Issuu

PREPARED FOR:

TOWN OF OSOYOOS 11500 - 115th Street Osoyoos, BC V0H 1V5

PREPARED BY:

URBAN SYSTEMS LTD. 304 – 1353 Ellis Street Kelowna, BC V1Y 1Z9 Tel: (250) 762-2517

Prepared By: Cameron Noonan, RPP, MCIP

Reviewed By: Ian Roth, P.Eng.

Transportation Planner

Transportation Engineer

Permit to Practice Number

Date issued:

File:

June 18th, 2026

Draft

August 17th, 2026

Final Draft

0552.0050.01

This report is prepared for the sole use of the Town of Osoyoos. No representations of any kind are made by Urban Systems Ltd. or its employees to any party with whom Urban Systems Ltd. does not have a contract. © 2026 URBANSYSTEMS®.

CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1 1.1

CONNECTION TO OTHER PLANS............................................................................................. 1

1.2

DEVELOPING THE PLAN ........................................................................................................... 3

2.0 KEY ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES .................................................. 6 2.1

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT ..................................................................................... 6

2.2

ROAD NETWORK ...................................................................................................................... 7

2.3

TOWN CENTRE.......................................................................................................................... 8

2.4

TRENDS AND OPPORTUNITIES .................................................................................................. 8

3.0 VISION & GOALS ................................................................... 10 3.1

OSOYOOS’ VISION FOR TRANSPORTATION ......................................................................... 10

3.2

GOALS .................................................................................................................................... 10

4.0 CONNECTED SIDEWALKS & PATHWAYS ................................ 13 4.1

SIDEWALK NETWORK ............................................................................................................. 13

4.2

BIKE AND PATHWAY NETWORK ............................................................................................. 15

5.0 SAFER STREETS & HIGHWAYS ................................................. 19 5.1

MUNICIPAL STREET NETWORK ............................................................................................... 19

5.2

PROVINCIAL HIGHWAYS ....................................................................................................... 22

6.0 SHARED RIDES & CLEAR PARKING......................................... 30 6.1

PUBLIC TRANSIT ...................................................................................................................... 30

6.2

PARKING ................................................................................................................................. 31

6.3

SHARED MOBILITY .................................................................................................................. 32

6.4

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 32

7.0 IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................. 33 7.1

FUNDING THE PLAN ............................................................................................................... 33

7.2

FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS............................................................................................................ 35

APPENDICES Appendix A: Road Condition Assessment Appendix B: Engagement Summary Reports #1 and #2 Appendix C: Existing Conditions Appendix D: Project List

TABLES Table 4-1: Priority Sidewalk Projects......................................................................................................... 13 Table 4-2: Priority Crosswalk Projects ....................................................................................................... 14 Table 4-3: Priority Biking Projects .............................................................................................................. 16 Table 5-1: Road Classifications ................................................................................................................ 19 Table 5-2: Priority Road Projects .............................................................................................................. 21 Table 5-3: Priority Highway Projects ......................................................................................................... 24 Table 6-1: Priority Actions for Parking/Shared Rides .............................................................................. 32 Table 7-1: Recommended Bylaw/Policy Updates................................................................................. 35 Table 7-2: Suggested Follow-Up Studies ................................................................................................. 35

FIGURES Figure 1-1: TMP Development Process ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 5-1: Sidewalk Condition Assessment ............................................................................................ 25 Figure 5-2: Recommended Bike Network ............................................................................................... 26 Figure 5-3: Road Classifications ............................................................................................................... 27 Figure 5-4: Renewal Priorities .................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 5-5: Town Priorities for Highway Crossings ................................................................................... 29 Figure 7-1: Proposed Capital Investment by Category ........................................................................ 33 Figure 7-2: Proposed Capital Investment by Year ................................................................................. 34

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Transportation Master Plan (TMP) is a 20-year strategic planning document to guide how people and goods move through the community: today and into the future. Building on recent efforts to modernize asset management, this work brings the road network into a broader, coordinated approach that looks at both infrastructure condition and community needs. The plan focuses on identifying practical priorities for roadway improvements, downtown streets, and key visitor areas, while reflecting input from residents, stakeholders, and Council. It also considers how streets can better support safety, accessibility, travel choices, and a more vibrant public realm. Overall, this work provides a roadmap that helps the Town care for its existing infrastructure while also making meaningful progress toward long-term community goals.

1.1 CONNECTION TO OTHER PLANS Transportation plays an important role in many aspects of life in Osoyoos, influencing everything from the local economy to the environment and overall day-to-day livability. While this is the Town’s first comprehensive Transportation Master Plan, it builds on a strong foundation of previous work. Together, these efforts help ensure that the TMP reflects existing priorities, past investments, and the community’s vision for the future.

1.1.1 LAND USE Official Community Plan (2025) This high-level guide directs long-term land use, infrastructure, and community growth through the year 2040. It sets the foundational rules for how streets and pathways should be integrated into new and existing developments. Aligning with this document ensures that future transportation improvements support the town's overarching goal of building a socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable community.

Town Centre Renewal Plan (2018) This plan is designed to revitalize the downtown area into a vibrant, year-round destination for businesses, locals, and visitors. Its main goal is to shift the downtown's layout from focusing on cars to prioritizing a safe, "pedestrian-first" environment. To achieve this, the plan specifically recommends narrowing the wide driving lanes on Main Street to make room for wider sidewalks, safer crosswalks, and outdoor seating. It also emphasizes the need to manage parking better, add clear directional signs, and build a connected network of walking and biking trails linking the downtown to nearby parks and neighborhoods.

