Traffic Management Plan

April 2015
First in Ontario

The Traffic Management Plan for the North End is in its 3rd year of a 5 year implementation.  The Traffic Plan is part of keeping our neighbourhood a liveable, safe community for all as changes happen on the West Harbour.
First In Ontario, Safe and Friendly Streets: North End

As more and more Cities look for ways of keeping their streets safe, Hamilton can be proud of its first whole neighbourhood safe street initiative!  First in Ontario!  

Both NEN and Public Works have written summary reports on the 2014 implementation of the traffic plan. They can be viewed and downloaded here

Also at that address you will find the full implementation schedule and maps.

Please note that item B2 Ferguson: Strachan to Burlington - the bike lane has been removed from the plan, owing to the loss of parking the lane would cause.

Similarly, B3, Guise,Dock Service Road to west end, bike lane, has been removed, as this would cause loss of parking and is redundant because there is an existing paved shared bike and pedestrian trail.


As part of the Setting Sail process, started in 2002, the City, and a team of consultants, engaged stakeholders and the broader community in a series of consultation events aimed at identifying common principles, opportunities and constraints, met together which became the basis for the Secondary Plan and transportation network.

Throughout the study process, significant public consultation occurred. During these public consultation events, traffic concerns were frequently mentioned. The main concerns expressed by residents relating to existing and anticipated traffic issues in the North End Neighbourhood include:

  •  the infiltration of through traffic on local streets 
  • the overall increase in traffic in the neighbourhood 
  • the possible loss of on-street parking on streets due to roadway improvements and traffic requirements during peak periods 
  •  the extension of the grid network into the Waterfront development area, in Pier8
  •   the traffic generated by special events in the Waterfront area
  •   traffic safety and speeding  
 Accordingly, the North End Traffic Management Plan (NETMP) was initiated to address these concerns and approved by Council in 2007.  The plan was subsequently appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), by representatives of the North End Neighbourhood (NEN).  In December 2012, the OMB rendered a decision in favour of the Council approved plan. 

As plans continue to unfold on the West Harbour, NEN continues to work for significant public consultation.  

February 2015

On February 18, the City presented the North End Traffic Management Update  

Shawn Selway accompanied with Dave Stephens presented an additional update.   This presentation is the same one as was presented at the January 29 Open House.  Essentially they discussed 3 challenges that we see ahead for the Traffic Plan. 

October 2014 - James Street North and Strachan

Steve Malloy from the City has sent the last version drawing of  the design that he was given from Barton to Strachan. The PDF showing the plans is posted below.

According to Steve, "the decision to construct curb extensions was made by our design section as GO bus circulation and City garbage trucks would have difficulty navigating the traffic circle. The IBI design only illustrated a fire truck, which could make turns by not following the proper circulation pattern of the traffic circle.

As the design shows, the section of James south of Strachan will be narrowed to improve the feel of the street. Also, an intersection pedestrian signal has been designed across from the GO entrance and the Liuna driveway. Discussions are on-going with GO to fund the signal, so the timing of implementation may or may not be ready for the station opening.

Also, I have requested that the sections of the existing curb on Strachan that has the horse tie down rings be cut out and preserved. I hope the contractor follows through on the request."

Click the image to view a PDF version.

February 2014

 Implementation is ongoing.  

 Attending the Council’s Planning Committee on February 4, 2014 made those in attendance renew their concern about traffic management as much of the discussion was about increasing parking spaces to 2000,  and moving traffic to the Waterfront.   

The Traffic Management Plan was developed in anticipation of Waterfront developments now rapidly going forward, including the James Street North Go Station, Pier 5-7, new buildings on Guise between MacNab and Hughson, and imminent plans for new buildings on the Waterfront Trust land.  Please direct your insights and comments to Dave Stevens 289 933 6180


On January 8 NEN sponsored a neighbourhood meeting to discuss traffic plan and give our association input into dealing with the City's Planners. 

Here are the notes of the meeting: 




This two hour meeting was called in hopes of moving beyond recriminations over lost parking on Bay and MacNab to a wider discussion of various calming measures in the context of the overall plan. To that end it was successful; however many participants stressed that Public Works should be receptive to changes in detail as the temporary measures are installed and tested.

About fifty people attended, including two members of the NEN implementation subcommittee and six board members. In addition messages were received from several residents who were not able to attend but wished to make their views known. We will forward these separately from this report.

Rather than report in the form of summary minutes, which could be a lengthy exercise, we will condense and arrange participants' remarks by topic.


The NEN traffic team members introduced themselves and made a few general remarks.  Participants were reminded that the NETMP was unique in the city as it was a neighbourhood wide program of traffic calming. However, NEN needed to know of any serious concerns, so as to relay them to Public Works for consideration.

