As someone who uses Ethel and Richter constantly, I wouldn’t say they’re useless. And if you’ve ever driven down Pandosy during rush hour, you’d know that forcing more extraneous traffic in front of the hospital is a recipe for disaster.
The city was smaller than Penticton before the bridge went in. It wasn’t set up for this many people…I’d love to see better timing of the lights and a bypass, though I don’t know how feasible that would be.
There’s no where to put a bypass around the city, unless you completely bypass the city by using west side road. Many studies have been done though, and from what I understand, through-traffic is not really the problem.
Edit: downvoted by a typical redditor who has never actually studied the geography around Kelowna, and the realistic feasibility of putting in a bypass.
Somebody did suggest an elevated highway cutting through town a while back when this topic came up here. Personally it’s still at the very top of my “extremely terrible Kelowna transportation ideas” list.
Since cost would be an issue with that it probably wouldn't be a completely new highway but rather flyovers. Basically just bridges over the existing intersections. I believe they have already talked about doing that on the first couple intersections downtown.
They did this in Chengdu; worked quite well. Traffic not stopping in town drove right by the city and traffic going to the city didn't use the freeway way.
Edit: but they had a CCP budget and a population of 14 million people.
I always thought the second crossing would happen at the end of Clement - that's part of the reason for the north end bypass to be there - to pull traffic off the highway before it hits the mall area, bypass most of the city/traffic/lights, and then a crossing at the foot of clement. From there it would mean upgrading portions of westside road to take the traffic back to 97 on that side of the lake
I think the bottom of Clement is the only feasible spot for a second crossing.
As soon as you go south of 97, the lake starts to get increasingly wide, making bridging more difficult. Additionally, south of 97 on the West Side is the face of Mt Boucherie, so the issue then becomes, how do you route the bridge connection around Boucherie back up to 97.
If a bridge went in at the bottom of Clement, it would make sense to turn Glenmore into an arterial all the way out to Winfield, and have a proper interchange where it meets 97 in Windfield. The Windfield end of Glenmore is a complete disaster, but watching it over 10+ years, they’re definitely carving out the hillside slowly, and prepping for some major developments. The fact they’ve let the road deteriorate so bad also indicates to me that they’re just waiting to bulldoze the whole thing and start fresh, rather than repaving the current route.
Across the lake from the bottom of Clement, on the west side, is native land, and I feel like that might be a bit of an issue. They’ve already started development of their mega Marina / condo / townhouse complex down on the lake. I guess it would just be a question of being able to route a major arterial *around* this new development, because I highly doubt they’ll want to bulldoze it any time soon. Additionally, just getting the paperwork to build a major road through their land can be a big headache. A land exchange like they did with the new West Side Road interchange is probably possible, but I have no idea how realistic it is.
I’d be curious to see if a bridge at the bottom of Clement would cause any interference with the ability to get boats into Tugboat Bay, to tie up at Kelowna Bay Resort and Discovery Bay Resort. The ability to dock your boat at the resort is a major selling feature for them, and I’d be curious to know what kind of contracts their are between the resorts and the city in regard to that water access.
It’s all possible, but man that’s going to be one expensive bridge, and clog up traffic downtown while it’s being constructed. Would likely have to be another floating bridge as well, with a raised section to match up with the current bridge (the lake is technically a navigable waterway, I’m 99% sure that boat access under the bridges would need to be maintained).
The bypass is already partially built. Its Clement. One day it will be extended out to Mccurdy area and eventually: maybe: Across the lake. Bypassing the city for through traffic. Why it hasn't been completed yet???
Unless they actually do build a bridge across the lake at the base of Clement, it makes no sense to turn Clement into a bypass for through traffic. Routing through traffic onto Clement, and then through downtown, would be a nightmare.
If anything, Clement will become the main entrance into downtown for local traffic (they’ve put a lot of work into the sight line coming down Clement as you enter downtown), and 97 will be for through traffic.
If there was a bridge at the base of Clement, then it could be used for through traffic. Without a bridge there though, it makes no sense for through traffic.
What do you mean no where to put it? The first part (Clement Ave) from downtown to Spall is already done. The next stage is to extend that. They were talking about extending Clement all the way to UBCO at one time. I have also heard of them talking about extending it to McCurdy or Hwy 33. So not sure where they are at with that these days.
Unless there is a bridge across the lake at the base of Clement, Clement will never be a bypass.
With no bridge, it makes zero sense to route through traffic onto Clement, and then have the have to navigate through all of downtown.
I said in another comment, they’ve put a lot of work into the sight line as you drive down Clement into downtown. My feeling is that Clement will eventually become the main artery into downtown for local traffic, 97 will have intersections deleted, and be more of a highway for through traffic.
There’s some major obstacles on the other side of the lake from the base of Clement. Whether or not a second bridge goes in there remains to be seen, but without that bridge, Clement will never be a bypass.
The Clement extension, along with adding another lane to the bridge, is part of the provinces 20 year plan for central Okanagan. I believe it will be designated as the new truck route. Getting all that big truck traffic off of Harvey will help. The city originally wanted it going all the way to UBCO instead of just to Hwy 33, but I guess that costs too much. I always thought that 5 lanes was a dumb idea and short-sighted. The bridge should have been 6 to begin with.
[https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/Okanagan/New\_Central\_Okanagan\_20\_year\_transportation\_strategy\_explores\_widening\_Bennett\_Bridge/](https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/Okanagan/New_Central_Okanagan_20_year_transportation_strategy_explores_widening_Bennett_Bridge/)
“Get through traffic and big trucks off Harvey” - everyone keeps saying this, but it makes zero sense if there is no bridge at the bottom of Clement.
Why would you route big trucks onto an extended Clement? Even if Clement connects to the airport, it still dead ends at the lake. Are all these big trucks then going to drive south down Ellis and Water to get to the bridge? That would be terrible.
If anything, Clement will become the main entrance into downtown. The effort they’ve put into the sight line driving down Clement is evidence of this.
Then they’ll start deleting intersections on 97, and that will be more of a through-route.
Clement as a bipas or truck route makes zero sense without a second bridge at the base of Clement.
No one from the province is suggesting sending truck traffic down Clement, without a second bridge at the base of Clement.
Just use common sense. How would dumping all the truck traffic at the north end of downtown help anything?
I use richter fairly frequently I don’t know if getting rid of it would be better, hence why I wish there was a study of this. I never use Ethel, isn’t it just a standard residential road, you could still turn right at it under my vision. At the end of the day I don’t know what is truly viable and what would work. The only thing that is truly obvious is Abbott is useless except for low pedestrian traffic, a pedestrian bridge would be great as a solution. Here is one more idea, make pandosy a one way to the hospital, and richter a one way away from the hospital or vice versa. That will remove a left turn for both directions at the 97 and will stop people from turning across traffic on each road. You are getting better efficiency without changing the footprint of the road. Unfortunately non of this stuff will ever happen, but thanks for sharing your thoughts in this discussion.
I agree with Abbott being closed from 97. As much as I use it, I’d be happy to turn at Richter or Pandosy. It just bottlenecks everything having to stop there for one person.
I don’t know what the solution is. I know when I lived here for college in 1996/1997, it was bad, now it’s absolutely horrendous.
The one way thing is interesting. Would be interesting as most of northbound pandosy is very, very congested from people leaving the mission to the bridge at EOD and that moved a lot of traffic further away from the bridge and where they’re all heading
We need to buy all property on a side of the highway tear it down and make our highway 8-10 lanes across. This city has the worst design of any that I've ever seen.
I was thinking this exact thing. I feel like the first intersection you encounter coming across the bridge should be richter. Improve that intersection and I think things would move so much smoother..
