11042 replies to this topic

[Rex Waverly]

And yes, the 2011-2014 council were fine with running LRT down Douglas with single lane traffic for vehicles in each direction. They also brought us a three lane bridge, and John Luton of the Cycling Coalition had been a councillor for a term but lost in 2011.

 

Really, LRT down Douglas? that's pretty.....well, crazy i guess, at least at first glance. 

 

The three-lane bridge I think makes sense though. The downtown roads can only store so much traffic, so either you bottleneck them at the border to downtown or you have gridlock within downtown. I recall the same discussion happening in Kelowna when they replaced the previous bridge with a 5-lane bridge (3 lanes WB out of town and 2 lanes EB into town). There was a lot of complaints about not having 3 lanes into town, as EB traffic backs up significantly on the way in to town in the AM.  But if the extra lane was built, 50% more cars would be entering downtown and overwhelming the all the pinch points there, instead of waiting orderly (if impatiently) on the road into town.  It's trading one traffic jam for another, but it's better than having downtown grind to a halt with too much traffic.  I mean, ask yourself what would happen to Johnson St if the inbound bridge traffic doubled?  How much spare capacity is there right now?

[Rex Waverly]

I always thought the no left turn from Quadra onto Burdett was a safety matter as result of poor sight lines (southbound traffic can't see northbound traffic coming up curved hill for a safe enough distance to turn). 

 

That is definitely a possibility, looking at the streetview anyway.  Didn't someone say earlier there was construction occurring there? Could be that it ends up removing this restriction, depending on what they're doing there. Actually would make some sense they would want to remove that restriction; Burdett would be the only way off Quadra to access Vancouver between the McClure St closure and Meares St, where it's one-way NB only.  As a traffic calming device, it probably wouldn't be needed anymore since only locals would really use it with Vancouver calmed.  

[On the Level]

Really, LRT down Douglas? that's pretty.....well, crazy i guess, at least at first glance. 

 

Much much much less crazy than thinking a middle aged couple going to hop on a bike in Colwood, ride into work downtown in November, then be back in time to pick your kids up from after school care so someone doesn't phone child services. (yes..that is an issue)

 

Quite frankly, the biggest signal from bike lanes, you, and Corey Burger is a big middle finger for those that work for government but live in other areas of the CRD.....because they have kids and can't afford a 3 or 4 bedroom condo downtown.

[Mike K.]

Oh yeah, the Burdett turn is safety. It’s been that way for eons.

So we’ve just shown the rapid change in the downtown road network occurred since 2014, with most people believing it was necessary due to rising vehicle usage, but we’ve shown vehicle usage is actually falling.

[Mike K.]

Really, LRT down Douglas? that's pretty.....well, crazy i guess, at least at first glance.

When was the last time our elected officials didn’t do something crazy because they thought they knew better than everyone else?

But yeah, that was the plan. Run it down the centre of Douglas right through downtown. Single lane traffic in each direction, and bike lanes on both sides.

The three-lane bridge I think makes sense though. The downtown roads can only store so much traffic, so either you bottleneck them at the border to downtown or you have gridlock within downtown.

Johnson splits into four lanes at the east side of the bridge, fed by one, which often gets gridlocked because people stick to one through-lane on Johnson and traffic backs up all the way down Esquimalt. That is where the congestion happens, and slows travel times during the morning rush considerably.

It was a botched design to have only one inbound lane, but to each his own.

[marks_28]

Much much much less crazy than thinking a middle aged couple going to hop on a bike in Colwood, ride into work downtown in November, then be back in time to pick your kids up from after school care so someone doesn't phone child services. (yes..that is an issue)

Quite frankly, the biggest signal from bike lanes, you, and Corey Burger is a big middle finger for those that work for government but live in other areas of the CRD.....because they have kids and can't afford a 3 or 4 bedroom condo downtown.

None of them are saying everyone has to bike, or expects everyone to bike. The plan is to provide a safe network so the millennial government employee who lives in the Jubilee neighbourhood is able to bike downtown to work. If her and her peers start doing the same, it creates more capacity for those that need to drive, such as the middle aged couple above. If there was no safe infrastructure, there would likely be more cars clogging up downtown.

[mbjj]

That bit of Rockland by the cathedral I believe was closed after Helps became mayor as in our household we call it the Lisa Helps Memorial Parkway. 

[Mike K.]

Early 2014, yes.

@Marks, Jubilee residents overwhelmingly walk, cycle or take transit to downtown. Most people who live within a short distance of downtown and work downtown will not drive, as the parking costs are something they can choose to avoid.

[mbjj]

Oh yeah, the Burdett turn is safety. It’s been that way for eons.

So we’ve just shown the rapid change in the downtown road network occurred since 2014, with most people believing it was necessary due to rising vehicle usage, but we’ve shown vehicle usage is actually falling.

Yes, we used to get from downtown to home by using that bit of Rockland by the cathedral. Since that has been closed we now turn right at Burdett by the playground, U turn in someone's driveway, then cross back over Quadra on Burdett. Now that parts of Vancouver are blocked, we use Burdett or MacLure between Vancouver and Cook, and when they bring in no left turn off of Cook onto Richardson, we'll probably turn left up MacLure, cut through the condo parking lot to get back onto Richardson, lol. It all gets to be a bit much. 

[marks_28]

Looks as though the Rockland Ave. closure was decided on in Jan of 2014.

 

A section of Rockland Avenue between Quadra and Vancouver streets will be closed to motorists for a year beginning the end of this month as part of Victoria’s Pioneer Square rehabilitation project.

The $700,000 rehabilitation project includes grave preservation, new walkways and lighting.

