Gore Park

[DC83]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I don't like either option, to be honest.

Why do they have to spend so much money re-doing the park again? I have a simple solution to pedestrianize Gore Park for as little money as possible... add decorative (removable) blockades at John and at James (such as the ones they currently use pictured below to the left of the hot dog stand)


courtesy Isra2008 on flickr.com

Gore Park does not need to be redesigned AGAIN! The park is beatiful as-is. Also, I don't think another permanant water-feature is needed. I don't want it to take away from the gorgeous fountain we currently have.

I'm not a fan of pedestrianizing the North section of King either. Sure Hamiltonians will be able to enjoy a car-free downtown... but will restrict passers-by from seeing what is probably our greatest street.

My final decision (and what I will email to Bratina):
- Pedestrianize the south-leg of Gore (removable blackades for delivery trucks, special events cars/trucks, etc)
- Make the north-leg of King two-way to calm traffic
- Keep Gore Park the way it is with the option of adding a removable/temporary ice rink for winter time (preferably ON the street itself)
- Then over-saturate Gore Park with as many festivals/events that can fit during the festival season (one week-long event per week betwene Jun-Oct should be good)

[Millstone]

Sorry guys, I'm not really fond of the idea of completely removing car traffic from King either. It's a main thoroughfare.

[raisethehammer]

you both make the arguement FOR closure of the north leg.

"Hamilton's greatest street"
"It's a main thoroughfare"

right now only the second statement is true. This COULD be our greatest street. Why isn't it?
Because it's a main thoroughfare.
Main, Hunter, Cannon, Wilson and Barton are all main thoroughfares right nearby. Let's let King Street become our greatest street and most vibrant district.

[SteelTown]

The city must convert York/Wilson to two way and redo Cannon St. After that then close the Northern section of King St. Once the new transit terminal opens immediately close the Southern section of King St.

The 403 entrance from York on High Level Bridge will greatly increase so the province will likely be forced to redo the 403 entrance at High Level Bridge.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

The city must convert York/Wilson to two way and redo Cannon St. After that then close the Northern section of King St. Once the new transit terminal opens immediately close the Southern section of King St.

The 403 entrance from York on High Level Bridge will greatly increase so the province will likely be forced to redo the 403 entrance at High Level Bridge.

why would that ramp from 403 need to be redone?? it's fine.

[SteelTown]

^ Not a complete redo just a few fixer upper for the entrance as more traffic will be added, likely will need to extend the on ramp to the 403 so it can handle more cars merging on 403 instead of backing cars all through the entrance ramp.

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

you both make the arguement FOR closure of the north leg.

"Hamilton's greatest street"
"It's a main thoroughfare"

right now only the second statement is true. This COULD be our greatest street. Why isn't it?
Because it's a main thoroughfare.
Main, Hunter, Cannon, Wilson and Barton are all main thoroughfares right nearby. Let's let King Street become our greatest street and most vibrant district.

It's because people speed right through it at 70 km/h between John and everything west. Just calm the traffic a little bit and see what happens. How are people even going to know it's there if you can't drive through it? Hamilton has a huge suburban (read: car-owning) population that isn't always keen on taking HSR through the city.

I mean it's literally taking a park and putting stores and hotels and malls around it. It's a tough sell to Joe Taxpayer.

How about this, turn the south and north parts into one-way angled parking. Come in from the east and leave on the west. No through traffic. Keep James, John, Hughson open. Turn Hughson two-way between King and Wilson so you can pick it up off Wilson.

[fastcarsfreedom]

Yeah--honestly I can't believe this ridiculous plan is still being discussed. This Forum is always cursing out the city for "old" thinking--this sort of pedestrianization was out of vogue even before Buffalo did in the 80s--it was a 60s and 70s phenomenon--and short of Minneapolis I can't think of a single place where it has worked well--cities are scrambling to reopen streets to traffic. Completely backward and illogical--I'm astonished.