1.1.2 TRANSPORTATION DCC Update (In-Progress) Development Cost Charges (DCCs) fund the infrastructure required to support new housing and commercial growth. An update to the DCC program is currently under Provincial review. The proposed transportation projects have been incorporated into this Transportation Master Plan. The DCC program also includes sewer and water projects, creating opportunities to improve efficiency by coordinating upgrades. This allows new transportation features to be added cost-effectively when streets are already being rebuilt.

Road Condition Assessment (2026) The Road Condition Assessment (RCA) evaluates the current condition of the Town’s road network to support infrastructure planning within the TMP. It provides a consistent, data-driven understanding of pavement and sidewalk conditions across the system. These findings help inform priorities, coordinate upgrades, and guide long-term investment decisions.

Active Transportation Network Plan (2023) The Active Transportation Network Plan (ATNP) outlines ways to improve walking, cycling, and rolling across the community. It focuses on key issues like safety at intersections, conflicts with parked cars, and the need for more accessible pathways. The proposed network from this plan has been incorporated and refined in the TMP to better align with current priorities and community needs.

Accessibility Plan (2023) This plan outlines the Town's strategy to identify, remove, and prevent everyday barriers for people with disabilities. It emphasizes the need for safe, inclusive travel options and pedestrian infrastructure. Specifically, the plan highlights community feedback calling for more accessible parking, bettermaintained sidewalks, smooth curb ramps, and audible crosswalk signals. By incorporating these priorities, the transportation plan can ensure that local streets, pathways, and transit services are easy and safe for everyone to navigate, regardless of their physical abilities.

1.1.3 TOURISM Tourism Osoyoos 5-Year Strategy (2024-2029) This strategy outlines the community's approach to growing and managing the local visitor economy with a focus on sustainable destination development. The seasonal influx of tourists heavily impacts traffic and parking demand. To support sustainable tourism, the transportation system must provide visitors with safe, clear, and convenient ways to travel between hotels, businesses, and recreational areas without relying solely on personal vehicles. By improving active transportation infrastructure and accessible pathways, the transportation plan can enhance the overall visitor experience while reducing road congestion and maintaining a high quality of life for year-round residents.

1.2 DEVELOPING THE PLAN From the outset of developing this plan, an intentional process was established to draw upon technical data, analysis and community input. This process is summarized in Figure 1-1. Figure 1-1: TMP Development Process

1.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT This phase combined background research, data review, and site visits to build a clear picture of how the transportation system works today in Osoyoos. It included a review of existing plans, bylaws, and census data, along with a basic analysis of travel patterns and how different parts of the network are used. Site visits were also completed to see how people move around the town in real conditions and to identify safety and accessibility issues that may not show up in data alone.

Road Conditions Assessment The Road Condition Assessment was a key part of the Transportation Master Plan, reviewing the condition of all roads and sidewalks in Osoyoos. Pavement was assessed in detail, including cracking, surface damage, and roughness. Sidewalks were also inspected for surface issues and accessibility barriers. The findings were used to help prioritize projects and align them with future road renewal work. Further details are provided in Appendix A.

Traffic Data Collection and Site Visits Traffic data was collected at 12 locations across the town from August 25 to 28, 2025. These counts captured how many vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists were moving through key intersections and crossing points during the busy summer period. Provincial traffic data was also used to understand travel patterns on Highway 3 and Highway 97. Site visits were carried out at the same time to confirm what the data showed and to identify real-world issues such as delays, unsafe movements, and gaps in the network.

1.2.2 ENGAGEMENT #1: ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES The first round of engagement focused on gathering input on local transportation issues, challenges, and concerns. It also sought to understand the community’s values and priorities. The feedback collected during this round informed the development of the TMP’s Vision and Goals (Section 3.0). A detailed engagement summary is available in Appendix B.

Public Engagement In February and March 2026, the Town invited residents to participate in an online survey, interactive map, and a pop-up event. Safety was the top concern, with people wanting safer crossings, better lighting, and improvements at high-risk intersections. Walking and biking are limited by difficulty crossing major roads and concerns about sharing space with traffic, with strong support for safer crossings, more pathways, and separated bike lanes. Driving issues focused on summer congestion, unsafe intersections, and parking challenges, while suggested fixes include separating highway and local traffic and adding traffic calming.

Interest-Holder Engagement The interest-holder engagement session was held on May 28, 2026, and included participants from BC Transit, Interior Health, and the Town of Osoyoos. The session reviewed key elements of the draft plan and included discussion on current issues, opportunities, and how the plan aligns with each organization’s goals. Two main themes emerged. First, there is a need to better support the senior population, particularly in accessing local destinations and regional health services. Second, participants highlighted challenges with expanding BC Transit service and discussed potential options to improve how people travel within the town and to nearby communities.

1.2.3 DEVELOPING THE DRAFT PLAN This phase focused on bringing together ideas from engagement, along with previous work, and turning them into a clear, practical set of options for the plan.

Gathering Options Options for the plan were developed using several sources, including projects identified in the Active Transportation Plan, the ongoing DCC update, site visits, and ideas raised during community engagement. These inputs helped ensure the plan reflects both technical priorities and community needs.

Prioritizing Investments Each project was evaluated based on how well it aligned with the core goals of the Transportation Master Plan. The renewal priorities from the RCA (for roads) and the DCC Update (for water and sewer) were crossreferenced and used as the main input for prioritization.

1.2.4 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT #2: DRAFT PLAN The second round of engagement presented the Draft TMP for community review and input. Residents were invited to review the draft plan through the project webpage and provide feedback on its vision, goals, and recommendations. The feedback gathered through this process was used to refine the Draft TMP and confirm the proposed direction of the plan, ensuring it reflects local priorities and interests. A detailed engagement summary is available in Appendix B.

