Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Urban Cowboy » Jan 11th, 2018, 1:38 pm

TylerM4 wrote:So a bit of a news flash for y'all - Infrastructure is expanded WHEN or even AFTER it's required, not before. Has always been that way, it's the same everywhere, and it will always be that way. And it should be that way. I could just imagine the posts on here if COK spend $5 Million improving infrastructure only to have a developer decide not to proceed. Another "Bridge to nowhere" thread basing council.

Roads don't get expanded until the traffic gets stupid, schools aren't built until there are kids in the area, stores don't open without potential customers surrounding them.


The point people are annoyed about is that Kelowna simply sucks in addressing the issues associated with expansion.

After all TylerM4 it's the city that issues the permits for all the development that has happened, as in Kettle Valley, South Slopes area, The Ponds, even Crawford Estates, yet whereas the developers did their part in providing the roads, sidewalks etc., the city has done virtually nothing to address all the increased congestion that came with issuing all those permits.

The only new route they really provided was by means of extending Gordon Drive up the hill, and I'm sure the people at the base who once lived in a quiet neighborhood are less than impressed with the City's decision to in essence turn their road into a freeway.

I know the development at the upper end of Stewart Road has been four lane with sidewalks for over twenty years, yet nothing has ever been connected to it.

Other than installing a stupid circle in front of where The Minstrel Cafe used to be, they've made virtually no provision for all the added traffic flow Kettle Valley and continuing development up there have caused.

On the flip side the City of Kelowna apparently has unlimited resources to put in bicycle lanes, and dress up areas such as Lakeshore Road with zero benefit to traffic flow.

When are they planning on providing an alternate road to move vehicles from Kettle Valley over to Crawford Estates? As far as I know that is supposed to be part of the plan for up there, yet all one sees is more and more homes popping up, with each one adding another vehicle to the mix.

The developers are more than doing their part, and the city sure as heck is benefiting from all the added tax base, so just maybe it's time they invested some money toward things that tax base needs, instead of fancy bicycle paths on Ethel Street.

It should come as no surprise that some people are fed up and rightly so.
"Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
- Robert A. Heinlein

3 people like this post.
User avatar
Urban Cowboy
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3991
Likes: 3970 posts
Liked in: 5876 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby techrtr » Jan 11th, 2018, 1:49 pm

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Jan 11th, 2018, 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Off Topic
techrtr
Übergod
 
Posts: 1054
Likes: 88 posts
Liked in: 1048 posts
Joined: Jul 5th, 2005, 6:47 am

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Woodenhead » Jan 11th, 2018, 1:53 pm

Urban sprawl is stupid. But building up doesn't seem to go anywhere fast here (no highrises! it blocks my view! even tho the only view is of the house across the street), so IDK.

Yeah, congestion is an issue for sure. Bypass shoulda been done (or at least the land procured) ages ago.

What about water supply, will that be fine come summer, for this new development?

meh, I don't really care, I live outside city limits. :130:
Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.

Jflem1983 likes this post.
User avatar
Woodenhead
Guru
 
Posts: 5184
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 964 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 1:47 pm

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby TylerM4 » Jan 11th, 2018, 4:26 pm

Old Techie wrote:The point people are annoyed about is that Kelowna simply sucks in addressing the issues associated with expansion.

After all TylerM4 it's the city that issues the permits for all the development that has happened, as in Kettle Valley, South Slopes area, The Ponds, even Crawford Estates, yet whereas the developers did their part in providing the roads, sidewalks etc., the city has done virtually nothing to address all the increased congestion that came with issuing all those permits.

The only new route they really provided was by means of extending Gordon Drive up the hill, and I'm sure the people at the base who once lived in a quiet neighborhood are less than impressed with the City's decision to in essence turn their road into a freeway.

I know the development at the upper end of Stewart Road has been four lane with sidewalks for over twenty years, yet nothing has ever been connected to it.

Other than installing a stupid circle in front of where The Minstrel Cafe used to be, they've made virtually no provision for all the added traffic flow Kettle Valley and continuing development up there have caused.

On the flip side the City of Kelowna apparently has unlimited resources to put in bicycle lanes, and dress up areas such as Lakeshore Road with zero benefit to traffic flow.

When are they planning on providing an alternate road to move vehicles from Kettle Valley over to Crawford Estates? As far as I know that is supposed to be part of the plan for up there, yet all one sees is more and more homes popping up, with each one adding another vehicle to the mix.

