Facts must drive improvements to Shelbourne

The principal challenge of the Shelbourne Plan is safe shared use of this street by all mobility types

Re: Option 3 of the Shelbourne Valley Action Plan. Shelbourne belongs to all of us. Many travel up and down (or across) this street every day.

The Shelbourne Plan has entered the resolution phase. The next opportunity for input, following this month’s open houses, will be the public hearing.

The principal challenge of the Shelbourne Plan is safe shared use of this street by all mobility types: cyclists, pedestrians, transit and vehicles.  The issues are safety, capacity, speed and cost.

To improve Option 3, we must broaden our vision of what is possible, and know what can be successfully implemented, with a positive impact.

A fact-based (not opinion-based) decision begins with data on what is happening now. Then potential improvement in proposed changes in roadway design can be assessed. Is this being done in the Shelbourne Plan?

We need to know: What under-utilized vehicle space is there on Shelbourne during the day, and available for redistribution to other mobility types: cyclists, pedestrians and transit? The roadway design with least potential for crashes (fewest conflict points)? The merits (pros and cons)  of proposed improvement  for all mobility types?

The optimum roadway design will have the greatest incremental benefits (improvement) with least incremental costs.  What changes will improve roadway performance (without land expropriation or purchase)?

Let’s also compare proposed changes on Shelbourne with actual performance on similar collector and distributor streets – such as Royal Oak Drive through Broadmead, Esquimalt Road, and Old Island Highway through View Royal. Let’s not reinvent the wheel.

Ray Travers

 

Saanich