City staff say that in addition to increasing Victoria’s walkability and improving this cycling corridor, the road will connect Christ Church Cathedral to Pioneer Square, creating an improved greenspace downtown.

It is also hoped the change will guide vehicle traffic onto main roads such as Fort and Fairfield. Local vehicle traffic will still be able to access Rockland Avenue from Vancouver Street, but there will be no exit to Quadra Street.

 

 

https://www.timescol...a-year-1.784410

[marks_28]

@Marks, Jubilee residents overwhelmingly walk, cycle or take transit to downtown. Most people who live within a short distance of downtown and work downtown will not drive, as the parking costs are something they can choose to avoid.

 

Okay, but there will be still some who don't live that close to the bus route who drive. Or fine, swap out Jubilee for Oaklands. I guess the overall point I'm trying to make is bike lanes help take space off the roads from people who CAN bike, leaving more space for people who CAN'T. 

[Mike K.]

Yes, that’s the line the GVCC pushes, but there’s nothing in the way of independent data to back that up.

[Barrrister]

I like the fact that the provincial government ihas finally committed to moving some offices to the west shore and from what I hear is with an intention to move a lot more. I suspect that this is a pretty wise plan. Where is Horgan's riding again?

[Mike K.]

It’s in Langford, and yes, there are plans for more offices on the West Shore. The shift has already begun with one downtown unit of a provincial ministry having moved to View Royal, and we know the flex space is coming soon to Westhills. There are rumours of much more but I’ll leave it at that for now.

[marks_28]

I like the fact that the provincial government ihas finally committed to moving some offices to the west shore and from what I hear is with an intention to move a lot more. I suspect that this is a pretty wise plan. Where is Horgan's riding again?

 

Agreed, this is a great move. Hopefully it's a situation where it's basically a remote office, that anyone from any ministry can drop in and work. Kind of like a WeWork shared space. If anything, the pandemic has shown that we don't really need to be in the office to be productive. I was strictly working from home from mid March to August, but went to the office again part time in September basically because I missed the interaction. Hopefully this setup will be the best of both those worlds.

[Rex Waverly]

Much much much less crazy than thinking a middle aged couple going to hop on a bike in Colwood, ride into work downtown in November, then be back in time to pick your kids up from after school care so someone doesn't phone child services. (yes..that is an issue)

 

Quite frankly, the biggest signal from bike lanes, you, and Corey Burger is a big middle finger for those that work for government but live in other areas of the CRD.....because they have kids and can't afford a 3 or 4 bedroom condo downtown.

 

Dude, they literally just finished a $90 million dollar interchange specifically to improve your commute. Also introduced dedicated bus lanes that give a second option if you want to save money on cars / parking. 

 

There are a lot of other people out there that want a different lifestyle than you. Why should they not have the right to commute safely to work in the manner that they choose?  

[Rex Waverly]

Johnson splits into four lanes at the east side of the bridge, fed by one, which often gets gridlocked because people stick to one through-lane on Johnson and traffic backs up all the way down Esquimalt. That is where the congestion happens, and slows travel times during the morning rush considerably.

It was a botched design to have only one inbound lane, but to each his own.

 

Yes, I know that's where the congestion happens. That's my point.  If you open up more lanes inbound, the congestion doesn't go away, it just moves to the downtown road network. Which would be BAD. 

 

Downtown traffic needs to have space in order to park, change lanes, turn into and out of driveways and parking lots.  If the gridlock happens downtown, everything stops. 

[Mike K.]

Pre-covid, everything was stopped. That’s the problem.

But your point takes us back to light timings. That is not difficult to overcome. Cities can move hundreds of thousands of vehicles through their downtown expediently, if they choose, every day. Or they can artificially grind the downtown to a halt, like we have done, and continue to do.

It would all at least feel better if City Hall would admit their plan, openly. But what we get are passive comments about sharing the road, efficiencies, improvements, etc. Just come out and say it: our goal is to reduce vehicle travel through downtown Victoria by 30% by 2025. Just say it, don’t dance around it.

[Rex Waverly]

It would all at least feel better if City Hall would admit their plan, openly. But what we get are passive comments about sharing the road, efficiencies, improvements, etc. Just come out and say it: our goal is to reduce vehicle travel through downtown Victoria by 30% by 2025. Just say it, don’t dance around it.

 

Not saying i'm convinced that that actually is their plan, but i agree in concept that they should be open and transparent about their goals and the methods they intend to use to get there. 

 

I think being open to the plan allows for better explanation of the reasoning behind the plan, which (if it's solid reasoning) would increase the public buy-in. Like, if there is an actual plan to reduce the vehicle travel into / through downtown by 30% by 2025, maybe explain why and what the benefits are.

 

Maybe try something like this:

"The plan is that by reducing vehicle use, we can substantially increase other modes of transportation to not only replace the vehicle trips lost but increase the overall number of trips to / from downtown. We believe that by reducing vehicle trips by 30% by 2025, we can increase total trips by 30%. This would bring more people / business / workers downtown while improving the efficiency of the land use and infrastructure dollars. Now, here's how we will do it and why we think it will work...." 

 

Obviously, i'm just making up some numbers there. But i do think that statements like that would at the very least allow people to understand the thinking behind the plan, even if they don't agree with it. Right now, there's a lot of people who just ascribe every move they make to an ideology, as if there's no thinking / reasoning behind it.  Less "god-damn lefties / righties and their crazy ideology" and more "i understand but respectfully disagree" might be nice

[Barrrister]

MikeK: I believe the city has a good chance of reaching their goal of vehicle reduction as business leave the downtown core and more people work remotely.