233 replies to this topic

[G-Man]

On a side note this overpass will create the second longest stretch of the Pat Bay without a traffic light. The longest being from Haliburton to Saanich Road at 6.9 km (according to Google Maps) this section will only slightly shorter at 6.6 km from Beacon Ave to Mount Newton Crossroad.

The longest stretch of highway in Greater Victoria is from Mackenzie to Spencer Road at 8.5 km soon to be 10.8 km when the light is taken out at Spencer and the following light is at Amy.

[Mike K.]

This is still a very rough rendering of the project. I think it's meant to show what sort of overpass will be built but connections and final location of ramps are still in the design stage.

[ressen]

I think that it is more likely that the Pat Bay Highway will go under and that the overpass will be more like the one at Royal oak with Canora/McTavish being above the highway.

[amor de cosmos]

one issue that the original hwy17 study raised with an overpass there was the connection with lochside. that's probably why the highway will be the overpass section, unlike other interchanges.

[Jacques Cadé]

Interesting letters in today's TC responding to the McTavish interchange. You can read all of them here, but this is the one that seemed closest to the money, so to speak:

Public transit, not an interchange

What our Victoria airport needs — way more than a new interchange — is simple public transportation. It’s absurd: Unless we drive cars to and from the airport, we can’t get there without padding the wallet of a private transportation company.
With no real public transit, our airport is just pretending to be an international terminal. Last year my spouse and I flew through Victoria and three other Canadian airports, nine European ones, plus Tel Aviv and Marrakesh. Of those 15 airports, only two lacked convenient public transportation: Victoria, and the tiny airport on Santorini (population 14,000).
Victoria Regional Transit makes just six or eight bus runs a day to the airport (just three on weekends). To catch one, you and your bags have to transfer through the Royal Oak exchange first; for most of us it’s a three-bus, two-hour exercise. Our alternatives? The Akal Airporter at $18 per person, or $50 for a Yellow Cab.
In just one year, the Olympics will supposedly bring tens of thousands more visitors through our airport — and few will have cars waiting. Yet our politicians and the Victoria Airport Authority seem eager to fork another $24 million into the highway interchange.
Please get real: Improve public transit to the airport first.

Bill Johnstone, Victoria

Readers raise other issues – that an interchange at the Trans-Canada Highway and McKenzie is more needed than one at the airport, for example. And we haven't even touched upon the peak-oil/global-warming argument that airplane travel will be far more expensive and less frequent in the near future. So is there any way to persuade the powers that be to rethink this interchange, or is it a done deal?

[Bernard]

Interesting letters in today's TC responding to the McTavish interchange. You can read all of them here, but this is the one that seemed closest to the money, so to speak:

Public transit, not an interchange

What our Victoria airport needs — way more than a new interchange — is simple public transportation. It’s absurd: Unless we drive cars to and from the airport, we can’t get there without padding the wallet of a private transportation company.
With no real public transit, our airport is just pretending to be an international terminal. Last year my spouse and I flew through Victoria and three other Canadian airports, nine European ones, plus Tel Aviv and Marrakesh. Of those 15 airports, only two lacked convenient public transportation: Victoria, and the tiny airport on Santorini (population 14,000).
Victoria Regional Transit makes just six or eight bus runs a day to the airport (just three on weekends). To catch one, you and your bags have to transfer through the Royal Oak exchange first; for most of us it’s a three-bus, two-hour exercise. Our alternatives? The Akal Airporter at $18 per person, or $50 for a Yellow Cab.
In just one year, the Olympics will supposedly bring tens of thousands more visitors through our airport — and few will have cars waiting. Yet our politicians and the Victoria Airport Authority seem eager to fork another $24 million into the highway interchange.
Please get real: Improve public transit to the airport first.

Bill Johnstone, Victoria

Readers raise other issues – that an interchange at the Trans-Canada Highway and McKenzie is more needed than one at the airport, for example. And we haven't even touched upon the peak-oil/global-warming argument that airplane travel will be far more expensive and less frequent in the near future. So is there any way to persuade the powers that be to rethink this interchange, or is it a done deal?

I have been on trips where the cost of the taxi to and from the airport was more than 25% of the flight cost.

An unreasonable number of my km driving in this region are related to picking and dropping off at the airport. I do something in the order of 1000 km a year going to and from the airport.

A decent express bus every half hour to and from the airport is clearly needed.

[Jacques Cadé]

Bernard, I agree with you. My understanding, though, is that the airport authority makes very good money from its paid parking, and by selling Akal and Empress/Yellow Cab the exclusive right to pick up passengers.

In other words, it seems the VAA doesn't want more public transit at the airport, even if BC Transit is willing to provide it. Anyone know more about this?

Victorians should lobby for a flat taxi rate to/from the airport, or demand that the VAA open the ground transportation to competition.