Public Engagement In July 2026, the project team hosted a pop-up event at the Osoyoos Farmers’ Market to share information about the Draft TMP and to promote the online survey, which was available July 2 to 31, 2026. Overall, feedback indicated broad support for the Draft TMP. Participants expressed support for initiatives aimed at improving intersection and crossing safety, connectivity, and transit service. Particularly, there was strong support for updating the layout of complex intersections, connecting the pathway network across town, advocating for new signals and crosswalks on Highway 97 and Highway 3, and considering a shuttle service around the community in the summer. While the majority of the recommendations received positive feedback, there was strong opposition to implementing paid parking on Main Street during the busy season. Additionally, comments reinforced the need to address unsafe pedestrian crossings and intersections, a lack of curb ramps and sidewalks, limited transit service, and poor road conditions.

2.0 KEY ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES The following provides a summary of the key findings from the Existing Conditions Report. These findings highlight the main challenges and opportunities for Osoyoos’ transportation system. They are based on a review of existing data, plans, and site observations.

2.1 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT Active Transportation Network Gaps: Limited dedicated cycling facilities, sidewalk network gaps, and crosswalk safety concerns.

Active transportation options, such as walking and cycling, are currently limited in several parts of Osoyoos. There are few dedicated cycling facilities, which makes it difficult for people to bike comfortably and safely. As a result, cyclists are often seen using sidewalks. The Town Centre has a strong Pedestrians observed crossing Highway 3 and local roads pedestrian network with sidewalks and crossings, east of Cottonwood Road but outside this area, sidewalks are less consistent and gaps are common. Most crosswalks that were reviewed meet standard guidance; however, some key locations along Highway 3 do not. In particular, the crossings at Kingfisher Drive and along Hotel Row do not provide enough protection given the traffic volumes and the distance people need to cross. There are no crosswalks on Highway 3 east of Cottonwood Drive making it harder for people to cross safely.

Transit Service: Limited service hours and stop amenities.

Transit service in Osoyoos is very limited. While some stops have basic features such as seating and signage (e.g. Main Street / 89th Street), others have no amenities at all (e.g. Gravenstein Drive). Currently, the Town is serviced by two routes: Route 40, a regional route connecting to Penticton, and Route 41, a local route. Both routes have limited service hours, having just two round trips on weekdays and no service on weekends. Improving both service frequency and stop quality would make transit a more practical option for residents and visitors.

Active Transportation Accessibility: Missing curb letdowns at crosswalks creates accessibility concerns within the active transportation network.

Accessibility is another key issue. Many areas, especially outside the Town Centre, are missing important features such as curb ramps. These gaps make it difficult for people using mobility aids, strollers, or wheelchairs to navigate the network safely and comfortably.

2.2 ROAD NETWORK Road Safety: Sightline challenges on minor road approaches and aggressive driver behaviours increase safety risks for both motorists and pedestrians.

Safety is a main concern on the road network. At many intersections, particularly on minor roads, limited sightlines make it difficult for drivers and pedestrians to see each other clearly. Drivers are often observed waiting in crosswalks or taking risks turning into small gaps after long delays, which increases the chance of collisions.

Signage: Inconsistent and improper signage placement in several locations.

Signage is inconsistent in several locations across town. Poor placement or unclear signs can lead to confusion and increase safety risks. Improving the consistency and visibility of signage will help make the network easier to understand and safer to use. Oleander Drive and Lobelia Drive (facing north) Intersection Design: Challenging and complex intersections increase driver confusion and safety risks. Some intersections in Osoyoos are complex or unconventional, which can be difficult for both residents and visitors to navigate. Locations such as Oleander Drive / Lobelia Drive and 89th Street / Kingfisher Drive are examples where the layout contributes to confusion and safety concerns

2.3 TOWN CENTRE Main Street Role and Function: An increase in population and tourism in the summer months intensifies congestion in the Town Centre road network.

Main Street Vehicle Queues

Traffic congestion in the Town Centre increases significantly during the summer months. Main Street (Highway 3) plays both a local and regional role, and this creates pressure on the road network. Long delays are common, particularly for drivers trying to turn onto the highway from side streets. In some cases, drivers change routes or take risks to enter traffic. Angle parking on Main Street is valued for access to businesses, but it also creates conflicts with through traffic. Vehicles backing out of stalls can disrupt traffic flow and lead to safety issues.

Boat Trailer Parking: Trailer parking near the boat launch is limited and alternate trailer parking is at an inconvenient location relative to the boat launch.

Boat trailer parking is limited and not well located in relation to the boat launch. This results in additional vehicle trips across the network, including through major bottlenecks like the bridge, and can lead to informal parking in unsuitable areas.

Accessibility and Active Transportation Gaps: There is a lack of infrastructure supporting accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists in the Town Centre.

The Town Centre also has gaps in accessible and active transportation infrastructure. There are currently no dedicated cycling facilities, and while sidewalks are generally present, some design issues reduce their effectiveness. For example, sidewalks do not always align with crosswalks, leading people to cross in less safe locations. At some crossings, the push buttons for pedestrian signals are not clearly visible or easy to find. Additional improvements are needed to make the network more intuitive and accessible for all users.

2.4 TRENDS AND OPPORTUNITIES This section outlines key forecasts and emerging trends that will shape transportation needs and opportunities in Osoyoos over time.

Population Growth Growth in Osoyoos has historically been cyclical, often reflecting broader economic trends. Population growth in Osoyoos, and the South Okanagan as a whole, is projected to be modest moving forward. BC Stats projects that roughly 650 new residents will arrive over the next twenty years. For context, the population grew by about 1,000 people in the previous twenty years (2004 to 2024).

Through Traffic Traffic on Highway 3 has increased by about 3.5% per year over the past six years, including both local trips within Osoyoos and through traffic. With the available data, it is not possible to determine exactly how much of this traffic is passing through without stopping. However, traffic counts suggest that roughly half of the vehicles crossing the bridge are local trips. This highlights that actions taken by the Town can play a meaningful role in improving highway conditions.