The developers are more than doing their part, and the city sure as heck is benefiting from all the added tax base, so just maybe it's time they invested some money toward things that tax base needs, instead of fancy bicycle paths on Ethel Street.

It should come as no surprise that some people are fed up and rightly so.



I'm well aware of that problem. But that's not what the OP posted is it? The OP's impression is that the infrastructure should be in place before the development.

It's the same problem everywhere. EVERY big development across all of BC has a bunch of people protesting and they always beat the same "Lack of infrastructure" drum. Same folks get mad when property taxes increase. Everyone wants infrastructure but nobody want to pay for it. Somehow this is COK's fault. Personally; overall I think the city's infrastructure is pretty good and I don't want to pay a bunch of extra taxes so a bunch of rich folks don't have to suffer a little traffic congestion. Spend some time in other big cities where there's actual traffic congestion, maybe it'll alter your perspective.
Last edited by TylerM4 on Jan 11th, 2018, 4:50 pm, edited 6 times in total.
TylerM4
Übergod
 
Posts: 1410
Likes: 328 posts
Liked in: 1122 posts
Joined: Feb 27th, 2014, 3:22 pm

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby TylerM4 » Jan 11th, 2018, 4:27 pm

*removed*
Last edited by ferri on Jan 11th, 2018, 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Response to removed post.
TylerM4
Übergod
 
Posts: 1410
Likes: 328 posts
Liked in: 1122 posts
Joined: Feb 27th, 2014, 3:22 pm

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Urban Cowboy » Jan 11th, 2018, 9:44 pm

TylerM4 wrote:It's the same problem everywhere. EVERY big development across all of BC has a bunch of people protesting and they always beat the same "Lack of infrastructure" drum. Same folks get mad when property taxes increase. Everyone wants infrastructure but nobody want to pay for it.


They are paying for it. It's called property taxes, so what are the residents living on the south slopes getting for those taxes exactly? The developers are the ones who paid for all the infrastructure, then through those costs being passed onto the price of the homes the purchasers wound up paying.

It just feels an awful lot like the City of Kelowna is using that area as a cash cow, so they can beautify Lakeshore Road and Ethel Street.

It's not as though the things needed are going to get any cheaper the longer the city puts them off.

Mind you their plan could well be to stall for a decade, then when traffic gets so bad it takes an hour to get from Kettle Valley to DeHart Road, they'll just inform the residents that since they need to build a new road to service them, their taxes will have to go up.


TylerM4 wrote: Somehow this is COK's fault. Personally; overall I think the city's infrastructure is pretty good and I don't want to pay a bunch of extra taxes so a bunch of rich folks don't have to suffer a little traffic congestion. Spend some time in other big cities where there's actual traffic congestion, maybe it'll alter your perspective.


No one is asking you to pay a bunch of extra tax, the people already paying through the nose up there, would simply like to see something for their money. I certainly can't blame them for it either.
"Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
- Robert A. Heinlein

Jflem1983 likes this post.
User avatar
Urban Cowboy
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3991
Likes: 3970 posts
Liked in: 5876 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby dominik » Jan 11th, 2018, 10:19 pm

TylerM4 wrote:
Old Techie wrote:The point people are annoyed about is that Kelowna simply sucks in addressing the issues associated with expansion.

After all TylerM4 it's the city that issues the permits for all the development that has happened, as in Kettle Valley, South Slopes area, The Ponds, even Crawford Estates, yet whereas the developers did their part in providing the roads, sidewalks etc., the city has done virtually nothing to address all the increased congestion that came with issuing all those permits.

The only new route they really provided was by means of extending Gordon Drive up the hill, and I'm sure the people at the base who once lived in a quiet neighborhood are less than impressed with the City's decision to in essence turn their road into a freeway.

I know the development at the upper end of Stewart Road has been four lane with sidewalks for over twenty years, yet nothing has ever been connected to it.

Other than installing a stupid circle in front of where The Minstrel Cafe used to be, they've made virtually no provision for all the added traffic flow Kettle Valley and continuing development up there have caused.

On the flip side the City of Kelowna apparently has unlimited resources to put in bicycle lanes, and dress up areas such as Lakeshore Road with zero benefit to traffic flow.

When are they planning on providing an alternate road to move vehicles from Kettle Valley over to Crawford Estates? As far as I know that is supposed to be part of the plan for up there, yet all one sees is more and more homes popping up, with each one adding another vehicle to the mix.

The developers are more than doing their part, and the city sure as heck is benefiting from all the added tax base, so just maybe it's time they invested some money toward things that tax base needs, instead of fancy bicycle paths on Ethel Street.

It should come as no surprise that some people are fed up and rightly so.



I'm well aware of that problem. But that's not what the OP posted is it? The OP's impression is that the infrastructure should be in place before the development.

It's the same problem everywhere. EVERY big development across all of BC has a bunch of people protesting and they always beat the same "Lack of infrastructure" drum. Same folks get mad when property taxes increase. Everyone wants infrastructure but nobody want to pay for it. Somehow this is COK's fault. Personally; overall I think the city's infrastructure is pretty good and I don't want to pay a bunch of extra taxes so a bunch of rich folks don't have to suffer a little traffic congestion. Spend some time in other big cities where there's actual traffic congestion, maybe it'll alter your perspective.


You are half right. My intention is definitely to call for prior infrastructure planning and implementation "before" giving out permissions to build left right and center. As another member (I believe AlienSoldier) pointed out, doing this is not new and has been proven effective, especially in controlling urban sprawl and traffic nightmares.

To be fair in Germany we had the railways which essentially were the backbone of our transportation network (that sadly has changed), but that doesn't mean that we cannot do the same thing here with roads, limit traffic by weigh classes, by using proper traffic flow techniques (no not by adding necessarily more traffic lights). One of Kelowna's biggest issues is that it is almost impossible to find a road which limits your travel, as in you can get anywhere from everywhere, this essentially guarantees a cluster**** of traffic as you do not have the ability to separate traffic from one another easily and encounter rush hour traffic scenarios and traffic jams.

We need to implement infrastructure FIRST, then use the based upon the infrastructure community / neighborhood plan and award building permits. There can be exceptions naturally... but damn they should be EXCEPTIONS and not happen daily...
dominik
Fledgling
 
Posts: 182
Likes: 232 posts
Liked in: 168 posts
Joined: Aug 22nd, 2011, 6:46 am
Location: Kelowna, BC

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby dominik » Jan 11th, 2018, 10:37 pm

Old Techie wrote:
TylerM4 wrote:It's the same problem everywhere. EVERY big development across all of BC has a bunch of people protesting and they always beat the same "Lack of infrastructure" drum. Same folks get mad when property taxes increase. Everyone wants infrastructure but nobody want to pay for it.


They are paying for it. It's called property taxes, so what are the residents living on the south slopes getting for those taxes exactly? The developers are the ones who paid for all the infrastructure, then through those costs being passed onto the price of the homes the purchasers wound up paying.

It just feels an awful lot like the City of Kelowna is using that area as a cash cow, so they can beautify Lakeshore Road and Ethel Street.

It's not as though the things needed are going to get any cheaper the longer the city puts them off.

Mind you their plan could well be to stall for a decade, then when traffic gets so bad it takes an hour to get from Kettle Valley to DeHart Road, they'll just inform the residents that since they need to build a new road to service them, their taxes will have to go up.


TylerM4 wrote: Somehow this is COK's fault. Personally; overall I think the city's infrastructure is pretty good and I don't want to pay a bunch of extra taxes so a bunch of rich folks don't have to suffer a little traffic congestion. Spend some time in other big cities where there's actual traffic congestion, maybe it'll alter your perspective.


No one is asking you to pay a bunch of extra tax, the people already paying through the nose up there, would simply like to see something for their money. I certainly can't blame them for it either.


I definitely agree, while these projects cost (and they don't JUST affect the upper mission but almost all areas in Kelowna), there is a lot of money being collected and awarded to beautification projects or maintenance projects which all are great but could be put on the backburner for a while. As TylerM4 points out he feels the issue is just in the Upper Mission, I disagree wholeheartedly with this. Try driving Glenmore, or Highway 33, or Rutland road, Sexsmith, leathead, enterprise, Gordon, all these major arteries are plugged a few times a day adding lakeshore and swamp to it is just completing the picture.

Kelowna's road infrastructure alone is loosely said a disaster. A large part of the issue being the Highway going directly through town, no over or underpasses, on or off ramps. We call it Harvey as it is essentially part of our road network but in reality it is Highway 97 one of the MAJOR roadways from West to East, meaning it is a transport route not some road downtown or mainstreet.

