This press release came out today from the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce and I think it makes a fair amount of sense. An independent third party review is needed of the recommendation for an LRT because the data and recommendation do not mesh and the details of the data have not been released.
Going to a referendum on a project of this scale is only reasonable, it is not right that BC Transit and the Greater Victoria Transit Commission can impose such a heavy financial burden on the people of the region without getting an explicit mandate
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Chamber Calls for Peer Review and Referendum on Rapid Transit Proposal
Victoria, BC – June 29, 2011 – The rapid transit system proposed by BC Transit requires a third party review and the endorsement of the voters in order to go forward.
The Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce gave BC Transit’s proposal a business review and concluded that the complexity is such that a third party review by experts is essential. The review would include analysis of construction and operating costs, including a sensitivity analysis. The review should also include analysis of the economic impact of the proposed system, and determination of cost sharing.
“Billion dollar expenditures require tremendous levels of due diligence,” said David Marshall, Chair of the Board of the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce. “We need to clearly understand the business case for improved transit and the associated potential economic benefits.”
Following the outcome of the review, a region wide referendum must be conducted. As a discretionary project, the views of the public must be determined, particularly as the region’s level of required investment is not clear.
“The experience with the Johnson St. Bridge has impressed upon us all the need to consult with the paying public on large borrowing projects. This is a project of choice which will shape the region’s future and as such, must be supported by those who will be footing the bill.” said Marshall.
The Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce has over 1,500 members and is the hub for business communication and collaboration that facilitates the financial vitality of its members while respecting people, planet and profit. The Greater Victoria Chamber has received Accreditation with Distinction from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.
-30-
For more information or to arrange an interview contact:
Ellen Henry David Marshall
Manager of Member Chair
Communications
ehenry@gvcc.org chair@gvcc.org
Cell: 250-812-0510
#100-852 Fort St.
Victoria, BC V8W 1H8
Ph: 250-383-7191 ext 208
Fax: 250-385-3552
www.victoriachamber.ca
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
I miss the Snug at the Oak Bay Beach Hotel
I am hoping that once the project is done and the hotel is open again, there will be the same sort of ambiance as there was in the Snug in the past.
If you are interested how things are going, the Oak Bay Beach Hotel project has a youtube channel with monthly updates of where the project is at. I think it is a very interesting for them to make these videos available. Yeah, it is a sales job, but it is worth watching.
This is the latest video:
If you are interested how things are going, the Oak Bay Beach Hotel project has a youtube channel with monthly updates of where the project is at. I think it is a very interesting for them to make these videos available. Yeah, it is a sales job, but it is worth watching.
This is the latest video:
Friday, June 24, 2011
What is the limit for buses on the Douglas Street corridor?
The LRT is being proposed in large part because there is a claim that buses could not handle the volume, but is that really the case?
We have a nearby example of a bus route that can handle more than 50,000 passenger trips in a day - the 99 B Line in Vancouver. The bus runs along a route that is busier than any street or road in the CRD and manages to travel 13 km in 42 minutes in traffic and 30 minutes late at night when there is no traffic.
What we have is a clear example that buses can carry more than enough passengers and can do it reasonably quickly.
The B Lines have managed to bring bus rapid transit to the lower mainland without needing to build a lot of transit only lanes and without having to spend a fortune of money. The example would be easily replicated here in the CRD.
If our goal is to be able to move a significant number of people cheaply and efficiently via transit, creating our own B Line would be by far the best option. If our goal is to make travelling in private cars harder and impose a larger tax burden on home owners, then the LRT is the best option.
I have yet to see any data from any source at any time that shows the LRT makes any sense for this region. The report BC Transit released has assertions and errors in which mean no one could work from it to make a good decision. BC Transit needs to show their work and explain how they came up with their numbers and the data supports. I know they will not do this because the data does not exist.
If the report had worked from real data the only answer would have been to introduce B Line type buses in this region.
We have a nearby example of a bus route that can handle more than 50,000 passenger trips in a day - the 99 B Line in Vancouver. The bus runs along a route that is busier than any street or road in the CRD and manages to travel 13 km in 42 minutes in traffic and 30 minutes late at night when there is no traffic.
What we have is a clear example that buses can carry more than enough passengers and can do it reasonably quickly.
The B Lines have managed to bring bus rapid transit to the lower mainland without needing to build a lot of transit only lanes and without having to spend a fortune of money. The example would be easily replicated here in the CRD.
If our goal is to be able to move a significant number of people cheaply and efficiently via transit, creating our own B Line would be by far the best option. If our goal is to make travelling in private cars harder and impose a larger tax burden on home owners, then the LRT is the best option.
I have yet to see any data from any source at any time that shows the LRT makes any sense for this region. The report BC Transit released has assertions and errors in which mean no one could work from it to make a good decision. BC Transit needs to show their work and explain how they came up with their numbers and the data supports. I know they will not do this because the data does not exist.
If the report had worked from real data the only answer would have been to introduce B Line type buses in this region.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
3rd Douglas Scouts Bottle Drive Saturday June 25th
 |
| Ben and Ethan cooking over a fire |
Scouting is still alive and well and teaches youth leadership, citizenship, outdoor skills and personal development. They also tend to have a lot of fun doing things and going to places they would otherwise not get a chance to do or go to.
The PJ in BC happens every four years, so it means youth in the Scout section only have a chance to go to one PJ during their time in Scouts. This is the one chance Ben and Ethan have to go to the PJ. Part of their personal responsibility to raise at least some of the costs.
If you have any bottles, please drop them off at Scouthouse at 505 Marigold between 9 am and 1 pm on Saturday.
If you want them picked up from your place, call 250-744-0866.
You can also drop them off at the Bottle Depot at 4261 Glanford - you just need to tell them to credit the account of 3rd Douglas Scouts.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Sooke and Epcor
The Sooke sewer system is currently operated by Epcor (Edmonton Power Corporation), which they have been doing for some five plus years now and operating some extensions. Sooke is now looking at a 21 year deal with Epcor to operate the system.
There are some residents that are unhappy with the contract going to Epcor and they have been out collecting the signatures needed in the Alternate Approval Process to force it to referendum. It sounds like they will succeed. They are focusing a lot on the idea that the system should be run in house, I think that is a red herring and unrealistic for Sooke to do.
I personally have a problem with the lack of an open and competitive process. There is no way to know if someone else could have done it better and for less money if they are not allowed to bid on the project. Sooke commissioned a consultant to find out if the deal is a good one, and low and behold, it is! What the study does not address is the potential for someone to offer to do it for less. There is a large enough margin that someone might have come forward.
