I had to laugh reading this. In the forty years since the VLA was built there has been no out cry for a left hand turn lane until the last two years. Really, the 6,000 people from the VLA signed a petition for this? Wow, that's some creative counting. I'm sure that's more people then signed the counter petition for Terasan Gas.

In my opinion, this is being driven by the business owners who want more direct access to all the cars that go by everyday. Given that, I'm wondering why they are expecting us tax payers to cover their business improvement project.

I agree. The only ones really pushing for this is the business owners and they build their places there knowing the traffic pattern as it is. I don't believe taxpayers should pay to improve a few businesses bottom line.

"In my opinion, this is being driven by the business owners who want more direct access to all the cars that go by everyday."

Wow, such an astute observation!!!

So now that we know you understand that, what exactly do you think is wrong with that?

When a City zones an area such as that part of highway 97 for businesses, they must practice their due diligence to provide services at the appropriate levels for the types of businesses that they have planned for.

Best practices planning for any business property along any kind of street or highway is that those using the businesses should be able to enter the business property from both directions. Not only that, but they should also be able to leave the business property to head back in the same direction they came from without driving much further and certainly without driving through adjacent residential neighbourhoods.

I live in the west end of the City. When we wish to go to the Vietnamese restaurant, or to a meeting at the new Sheraton that was allowed to be built just recently, we have three options:

1. drive past the businesses on 97 to Ferry; take the off ramp, hang a left; then hang a left once more onto the on ramp.

2. drive along 20th, turn at Upland and head up to enter the business section from the north.

3. drive along Ferry from Hwy 16, hang a right at Upland, under the Hwy 97 and enter the business section from the north.

With #1, which might be the most common for those who do not know the back street routes since they might be from out of town, that means four activities which can increase accident potential.
- a longer drive than should be required
- additional movements accross traffic at yield and stop signs
- additional merging movements.

The slot for the Casino shows one way the acccess can be provided safely. If it is not safe, then they should close that access down, or never have built it in the first place.

There is, of course, another way to provide access to both the Casino and the businesses on the north side - simple off ramps in both directions parallel to the highway, leading to Upland where one can make a turn to go under the highway to access businesses on either side. No turning slots are required, so the undesired turning slot at the Casino can be removed.

There are plenty of examples in larger cities of how such businesses along highways are properly serviced. Prince George has some good examples of how not to do it, both in that location as well as the Central Avenue section of hwy 97.

That highway, as well as hwy 16 going west is used primarily as an urban arterial and none of it properly designed for that purpose. It is trying to be a highway and it is trying to be an urban arterial. One of these days we will have to face that fact and take care of the problem properly.

Of course, we can always allow the businesses there to fail rather than flourish and loose the city taxes and have another unkempt part of the city hit our tourists right in the face as they enter the city.

Why shouldn't the business benefit from a left hand turn lane? They built one for the new sandman hotel and no one is complaining about that. Seems to me the ministry got caught doing some shady studies to get around paying for this improvement and now they've been busted.

Why oh why does everything have to be a conspiracy?

I highly doubt anyone involved in the Ministry study had a personal vendetta against a couple of vocal businesses. They commissioned an independent study, they found a left turn lane would be unsafe.

Now they're going to court. What happens when the court upholds the study findings? Will it finally be over then? Hope so.

It's not a conspiracy. The ministry didn't want to pay and they fudged the numbers in their favour.

"they built one for the Sandman" that is true, of course there will eventually be other services built that can be accessed from the new L. turn lane, but
precedent has been set, and commerce should be encouraged. By providing easy access, there will be more trade at the restaurants and motels along that stretch. The increased business helps the local economy, to think that it would merely line the pockets of the business owners is to take an extremely myopic view of the matter.
metalman.

"The ministry didn't want to pay and they fudged the numbers in their favour."

You got any proof of that or is it just another conspiracy theory?

Hey we have to get permission from Major first and the Sandman is run by Gilardies so they get what they want.

