The Toronto-Hamilton relationship is most analogous

[kirjtc2]

Boston-Providence?

Providence is very much a self-contained city, but they're connected by commuter rail and the populations are similar.

[Acajack]

It's surprising to me that anyone who pays attention to air travel and airports wouldn't be aware of the existence of Tacoma. I've known about it for decades because of that. It's also been tacked on to the official name of Seattle's metro area for several decades too. Kind of like Dallas-Forth Worth - I don't pay much attention to Fort Worth but it's been there in the metro name all my life, so...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Doady

I did it here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...&postcount=109

Hamilton would be its own MSA, but the MSAs of Hamilton, Toronto, Guelph and Barrie would form one CSA.

I also look at Hamilton Street Railway ridership, it is much higher than Pierce Transit in Tacoma (87k vs 49k per weekday in 2009), and competitive with London, Kitchener-Waterloo, Guelph, and other small cities in Ontario and across Canada. Hamilton has to be a self-contained city for HSR to acheive such ridership.

I am not sure I understand the relationship between transit ridership and being a self-contained city. Indianapolis as a random example is very much a self-contained city but has very low transit ridership.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Doady

I did it here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...&postcount=109

Hamilton would be its own MSA, but the MSAs of Hamilton, Toronto, Guelph and Barrie would form one CSA.

I stand corrected.

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Distance-wise I think a good comparison might be San Francisco-Oakland (Toronto) and San Jose (Hamilton).

But SJ has a lot more going for it than the Hammer at the moment and Toronto is bigger than SFO.

Yeah, San Jose is too suburban and tech-oriented to be analogous to Hamilton, not to mention that it's, technically, the largest city in the Bay. We'd need a bigger Waterloo connected to Toronto to have a SJ-type equivalent.

[hipster duck]

I honestly wish that Hamilton were either somewhat bigger or somewhat closer to Toronto.

It would have been a good "alternative city" for people who want urban living, and may have developed much more of its own flavour historically. It already has that to some degree, but could have it more. I'm thinking of Oakland, in particular, which is more interesting than Hamilton if only because it's much closer and has been historically more integrated with San Francisco.

[rousseau]

Don't get me started on how disappointing and unsatisfying Hamilton is. What I find most frustrating is that the stirring urban possibilities are everywhere overwhelmed by midwestern blandness due to the city's slightly too short history characterized by decently-paid work early on (good for those workers a century ago, of course, but the single-family homes everywhere make for crappy streetscapes).

Examples abound. Click on the tantalizing street view links, then do a 360 and feel the "meh."

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25849...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25212...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26069...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25807...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25786...7i13312!8i6656

Everywhere, almost without exception, potentially awesome urban fabric is limited or compromised, affording no critical mass. People are moving there and real estate prices are going through the roof, so it's a happening place, but the main attraction for Torontonians is the ability to buy houses here: https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.24926...7i13312!8i6656.

Contrary to the Chamber of Commerce suggestions in another thread from a while ago, Hamilton is in no way, shape or form even remotely like Brooklyn.

Do I sound bitter? Well, I am. It's probably more to do with unrealistic expectations and urban envy of better-looking cityscapes elsewhere on my part than anything else, though. Lots of outsiders are breathing new life into Hamilton, which I think is great.

It's not you, it's me.

[megadude]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Don't get me started on how disappointing and unsatisfying Hamilton is. What I find most frustrating is that the stirring urban possibilities are everywhere overwhelmed by midwestern blandness due to the city's slightly too short history characterized by decently-paid work early on (good for those workers a century ago, of course, but the single-family homes everywhere make for crappy streetscapes).

Examples abound. Click on the tantalizing street view links, then do a 360 and feel the "meh."

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25849...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25212...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26069...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25807...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.25786...7i13312!8i6656

Everywhere, almost without exception, potentially awesome urban fabric is limited or compromised, affording no critical mass. People are moving there and real estate prices are going through the roof, so it's a happening place, but the main attraction for Torontonians is the ability to buy houses here: https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.24926...7i13312!8i6656.

Contrary to the Chamber of Commerce suggestions in another thread from a while ago, Hamilton is in no way, shape or form even remotely like Brooklyn.

Do I sound bitter? Well, I am. It's probably more to do with unrealistic expectations and urban envy of better-looking cityscapes elsewhere on my part than anything else, though. Lots of outsiders are breathing new life into Hamilton, which I think is great.

It's not you, it's me.

