Jump to content

      



























Photo

Shelbourne Corridor | Shelbourne Valley Action Plan


  • Please log in to reply
308 replies to this topic

#21 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 14 April 2010 - 11:37 AM

I would never bike on Shelbourne.

I often wonder what it would be like if all of Shelbourne was one lane of traffic each way for its entire stretch. I can't see how this would be a problem as long as every left turn had its own dedicated lane. There would be a need for a few dedicated right turn lanes as well. This would free up plenty of space for a bike lane.

#22 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 14 April 2010 - 12:41 PM

^ Exactly. The only problem I could foresee are busses.

#23 goke

goke
  • Member
  • 123 posts

Posted 14 April 2010 - 12:48 PM

What do you think of the elimination of a lane on north Shelbourne (north of Feltham)? Was there any consultation of Shelbourne users before they did this? I didn’t hear of the plans before they started construction and I can’t seem to make sense out of what they are trying to achieve either.
Can anyone fill me in?

#24 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 7,116 posts

Posted 14 April 2010 - 02:42 PM

i noticed that on the bus a few days ago. there were almost always cars parked on the curb which blocked off the curb lane anyway for most of that part of shelbourne. i don't think bringing the curb out in some places will make much difference since that lane wasn't really functional to begin with (imo). the rest of the sidewalk improvements, etc are coming along also. for the longest time a path had been worn into the grass on the gordon-head side & now it's being made into a real sidewalk, and there's now are real concrete pads at the bus stops on that side also. looks good to me

#25 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 14 April 2010 - 02:58 PM

^I agree; cars are parked there anyway and there's not much point in making it two lanes because traffic is light and you're near the entrance of Mt. Doug park and its narrow road so what's the hurry. To paraphrase Councillor Luton it's like a fire hose feeding a drinking straw.

The new grassy areas will give some of the trees along the street a bit of breathing room.
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#26 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,056 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 14 April 2010 - 03:23 PM

This planning process Saanich is undertaking is an example of the flaws of our municipal boundaries. This review of Shelbourne should extend all the way to Bay St.

Since they are looking 20-30 years ahead, if there is enough density created, the street would potentially make sense for rail based rapid transit. University Heights as the CRD's Metrotown

#27 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 7,116 posts

Posted 15 April 2010 - 10:37 AM

what if victoria at the same time did the same sort of thing for hillside at the same time, say between richmond & cook, or between shelbourne & cedar hill, or something like that? link that part of hillside has a similar "big parking lots, could-be-more-pedestrian-friendly" sort of feel as the shelbourne/mckenzie area.

Since they are looking 20-30 years ahead, if there is enough density created, the street would potentially make sense for rail based rapid transit. University Heights as the CRD's Metrotown

that is a cool idea

#28 phx

phx
  • Member
  • 1,853 posts

Posted 15 April 2010 - 07:00 PM

Since they are looking 20-30 years ahead, if there is enough density created, the street would potentially make sense for rail based rapid transit. University Heights as the CRD's Metrotown


Interesting idea, but wrong location. Burnside is the likely candidate for that sort of development.

#29 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,056 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 16 April 2010 - 08:14 AM

I can see University Heights workings a Metrotown because of the proximity to UVic and the potential of being on a rapid transit line downtown.

UVic spawns a lot of start businesses, but there is no close location for offices. The University will also eventually need to move off campus for more and more things as they run out of space for more buildings. Note that the alumni services is already off campus.

UVic also spawns a need for rentals and condos that are not being supplied at the moment.

#30 larrobb

larrobb
  • Member
  • 120 posts

Posted 17 April 2010 - 06:15 PM

UVic Alumni Services has moved to the ground floor of the Ian Stewart Complex, on the Mt Doug High end of the parking lot. This puts them in the same building again as the Development office, Advancement services and Corporate Relations, all of whom recently vacated Alumni House on Sinclair rd. The office space on Shelbourne formerly occupied by Alumni Services is rumoured to become a rotating temporary office space as renovations continue on campus. Until a few months ago, a second floor office at the Shelbourne location was also being used by UVic but that department has moved back onto the main campus.

#31 Evan

Evan

    People not cars

  • Member
  • 70 posts

Posted 26 April 2010 - 02:11 PM

There is a 'new' (not really, since the Danes have been using to great effect for 50 years) school of thought around traffic planning that, in brief, eliminates lanes in order to reduce traffic. New York's Broadway closure is somewhat based around this idea.

Victoria is beginning to have a traffic problem. The solution is not more lanes or more arterials, or separating the bikes/people routes from the car routes.

Shelbourne should be immediately reduced to 2 vehicular lanes (with the possible inclusion of dedicated bus lane(s)), have 2 physically-separated bike-lanes added, have its sidewalks widened, and look to the future idea of LRT.

It will be madness for about 2 weeks, and then, miraculously, traffic will be way down, walking, biking, and busing will be way up.

