Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby Rosemary1 » Dec 31st, 2015, 11:12 pm

Anyone know if there has ever been any talk in Penticton to add more street lighting on its channel parkway, and stretch of skaha lake to airport turnoff and road into the airport. They are fairly well travelled routes but visibility at night could be better.
If we ask the right questions we can change the world with the right answers
User avatar
Rosemary1
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 984
Likes: 731 posts
Liked in: 728 posts
Joined: Jan 24th, 2013, 3:47 pm

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby Tony » Jan 1st, 2016, 7:35 am

The visibility at night is fine if you turn your headlights on.

LTD likes this post.
Tony
Übergod
 
Posts: 1182
Likes: 725 posts
Liked in: 425 posts
Joined: Aug 11th, 2005, 6:43 am

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby fluffy » Jan 1st, 2016, 7:45 am

Interesting thought. I never really noticed any dark spots, the intersections are well lit along the parkway itself. The airport turnoff is a different story though, I've never paid much attention to peripheral lighting, the stoplights do enough to grab my attention. I wonder if being right at the end of the runway has anything to do with it, not wanting to muddle the area with extra lighting that may detract from the effectiveness of lighting directed at pilots?
Okey dokey doggie daddy.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 19422
Likes: 351 posts
Liked in: 4414 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby twobits » Jan 1st, 2016, 6:36 pm

Rosemary1 wrote:Anyone know if there has ever been any talk in Penticton to add more street lighting on its channel parkway, and stretch of skaha lake to airport turnoff and road into the airport. They are fairly well travelled routes but visibility at night could be better.


Channel Parkway is designated Hwy. As such, the Ministry of Hwy's only provide street lighting at intersections and designated pull outs. Just as it is for thousands of miles of other designated Hwy's in the Province. If you are uncomfortable with driving designated Hwy routes with only your headlights, perhaps you should recognize your own comfort level with driving at night.

As to the stretch of Hwy from the Skaha intersection to the airport, you would have to lobby the PIB to see if they are interested in taking on that cost of installation as well as the ongoing power bill. It is after all their jurisdiction since it is reserve land the Hwy ROW passes through, not the City of Penticton lands. Perhaps the new residents of Skaha Hills can join you in that lobby to provide lighting from the taxes they pay the PIB?
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 7223
Likes: 1092 posts
Liked in: 3854 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 9:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby Rosemary1 » Jan 1st, 2016, 8:08 pm

Thanks for the information. Just wondered about its status.
If we ask the right questions we can change the world with the right answers
User avatar
Rosemary1
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 984
Likes: 731 posts
Liked in: 728 posts
Joined: Jan 24th, 2013, 3:47 pm

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby GordonH » Jan 1st, 2016, 8:13 pm

Harvey is Provincial highway there are lighting all along it.
32 St in Vernon is as well, I could go on & on
When you have to start compromising yourself and your morals for the people around you, it’s probably time to change the people around you. John Spence
User avatar
GordonH
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 23498
Likes: 2854 posts
Liked in: 9074 posts
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm
Location: Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby twobits » Jan 1st, 2016, 9:17 pm

GordonH wrote:Harvey is Provincial highway there are lighting all along it.
32 St in Vernon is as well, I could go on & on


Yes it is. And who pays for that lighting outside of intersections gordo? Perhaps you should have checked before you commented?
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 7223
Likes: 1092 posts
Liked in: 3854 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 9:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby GordonH » Jan 1st, 2016, 9:32 pm

GordonH wrote:Harvey is Provincial highway there are lighting all along it.
32 St in Vernon is as well, I could go on & on


twobits wrote:Yes it is. And who pays for that lighting outside of intersections gordo? Perhaps you should have checked before you commented?


Taxpayers

Added later: there is section Highway about a Km (maybe longer) in length between Sicamous & Malakwa, out in middle of nowhere all lite up with lights . Why
When you have to start compromising yourself and your morals for the people around you, it’s probably time to change the people around you. John Spence
User avatar
GordonH
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 23498
Likes: 2854 posts
Liked in: 9074 posts
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm
Location: Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby fluffy » Jan 2nd, 2016, 8:26 am

GordonH wrote:Harvey is Provincial highway there are lighting all along it.
32 St in Vernon is as well, I could go on & on



It's not hard to imagine some sort of partnership arrangement for provincial highways inside city limits. What applies for maintenance might not be the same for design and construction.
Okey dokey doggie daddy.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 19422
Likes: 351 posts
Liked in: 4414 posts
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm
Location: Ogo

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby Tony » Jan 2nd, 2016, 10:18 am

