|
|
Doncaster Pathway
This webpage is dedicated to ensuring there is the best solution implemented for upgrading the Doncaster walkway to the Doncaster pathway, in Victoria, B.C. Canada.
INTRODUCTION:
The Doncaster walkway, which connects Hillside and Myrtle, has been upgraded but significant issues remain.
DISCUSSION:
August 2016:
The new pathway has been constructed. A significant safety issue with north-bound cyclists remains. They end up guided along the west side of the path up to Hillside and then what?
At their decision point (at Hillside) it is very inviting to go straight across the west crosswalk, and especially at a green light (instead of two sharp turns for the east crosswalk), which then puts cyclists on the wrong side of the street.
Instead, we suggest that a new proposed north bound cycle path be constructed so that at the decision point (at Hillside) it only makes sense to go to the east crosswalk.
Other issues include:
- a pedestrian symbol instead of a cyclist symbol is used for the push button near the elephant's feet; this results in some pedestrians walking in the cycling crosswalk, or cyclists walking across: solution is to use a cycling symbol for the push button
- cycling and pedestrian sides are flipped: cyclists should be east, and pedestrians should be west
- the cyclist stencil is upside down on south end of pathway which causes some north bound cyclists to go onto the pedestrian walk: solution is to reverse stencil
- deep cracks in pedestrian path cause issues with dogs, strollers, wheelchairs; this is contrary to the info board or the decision at last meeting: solution should be to revert to smooth surface with stencils
- pedestrians prefer walking on cyclist path because of cracks, causing more conflicts
- there are no wayfinding indication for north bound cyclists to head to the east crosswalk, so instead they use the west crosswalk: short term solution could be to add arrows
- there is confusion abound when the north/south green lights turn on: what about a scramble traffic signal?
April 2016:
There was an onsite board explaining the proposed changes with a marker for comments.
This was in response to our suggestions at the April 4 meeting, but there was no onsite open house with people from the city to explain.
There was an April 4 meeting to discuss latest plans.
The updated proposal has one path, but with markings to delineate cyclists from pedestrians. Is that enough? Should the walking path go around the cement pad (to the east)?
Has there been enough consideration to deal with the pedestrians and cyclists at the intersection with Hillside?
Will the timing of the signal lights be appropriately adjusted?
Should more guidance (e.g. lines) be used for the cyclists through the intersection? Shouldn't north-bound cyclists be given a more direct path instead of the two sharp turns?
The path is used by cyclists throughout the city. What type of notice and input has been gathered for their input (shouldn't a sign be posted onsite)?
How has pedestrian input been gathered?
Will there be an onsite "open house" as discussed at the June 2015 meeting?
Has lighting and native plantings been considered?
Cycling north at night, the oncoming headlights from Doncaster are quite blinding as the Doncaster pathway is aligned with the south-bound Doncaster traffic lane (north of Hillside) - has screening been considered?
June 2015:
The City of Victoria in a letter to nearby residents plus an aerial picture proposes a single pathway to accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists.
We oppose the single multiuse pathway plan proposed by the City and suggest that instead there should be separate paths for cyclists and pedestrians; see the aerial graphic view and detailed diagram of our "Separate Paths" proposal.
At the June 22 OCA Land Use meeting, the City rep stated that "we don't have a design" in regards to the Doncaster walkway upgrade project - so now is the time to provide your input. We were told that an onsite meeting is planned in 4 to 6 weeks.
We distributed the following summary of our proposal to those in attendance, including the City.
Here is another idea - a north bound cycle path.
Why do we suggest separate paths?
- improved safety for both pedestrians and cyclists,
- the intersection of Hillside and Doncaster is very complex from both a pedestrian's and cyclist's point of view (needs separated paths to simplify),
- both paths can easily be accommodated in the space available,
- with separated pedestrian and cyclist paths feeding on both sides it is confusing to have one small section, Doncaster, where they are shared,
- encourages both walking and cycling in the neighbourhood,
- greater efficiency for both pedestrians and cyclists,
- different materials or patterns could be used for each path, (for example, the walking pathway could be a permeable material or stamped to discourage bikes, while the cycling pathway could be paved),
- the pathway is already heavily used for pedestrians of all types: going to Hillside Mall, getting the bus, going to school,
- it is also an important feeder for cyclists including those as far away as Oak Bay, UVIC wanting to cross Hillside and avoid Shelbourne,
- it is even more busy at rush hours which further increases the pedestrian/cycle conflicts,
- with pathway improvements, the pathway(s) are bound to get yet even busier for pedestrians and cyclists,
- Oaklands has a strong and active walking and cycling community (and we want to further encourage both),
- the City of Victoria is embarking on major cycling upgrades throughout the city; this connector should have the same focus and attention, and can be a showcase for the future.
Why involve only local residents?
We notice that:
Why wasn't a wider group invited to OCA Land Use meeting, when people from all over the area use the Doncaster pathway and it is to be part of the Victoria wide "All Ages and Abilities" cycling network? At the June 22 OCA Land Use meeting we were told that a wider audience will be invited to next meeting (onsite in 4 to 6 weeks).
COMMENTS:
June 17, 2015, by Peter Bell:
Historically the walkway has been mainly a pedestrian walkway for 30 years.
Hillside Mall is the largest retail center in Victoria. Over the last 5 years there have been massive changes
resulting in a substantial increase in retail space. Part of Hillsides pitch was that there would be an ever increasing
flow of both pedestrians & cyclists using their services. This pitch was successful as the city allowed them a variance on parking
spots required.
This resulted in a great tax boon to the city.
Now it is the cities responsibility to provide the infrastructure to get the pedestrians & cyclists there safely.
Safe assumptions -
- Doncaster is the busiest pedestrian & cyclist crossing to the largest retail center in Victoria.
- People are leaving their cars at home & as cycling continues to explode traffic will only increase to Hillside.
- It is a major bus transit link which results in heavy pedestrian traffic
- Shelbourne & Hillside is rated as the most dangerous traffic intersection in Victoria
- Doncaster has become a major transit cycling route to avoid Shelbourne
- Cities shared path straight line approach seems to be justified to them as it is the cheapest & they are looking for zero maintenance.
This is inconsistent with the revenue increase they received from Hillsides property tax.
Let's face it, the cost to develop separate paths is the equivalent of about three feet of new roadway.
If you would like to us to post your comments regarding the Doncaster pathway, please send them to doncastercomments@blockcommunities.com.
|
|