Better environmentally, economically, socially, culturally, psychologically.

Plant more street trees, eliminate front setback parking, and then, in time, increase the densities and reduce parking of those horrible strip malls, and Bob's your uncle.

(A blog series on the topic can be found at makevictoriabetter.com)

They need to start now and not study this for 10 years before making some decisions. Bike lanes need to go in. This street is not a highway. It needs to become a main street linking 3-4 suburban centres... not a bunch of crappy malls.

#32 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 26 April 2010 - 03:08 PM

^ Agreed. And with first-class biking and pedestrian access I bet dollars to donuts it greatly increases property values and encourages density.

Its not like Shelbourne is even very busy right now. A few motorheads would complain for a few weeks and then no one will remember it being any other way. Despite all the protests, Fort is still just as quick a way to go as it ever was with 4 lanes.

#33 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 6,363 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 26 April 2010 - 03:39 PM

Shelbourne should be immediately reduced to 2 vehicular lanes (with the possible inclusion of dedicated bus lane(s)), have 2 physically-separated bike-lanes added, have its sidewalks widened, and look to the future idea of LRT.

It will be madness for about 2 weeks, and then, miraculously, traffic will be way down, walking, biking, and busing will be way up.


The traffic may reduce, but as with water flowing through a pipe it still needs to go somewhere, so reduce shelbourne to 1 lane each way and watch Cedar Hill and Richmond and Foul Bay increase, not to mention all the money that will be spent on closing side streets.

I dont have a problem with reducing to single lane but there are certain streets that need to remain as arterial roads while others could be considered for bike lanes etc. Why not put bike lanes on Richmond and Cedar Hill Rds? Make cedar Hill 1 way and take the other lane for parking and bikes....just a thought.

#34 piltdownman

piltdownman
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 26 April 2010 - 04:57 PM

Kinda off topic but am I the only one that thinks its madness how the city likes to combine bike lanes and transit routes? Bikes and Buses aren't a safe mix. Bikes shouldn't be on the arterial roads at all. One might argue that buses shouldn't either.

#35 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 26 April 2010 - 05:02 PM

^^ I don't think there is any evidence the pipe is currently clogged, so there is no need for it to be as wide as it is. You could double traffic on Shelbourne tomorrow and it would barely slow down.

However, the idea is that even if it were clogged, people would choose other ways to travel than cars.

Cedar Hill and Richmond are both quite narrow and hilly and there is no commerce on either. There is already a bike route up Dean for Camosun and UVic, so there really isn't any need at Richmond.

#36 bicycles

bicycles
  • Member
  • 172 posts

Posted 26 April 2010 - 06:43 PM

I think they should look to something like Edmonton's Whyte Ave. Lots of similarities (both close to the university, fairly major artery, lots of university students in the area) between the two and if Shelbourne added a bunch of 3-4 story apartments with ground floor retail fronting Shelbourne, and then more 3-4 story walk ups around it, it would create a really vibrant area. The biggest things they need to is widen the sidewalks, add bike lanes, and hopefully at some point right a streetcar/low floor lrt from downtown along Hillside and Shelbourne to University Heights. I also think they really need some nightclubs/bars along the strip. Having all of them in one area (downtown) just creates problems as it's where everyone goes. Splitting it up means less people (or at least more choices) and hopefully less problems.

#37 Lover Fighter

Lover Fighter
  • Member
  • 653 posts

Posted 27 April 2010 - 11:25 AM

Shelbourne is actually pretty busy, and dangerous (narrow lanes). Motorists I've talked to who complain about the traffic actually support the two lane proposal.

As it is now, traffic must weave into the left lane to avoid cyclists then back into the right lane to avoid those turning left onto collector streets. Dedicated bike lanes and and left turn pullouts will allow traffic to flow much better, and the motorists recognize this.

#38 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 27 April 2010 - 12:58 PM

Shelbourne is actually pretty busy, and dangerous (narrow lanes). Motorists I've talked to who complain about the traffic actually support the two lane proposal.

As it is now, traffic must weave into the left lane to avoid cyclists then back into the right lane to avoid those turning left onto collector streets. Dedicated bike lanes and and left turn pullouts will allow traffic to flow much better, and the motorists recognize this.


I'd more or less agree with this. You can't really give a cyclist adequate room without making sure you veer at least a bit into the centre lane for his/her safety.

#39 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 27 April 2010 - 04:18 PM

Yes, reducing lanes seems like a no brainer to me. If anyone is concerned about this should experience the lane reductions on Esquimalt rd. I notice no difference in speeds and it's much easier to navigate.

#40 Lover Fighter

Lover Fighter
  • Member
  • 653 posts

Posted 27 April 2010 - 06:21 PM

There's a survey on the saanich website in the first post that people have until May 10th to fill out.

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users