Page 2 of 3

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Oct 25th, 2017, 6:16 am
by Chyren
Fully support the project and they need to make the stickle road intersection with 97 a no exit from Stickle onto the highway. Problem solved.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Oct 26th, 2017, 2:11 pm
by Alice in Vernon
My last comment on "Eric Foster Way". "They paved paradise to put up a parking lot". SAD

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 21st, 2018, 5:59 am
by dontrump
Alice in Vernon wrote:My last comment on "Eric Foster Way". "They paved paradise to put up a parking lot". SAD


what surprize LOL

More money
The Stickle Road extension is going to cost 50 per cent more than originally thought. :cuss:

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 21st, 2018, 8:12 am
by Ingevan22
They're hardly paving "paradise" - this was always a road right-of-way in Vernon's books.

Had we gone with "NO LEFT TURN", perhaps those millions could have been spent on hookup to city sewer.

But folks would rather complain about something they can see, the loss of a marginal wetland (even if it will be replaced by 3X as much wetland), while continuing to ignore what they apparently can't see, all that human filth that continues to be directed into the cesspool we call Swan Lake.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 21st, 2018, 11:52 am
by venables
Everyone at MOTI and politicians that supported this project (now over budget) should be fired.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 21st, 2018, 12:07 pm
by GordonH
I've never used to left turn lane off Stickle onto Hwy heading south.
I go to PVR & turn right at Butcher Boys, simple & no new road needed.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 21st, 2018, 6:27 pm
by dontrump
venables wrote:Everyone at MOTI and politicians that supported this project (now over budget) should be fired.


I said that before and totally agree very bad bad decision to do this whole deal

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 21st, 2018, 7:09 pm
by GordonH
venables wrote:Everyone at MOTI and politicians that supported this project (now over budget) should be fired.

dontrump wrote:I said that before and totally agree very bad bad decision to do this whole deal


The worst idea would be to have install a traffic light.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 22nd, 2018, 5:12 am
by Chyren
Anyone forget that they're working with Ducks Unlimited on improving wetlands in the area and have been involved with the environmental assessments of the project? Oh wait, that doesn't line up with agendas on this so I guess that got overlooked...

Its about safety. Look how many lives have been lost in the area and will continue to be lost. If you divert everything to PV Road, which is a very small, very well traveled roadway, then problems will be caused and they will have to rebuild the road there.

This is a far safer way to fix the problems and increase safe access to that part of Vernon.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 22nd, 2018, 7:08 am
by Gixxer
Now build a roundabout at the entrance to tim hortons/McDonalds, 58 ave and 24 street

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 22nd, 2018, 7:21 am
by skiddur
Why dont they just cancel what they have planned and build a giant traffic circle? It seems to be all the rage in the Okanagan.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 22nd, 2018, 8:24 pm
by dontrump
dontrump wrote:I said that before and totally agree very bad bad decision to do this whole deal


The worst idea would be to have install a traffic light.[/quote]

yes agreed a traffic light would have fixed the intersection and cost under 3 million and have been completded 3 years ago
so agree totally it would have been the worst idea for sure glad you think clearly there sir

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 26th, 2018, 11:58 am
by JohnMcLean
yes agreed a traffic light would have fixed the intersection and cost under 3 million and have been completded 3 years ago
so agree totally it would have been the worst idea for sure glad you think clearly there sir[/quote]

Initial could would be lower, but also not as safe and impeding the 20,000 vehicles a day to accommodate a vehicle every few minutes.

When it isn't as safe the cost really isn't lower when you factor in all the future accidents at that intersection. During peak summer traffic those lights will start backing up highway traffic towards a very busy 27th street onramp to Hwy 97 that has about 10,000 vehicles a day. Now what happens to the lousy drivers that are trying to merge onto 97 from 27th and are looking behind and beside them when they run into stopped traffic waiting at Stickle Road for that one vehicle that triggered it? That's just the increase in rear-end accidents, factor in a few T-Bone accidents from people running through on the red. That 3 million set of lights which probably would've come in over that would balloon up far higher due to future accidents.

While I like the idea of just making people take PV road and foregoing the 20th street extension something tells me the NIMBY residents complaints in addition to the city looking to get a development area road built for free from the province had a lot to do with constructing the 20th street extension.

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 27th, 2018, 5:18 pm
by dontrump
the 20 street extension from a expansion point of view may be viable for sure but then it would be two lane not one
and done under a different venue;; had they built the merge lanes and installed a traffic lite we would all be better off
one saying the 27 street/97 highway traffic merging would be chaotic is very inaccurate + not correct ;;this situation would be no different than hundreds of similar situations in the province and canada as a whole all seem for the most part to work very well; what iam curious to view is what a :cuss: craiqmire we are going to end up with in the poorly set up and jammed up roadway from 20 street through to 27 street to turn south or north

Re: Stickle Freeway?

PostPosted: Apr 28th, 2018, 9:38 am
by Gixxer
MOT got it right by not installing another light on a highway that already has too many lights.