[DC83]

^^ I somewhat agree with Fastcars on this one.
I'm 110% FOR ped'ing Gore Park and 'its' King St (south-leg). But why the north-leg? It doesn't make sense!? Even though I don't drive and am a huge booster for Public Transit & Green Living, people (ESPECIALLY visitors) need to drive thru our downtown. THEN they can get out and walk around and appreciate all it has to offer.

How many times have you been driving along and decided, "Ooh there's "whatever-ville" or "random-town", I'm gonna pull off the Highway and check it out since I have nothing better to do!? I know I have, and read it quite often while reading the comments on the My City Pictures section of the forum. If the north-leg og King St were closed completely to traffic, we'd make those random visitors drive along Main or even worse, Wilson/Cannon. So instead of being able to drive slow enough to see our great stock of historic buildings, an awesome urban park, crazy street-activity for a city of 500,000... they'll drive slow enough to see decrepit houses, crack heads or if they drive along Main they'll see a bunch of empty lots and an empty city hall (for now anyway).

Slow traffic along King(north), prohibit traffic to (south)King, and let EVERYONE (drivers AND peds) enjoy our Gore Park!

ps: If they close traffic to the north-leg of King, I could see a 'Buffalo-Main Street' effect. However, if they leave traffic along that section and close Gore Park, I could see a 'Montreal-Place Jacques-Cartier' effect!

Main St, Buffalo:

from KCA on flickr.com, http://flickr.com/photos/kca/1009671446/

Place Jacques-Cartier, Montreal

from Mike_Cohn on Flickr.com, http://flickr.com/photos/jazzone/516707787/

(I searched thru 9 pages to find a more vibrant Main St, Buffalo w/ no luck)

PJC in Mtl is bordered by 4 streets... of course it's in Old Montreal so traffic crawls down there (narrow, cobblestone streets full of gorgeous historic blgds). So I think (imo of course) (north)King St would THRIVE on a setting similar to PJC (slow traffic, ped'ized public square) rather than shutting off traffic and hiding a gem from passers-by!

[raisethehammer]

first of all, this is nothing like what Buffalo did, so the comparison is mute.
secondly, more cities around the world are converting streets to pedestrian only, or shared space at an incredible rate right now. it's not an 80s thing. it's the way of the past, and mercifully, the way of the future.

third, people will know it's there because it 2 blocks of Gore Park, not 15 blocks of King St. people will still drive in their cars on james and john as well as 2-way on King on either side of this small area. many suburban folks work in the downtown office towers nearby and will love having this space at their doorstep.
Finally, while not everyone will take HSR, many people will hop on LRT. Many more people within a 15 minute walk of Gore will walk and cycle over on new cycle-friendly streets like King, Wilson, York and Hunter.

Ask car-addicted, suburbanites if they know where Hess Village is? I bet they all do, and have come downtown to go there more than anywhere else (other than work). Same setup - 2 blocks long with ample street capacity nearby.
this would help revitalize the Gore. Those who want to be selfish and keep the entire city held hostage because they are too lazy to turn right at Sherman or Victoria have had their day. The 1 minute delay on their trip is FAR worth the positive this will do for our downtown. As we all know, none of those people stop downtown anyhow. I for one, am sick of gearing our whole downtown around them. Their opinion doesn't matter and their speed-through vehicle doesn't matter. The health of our city is what matters.

[markbarbera]

Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom

This Forum is always cursing out the city for "old" thinking--this sort of pedestrianization was out of vogue even before Buffalo did in the 80s--it was a 60s and 70s phenomenon--and short of Minneapolis I can't think of a single place where it has worked well--cities are scrambling to reopen streets to traffic.

Well, some cities are scrambling to close streets to traffic for new and expanded existing pedestrian areas because of their success. From my own personal travels I can add the following cities to the list of those with successful neighbourhoods with limited traffic (i.e traffic restricted to pedestrian and transit):

London
Glasgow
Manchester
Dublin
Chicago
New York
Boston
Las Vegas
Rome
Montreal
Quebec City
Halifax

There may be some examples of failed pedestrian conversions, but there are many more exaples of very successful ped conversions. However, Sparks Street in Ottawa really cannot be included on the list of failures. If anything, its success has been tempered perhaps by a concept put in place a tad ahead of its time.