Constrained Network Highway 3 is the only connection between the east and west sides of Osoyoos. Expanding this corridor would be costly and would impact adjacent properties, while a bypass is unlikely given the surrounding terrain. As a result, reducing peak summer congestion will depend on finding alternative ways to move people across the lake. Another key focus should be reducing reliance on Highway 3 for short local trips, particularly for residents in East Osoyoos.

Short Trips Trip patterns in Osoyoos present an opportunity to shift how people travel. Driving is currently the default mode of travel; however, most trips within Osoyoos are less than 3 km. This distance is well suited to walking, cycling, or other active modes, as 3 km is roughly a 10-minute bike ride. While there are some hills on the west side, the terrain is generally flat, and the climate is favourable for biking. Driving will remain the most convenient option for many trips, but providing more travel options can help reduce overall congestion. Not everyone needs to make the switch for the entire community to benefit.

Aging Population Osoyoos has long been a popular retirement destination, and this trend is expected to continue. As the population ages, designing smooth, predictable, and accessible infrastructure will be essential to support independence and everyday mobility for older adults.

Electrification New mobility options are changing how people travel around the community. Small electric vehicles, including e-bikes and e-scooters, are becoming more common and expanding access to active transportation, particularly for older adults or those travelling longer distances. However, their higher speeds and quiet operation can create conflicts on shared paths and sidewalks, highlighting the need for clear design and separation where appropriate.

Coordinating with Renewal Coordinating transportation improvements with planned road, water, and sewer upgrades allows the Town to deliver multiple projects at the same time, reducing disruption and making better use of available funding. This “dig once” approach helps lower costs and ensures transportation improvements are integrated into broader infrastructure upgrades rather than delivered separately.

3.0 VISION & GOALS 3.1 OSOYOOS’ VISION FOR TRANSPORTATION Osoyoos Transportation Vision: A reliable transportation network that preserves our small-town charm and keeps everyone moving safely and smoothly. This means prioritizing cost-effective maintenance and safety upgrades, creating smooth pathways that support daily independence for every stage of life. It also means organizing parking and traffic during the peak summer months to support a welcoming visitor experience while maintaining smooth travel on local roads. By focusing on these everyday needs, the following goals provide a practical, financially responsible roadmap to keep the community moving safely.

3.2 GOALS The vision statement is supported by a set of more detailed goals and objectives that describe how the Town can make progress towards the vision over time.

Build an Age-Friendly, Connected Walking Network Create a highly walkable, age-friendly community where everyone, from young children to seniors, can move comfortably and safely through town. Objectives: •

Fill the Sidewalk Gaps: Prioritize high-impact, cost-effective fixes for missing links in the sidewalk network to connect key destinations, schools, and services.

•

Make Crossings Safer: Upgrade local crosswalks to be highly visible and shorter to cross, enabling people walking to feel safe and prioritized.

•

Design for All Ages and Abilities: Provide walking paths that meet age-friendly standards by adding smooth surfaces, clear curb ramps, and tactile features to support people pushing strollers or using mobility aids.

•

Maintain Year-Round Access: Conduct proactive maintenance of sidewalks and pathways, such as timely snow clearing, sweeping, and trimming overgrown vegetation.

•

Improve Walking Comfort: Invest in features that make walking safer and more pleasant yearround, such as shade trees and better street lighting.

Connect the Biking and Multi-Use Pathway Network Build on the town's existing multi-use pathways by filling in the gaps, creating a fully connected and safe network for biking, rolling, and walking Objectives: •

Close the Network Gaps: Focus on connecting the existing trails and pathways so people can travel seamlessly across town without feeling forced onto busy roads.

•

Provide Safe and Practical Alternatives: Use low-cost, practical solutions (like painted lines or simple physical barriers) to give people biking or riding e-scooters cyclists and e-scooter users safe routes to ride, keeping them off pedestrian sidewalks.

•

Manage Shared Paths Safely: Provide clear signs, design cues, and community education to help walkers, cyclists, and e-scooter users share multi-use paths, while reinforcing rules against riding on sidewalks.

•

Provide Secure Bike Parking: Encourage a mix of town-funded bike racks at parks and community facilities, and privately funded racks at businesses and apartment buildings, making riding a practical choice for everyday errands.

Create Safe and Welcoming Local Streets Work towards providing safe, comfortable, and intuitive travel for everyone, protecting the character of residential neighborhoods. Objectives: •

Calm Neighborhood Traffic: Use practical traffic-calming measures to lower vehicle speeds, improve safety, and discourage drivers from using residential streets as highway shortcuts.

•

Make Local Intersections Safer: Improve lines of sight, traffic signage, and the physical layout of local intersections to prevent near-misses and make it easier to get around town.

•

Encourage Safe Driving: Pair physical street improvements with community education and consistent enforcement to ensure drivers respect speed limits and share the road safely with all users.

•

Coordinate with Renewal: Integrate safety upgrades and intersection improvements with the Town's regular road renewal and utility projects to increase value for public investment.

Partner with the Province to Improve the Highway Corridor Work collaboratively with the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) to make Highway 97 and Highway 3 safer for regional traffic while also serving as a welcoming Main Street for our community. Objectives:

•

Balance the Highway and Main Street: Advocate for design solutions that handle the summer tourist traffic surges and regional movement while keeping central areas pedestrian-friendly, lively, and easy to navigate on foot.

•

Improve Highway Intersections: Work with the Province to upgrade key highway intersections (e.g., adding dedicated turn lanes, roundabouts, or signals) to improve functionality and make turning easier.

•

Connect Across the Highway: Collaborate on upgrading highway crossings for people walking and rolling while balancing demand for through traffic.

•

Manage Highway Speeds: Partner with provincial authorities to add design features that naturally encourage drivers to respect speed limits and pay closer attention as they enter the Town.