I heard the Mayor on the radio today say that they can not go to a competitive process because Epcor has provided them with information on costs and that would mean the process would not be fair. This has to be the most bizarre reason I have heard not to go to a competitive process. Sooke has no requirement to do anything to benefit Epcor, frankly they should be trying to squeeze every penny they can from the company.
The information on the costs of operating the system are not proprietary and should be available to anyone who wishes to bid on the project. Epcor has not given away anything that should not be available to everyone.
IF Epcor has the best bid for a 21 year contract to operate the system, great, but how can anyone know this if no was allowed to bid?
This is all part of the larger problem of a lot large contracts handled by local government not going through any sort of competitive process. Local governments are not willing to allow enough competition and are not willing to be hard nosed enough to make business sweat to make any money off of them.
There are some residents that are unhappy with the contract going to Epcor and they have been out collecting the signatures needed in the Alternate Approval Process to force it to referendum. It sounds like they will succeed. They are focusing a lot on the idea that the system should be run in house, I think that is a red herring and unrealistic for Sooke to do.
I personally have a problem with the lack of an open and competitive process. There is no way to know if someone else could have done it better and for less money if they are not allowed to bid on the project. Sooke commissioned a consultant to find out if the deal is a good one, and low and behold, it is! What the study does not address is the potential for someone to offer to do it for less. There is a large enough margin that someone might have come forward.
I heard the Mayor on the radio today say that they can not go to a competitive process because Epcor has provided them with information on costs and that would mean the process would not be fair. This has to be the most bizarre reason I have heard not to go to a competitive process. Sooke has no requirement to do anything to benefit Epcor, frankly they should be trying to squeeze every penny they can from the company.
The information on the costs of operating the system are not proprietary and should be available to anyone who wishes to bid on the project. Epcor has not given away anything that should not be available to everyone.
IF Epcor has the best bid for a 21 year contract to operate the system, great, but how can anyone know this if no was allowed to bid?
This is all part of the larger problem of a lot large contracts handled by local government not going through any sort of competitive process. Local governments are not willing to allow enough competition and are not willing to be hard nosed enough to make business sweat to make any money off of them.
A Channel Goes to Uptown and Everything is Great!
A Channel did a rather pro-Uptown day recently, here are two videos from that day.
Neither one of the videos really looks for any flaws with the project. My concerns remain the entrance on Oak street. Even once the next phase is done, there will still be problems with the access at Oak because it only has one lane in and one lane out. With the next phase open there will be more access points, but the vast majority of people will be accessing the site from Saanich and Oak Street.
I also do not like the lack of connection with the streets around the site, it is not an open and inviting site. The development is monolithic and turns it back on the community around it. It is unfriendly to people and not only does not add anything for people living near by, but it makes the neighbourhood colder and more sterile.
I personally spend less time at Uptown than I did at Town and Country. The WalMart has less selection now than before and the Fairway is missing. This means I have no day to day reason to go to Uptown.
Neither one of the videos really looks for any flaws with the project. My concerns remain the entrance on Oak street. Even once the next phase is done, there will still be problems with the access at Oak because it only has one lane in and one lane out. With the next phase open there will be more access points, but the vast majority of people will be accessing the site from Saanich and Oak Street.
I also do not like the lack of connection with the streets around the site, it is not an open and inviting site. The development is monolithic and turns it back on the community around it. It is unfriendly to people and not only does not add anything for people living near by, but it makes the neighbourhood colder and more sterile.
I personally spend less time at Uptown than I did at Town and Country. The WalMart has less selection now than before and the Fairway is missing. This means I have no day to day reason to go to Uptown.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Craigflower Bridge
So View Royal is finally done with their work on the Old Island Highway, now we are going to have the Craigflower bridge replaced.
It is nice to know that this bridge is of regional importance and therefore is being paid for mainly of CRD funds. The CRD has decided to cover most of the costs of this bridge, but offered more or less nothing of substance towards the Johnson Street bridge.
View Larger Map
Given the constraints of the location, I assume that the replacement will mean the closure of the existing bridge and then the construction of the new one. This means about 18,000 vehicle trips a day will have to find alternate routes to get to their destination. This just after we have had an extended period of traffic problems in the area.
All I can say is I am thankful my son Ben is finished at Shoreline and Stephen wants to go to Colquitz. I will not have to deal with the troubles at that intersection, though I expect the Tillicum bridge will be backed up most days.
It is nice to know that this bridge is of regional importance and therefore is being paid for mainly of CRD funds. The CRD has decided to cover most of the costs of this bridge, but offered more or less nothing of substance towards the Johnson Street bridge.
View Larger Map
Given the constraints of the location, I assume that the replacement will mean the closure of the existing bridge and then the construction of the new one. This means about 18,000 vehicle trips a day will have to find alternate routes to get to their destination. This just after we have had an extended period of traffic problems in the area.
All I can say is I am thankful my son Ben is finished at Shoreline and Stephen wants to go to Colquitz. I will not have to deal with the troubles at that intersection, though I expect the Tillicum bridge will be backed up most days.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Light Rail and the impact on Property Values
My desk is covered in all manner of US reports that have tried to quantify the impact rail transit has on property values. Any you know of out there, please send me a link. When I am done going through them, I will post a full set of links to reports.
There are no studies I can find of the impact on property values in metro regions with populations of less than 1,000,000. There are few impact studies I can find of the C-Train or the SkyTrain, both of which I would find very interesting as municipal governance environment in Canada is dramatically different than in the US.
Here is what I gleaning from them to date:
The biggest impact is a rise in prices in single family homes in the suburbs. There seems be a clear premium paid to own a house within walking distance of a rail transit station. There is no clear premium that seems to be directly link rail transit to condos in the urban cores.
The impact on commercial values are very, very mixed. Only the largest cities seem to show any significant rise in values. Many locations show no measurable benefit or one that is so small as to not be outside the margin of error of the work. There is also a problem in the US because many commercial areas along rail transit corridors have received preferential tax treatment. Factoring that out seems to be beyond most of the studies.
Interesting, there is some evidence that shows a good freeway has about the same benefit to residential home values as a light rail lines have.
One study I did find on the SkyTrain seems to indicate that houses along the SkyTrain line lost ground on houses not near the line between 1981 and 2001. Another interesting site I found on the SkyTrain was this UBC Geography class project analyzing the impact of the SkyTrain, they had mixed results looking at four stations.
I am also trying to find reports that look in detail of the impact of re-zoning on values and how that fits into any property value changes on a rail transit line.
