Penticton parking problems

With a little research, I have now become aware that Penticton’s only remaining sani-dump, located at Canadian Tire, has been forced to permanently close as a result of the City of Penticton requiring landscaping within parking areas of 10 or more spaces.

Not only have we lost a valuable community asset, but we have also created a parking lot that is difficult to access, confusing, virtually impossible for someone with an RV to enter, to park and shop at Canadian Tire andnecessitated the loss of adjacent green space to expand the parking lot.

Who comes up with these great ideas and who approves them?

Is bylaw 6.1 approved yet?

I and others I have spoken to feel this is a further sign that the city council and administration of the City of Penticton has lost sight of what they are doing with roads, and parking in particular.

Many questions need clarification.

Sani-dump/Canadian Tire parking lot:

1. Does the city want to continue to attract tourists, especially those who travel with RVs? Is it best they go elsewhere with proper facilities and parking? Would you not think (the city) should enhance visitor services, not necessitate their closure? Plenty of local tourism related businesses have been severely affected by the economy over the last few years would likely agree.

2. What is the city’s plan to provide sanitation services, not only to its residents but our much-needed visitors?

3. Think of the thousands of parking spaces that will be lost throughout Penticton as the city gradually enforces the landscaping bylaw everywhere—schools, SOEC, City Hall, Safeway Plaza, Cherry Lane Mall, literally everywhere.

So what does this actually do? Commercial, residential and industrial developments are required to provide parking based on square footage, etc. Now get this, they will actually need to spend more money on land to accommodate the parking. It will actually take up more valuable land, leaving less real useable green space and cost more money. What makes sense about this?

Downtown

1. How much money has the city accumulated in its “cash in lieu” parking fund? Even though the city has vastly undercharged developers at only $13,000 per stall, that money should now amount to at least several million dollars.

2.  The parkade: In a Utopian world it wouldn’t be necessary and we would all walk or ride bikes, the reality is that the vast majority of Penticton’s residents move about by motorized vehicles. Those vehicles need spaces to park, especially in the downtown area. We have land set aside on the Backstreet Boulevard, should have some funds already accumulated and should immediately set the new fee for cash in lieu of parking at $51,000 per stall. Perhaps we can build it in a few years.

3. I’m not sure if the city has done any follow up studies to see how many people have a motorized vehicle in a dwelling where they were given an exemption to the required number of parking spaces? A 20-unit building that received an exemption to have 10 parking stalls. How many (vehicles) are actually parked there and in the surrounding neighbourhoods?

If there is 20 units and 22 cars, they should be required to supply 20 stalls or the $51,000 fee to provide alternative parking in a parkcade. This shouldn’t end up being a cost to taxpayers.

Roadways

1. Once again, after talking with many Penticton residents, over the last few years it is very hard to find anyone who supports the ongoing proliferation of “bumpouts” throughout the city. Not only are they hard to navigate, they have caused the loss of a lot of parking everywhere. In a time when the density of residential units is increasing, why would we initiate a strategy that sees reduced availability of on-street parking? I asked a representative of the city if they had actually gone out and asked residents if they were in favour of these “bumpouts.” The answer was no, but the decisions were driven by data from elsewhere. There were no actual facts about safety at any of these particular intersections?

Not only are the “bumpouts” bad for driving and parking, their construction and ongoing use is detrimental to the environment through the loss of right-turn lanes causing greater traffic backups, and, in turn, creating excessive pollution. Their construction leads to more perfectly good asphalt being removed and replaced with concrete.

Mike Stokes