HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2007, 4:33 PM
the dude the dude is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,812
perhaps, but i believe that mcquesten was the minister of transport when the qew was built, so who knows what he was thinking. that sort of schitzophrenic behaviour might have been easier to understand then than it is now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2007, 5:25 PM
flar's Avatar
flar flar is offline
..........
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 11,710
I think McQuesten was also involved in the Bluewater bridge in Sarnia and one of the bridges over the Niagara. He liked infrastructure apparently.
__________________
RECENT PHOTOS:
TORONTOSAN FRANCISCO ROCHESTER, NYHAMILTONGODERICH, ON WHEATLEY, ONCOBOURG, ONLAS VEGASLOS ANGELES
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2007, 5:47 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I think he had a good balance, at least what I've picked up in learning about him....nature areas were important and infrastructure was important.
the strip along the QEW was already being developed...brides into the USA are obviously important.
He's responsible for the mountain brow being preserved as parkland, the RBG, high level bridge....I'm guessing he would never have dreamt of building a highway through the valley.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2007, 7:16 PM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
If the "5 Freeways" had been built you wouldn't have your dreaded one-way street system.

McQuesten was a genius in many ways who saw the balance between infrastructure and aesthetics and he was a great admirer of Frederick Law Olmstead. To say McQuesten would've railed against constructing a highway through the valley is nothing short of a cross between fantasy and revisionist history. McQuesten was about BUILDING first and foremost--he just saw the benefit of beautification in the process. High Level Bridge is a great example of this, as is the Niagara Parkway and the original QEW design work. I'm an infrastructure fanatic (surprise)...and I am willing to confess that the loss of the "style and design" element in infrastructure projects is unfortunate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2007, 7:20 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom View Post
If the "5 Freeways" had been built you wouldn't have your dreaded one-way street system.

McQuesten was a genius in many ways who saw the balance between infrastructure and aesthetics and he was a great admirer of Frederick Law Olmstead. To say McQuesten would've railed against constructing a highway through the valley is nothing short of a cross between fantasy and revisionist history. McQuesten was about BUILDING first and foremost--he just saw the benefit of beautification in the process. High Level Bridge is a great example of this, as is the Niagara Parkway and the original QEW design work. I'm an infrastructure fanatic (surprise)...and I am willing to confess that the loss of the "style and design" element in infrastructure projects is unfortunate.

o great..instead of the one-way system we would have had freeways tearing through the lower city. great tradeoff.
I happen to believe that there were more than those 2 options for Hamilton to choose from - proper city streets with proper transit was a great option. Toronto chose this path, and gee whiz, they seem to have survived - granted, their downtown core and neighbourhoods aren't nearly as healthy as Hamiltons. We simply blew it here.

I'm a big fan of Olmstead too...great design work.
Today's park systems and infrastructure is a load of crap. Slabs of ugly concrete. scrawny little trees tossed in as an afterthought. no public space. no beauty. just utilitarian all the way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2007, 9:45 PM
matt602's Avatar
matt602 matt602 is offline
Hammer'd
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St. Catharines/Hamilton, ON
Posts: 4,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisethehammer View Post
granted, their downtown core and neighbourhoods aren't nearly as healthy as Hamiltons.
Whoa, whoa... what? Am I reading this wrong or are you saying Toronto's downtown and neighbourhoods are not as "healthy" as Hamilton's?

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2007, 3:15 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt602 View Post
Whoa, whoa... what? Am I reading this wrong or are you saying Toronto's downtown and neighbourhoods are not as "healthy" as Hamilton's?

haha...no sir. I was being sarcastic. It's so much harder to write sarcastically as opposed to speaking.

The Spec has a video up now about Red Hill. Kind of long, but worth the watch.
I think Don MacLean read my mind with his final statement - this is embarassing.

www.thespec.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2007, 7:14 PM
DC83 DC83 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,430
Wow, Don Mclean makes SO much sense...
Too bad the city looks upon him as a joke!

Mike Marini - Community Relations Manager RHVP, "...environmentally, it's a showcase!"
Ummm... didn't the building of this hwy kill off the Flying Squirrell population in the Valley??

Last edited by DC83; Nov 14, 2007 at 7:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2007, 7:20 PM
LikeHamilton's Avatar
LikeHamilton LikeHamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 1,992
Latest info on the opening copied from a memo to emergency services personnel (Police, Fire, EMS).

The Red Hill Valley Parkway (RHVP) is scheduled to open to vehicular traffic on Saturday November 17, 2007. The northbound direction will open at approximately 8:00 a.m. and the southbound direction will follow thereafter.

Please note that the RHVP will be opened from the LINC to the QEW; however, the ramp from QEW Toronto to RHVP southbound will not be opened until the fall of 2008. As you may be aware, the Ministry of Transportation is responsible for the construction of the RHVP interchange with the QEW as well as the QEW reconstruction between the Burlington Street interchange and the Centennial Parkway interchange.