Based on what I have read so far, I am currently not convinced there will be any property value increases along Douglas Street that could be attributed to the LRT. If I have the time to do it properly, I am going to try and compare some neighbourhoods in Metro Vancouver along the Expo line and some that are not. Specifically I am thinking Burnaby along the line and Coquitlam. That is if I have time.
There are no studies I can find of the impact on property values in metro regions with populations of less than 1,000,000. There are few impact studies I can find of the C-Train or the SkyTrain, both of which I would find very interesting as municipal governance environment in Canada is dramatically different than in the US.
Here is what I gleaning from them to date:
The biggest impact is a rise in prices in single family homes in the suburbs. There seems be a clear premium paid to own a house within walking distance of a rail transit station. There is no clear premium that seems to be directly link rail transit to condos in the urban cores.
The impact on commercial values are very, very mixed. Only the largest cities seem to show any significant rise in values. Many locations show no measurable benefit or one that is so small as to not be outside the margin of error of the work. There is also a problem in the US because many commercial areas along rail transit corridors have received preferential tax treatment. Factoring that out seems to be beyond most of the studies.
Interesting, there is some evidence that shows a good freeway has about the same benefit to residential home values as a light rail lines have.
One study I did find on the SkyTrain seems to indicate that houses along the SkyTrain line lost ground on houses not near the line between 1981 and 2001. Another interesting site I found on the SkyTrain was this UBC Geography class project analyzing the impact of the SkyTrain, they had mixed results looking at four stations.
I am also trying to find reports that look in detail of the impact of re-zoning on values and how that fits into any property value changes on a rail transit line.
Based on what I have read so far, I am currently not convinced there will be any property value increases along Douglas Street that could be attributed to the LRT. If I have the time to do it properly, I am going to try and compare some neighbourhoods in Metro Vancouver along the Expo line and some that are not. Specifically I am thinking Burnaby along the line and Coquitlam. That is if I have time.
Sidney Island
 |
| From http://sidneyisland.ca |
I have only been there once before, a few years back for a day hike with the Scouts. Not really enough time to explore all of the island. One of the most impressive parts of the Island is the
The northern third of the island is now park of the Gulf Islands National Park and has a number of campsites close to the dock where the ferry comes in from Sidney.
The sandspit is bit over two kilometers long and rarely more than 50 meters wide - parts of it is under water during high tide.
You can get there by catching the ferry from the dock in Sidney.
It is once more an area of natural beauty in this region that people seem to be utterly unaware of.
I will post some pics after the weekend.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Dean Murdock Fundraiser
Saanich Councilor Dean Murdock is out to the gate with a July 13th fundraiser for his re-election campaign.
Here are the details:
I can not go because I am not in town. That said, I am unlikely to go because I still think Dean is really angling to be an MLA and it concerns me that he supports the LRT idea even though the recommendation report that came out is fundamental flawed and written by a company with a conflict of interest.
My main reason in posting this is to make all of you out there that are thinking about running for council that you need to get your act gear now. I know some other sitting councilors and mayors around this region have been holding small discrete fundraisers already.
If you are not an incumbent and you are running in Saanich or Victoria, you need to raise $30,000 to have any realistic chance of winning a council seat. Incumbents need a lot less money to be able to be win re-election.
Here are the details:
I'm pleased to invite you to a summer fundraiser for my fall municipal election campaign!
Let's celebrate the summer! Come and enjoy a summer evening of drinks, appetizers, prizes, and great conversation.
Wednesday, July 13
6 - 8pm
University Club
University of Victoria
Tickets - $50 or $30 for students
For tickets or information - 250.508.4137, deanmurdock2011@gmail.com
I can not go because I am not in town. That said, I am unlikely to go because I still think Dean is really angling to be an MLA and it concerns me that he supports the LRT idea even though the recommendation report that came out is fundamental flawed and written by a company with a conflict of interest.
My main reason in posting this is to make all of you out there that are thinking about running for council that you need to get your act gear now. I know some other sitting councilors and mayors around this region have been holding small discrete fundraisers already.
If you are not an incumbent and you are running in Saanich or Victoria, you need to raise $30,000 to have any realistic chance of winning a council seat. Incumbents need a lot less money to be able to be win re-election.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
There will be at least one very interesting race this fall....
Former one term NDP MLA David Cubberly will be challenging incumbent Saanich mayor Frank Leonard for the job.
Frank Leonard has been mayor of Saanich since he was elected in the fall of 1996. In 2008 he had an easy campaign against Harald Wolf and in 2005 no one ran against him. I need to do some research on what happened in the 2002, 1999 and 1996. Oddly enough, the results are not available online anywhere that I can find. Before that he sat on council since 1986.
David Cubberley has a strong name recognition from his time on council from 1990 to 2002 and then his term as MLA from 2005 to 2009. If he is going to run for mayor, this is the election in which he has to do it otherwise he will have faded too much from the public memory.
With a race that is Cubberley v Leonard, the Saanich election will be very much one of NDP versus the Free Enterprise Coalition. At the moment the council is sort of split five on the Leonard side and four on the NDP side. Though keeping in mind that two of the councilors are bit more independent and not completely from one side or the other, those being Vic Derman and Paul Gerrard.
The NDP has a strong enough network to have a chance to get David Cubberley elected as mayor, though I would put the odds in Frank Leonard's court at the moment. The question becomes one of what happens in the race for council?
With a strong left/right race for the mayor's seat, turn out will be up and people will be looking for who to vote for to sit on the council. Which ever side has a slate together with their mayoralty candidate will have a very distinct advantage in the council races if they run a full slate. Supporters of David Cubberley will be looking to vote for 'his team' and the slate name on the ballot will be a huge benefit towards that.
What will happen if there are no slates is that about 30-40% of the people voting in the municipal election will be there to vote for their choice for mayor. They will also be voting for council candidates but really have no idea who they support. They will vote for the names on the ballot they recognize.
If there are slates, or especially if there is only one, the public will have a guide on the ballot on whom they might want to support and will have a significant impact on the council election. With only one slate, there are sitting incumbents that will be defeated. With no slates, all the incumbents running for re-election will win again.
It will be interesting to see what happens in this race.
Frank Leonard has been mayor of Saanich since he was elected in the fall of 1996. In 2008 he had an easy campaign against Harald Wolf and in 2005 no one ran against him. I need to do some research on what happened in the 2002, 1999 and 1996. Oddly enough, the results are not available online anywhere that I can find. Before that he sat on council since 1986.
David Cubberley has a strong name recognition from his time on council from 1990 to 2002 and then his term as MLA from 2005 to 2009. If he is going to run for mayor, this is the election in which he has to do it otherwise he will have faded too much from the public memory.
