Hamilton has a legacy of multi-lane, one-way arterial streets dating back to the 1950s. Do you support accelerating the conversion of these streets to two-way? Why or why not?

Responses to the question: "Hamilton has a legacy of multi-lane, one-way arterial streets dating back to the 1950s. Do you support accelerating the conversion of these streets to two-way? Why or why not?"

← Back to Election Page

In This Page:

10 Candidate Responses (top)

CandidateBrief ResponseFull Response
Davis, Jim No One-way streets were created to empty out traffic at a quicker rate. When industry was booming in Hamilton it worked, one-way streets to mountain accesses got people home faster. I read it cost $250,000 to convert each intersection from one-way to two-way so in the case of Wentworth St. I don't think the cost out weighed the improvement. In fact, it just increased the dangers to the students at the two schools on that street. Although stats say more people are hit on one-way St. than two-way St. (because they compared ratio instead of auto/pedestrian accidents) its common sense that it is easier to cross a street when you only have to deal with the flow of traffic from one direction. Certain areas of the city should be converted to two-way streets, like south-west of James St. but don't put parking in the middle of the street with the bike lane next to the curb. This increased the dangers to cyclist with no repercussions to the passenger that opens the door and takes them out.
Eisenberger, Fred Yes Yes I support gradual conversion where it makes sense in conjunction with enhanced transit.
Gomes, Carlos No No I don't support acceleration of converting something that's been working since the 1950's, just to confuse a bunch of people and make the rich even richer
Graydon, Edward HC N/A No response provided
Pattison, Michael Yes My opinion on this topic has been swayed over the years. Originally, I was against converting our one-way streets as I knew congestion was inevitable and my environmental stance was cars should be moving while polluting, not idling. Now I take the stand for conversion solely for the importance of mass transit. The way cities move must be adapted by all future generations.

I will make one more suggestion. Put pressure on the automotive/manufacturing sector for independent commuter vehicles. People are very different and every argument I have listened to over mass transit seems to come back to private spaces. Personal climate control, smells and even personal safety are securities that are controlled within one’s own vehicle. These vehicles should be produced with complimenting strategies of mass transit and fully compatible with the capabilities of all LRV/Transit options. Made in Hamilton maybe?
Schmid-Jones, Ute Yes The perception of flow of traffic is very different in a two way street, so as someone who moved to Hamilton from an environment that didn't have a lot of one way streets, I found it an adjustment to adapt to the way Hamilton drivers seem accustomed to speeding through downtown. I can also say that the conversion of Duke street, where I live, has definitely made the street safer. Drivers are clearly taking more time and being more aware of things like cyclists and pedestrians as a result. I'm not sure how many people who grew up driving on Hamilton's one way roads see the difference or really understand how baffling getting around the city is to someone like a visiting tourist, and we have to concede that people are resistant to change what is familiar to them, but the economic uplift James Street in particular went through after it was converted to two way should help people to understand the other potential benefits as well.

It also needs to be said, though, that I don't think this is the primary focus of the mayor's job, and that for planning committee issues like this I would be glad to have the input of the experts who would have a better grasp of how changes to specific Hamilton streets will impact the larger city and where the biggest priorities need to be. Like your Vision Zero question above, I suspect the smart place to start is in areas that see the highest rate of accidents today and go from there.
Sgro, Vito N/A Please use our website vitosgroformayor.ca as the the answer to the provided questions.
Tavares, Ricky N/A How much are you going to pay me ? $100 and I will communicate with you at your basic level. Otherwise you are useless to me and Hamilton.
Wozny, Mark Yes Some take the position that traffic fatalaties are reduced by one-way streets and proper signal regulation. I take the middle position.

As long as there is a mixture of both one-way and two-way streets, the option tends to 'tame' traffic congestion and stress.

Two-way strees assist in reducing the pace of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Jacobs has noted how some congestion creates more vitality for businesses and encourages the social intercourse that we call community.
Yan, Nathalie Xian Yi Yes It is a long overdue for Hamilton to open every single street to two way traffic except a very short or absolute even necessary small route otherwise open them up ASAP. the world is evolving economy is changing the population is re-shaping the city landscape

Response Summary (top)

Brief ResponseCount% of Total

4 Candidates Have Not Responded (top)

Geissler, Henry
May, Todd
Rusich, George
Ryerson, Phil