HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Suburbs


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 9:24 PM
Millstone Millstone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Port Colborne, ON
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamiltonguy View Post
I'm afraid you're wrong on that count. Since there is no North South Freeway between the 403 and 401 (and the cities along their routes) west of the 403 in Peel, Highway 5/8 remains an important route.

In fact when many other single digit highways were downloaded Highway (albeit only between 6 and 8) and Highway 8 (from K-W to highway 5) were kept as provincial highways.
It's "important" but it's slow, as you can see by the amount of people that wish to bypass the route altogether by using Hwy 6. I stand by my original statement as it is accurate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2008, 2:59 AM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I just noticed a comment a page or two back trying to excuse this highway away by citing "safety".
That's another great one.
Let's build a highway for safety. Lord knows, driving a car on a highway is darn safe. lol.

Also, it's funny how this highway that was 'on the books' for all these years suddenly got some government action once the big boxers showed up.
The stupidity on this thread is amazing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2008, 3:49 AM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
Safety is a key component in the design and engineering of highways, and a key consideration when highways are expanded and/or reconstructed. Separation of traffic which travels in opposing directions is a basic principle of highway safety. Any connection between retail development and the construction of this interchange at Clappison's Corners is completely speculative (and false, for that matter). As far as collisions go, I don't think I need to point out that most collisions occur on surface streets as opposed to controlled-access/divided highways--so therefore, relatively speaking, driving on highways IS safer. We all know of Highway 6's unfortunate history--and most of the fatalities that I recall occuring happened either in the 5/6 intersection or involved vehicles crossing into opposing traffic further north. York Road was another story altogether.

There are numerous examples elsewhere in Ontario where previously 'traditional' highways and interchanges have been expanded/upgraded to divided/controlled-access thoroughfares due to traffic volume and safety considerations. Highway 11 North, Highway 400 North and Highway 416 are all examples elsewhere in Ontario. I believe it is fair to say that the MTO is not in the business of building highways based on the whims of retail developers.

So, while someone may be opposed to sprawl--opposed to suburban retail--opposed to anything they choose to be--it's certainly a long way from "stupid" to point out that a highway that is over-capacity and subject to frequent serious collisions ought to be considered for upgrade.

I am still waiting for a response as far as how exactly a controlled access intersection is a good thing for these retail establishments--considering access to their sites will not be improved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2008, 3:56 AM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,405
You are not understanding me. I did not say that the retailers asked for the interchange nor that it will improve direct access to their stores. My point is that the future traffic increases - projections upon which the importance of this upgrade are presumably based on - will be driven largely by retail development. That the development is big-box is beside the point - but it is still reality. If it was a mall going there, or a casino, I'd have the same things to say. But you can see with your own eyes that all development on the horizon within a reasonable distance from that intersection is single storey retail.

So I will say again: the interchange may not be specifically meant to service these parking lots - but the traffic being driven by the retail developments is the main reason the interchange is needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2008, 8:39 AM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
coalmine--I do get your point--got it a long time ago--I disagree with it, but I hear it. My post was in response to another poster's assertion that this interchange is being built only to service sprawl--and more bluntly, that the safety component of the upgrade was "stupid".

Though I do not have the MTO documents at my disposal--I believe it was volume increases primarily on Highway 6 that necessitated the upgrades from 403 to Clappison's--important to note that this is a Highway 6 project--not a Highway 5 project. I would argue that the vast majority of the traffic increases on Highway 6 are entirely unrelated to any sprawl development at the intersection--it is in fact primarily "in transit" traffic that is the issue. Thus, any corelation between the upgrades and sprawl is spurious.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2008, 10:32 AM
Millstone Millstone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Port Colborne, ON
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisethehammer View Post
I just noticed a comment a page or two back trying to excuse this highway away by citing "safety".
That's another great one.
Let's build a highway for safety. Lord knows, driving a car on a highway is darn safe. lol.

