Published: February 10, 2009 7:00 PM Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star
Vernon’s seemingly endless roundabout debate isn’t going in circles anymore. Council voted 5-2 Monday to continue with construction of a roundabout at Pleasant Valley Road and 32nd Avenue. “We will probably be putting up signs in the next couple of weeks in preparation of redirecting traffic and work will begin March 2,” said Rob Dickinson, engineering services manager. Along with work at 30th Avenue and Pleasant Valley Road, the project will last until the end of July. The concept of a roundabout first arose last spring, and while the previous council made a decision to go ahead, heated discussion continued among politicians and residents, bringing the matter to a head Monday. “There’s so much emotion in this. I don’t understand why,” said Coun. Shawn Lee, who supported the roundabout although he admits he’s never had a problem there. “The material I saw convinced me. It showed me what it will look like.” Statistics show there are about two accidents at the current four-way stop every year and city staff claims a roundabout will reduce that number, and particularly injury accidents. That was enough to sway Coun. Jack Gilroy, who had previously lobbied to have the road project scrapped. “When it comes to public safety, I will have to change my mind,” said Gilroy, adding that a roundabout will improve conditions for pedestrians and cyclists.
Coun. Mary-Jo O’Keefe believes that a roundabout will help ease some of the traffic congestion in Vernon’s central core. “The continuous flow of Pleasant Valley Road is important,” she said. “The cycling club has also said it (roundabout) is much safer for people on bikes.” Opposition to the project came from Mayor Wayne Lippert and Coun. Patrick Nicol. “I can see the value of roundabouts but I’m not sure if it will do the job people think it will. I don’t think it’s the right size,” said Lippert. Nicol believes East Hill residents have been ignored.“The neighbourhood has indicated that this move is unnecessary. Their voices need to be heard,” he said. The price tag for just the roundabout is $80,000, and ICBC is picking up $56,000 of that, with the city’s portion being $24,000. “It’s not necessary to waste money on that in this day and age. I find it appalling,” said Nicol.
And while ICBC is covering most of the cost, Nicol states that’s still taxpayers’ dollars.“It’s a waste of money, pure and simple. We just don’t get it.”
----------------------
Better safe than sorry? Vernon Morning Star Editorial:
City council had a second crack at the Pleasant Valley Road and 32nd Avenue roundabout – and they got it wrong again. New council, same mistake. Well, to be fair, they didn't all get it wrong. "It's a waste of money, pure and simple," said Coun. Patrick Nicol, who voted against continuing with the project that was launched by the previous council. "We just don't get it." Well, Mayor Wayne Lippert gets it too. He voted against it, noting it's not the right spot for the traffic calming device. City staff's presentation Monday helped sway several other councillors that the roundabout was the way to go at the intersection that is now serviced by a four-way stop. Apparently the talk was so powerful it convinced Coun. Jack Gilroy to change his mind and vote for the roundabout, for safety sake. This is the same staff that came up with the idea of the roundabout, even though no one was lobbying for it and many East Hill residents don't want it and see no reason for the change. However, staff says there's at least two accidents there every year so there's a safety concern. Gee, two accidents annually at a busy intersection. We bet if they investigated further, they would find there's at least two accidents annually at every four-way stop in the city, many much less busy than PV and 32nd. Utilizing council's way of thinking, maybe we should replace every four-way stop intersection in the city with a roundabout. After all, it would be safer, wouldn't it? Then again, that might be a bit of a waste of money. And we are in a recession, aren't we?
No comments:
Post a Comment