It is essentially the Strip in Vegas (especially with all the shops built the way they are) just add major commercial traffic to it (which the strip doesn't have). Too many intersections and entrances to small side streets and shops. This simply doesn't work either. Okay so in this case the province has to get involved, as it isn't municipal but that again shows clearly the issue here.

A big role in this however is played by development. We cannot talk about reduction of traffic, improvement of services, and an easier/simpler living experience if we don't talk about density and building up. Looks can be argued about, but again here should be community plans and restrictions in place. By going up and high density we can remove/reduce the need for vehicles, or create the ability for mass transportation platforms to take over, it will also free up land for municipal utilities such as water treatment plants which need to be improved and added to our regional network as we are at or past capacity every year now.

This isn't easy and many of the decisions council should be making at this point should be unpopular for the reason that sprawl should be avoided. We need to go up, we need infrastructure, and none of that is likely visible enough or felt by most people until more units become available, water restrictions are rescinded and housing is becoming less expensive, and traffic is reduced.

This needs to happen now, not with a next council, and judging by some of the responses of council members alone in regards to central green it seems to me that they are starting to get to the same point of being frustrated with this bait and switch and urban sprawl culture.
dominik
Fledgling
 
Posts: 182
Likes: 232 posts
Liked in: 168 posts
Joined: Aug 22nd, 2011, 6:46 am
Location: Kelowna, BC

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Rider59 » Jan 12th, 2018, 4:50 am

Developer are responsible for all offsite works up to the road center line, all infrastructure upgrades (including roadworks if applicable) to service the development AND pay DCCs.

https://www.kelowna.ca/sites/files/1/do ... ._7900.pdf

9.3
Required Works and Services
(1)
(a)
The Owner shall design and construct such Works and Services as are
required by the City, which are:

(i)in the case of a Subdivision:

all onsite Works and Services, and

all offsite Works and Services on that portion of a highway(s)
immediately adjacent to the site, up to the center line
of
that adjacent highway(s), insofar as their requirement is
directly attributable to the Subdivision.



and

(2)
The Owner shall design and construct such offsite Works and Services which are
beyond that portion of a highway(s) immediately adjacent to the site
, up to the
center line of that adjacent highway(s), which may be required by the City
under this bylaw, provincial legislation or by agreement between the Owner
and the City.


But we all knew that before we posted, right?
Rider59
Board Meister
 
Posts: 524
Likes: 369 posts
Liked in: 470 posts
Joined: Aug 17th, 2016, 9:02 am

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Jflem1983 » Jan 12th, 2018, 6:47 am

Rider59 wrote:Developer are responsible for all offsite works up to the road center line, all infrastructure upgrades (including roadworks if applicable) to service the development AND pay DCCs.

https://www.kelowna.ca/sites/files/1/do ... ._7900.pdf

9.3
Required Works and Services
(1)
(a)
The Owner shall design and construct such Works and Services as are
required by the City, which are:

(i)in the case of a Subdivision:

all onsite Works and Services, and

all offsite Works and Services on that portion of a highway(s)
immediately adjacent to the site, up to the center line
of
that adjacent highway(s), insofar as their requirement is
directly attributable to the Subdivision.



and

(2)
The Owner shall design and construct such offsite Works and Services which are
beyond that portion of a highway(s) immediately adjacent to the site
, up to the
center line of that adjacent highway(s), which may be required by the City
under this bylaw, provincial legislation or by agreement between the Owner
and the City.


But we all knew that before we posted, right?



Just the city downloading responsibilities to developers. Providing cover for why nothing geys built vis a vis roads
Now they want to take our guns away . That would be just fine. Take em away from the criminals first . Ill gladly give u mine. "Charlie Daniels"

You have got to stand for something . Or you will fall for anything "Aaron Tippin"
User avatar
Jflem1983
Guru
 
Posts: 5769
Likes: 12238 posts
Liked in: 3213 posts
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2015, 10:38 am

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Rider59 » Jan 12th, 2018, 7:01 am

Jflem1983 wrote:Just the city downloading responsibilities to developers. Providing cover for why nothing geys built vis a vis roads


Developers have footed the bill for off site improvements required to develop the site to standards set out by the approving authorities for as long as I can remember AND pay DCCs for their portion of existing infrastructure.

