$3 millions conversion of Main St. in Penticton

[matai]

3 million dollars to convert Main St into a two way street?

Pretty expensive for painting a yellow lane & upgrading a couple traffic lights, don't you think?

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... .htm#95569

[GordonH]

I would suspect large portion of that amount will be used to reconfigure this area alone:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Main+St, ... 33.18,,0,0

[nepal]

The amount of traffic on the north section of Main would double if two-way, similar to volume near Safeway. That might ruin the uncongested one-way zone as it is now. Is this change, for the sake of change? Lakeshore Dr. is a good example of leaving something that works well and simply fixing it up to maintain it and look nicer. Two-lanes yes, but two-way no.
That one-way section is unique to the character of Penticton and we don't have to be Kelowna.

[Tony]

Why don't they look at how the traffic flowed before they turned Main into a one way. The hours spent by we, as kids, driving to the end, turning around and coming back up Main (pulling Mainers) was countless!

[matai]

I personally prefer the one way. That way, one can wander down the street as slow as they want, and if one isn't happy about it, they can always use the other lane to go faster. Won't be possible anymore if it's two way with one lane in each direction...

[southy]

Why don't they look at how the traffic flowed before they turned Main into a one way. The hours spent by we, as kids, driving to the end, turning around and coming back up Main (pulling Mainers) was countless!

Tony, nostalgia is great, however, the only constant is change and traffic has changed since then. Personally, I think having three lanes running one way through our downtown is just plain silly. It's a waste of space and the only thing I've seen it do is allow for greater speeds. Accidents waiting to happen and they do ... both vehicle and pedestrian. Two lanes allowing for greater sidewalk/green space makes sense.

[Tony]

Your right, traffic has changed, and it changed enough back in the late 70's or early 80's to warrant a one way conversion. I'm not opposed to either - was just saying that if they want to see how traffic would flow, look back 30 years or so. There doesn't have to be a 1/2 million dollar study done on it. The traffic hasn't increased that much since then as the malls have decreased the amount of downtown traffic. Personally, I think they should make Main a walking mall from about the 400 block down like a Gastown concept. I think that would attract more business than anything else.

[irish61]

I wouldn't like to see it change to two way traffic but would be in favor of just two lanes for more room for sidewalk cafe's.

[XT225]

From Castanet headlines today:

The Penticton City Council will continue discussions on traffic flow in the downtown core at tonight's, Tuesday, meeting.

Staff is recommending that the council consider two options, maintain one way traffic flow on Main and Martin streets and reduce the number of lanes on Main from three to two, or make Main and Martin streets two way from Jermyn Street to Lakeshore Drive and reduce the number of lanes on Main Street from three to two lanes.

The cost to maintain the one way traffic flow is $424, 600. The cost for a move to two way traffic is $1,997,300 to $2,708,200.

I wonder what the cost to "maintain the one way flow as it stands NOW would be?" Likely nothing! Why fix what is not broken? These folks who run the city are still wanting to spend like drunken sailors! Just think of what would happen if they went to two-way traffic with only two lanes (as is one of their brainy ideas). There would be ONE lane going North, period and one South. Presently there are three Northbound. While watching the traffic flow today, all three lanes were busy; it would be chaos if reduced to ONE. Maybe its the heat; but something is sure confusing those who run our fair city. Maybe the upcoming election might generate some stability. Too bad ALL councils jobs weren't up for auction, presently.

[twobits]

I wonder what the cost to "maintain the one way flow as it stands NOW would be?" Likely nothing! Why fix what is not broken?

Not according to Barb Haynes and the downtown merchants association. Much of this money for downtown renewal is lipstick on a pig. We'll have nice sidewalk pedestrian areas lined with slumlord buildings. Then we'll be doing it again in 10 or 12 years. Phil Locke is right when he says the only way downtown is truly going to redevelop is when you have 3000 people living within two blocks of main street. Pretty hard to do until there is motivation to increase density on the side streets bordering downtown. Someone proposes a tower and the nimbys come out with the full support of Litke.

[XT225]

The cost to maintain the one way traffic flow is $424, 600 according to the City. I believe that is if they change it to two-lanes, one way and I think that is what they have decided on. Cutting DOWN on vehicles coming downtown to shop and widening the sidewalks alone, is not going to cut it and improve business. Wider sidewalks - more room for skateboarders (who shouldn't be there in the first place). The restaurants that have outside areas mostly have them NOW. I think they should've left well enough alone for now; there is no money; pay down the debt that presently exists. I also believe that at least two councillors should've excused themselves from the vote on this project as they appear to be a direct conflict of interest - they own businesses in that area.

[matai]

Why fix what is not broken?

That's a good question! It looks like there's something broken that is not being fixed here:
http://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton/ ... reet-fixed

[XT225]

Mathieu, you're correct in that streets like Corry Place need a lot of work and underground infrastructure is always an "unknown". Cutting the three lanes, one-way, down to two and widening the sidewalks is a bandaid solution and its not going to bring more people down there. Just wait til one of those moronic truck drivers double parks down there (as they continually do) on Main street; traffic flow will be reduced to ONE lane and the horns will be a honkin! This change was far too big for council to deal with; deserved a referendum or far more study. I still maintain that two of those councillors were completely in a conflict of interest by voting.

[XT225]

Re the Conversion of Main Street and an explanation of why two council members should not have voted in my opinion, please read the following (it is from the City Website). I say it should back to the public in the form of a referendum:

Conflict of Interest

Conflict of interest voting rules in the Community Charter requires that, once in local office, you may not vote on or participate in discussions about any matters where you have a direct or indirect pecuniary (financial) interest.

If you do have such an interest, you must:
•declare your interest in the matter;
•withdraw from the meeting;
•not participate in the discussion or vote; and
•not attempt to influence, in any way, the voting of other elected officials on the matter.

If you participate in the discussion or vote, or attempt to influence the vote, you risk losing your elected office.

[matai]

Mathieu, you're correct in that streets like Corry Place need a lot of work and underground infrastructure is always an "unknown". Cutting the three lanes, one-way, down to two and widening the sidewalks is a bandaid solution and its not going to bring more people down there. Just wait til one of those moronic truck drivers double parks down there (as they continually do) on Main street; traffic flow will be reduced to ONE lane and the horns will be a honkin! This change was far too big for council to deal with; deserved a referendum or far more study. I still maintain that two of those councillors were completely in a conflict of interest by voting.

That's exactly my point... why "fix" something that isn't broken instead of investing where the need is...