With a race that is Cubberley v Leonard, the Saanich election will be very much one of NDP versus the Free Enterprise Coalition. At the moment the council is sort of split five on the Leonard side and four on the NDP side. Though keeping in mind that two of the councilors are bit more independent and not completely from one side or the other, those being Vic Derman and Paul Gerrard.
The NDP has a strong enough network to have a chance to get David Cubberley elected as mayor, though I would put the odds in Frank Leonard's court at the moment. The question becomes one of what happens in the race for council?
With a strong left/right race for the mayor's seat, turn out will be up and people will be looking for who to vote for to sit on the council. Which ever side has a slate together with their mayoralty candidate will have a very distinct advantage in the council races if they run a full slate. Supporters of David Cubberley will be looking to vote for 'his team' and the slate name on the ballot will be a huge benefit towards that.
What will happen if there are no slates is that about 30-40% of the people voting in the municipal election will be there to vote for their choice for mayor. They will also be voting for council candidates but really have no idea who they support. They will vote for the names on the ballot they recognize.
If there are slates, or especially if there is only one, the public will have a guide on the ballot on whom they might want to support and will have a significant impact on the council election. With only one slate, there are sitting incumbents that will be defeated. With no slates, all the incumbents running for re-election will win again.
It will be interesting to see what happens in this race.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Red Creek Fir
The blog Vancouver Island Big Trees reminded me that I have been wanting to go see the Red Creek Fir for some time now. The tree is the largest Douglas Fir that we know of in the world. It is not the tallest, largest is a measure of height and bulk of the tree.
Friday, June 10, 2011
That Chicken and Egg Thing
The more I look at the recommendation for the LRT for the CRD and the more I read the BC Transit Transit Future Victoria Region, and when I look at their planning for neighbourhoods like James Bay or UVic, the more I realize there is a fundamental flaw in how BC Transit is approaching all these plans. BC Transit is not developing their plans based on the planning of the municipalities, but is effectively trying to develop land use plans.
Local land use and transportation is a function of local government. They have to develop Official Community Plans and have detailed zoning maps for their city. Any planning for transit should be being done by the local governments and then implemented by BC Transit. I am not sure how BC Transit ended up doing any sort of planning at all?
If one looks to page 66 of Transit Future Plan Victoria Region, you get some interesting quotes:
I read through the above and it seems like BC Transit wants to control land development in this region, that it wants to control all transportation planning. BC Transit is way over reaching their mandate.
Decisions on transit service locations, modes and frequency are all the responsibility of elected local government representatives.
It is the 13 local governments and the CRD that decide the form and function of development in this region. It makes no sense to add a new layer to this from an agency that has no mandate or expertise in zoning, community planning, or general transportation.
The vision that they have for 25 years down the road for Transit has been written as if there is only one local government and that there is currently no OCP in place anywhere because the Transit Plan is the OCP.
Transit exists as a service to improve the quality of life for people in the city, it does not exist as an end in itself. If we could move everyone with no delays and no greenhouse gases without transit, we would do so. Transit is a solution to a problem and can only fail when it becomes the goal in itself.
Transit has to be responsive to the needs of communities and not be seeking to make communities conform to the needs of transit. Transit has to be primarily directed by the planning departments in our local governments and make potential recommendations for service based on the OCPs of the local governments. This one quote makes me seriously wonder how far out of touch with reality BC Transit has become:
• Ensure that local and major development proposals and projects are received and reviewed by BC Transit to ensure support of the Transit Future Plan
We first have to have the communities decide what they want their future to look like, then we can make plans for transit. Local councils and planners are the ones with mandate and skills needed to make transit plans.
Local land use and transportation is a function of local government. They have to develop Official Community Plans and have detailed zoning maps for their city. Any planning for transit should be being done by the local governments and then implemented by BC Transit. I am not sure how BC Transit ended up doing any sort of planning at all?
If one looks to page 66 of Transit Future Plan Victoria Region, you get some interesting quotes:
What We Need to SucceedBC Transit has begun to take steps to guide the Transit Future Plan from a vision to a reality. These efforts will only be successful if done in partnership with the Victoria Regional Transit Commission, the
CRD, the region’s 13 municipalities, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and the community. A continuous dialogue between these partners is required to ensure strong links between:
• Land use planning and transit planning
• Provincial and regional transportation planning and transit
• Transportation policy and funding availability
How will BC Transit use this plan?• As a tool to communicate the region’s vision for transit to partners, stakeholders, and the public
• To identify where and in what order key transit investments will occur
• To strategically move projects through the capital planning process
• To inform the three year service planning and budgeting process
• To work with partners on integrating transit plans and investments with other major infrastructure plans and projects
• To respond to planning and development proposals
What actions does BC Transit need from local and regional partners to succeed?• Integrate the Transit Future Plan into regional plans, Official Community Plans and transportation plans
• Integrate and consider the Transit Future Plan network when developing local corridor plans or any road infrastructure projects. For example, incorporating transit signal priority measures with an intersection upgrade project
• Integrate and consider the Transit Future Plan network when developing active transportation infrastructure plans and projects. For example, a pedestrian and cycling infrastructure project on a transit corridor could improve access to transit by providing or improving sidewalks
• Ensure that local and major development proposals and projects are received and reviewed by BC Transit to ensure support of the Transit Future Plan
• Implement Travel Demand Management strategies that encourage shifting automobile trips to transit such as, implementing High Occupancy Vehicle lanes, transit priority measures, marketing efforts, restructuring parking fares and reducing parking availability/requirements in areas well served by transit
• Support and encourage Transit Oriented Development
• Work with BC Transit to explore incentives to attract high density and mixed use development to areas well served by transit
• Work with BC Transit to pursue new funding options for transit service and infrastructure (e.g., developer cost contributions (DCCs), cash in lieu of parking, land acquisition through rezoning and subdivision etc.)
I read through the above and it seems like BC Transit wants to control land development in this region, that it wants to control all transportation planning. BC Transit is way over reaching their mandate.
Decisions on transit service locations, modes and frequency are all the responsibility of elected local government representatives.
It is the 13 local governments and the CRD that decide the form and function of development in this region. It makes no sense to add a new layer to this from an agency that has no mandate or expertise in zoning, community planning, or general transportation.
The vision that they have for 25 years down the road for Transit has been written as if there is only one local government and that there is currently no OCP in place anywhere because the Transit Plan is the OCP.
Transit exists as a service to improve the quality of life for people in the city, it does not exist as an end in itself. If we could move everyone with no delays and no greenhouse gases without transit, we would do so. Transit is a solution to a problem and can only fail when it becomes the goal in itself.