Sometimes it's an advantage for the city to take cash in lieu of these works and put it in a bigger pot for large capital projects.

Facts vs emotional opinion?
Rider59
Board Meister
 
Posts: 524
Likes: 369 posts
Liked in: 470 posts
Joined: Aug 17th, 2016, 9:02 am

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Urban Cowboy » Jan 12th, 2018, 3:27 pm

dominik wrote: As TylerM4 points out he feels the issue is just in the Upper Mission, I disagree wholeheartedly with this. Try driving Glenmore, or Highway 33, or Rutland road, Sexsmith, leathead, enterprise, Gordon, all these major arteries are plugged a few times a day adding lakeshore and swamp to it is just completing the picture.


I'm afraid I can't agree with you here.

Glenmore has not so long ago had a significant section of it four laned, in doing so extending what was already a four lane main artery.

Highway 33 has also recently seen upgrades in the Black Mountain area so that it is four lanes right through town and all the way up to the brake check atop the hill.

The others you mention don't really experience any undo issues not common to any area during rush hour for example.

By contrast if you live up in Kettle Valley, or South Slopes (Frost Road area), you have one two lane roadway all the way into town, as Lakeshore/Pandosy despite being a main artery, is still restricted to two lanes for the most part.

Most avoid this by using Gordon Drive or Benvoulin Road as they are four lane, but this still leaves the whole section from DeHart Road to Kettle Valley a mess at the best of times. It doesn't even require it to be rush hour to get stuck in traffic there.

Given the population up there already, plus the fact that it is the fastest growing area, due to availability of land, dealing with traffic flow in and out of there should be CoK's highest priority yet it certainly doesn't appear to be the case.

It's abundantly clear that the city has no desire to turn Lakeshore into an artery able to handle heavier traffic flow, as they have shown they are more interested in aesthetics there, as opposed to functionality, therefore they need to alleviate some of the Lakeshore/Chute Lake congestion by offering a viable alternative route.

The only way I can see that happening is if they put in place a road that allows traffic from Kettle Valley to flow east/west over to Crawford and subsequently connect up with Benvoulin. Their lame attempt at addressing the issue, by extending Gordon Drive through a quiet residential area, certainly doesn't come across as the best long term solution, for one thing because they aren't able to keep it four lane through the one section, thus turning it into a bottle neck, but also because four lanes through that neighborhood is unsafe, and ruins it for all who lived there before Gordon Drive was extended.
"Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
- Robert A. Heinlein

Jflem1983 likes this post.
User avatar
Urban Cowboy
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3991
Likes: 3970 posts
Liked in: 5876 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby dominik » Jan 17th, 2018, 5:28 pm

Old Techie wrote:
dominik wrote: As TylerM4 points out he feels the issue is just in the Upper Mission, I disagree wholeheartedly with this. Try driving Glenmore, or Highway 33, or Rutland road, Sexsmith, leathead, enterprise, Gordon, all these major arteries are plugged a few times a day adding lakeshore and swamp to it is just completing the picture.


I'm afraid I can't agree with you here.

Glenmore has not so long ago had a significant section of it four laned, in doing so extending what was already a four lane main artery.

Highway 33 has also recently seen upgrades in the Black Mountain area so that it is four lanes right through town and all the way up to the brake check atop the hill.

The others you mention don't really experience any undo issues not common to any area during rush hour for example.

By contrast if you live up in Kettle Valley, or South Slopes (Frost Road area), you have one two lane roadway all the way into town, as Lakeshore/Pandosy despite being a main artery, is still restricted to two lanes for the most part.

Most avoid this by using Gordon Drive or Benvoulin Road as they are four lane, but this still leaves the whole section from DeHart Road to Kettle Valley a mess at the best of times. It doesn't even require it to be rush hour to get stuck in traffic there.

Given the population up there already, plus the fact that it is the fastest growing area, due to availability of land, dealing with traffic flow in and out of there should be CoK's highest priority yet it certainly doesn't appear to be the case.

It's abundantly clear that the city has no desire to turn Lakeshore into an artery able to handle heavier traffic flow, as they have shown they are more interested in aesthetics there, as opposed to functionality, therefore they need to alleviate some of the Lakeshore/Chute Lake congestion by offering a viable alternative route.