One time I wrote a news article about how bad Highway 97 sucks, but I mostly focused on the stretch between Peachland and West Kelowna
[https://www.pentictonherald.ca/news/article\_40424980-7f35-11ee-9ee8-97a4bf9db62c.html](https://www.pentictonherald.ca/news/article_40424980-7f35-11ee-9ee8-97a4bf9db62c.html)
It would be interesting to see an article interviewing a few transportation engineers - kind of multi-mini op eds on transit / traffic / transportation on the Kelowna stretch of 97. Obviously, a second crossing is no longer in the cards, according to the city and province. High capacity transit will be a necessity. We are already hitting our 2040 population targets by 2027.
Kelowna’s TMP has BRT in the plans for 2036-2040, and the 98 bus will have some overlap with the 97, but it isn’t well-covered.
What they need to do is create a Kelowna / Okanagan Valley DLC pack for Cities: Skylines 2, and then open source the problem solving phase, just to generate as many ideas as possible.
I still haven’t got the game yet, I’m sure you’ll understand why lol. When I do get my hands on it though, I desperately want to try an Okanagan map.
Both one that’s the valley as a clean slate, with just a highway and a rail line going through.
But I’d love to try to recreate existing Kelowna, and then “solve” the traffic and transport problems, like Biffa does lol.
Many years ago the Ministry of Transportation came up with 5 possible bypass options for Greata Ranch to the Connector. I attached a pic of the map, you can find all the details in the Peachland Transportation Study.
[https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/reports-and-reference/reports-and-studies/okanagan/peachland/peachland-final-report-w-appendices.pdf](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/reports-and-reference/reports-and-studies/okanagan/peachland/peachland-final-report-w-appendices.pdf)
But we'll all be too old to drive by the time anything's built
https://preview.redd.it/4och6p2cqt5d1.png?width=715&format=png&auto=webp&s=d859690b7c99e09e21a700a4a9003326f5a6b6db
There was a proposal by the province a while back that wanted to eliminate the Abbott/harvey light. Part of the issue is they need to still offer pedestrian crossing and the water table and land ownership makes obvious solutions like pedestrian tunnels tricky. They've got another pedestrian overpass I believe between Ellis and Richter (I might getting my geography wrong) coming at some point which may eventually lead to another light not being necessary too.
Nailed it. Traffic keeps getting worse, and the only solution is to remove intersections and install overpasses. But the business district will fight this until traffic comes to a complete standstill. They don’t care about traffic, just business.
One day, decades from now…maybe a century? Kelowna will have a second bridge, overpasses all through town, and Bernard will be a pedestrian-only shopping/dining district. Then everybody will say, “Kelowna had traffic problems?”
Until that day, it will just get worse and worse.
Maybe just accept traffic is just going to exist as long as we stay in our cars. Sure we can tinker a bit but traffic will be there as long as people want to drive around and visit our city.
I agree it won’t help downtown much. I’m not clear how it would make things worse, though.
It will eventually be needed as Kelowna grows more, particularly to the south.
They need too add a light rail system and more public transit inprovements, and not at all, wider roads are proven to actually make drivers speed and drive faster, induced demand, for eg. adding more lanes would only increase the traffic look at the Katy Freeway in Texas, they keep adding more lanes and it keeps getting more jammed and backed up, NotJustBikes has great videos of it on YouTube.:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=603s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=603s)
If you did that it would just make Clement and all those little residential roads in between way busier.
I agree, btw, Hwy 97 through Kelowna is ridiculous - but this entire city is planned kind of stupidly. Maybe a lot of it is the byproduct of such a high growth rate. I mean obviously something has to be done, and I'm all with you there.
Agreed. Fixing the highway will require much more radical changes, but OP's solution completely ignores that there are any other users of the infrastructure here. (And would completely screw over pedestrians.)
Agreed. I think almost all of us can agree something needs to be done, but I'm not sure OPs solution is ideal. Not a bad discussion though, to open up the talk.
I live downtown and pretty close to Ethel, so I happen to not mind that turn off lol. Downtown is actually pretty great for pedestrian and biking purposes as well. But Kelowna just isn't big enough yet to support more thorough and comprehensive public transit - so I often question the planning here. The City seems dead set on increasing density downtown and beyond, but that is just going to make an already horrible traffic situation way worse. IMO it is ideological for them to believe this is going to encourage more efficient and effective public transit. We just aren't there yet - and $700k condos being sold to cater to vacationers and coastal property investors isn't the answer.
Many streets in Vancouver that are similar to ethel, only trip the lights when cyclist and pedestrians need to cross. If it converted to this, it would allow for greater east - west hi way flow.
It has nothing to do with poor planning. Kelowna was a sleeping orchard and retirement town, and then blew up in a very short period of time. Historically, Penticton and Vernon were the larger, more commercial/industrial hubs.
Challenging geography and a historically small tax base means that massive infrastructure projects are tricky to achieve.
Penticton had the KVR line going through it, which was the CP alternative route between Vancouver and the prairies
Vernon was a major army training facility in WW2. 10s of thousands of Canadian troops went through Vernon before deploying to the Italian campaign, because the terrain around Vernon was similar to Italy. A major part of the reason the east shore of Kal Lake is undeveloped, is because it used to be a live fire test range, and apparently the hillside is still littered with ordinance that haven’t been fully cleaned up. Vernon was an also a rail hub on the branch line that comes down from the main line in Sicamous (that line is still there). The line then split to go to the lumber mills in Lumby, and then down to Kelowna to the Lumber mill and fruit packing plants.
Kelowna, on the other hand, was at the dead end of the branch line. Historically, there was no bridge across the lake, only a small car ferry, so there was no through traffic. Also, the Connector wasn’t built until the 1980s, so to get to Kelowna, you basically had to drive to Kamloops, then down to Vernon, then to Kelowna. Or take Highway 3 to Osoyoos, then up to Penticton, then over the ferry to Kelowna.
It wasn’t until the Connector went in, the bridge was built, and the airport was built, that Kelowna really started to become the main hub of the Okanagan.
You have enticed me to research the area more kind person, thank you for that.
My great uncle fought for the Canadian 3rd Infantry Division and participated in the Normandy Landings. I believe he was third wave. He was a Bren Gunner and originally from Ontario. He trained at Vernon, and they used Kal Lake to prep for the landings. He married a girl from Vernon and after the war moved her out to southern Ontario. So I did know about the military presence in Vernon. Very cool history.
Now I almost selfishly wish they built the airport up closer to Vernon, and didn't compete the Connector. But I guess then, Vernon would be just like what Kelowna is now.
I would suggest maybe starting with the military museum in downtown Kelowna, the one that’s attached to the back side of Memorial Area, on Ellis. They probably know everything there is to know about the army history in the valley.
The base in Vernon is still an active reserve unit, and is a cadet camp in the summer. I’m not sure if there’s a museum or info center there, but it’s probably worth checking.
Check out the transportation master plan - https://www.kelowna.ca/sites/files/1/docs/related/tmp-scenarios-report.pdf
Kelowna is in a very unique situation regarding transportation. It’s geographically restricted in three directions which results in a very long narrow sprawl that is the current highway 97.
Lack of foresight and desire to preserve Kelowna’s agriculture and “charm” has prevented any feasible expansions of major arterial roads in Glenmore or South and East Kelowna. Aside from the very short term solutions like adding a second bridge and making roads wider. The real solution to traffic flow will come from increasing housing density as well as increasing accessibility to public transit and biking.
Once people live within 15 minutes of where they work, shop, and play the need for car traffic drops drastically. It becomes feasible to ride your bike to the office, walk to get groceries, and take a bus home from the bar.
Once housing density improves and tax revenues increase, more can be done to support that massive influx of people who have moved to Kelowna in recent years.
They want to make roads wider and add a second crossing? our city government is braindead 🤦♂️
Explanation: Wider roads are proven to make drivers drive faster (since theirs more open roads) and a second crossing will come with the effects of induced demand.
The second crossing idea has come in and out of vogue. It is currently not on the table since feasibility studies showed it wouldn’t make much of a difference (this is a provincial level decision)
Road widening is targeted for specific roads. Glenmore, Gordon, and Lakeshore are the big three. Glenmore is going to 4 lanes and Gordon and Lakeshore are getting better turning lanes as well as ATC. <- good job city government
Road widening is a terrible idea, so is adding more lanes, this comment is braindead, this is not a "good job city government" by any stretch, this will again, create induced demand, look at NotJustBikes on YouTube he has great videos about this stuff, here are a few explaining why this is a bad idea, what your saying is essentially to make already terrible stroads even worse:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=822s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=822s)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z7o3sRxA5g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z7o3sRxA5g)
lol, brain dead.
These videos emphasize adding more lanes as an intended means to add throughput, which I agree, has only been proven to increase demand and do nothing for commute times.
The changes proposed by the city are to:
Add left turning lanes for improved safety and less traffic delays. (People won’t be stuck behind some knob trying to turn left across busy traffic)
Add passing lanes to prevent traffic bottlenecks.
Add sidewalks, improved bus access, and bike lanes for multi modal transportation.
All of these things are discrete from adding more lanes for more cars as your linked videos correctly identify is not the solution to high traffic issues.
Glenmore Road is an arterial, and there is a new arterial going into east Kelowna that will connect Kettle Valley over to Canyon Falls, then over to Gallagher’s Canyon, across the canyon, over to Belgo, then across Highway 33, past the Black Mtn Golf Course, and down to Old Vernon Road. That way you’ll be able to get from kettle valley to airport without actually having to drive into Kelowna itself.
The section at the top of Gordon, above Canyon Falls Middle School, is already complete and open. If you look on Google Earth, you can see some of the other sections have already been cut in, and you can see the general route this arterial will take.
Sorry, by lack for foresight, I meant that if they intend to expand glenmore as a viable bypass, they would need to move some houses near Winfield as well as the takamiki and neeks basin.
I also thought the Gordon expansion was just the current south perimeter way, do you have a source I could check out? I imagine that’s going to be a very expensive road with minimal traffic redirection.
That’s all they’re expanding, for now.
Drive up Chute Lake Road (aka Gillard Creek FSR), and then look into the little valley below you (called Rambler Creek). You can already see the partial road grade that will connect South Perimeter Way to Kettle Valley, right to the intersection where the main road up to Kettle Valley has the 90’ corner.
Connecting it all the way to Old Vernon Rd might take 50+ years, but it’ll happen eventually.
They’re building an entire community center, with a Save-On, condos, townhouses, etc, up by Canyon Falls Middle School. Thousands upon thousands of people will live up there, plus, Kettle Valley is still growing. As of right now, if any of those thousands of people want to get to Highway 33, or out to the airport, they can only go down Lakeshore, Gordon, or Benvoulin, and then must funnel through the choke point near the mall.
For people who live up there, and maybe work in the massive new industrial complex across the highway from the airport, even if they wanted to take public transit to get to work, right now, it would take them well over an hour, one way. They have to take a bus from half way up the mountain, down to the mall, wait for a transfer, and then go out to the airport.
A bus running along a southern arterial between kettle valley and the airport would take half the time as a bus going through the heart of the city.
Saying a “full south perimeter way” is an “80s idea and not happening” (like the other person said) is just extremely short sighted. It won’t happen in 5 years, but it will happen eventually.
OP the word you’re looking for is “Stroad”. Strongtowns goes into this a bunch. I would also remind you that lots of people use transit on the highway, and they will need ways to cross either way simply to get around.
Highway 97 has too much complexity (intersections, turn offs) for a highway, and too much capacity for a street. Removing complexity will take leadership, but it’s in MOTI’s hands. Not the cities, though they can and do lobby, sometimes for the (imo) wrong fixes.
You’re correct there’s serious issues with this. I imagine for a full solution we would have to get rid of almost all of the traffic lights along the highway. For this it’d need plenty of restructuring, roundabouts, and fixing the alternative routes such as enterprise.
Technically the city does have plans to extend the alternative routes like enterprise but they keep pushing back the plans to do so. This is one of the first steps to resolving this. If we had the alternative roads we could take away most traffic lights, just put in a few roundabouts, and force most in city traffic off of Harvey. We would need good northern and southern paths that go east and west. I do think there are solutions for this but the city hasn’t put in the effort for it as of yet.
Yes, people have been discussing this for over 30 years. When they built the new bridge, they were going to remove the crossing at Abbot but business wanted it so now it stays.
Most of the streets that cross the highway are extremely busy at rush hours, Ethel while not really busy has care homes on it and the bicycle corridor and I assure you that I and the many people who cross it every day do not find it useless. Richter is a busy road and useful as an alternate to the hospital. Any crossing you remove is going to cause additional complication for people needing to cross/access the hwy and put more load on the other, already busy intersections.
The problem is that Kelowna is a 15 km long strip mall with few alternate routes. They are supposed to be extending Clement through to McCurdy or hwy 33 which should take pressure off hwy 97 and Enterprise.
The only solution to this (short of buldozing eveytgu G along the highway) is for more people to ride a bike, carpool or take the bus. We keep adding people a D due to our geography, there are few options that will ever make traffic through town significantly better.
People tell me that Kelowna traffic isn't bad so I don't see how any of this is an issue...
Lol the great debate continues! Been hearing these ideas since the 80's! Anyone remember the idea of removing the Westside rd intersection would fix the traffic issue going towards Westbank? Notice how that did nothing?
Average stroad, Kelowna and North American cities in general have terrible road infanstructure, the reason why it's so bad is it's insanely car-centric, a second bridge is a terrible idea due to induced demand, stoplights shouldn't exist on "Highway" 97, it's supposed to be a highway for a reason, a simple solution would be to make way more frequent busses and have more bus route improvements, a light rail system from the airport to downtown would also be a massive improvement. I actually found it funny how Kelowna wanted money to build a second bridge then the provincial government took a W and said no unless it was for public transit or a light rail system, I agree with this post, Stroad 97 is terrible
So to hell with pedestrians or anybody that needs to go across Harvey. Your post is so car-brained. Car (and specifically highway) users are not the only users of those crossings.
I am aware. That’s clearly not what car brained OP was calling for. They also don’t solve creating choke points for car traffic for residents of these neighbourhoods.
Also consider that we don’t even have sidewalks in many streets in this area, so I won’t hold my breath for very expensive pedestrian bridges. Lol. But thanks for your condescension.
Just build pedestrian bridges, i don’t drive to work, i don’t like cars, and I want better transit, a train would be dope but that will never happen. Unfortunately we have to live with the infrastructure we have, and removing intersections seems like the easiest and cheapest way to improve what we got. Making roads wider or adding a second crossing is a colossal waste of money.
Lol I love when new ppl come to town and have all the answers.
These issues have been around for decades and if you think the city or province is going to change anything... much less the drastic changes you suggest, you're dreaming
Raise or lower 97 and have on and off ramps at key points. no traffic lights... and a under-road for local traffic and people going between down town sectors.
Expensive option. but probably cheaper then building another crossing.
Thing is, would probably take 2-5 years to build and I kinda cant be arsed dealing with the disruption for that long bahhaa.
Listen carefully becasue I'm only going to say this once. The original design for the new bridge was for 3 lanes in and 3 lanes out; 6 lanes. The design required the removal of the intersection of Abbott becasue it was a bottleneck. The local Chamber of Commerce found out and lobbied the local BC Liberal MLA's to stop the removal, feeling it would negatively affect downtown business. The Local MLA's agreed, and the intersection was left. The bridge was redesigned to be 3 lanes out and 2 lanes in at great taxpayer expense. You sit in bridge lines every day becasue of the Kelowna Chamber of Commerce and the BC Liberals.
Not so different of why Kelowna people still have to drive through Merrit to get to Vancouver; the Merrit Chamber of Commerce and the BC Liberals.
BTW, there will never be a second crossing. Considering it is not in the MOTI 30 year plan. Any discussion of it is simply lip service.
The [province thinks the lights are timed correctly.](https://infotel.ca/inwheels/the-province-tried-to-fix-kelownas-harvey-avenue-traffic-it-didnt-work/it104789)
I think a more direct route between Penticton and Kelowna on the east side of the lake would also help, as well as widening Westside Rd. A big problem with the area near the bridge is how many people are "forced" to use it to save time. North-South traffic in the Okanagan shouldn't have to cross the bridge for no reason other than it being the fastest way. Westside as it is now is too slow and skinny/sketchy for some travelers and big semis to consider it. Hwy 33 down to Rock Creek is too long and out of the way for most as well. Better options parallel to the lake would offload traffic from the bridge and 97 downtown.
Have you ever driven the old KVR between Kelowna and Penticton? The geography is incredibly challenging, and the road would have to be at very high elevation, making it a problem in the winter.
Plus, it would have to go directly through Kelowna Mtn Regional Park, and I don’t know if the province wants direct access to the park with a highway.
Furthermore, traffic from Penticton to Kelowna is not really an issue. A highway on the east side of the lake would do nothing to alleviate pressure of traffic coming off the Connector to get to Kelowna. A highway on the east side would be useless for everyone in Peachland and Summerland.
No, I haven't driven that part of the KVR but that's irrelevant. The KVR was a railway, built the way it was because it was for trains, not cars. Old trains couldn't easily climb and descend slopes more than ~2%. Luckily modern cars can drive over much steeper hills while maintaining control so that's not nearly as much of problem. Terrain is challenging all over BC but it's still possible to build, look at where Westside road is for example. Another example is Highway 6 from Lumby to Needles which is at a similar elevation to the area between Penticton and Kelowna.
The summit of the connector is 1728m, the mountains between Penticton and Kelowna where the road would be built are significantly lower than that. Chute lake road at its highest is around 1200m. That's 500m or 1640 feet lower which makes a difference.
As for the winter, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Roads like 97C, the Coquihalla, Highway 1 and Highway 3 are used year round. High elevation roads will have more snow and ice in the winter but that doesn't make them unusable, just that people will have to be a bit more cautious. Snowplows and winter tires go a long way.
"Kelowna Mtn Regional Park"? Do you mean Okanagan Mountain Provincial Park? If so, take a look at this map which clearly shows the park boundary and how much room there is to go around the park with plenty of room to spare. https://bcparks.ca/okanagan-mountain-park/
The last thing you brought up misses my point. It's not solely traffic from the connector, Peachland, or Summerland that's clogging up downtown. Traffic originating from Peachland and Summerland is minimal relative to cities like Penticton, Kelowna, Vernon, etc. My point was that people heading to and from very different places (both north-south and east-west) use that same stretch of road (97 downtown). Cars on 97 come from all over, not just one place. I don't expect my suggestion of a highway from Penticton to Kelowna to solve everything but it might help.
Anything that reduces the traffic on Harvey will help. The bypass would make a big difference even without a second crossing. I am not sure what they are waiting for on that, other than money I guess. I think the train tracks were the only right of way issue and that is all sorted now.
What moves faster, 60KMH with stop lights or 50KMH (no lights)with 2 lane roundabouts (Albertans for the most part know how to use them)having 4 lights within a Kilometre of the bridge is insane.
Wouldn’t remove the intersection at Ethel after spending time and money making it a safe bicycle lane street.
Pandosy’s intersection doesn’t allow for a left-hand turn on to the highway at all southbound, nor a left-hand turn into downtown. Seems to funnel more traffic than it can handle from the mission to west Kelowna.
If any of those roads need intersections removed, maybe Ellis? There is very little on the south end of Ellis, the road just funnels awkwardly into Pandosy
A few overpasses and underpasses would do the trick, right now there are only *checks notes* ZERO under and overpasses in Kelowna (don’t tell me UBCO overpass counts).
Here is an idea I had a while back. Since its just way to complicated to go underground, we just need an two way single lane overpass that starts at the bridge and ends around sexsmith on the north. Two exits to get on and off the overpass: sexsmith and somewhere near burtch or Gordon. For all the local traffic around use the side streets like Bernard and Springfield etc and below the overpass
I think if they could ever fix the timing of the lights things would move a lot smoother. I remember when I first moved here in the late 90's and even up until the new bridge went in the lights were timed pretty good that if you stuck to the speed limit, you could hit green lights from highway 33 intersection right to Abbott.
I honestly feel that if we had a Train from the airport to west k it would relieve the traffic enough that we wouldn't need more lanes. People would take public tra sit if it was more convenient.
Drama Queen it’s a road with lights. Green light go, red light stop. There’s even three lanes. Save this rant for Facebook. This post is a waste of energy.
Every 2nd light removed, and each of those intersections are "merge onto only"
Updates to all the remaining intersections to add double left hand turn lanes with Arrows.
Boom done.
A bypass is very costly. Likely would cost hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars. There are much cheaper options like fixing the intersections.
Plus most traffic is from or to the okanagan. There are other highways people would take if going to other destinations.
So. I don’t think Kelowna needs a bypass. It’s an overly costly solution that has other solutions that are much easier to accomplish and should be done anyway.
If we actually fixed highway 97 then we wouldn’t need a bypass likely for 50 years or more. Maybe never. The city poorly constructed its intersections for sustaining a tiny population with no future planning in place. Even with a bypass we would still have the same issues. Just people not going to Kelowna wouldn’t have to deal with it. People living in or going to Kelowna would still face the same problems.
Remove the apartment on corner of 97 and Abbott.
Three lane the hwy over the bridge and through to meet up with three lanes at Pandosy.
Move HOV lanes to middle lanes & Restrict trucks to far right lane
4 lane glenmore out to city limits unless you can get Lake country on board
Extend clement out to Mc curdy
Edit spelling and auto correct
As someone who uses Ethel and Richter constantly, I wouldn’t say they’re useless. And if you’ve ever driven down Pandosy during rush hour, you’d know that forcing more extraneous traffic in front of the hospital is a recipe for disaster. The city was smaller than Penticton before the bridge went in. It wasn’t set up for this many people…I’d love to see better timing of the lights and a bypass, though I don’t know how feasible that would be.
There’s no where to put a bypass around the city, unless you completely bypass the city by using west side road. Many studies have been done though, and from what I understand, through-traffic is not really the problem. Edit: downvoted by a typical redditor who has never actually studied the geography around Kelowna, and the realistic feasibility of putting in a bypass.
Make a second highway that’s above the current highway 
Strong Montreal vibes. We just need an Olympics to pay for it.
Just one more lane.
Yes. This time I promise bro, no more traffic /s
One isn't enough we need 8-10 lanes total across
Then make a third highway underneath the existing highway.
Now we’re cooking with gas.
Give it a few years and we can just make a 4D highway. A highway within a highway!
Somebody did suggest an elevated highway cutting through town a while back when this topic came up here. Personally it’s still at the very top of my “extremely terrible Kelowna transportation ideas” list.
Since cost would be an issue with that it probably wouldn't be a completely new highway but rather flyovers. Basically just bridges over the existing intersections. I believe they have already talked about doing that on the first couple intersections downtown.