As economic and environmental conditions, combined with changing lifestyles, continue to make personal automobile travel options more restrictive and less desireable, this concept will continue to gain in popularity.

[SteelTown]

If you read the report you'll see successful examples of pedestrianized areas.

With Hamilton it can work because Gore Park is exactly that, A PARK. This will expand Gore Park. In other places they just closed down the streets and hope people will be attracted to that area.

Also this is only for 3 blocks, John, Hughson and James. That's not a lot compared to other successful examples of pedestrianized areas. Perhaps if it works it'll expand down to Wellington.

[JT Jacobs]

Originally Posted by markbarbera

Well, some cities are scrambling to close streets to traffic for new and expanded existing pedestrian areas because of their success. From my own personal travels I can add the following cities to the list of those with successful neighbourhoods with limited traffic (i.e traffic restricted to pedestrian and transit):

London
Glasgow
Manchester
Dublin
Chicago
New York
Boston
Las Vegas
Rome
Montreal
Quebec City
Halifax

There may be some examples of failed pedestrian conversions, but there are many more exaples of very successful ped conversions. However, Sparks Street in Ottawa really cannot be included on the list of failures. If anything, its success has been tempered perhaps by a concept put in place a tad ahead of its time.

As economic and environmental conditions, combined with changing lifestyles, continue to make personal automobile travel options more restrictive and less desireable, this concept will continue to gain in popularity.

The key here is *limited* traffic, not the entire elimination of such from around the Gore. If traffic is completely cut off then the result will be an insular area that is economically impoverished.

Hamilton's downtown economy cannot sustain zero traffic anywhere. Having some traffic ensures an appropriate level of vehicle-dependent commerce while still giving the overwhelming priority to pedestrians and cyclists. Driving at a crawl pace forces drivers to look at streets and signs; when they see something intriguing, they pull over because it's no real waste of time for them (then they spend) because they're going so slow anyway. But on a street like Main with timed lights, the urge is to gun it and get through fast, without any stops.

The real problem is, as Raise the Hammer and many others have articulated, that roads like Main acting as inner city expressways are disastrous to the core economy.

So, it seems to me that the issue is primarily how much traffic is allowed through the Gore, not the total elimination of it. Give the priority to pedestrians and cyclists, but allow a trickle of traffic, too.

[raisethehammer]

Originally Posted by JT Jacobs

The key here is *limited* traffic, not the entire elimination of such from around the Gore. If traffic is completely cut off then the result will be an insular area that is economically impoverished.

Hamilton's downtown economy cannot sustain zero traffic anywhere. Having some traffic ensures an appropriate level of vehicle-dependent commerce while still giving the overwhelming priority to pedestrians and cyclists. Driving at a crawl pace forces drivers to look at streets and signs; when they see something intriguing, they pull over because it's no real waste of time for them (then they spend) because they're going so slow anyway. But on a street like Main with timed lights, the urge is to gun it and get through fast, without any stops.

The real problem is, as Raise the Hammer and many others have articulated, that roads like Main acting as inner city expressways are disastrous to the core economy.

So, it seems to me that the issue is primarily how much traffic is allowed through the Gore, not the total elimination of it. Give the priority to pedestrians and cyclists, but allow a trickle of traffic, too.

I agree with these thoughts, but see the actions from a slightly different angle.
There still will be slower moving traffic through this area. On James and John and on King both E and W of the Gore.
transit will still be allowed with deliveries and cyclists/peds etc... right now cars have nowhere to stop. adding parking along here isn't practical or useful use of land.
It's 2 short blocks. All the way to Wellington would become an insular stretch without much life, but right now the Gore has no parking. we aren't removing any parking infrastructure for cars. it still exists all around the Gore. this is a people place and should become one more fully, but shared with LRT and bikes.