The Plan was developed in anticipation of other developments now rapidly going forward, including the James Street Go station and Pier 5-8 development. A map of  rough development blocks on Pier 5-8, produced by City staff and their consultants for presentation at a PIC on new sewage pumping stations proposed for that area, was distributed.  A map of traffic routes to GO station circulated. Both the GO station and Pier 8 build-out will result in increased traffic volumes.

The Plan was drawn up in conceptual form. It has now entered the detail design phase, followed by implementation and evaluation. We are in the evaluation phase for parts of the plan which have been placed on Bay, MacNab and Burlington West, as well as Wellington at Simcoe.

There are four sets of participants as the Plan is implemented: City Councillors, Public Works, NEN and its implementation sub-committee, and northenders- the residents whose streets are affected.

At one extreme, people want to cancel the traffic plan altogether, at the other, people say: just put it all in place and let people whine, evaluate after everything is installed. Neither attitude is acceptable.

We will benefit from development commercial and residential at the piers, but. Traffic volumes are going to rise. We will have to accept some inconvenience for benefits overall of calming. But we don't want to see any unnecessary inconvenience where it is avoidable.


  1. Bay Street - Residents generally in favour, but baffled by removal of parking from west side of street opposite bump-outs. Makes no sense if intent is to narrow passage in order to slow vehicles... Clearance for snow plowing ( 6.5 m.) was raised. However, plowing occurs on narrower streets which have parking both sides so this explanation makes no sense either... Resident reported watching trucks take turns at a bumpout. Working well... when Bay Street Bridge is re-opened, traffic feed will resume. To the extent that calming measures redirect traffic to "arterial' road,  and calms traffic coming through, it is worth paying the price of some inconvenience...What is the classification of Bay Street, arterial or local? The new nomenclature explained. Bay thought to be a Neighbourhood Mobility street... Why is the bumpout at the southwest corner of Bay and Ferrie so long? What does the additional length achieve, other than to remove parking? ... Asked how they felt about a proposal to allow seasonal parking both sides, residents present had no immediate response...Residents reported that they had seen workers clearing ice and snow from within the bumpouts, and wondered why this expense was being incurred. Clearing storm drains? ...also, who is going clean within the bumpouts during the rest of the year? It was explained that they were temporary features. Presumably residents will have to sweep them until the permanent features are installed... What about speed bumps? Don't they work elsewhere, as in London or Durand?  It was explained that they are not liked by traffic engineers. Difficult for emergency vehicles and found noisy by residents. Are being removed from some location in Durand. A resident who works for Toronto EMS remarked that if his elderly parent were being transported in an emergency vehicle, he would rather it were not going over speed bumps.

  1. MacNab Street - the bumpouts are on the east side of the street, same as the parking, so there is no discernible effect. Cars still going quite fast... Odd 1 hour parking zone. Apparently you can buy a sixty dollar permit to park in that zone as per a normal street?..The combination of four-way stop and bumpouts at Strachan and MacNab seems redundant. This comment was made by a non-resident who comes to the neighbourhood frequently to sail, and is concerned about the expense of redundant features. It was explained that the four-way stop  resulted from the uncertainty experienced by drivers at that corner when MacNab became two-way...A resident felt that two way conversion and bumpouts had made some corners "blind"- difficult to see approaching vehicles when crossing. 

  1. Burlington West - parking? one side? both sides? when? how?... A resident objected to the partial closure at James and Burlington because of the increased gas cost in going around the block to get home...

  1. John Street - the north side of the bridge is dangerous, blind hill... Some discussion of impending work, closure of bridge for repairs. Do John Street residents feel this bridge needed? Yes, or there would be much more traffic on the Ferguson Bridge. Where would LIUNA patrons exiting on John go? 

  1. Ferguson Street - complaints about the inconvenience arising from a partial closure to southbound traffic at Burlington. It was explained that this measure was intended to direct traffic flowing from new development at Pier 8 along Dock Service Road to continue southward along Wellington rather than by Ferguson... Is a bike lane to be installed on Ferguson? Will that remove parking from one side of the street, which is narrow? ... Why don't the police enforce the 30 K, eliminating the need for expensive calming measures? It was explained that police will not give traffic duty a high priority. Currently an officer deals with North End traffic one day a week. According to Public Works October report to council, since 30 K in effect police have given 400 warnings  and issued 70 tickets.

  1. Macauley Street - A resident is strongly opposed to bumpouts/chokers on Macauley, has circulated a petition in opposition, fearing loss of parking. Parking both sides should be adequate to slow traffic. It was explained that the point of a choker mid-block was to slow vehicles by obliging them to aim for the opening when no parked cars present. Response: there are always parked cars on that street. No point in having calming measures on the east-west streets. 