Great examples. Despite living in Oakville and Burlington for the last four years, I haven't explored Hamilton in town very much. Outside the core up in the escarpment is great though.

Just like discussed on another thread about downtowns shifting, Hamilton had so much potential aesthetically speaking, but has ultimately been a disappointment. Downtown not developing on the waterfront being the most glaring example.

The Hess gateway sign reminds me of the couple of times I went clubbing there a good 12 years or so. I have to put that pic in my other thread about charming downtowns.

[niwell]

I was actually wondering if Rousseau was going to post this example, which struck me on one of my recent trips to the city: https://goo.gl/maps/PN6vRvy9QWB2

Looks amazing till you do a 360. Lots of potential of course.

And another good one just a block or so away... https://goo.gl/maps/bX2pSM6RxG72

[Doady]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I am not sure I understand the relationship between transit ridership and being a self-contained city. Indianapolis as a random example is very much a self-contained city but has very low transit ridership.

It seems very difficult for a transit system to have high ridership if it serves only the origins and not the destinations (or vice versa).

I think people here overestimate how connected cities in Canada are. Even Kitchener and Guelph are not connected enough to be part of the same MSA or CSA by US definition. Canadian cities are a lot more compact, people tend to live where they work more compared to US cities.

Transit, walking, biking - the key for all of them is lower distances. This is why Canadian cities have so much higher transit ridership compared to US cities, and Hamilton is no exception.

[rousseau]

This one breaks my heart:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26103...7i13312!8i6656

It's a sliver of Lower Manhattan. Imagine streets upon streets like that!

And this one irritates the living fuck out of me because it always gets included in stirring promotional videos.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26508...7i13312!8i6656

Yeah, well, if major swathes of the residential periphery of downtown had gapless row houses like that instead of just that one tiny section of that one street, then hells yeah, Hamilton would be awesome.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by niwell

I was actually wondering if Rousseau was going to post this example, which struck me on one of my recent trips to the city: https://goo.gl/maps/PN6vRvy9QWB2

Looks amazing till you do a 360. Lots of potential of course.

And another good one just a block or so away... https://goo.gl/maps/bX2pSM6RxG72

King William Street has been a potentially great street for well over thirty years. Always the potential, never the fruition. But things are happening now, so maybe there's enough momentum to do something decent on the south side of it.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Doady

It seems very difficult for a transit system to have high ridership if it serves only the origins and not the destinations (or vice versa).

I think people here overestimate how connected cities in Canada are. Even Kitchener and Guelph are not connected enough to be part of the same MSA or CSA by US definition. Canadian cities are a lot more compact, people tend to live where they work more compared to US cities.

Transit, walking, biking - the key for all of them is lower distances. This is why Canadian cities have so much higher transit ridership compared to US cities, and Hamilton is no exception.

I've said it before but Kitchener, Cambridge, Waterloo and Guelph really need to come together as an urban region. Call it Grand River or Grand Valley or something.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

This one breaks my heart:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26103...7i13312!8i6656

It's a sliver of Lower Manhattan. Imagine streets upon streets like that!

Most city cores in the Northeast have entire neighborhoods where that's the dominant housing form. (I'd have expected Hamilton to be among them.)

In that context though, those rowhouses are just a tease.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Indeed - a perfect example of harmonic resonance.

They shoulda done a wind tunnel test first!

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Tacoma narrows suspension bridge, right? I show a segment in one of my classes.

Yes, that's the one though FYI in the end it wasn't actually wind-induced harmonic resonance as thought for decades (and as used to be told in all basic undulatory physics textbooks) that caused it to swing like that to the point of collapsing.

A bit of reading on the topic if you're so inclined:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma...s_Bridge_(1940)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroelasticity#Flutter

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by rousseau

This one breaks my heart:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26103...7i13312!8i6656

It's a sliver of Lower Manhattan. Imagine streets upon streets like that!

And this one irritates the living fuck out of me because it always gets included in stirring promotional videos.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.26508...7i13312!8i6656

Yeah, well, if major swathes of the residential periphery of downtown had gapless row houses like that instead of just that one tiny section of that one street, then hells yeah, Hamilton would be awesome.

a real waste. London has similar places with so much potential, but dragged down by the fact that nobody wants to invest (despite awesome bones) in these places. Our council is always ready to invest millions in greenfield industrial parks (sitting vacant for decades, astride banal highways), and of course, big box barf retail. The miltonization of Canada.