[Mike K.]

Every airport sells pick-up and drop-off rights to private companies and public transportation is typically a necessity for airport staff and not travelers. Victoria's airport is simply doing what most other airports around the world do.

While I agree that our airport is under-serviced by public transportation compared to other cities, it makes no sense to have an express bus heading from downtown to the airport just because people don't like to switch buses. Even in the largest cities, express bus service to the airport is rare and in most cases public transit drops you off at an exchange near the airport. Even in Vancouver, the airport bus takes you into Richmond and much of the time it's half full because travelers couldn't be bothered to meander around on transit prior to a flight. Perhaps the RAV line will increase use of public transit, but YVR hasn't had express bus service from downtown for decades.

Whether or not this interchange is a higher priority over others in the region, it's needed as airport use increases. A country road stop sign and an s-turn onto the highway are NOT conducive for growth and the situation will continue to get worse unless a proper approach (no pun) is built.

As for aircraft fuel efficiency, Boeing and Airbus are designing extremely fuel efficient long range aircraft to help combat the rising rates of fuel. People need to travel, and whether the fare is $500 or $600 it's still far more convenient and efficient (dollar for dollar) than all other options.

[Bernard]

More and more cities have major rail transit links to their airports.

In London all four airports are well connected to the rail system.

Frankfurt has good rail into downtown and a connection onto the mainline

San Francisco has pushed the BART out to the SF Airport.

Vancouver's will be on the Canada Line in a few months.

People will use transit from airports if what is offered is a good service. People on business may not use it because they can expense the costs of the cab, though in London and Frankfurt that makes no sense when it comes to time.

[AllseeingEye]

The question I have Bernard is whether with barely 365,000 people - 100,000 less than Surrey - Greater Victoria can afford a rail link to YYJ?

I'm a proponent and huge fan of rail generally, and support it in concept. However the difference between this region and the cities you cite is that they have multiple millions of people to bear and help offset the tax burden. Any system here would have to be massively and overwhelmingly subsidized by government.

Possibly a more relevant example might be Calgary; however even at that Cowtown didn't inaugurate its C-Train system until 1981 when its population was 600,000+.

[Mike K.]

Not to mention the c-train doesn't connect to the airport.

[AllseeingEye]

Correct; although there is a tentative plan for a branch line to Calgary International Airport that is likely to see the light of day until 2020 or beyond - nearly 40 years after the inception of the C-Train.

Clearly this and other systems like Sky train are overwhelmingly focused on getting suburban commuters to the business core, and back, rather than acting as adjunct and alternative options for local airports. In that case Victoria's potential ridership - from our burbs, presumably West Shore? - to the city center, shrinks even more. I love the idea, just not certain that the math works....

[amor de cosmos]

While I agree that our airport is under-serviced by public transportation compared to other cities, it makes no sense to have an express bus heading from downtown to the airport just because people don't like to switch buses.

transferring is what causes people to lose time on their trip. people can go a lot farther on a single bus in 10mins than they can if they have to wait 10mins for their connecting bus

More and more cities have major rail transit links to their airports.

In London all four airports are well connected to the rail system.

Frankfurt has good rail into downtown and a connection onto the mainline

San Francisco has pushed the BART out to the SF Airport.

Vancouver's will be on the Canada Line in a few months.

People will use transit from airports if what is offered is a good service. People on business may not use it because they can expense the costs of the cab, though in London and Frankfurt that makes no sense when it comes to time.

so I think it makes sense that with an (expected) increase in airport traffic coming with more direct flights to Victoria, it would make sense to increase bus service from the airport. I wonder how ferry traffic will be affected with people being able to fly direct to/from Victoria rather than going to Vancouver first.

[Jacques Cadé]

Mike, I have to reply to your post too.

Every airport sells pick-up and drop-off rights to private companies and public transportation is typically a necessity for airport staff and not travelers. Victoria's airport is simply doing what most other airports around the world do.

But they don't do it the way we have. YYJ has sold the pick-up rights to one taxi company and one shuttle company. This doesn't happen elsewhere. At San Francisco, for example, you have BART, plus a choice of cab companies, and a choice of shuttle companies, serving every part of the Bay Area. Here, if you don't live where Akal goes, tough luck: you're either paying a $60 cab fare or begging friends for a ride.

Even in the largest cities, express bus service to the airport is rare and in most cases public transit drops you off at an exchange near the airport.

As Bernard has pointed out, several cities have rail. I've also taken public buses to quite a few European airports. Prague, for example, has an express public bus (leaving every 30 minutes) that links up to its subway system. Tourists don't take it because they don't know it exists, but it's the residents' first choice.

Whether or not this interchange is a higher priority over others in the region, it's needed as airport use increases. A country road stop sign and an s-turn onto the highway are NOT conducive for growth and the situation will continue to get worse unless a proper approach (no pun) is built.

