3 McKenzie Interchange Options: What Would You Pick?

APRIL 26, 2016 UPDATE: The new McKenzie interchange will be built as a partial cloverleaf reflecting the preferred option of 75% of those who participated in the public consultation, Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Todd Stone announced today.

3 Options McKenzie Interchange

Here they are: three concepts for the future McKenzie Interchange on the Trans-Canada Highway.

We’ve determined that all three concepts are technically doable and meet the project goals of reducing congestion, improving safety and increasing reliability.

What do you think is the best one?

We’ll be considering your feedback during the design process, along with technical reviews, financial information, and input from local governments and key stakeholders. Feel free to provide feedback in person at the open house, on the project website, or by sending to the project team: mckenzieinterchange@gov.bc.ca or 250.387.8700.

Open House Details:

When? 3 – 7 p.m. Tuesday Nov 17, 2015
Where? St. Joseph the Worker Parish Hall, 753 Burnside Road West

We hope to see you there!

*In case you can’t make it, or if you missed it – we are excited to share some of the material available at the public house today.

Below you will find two video simulations of current alignments and proposed designs, as well as additional information on transit integration, option considerations, traffic management plans etc. For all the details (and to provide your feedback), please visit: http://engage.gov.bc.ca/mckenzieinterchange/

This video shows a computer-generated simulation of the traffic patterns near the Trans-Canada Highway/McKenzie interchange in the afternoon peak period.


This video shows a computer-generated simulation of the traffic patterns near the Trans-Canada Highway/McKenzie interchange in the morning peak period.

McKenzie OptionsMckenzie Transit McKenzie Volumes McKenzie Traffic Mgmt McKenzie Technical

Page 1 of 19 comments on “3 McKenzie Interchange Options: What Would You Pick?”

Leave a Comment

  1. In my view, option three (cloverleaf) would facilitate much better traffic flow. The two diamond interchange options, while facilitating constant movement for through traffic to Tillicum and beyond, would result in long backups (similar to those experienced currently) for the 50% of vehicle traffic wishing to turn onto McKenzie.
    But that’s only half of the potential backup problem. This project also needs to address the Burnside-McKenzie intersection by installing either an overpass for McKenzie traffic or a traffic circle.

    Reply
  2. I live in the area and strongly prefer option 1, which reduces noise from the TCH and also preserves the current configuration of Cuthbert Holmes Park.

    However, with both options 1 and 2 I am concerned with initial details of what amenities are being provided on the overpass structure that goes over the TCH to link Admirals and McKenzie. Currently there are bike lanes on Admirals, and Saanich’s vision is to eventually have bike lanes on McKenzie as well. Please do not design an overpass with sharrows or shared lanes, as these would be a serious barrier to making this route safe for all ages and abilities cycling. Instead, if space is an issue, I recommend that you take the additional width allocated to the gutter lanes on the structure and re-allocate them along with the sidewalk allocation to create a multi-use path on one side of the structure. This is not as ideal as a solution on both sides but it at least provides a safe way for cyclists and pedestrians to cross the TCH without having to do a considerable detour to the new pedestrian overpass to the west.

    Reply
  3. I would choose option 2 or better yet a full cloverleaf. Please do not underbuild this.

    Also, please take into account all the traffic that is avoiding the highway with the side roads. An example of this is I take Blanshard to Ravine Way to Carey to Columbine Way to Interurban to Hastings to either Holland that comes out at Interurban or one further that come out by the backside of the hospital and go up by the Six Mile Pub. This is all to avoid Tillicum, McKenzie and Wilkinson. I live in the Costco/Home Depot Area.

    To get to work in the morning we turn onto the highway and go towards the Malahat then take the Leigh Road exit and come back to the highway and head towards Victoria. We do this to avoid the backup on Millstream to get onto the highway which is either at Home Depot or Treanor Road. Once we are on the Highway we sit and wait in traffic until we get past McKenzie. After that it is clear sailing to work.

    As you can see from my examples, you need to include the feeder routes and make sure we have a regional traffic plan instead of just trying to fix one part of the problem.

    Reply
    • Hi Amanda,

      Thanks for sharing your feedback. The materials from the public open house are now on the engagement website here: http://engage.gov.bc.ca/mckenzieinterchange/materials/

      In the materials you will see a hyperlink to the powerpoint presented at the meeting. In those notes, you will see feeder route traffic considerations. While they are not as far reaching as your scenario, these additional traffic volumes are being considered in the plan. Hope that this helps. Please let us know if you have any other comments or concerns.

      Reply
  4. As well as free-flow on highway 1 – there must be free-flow movement between Highway 1 southbound to McKenzie and McKenzie to Highway 1 northbound.
    Also there should be an overpass at McKenzie and Burnside to remove the light at that intersection.

    Reply
  5. As an avid cyclist I was interested in seeing how the galloping goose trail will be impacted by the new interchange. It appears from looking at the 3 concepts that the trail will cross over McKenzie via an elevated bridge.

    I like the concept because this separates cyclists from the motorists. I will no longer have the cross the highway exit or onramp to continue along the Goose.

    That’s for making it safer for us cyclists.

    Reply
  6. I believe Option 3 would work well, no need to take over more land than is needed and the off ramp from town to Mckenzie does not need to be built up so much. Option 3 would work a lot better if it incorporated a large roundabout connecting all four ramps which would remove any stop lights and improve traffic flow. As can be seen in the link below. Change the road names to suit the Mckenzie junction.

    https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.4914506,-0.5427766,17.76z

    Reply
    • Hi Brad,

      Thank you for your feedback. If you can make it – project staff will be on hand to answer any questions about the three options presented and any other concerns you might have today between 3 and 7 pm at St. Joseph the Worker Church – 753 Burnside Road West.

      If you can’t make the open house tonight, you can have your feedback included formally by visiting the project website here: Project staff will be on hand to answer any questions about the three options presented and any other concerns you might have today between 3 and 7 pm at St. Joseph the Worker Church – 753 Burnside Road West. Hope to see you there!

      http://engage.gov.bc.ca/mckenzieinterchange/
      http://engage.gov.bc.ca/mckenzieinterchange/

      Reply
  7. What would be wrong with a tried and true clover leaf? They seem to move traffic well. What is to be done with the traffic back-up at Burnside during afternoon rush hour? Will that light remain to keep the traffic backed-up?
    All three may be doable, but I don’t consider any one to be desirable.

    Reply