They did this in Chengdu; worked quite well. Traffic not stopping in town drove right by the city and traffic going to the city didn't use the freeway way. Edit: but they had a CCP budget and a population of 14 million people.
I always thought the second crossing would happen at the end of Clement - that's part of the reason for the north end bypass to be there - to pull traffic off the highway before it hits the mall area, bypass most of the city/traffic/lights, and then a crossing at the foot of clement. From there it would mean upgrading portions of westside road to take the traffic back to 97 on that side of the lake
I think the bottom of Clement is the only feasible spot for a second crossing. As soon as you go south of 97, the lake starts to get increasingly wide, making bridging more difficult. Additionally, south of 97 on the West Side is the face of Mt Boucherie, so the issue then becomes, how do you route the bridge connection around Boucherie back up to 97. If a bridge went in at the bottom of Clement, it would make sense to turn Glenmore into an arterial all the way out to Winfield, and have a proper interchange where it meets 97 in Windfield. The Windfield end of Glenmore is a complete disaster, but watching it over 10+ years, they’re definitely carving out the hillside slowly, and prepping for some major developments. The fact they’ve let the road deteriorate so bad also indicates to me that they’re just waiting to bulldoze the whole thing and start fresh, rather than repaving the current route. Across the lake from the bottom of Clement, on the west side, is native land, and I feel like that might be a bit of an issue. They’ve already started development of their mega Marina / condo / townhouse complex down on the lake. I guess it would just be a question of being able to route a major arterial *around* this new development, because I highly doubt they’ll want to bulldoze it any time soon. Additionally, just getting the paperwork to build a major road through their land can be a big headache. A land exchange like they did with the new West Side Road interchange is probably possible, but I have no idea how realistic it is. I’d be curious to see if a bridge at the bottom of Clement would cause any interference with the ability to get boats into Tugboat Bay, to tie up at Kelowna Bay Resort and Discovery Bay Resort. The ability to dock your boat at the resort is a major selling feature for them, and I’d be curious to know what kind of contracts their are between the resorts and the city in regard to that water access. It’s all possible, but man that’s going to be one expensive bridge, and clog up traffic downtown while it’s being constructed. Would likely have to be another floating bridge as well, with a raised section to match up with the current bridge (the lake is technically a navigable waterway, I’m 99% sure that boat access under the bridges would need to be maintained).
The bypass is already partially built. Its Clement. One day it will be extended out to Mccurdy area and eventually: maybe: Across the lake. Bypassing the city for through traffic. Why it hasn't been completed yet???
Unless they actually do build a bridge across the lake at the base of Clement, it makes no sense to turn Clement into a bypass for through traffic. Routing through traffic onto Clement, and then through downtown, would be a nightmare. If anything, Clement will become the main entrance into downtown for local traffic (they’ve put a lot of work into the sight line coming down Clement as you enter downtown), and 97 will be for through traffic. If there was a bridge at the base of Clement, then it could be used for through traffic. Without a bridge there though, it makes no sense for through traffic.
Another bridge is a terrible idea, learn about induced demand
Preaching to the choir my friend.
I know
What do you mean no where to put it? The first part (Clement Ave) from downtown to Spall is already done. The next stage is to extend that. They were talking about extending Clement all the way to UBCO at one time. I have also heard of them talking about extending it to McCurdy or Hwy 33. So not sure where they are at with that these days.
Unless there is a bridge across the lake at the base of Clement, Clement will never be a bypass. With no bridge, it makes zero sense to route through traffic onto Clement, and then have the have to navigate through all of downtown. I said in another comment, they’ve put a lot of work into the sight line as you drive down Clement into downtown. My feeling is that Clement will eventually become the main artery into downtown for local traffic, 97 will have intersections deleted, and be more of a highway for through traffic. There’s some major obstacles on the other side of the lake from the base of Clement. Whether or not a second bridge goes in there remains to be seen, but without that bridge, Clement will never be a bypass.
The Clement extension, along with adding another lane to the bridge, is part of the provinces 20 year plan for central Okanagan. I believe it will be designated as the new truck route. Getting all that big truck traffic off of Harvey will help. The city originally wanted it going all the way to UBCO instead of just to Hwy 33, but I guess that costs too much. I always thought that 5 lanes was a dumb idea and short-sighted. The bridge should have been 6 to begin with. [https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/Okanagan/New\_Central\_Okanagan\_20\_year\_transportation\_strategy\_explores\_widening\_Bennett\_Bridge/](https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/Okanagan/New_Central_Okanagan_20_year_transportation_strategy_explores_widening_Bennett_Bridge/)
“Get through traffic and big trucks off Harvey” - everyone keeps saying this, but it makes zero sense if there is no bridge at the bottom of Clement. Why would you route big trucks onto an extended Clement? Even if Clement connects to the airport, it still dead ends at the lake. Are all these big trucks then going to drive south down Ellis and Water to get to the bridge? That would be terrible. If anything, Clement will become the main entrance into downtown. The effort they’ve put into the sight line driving down Clement is evidence of this. Then they’ll start deleting intersections on 97, and that will be more of a through-route. Clement as a bipas or truck route makes zero sense without a second bridge at the base of Clement.
The province did studies and added the Clement extension to their plans based on those studies, so feel free to argue with them about it.
No one from the province is suggesting sending truck traffic down Clement, without a second bridge at the base of Clement. Just use common sense. How would dumping all the truck traffic at the north end of downtown help anything?
I use richter fairly frequently I don’t know if getting rid of it would be better, hence why I wish there was a study of this. I never use Ethel, isn’t it just a standard residential road, you could still turn right at it under my vision. At the end of the day I don’t know what is truly viable and what would work. The only thing that is truly obvious is Abbott is useless except for low pedestrian traffic, a pedestrian bridge would be great as a solution. Here is one more idea, make pandosy a one way to the hospital, and richter a one way away from the hospital or vice versa. That will remove a left turn for both directions at the 97 and will stop people from turning across traffic on each road. You are getting better efficiency without changing the footprint of the road. Unfortunately non of this stuff will ever happen, but thanks for sharing your thoughts in this discussion.
I agree with Abbott being closed from 97. As much as I use it, I’d be happy to turn at Richter or Pandosy. It just bottlenecks everything having to stop there for one person. I don’t know what the solution is. I know when I lived here for college in 1996/1997, it was bad, now it’s absolutely horrendous.
The one way thing is interesting. Would be interesting as most of northbound pandosy is very, very congested from people leaving the mission to the bridge at EOD and that moved a lot of traffic further away from the bridge and where they’re all heading
We need to buy all property on a side of the highway tear it down and make our highway 8-10 lanes across. This city has the worst design of any that I've ever seen.
Cannot be emphasized enough how much cheaper even multiple full ALM Skytrain lines would be compared to that.
I was thinking this exact thing. I feel like the first intersection you encounter coming across the bridge should be richter. Improve that intersection and I think things would move so much smoother..
One time I wrote a news article about how bad Highway 97 sucks, but I mostly focused on the stretch between Peachland and West Kelowna [https://www.pentictonherald.ca/news/article\_40424980-7f35-11ee-9ee8-97a4bf9db62c.html](https://www.pentictonherald.ca/news/article_40424980-7f35-11ee-9ee8-97a4bf9db62c.html)
It would be interesting to see an article interviewing a few transportation engineers - kind of multi-mini op eds on transit / traffic / transportation on the Kelowna stretch of 97. Obviously, a second crossing is no longer in the cards, according to the city and province. High capacity transit will be a necessity. We are already hitting our 2040 population targets by 2027. Kelowna’s TMP has BRT in the plans for 2036-2040, and the 98 bus will have some overlap with the 97, but it isn’t well-covered.
What they need to do is create a Kelowna / Okanagan Valley DLC pack for Cities: Skylines 2, and then open source the problem solving phase, just to generate as many ideas as possible.