GordonH wrote:Harvey is Provincial highway there are lighting all along it.
32 St in Vernon is as well, I could go on & on

Those are both heavily populated areas. The area the OP is talking about is a barren stretch by the airport to the Channel Parkway. Once again, turn on your headlights, follow the flow of traffic and you should be fine. I see no reason to spend any money on lights for an area that is basically no different than the highway between Kaleden and Penticton.
Tony
Übergod
 
Posts: 1182
Likes: 725 posts
Liked in: 425 posts
Joined: Aug 11th, 2005, 6:43 am

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby onestop67 » Jan 2nd, 2016, 10:56 am

twobits wrote:As to the stretch of Hwy from the Skaha intersection to the airport, you would have to lobby the PIB to see if they are interested in taking on that cost of installation as well as the ongoing power bill. It is after all their jurisdiction since it is reserve land the Hwy ROW passes through, not the City of Penticton lands. Perhaps the new residents of Skaha Hills can join you in that lobby to provide lighting from the taxes they pay the PIB?


Wrong.

It is Provincial responsibility.

Treaties will provide for unrestricted access for public and commercial traffic on highways. Highways will remain provincial Crown land and are specifically excluded from treaty settlement lands.

https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/11001 ... 0100022279
User avatar
onestop67
Guru
 
Posts: 9523
Likes: 17 posts
Liked in: 344 posts
Joined: Sep 10th, 2006, 11:12 pm

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby Ekalahaks » Jan 2nd, 2016, 11:56 am

Tony wrote:The visibility at night is fine if you turn your headlights on.


What is the point of this comment? Other than to try and ridicule the OP for asking a question? Why is it that you need to try to knock this person down by using passive aggressive assumptions that they are probably doing "something wrong" to invalidate them as a person? Please tell me how this helps answer the question? What ever happened to simple respect?

It's a valid point and concern. This is an area of town that is increasingly getting busier with the development of the Barefoot Beach Resort and many of their new events and concerts that are happening on the beach in the evenings. There is also a high number of tourists walking along the airport fence carrying their floaties as they return to the campsites & motels after floating down the channel. Additionally, when the wind is right that stretch of road can be obscured by flying sand in the summer and snow in the winter.

There have also been a number of accidents along that stretch of road, some fatal.

The question is valid. The OP deserves a little more respect than a flippant jab.
Ekalahaks
 
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 12 posts
Joined: May 28th, 2014, 11:44 am

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby LTD » Jan 2nd, 2016, 12:35 pm

I disagree there's a million miles of roads and highways should we have lights everywhere, kind of silly really that's why your vehicle comes with headlights, cant see at night means it might be time for an eye test or to re evaluate your skills behind the wheel. Thankfully there aren't any other roads out there that have blowing snow on them.

pentona likes this post.
LTD
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4700
Likes: 3310 posts
Liked in: 3817 posts
Joined: Mar 31st, 2010, 3:34 pm

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby pentona » Jan 2nd, 2016, 1:09 pm

Perhaps by the airport there is a reason NOT to have lighting. It could be distracting to planes landing?

Ever drive Lakeshore Drive recently after the city replaced the tall lights with LED's? Very hard on your eyes when coming towards them. The lights on the walkway by Okanagan beach are shorter and direct the light downward only. Very nice.
pentona
Übergod
 
Posts: 1170
Likes: 291 posts
Liked in: 633 posts
Joined: Feb 21st, 2011, 5:38 pm

Re: Traffic Safety - More Lights?

Postby twobits » Jan 2nd, 2016, 5:52 pm

onestop67 wrote:

Wrong.

It is Provincial responsibility.

Treaties will provide for unrestricted access for public and commercial traffic on highways. Highways will remain provincial Crown land and are specifically excluded from treaty settlement lands.

https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/11001 ... 0100022279


What was wrong? I said Hwy's Dept were the ones to decide on illumination and they do it according to their criteria. For this section of Hwy, it is the Channel Parkway intersection with Skaha Lake Rd and also at the Airport road intersection. If additional lighting is required or desired by the jurisdiction through which the Hwy passes, it would be at the expense of that jurisdiction.
So, for the airport section of Hwy 97, that would be the PIB. And also why I said that the op perhaps contact them given they are creating more traffic there through the development of Skaha Hills, and all the tourists using native lands for all of the campgrounds including the new Barefoot Beach. I do not think there is anything wrong with me suggesting that if the PIB is going to create a commercial and residential hub in that area, that maybe they should be the ones to provide the illumination for their taxpayers and tourist patrons.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 7223
Likes: 1092 posts
Liked in: 3854 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 9:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost

Next

Return to South Okanagan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest