Blvd.

That said, I am so looking forward to King St downtown losing all that car traffic. Downtown will feel just so much more pedestrian friendly.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I suspect that as well, but it doesn't explain the much lower outbound volumes on York towards Burlington as the LRT wouldn't help that trip pattern.

Maybe it reflects a mode shift for Burlington-to-Hamilton commuters? Fewer of them making the trip home via York and the 403 (depending on the assumptions re: 2-way GO service)