[the dude]

given the amount of foot traffic in the core and how readily accessible it is by public transit, the area will not be a ghost town.

personally, i would go even further. the area bounded by james, wilson, king and wellington is ripe for this sort of limited access development. it's a blank slate and would be a great experiment in car-free living. car-free areas are great successes when there's ample parking around its periphery and when they're accessed by public transit, particularly trams. they also require a high population density, which we don't have quite yet...but we're working on it. let's be trend-setters for once and show north america how it's done.

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by the dude

given the amount of foot traffic in the core and how readily accessible it is by public transit, the area will not be a ghost town.

personally, i would go even further. the area bounded by james, wilson, king and wellington is ripe for this sort of limited access development. it's a blank slate and would be a great experiment in car-free living. car-free areas are great successes when there's ample parking around its periphery and when they're accessed by public transit, particularly trams. they also require a high population density, which we don't have quite yet...but we're working on it. let's be trend-setters for once and show north america how it's done.

I don't mean to be a NIMBY, but I didn't move here so you could take away my car. Maybe take the "great experiments" to SimCity. =)

[matt602]

So far the plans I'm seeing are just a bit too dramatic. I think Gore Park should be left alone in it's current state. King is also fine, it's not usually a quick or incredibly wide thoroughfare except for later at night.

I think Main St. needs to be focused on immediately. Some wide sidewalks, street-side parking and beautification coupled with future LRT. Something to reflect what was done with Bay St.

In the future the area around Gore should be tinkered with, but we've definitely got a good thing going there right now. Let's let the density build a bit and see what the current projects do to the area before we start changing it dramatically. Both of the big residential projects on King East, London Taps, Foster Building and the eventual Connaught project should change things a lot. Their progress may be hampered if things get altered too much in the near future.

[raisethehammer]

FYI...none of the projects you mention - Taps, Foster, King East rez and Connuaght will be affected at all by this plan. This is such a small plan in such a small, parking-free area that it boggles my mind that some want to make the area even smaller. Should we just close the south leg from James to Hughson and leave the rest?? why bother.
If anything I'd love to see the city work with someone like Stinson...perhaps he might want to see the LRT come through his property on the Catharine side as it goes from Main to King (in my plan).
Local residents would have parking access, just like in Hess, underneath or behind their buildings if necessary.

I'm stunned at the comment that 'we have a good thing going right now'. We do?? I haven't seen a legit business open up on the north side of King between James and John in ages. The retail through here is lame. A plan like this coupled with the Connaught and other projects could be the catalyst for making this the retail heart of the city again.

[DC83]

Originally Posted by matt602

In the future the area around Gore should be tinkered with, but we've definitely got a good thing going there right now. Let's let the density build a bit and see what the current projects do to the area before we start changing it dramatically. Both of the big residential projects on King East, London Taps, Foster Building and the eventual Connaught project should change things a lot. Their progress may be hampered if things get altered too much in the near future.

"in the future..." exactly! I agree w/ you 100% on everything you said.
Currently, there isn't much to warrant blocking traffic completely from King... besides a nice stock of heritage buildings.

Worry about the Main St Expressway, LRT & other traffic calming measures first. Shut off the south-leg of King as the experiment... then years down the road when we have lots of two-way streets, lots of big-name retail along King, and LOTS more residents & tourists downtown, then worry about pedestrianizing main streets. For now, let's concentrate on Gore Park!

[matt602]

RTH, the "good thing we have" that I was referring to is Gore Park and King St. I don't pin the suffering retail situation downtown on either of them, in fact I'd go as far as to say they are both keeping things together downtown. Stinson said it himself: King St. is an awesome street in it's current state, as is Gore Park. It just needs some development around it to bring it out. You underestimate the projects that I listed. I think they'll have more of a positive impact on the downtown than any of us thought they would. Time will tell.

The only change to Gore Park that I really think is needed currently is getting the buses out of there. Once that is done it will be much quieter and enjoyable. Some more emphasis can be put on parking in the South leg, but for the most part it will be considered a "shared use" street. Once the buses are out the cobblestone needs to be re-laid, post haste. The buses have absolutely chewed up the old stones, they're all popping up and chipped up especially around Hughson.