The only way I can see that happening is if they put in place a road that allows traffic from Kettle Valley to flow east/west over to Crawford and subsequently connect up with Benvoulin. Their lame attempt at addressing the issue, by extending Gordon Drive through a quiet residential area, certainly doesn't come across as the best long term solution, for one thing because they aren't able to keep it four lane through the one section, thus turning it into a bottle neck, but also because four lanes through that neighborhood is unsafe, and ruins it for all who lived there before Gordon Drive was extended.


I am happy you are not agreeing with me, because I have to agree with you, I wasn't considering the extention and widening in glenmore and the soon to come access road to the college from glenmore (mind you that should start the discussion of widening / four laneing of glenmore to the dump at least. When it comes to Enterprise/Spall, Enterprise Dilworth, Enterprise Leckie... well essentially anything Enterprise road we see some pretty substantial congestion. This then has effects on Dilworth, Spall, Highway 97, Leathead, and all the side streets (not uncommon to see people cutting through parking lots and business parks). Similar issues occur downtown.

I agree the addition of lanes helped but it created additional congestion points, and this is where we come more into the area of traffic management. We need neighbourhood access roads, and limited intersections to the highways. I know that sounds counterproductive but stay with me here. The highways are for many the main arteries to get to or from work/shopping, but with having entrances and exits onto the highway, as well as many intersections we have converted the Highway to normal (while heavy volume) roads, which they simply are not.

So restricting/removing intersections, creating proper side arteries for local traffic with "easy" ways of crossing the highways should be definitely contemplated.

But yes you are absolutely right, the upper mission is most definitely a disaster for traffic management, looking at the future plans for traffic I just see massive headaches. Sure you connect Stoneridge and the ponds with Crawford... but then what? Okay now its Saucier that gets 4 laned Benvoulin will be 3 laned before that (2030), to extend Gordon up to Stoneridge was only for one purpose and that was emergency management which needed another faster way up there. I remember during the fire evacuation having to use Paret Road... Seeing all that traffic, I remember sitting there waiting for the vehicles to drive down there and thinking that if there were any more people this would have ended in disaster...

Now you have mornings like that almost every weekday (a little less, and well no big flames in the backdrop), between lakeshore road, barnaby, and chute lake being 2 lanes each it becomes glargingly obvious that someone is either not accounting for all the suites in the upper mission or is trying to ignore them. I am pretty certain there was an agreement between the city and the developer of kettle valley, where the city had to upgrade the infrastructure based on population density/houses/traffic in Kettle Valley (didn't even include Stoneridge).

In reality I am not sure if gordon can be kept the way it is, it needs to be four laned all the way up but that would require a serious amount of high value property purchases.

Sorry if it seems like I am rambling but I had a long day.
dominik
Fledgling
 
Posts: 182
Likes: 232 posts
Liked in: 168 posts
Joined: Aug 22nd, 2011, 6:46 am
Location: Kelowna, BC

Re: Thomson Flats... Goodbye Hills, Hello Urban Sprawl

Postby Urban Cowboy » Jan 17th, 2018, 8:04 pm

^^ As far as the South Slopes goes I am of the mind that considering current status of lands, the thing that makes the most sense is to put in place an East/West road that connects Kettle Valley all the way over to Crawford, then extend Benvoulin straight up the hillside to connect with the existing Stewart Road.

If that was done as a four lane artery all the way up the hill it should go a long way toward alleviating a lot of the current congestion.

The Gordon Drive extension that was put in place, should in my opinion not be viewed as a main artery, nor truck route, but rather simply an alternate route within a neighborhood and useful for emergency purposes.

As for the rest of your post I agree with most of it, in that there's room for improvement in a lot of places, but not nearly as pressing as the South Slopes problem.

I also agree it's well past time interchanges were implemented in high volume intersections such as Spall, Dilworth, McCurdy, Sexsmith, etc. Most certainly at Spall and Dilworth should be high priority, as the one connects with Benvoulin, and the other with Glenmore Rd., both crucial main arteries during rush hour. I believe those two also happen to hold the local record for most ICBC claims if memory serves correctly.

Since it's the province's jurisdiction being a highway, perhaps they should approach ICBC about contributing to the cost of those interchanges, given that in the long run it would save them a lot of money in claims. :biggrin:
"Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
- Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
Urban Cowboy
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3991
Likes: 3970 posts
Liked in: 5876 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Previous

Return to Central Okanagan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 69cutlass, CommonCrawl [Bot], dominik, hockey_glenn and 4 guests