If Shirley Bond origionally used this issue as a photo op to show her support, and since she is now the Minister for Transportation, it should be a snap to get done....unless she has to get on her knees for Gordon's wishes like every other MLA in his party. If she does not get this done it will just be further proof that the Campbell Government is a dictatorship run by a man who is currently under suspicion and investigation for coruption in the sale of "our" property: BCR.

A left turn lane would need to go under or over the existing lanes. Going straight across would just make it a "high accident zone". There is too much traffic and it is all merging back and forth into their respective lanes.

For the same reasoning, they are not having northbound commercial vehicles reporting to the North Weigh Scale.

I am not against the idea of a left turn lane there, it really is a difficult area to access from the town side.
However, without putting in more traffic lights, it would only be prudent to have an elevated left turn lane going over the traffic.

I think it would be a really bad idea to have traffic turning left across that section of road, on the same grade as the through traffic. It would make it a very challenging stretch for a lot of people.
Remember that you can't design roads around the best driver, you have to design them for the worst driver.

Seems like another ideal spot for a roundabout...

God one dan LOL!
If Europe can handle 6 lane roundabouts why can't we?

This comment will probably be remove as well but if the people want a left turn ask Mr Major how he got his left turn...same stretch of road, same dangers...
I wonder how much it cost? if any?
who got paid?
..if anyone...

Then maybe he paid for the cost to widen the road?

Maybe they can justify it by putting a few slot machines in the Carmel or the Chinese restaurant. Could happen. They have machines everywhere in Reno and Las Vegas. But here? I have to laugh. You can drink while you gamble in the US, but take your drink off the purple carpet here and the bouncers will throw you out. Free alcoholic drinks down there while you gamble. Here? I think not. Speaks volumes, eh? Ain't we world class?

oh hell just build a clover leaf and overpass or a clover onto Upland and be done with it

BCRacer - it is clearly not the same section of road; as a result of the lights at hwy 16/97 there are safe times to turn left while northbound every time the lights for hwy 97 are red.

Word on the street has it that the casino did pay up the $millionish required for the turn lane. However, the Ministry's stance appears to be not who will pay, but that it is unsafe to put in.

Of course ther casino paid some--why not?? It's not his money. He gets loads of money and so does the BC Govt. It's bull---! They can put a left lane anywhere they want when it comes to robbing the poor. The casinos are criminal and should be closed.

"BCRacer - it is clearly not the same section of road"

Exactly. I am amazed when people say the left turn at the casino is the same thing. It is not.

As for closing the casino, why? I don't go there, but I don't think I should be able to dictate who does. If you want to blow your money, who are you or I to say how?

"A left turn lane would need to go under or over the existing lanes. Going straight across would just make it a "high accident zone". There is too much traffic and it is all merging back and forth into their respective lanes."

This is completely untrue. I live on a street just off of Ospika. To get onto Ospika I have to cross two lanes of traffic at an uncontrolled intersection, on a corner no less. In the three years I've lived here there has been one accident I can recall. This left hand turn lane would give a driver a lane to stay in until it's safe for him to cross two lanes of traffic. There's no rush to cross and you only have to worry about traffic from one direction. It's no more unsafe than the merge lane just a little further down the road. Perhaps PG residents need to go back to driving school if the majority cannot handle simple traffic rules.

Casino money is extorted from the poor criminally by the government and the likes of Major. They depend on the addictive nature of the machines to get people hooked on gambling and it is slowly destroying families and society. The Government knows that and they don't care.
Back to the left turn lane -- It's no more dangerous than at the casino -- same thing but the casino feeds the corruption and Victria street doesn't.

Gus:

I'm glad that you admit it has nothing to do with the "6,000" people who live in the VLA and is all about 7 (yes SEVEN) businesses.

Every business there was built/bought knowing there was no left hand turn lane. If they now believe they need that feature to be profitable, I suggest they put up their OWN money instead of asking for MY tax money to build it.

It's amazing how a very small vocal minority can cost the rest of us SO much money.

