North Saanich Online

THE PROJECT BEGINS!

(PLEASE DO CHECK THE SIMULATION LINK-YOU WILL BE AMAZED AT HOW COMPLICATED THEY WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT. IT MUST HAVE BEEN A LONG SEARCH TO FIND SOME ENGINEERS THAT COULD FIND A WAY TO SPEND $24M. I MEAN THEY REALLY COULDN’T DEVELOP SOMETHING SIMPLER TO SOLVE A LEFT TURN PROBLEM  AND SEND $12M BACK NOW– COULD THEY?. I MEAN WHO EVER HEARD OF A  POLITICIAN SAYING ‘OH WE DON’T NEED TO SPEND THIS MUCH MONEY.”?)

Please be advised that construction of the McTavish Road Interchange will begin on November 30, 2009.  Starting that morning, McTavish Road will be closed between Highway 17 and Lochside Drive until Spring 2011.  Access to the Pat Bay Highway will be maintained via Amity Drive (right turns to/from northbound Highway 17 only), Mt. Newton Cross Road (all movements), and Beacon Avenue in Sidney (all movements).

In addition, an extended closure of Canora Road between McTavish Road up to Rideau Avenue will begin on approximately January 26, 2010.  Motorists travelling to the airport will follow McTavish to East Saanich Road, turn north, and take the airport exit from the roundabout.

For construction details and additional information, please visit the project web site at
www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy_17_McTavish_Interchange.  For the latest traffic conditions, visit www.DriveBC.ca.

For those interested in how the traffic flow will work check out a simulation here:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy_17_McTavish_Interchange/video/McTavish_IC_Sim/index.html

Please check out all the comments, they certainly beg the question. “Are the politicians, at all levels interested in the design,efficiency and the lessening of the cost of this project or soley interested in 24 Million dollars coming into their, province, district, town or municipality ?”

LETTER OF THE WEEK FROM A CYCLIST AND RESIDENT (NOVEMBER 4)