The new alignment of Mount Albion Road between Hixon Road and Lawrence Road will be opened on Monday November 19, 2007 at 5:00 a.m. Concurrently, Mount Albion Road will be closed to vehicular traffic between the bus turnaround south of Glen Castle Drive and the intersection of Old Mud Street/Cornerstone Drive.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2007, 7:54 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I'll have to head over to that part of town and see what's happening with Mt Albion. Sounds pretty good...turning to a bike/pedestrian street all the way up the escarpment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2007, 8:37 PM
DC83 DC83 is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,430
Quote:
Mount Albion Road will be closed to vehicular traffic between the bus turnaround south of Glen Castle Drive and the intersection of Old Mud Street/Cornerstone Drive.
A pedestrian trail/stairs would be very welcome in this area. There is currently no stairs going up the escarpment in this area, and most ppl climb up the hill in Felker's Falls Park (I know I used to when I was a teenager). It's the only access to/from the Stoney Creek Mountain if you don't have a car.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 4:52 AM
fastcarsfreedom's Avatar
fastcarsfreedom fastcarsfreedom is offline
On Guard For Thee
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex County
Posts: 1,007
With all due respect RTH, Toronto built several major freeways across it's urban area--namely the Gardiner and the DVP, as well as the 427 to the west. Granted the full freeway plan (Eastern Gardiner, Spadina, Allen) was never completed--but the city built major north/south and east/west arteries. Montreal, a city often praised here for it's walkability and urban character is lacerated every which way by MULTIPLE east/west and north/south freeways.

"Proper" urban streets and "proper" transit are great--but they don't solve the reality of needing to move cars (I know you hate them). Like it or not, the one-way street system was the alternative to more freeways...end of story. I would argue that the lack of gridlock and lack of long, frustrating drives and waits at red lights actually contribute to quality of life...but that is a matter of opinion we are unlikely to agree on. That being said, the current set-up of QEW/403/LINC/RHVP does provide multiple NS and EW routes around the area--which has the potential to greatly reduce "in transit" traffic in the downtown core--and that may well allow "two-way-ing" of King and Main to be viable in the future. Personally I like the effect two-way traffic has had on John and James--all I ever asked for were alternatives before any traffic calming on those streets.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 2:46 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,404
"two-waying" main and king should have been part of the rhvp plan then. The two way switch should be thrown at the same time as the parkway opens up.

Every day that we wait is another day of increased traffic on the parkway, and another argument by car lovers AGAINST two-waying those streets because "we need to move cars through the city". Highways have a magnetic attraction to traffic. That parkway WILL fill up. We need to act now to make it impossible for main and king to once again become the overflow routes for through traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 2:52 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18,543
You'll have to wait until 2010 when King St West goes two way. After that Hamilton will have a planned out and likely construction for rapid transit along Main St, meaning a new streetscape and a plan for Main St will arise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 2:55 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,404
fingers crossed... i'm willing to wait. However the pessimist in me thinks 2010 is too optimistic ;-)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 4:36 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I'd be thrilled if we did that by 2010. I'd be thrilled if we did it by 3010. City hall loves the one-ways, and fast traffic. It'll be a big uphill battle to convert them regardless of how many new highways we build.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 4:58 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18,543
King St W is going two ways, that was determined like 5 years ago but we have to wait until 2010. There's even a website towards the plan.

Main St well I don't know. But by 2010 Hamilton will likely have developed a blueprint for the rapid transit. The first wave of MoveOntario 2020 cash comes in 2013, though I think Dalton bumped it to 2012 now. Also it appears on the news the federal government will make a funding commitment of 1/3 funding of MoveOntario 2020 by the end of November, part of the $33 billion Infrastructure fund.

So by having a blueprint it means Main St will have to be configured to add a transit lane and the city always like to lump everything together at the same time so Main St will likely get a new streetscape at the same time as well. This will force councilors to reevaluate Main St.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2007, 7:56 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
I think you might be right Steeltown...man, that would be great to start addressing Main St sooner, rather than later.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2007, 4:52 AM
matt602's Avatar
matt602 matt602 is offline
Hammer'd
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St. Catharines/Hamilton, ON
Posts: 4,350
Just got back from a walk down to the Expressway at Barton. Everything is pretty much ready, the traffic lights are even working now. Looks pretty good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Nov 17, 2007, 5:36 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
well, today the highway is supposed to open.
Never again will anyone be able to enjoy a peaceful walk in the valley.
East Hamilton residents would be advised to pick up a copy of the hiking trail guides from the tourism office downtown if you ever have the itch to get outdoors. The west end and Dundas Valley have just been bumped up another few notches as Hamilton's most desirable areas....you can hike until your heart's content with no overhead traffic.
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 > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:34 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.