This is one of those subjects that will go on forever...

Just to keep my point alive, a reminder;
All of those (6 or 7?)businesses pay taxes, their employees pay taxes, and I assume that all of them live in PG, so taxes are being paid, if not directly, then through landlords, plus all of the employees and the businesses support the local economy (supply & services) probably for the most part anyway, so making the businesses stronger (more customers) makes PG stronger, if they prosper they need more employees, maybe they will expand, most of that extra business will directly benefit PG, heck that chinese restaurant might even renovate some day (lol) The point here is that profit is not a dirty word.
metalman.

we need a turn out lane at Bellamy road off the hart. It has a lot of traffic turning off the highway and at rush hour it is a bit of a hazard

MiddleGround ....
"Every business there was built/bought knowing there was no left hand turn lane."

In case you forgot, John Majors bought the Treasure Cover property under EXACTLY the same condition.

The assessed value of the improvements on the Casino + hotel property, prior to the latest expansion but after the access was built was $11.3 million.

The assessed value of the improvements on the opposite side of the highway are $9.4 million. Where is the fine cutoff line for receiving equitable service?

If a left turning slot for northbound traffic into the Casino/hotel property is safe, then certainly a left turning slot for southbound traffic into the 8 properties (there is still a 0.95 hectare - the largest property - available for development)is safe. The argument that there is a light at the 16/97 intersection that stops southbound traffic at intervals is a bit simplistic since there is still traffic from both directions of hwy 16 which turn to go south on hwy 97 at that time. In fact, the movement from hwy16 west to hwy97 south would be a relatively high volume movement.

We must remember that we are not servicing 7 or eight businesses. What we are actually servicing are the customers of those businesses. It is the customers of the businesses that are put out of their way by city and highway planning which has failed to provide best practices service to its citizens and its visitors.

In my opinion, the City being so eager to please the businesses that want to develop here has allowed a business into a substandard service area. Perhaps they thougth that the MoH would allow the turning slot. Maybe someone else knows the answer to that.

Central and the bypass have a 90 metre right of way. This section of road has a 60 metre right of way. There is sufficient room to provide a straight-in off ramp as well as on ramp with retaining walls on the south side of hwy 97 that ends at a T-intersection of Upland. Traffic can then turn left at a signalled intersection to enter the Ford Ave. service road, or, if that grade would be too steep, access the businesses from the north via St. Laurent and Spruce St. as can be done now.

The Sheraton is a $5.7 million improvement on a 0.68 hectare property. There is a 1.0 hectare vacant property which could be developed by a hotel for a value of at least that. The Treasure Cove hotel, btw, is assessed at $4.6 million.

To add a proper turning opportunity to service those properties makes sense from:
1. an equal treatment point of view
2. a safety point of view
3. a service to all the CUSTOMERS point of view
4. a maximizing of business viability and thus tax revenue point of view.
5. a promotion of the City as a quality planned community point of view.

There is no room in a society or business of any sort to simply take the point of view "they knew what they were getting themselves into". If that "no can do" attitude were to prevail, there would be no progress.

The hart is another major problem which will need some solutions as traffic increases. There are major properties sitting waiting to be developed adjacent to the highway. The right of way is in the order of 45 to 50 metres and is insufficient to develop proper service roads.

Again, we have the situation of a highway acting as a city arterial as well. That is why cities such as Nanaimo develop the modern day version of by-passes. The other option is raised or depressed through highways which are used in large urban areas. It could be an option down the road for the Central part of hwy 97.

Good luck in court Gus.

Sorry, I am not involved with the group. I am a citizen of the City concerned about proper planning.

BTW, based on what I have read, the group has a good chance at winning the case if they have a lawyer who knows what he/she is doing. We appear to have two "epxerts" woth differing opinions. In addition we have an arm of the government which cannot simply make arbitrary decisions.

I case anyone cares, those businesses were there when there was a left turn lane.! or at least the buildings were and may have been occupied by other businesses...but they were there!