I recently attended the open house re above and was appalled by what is
> being proposed and shortly thereafter Mayor Finall was interviewed on
> local
> tv news and I got the distinct impression that the Mayor at least was in
> support of this fiasco that is supposedly going to cost the taxpayers some
> $24 million.
> As a daily user of this intersection it is abundantly clear that it is
> only
> traffic from Canora wanting to cross McTavish to access Pat Bay Highway
> Southbound that is occasionally delayed and that could be easily resolved
> with a simple flyover to allow this traffic to enter the Pat Bay Highway
> going south. Similarly if it is deemed safer to eliminate the left turn at
> the traffic light on Pat Bay for traffic wishing to access Canora or
> McTavish then a similar flyover to Canora could achieve that. Instead what
> we have proposed is a massive construction project that will introduce
> huge
> problems for the most vunerable of road users i.e. cyclists and
> pedestrians.
> I had attended an earlier open house when this proposal was first
> presented
> and I raised in writing the safety issue for cyclists and pedestrians and
> asked to be contacted by the design team so that I could offer some
> practical input as an active cyclist with over 50 years experience and a
> director and long term member of Sidney Velo Cycling Club, BC Masters
> Cycling Club and Cycling BC. I have never received any call but I note
> that
> at a recent presentation to the Saanich Bicycle Advisory Committee that an
> Engineer from the B.C.Interior who knew nothing of the surrounding roads
> was
> able to be part of this design team and that it seems at least one of
> these
> Engineers is claiming to have “consulted” with Sidney Velo Cycling Club
> amongst others and this is totally untrue – we have never been consulted
> in
> this matter so let there be no illusion that we are in favour.
> At the last open house on October 22nd I asked an engineer present to
> explain the thinking behind the addition of the pedestrian and cycling
> overpass that is now part of the design. It became obvious that there has
> been a total lack of understanding of the issue as anyone who has cycled
> or
> walked a trail or an overpass knows that pedestrians and cyclists do not
> mix
> and his answer to that was “well it will be 11ft wide” – Hello, that is
> 5’6″
> each way and while I cannot imagine cyclists would ride two abreast over
> an
> overpass any pedestrians out walking together do walk side by side and
> whether they walk side by side or behind each other it does pose a
> potential
> problem for cyclists being able to safely pass pedestrians on the overpass
> especially when there is pedestrian/cyclist traffic coming the otherway.
> And
> before someone raises this, it is also totally impractical to expect
> cyclists to dismount and become pedestrians to walk over the overpass as
> they wear shoes specifically designed to fit pedals which makes them
> unsuitable/dangerous even for walking. Also the overpass dumps the cyclist
> into the new bus terminal without any marked or posted right of way for
> cyclists who then will have to navigate through the terminal to end up on
> McTavish Rd which has not even paved shoulders never mind a bike lane. I
> then advised the engineer that for children and occasional cyclists the
> overpass would work (except for still dumping them into the bus terminal)
> but any commuter/avid or recreational cyclist would obviously have to
> remain
> on the road with the traffic and negociate the roundabouts which do not
> have
> any allowance for cyclists. The only way to safely negociate the
> roundabouts
> is to ride in the centre of the traffic lane to avoid someone trying to
> pass
> which is unsafe as they are not designed to allow this so will no doubt
> cause aggrevation to motorists who may be impatient. The response was
> “that’s the chance you will have to take” which I find truly unbelievable
> and unacceptable in this day and age when we are trying to make roads safe
> for all users and Greater Victoria is claiming to be bicycle friendly.
> Just so you appreciate what it is like for cyclists in roundabouts we have
> two nearby already – one at Canora and E. Saanich and one at bottom of
> Beacon Ave in Sidney. If you grew up in U.K./Europe then you know how to
> navigate and yield to traffic in roundabouts but that is not the situation
> here in B.C. As a cyclist I have had extremely near misses at both
> roundabouts with drivers either failing to yield to traffic in the
> roundabout coming from their left (me) or trying to pass me while I am
> entering or already in the roundabout itself forcing me to “bunny hop” my
> bicycle over the kerb and onto the sidewalk to avoid being knocked off and
> then being told to F… off for being there. One motorist told the RCMP
> that
> it was my fault for being there as there was no room for both of us! I
> would
> expect North Saanich Council to be well aware of the thousands of visitors
> we have that arrive by the Port Angeles ferry and that includes motorists
> and cyclists (we recently had close to 250 tandem bicycles here from
> Pacific
> Northwestern USA for organised bike rides during a long weekend and those
> 500 riders/tourists were riding all over our Peninsula) and our American
> visitors really get confused with roundabouts and proposing to have three
> VERY close together will undoubtedly cause great confusion. I can only
> imagine the plethora of road markings and signs that will be required to
> direct traffic through this boondoggle.
> It seems that no matter what anyone may say the powers that be have
> already
> decided that this fiasco is going ahead in its present design and that
> they
> are unwilling to accept a better way is possible. Please prove me wrong.
> David Osmond. North Saanich resident, taxpayer, motorist and bicycle user

COMMENT OF THE WEEK (so far)(OCTOBER 25-31)

A refreshing view from an engineer. I think too many of the engineers involved in this project are most concerned about building a monument to themselves. I think this view also supports my comments above.

“My background is transportation engineering, yes I am an accredited specialist in the area of transportation engineering (APEO), yes I have designed multi lane freeways, expressways,urban transportation systems including LRT. (33 years)

I read most of the  comments.!

Words fail to express my displeasure of what is going on.
Some comments are near correct, one alternative scheme (direct fly over, but without the McTavish connection is almost correct !

Steering committees and task forces of lay people (Mostly local council members)will add to the confusion.A steering committee should have transportation engineering expertise and should include high level MOT personel, although given the MOT endorsed proposals I question the competency of the latter.

Both North Saanich and Sidney councils have ignored my free advice !
Oh, by the way—M Coell and Gary Lunn refused to get involved as well.”

And what about cyclists and pedestrians????