Also, it's funny how this highway that was 'on the books' for all these years suddenly got some government action once the big boxers showed up.
The stupidity on this thread is amazing.
I'm all ears for these conspiracy stories. Please share. Also, please indicate how the freewayization and grade separation of Plains Rd W @ Hwy 6 and Hwy/RR 5 @ Hwy 6 is not an improvement in safety of the current road.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2008, 12:19 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,405
fcf - cool - it just makes me crazy that the city is in for so much money on that project, meanwhile whitehead et al do not want to spend 750 grand on converting york to two way. If hwy6 is mainly a safety concern, and if it were up to me, i'd install photo radar and be done with it.

anyway, back to flamborough -- they have some sweet mountain biking along the escarpment there :-)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2008, 12:43 AM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
Couldnt agree more on the biking/hiking. Flamborough was an incredible place to grow-up and I consider myself lucky to have done so. From home I could get to the Dundas Peak, Darnley Mill ruins, farms, creeks, fishing--it took getting older to realize how much my childhood was influenced by the environment up there.

I was downright passionate on the amalgamation when push came to shove. Once some sort of municipal reorganization was a fait accompli--I railed against any partitioning or parcelling off of parts to Halton, Waterloo and/or Brant...all that mattered to me was that Flamborough stayed "together"--even if it was in the context of something larger. I was no fan/supporter of amalgamation--but assuming it was inevitable, it turned out the best way possible--where I'm concerned anyway.

I am no supporter of McCarthy--or the vast majority of politicians who managed to get elected up there--both before and after amalgamation. The sooner the multi-directional pissing contests come to an end--the better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2008, 1:03 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,405
Well, hopefully we will be able to push some HSR service up there so that at least Waterdown feels more connected to the city. Part of the problem though, is it's too easy to get lost in a bubble when you live so far from the Core. Many residents up there have no reason to ever come into Hamilton - they go east for work, and do all of their shopping between work and home. I used to be one of them. And even though my passion for Hamilton runs deep, even *I* had trouble finding time to come into the city!

How will someone living along centre road ever feel like they are part of the city? And if they never do, then they will never have a reason to be passionate about Hamilton as a whole.

I honestly don't know how to solve that issue... Perhaps we need to do a tourism blitz to get our own residents to venture into town. We have some amazing spaces right now... the waterfront is unbelievable these days. I have a personal love (borderline lust) for the steam museum. Doors open is amazing, and maybe we should have a localized version of it that runs every weekend.

If we can get some of the suburban dwellers to spend more time inside the city - give them a reason to come in other than shopping (since that reason doesn't really work anymore).

Hopefully LRT can have this effect - if we can put decent parking at each end, we can give people easy options to get in the city and see things.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2008, 6:47 PM
realcity's Avatar
realcity realcity is online now
Bruatalism gets no respec
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Williamsville NY
Posts: 4,014
HSR service to flambourdisaster will not make a dent in traffic congestion. The houses are too far apart (sprawled) and nobody moved out there to take the bus.

I recently drove up highway 6 north and couldn't believe the congestion at the road turning west into Dundas. Was there another sprawl housing development there? The morons were lined up for 15 minutes to turn left into their survey. I don't care what Flambourdisaster does, build as many big box/power centers you like in the name of economic development and I'll consider it 'self inflicted' because that's the disaster of a community planning that you wanted.

Peace
Out
__________________
Height restrictions and Set-backs are for Nimbys and the suburbs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2008, 11:40 PM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
realcity, thanks for your contribution to the thread--it clearly has further advanced debate, discussion, reason and understanding. While I often disagree with coalminecanary--he and I made a concerted effort to make this a positive--or at least constructive discussion. At coalmine's request for ideas and suggestions you brought a stream of negativity and venom.

Quote
I don't care what Flambourdisaster does, build as many big box/power centers you like in the name of economic development and I'll consider it 'self inflicted' because that's the disaster of a community planning that you wanted.

Who exactly are you referring to? Presumably the City of Hamilton which has dominion over the area formerly known as the Town of Flamborough. In light of this, your comment is nothing but complete nonsense.

Getting back to the discussion at hand--the question posed by coalmine--what comes to mind for me immediately is selling the unique cultural features of the city to residents across the region--not exclusively those within the city limits--but also in surrounding areas. Institutions such as the AGW, HPO, etc, aren't replicated elsewhere in the region. It's unreasonable to suggest someone would drive into the city to shop at a store which is already located close to home for them--but if they want a Bulldogs game, a Ti-Cats game, a trip to Art Gallery--those are things that they must drive to the city for...that's really the key.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 2:13 AM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by realcity View Post
HSR service to flambourdisaster will not make a dent in traffic congestion. The houses are too far apart (sprawled) and nobody moved out there to take the bus.