•

Leverage Provincial Funding: Maximize local infrastructure budgets by aligning municipal projects with planned provincial highway upgrades to share costs and resources efficiently.

Make it Easy for Visitors to “Park Once” Welcome visitors with a transportation system that makes it easy, intuitive, and enjoyable to arrive, park their vehicle once, and explore the town on foot, by bike, or via transit. Objectives:

•

Promote Day Use Parking: Use clear signs to direct drivers, especially those with recreational vehicles (RVs), boat trailers, and other large vehicles, to parking lots off Main Street.

•

Enhance Wayfinding: Implement clear, welcoming signs and maps at key parking areas, transit stops, and along pathways that highlight how quick and easy it is for residents and visitors to walk or bike to popular local destinations.

•

Provide Convenient Shuttles: Partner with tourism groups to support convenient seasonal shuttles linking gateway parking areas, hotels, and popular attractions (like wineries or beaches).

•

Improve Turnover in Busy Areas: Use simple, low-cost parking management strategies to make sure spaces free up regularly in high-demand areas for quick errands.

Improve Transit and Shared Transportation Make it easier to get around without a private car by offering accessible, well-promoted transit and shared mobility options. Objectives:

•

Improve Public Transit and Shuttles: Explore expanded public transit tailored to residents' everyday errands, alongside convenient seasonal shuttles that allow visitors to access regional attractions without driving.

•

Strengthen Regional Connections: Work with neighbouring Okanagan communities to secure better regional bus connections (e.g. Oliver, Penticton, Kelowna).

•

Manage Shared E-Scooters Safely: Partner with the operating company to expand parking areas for daily trips, while holding them responsible for rider education and enforcement (e.g. sidewalk riding).

•

Raise Awareness of Options: Launch clear communication campaigns so residents are aware of their mobility options, and visitors are actively empowered to leave their cars behind by knowing exactly how to use local transit, ride-shares, and taxis.

4.0 CONNECTED SIDEWALKS & PATHWAYS Osoyoos has high potential for walking and biking. Many residents are already walking to work, and public surveys indicate that half of the residents want to walk more. The town currently features a mix of sidewalks (designated for people walking) and pathways (shared spaces for both walking and biking). Currently, there are few routes dedicated solely to people biking. The walking and biking network is anchored by popular routes like the Pioneer Walkway and the Lakeshore multi-use pathway. The next step is connecting these standalone paths into a complete network. This ensures that whether someone is commuting to work or heading to the beach, the journey is safe and enjoyable.

4.1 SIDEWALK NETWORK The core strategy for sidewalks is to focus investment on building complete routes along busier collector and arterial roads where safety risks are highest. Quieter local streets can often function safely as shared space. Focusing on these main arteries ensures children and seniors have safe routes to schools, parks, and daily errands.

4.1.1 FILLING SIDEWALK GAPS Sidewalk gaps can make or break a walking trip, forcing pedestrians into vehicle lanes or uneven gravel shoulders. Focusing on missing links is a cost-effective way to improve the entire network. Table 4-1: Priority Sidewalk Projects

PROJECT

PROJECT NAME

DESCRIPTION

EST. YEAR

6 & 10

Harbour Key Drive Sidewalk

Construct a sidewalk along the north side of Harbour Key Drive from Main Street (Highway 3) to the Solana Key Pathway. This segment will improve access to the dog park/boat trailer parking.

2027-2028

Lobelia Drive Sidewalk Infill

Fill in the sidewalk gap on the west side of Lobelia Drive between Hibiscus Court and Larkspur Place.

2031-2035

Finch Crescent Sidewalk Infill

Extend the existing sidewalk network on Finch Crescent from Swan Crescent to 74th Avenue.

2031-2035

Nighthawk Drive Sidewalk Infill

Fill in the sidewalk gap on the west side of Nighthawk Drive north of Hummingbird Lane.

2031-2035

4.1.2 SAFER CROSSINGS The most common barrier preventing people from walking is the danger of crossing busy roads. When there are long gaps between safe crossing points, people walking are forced to take long detours. A 200-metre detour to reach a marked crosswalk can take five to eight minutes. This encourages people to cross informally at unsafe locations. The Town cannot upgrade every intersection at once, so crossing infrastructure must be prioritized. Upgrades can be expensive, particularly on major roads, and additional crossings must be balanced with overall traffic flow. Table 4-2: Priority Crosswalk Projects

PROJECT

PROJECT NAME

DESCRIPTION

EST. YEAR

Hotel Row Crosswalk Upgrades

Work with MOTT to upgrade the Highway 3 crosswalk(s) on Hotel Row to increase the visibility and safety of people walking and biking.

2027

Main Street (Highway 3) / Kingfisher Drive Intersection Improvements

Explore intersection upgrades such as a new signalized intersection, a roundabout, adding a leftturn storage lane on Kingfisher Drive, and/or upgraded crosswalk treatments to improve mobility and pedestrian connectivity and safety.

2028

Highway 97 / 74th Avenue Crossing

Advocate to work with the MOTT to install a crosswalk connecting 74th Avenue east and west of Highway 97. This project includes filling the sidewalk gaps connecting to each side of the highway, and could be coordinated with water main upgrades.

2030

Main Street (Highway 3) / 89th Street Intersection Upgrades

Intersection upgrades to the Main Street (Highway 3) / 89th Street intersection to accommodate increasing vehicle and pedestrian demands, including a review of the current crosswalk treatments and potential improvements.

2031-2035

Local Road Crosswalk Upgrades

Perform annual reviews to identify local crossings that require upgraded treatments. Initial locations that were identified for potential improvements include:

Annual

• • • • 67

Lakeshore Drive Intersection Improvements

89th Street / Cactus Crescent 87th Street (north of Hwy especially) 74th Street / Nighthawk Drive Lakeshore Drive / 56th Ave

Work with the MOTT to upgrade the Highway 3 / Lakeshore Drive intersection to include a pedestrian crossing. This intersection should be considered for a traffic signal, dependant on the implementation timeline of the 45th Street Extension.