Here is an interesting observation of  some of thinking regarding cyclists and the interchange:

He was from Kelowna (the PR(?) engineer); he knew nothing
of the surrounding roads that he was connecting to! The PR Engineer had
outlined a route for cyclists that wanted to connect to the airport when
heading north on Lochside (this included riding over the Ped bridge,
naviagating through the park and ride / bus terminal, then some
unbelievable maneuvers to get onto Canora. The design engineer said this
was all wrong, there was no such connection! If one wants to go from
Lochside to Canora and the airport, the only way is via all the traffic
circles, but, instead, their recommend route is via the bridge, bus
depot, up McTavish then down East Saanich. He was unaware that McTavish
is narrow with no bikelanes, that the route goes up hill, is longer vs
Canora which is level, direct and has paved shoulders.

CHECK OUT THE MOST RECENT COMMENTS GO HERE

AND SCROLL ON DOWN

SO WHAT HAPPENED AT THE OPEN HOUSE?

Well now that we know that ALL politicians touched by this scheme have no interest in listening to what the residents have to say but are only interested in the sound of 24$ million dollars streaming into their backyards we now have another open house to let people vent (save your breath folks ) before this absurd project sticks the shovel in. Having had my rant here is a letter from the North Saanich representatives on the McTavish Road Interchange Task Force:

October 1st, 2009

We wanted to let you know that we have been appointed by the District of North Saanich Council, as the two community representatives  to to sit on the McTavish Road Interchange Task Force.  Other members include representatives from North Saanich Staff and Council, Sidney Council, the Victoria Airport Authority, the RCMP, the Tseycum and Pauquachin First Nations and the Ministry of Transportation.

The purpose of the Task Force is to maintain consultation and dialogue with groups and individuals to identify and address community concerns during the detailed design and construction of the McTavish Road Interchange.  We will represent community interests primarily in the geographic area bounded approximately by Amity Drive to the south, Dean Park to the west, Beacon Avenue to the north and Lochside Drive to the east, however we will accept comment from the community in general.

The BC Ministry of Transportation is proceeding with this project to improve safety, enhance transit and improve access to the Victoria International Airport.  While we understand that you may have concerns about the design, timing and cost of this project, the Task Force is not in a position to consider those.

This is a Provincial project on Provincial land and as such, the Province can proceed.  To qualify for supporting funds from the Federal Government, the project must be completed by March 2011.

After considering alternatives, the conceptual design comprising two roundabouts and a road bridge over the main highway has been complete and has now been accepted as the final design.  The design contract has been awarded to a consulting engineering firm who will proceed with the detailed design.  No fundamental changes can be made to the concept.

Citizens can provide input on bicycle paths, pedestrian paths, signage,  landscaping, noise abatement and pollution control, but not on the design concept itself.  On site construction activity is expected to commence as soon as October 2009.

As your community representatives, we would be pleased to communicate your concerns, suggestions and comments on topics where we can still exert some influence  as the McTavish Road Interchange moves to the next phase.

The Task Force will be meeting at regularly scheduled intervals.  You will find the project website at:  http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy_17_McTavish_Interchange/index.htm

Please feel free to pass this information along to friends and neighbors who will also be impacted by the McTavish Road Interchange.

Heather Gartshore                  heathergartshore@shaw.ca 250-656-0974

Bob Williamson                       prismoid@islandnet.com 250-655-1270

Just to let you know about the upcoming McTavish Road Interchange Open House.  Come and view the updated design for the interchange, learn about construction plans, and the impact on traffic in the local area.

You can refer to the Ministry of Transportation website for more details at:  http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy_17_McTavish_Interchange/index.htm

Public Open House

Thursday October 22nd, 2009

2:00 to 8:00 pm

Saanich Peninsula Presbyterian Church

9296 East Saanich Road

———————————————————————————————————————————————————-

What is happening with this proposal? Make sure to read the comments!  Link to Cairine’s blog and check out some of her responses to some concerns that have been voiced:

Cairine Green’s Blog  and follow the thread. Cairine gives an excellent account of recent meetings and the public meeting leading up to the most recent contact with government officials.