I recently drove up highway 6 north and couldn't believe the congestion at the road turning west into Dundas. Was there another sprawl housing development there? The morons were lined up for 15 minutes to turn left into their survey. I don't care what Flambourdisaster does, build as many big box/power centers you like in the name of economic development and I'll consider it 'self inflicted' because that's the disaster of a community planning that you wanted.

Peace
Out

So true....I can't wait to see what a mess it is in 20 years out there.
And it'll still be Hamilton's fault. We know already. All your crappy planning and ignorance is our fault.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 5:07 AM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
On one hand there is the approach where rational people look at reality--not assumptions or generalizations--and attempt to foster improving relationships. On the other hand, there is eagerly anticipating some sort of presumed grave dancing.

Quote
I can't wait to see what a mess it is in 20 years out there.

The retail development that is so hated was stonewalled for years by the former Town of Flamborough...that's why I don't understand the argument.

Interesting. Us vs. Them. Yawn. The attitudes expressed here are every bit as destructive as those expressed by the likes of Margaret McCarthy. I can't think of a single case where a city/region has suffered from this sort of disconnect among urban, suburban and rural and lived up to it's prosperity potential. If you believe you can go on hating Flamborough, and Flamborough can go on hating you and all well be will because gas will be expensive and the inner-city will thrive again you are living an absolute fantasy. Even if that were to come to pass, the jobs would all be long gone to a city/region that had it's sh*t together, instead of wasting it's energy and talents on a barrage of pissing matches.

In the end, despite your good intentions, you completely don't get it. That's sad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 1:31 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I get it just fine.
I shop at farmers markets on Hwy 5 and pick my own food at other farms in flamborough. I love living so close to that rural area.
It's the little babies in Waterdown that I have no use for. They are screwing over the rural area more than I am.
And yes, I CAN'T WAIT for the day when sprawls time comes to an end. I'll celebrate in the streets, er, parking lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 2:32 PM
adam adam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Downtown Hamilton
Posts: 1,231
I don't remember ever hearing about a head on collision because of lack of a median.
However a median does give motorists a false sense of security and free reign to drive as fast as they can.

I routinely see people driving as fast as they can until they have to slam on their brakes for a car ahead. What gives? This mentality has got to stop for the safety of others. Whenever I see an accident along a highway its because someone rear ended the driver ahead of them or someone was trying to switch lanes and was t-boned by someone who didn't let them in.

If people don't feel safe and feel they might collide into the next lane, they should either stop driving, or slow down!

Last edited by adam; Aug 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 6:51 PM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
RTH--I believe you fail to see the bigger picture. A provincial attitude--whether it's held by suburbanites toward the city--or held by you, is the same thing--it is equally destructive, no matter who holds it. Again, the "Us v Them" game is completely hollow--it's all one political unit now--EcDev, planning, etc, so you really can't play the finger-pointing "those people" game anymore. You cannot expect the vocal minority out there to drop their rhetoric, when you so fully embrace your own.

adam--are you serious? Without getting into a really ridiculous back and forth conversation, I would refer you elsewhere on the internet for statistics regarding the severity of accidents, and the frequency with which "cross-over" accidents result in fatalities and bodily injuries. Median constuction and separation of opposing traffic flow has nothing to do with controlling speed or eliminating rear-end collisions. It's about saving lives and preventing head-on collisions. If you've never heard of "cross-over" accidents you either don't read, don't travel or are a two-year old with incredible typing skills. Think before you post.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 7:47 PM
markbarbera markbarbera is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,050
I think this thread would do best if basic respect is shown to all posters, and the coments they post here. Belittling a participant by calling him a two-year-old does not make for valuable discussion. If you disagree with a post, you can do so while maintaining some civility. Offer an opposing point of view and some evidence to support that view. It doesn't matter how valid your point of view is, its value is severly discounted when accompanied by school-yard style name-calling.

I have read many of Adam's posts here. Being a (relatively) new participant, insults like that may discourage him from continuing to post. I really hope that isn't the case because he has had many interesting comments that have added to discussion on this SSP.
__________________
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"
-George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 8:28 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I agree with Mark's above comments, but I've got to hand it to fastcars - "a two year old with incredible typing skills" is a great line! Had me chuckling for a few minutes here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 9:50 PM
adam adam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Downtown Hamilton
Posts: 1,231
Here is the latest idea from my 2 year old mind:
Why don't we encase all of highway 6 in a concrete tunnel.. that way we'll be safe from jet planes that might otherwise hit us!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2008, 10:13 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Lol....classic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Suburbs
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:35 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.