I agree, the current intersection is not very pretty. But what we're talking about here is the most efficient use of limited infrastructural cash. I argue that the money would be much better spent at TCH and Mackenzie ... plus that competitive shuttle service would be an improvement on Akal, and that it's a waste of gas to have Bluebird cabs drop people at the airport and drive away empty because they're not allowed to pick anyone up.

[Mike K.]

But they don't do it the way we have. YYJ has sold the pick-up rights to one taxi company and one shuttle company. This doesn't happen elsewhere. At San Francisco, for example, you have BART, plus a choice of cab companies, and a choice of shuttle companies, serving every part of the Bay Area. Here, if you don't live where Akal goes, tough luck: you're either paying a $60 cab fare or begging friends for a ride.

YYJ is too small for multiple cab companies. Just like cab licenses in a city, airport pick-up licenses are limited in order to keep a handle on supply and demand. On any given day over 20 Yellow Cabs line up to pick up passengers. If there were two licensed taxi companies, that number would double as both companies vie for the same travelers. My understanding is that even in Edmonton only one taxi company has pick-up rights. At least that was the case last time I was at that airport.

As Bernard has pointed out, several cities have rail. I've also taken public buses to quite a few European airports. Prague, for example, has an express public bus (leaving every 30 minutes) that links up to its subway system. Tourists don't take it because they don't know it exists, but it's the residents' first choice.

Absolutely, but we're talking about cities with millions of residents and tens of millions of flying travelers. Victoria as a city and its airport simply lack enough people for similar transit connections. I see an airport connection being available soon, but I doubt it would be a downtown-airport service. What transit could immediately do is run a 30-minute connector with the McTavish exchange at McTavish and HWY17. That connects travelers with the 70 and off they go.

I agree, the current intersection is not very pretty. But what we're talking about here is the most efficient use of limited infrastructural cash. I argue that the money would be much better spent at TCH and Mackenzie ... plus that competitive shuttle service would be an improvement on Akal, and that it's a waste of gas to have Bluebird cabs drop people at the airport and drive away empty because they're not allowed to pick anyone up.

Absolutely, the TCH situation deserves attention. But it's up to Saanich (the municipality needs to play a large part in this, no? -- at least I think they should) to push government's buttons. The airport authority has done a commendable job getting what it wants from various levels of government.

[G-Man]

^ Exactly. There is no Mackenzie/TCH authority paying part of the cost.

I agree better transit service will be needed but not till the airport is busier than it is today. How will it get busier? By convincing Victorians to use it rather than consider it a second rate facility. While the overpass may be partially cosmetic, it will at least let people know that there is a real airport there.

On top of it all the airport needs to be successful if we want Victoria to thrive, while the airport employs many people directly, indirectly it creates 10 times that (a guess) in jobs across the region.

Just consider cab drivers, airporter drivers, pilots, flight school trainers, hotel clerks, travel agents, etc etc...

We need the airport to be the best it can be and it will pay us back and then some.

[Mike K.]

I agree better transit service will be needed but not till the airport is busier than it is today.

Bingo. I get the sense that Victorians don't use the airport because this isn't up to snuff or that isn't available, etc. Let's show support for the airport by using it. Anyone complaining about poor transit connections in Victoria, then gleefully hopping onto a BC Ferry and figuring out their way to Vancouver Intl. isn't in the slightest interested in using the airport in the first place. Victorian's greatly underutilize the local airport and it's not because of a lack of access.

[mat]

Bingo. I get the sense that Victorians don't use the airport because this isn't up to snuff or that isn't available, etc. Let's show support for the airport by using it. Anyone complaining about poor transit connections in Victoria, then gleefully hopping onto a BC Ferry and figuring out their way to Vancouver Intl. isn't in the slightest interested in using the airport in the first place. Victorian's greatly underutilize the local airport and it's not because of a lack of access.

Circular argument Mike - the airport is underused as there are few direct flights to even Canadian cities, let alone international destinations. Most people going by ferry to YVR for flights overseas, or down south, have worked out the cost of a Victoria flight connection is far more than taking BCF.

That's how it is with our family. 3 of us flying to Europe out of YVR and a YYJ vs BCF connection is 4 times the cost.

[amor de cosmos]

in the link in the original post frank leonard says the mckenzie/tch interchange isn't "shovel-ready" but it seems to be "in the hopper" (hey i just made that up... actually i stole it from Kramer )

[Nparker]

in the link in the original post frank leonard says the mckenzie/tch interchange isn't "shovel-ready" ...

Also, as everyone seems to be forgetting to mention, the McKenzie/TCH connection is NOT in a provincially-held Liberal riding/federally-held Conservative riding. Like it or not, it was partisan politics that ultimately decided that the McTavish interchange would get built, moreso than any other factor.