  1. Wellington- Simcoe - vehicles forbidden to turn right off Wellington onto Simcoe are now taking Picton etc. instead. There are fewer houses on Simcoe, so problem should remain on Simcoe.  It was explained that at some point there will be a count and we will have some data on this question.

  1. Wood Street - parking both sides adequate calming, especially in winter. Wood and Mary dangerous because of speed on Mary.

  1. Mary Street is a very wide north-south street but there are no calming measures planned?

  1. 30 K - Why are we down to 30 K? The signs say Child and Family Friendly, but not very friendly to visitors to make them deal with slow traffic and therefore congestion. Response from another resident: 30 K not a magic number but chosen because the severity of injury falls dramatically when accidents occur at 30 K rather than higher speeds.

  1. James Street Go station - James will have calming measures installed. Signed 50 but evident from traffic management concept plan that designers felt street needed to be slowed as roadway permitting too much speed... there doesn't seem to be co-ordination between the City/CN and Metrolinx with regard to elevator and stairs at Bay Bridge to access parking... Will there be parking in the neighbourhood as there is for General Hospital even though the hospital has a vast parking lot? ... When there is another GO station to the east ( at Centennial?) there will be reduction in parking demand... not all day GO anyway, it's not known when that will occur. 



 MAY 2013

(To enlarge the image, click on the image, then choose "view image")

The 4 maps below show different aspects of the plan at different implementation time. 

The 3 schedules show the month and year of the various aspects of the plan to be implemented.

The following schedules are of the Implementation Timelines.  

IDEAS Received to Implement the City Plan (February 15, 2013)

Roundabout on James to give message to those entering neighbourhood.

Corner James and Burlington - (many mentions)

John Street hill 

Crossing enhancements at schools

Two Way conversions of MacNab and John. 

Slow down Guise Street

Partial closure at Simcoe street east to stop traffic flow when R.R. crossing is engaged.  Traffic backs up in neighbourhood.  

Burlingon Street - curb extensions and pedestrian crossings

James and Guise

James and Strachan

Bay and Strachan

Additional Thoughts and Concerns for Consideration

Several phone calls requested from residents on Picton requesting no partial closure of Simcoe at Wellington.

Stop signs along Bay being ignored by drivers and many complaints of trucks (transport and delivery)  using Bay.

Stop signs Wood and Hughson  

Concerns of losing on-street parking.

Speed humps suggested for Guise Street

Timing of lights at Mary and Burlington be made pedestrian friendly. 

Crosswalks repainted and additional bike lanes (James, Bay)

Additional parking requested along Ferrie Street - south side of street has no parking.

People running stop sign at Ferguson and Simcoe street  (speed hump welcomed)

Speed enforcement on Burlingon Street (3 recent accidents)

Physical size of bumpouts (curb extensions)  not to take away from parking

Brick roadway on Ferguson to be restored/continued from Barton to Burlington.
Pedestrian activated push buttons at all traffic lights

Repair the 2nd set of train tracks on Wellington to encourage drivers to use Wellington and not avoid the tracks.

NEN (North End Neighbours) Response to the OMB decision of December 27, 2012

The residents of the North End Neighbourhood welcome the findings of the OMB that we are a vital family oriented neighbourhood and that traffic can have a major impact on the health and safety of our families and particularly on the lives of our children. Yet the OMB decision excludes several of our objectives, one of which was to keep Burlington Street and James Street in the 30K plan. A  Neighbourhood Association meeting has been called for January 15 at 7 pm at Bennetto Recreation Centre to discuss the results.

The OMB decision does say that efforts should be made by the City as soon as possible to improve streetscaping and signage. That traffic calming and management measures be implemented as per the City’s North End Traffic Management Plan (June 2008) working with NEN on the implementation process, monitoring, and analysis of results.  A pilot project for five years will provide time for these measures to have their full effect. It is important to start at once. Drivers must be given the message that they are potentially in conflict with children and must drive in a slower and more cautious manner; to feel they are participating in protecting the safety of pedestrians, especially children.

Our Board and volunteers believe that Hamilton has a great opportunity to move ahead in the vanguard of Canadian communities that understand how streets impact our daily lives.

We take this opportunity to thank everyone who has worked with us over the years – City Staff, consultants and especially the many, many residents who researched the issues, told their stories, brought their ideas, attended hours of meetings, and participated in the OMB hearing. 

We will now be working with a Neighbourhood Implementation Team and City of Hamilton Public Works.

 OMB decision link