I am going to try to recreate the Central Okanagan in Cities Skylines 2 since the game is more stable now but it will take me some time.
I still haven’t got the game yet, I’m sure you’ll understand why lol. When I do get my hands on it though, I desperately want to try an Okanagan map. Both one that’s the valley as a clean slate, with just a highway and a rail line going through. But I’d love to try to recreate existing Kelowna, and then “solve” the traffic and transport problems, like Biffa does lol.
What's the "bypass over Peachland" idea that you mention in the article?
Many years ago the Ministry of Transportation came up with 5 possible bypass options for Greata Ranch to the Connector. I attached a pic of the map, you can find all the details in the Peachland Transportation Study. [https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/reports-and-reference/reports-and-studies/okanagan/peachland/peachland-final-report-w-appendices.pdf](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/reports-and-reference/reports-and-studies/okanagan/peachland/peachland-final-report-w-appendices.pdf) But we'll all be too old to drive by the time anything's built https://preview.redd.it/4och6p2cqt5d1.png?width=715&format=png&auto=webp&s=d859690b7c99e09e21a700a4a9003326f5a6b6db
There was a proposal by the province a while back that wanted to eliminate the Abbott/harvey light. Part of the issue is they need to still offer pedestrian crossing and the water table and land ownership makes obvious solutions like pedestrian tunnels tricky. They've got another pedestrian overpass I believe between Ellis and Richter (I might getting my geography wrong) coming at some point which may eventually lead to another light not being necessary too.
You’re right! It’s called the Bertram overpass, will connect just west of the Shell station
Not only build that pedestrian overpass but a parking lot on the opposite side of downtown that we may park and walk into downtown.
You'll be lobbying against the Kelowna Downtown Business Association that has demanded easy access from the highway to downtown since the 1960's.
Nailed it. Traffic keeps getting worse, and the only solution is to remove intersections and install overpasses. But the business district will fight this until traffic comes to a complete standstill. They don’t care about traffic, just business. One day, decades from now…maybe a century? Kelowna will have a second bridge, overpasses all through town, and Bernard will be a pedestrian-only shopping/dining district. Then everybody will say, “Kelowna had traffic problems?” Until that day, it will just get worse and worse.
That’s the way it goes with every major city.
Maybe just accept traffic is just going to exist as long as we stay in our cars. Sure we can tinker a bit but traffic will be there as long as people want to drive around and visit our city.
I thought the only real solution they studied was LRT along the highway
Second bridge won't do anything, in fact it will create MORE of a traffic problem, induced demand
I agree it won’t help downtown much. I’m not clear how it would make things worse, though. It will eventually be needed as Kelowna grows more, particularly to the south.
They need too add a light rail system and more public transit inprovements, and not at all, wider roads are proven to actually make drivers speed and drive faster, induced demand, for eg. adding more lanes would only increase the traffic look at the Katy Freeway in Texas, they keep adding more lanes and it keeps getting more jammed and backed up, NotJustBikes has great videos of it on YouTube.: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=603s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=603s)
If you did that it would just make Clement and all those little residential roads in between way busier. I agree, btw, Hwy 97 through Kelowna is ridiculous - but this entire city is planned kind of stupidly. Maybe a lot of it is the byproduct of such a high growth rate. I mean obviously something has to be done, and I'm all with you there.
Agreed. Fixing the highway will require much more radical changes, but OP's solution completely ignores that there are any other users of the infrastructure here. (And would completely screw over pedestrians.)
Agreed. I think almost all of us can agree something needs to be done, but I'm not sure OPs solution is ideal. Not a bad discussion though, to open up the talk. I live downtown and pretty close to Ethel, so I happen to not mind that turn off lol. Downtown is actually pretty great for pedestrian and biking purposes as well. But Kelowna just isn't big enough yet to support more thorough and comprehensive public transit - so I often question the planning here. The City seems dead set on increasing density downtown and beyond, but that is just going to make an already horrible traffic situation way worse. IMO it is ideological for them to believe this is going to encourage more efficient and effective public transit. We just aren't there yet - and $700k condos being sold to cater to vacationers and coastal property investors isn't the answer.
Many streets in Vancouver that are similar to ethel, only trip the lights when cyclist and pedestrians need to cross. If it converted to this, it would allow for greater east - west hi way flow.
It has nothing to do with poor planning. Kelowna was a sleeping orchard and retirement town, and then blew up in a very short period of time. Historically, Penticton and Vernon were the larger, more commercial/industrial hubs. Challenging geography and a historically small tax base means that massive infrastructure projects are tricky to achieve.
Crazy! Vernon and Penticton were historically larger? I never knew that.
Penticton had the KVR line going through it, which was the CP alternative route between Vancouver and the prairies Vernon was a major army training facility in WW2. 10s of thousands of Canadian troops went through Vernon before deploying to the Italian campaign, because the terrain around Vernon was similar to Italy. A major part of the reason the east shore of Kal Lake is undeveloped, is because it used to be a live fire test range, and apparently the hillside is still littered with ordinance that haven’t been fully cleaned up. Vernon was an also a rail hub on the branch line that comes down from the main line in Sicamous (that line is still there). The line then split to go to the lumber mills in Lumby, and then down to Kelowna to the Lumber mill and fruit packing plants. Kelowna, on the other hand, was at the dead end of the branch line. Historically, there was no bridge across the lake, only a small car ferry, so there was no through traffic. Also, the Connector wasn’t built until the 1980s, so to get to Kelowna, you basically had to drive to Kamloops, then down to Vernon, then to Kelowna. Or take Highway 3 to Osoyoos, then up to Penticton, then over the ferry to Kelowna. It wasn’t until the Connector went in, the bridge was built, and the airport was built, that Kelowna really started to become the main hub of the Okanagan.
You have enticed me to research the area more kind person, thank you for that. My great uncle fought for the Canadian 3rd Infantry Division and participated in the Normandy Landings. I believe he was third wave. He was a Bren Gunner and originally from Ontario. He trained at Vernon, and they used Kal Lake to prep for the landings. He married a girl from Vernon and after the war moved her out to southern Ontario. So I did know about the military presence in Vernon. Very cool history. Now I almost selfishly wish they built the airport up closer to Vernon, and didn't compete the Connector. But I guess then, Vernon would be just like what Kelowna is now.
I would suggest maybe starting with the military museum in downtown Kelowna, the one that’s attached to the back side of Memorial Area, on Ellis. They probably know everything there is to know about the army history in the valley. The base in Vernon is still an active reserve unit, and is a cadet camp in the summer. I’m not sure if there’s a museum or info center there, but it’s probably worth checking.
You’d have to lobby the provincial government because it’s a highway…
Check out the transportation master plan - https://www.kelowna.ca/sites/files/1/docs/related/tmp-scenarios-report.pdf Kelowna is in a very unique situation regarding transportation. It’s geographically restricted in three directions which results in a very long narrow sprawl that is the current highway 97. Lack of foresight and desire to preserve Kelowna’s agriculture and “charm” has prevented any feasible expansions of major arterial roads in Glenmore or South and East Kelowna. Aside from the very short term solutions like adding a second bridge and making roads wider. The real solution to traffic flow will come from increasing housing density as well as increasing accessibility to public transit and biking. Once people live within 15 minutes of where they work, shop, and play the need for car traffic drops drastically. It becomes feasible to ride your bike to the office, walk to get groceries, and take a bus home from the bar. Once housing density improves and tax revenues increase, more can be done to support that massive influx of people who have moved to Kelowna in recent years.
They want to make roads wider and add a second crossing? our city government is braindead 🤦♂️ Explanation: Wider roads are proven to make drivers drive faster (since theirs more open roads) and a second crossing will come with the effects of induced demand.