2030

4.1.3 DESIGNING FOR ALL AGES AND ABILITIES Consistently smooth sidewalks and pathways benefit everyone. They support people with disabilities, enable older adults to stay independent, and assist families with children in strollers.

Sidewalk Condition Assessment The Road Condition Assessment (RCA) found that roughly 80 percent of sidewalks are in good or satisfactory condition. Asphalt sidewalks make up a small portion of the overall network but are generally in poorer condition, particularly along Lakeshore Drive. Most sidewalks in town are concrete and remain in good condition. Sidewalks should be renewed alongside road work where possible to reduce costs and limit disruption. However, in some cases, sidewalks may need to be upgraded on their own to address safety and accessibility issues identified in Figure 5-1. Based on current conditions, the area around the Sonora Community Centre is a strong candidate for early improvements.

Municipal Standards Standards for new construction are outlined in the Town’s Subdivision Bylaw. While recent updates have incorporated numerous accessibility features, the Town could consider increasing the standard sidewalk width from 1.5 metres to 1.8 metres. This width allows two people using mobility devices or pushing strollers to pass each other. Although the current standard of 1.5 metres may be sufficient within a small-town environment, close attention must be paid during the design process to ensure that obstructions like utility or sign poles do not create pinch points that restrict access.

4.1.4 MAINTAINING YEAR-ROUND ACCESS While heavy snowfall is rare in Osoyoos, reliable snow clearing prevents isolation during the winter months. Generally, clearing sidewalks falls to the adjacent property owners. To improve reliability, the Town should adopt a formal snow and ice control policy, setting a target for clearing sidewalks and pathways that border parks and other public property. Furthermore, the Town should consider adopting a bylaw to formalize the responsibility of clearing sidewalks adjacent to private property. This could be a standalone bylaw or rolled into the existing Traffic Bylaw. Before updating the Traffic Bylaw, the Town should review all sidewalks and consider exempting some property owners (for example, where sidewalks run along a rear property line). Recognizing that some residents are physically unable to shovel, the Town could launch a community recognition program where residents can nominate neighbours for prizes for helping clear snow. Enforcement should take a light touch, focusing on education and community support for the first few seasons.

4.2 BIKE AND PATHWAY NETWORK Biking has significant potential in Osoyoos. Most trips are short, the terrain is relatively flat, and e-bikes are making biking viable for a wider range of people. The number of people biking will naturally decline over

the winter, but it is most attractive in the summer, when alternatives to relieve traffic are needed most. It can become part of the attraction for visitors and reduce summer congestion. One-third of surveyed residents stated they were interested in biking more. However, a lack of routes separated from vehicle traffic was the most cited barrier. This map shows the recommended bike network designed to address those safety concerns. The recommended bike network is shown in Figure 5-2.

4.2.1 CONNECTING THE CORE NETWORK This network represents the highest-priority routes connecting the east and west sides of Osoyoos. Roughly half of the network is already in place, including key routes such as the Pioneer Pathway and Lakeshore corridor. It is recommended that the Town pursue separating spaces walking and biking along the core network, rather than shared pathways. As e-bikes and e-scooters enable faster travel, dedicated space helps keep sidewalks comfortable for pedestrians. There are already challenges with shared use along these routes, and addressing these issues will be important. Where feasible, pathways should be designed to accommodate higher future demand, recognizing this will be a long-term, gradual effort and that some locations, such as the Osoyoos Trestle Bridge, will be more difficult to adapt. The Pioneer Pathway is a strong example, where clear visual and physical separation improves safety and overall user experience. Table 4-3: Priority Biking Projects

PROJECT

PROJECT NAME

DESCRIPTION

EST. YEAR

Kingfisher Road Renewal and Protected Bike Lanes

Installation of quick-build style protected bike lanes on Kingfisher Road. The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

2027

2 & 21

74th Avenue Neighbourhood Bikeway

Neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) along 74th Avenue between Highway 97 and Highway 3. This project is split into two segments: east of 89th Street and west of 89th Street.

2028

3, 16 & 36

Oleander Drive Reconstruction and Active Transportation Improvements

Upgrades to the roadway with the implementation of active transportation facilities (e.g. multi-use pathway or protected bike lanes). This project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

2029

4 & 24

87th Street Multi-Use Pathway

Construction of a new multi-use pathway on the west side of 87th Street to connect Osoyoos Elementary School and the Sonora Community Centre to 74th Avenue. This project is split into two segments to align with pavement renewal; the first segment (from Osoyoos Elementary to 70th Avenue) is planned for the near-term, and the second segment (70th Avenue to 74th Avenue) is planned for long-term.

2028

PROJECT

PROJECT NAME

DESCRIPTION

EST. YEAR

5, 7, 17 & 46

East Osoyoos Neighbourhood Bikeway

Neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) along Maple Drive, Lombardy Lane, and Tamarack Road. The project is split into multiple segments to implement over multiple years.

2028 – 2030

62nd Avenue Active Transportation Improvements

Implement bike facilities (e.g. multi-use pathway) along 62nd Avenue to connect the future multi-use pathway on 89th Street to the existing multi-use pathway west of Highway 97. The project should be completed alongside, or after, the 89th Street / 62nd Street intersection upgrades.

2030

8, 9 & 20

92nd Avenue Reconstruction

Upgrades to the roadway and intersections with the implementation of active transportation facilities, curb and gutter, lighting, and landscaping. The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

By development

4.2.2 SAFE AND PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVES After establishing the core of the network, the Town can build outwards. Rebuilding every street in the network is not realistic or fiscally responsible. Instead, the focus will be on using practical and retrofit-based solutions (such as repainting road lines or laying down physical barriers). Two important strategies are interim materials and neighbourhood bikeways.