Transit has to be responsive to the needs of communities and not be seeking to make communities conform to the needs of transit. Transit has to be primarily directed by the planning departments in our local governments and make potential recommendations for service based on the OCPs of the local governments. This one quote makes me seriously wonder how far out of touch with reality BC Transit has become:
• Ensure that local and major development proposals and projects are received and reviewed by BC Transit to ensure support of the Transit Future Plan
We first have to have the communities decide what they want their future to look like, then we can make plans for transit. Local councils and planners are the ones with mandate and skills needed to make transit plans.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Chatterton Way
There are six small office buildings located on Chatterton Way just off of the top end of Quadra Street. They are only three stories tall but are home to many small offices for financial services or medical specialists.
View Larger Map
The big problem with this site is that is was not built with enough parking for the people that work there and the clients. Showing up there mid day often means you need to circle around for sometime to find a place to park.
The very location for the development has always seemed odd to me. The nature of these buildings is that they feel isolated and like you need to take a car to get there. The access to the location with transit, but really only from one route.
It is disconnected from anything around it. It is not that far from Broadmead or Royal Oak, but very clearly not connected in people's minds. The distance from the office buildings in Royal Oak on West Saanich Road to the offices on Chatterton Way is just over 100 metres as the crow flies, but the feel is as if they are in completely different neighbourhoods.
I am not sure what the thinking was that went into the construction of these buildings or what the long term plans are for the location, but at the moment it feels like a failure.
View Larger Map
The big problem with this site is that is was not built with enough parking for the people that work there and the clients. Showing up there mid day often means you need to circle around for sometime to find a place to park.
The very location for the development has always seemed odd to me. The nature of these buildings is that they feel isolated and like you need to take a car to get there. The access to the location with transit, but really only from one route.
It is disconnected from anything around it. It is not that far from Broadmead or Royal Oak, but very clearly not connected in people's minds. The distance from the office buildings in Royal Oak on West Saanich Road to the offices on Chatterton Way is just over 100 metres as the crow flies, but the feel is as if they are in completely different neighbourhoods.
I am not sure what the thinking was that went into the construction of these buildings or what the long term plans are for the location, but at the moment it feels like a failure.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
The Cosmopolitan - proposed new 5 story rental building turned down
The Cosmopolitan was a proposed five story building to go in the 600 block of Fort Street.
View Larger Map
The project would have replaced a number of small retail buildings with one building with high quality ground floor retail and four floors of apartments for rent. The building is the same height as the neighbouring building on Fort Street. It would have been much shorter than the Sovereign, which is going in on Broughton behind this location.
For some reason the City of Victoria's Planning and Land Use Committee gave the project a thumbs down. An issue of height and density apparently.
Seriously? This would be too dense for this part of Fort Street? I am stunned at that thought. As to height, it is not located in a spot that it would be seen from anywhere further afield. It is the same height at the neighbouring building and theEaton Bay Centre. How can it be too tall?
The developer was offering rental units, did they miss out how important that is for the city?
I really can not understand this decision on any level.
View Larger Map
The project would have replaced a number of small retail buildings with one building with high quality ground floor retail and four floors of apartments for rent. The building is the same height as the neighbouring building on Fort Street. It would have been much shorter than the Sovereign, which is going in on Broughton behind this location.
For some reason the City of Victoria's Planning and Land Use Committee gave the project a thumbs down. An issue of height and density apparently.
Seriously? This would be too dense for this part of Fort Street? I am stunned at that thought. As to height, it is not located in a spot that it would be seen from anywhere further afield. It is the same height at the neighbouring building and the
The developer was offering rental units, did they miss out how important that is for the city?
I really can not understand this decision on any level.
20 questions that are unanswered about the LRT proposal
Here is a basic list of 20 questions that are unanswered about the LRT:
- Why go to an LRT if there is almost no time savings between the LRT and the current bus schedule? The Victoria Regional Rapid Transit Project Report does not use currently scheduled times of the #50.
- Why choose the LRT option if the current capacity on buses is better? In the peak hour of 4 pm to 5 pm the current buses that run all the way along Douglas can carry more people than the LRT when it opens
- How were the numbers come up with for ridership of the LRT?
- How would the LRT construction be paid for? Even if 2/3s comes from senior governments, how would the last 1/3 be funded?
- How will access be managed to business on the east side of Douglas Street?
- What is the traffic consequence of the loss of lanes of traffic on Douglas Street in the Downtown Core?
- What is the traffic consequence in Victoria of not allowing any right hand turns off of Douglas going northbound? As an example, how does the #4 get onto Hillside from Douglas?
- How will the interface between the LRT and the Galloping Goose be dealt with in the areas where there is almost no space for both to exist?
- Why did BC Transit use a subsidiarity of SNC Lavalin, Pacific Laicon, to do the consulting work on the Rapid Transit Project?
- How can anyone trust that the recommendation of the LRT by Pacific Laicon was not done to give SNC Lavalin a new project to build?
- Why was the Victoria Regional Rapid Transit Project Report released with serious and obvious errors? Current capacity of buses and their trip times are two obvious errors.
- Why do all the errors seem to be in favour the LRT in the report written by Pacific Laicon?
- How will the added $10 million a year operating deficit from the LRT after savings from replaced bus routes are accounted for be funded?
- What bus routes will be replaced or shortened because of the LRT?
- What bus routes will need to be cut outside of the LRT corridor to ensure enough funding to operate the LRT?
- What is the impact of a 40 metre long LRT train on 78 metre long downtown blocks?
- What evidence is there that any property values would rise if there is no significant increase in traffic on the LRT when compared to buses currently?
- What happens to transit in James Bay if there is no longer a #30 or #31?
- What is the impact on workers that currently commute to jobs in and around the Legislature given that the LRT end of the line will add an extra 600 metre walk to their office?
- How many transit riders will be lost because people will have longer commutes because they now need to transfer?
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
Two cool local sources of produce
I try to grow my own food, but lift gets in the way and I often manage to produce less than I would want. When I need to supplement my production, there are two interesting small scale producers of vegetables in my neighbourhood.1) Donald Street Farms
2) Glanford Greenhouses
The family has been operating at this site, 3968 Glanford, for more than 50 years. The location is a short walk from McKenzie. Only a short distance from a major commuter route there is this little amazing farm.
It is amazing what they can grow on this small space - the property is just over an acre in size. You also have to remember that it sits in the middle of suburban housing. Most of the property is covered with their greenhouse.