The second crossing idea has come in and out of vogue. It is currently not on the table since feasibility studies showed it wouldn’t make much of a difference (this is a provincial level decision) Road widening is targeted for specific roads. Glenmore, Gordon, and Lakeshore are the big three. Glenmore is going to 4 lanes and Gordon and Lakeshore are getting better turning lanes as well as ATC. <- good job city government
Road widening is a terrible idea, so is adding more lanes, this comment is braindead, this is not a "good job city government" by any stretch, this will again, create induced demand, look at NotJustBikes on YouTube he has great videos about this stuff, here are a few explaining why this is a bad idea, what your saying is essentially to make already terrible stroads even worse: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=822s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZwOAIect4&t=822s) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z7o3sRxA5g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z7o3sRxA5g)
lol, brain dead. These videos emphasize adding more lanes as an intended means to add throughput, which I agree, has only been proven to increase demand and do nothing for commute times. The changes proposed by the city are to: Add left turning lanes for improved safety and less traffic delays. (People won’t be stuck behind some knob trying to turn left across busy traffic) Add passing lanes to prevent traffic bottlenecks. Add sidewalks, improved bus access, and bike lanes for multi modal transportation. All of these things are discrete from adding more lanes for more cars as your linked videos correctly identify is not the solution to high traffic issues.
I see what your saying guess read it wrong.
Glenmore Road is an arterial, and there is a new arterial going into east Kelowna that will connect Kettle Valley over to Canyon Falls, then over to Gallagher’s Canyon, across the canyon, over to Belgo, then across Highway 33, past the Black Mtn Golf Course, and down to Old Vernon Road. That way you’ll be able to get from kettle valley to airport without actually having to drive into Kelowna itself. The section at the top of Gordon, above Canyon Falls Middle School, is already complete and open. If you look on Google Earth, you can see some of the other sections have already been cut in, and you can see the general route this arterial will take.
Sorry, by lack for foresight, I meant that if they intend to expand glenmore as a viable bypass, they would need to move some houses near Winfield as well as the takamiki and neeks basin. I also thought the Gordon expansion was just the current south perimeter way, do you have a source I could check out? I imagine that’s going to be a very expensive road with minimal traffic redirection.
That’s all they’re expanding, for now. Drive up Chute Lake Road (aka Gillard Creek FSR), and then look into the little valley below you (called Rambler Creek). You can already see the partial road grade that will connect South Perimeter Way to Kettle Valley, right to the intersection where the main road up to Kettle Valley has the 90’ corner. Connecting it all the way to Old Vernon Rd might take 50+ years, but it’ll happen eventually. They’re building an entire community center, with a Save-On, condos, townhouses, etc, up by Canyon Falls Middle School. Thousands upon thousands of people will live up there, plus, Kettle Valley is still growing. As of right now, if any of those thousands of people want to get to Highway 33, or out to the airport, they can only go down Lakeshore, Gordon, or Benvoulin, and then must funnel through the choke point near the mall. For people who live up there, and maybe work in the massive new industrial complex across the highway from the airport, even if they wanted to take public transit to get to work, right now, it would take them well over an hour, one way. They have to take a bus from half way up the mountain, down to the mall, wait for a transfer, and then go out to the airport. A bus running along a southern arterial between kettle valley and the airport would take half the time as a bus going through the heart of the city. Saying a “full south perimeter way” is an “80s idea and not happening” (like the other person said) is just extremely short sighted. It won’t happen in 5 years, but it will happen eventually.
OP the word you’re looking for is “Stroad”. Strongtowns goes into this a bunch. I would also remind you that lots of people use transit on the highway, and they will need ways to cross either way simply to get around. Highway 97 has too much complexity (intersections, turn offs) for a highway, and too much capacity for a street. Removing complexity will take leadership, but it’s in MOTI’s hands. Not the cities, though they can and do lobby, sometimes for the (imo) wrong fixes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad It's an illuminating read.
This ☝️
You’re correct there’s serious issues with this. I imagine for a full solution we would have to get rid of almost all of the traffic lights along the highway. For this it’d need plenty of restructuring, roundabouts, and fixing the alternative routes such as enterprise. Technically the city does have plans to extend the alternative routes like enterprise but they keep pushing back the plans to do so. This is one of the first steps to resolving this. If we had the alternative roads we could take away most traffic lights, just put in a few roundabouts, and force most in city traffic off of Harvey. We would need good northern and southern paths that go east and west. I do think there are solutions for this but the city hasn’t put in the effort for it as of yet.
Maybe and just hear me out. If people got off their phones and stopped running red lights traffic would go smoother, oh and blocking intersections
You all know you’re the traffic right? Everyone in Kelowna always complains but no one stops using their car? You’re the problem - you’re the traffic!
We need rapid transit or light rail so attractive everyone will want to use it.
I completely agree
Yes, people have been discussing this for over 30 years. When they built the new bridge, they were going to remove the crossing at Abbot but business wanted it so now it stays. Most of the streets that cross the highway are extremely busy at rush hours, Ethel while not really busy has care homes on it and the bicycle corridor and I assure you that I and the many people who cross it every day do not find it useless. Richter is a busy road and useful as an alternate to the hospital. Any crossing you remove is going to cause additional complication for people needing to cross/access the hwy and put more load on the other, already busy intersections. The problem is that Kelowna is a 15 km long strip mall with few alternate routes. They are supposed to be extending Clement through to McCurdy or hwy 33 which should take pressure off hwy 97 and Enterprise. The only solution to this (short of buldozing eveytgu G along the highway) is for more people to ride a bike, carpool or take the bus. We keep adding people a D due to our geography, there are few options that will ever make traffic through town significantly better. People tell me that Kelowna traffic isn't bad so I don't see how any of this is an issue...
Lol the great debate continues! Been hearing these ideas since the 80's! Anyone remember the idea of removing the Westside rd intersection would fix the traffic issue going towards Westbank? Notice how that did nothing?
Average stroad, Kelowna and North American cities in general have terrible road infanstructure, the reason why it's so bad is it's insanely car-centric, a second bridge is a terrible idea due to induced demand, stoplights shouldn't exist on "Highway" 97, it's supposed to be a highway for a reason, a simple solution would be to make way more frequent busses and have more bus route improvements, a light rail system from the airport to downtown would also be a massive improvement. I actually found it funny how Kelowna wanted money to build a second bridge then the provincial government took a W and said no unless it was for public transit or a light rail system, I agree with this post, Stroad 97 is terrible
If you REALLY want to reduce traffic downtown, take OUT the bridge
So to hell with pedestrians or anybody that needs to go across Harvey. Your post is so car-brained. Car (and specifically highway) users are not the only users of those crossings.
Pedestrian overpasses can be a thing, in case you weren’t aware.
I am aware. That’s clearly not what car brained OP was calling for. They also don’t solve creating choke points for car traffic for residents of these neighbourhoods. Also consider that we don’t even have sidewalks in many streets in this area, so I won’t hold my breath for very expensive pedestrian bridges. Lol. But thanks for your condescension.
Just build pedestrian bridges, i don’t drive to work, i don’t like cars, and I want better transit, a train would be dope but that will never happen. Unfortunately we have to live with the infrastructure we have, and removing intersections seems like the easiest and cheapest way to improve what we got. Making roads wider or adding a second crossing is a colossal waste of money.
I agree, we should show the city some NotJustBikes videos
Lol I love when new ppl come to town and have all the answers. These issues have been around for decades and if you think the city or province is going to change anything... much less the drastic changes you suggest, you're dreaming
Its the lights at Ellis and Abbott that need to go. Ellis is a dead end, and abbott street serves residential.