Neighbourhood Bikeways Neighbourhood bikeways are quiet residential streets where people biking and driving share the road. Surveys show that people biking feel more comfortable riding on these calm routes: even compared to protected bike lanes on busy streets1. Implementing measures to control speeding on these streets has direct safety benefits for the residents living there. These routes can be more cost-effective to implement than entirely new multi-use pathways, as the most significant expenses are typically safety upgrades at intersections. The Active Transportation Plan identified 74th Avenue as a potential neighbourhood bikeway, and the Town should continue exploring this option through future biking projects.

Interim Materials Using planters and temporary barriers allows the municipality to test safety features quickly. These materials allow for piloting solutions before committing capital to permanent concrete infrastructure. The upcoming pavement renewal of Kingfisher Drive presents an opportunity to use interim materials to pilot a protected bike lane.

1 Impacts of Bicycle Infrastructure in Mid-Sized Cities Study (IBIMS). www.sfu.ca/ibims. Cities, Health & Active

Transportation Research (CHATR) Lab. Simon Fraser University.

4.2.3 MANAGING SHARED PATHS SAFELY Physically separating people walking and biking is not always feasible, and shared pathways can work well in quieter areas. However, conflicts arise as pathways get busier during the summer. Strategies to manage these spaces include painting centerlines in high traffic areas, particularly approaching pathway intersections. Installing bollards at pathway intersections, adding clear signage, and focusing on community education will help regulate speed and behaviour.

4.2.4 REGIONAL CONNECTIONS Osoyoos would serve as the southern terminus of the Trail of the Okanagans, a proposed 250-kilometre walking and cycling route through the Okanagan Valley. Much of the trail already exists or is currently under development, and it has the potential to become a significant tourism draw for the region. As the trail’s endpoint, Osoyoos could benefit substantially from increased visitation and related economic activity. Although most of the route lies outside municipal boundaries, there is value in improving connections between Osoyoos and the International Hike and Bike Trail. This will involve both regional coordination and targeted local projects, such as multi-use pathways along 92nd Avenue and 87th Street.

4.2.5 BIKE PARKING Secure bike parking is critical to making biking a practical option. Fear of theft and a lack of secure storage were identified through public engagement as one of the main barriers to riding.

Bike Parking Standards There is currently no municipal requirement for businesses or apartment buildings to provide bike parking. While some locations offer it voluntarily, the lack of consistent standards leads to uneven availability and quality across the community. Updating the Zoning Bylaw would help address this gap by requiring both short-term bike parking (for customers and visitors) and long-term parking (for employees and residents) in all new commercial and multi-family developments. These requirements would apply to new construction only, allowing existing properties to remain unchanged.

Cost Shared Bike Rack Program To support existing businesses, the Town could introduce a cost-shared program to improve access to bike parking. This would involve the Town purchasing racks in bulk and offering them to businesses at a reduced cost. This approach lowers the barrier for adoption and makes it easier for businesses to provide convenient and visible bike parking. Over time, this can help build a consistent network of bike parking on private property.

Public Bike Parking In addition to private development, the Town has a role in providing bike parking at public destinations. Parks, beaches, and municipal facilities should include well-placed and easy-to-use bike racks. Locations such as the Sonora Community Centre, Gyro Beach Park, and Cottonwood Beach are key priorities. Bike parking should be located close to entrances, highly visible, and designed to support secure locking. Providing enough capacity in busy areas, particularly during the summer, will be important to support both residents and visitors.

5.0 SAFER STREETS & HIGHWAYS Every day, thousands of vehicle trips take place in Osoyoos. Most of these trips happen without incident or significant delay. However, traffic delays become a noticeable frustration during the busy peak season. Outside of a few strategic road connections in East Osoyoos, opportunities to expand the overall road network are limited. The very features that make Osoyoos attractive - the lake, the surrounding mountains, and nearby farmland - also make it difficult and expensive to build new roads. Because widening roads is rarely an option, the focus shifts to improving the safety and efficiency of existing streets.

5.1 MUNICIPAL STREET NETWORK The Town maintains approximately 46 km of roads, each serving a different function. Local streets are designed to support neighbourhood access and a comfortable environment for walking and biking, while collectors and arterials are intended to move people and goods more efficiently across the community and connect to the highway.

5.1.1 CLASSIFICATIONS Road classifications are defined in the Official Community Plan and shown in Figure 5-3. Table 5-1: Road Classifications

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Highway

Arterial

ROAD PURPOSE Maintained by the provincial Ministry of Transportation and Transit. This route serves heavy regional traffic and summer tourists. Because it also acts as the town's main street, creating safe pedestrian crossings and making it easier for locals to turn left are top priorities. The primary routes connecting different parts of town and linking local traffic to the highway. These roads handle higher daily vehicle volumes and are key targets for closing sidewalk gaps and building safe, separated cycling paths.

Collector

Mid-sized streets that link quiet residential areas to busier main roads.

Local

Quiet neighborhood streets where residents live, walk, and bike. The main goal for these roads is keeping speeds safe and discouraging highway traffic from using them as shortcuts.

5.1.2 ROAD PROJECTS This section outlines the key approaches that will guide future road projects in Osoyoos. A full project list is provided in Appendix D.

Coordinating with Renewal To make the most of available funding, the Town should coordinate transportation and safety improvements with planned road renewal and utility work. When a street is already scheduled for repaving or underground upgrades, related improvements should be delivered at the same time to reduce costs and avoid rework. Figure 5-4 shows the results of the 2026 Road Condition Assessment. These near-term renewal priorities were a key input in project prioritization.

