![]() ![]() | ![]() |
| | |
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
| | Thread Link Options | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#326
| ||||
| ||||
|
Maybe they should turn it into a wildlife bridge.
|
|
#327
| ||||
| ||||
|
Everyone will be thrilled to hear the five-year moratorium on new development north of the TransCanada Highway and the unfinished Spencer Interchange is history. On Monday, December 20, city council scrapped policies intended to halt new residential construction until the interchange was finished. Increasing traffic congestion on Millstream Road was the reason for imposing the moratorium in 2005. Read "Transportation planning the Langford way!" |
|
#328
| ||||
| ||||
|
I guess the benefit is that new developers could help fund the overpass. It has to get done before I have to start driving through Langford again next summer.
|
|
#329
| ||||
| ||||
|
If I was one of those new developers, I'd be upset at having to pay thousands of dollars per unit on another developer's debt. There are bylaws on the books that spell out Bear Mountain and South Skirt Mountain's payment obligations for the interchange. Both of them have their zoning in place, so these new charges won't apply to them. What a deal, eh? At the same time, Stew still seems to think federal and provincial grants will help bail out this "developer-funded" project. I have doubts. |
|
#330
| |||
| |||
|
Well I give credit to Langford for the change in model. Demanding the money up front will at least sort the wheat from the chaff and precent problems that we have in other munis with the amenities never being completed or funds paid. What I object to though is the ponzi scheme nature of all of this. New developers pay for the costs of the old ones and ongoing maintenance on existing infrastructure. We need a continually and growing supply of new development though to keep all of the balls in the air. |
|
#331
| ||||
| ||||
|
Must be spring! Time for an update on the Spencer Road Interchange. Summary: still no commitment from the developers to pay what they agreed; check back in a few months. From the Goldstream Gazoo: Quote:
|
|
#332
| |||
| |||
|
Election year.
|
|
#333
| ||||
| ||||
|
Oh right. How about that Lillian Szpak, eh? If she wins Keith Martin's seat, she can bring the pork back home to Langford.
|
|
#334
| ||||
| ||||
| She has more or less no chance of winning, she will be lucky to finish third
|
|
#335
| ||||
| ||||
| DeSouza has this one, hands down.
__________________ TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney |
|
#336
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#337
| ||||
| ||||
|
Does anyone care to guess (or knows) how much has already been sunk into the Langford interchange? Re politics, DeSouza's plan is to push for the Admirals interchange project. But for anyone to get behind the Langford interchange, that would be politically foolish. It's not a regional project and even Langford residents don't seem to care whether it's completed now or later, or at all.
__________________ Skyscraper Source Media Inc.
|
|
#338
| ||||
| ||||
|
I see this as a regional project as the elimination of the Spencer Road light was a key part of the plan. Who cares about the connection to Bear Mountain. Just get rid of that light.
__________________ Density Fanboy |
|
#339
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#340
| ||||
| ||||
|
I am frustrated with the lack of progress.
__________________ Density Fanboy |
|
#341
| ||||
| ||||
|
Thanks, Zoe. G-man, with regards to: I'd be in agreement if Langford hadn't installed a traffic light immediately to the north at Langford Parkway. That intersection negates any benefit of having an interchange at Spencer Rd.
__________________ Skyscraper Source Media Inc.
|
|
#342
| ||||
| ||||
|
I am not sure I mean a large volume of traffic will have been removed by the time you get to the next light and currently you have a traffic light and the highway going from two lanes to one in the same spot. Surely only doing one of these things will speed things up.
__________________ Density Fanboy |
|
#343
| ||||
| ||||
|
In my experiences it would seem that the majority of traffic heading towards Spencer Road continues onto the Malahat (at least that's what it seems like). The new intersection, together with Spencer still being light controlled, won't add to the fun. I'm talking purely about my trips out of the CRD and not as a commuter living in Langford. Maybe for some commuters having an interchange in lieu of a light will help but for the rest of us who want to get out of town it makes no difference and will likely be more pronounced once Langford Parkway is connected with Jacklin and subdivisions are built out.
__________________ Skyscraper Source Media Inc.
|
|
#344
| ||||
| ||||
|
^ Me too. If I am there it means I am heading up Island.
__________________ Density Fanboy |
|
#345
| ||||
| ||||
|
The people who pushed through the interchange and the loan have come up with all kinds of different rationales, depending on who they're talking to. It's a regional benefit for the entire south Island; It's a local area service just for the landowners on Skirt Mountain (and therefore exempt from referendum); It will reduce congestion on Millstream; It's vital infrastructure; It's required for emergency access to Bear Mountain; And finally, it's not really needed right now. (Obviously, not all these claims are true.) Now that the North Langford development policy has been repealed, we can be reasonably certain that more subdivisions and density will be happening in that area without the benefit of more infrastructure. Langford's development policy now is: go ahead and build, we'll sort out the transportation issues later. They're definitely thinking outside the box! |
|
#346
| ||||
| ||||
| Bridge to nowhere to get connected Overpass project in Langford ramps up for highway link to ease congestion By Carla Wilson, Times Colonist August 4, 2011 It looks like Langford’s lonely Bridge to Nowhere will soon be going somewhere. Motorists will be able to drive north along Leigh Road, travel across the now-unused overpass and turn left onto a ramp linked to the Trans-Canada Highway to head up Island......... http://www.timescolonist.com/Bridge+...024/story.html Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/Bridge+...#ixzz1UIx4FFPv |
|
#347
| ||||
| ||||
|
Work is moving ahead at the interchange. It looks like paving should start soon along the acceleration lane connecting the overpass with HWY1 northbound.
__________________ Skyscraper Source Media Inc.
|
|
#348
| |||
| |||
|
Drove past Leigh Rd the other day and they have lamp standards in along part of the road from Goldstream towards the over pass.
|
|
#349
| |||
| |||
|
Looks like, according to todays' transit commision meeting, more than just the northbound on-ramp will be completed this year. B.C. Transit is planning on adjusting routes 56, 57, 57X, and 58 to use the Leigh Road overpass, as the Spencer Road traffic light will be removed. They are planning for this to happen sometime this fiscal year. If this is true, then that means the frontage road from Leigh east to Spencer and Brock (north side of highway) must also be completed, for the 56, 57, and 57X to operate without detours. Also, does anyone know if the Spencer Road Shell will close when the Westshore Pkwy Shell opens? |
|
#350
| ||||
| ||||
|
Here's what the interchange currently looks like.
__________________ Skyscraper Source Media Inc.
|
| You're not quite at the end of this discussion thread! Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page and read additional posts. |
| | |
![]() |
| « Previous Thread
|
Next Thread » | ||||||
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |