31 replies to this topic

[G. Hanson]

http://www2.gov.bc.c...nning_study.pdf

 

Quite the interesting study from 2014 that includes concepts and cost-benefit analyses for overpasses for all intersections along the Pat Bay Hwy Corridor. The study also looks into adding bus only shoulder lanes along the corridor. 

 

I just had a quick overview of the document rather than going into detail on the methodology, but I definitely question their capital cost estimates for the infrastructure as well as the values they use for valuing time and safety savings. 

 

Of most interest to me was their proposals for overpasses at Keating and Beacon Ave. Not sure the Beacon Ave. concept would fly with the general pubic after the McTavish Overpass snafu, but interesting it is to say the least. 

 

 

Anyways, for those interested in transportation related issues for the region, this should be quite an interesting read.

[gkz]

There has been some discussion of this on the HWY17 thread starting on page 11:  http://vibrantvictor...cussion/page-11

[Bingo]

Another accident at Keating Cross Road and the Pat Bay Highway.

 

The first was a three-vehicle crash on the Pat Bay Highway that snarled traffic at the end of the evening commute.

 It happened just before 6:30 pm at the Keating Cross Road turnoff  and officials say it was the result of someone trying to turn across the traffic when they shouldn’t have.

“Apparently there was a car turning left and it turned in front of cars going the other way.” says Dep. Chief Rob Nelson of Central Saanich Fire.

“There should be an overpass here but there isn’t so people just have to be careful making left turns.”

The crash brought north bound traffic to a standstill and shutdown the highway for more than an hour.

Three people had to be rushed to hospital and officials say two of the three vehicles in the crash were totaled.

http://www.cheknews....ictoria-247906/

 

There has been talk of a flyover heading north on the Highway for years, for making the left turn onto Keating X Road.

This would be an expensive solution and could be delayed because of funding.

A less expensive solution could be implemented by closing the access to Keating X Road heading north at the highway.  Red arrow on map.

There could still be the merge lane heading south on the highway from Keating X Road.

Access to and from Keating X Road to the north is already in place along Central Saanich Road to the controlled intersection at Island View Road and the highway. Route in Red on map.

Access to and from Keating X Road to the south is already in place along Central Saanich Road and Tanner Road. Route in Blue on map

The Tanner Road intersection at the highway would need lights installed to make it safer. 

This is an easy fix that could be done tomorrow if there was the will to try it.

 

[Nparker]

I first moved to Central Saanich in 1978 and there has been talk about improving the Keating X Road access since at least then. 38+ years later and aside from extending the left turn lane on the northbound PBH, there have been zero changes implemented. I can't see the residents of CS accepting the closure of Keating and funnelling all the industrial/Butchart Gardens traffic along Island View, Central Saanich Road and Tanner. The cost to improve these roads would be nearly as much as a flyover at Keating which is already built to handle high traffic volumes. I see the flyover option as being the only viable solution. Will I live to see it built? Doubtful.

Edited by Nparker, 23 December 2016 - 04:28 PM.

[Bingo]

 I can't see the residents of CS accepting the closure of Keating and funnelling all the industrial/Butchart Gardens traffic along Island View, Central Saanich Road and Tanner. 

 

Keating would still be open for accessing the highway heading south. There is no left turn to head north at the Pat Bay Highway from Keating, so that traffic has been using Central Saanich and Island View for years. Residents might complain but the life that might be saved by the changes could be theirs.

Edited by Bingo, 24 December 2016 - 02:14 AM.

[Nparker]

Keating would still be open for accessing the highway heading south. Residents might complain but the life that might be saved by the changes could be theirs.

Lives would be just as easily saved with a Keating flyover without all the disruptions to the much smaller capacity roads like Central Saanich and Tanner.

[Bingo]

Lives would be just as easily saved with a Keating flyover without all the disruptions to the much smaller capacity roads like Central Saanich and Tanner.

I suggested the flyover years ago, but the study is taking years, and would cost millions to build. 

Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and get it done even if it is a temporary solution.

The re was a recent accident at Tanner and the highway which might have been prevented if there had been a light there.

[Nparker]

...Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and get it done even if it is a temporary solution...

"Temporary" solutions in the CRD tend to last at least a couple of generations and hinder appropriate actions from taking place. See the "temporary" main branch of the Victoria Public Library, and the "temporary" government offices on Superior and Michigan Streets in James Bay for just 2 examples.

[Nparker]

...There was a recent accident at Tanner and the highway which might have been prevented if there had been a light there.

The last thing the Pat Bay Highway needs is more traffic lights. 

[Bingo]

The last thing the Pat Bay Highway needs is more traffic lights. 

And fewer accidents. We don't need to create another Malahat style boondoggle. 

[Nparker]

Fewer accidents will happen when all left turns across the Pat Bay Highway are closed (Tanner, East Saanich?), and a flyover is added at Keating.

[Bingo]

Whenever I use Keating it's actually surprising how little commercial traffic I see.

As an industrial park, I don't think it ever realized it's full potential. Even Thrifty Foods moved away.

[Nparker]

...As an industrial park, I don't think it ever realized it's full potential...

That is likely a direct result of the difficult highway access that has existed since time immemorial. I recall when the industrial park was first being developed back in the early 1980s there was an assumption that the Keating/PBH access would be improved. As I stated above, this has been in discussions for decades, but like many CRD projects, it's easier to talk about them rather than make them happen.

[Bingo]

That is likely a direct result of the difficult highway access that has existed since time immemorial.

I recall when the industrial park was first being developed back in the early 1980s there was an assumption that the Keating/PBH access would be improved. 

 

Yes and it's time to put that 35 year old failure behind us and make the Pat Bay Highway safer for thousands of other people who use that road.

[Nparker]

Yes and it's time to put that 35 year old failure behind us and make the Pat Bay Highway safer for thousands of other people who use that road.

A Keating flyover will both help the industrial park and make the PBH safer. Another win-win.

[Nparker]

 

Bingo, on 23 Dec 2016 - 4:09 PM, said:

Endless posts attempting to stifle my ideas for a solution to accidents on the Pat Bay Highway does not make for an interesting read either.

 

I wasn't trying to stifle your ideas at all. I was simply offering alternatives that I think would have a more beneficial outcome for an expenditure of public funds.

ps: I am going to copy this response to the Pat Bay Highway thread so I don't have to "off-topic" stamp my own post.

[Bingo]

I wasn't trying to stifle your ideas at all. I was simply offering alternatives that I think would have a more beneficial outcome for an expenditure of public funds.

ps: I am going to copy this response to the Pat Bay Highway thread so I don't have to "off-topic" stamp my own post.

Edited by Bingo, 24 December 2016 - 12:55 AM.

[Nparker]

Oh goody!

Glad you understand.

[Bingo]

Glad you understand.

Edited by Bingo, 24 December 2016 - 01:19 AM.

[Bingo]

I wasn't trying to stifle your ideas at all. I was simply offering alternatives that I think would have a more beneficial outcome for an expenditure of public funds.

ps: I am going to copy this response to the Pat Bay Highway thread so I don't have to "off-topic" stamp my own post.

 

Here is the rest of the conversation that you forgot to move.

How about we leave those discussions to private conversations among the owners/residents and have this thread deal with more general issues of the project in the context of CoV vibrancy?

 

How about we leave that to the moderators to decide.  

Edited by Bingo, 24 December 2016 - 01:15 AM.