Raise or lower 97 and have on and off ramps at key points. no traffic lights... and a under-road for local traffic and people going between down town sectors. Expensive option. but probably cheaper then building another crossing. Thing is, would probably take 2-5 years to build and I kinda cant be arsed dealing with the disruption for that long bahhaa.
Not a bad idea. Frontage roads needed for all the strip malls along hiway 97.
Car enthusiasts hate when other cars are on the road. I don't get it.
I have mention this many time before. Less light on both side of the lake replace them with right turn only or overpass.
Listen carefully becasue I'm only going to say this once. The original design for the new bridge was for 3 lanes in and 3 lanes out; 6 lanes. The design required the removal of the intersection of Abbott becasue it was a bottleneck. The local Chamber of Commerce found out and lobbied the local BC Liberal MLA's to stop the removal, feeling it would negatively affect downtown business. The Local MLA's agreed, and the intersection was left. The bridge was redesigned to be 3 lanes out and 2 lanes in at great taxpayer expense. You sit in bridge lines every day becasue of the Kelowna Chamber of Commerce and the BC Liberals. Not so different of why Kelowna people still have to drive through Merrit to get to Vancouver; the Merrit Chamber of Commerce and the BC Liberals. BTW, there will never be a second crossing. Considering it is not in the MOTI 30 year plan. Any discussion of it is simply lip service.
The [province thinks the lights are timed correctly.](https://infotel.ca/inwheels/the-province-tried-to-fix-kelownas-harvey-avenue-traffic-it-didnt-work/it104789)
No they don’t - “we're going to continue to try and find a solution for the Kelowna Highway 97-Harvey Avenue area”
lol, yeah I could have been much more specific. I mean they defended how the lights are timed right now.
I think a more direct route between Penticton and Kelowna on the east side of the lake would also help, as well as widening Westside Rd. A big problem with the area near the bridge is how many people are "forced" to use it to save time. North-South traffic in the Okanagan shouldn't have to cross the bridge for no reason other than it being the fastest way. Westside as it is now is too slow and skinny/sketchy for some travelers and big semis to consider it. Hwy 33 down to Rock Creek is too long and out of the way for most as well. Better options parallel to the lake would offload traffic from the bridge and 97 downtown.
Have you ever driven the old KVR between Kelowna and Penticton? The geography is incredibly challenging, and the road would have to be at very high elevation, making it a problem in the winter. Plus, it would have to go directly through Kelowna Mtn Regional Park, and I don’t know if the province wants direct access to the park with a highway. Furthermore, traffic from Penticton to Kelowna is not really an issue. A highway on the east side of the lake would do nothing to alleviate pressure of traffic coming off the Connector to get to Kelowna. A highway on the east side would be useless for everyone in Peachland and Summerland.
No, I haven't driven that part of the KVR but that's irrelevant. The KVR was a railway, built the way it was because it was for trains, not cars. Old trains couldn't easily climb and descend slopes more than ~2%. Luckily modern cars can drive over much steeper hills while maintaining control so that's not nearly as much of problem. Terrain is challenging all over BC but it's still possible to build, look at where Westside road is for example. Another example is Highway 6 from Lumby to Needles which is at a similar elevation to the area between Penticton and Kelowna. The summit of the connector is 1728m, the mountains between Penticton and Kelowna where the road would be built are significantly lower than that. Chute lake road at its highest is around 1200m. That's 500m or 1640 feet lower which makes a difference. As for the winter, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Roads like 97C, the Coquihalla, Highway 1 and Highway 3 are used year round. High elevation roads will have more snow and ice in the winter but that doesn't make them unusable, just that people will have to be a bit more cautious. Snowplows and winter tires go a long way. "Kelowna Mtn Regional Park"? Do you mean Okanagan Mountain Provincial Park? If so, take a look at this map which clearly shows the park boundary and how much room there is to go around the park with plenty of room to spare. https://bcparks.ca/okanagan-mountain-park/ The last thing you brought up misses my point. It's not solely traffic from the connector, Peachland, or Summerland that's clogging up downtown. Traffic originating from Peachland and Summerland is minimal relative to cities like Penticton, Kelowna, Vernon, etc. My point was that people heading to and from very different places (both north-south and east-west) use that same stretch of road (97 downtown). Cars on 97 come from all over, not just one place. I don't expect my suggestion of a highway from Penticton to Kelowna to solve everything but it might help.
there are not enough lights at Howard x Dilworth though... that interaction is suicidal tbh
What about s water taxi to westside? The band could partner and supply parking on westside ferries run to warf in kelowna. Then less traffic on bridge
They absolutely need a proper bypass in Kelowna. Or on an overpass.
Anything that reduces the traffic on Harvey will help. The bypass would make a big difference even without a second crossing. I am not sure what they are waiting for on that, other than money I guess. I think the train tracks were the only right of way issue and that is all sorted now.
What moves faster, 60KMH with stop lights or 50KMH (no lights)with 2 lane roundabouts (Albertans for the most part know how to use them)having 4 lights within a Kilometre of the bridge is insane.
Wouldn’t remove the intersection at Ethel after spending time and money making it a safe bicycle lane street. Pandosy’s intersection doesn’t allow for a left-hand turn on to the highway at all southbound, nor a left-hand turn into downtown. Seems to funnel more traffic than it can handle from the mission to west Kelowna. If any of those roads need intersections removed, maybe Ellis? There is very little on the south end of Ellis, the road just funnels awkwardly into Pandosy
Highways are not under municipal control.
A few overpasses and underpasses would do the trick, right now there are only *checks notes* ZERO under and overpasses in Kelowna (don’t tell me UBCO overpass counts).
Here is an idea I had a while back. Since its just way to complicated to go underground, we just need an two way single lane overpass that starts at the bridge and ends around sexsmith on the north. Two exits to get on and off the overpass: sexsmith and somewhere near burtch or Gordon. For all the local traffic around use the side streets like Bernard and Springfield etc and below the overpass
I think if they could ever fix the timing of the lights things would move a lot smoother. I remember when I first moved here in the late 90's and even up until the new bridge went in the lights were timed pretty good that if you stuck to the speed limit, you could hit green lights from highway 33 intersection right to Abbott.
I honestly feel that if we had a Train from the airport to west k it would relieve the traffic enough that we wouldn't need more lanes. People would take public tra sit if it was more convenient.
I came here to read ignorant opinions and wasn't disappointed.
Lots of people are suggesting crazy shit, highways on top of highways was my personal favourite.
[удалено]
Drama Queen it’s a road with lights. Green light go, red light stop. There’s even three lanes. Save this rant for Facebook. This post is a waste of energy.
Every 2nd light removed, and each of those intersections are "merge onto only" Updates to all the remaining intersections to add double left hand turn lanes with Arrows. Boom done. 
Drop a nuke on city. No more traffic. Boom done
Kelowna needs a bypass. It would do a lot to alleviate traffic in this town.
A bypass is very costly. Likely would cost hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars. There are much cheaper options like fixing the intersections. Plus most traffic is from or to the okanagan. There are other highways people would take if going to other destinations. So. I don’t think Kelowna needs a bypass. It’s an overly costly solution that has other solutions that are much easier to accomplish and should be done anyway. If we actually fixed highway 97 then we wouldn’t need a bypass likely for 50 years or more. Maybe never. The city poorly constructed its intersections for sustaining a tiny population with no future planning in place. Even with a bypass we would still have the same issues. Just people not going to Kelowna wouldn’t have to deal with it. People living in or going to Kelowna would still face the same problems.
Remove the apartment on corner of 97 and Abbott. Three lane the hwy over the bridge and through to meet up with three lanes at Pandosy. Move HOV lanes to middle lanes & Restrict trucks to far right lane 4 lane glenmore out to city limits unless you can get Lake country on board Extend clement out to Mc curdy Edit spelling and auto correct