I must say that I was quite alarmed at a great many of the proposed “options” that were presented at the Hwy 97 Open House this past Monday.

Peachland is an incredibly lovely town. You DO NOT route a 4-lane highway through an existing neighbourhood. And yet 3 of the 5 “bypass” routes and 1 of the “in-place” routes did exactly that.

A bypass goes around, it does not go through. An in-place route expands the existing route IN PLACE, it does not reroute a portion through an existing residential neighbourhood.

These 4 “options” should have been discarded during committee deliberations and never presented to the public as viable options. (And the second “South of Princeton” option that went through the trailer parks, should have gone around them – if that means going slowly, then you reduce the speed limit)

If it is to be a bypass, then only Options 1 and 2 are really options as they are the only ones that bypass Peachland – all of the others would bisect Peachland.

If it is to be in place, then it must be in place. If issues exist such that the existing route can not be expanded in place, then it must be a bypass. If expanding it in place would necessitate slow speeds for stretches, then stretches must have slow speeds to protect the nature of the town and the safety of the residents.

But in no instance should a 4 lane highway be routed through an existing neighbourhood – period, end of discussion.

Rick Ingram
6536 Bulyea Ave
Peachland