Sometimes you have to go to a public hearing…in an earlier life I was very much in the forefront of the development of public involvement in the governing processes. You can read about it in my book so I won’t bore you with the details now (and besides, I’ll probably explain it much better in my next book [Don’t Pause on Curves — Change is Never Still]11) But one of the things I always cautioned people about was relying on public hearings to resolve key governance challenges.

Well now public participation is almost a fetish with local governments; but it is with good reason. People are more engaged that ever before and with social media so prevalent in our lives, it is necessary particularly at the municipal level that governments keep a constant and effective ear to community wants and dislikes.

Penticton City Council just in the past seven years has had a remarkably large number of screw-ups due to inadequately listening to the community. No need to list them all here; however one really stands out — the infamous water-slide concept for a beautiful lakeside park. The mayor of the day got us into it, the public didn’t want it, and it cost the City (i.e. all of us) about a quarter of million dollars to cancel the deal. Needless to say several counsellors including the mayor were voted out at the first opportunity. The message finally seemed to get through — listen and listen again before making any major investment.

Well, now it is the creation of dedicated bike lanes through the middle of the city, including the use of a street that the taxpayer just recently spent a tonne of money on to beautify in an effort to make the downtown more attractive. The cost of this venture: eight million bucks minimum. Here is my initial thoughts on the matter that I have sent to each Counsellor, but to which I will go and speak this evening because this is not a big bike-riding town (except for the professionals who train in our mountains for Ironman and other gruelling races) and those who do are mainly older or quite young.

To the Mayor and Council, City of Penticton:

If we have 8 million to spend...

I have just returned from a business trip so I apologize for the lateness of this communiqué. Let me admit my bias from the start. I love to bike; it’s one of the reasons I moved back to Penticton earlier this decade. However, I don’t like to bike in traffic if I can avoid it. And that brings me to the quandary about the debate going on at City Hall and throughout our community. Of course we should have a bike route from one lake to the other. But we shouldn’t be trying to force it through the middle of town. Let me explain:

First of all, if we are going to spend eight million dollars, let’s use the majority of that money to buy more land for parks – multi-use parks, not ball diamond or soccer fields. Parks that everyone can use, maybe some might even have more pickleball courts (even though I don’t play).

Then maybe with two million we could do some serious improvements to the routes WE ALREADY HAVE. Let’s erect protective barriers along the routes already laid out on South Main but continue them up Dawson Avenue onto Government Street northbound. At that point, make two way lanes on the east side of Government (no parking on either side), with barriers all the way to Wade Avenue. This gives every one protected access to the KVR up into the hills or back down to Penticton Plaza as well as the current path to Lakeshore Drive.

Next step: make Lakeshore Drive one-way westbound from Winnipeg onward and Churchill one-way eastbound to Winnipeg (with a four way stop at Power St) and place a wide two-way bike path next to the south sidewalk. This allows for parking as well as traffic flow (all at the current 30 km/hr). At the Sicamous {the restored paddle-wheeler from an earlier era}, route the bike path through the bottom end of the mini-circle and then over to the dam. By the way, the route from Front Street along Lakeshore to Winnipeg is wide enough to place the barrier bike lanes on the south side of the street without disrupting the two-way flow.

Now, work together with the Penticton Indian Band to access a fistful of trees from the feds new program (get Dick Canning {local MP} to help get at least a thousand trees) – and then organize a planting party with students from both sides of the river channel. Plant one row next to the water, another above the path that dog-walkers could use, and a third row on the west side of the current roadway on the west bank from the dam to Skaha Lake. Refurbish the roadway so that it is completely paved with clearly marked bike, walking and skateboard lanes; upgrade the lower path so that dog-walkers have a comfortable and useful route. As an added bonus, on the eastside of the channel from the Golf Course bridge north to Hwy 97 upgrade the path to include a paved shared pathway with single lanes for bikes and walkers; a gravel walk could be made for dog-walkers. (By getting both deciduous and coniferous trees not only will there be shade and windbreaks but also leaves to fall into the river to augment the food chain for insects and fish.)

At the junction of the Channel Route and Hwy 97 at Skaha Lake make the highway westbound one lane for that fifty metres, put up barriers along to the lights for a bike path next to the north sidewalk. At the lights, cyclists would cross the road, to the south side where the eastbound road would be reduced to one lane to the entrance to Skaha Lake Park thus allowing for barriers and two-way bike lanes. Cyclists then would ride through the park and link up with the enhanced (and protected) South Main route.

It would be circular, any traffic areas would be barrier-protected, no downtown renovations would be needed and people would still have some alternate routes (e.g. from Penticton Plaza along the current Atkinson bike route which can lead to the Green Ave bridge and onto the aforementioned enhanced Channel route, or going the other way they could continue right through to the KVR and/or the Penticton Creek experience or into the downtown core). Information signage could be placed along the Channel that discusses the history of the area from the earliest days of Aboriginal habitation, the return of the fish, the different generations of immigrant settlers, the surrounding geography, today’s economic and cultural activities including arts venues, wineries, craft breweries & distilleries and other points of interest to visit. Maps could be erected at key intersections to help visitors continue on the appropriate routes.

As for those who think Government is too dangerous for kids, my grandsons (from Arizona) felt that biking downtown was far trickier – too many drivers not paying attention. Put barriers on Government, and leave the downtown for the few bikers who feel they really need to be there. Let’s face it, most of us who bike aren’t going to bike downtown to shop and next to none of the visitors will. We bike for exercise, for views, for moments away from the madding crowds – the circular route does all this, and at far less expense or disruption (and if there is still money left, enhance the path along Ellis Creek to add options off Government and Atkinson Streets!!). We have started to re-do the downtown core for business purposes: leave that program to evolve, don’t rip it up for a less than stellar bike concept.

Tonight I will attempt to articulate a couple of additional reasons to counteract the case for spending so much money where it isn’t needed. The route requested actually contains the southern portion of my recommendation. Furthermore the Atkinson Street which is another part of both proposals would remain — I would not have people crossing a major main artery though. Government Street parallels the recommended street but is wider and already has major bike lanes (they just need better barriers). And I am not convinced that the few really serious bikers won’t use the streets as they are, so we wouldn’t gain anything but anger by tearing up one street that is narrow and basically an office/pub/services street already.

We will see how it goes… I will report back… my concern is that those pushing the expensive plan will already be organized to dominate the public hearing and thus will actually skew the perception of what the larger community wants — a concern I’ve had for decades about relying too heavily on public hearings.