The Hamilton Spectator once again covers a critical issue without presenting it in an easily understood fashion.
Read the article "Traffic will grow with Mountain development", Monday November 27, 2006.
There are lots of numbers presented, but what is the big picture? Is the conclusion obvious? How about this analysis of the same numbers, which took me less than ten minutes:
403 - Linc | QEW - 20 | QEW - 403 | Rymal - Centennial | Cars Registered | Pop Growth | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
start yr | 1998 | 1988 | 1988 | 2001 | 1994 | 2001 |
end yr | 2003 | 2003 | 2003 | 2005 | 2004 | 2011 |
net yrs | 5 | 15 | 15 | 4 | 10 | 10 |
start flow | 48100 | 77000 | 64200 | 14080 | 265696 | 490000 |
end flow | 60100 | 127300 | 107500 | 16600 | 294874 | 540000 |
multiplier | 1.25 | 1.65 | 1.67 | 1.18 | 1.11 | 1.10 |
annual % growth | 4.56 | 3.41 | 3.50 | 4.20 | 1.05 | 0.98 |
check | 60100 | 127300 | 107500 | 16600 | 294874 | 540000 |
The key here is the equivalent annual percentage growth.
We are growing in numbers and buying cars at about the same rate of about 1 percent annually. But on the roads, the use of vehicles is increasing about 3 to 4 times the rate of population growth.
One can also look at this from an economic standpoint (we all know that Council can do little else). As I understand it, real GDP growth is around 2-3 percent annually for Ontario. Likely, Hamilton is far below that. (Does anyone have an exact number?)
So whatever way you look at it, relative to dollars or people, we are now using cars very inefficiently.
By jason (registered) | Posted November 29, 2006 at 13:32:19
I'm sure a new big box centre at the QEW/Hwy 20 will help that area keep pace with the other areas as well. Right now, that's the lonely 'intersection' below 3.5% annual growth rate.
By nobrainer (registered) | Posted November 29, 2006 at 13:54:36
That's what passes for a "balanced transportation system" in the Hammer. :P
You must be logged in to comment.
There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?