They have amazing tomatoes. In the fall I normally get a hundred to two hundred roma tomatoes to make into sauce. They also offer scarlet runner beans, a vegetable that is rarely available in any store as they do not keep their amazing sweetness for more than a day once they are picked.
They also have cucumbers, basil, peppers, seedlings, flowers and more available. It is really worth going there and seeing what they have.If you do go, remember you have to bring cash as they do not have debit.
Friday, June 03, 2011
Operational costs of buses versus LRT
A conventional bus can carry 80 people and costs about $97 per hour to operate. The cost recovery from fares averages $1.37 per passenger on the Victoria system. These numbers are from the Greater Victoria Transit Commission. If a bus can pick up 71 unique passengers in an hour, it can pay for itself.
Meanwhile, an LRT can carry 230 passengers and will cost about $350 per hour to operate. This means at $1.37, the train has to 256 passengers in an hour to pay for itself.
Three buses can carry 240 people, fits in the same space as the LRT, and costs $291 an hour to operate. So the buses can carry 10 more people and costs $59 an hour less to operate.
What these numbers say to me is that the LRT will never be able to move as many people as cheaply as the existing buses can.
The LRT has only one possible area in which it can beat the buses, that is speed. But if the buses were given a dedicated right of way, they would be as fast or faster than the LRT.
All it would take to improve the speed of the buses would be to provide some bus lanes in a few locations.. 3 pm to 6 pm northbound from about Mayfair to Uptown would make a better time on Douglas during the one time frame where there is a problem. From Saanich Road through to Mackenzie a bus only lane would alleviate most of the problems.
Inbound in the mornings, a bus lane running from near Helmeken to Tillicum should deal with much of the trouble.
If these changes were made, any time advantage the LRT would have would not exist. The buses also have the flexibility of getting around obstructions to the route if there any. The cost of making these changes would not be much money at all, certainly not a billion dollars.
So the buses are cheaper to operate, can carry more people, and for a comparatively small capital investment, would be as fast the LRT.
Meanwhile, an LRT can carry 230 passengers and will cost about $350 per hour to operate. This means at $1.37, the train has to 256 passengers in an hour to pay for itself.
Three buses can carry 240 people, fits in the same space as the LRT, and costs $291 an hour to operate. So the buses can carry 10 more people and costs $59 an hour less to operate.
What these numbers say to me is that the LRT will never be able to move as many people as cheaply as the existing buses can.
The LRT has only one possible area in which it can beat the buses, that is speed. But if the buses were given a dedicated right of way, they would be as fast or faster than the LRT.
All it would take to improve the speed of the buses would be to provide some bus lanes in a few locations.. 3 pm to 6 pm northbound from about Mayfair to Uptown would make a better time on Douglas during the one time frame where there is a problem. From Saanich Road through to Mackenzie a bus only lane would alleviate most of the problems.
Inbound in the mornings, a bus lane running from near Helmeken to Tillicum should deal with much of the trouble.
If these changes were made, any time advantage the LRT would have would not exist. The buses also have the flexibility of getting around obstructions to the route if there any. The cost of making these changes would not be much money at all, certainly not a billion dollars.
So the buses are cheaper to operate, can carry more people, and for a comparatively small capital investment, would be as fast the LRT.
I am really wondering what will happen to all the bus service that currently goes past Douglas and Humbolt to either end outside the east side of the Legislature or provide the local bus service in James Bay. The LRT would seem to be designed to replace all the buses coming from the Westshore and the #30 and #31. But the LRT route calls for it to end at Douglas and Humbolt. The shorter LRT route gives the rail option on paper a three minute time advantage over the current bus service. This makes the LRT look better but it ignores the fact that there are people would expecting to be able to get to work on the south side of the inner harbour on transit. I am basing the terminal location on the one used in the report that evaluated the technology options for transit. In the report they timed the LRT to Douglas and Humbolt but compared this to buses going further.
I am annoyed that the report recommending the LRT option has so many obvious errors or deliberate attempts to mislead people by making the LRT look better than buses.
People will either have to walk an extra eight to nine minutes from the LRT to their work, or they will have to transfer for a short trip. This assumes there is a local regular bus option. Even though the money is not there in the budget, BC Transit will have to provide a transit connection from James Bay to Downtown. Waiting for that bus will take up time.
What will people do? Many will walk and be really pissed off in the rain. They will resign themselves to an extra 17 minutes commuting time per day which works out to an extra hour and half a week and to almost 64 hours in a year. A lot will quit using transit and will change to a car. There is available parking in James Bay for people wanting to commute that way.
Once again, I am basing this on what is currently proposed for the LRT. They might extend the LRT to the Legislature, but this would reduce the peak hour capacity of the LRT by about 300 people both ways, or 150 one way unless they buy more trains.
The Lady Washington from Gray's Harbor was at Ship Point for a couple of hours on Wednesday. I had a chance to take a couple of pictures without many people around. They were on their way to Sidney for the late afternoon. The ship, along with the Hawaiian Chieftain are both on their way to Steveston for the Ships to Shore event where they will be two of the five tall ships available for the public to board.
Thursday, June 02, 2011
LRT capacity - it is no better than what buses currently do but it will cost more operate
Looking at the number of trains proposed on the system at the start of proposed operations, which is 13, there is a major issue with capacity on the route - the LRT does not offer more capacity than we currently have on the buses.
Each train could do about 0.66 round trips per hour. The proposal is to start with 13 trains with a capacity of 230 passengers, this means a maximum capacity of 4000 people per hour. This would be a train every 3:28 minutes. That is a one way capacity of 2000 people per hour.
Buses can make about 0.6 trips per hour in peak hours from the Legislature to Langford and back meaning it would take 42 buses a hour to have the same capacity, as 13 LRT trains. So how are we doing at the moment?
Currently, during the busiest peak hour which is 4 pm to 5 pm, there are 35 out bound buses on 11 routes that would likely be replaced by the the LRT. This means the one way capacity of the busiest hour with the the buses BC Transit is operating now is 2800 people outbound. This is a bus every 1:43 minutes.
I am assuming a maximum capacity of 80 people per bus. The Alexander Enviro500 double decker buses operated here have a capacity of over 100 people. The eleven routes are: #30, #31, #32x, #50, #52, #57, #61, #70, #71 #72 and #75.
If we take out all the peninsula routes and only look at the buses that run the whole length of Douglas, there are 26 outbound buses between 4 pm and 5 pm with a capacity the same as what the LRT will be able to handle on day one. This is a bus every 2:19 minutes along Douglas.