The most recent comments on Cairine’s blog address the leadership of North Saanich in responding to the McTavish Rd issue.

I find it very interesting that what has not been discussed re the McTavish Road interchange proposal is the actual need for this huge “solution” in the first place.  I would go even further and suggest that what is proposed is absurd; the problem is not that huge.  This is clearly something that politicians are not addressing.  Furthermore, the proposed amount of 24 million dollars of taxpayer’s money begs credulity when the so-called “solution” does not even involve a serious safety issue. If 24 million dollars is available to sink into the Pat Bay highway system then the bulk of it in all good conscious should be going to the Sayward Road Interchange with its well-documented list of traffic accidents and deaths.  Now that is a safety issue!

It becomes very obvious that the concern here is not about the safety of the Pat Bay Highway but rather an attempt to massage travelers, visitors, and tourists moving through Victoria Airport.  The biggest problem there seems to be traffic leaving the airport and getting onto the highway—the  intersection of Canora and McTavish roads and not McTavish Road and the Pat Bay high way.

We need to ask ourselves (and our politicians) what alternative  solutions to an overly expensive interchange might be.  The development of a Light Rapid Transit system between the airport, the ferries, and Victoria would seem to be a no-brainer, and especially far-sighted  during this era of fossil fuel depletion and climate change.  The McTavish Road interchange as presently envisioned represents outdated and “un-green” thinking.  . Where are the visionaries?

There were two excellent letters to the editor in the Times Colonist this morning (June 24, 09) regarding this project. Both are also saying what is stated above about lack of comment regarding the scale of and need of  this interchange.

Regarding the interchanges on the Pat Bay Highway, it does not take studies and surveys to realize that the problem at Sayward Road is the lack of an acceleration lane for northbound traffic. You cannot expect to enter even the slow lane from a near… read more…

Paving paradise for little improvement

Times Colonist
24 Jun 2009

The proposed McTavish Avenue/Pat Bay Highway interchange — which must dwarf every comparable traffic structure on the Island — replaces a single stoplight with a daunting array of multiple ramps and twin roundabouts, creating a Byzantine traffic flow… read more…

THERE IS A SIMPLER WAY

The rationale for this approach includes:

• the only real problem at McTavish is Airport Access/Egress
  • all other traffic flows are acceptable
  • with the airport traffic on dedicated lanes, the residual local traffic would be quite modest
  • much of the $24 million should be spent on LRT or more needy intersections
• the existing design:
  • is overly complex
  • is overly expensive
  • is overly “busy”
  • relies on two lane traffic circles, likely a challenge for new visitors in a rental car
  • requires many lane changes and turns
  • will likely require extensive signage to direct drivers
  • has several choke points where cross traffic will be competing with airport through traffic for roundabout access
• my concept is to engender discussion and implies:
  • all new lanes are elevated
  • the McTavish Exit (and Canora exit to McTavish) are optional
  • the southbound Canora exit to Hwy 17 goes over the (optional) McTavish Exit
  • existing pedestrian crossings are acceptable
  • further design/engineering is required:
    • to provide for the bus loop
    • to provide PnR parking
    • to provide a new pedestrian crossing if PnR parking is provided south of McTavish
    • to refine the (optional) Canora/McTavish exit/merge

ANOTHER SIMPLER WAY

Harvey Lubin sends this comment and concept

This week I came across the plan for the McTavish interchange:
http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/highwayprojects/Hwy_17_McTavish_Interchange/docs/mctavish_interchange.pdf

The proposed design seems to be an overly complex solution to a simple problem. What this design does is increase travel distances, increase travel times, increase gas used, and increase the number of intersect points (and opportunities for collisions) from the current traffic intersection. This is a big step backwards. For a project estimated to cost $24 million, the result should be an improvement, not a worsening from the present state.

Another problem with the design is that it appears that people coming from the airport, or from McTavish Road will no longer be able to head north on Pat Bay to Sidney and the ferries, as they can do now. If this is the case, it would be a major oversight.