The cost to operate the 13 LRT trains for one hour is $4550. The cost to operate the current buses on all 11 routes for that one peak hour is $3400. This means it costs $1150 more per hour to run the LRT which has a lower capacity. If we only look at the 26 buses that currently run the length of Douglas, the operational cost is $2500. That is $2000 less per hour than the LRT will cost.
Meanwhile, in the heart of downtown, during the busiest peak hour of 4 to 5 pm there are 81 buses that pass through the intersection of Douglas and Yates northbound. That is a bus every 44 seconds and an hourly capacity of 6500 people going through that intersection northbound. This is what we can do at the moment, this is not a plan or projection, this is what is actually being done at the moment
Each train could do about 0.66 round trips per hour. The proposal is to start with 13 trains with a capacity of 230 passengers, this means a maximum capacity of 4000 people per hour. This would be a train every 3:28 minutes. That is a one way capacity of 2000 people per hour.
Buses can make about 0.6 trips per hour in peak hours from the Legislature to Langford and back meaning it would take 42 buses a hour to have the same capacity, as 13 LRT trains. So how are we doing at the moment?
Currently, during the busiest peak hour which is 4 pm to 5 pm, there are 35 out bound buses on 11 routes that would likely be replaced by the the LRT. This means the one way capacity of the busiest hour with the the buses BC Transit is operating now is 2800 people outbound. This is a bus every 1:43 minutes.
I am assuming a maximum capacity of 80 people per bus. The Alexander Enviro500 double decker buses operated here have a capacity of over 100 people. The eleven routes are: #30, #31, #32x, #50, #52, #57, #61, #70, #71 #72 and #75.
If we take out all the peninsula routes and only look at the buses that run the whole length of Douglas, there are 26 outbound buses between 4 pm and 5 pm with a capacity the same as what the LRT will be able to handle on day one. This is a bus every 2:19 minutes along Douglas.
The cost to operate the 13 LRT trains for one hour is $4550. The cost to operate the current buses on all 11 routes for that one peak hour is $3400. This means it costs $1150 more per hour to run the LRT which has a lower capacity. If we only look at the 26 buses that currently run the length of Douglas, the operational cost is $2500. That is $2000 less per hour than the LRT will cost.
Meanwhile, in the heart of downtown, during the busiest peak hour of 4 to 5 pm there are 81 buses that pass through the intersection of Douglas and Yates northbound. That is a bus every 44 seconds and an hourly capacity of 6500 people going through that intersection northbound. This is what we can do at the moment, this is not a plan or projection, this is what is actually being done at the moment
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
The impact of the LRT on users of routes #30 and #31
Currently if you use the #30 or #31 to get downtown, the trip takes about 30 to 38 minutes to get from Royal Oak Exchange to Douglas at Fort. The morning commute being close to 31 minutes and the afternoon one being around 37 minutes.
With the LRT, the #30 and #31 will end at Uptown and people will have to transfer to the LRT. The time to get from the bus to the LRT and vice versa will take about 2 minutes. There will be waiting time to board the bus or the LRT. Using the five minute peak hour headway of the LRT and 8 minute headway of the buses and that on average you will wait for half of that time, going into town you will add 2.5 minutes to your trip and going home it will be 4 minutes.
I have looked through everything on offer and every thing indicates that the time for the LRT to get between downtown and Uptown will have roughly the same as buses currently take.
I personally think the LRT may end up taking longer because it is more than three times as long as current buses. They are 40 metres long and the blocks south of Bay are almost all only 77 metres long. You can not have two LRTs on the same block. The LRTs can not pass each other meaning a delay for any LRT will mean all of them are delayed. I will write a lot more on this later, but there are some huge logistical issues in the downtown core no one is thinking about with respect to the LRT.
With the LRT, the Royal Oak to Fort and Douglas trip will take about 35 to 36 minutes. Going northbound in the afternoon this will be 43 minutes. If the separate lanes work, there might be a 6 minute afternoon savings.
This is 38 extra minutes in travel time a week or over 28 hours in a year.
The people coming into town in the mornings on the #30 and #31 will be dealing with standing room only on the LRT as the LRT should in theory already be full when it arrives at Uptown. Not only is your reading of a book or paper interrupted with a transfer, going into town you are unlikely to be able to continue reading.
The extra 28 hours of travel time applies to anyone that currently uses the #30 or #31 for their daily commute, the transfer is the cause of all of it. As an example, for people that currently use the #30 or #31 to get from somewhere like Glanford and Vanalman to Mayfair mall, the current trip time of 15 to 17 minutes will change to 20 to 23 minutes.
For transit users from Royal Oak area, the LRT is going to have no benefits and only cause an increase in frustration.
With the LRT, the #30 and #31 will end at Uptown and people will have to transfer to the LRT. The time to get from the bus to the LRT and vice versa will take about 2 minutes. There will be waiting time to board the bus or the LRT. Using the five minute peak hour headway of the LRT and 8 minute headway of the buses and that on average you will wait for half of that time, going into town you will add 2.5 minutes to your trip and going home it will be 4 minutes.
I have looked through everything on offer and every thing indicates that the time for the LRT to get between downtown and Uptown will have roughly the same as buses currently take.
I personally think the LRT may end up taking longer because it is more than three times as long as current buses. They are 40 metres long and the blocks south of Bay are almost all only 77 metres long. You can not have two LRTs on the same block. The LRTs can not pass each other meaning a delay for any LRT will mean all of them are delayed. I will write a lot more on this later, but there are some huge logistical issues in the downtown core no one is thinking about with respect to the LRT.
With the LRT, the Royal Oak to Fort and Douglas trip will take about 35 to 36 minutes. Going northbound in the afternoon this will be 43 minutes. If the separate lanes work, there might be a 6 minute afternoon savings.
- Total travel time now there and back in peak hours: 68 minutes
- Total travel time with the LRT there and back in peak hours: 72 to 79 minutes
- Increase in travel time is 5.9% to 16.2%
This is 38 extra minutes in travel time a week or over 28 hours in a year.
The people coming into town in the mornings on the #30 and #31 will be dealing with standing room only on the LRT as the LRT should in theory already be full when it arrives at Uptown. Not only is your reading of a book or paper interrupted with a transfer, going into town you are unlikely to be able to continue reading.
The extra 28 hours of travel time applies to anyone that currently uses the #30 or #31 for their daily commute, the transfer is the cause of all of it. As an example, for people that currently use the #30 or #31 to get from somewhere like Glanford and Vanalman to Mayfair mall, the current trip time of 15 to 17 minutes will change to 20 to 23 minutes.
For transit users from Royal Oak area, the LRT is going to have no benefits and only cause an increase in frustration.
The Impact of the LRT on James Bay
The LRT to the Westshore will have a number 'interesting' impacts to neighbourhoods that are not expecting any changes. One of those neighbourhoods will be James Bay.
At the moment the #30 and #31 both offer service to James Bay. This is an important local service to many of the older people living in James Bay. Should the LRT be built, the plans are to end the #30/31 at Uptown which means they will be no longer service James Bay.
Currently the #31 offers 41 trips into James Bay that end at Erie at Dallas and the #30 offers 38 trips to the Beacon Hill side of James Bay and 8 evening trips to Erie at Dallas.
The #27 offers 10 evening trips to the Beacon Hill side of James and the #28 offers 8 trips in the evening to Beacon Hill.
After the LRT, only the #3 will offer any regular service to James Bay and then 38 trips only to the eastern side.
Currently there are 147 bus trips into James Bay, once the LRT is in place this will drop to 60 trips. James Bay will lose 60% of its regular bus service. 147 is 296 round trips by buses. At the moment there is an average of 4 trips to each terminus per hour and 4 departures each hour as well, 16 total trips per hour. With the change this will drop to 6.7 trips per hour.
Could BC Transit offer a new James Bay bus route? Highly unlikely as the operating expense of the LRT will mean that there will be no scope for any new services and likely a reduction of existing services beyond what can in theory be replaced by the LRT. I am assuming BC transit seeks a 16% property tax increase and a $0.50 fare increase to fund LRT operations and not have dramatically reduce bus service throughout the region. If there is no fare increase or property tax increase, there would have to be the loss of 15% of the current bus service hours beyond what is replaced with the LRT.
At best one could re-route the #3 during the day and the #27 and #28 in the evening so that the routes split to go to Erie at Dallas as well as Toronto at Huntingdon.
Another impact will be the downtown terminal of the LRT. It is slated to be on Humbolt, about 600 metres away from where the #50, #60, #70, #72, #73, and #75 all currently end their run, which is on Government on the east side of the Legislature. As discussed above, the #30 and #31 will be replaced by an LRT ending far short of their current terminus.
There are a significant number of government workers located in and around the Legislature. With an LRT they will have to add an extra 600 metre walk to each end of their daily commute. Normally 500 metres is seen as the furtherest an average person will walk from transit to a destination. It is not only these government workers, but all the staff at all those major hotels just to the west of the Legislature. There are also people that work at Ogden Point that need the #30 to get there.
The terminus of the LRT will act as a disincentive to transit for many people currently taking it. Odds are not only will transit use not grow, it will shrink in this neighbourhood. I am often down there and I know there is space left for people to park in the lot just to the west of the Legislature.
For residents of James Bay and people that work on the south side of the inner Harbour or at Ogden Point, the LRT will be a significant down grade of transit service.
At the moment the #30 and #31 both offer service to James Bay. This is an important local service to many of the older people living in James Bay. Should the LRT be built, the plans are to end the #30/31 at Uptown which means they will be no longer service James Bay.
Currently the #31 offers 41 trips into James Bay that end at Erie at Dallas and the #30 offers 38 trips to the Beacon Hill side of James Bay and 8 evening trips to Erie at Dallas.
The #27 offers 10 evening trips to the Beacon Hill side of James and the #28 offers 8 trips in the evening to Beacon Hill.
After the LRT, only the #3 will offer any regular service to James Bay and then 38 trips only to the eastern side.
Currently there are 147 bus trips into James Bay, once the LRT is in place this will drop to 60 trips. James Bay will lose 60% of its regular bus service. 147 is 296 round trips by buses. At the moment there is an average of 4 trips to each terminus per hour and 4 departures each hour as well, 16 total trips per hour. With the change this will drop to 6.7 trips per hour.
Could BC Transit offer a new James Bay bus route? Highly unlikely as the operating expense of the LRT will mean that there will be no scope for any new services and likely a reduction of existing services beyond what can in theory be replaced by the LRT. I am assuming BC transit seeks a 16% property tax increase and a $0.50 fare increase to fund LRT operations and not have dramatically reduce bus service throughout the region. If there is no fare increase or property tax increase, there would have to be the loss of 15% of the current bus service hours beyond what is replaced with the LRT.
At best one could re-route the #3 during the day and the #27 and #28 in the evening so that the routes split to go to Erie at Dallas as well as Toronto at Huntingdon.
Another impact will be the downtown terminal of the LRT. It is slated to be on Humbolt, about 600 metres away from where the #50, #60, #70, #72, #73, and #75 all currently end their run, which is on Government on the east side of the Legislature. As discussed above, the #30 and #31 will be replaced by an LRT ending far short of their current terminus.
There are a significant number of government workers located in and around the Legislature. With an LRT they will have to add an extra 600 metre walk to each end of their daily commute. Normally 500 metres is seen as the furtherest an average person will walk from transit to a destination. It is not only these government workers, but all the staff at all those major hotels just to the west of the Legislature. There are also people that work at Ogden Point that need the #30 to get there.
The terminus of the LRT will act as a disincentive to transit for many people currently taking it. Odds are not only will transit use not grow, it will shrink in this neighbourhood. I am often down there and I know there is space left for people to park in the lot just to the west of the Legislature.
For residents of James Bay and people that work on the south side of the inner Harbour or at Ogden Point, the LRT will be a significant down grade of transit service.
The Park and Ride at the McTavish Interchange
Apparently BC Transit is spending $5 million on a park and ride at the Mctavish Interchange. Apparently the Greater Victoria Transit Commission knows nothing of this project. In my reading of their minutes and looking at the budgets, I missed this, but then it is only 5% of their 2010/11 budget.
I have no problem with the idea of a Park and Ride, but I do wonder what they are spending that much money on. The number seems very high given the overall cost to build the interchange. So where does the cost come in?
I really have no idea where the expense comes in given that they already had a park and ride at that location and I would assume it was the responsibility of the province to replace it because they built over top of it.
So I ask again, what are they spending the money on? They cut some bus service this year and raised property taxes this year to pay for this, I would like to know what it cost and what we are getting.
I have no problem with the idea of a Park and Ride, but I do wonder what they are spending that much money on. The number seems very high given the overall cost to build the interchange. So where does the cost come in?
- Is it the land?
- Is it the paving?
- Are they chipping in for the interchange?
I really have no idea where the expense comes in given that they already had a park and ride at that location and I would assume it was the responsibility of the province to replace it because they built over top of it.
So I ask again, what are they spending the money on? They cut some bus service this year and raised property taxes this year to pay for this, I would like to know what it cost and what we are getting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)