Making Local Intersections Safer Several intersections in Osoyoos have non-standard layouts that can be confusing, particularly for visitors. Notable examples include 89th Street and 62nd Avenue, as well as Oleander Drive and Lobelia Drive. Improvements will focus on simplifying movements, clarifying right-of-way, and making intersections easier to navigate. These changes will help reduce conflicts and improve safety for all users.

Future Connections Most future road connections are planned in East Osoyoos, where gaps in the network still exist. The proposed 45th Street connection is the most significant, as it would link neighbourhoods on both sides of the highway and reduce reliance on Highway 3 for short local trips. The project is expected to include a roundabout to improve access and safety, as well as a multi-use pathway for walking and biking. Timing will depend on future development and regulatory approvals, since the required land is currently within the Agricultural Land Reserve.

Calming Neighborhood Traffic Residents have expressed concern about speeding and shortcutting on local streets. Traffic calming measures can help address these issues by slowing vehicles and discouraging through traffic. Changes such as tighter corner radii and narrower travel lanes encourage slower driving behaviour without relying on enforcement alone. Low-cost, temporary materials can be used to test these approaches before making permanent changes. Adjusting the posted speed limit down to 30km/h is recommended where traffic calming improvements are implemented.

Table 5-2: Priority Road Projects

PROJECT 59

PROJECT NAME

DESCRIPTION

EST. YEAR

89th Street and 62nd

Updates to intersection configuration to include a single, level intersection to improve traffic flow and safety. This includes road reconstruction on 89th Street between Kingfisher Drive and Oleander Road, and 62nd Avenue from 89th Street to Osprey Place. Includes active transportation improvements through the intersection.

2031 - 2035

Avenue Intersection Improvements

Lobelia Drive / 32nd Avenue Intersection Upgrades

Install a traffic button and curb at the Lobelia Drive / 32nd Avenue intersection to manage vehicle speeds and improve safety on all approaches.

2030

45th Street Extension

New local road link from Highway 3 to Lakeshore Drive, including implementation of active transportation facilities such as a multi-use pathway.

By Development

56th Avenue Extension

New local road link from 51st Street to the 45th Street Extension, including active transportation facilities.

By Development

Tamarack to Cottonwood Local Road Linkage

Construction of a new local road to improve local road links and reduce traffic on Highway 3. Includes curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lighting. Reconstruct Cottonwood Road from Lombardy Lane.

By Development

5.1.3 DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET Main Street is both the economic centre of the community and the primary transportation corridor. It serves local traffic, regional travel, and tourism, creating competing demands within a limited space. Feedback from the community highlights three key challenges: difficulty making left turns, conflicts from vehicles reversing out of angled parking, and limited parking availability during the summer.

More Convenient Turns Left Turns onto Main Street During busy summer times, making a left turn onto the highway becomes nearly impossible. Because Main Street serves as both the primary local road and an interprovincial highway, supporting the surrounding grid network is critical to help people avoid making left turns (for example, by turning right and going around the block instead). The Town should work towards installing a signal at 89th Avenue. A new signal at 89th Ave and the highway will make it significantly easier to turn left safely. To improve overall traffic flow, the Town might have to restrict other unsignalized left turns nearby. The potential signal at 89th Avenue is discussed further in Section 5.2.

Left Turns from Main Street Establishing new left turn lanes directly on Main Street will be difficult given the tight space constraints. One effective strategy could be to establish a dedicated left turn lane from the highway just south of the Downtown Main Street, potentially at 74th or 72nd Avenue, allowing turning traffic to exit traffic flow.

Clearer Parking The danger of parked cars reversing into traffic was noted as a key challenge. However, the existing angle parking is highly valued by the community for its convenience. The primary opportunity is to improve and promote parking options slightly off Main Street. Currently, there is little signage to direct visitors to off-street parking lots. Parking is discussed further in Section 6.2.

Safer Crossings Improving pedestrian crossings along Main Street is an important priority. This includes better aligning sidewalks with crossing locations, adding features such as overhead flashers at key locations like 87th Street, and removing curb letdowns that are not connected to formal crossings. Addressing these issues will make crossings more visible and predictable, improving safety for people walking.

Biking to Main Street Improving bike access to Main Street is already underway. Projects such as the 89th Street pathway and the bike route on 74th Avenue will provide safer connections from surrounding neighbourhoods, making it easier to reach the downtown without driving.

5.1.4 SPEED LIMITS The Town should consider lowering speed limits on municipal streets to 30 km/h. The goal is to curb speeding, not significantly change average travel speeds, since many vehicles already move at about 30 km/h on local streets because of frequent stops and turns. Most trips in town are short, often using local streets for only about a kilometre, so the change in travel time would be minimal. The safety benefits, however, are substantial: a collision involving a person walking is far more likely to be survivable at 30 km/h than at 50 km/h. Any speed limit changes should be paired with low-cost traffic-calming measures, such as interim materials that tighten corner radii and encourage slower turning speeds.

5.2 PROVINCIAL HIGHWAYS Highway 3 and Highway 97 are under provincial jurisdiction and play a crucial role in interprovincial travel and bringing vital tourism to the region. Balancing these high-volume demands with the need for a safe, walkable local Main Street requires careful coordination.

Turning Off the Highway Improving access off the highway is a priority, particularly in East Osoyoos. Adding dedicated left-turn lanes can reduce delays and improve safety by making it easier for drivers to leave the highway without disrupting through traffic.

Connecting Across the Highway While Highway 3 and 97 must prioritize long-distance travel and trade, limited crossing opportunities can create challenges for both drivers and people walking. When it is too difficult to cross directly using local streets, drivers turn onto the highway for short distances before exiting again. These frequent turning movements add unnecessary delays to the main corridor. Upgrading local intersections can help keep short neighborhood trips off the highway. For people walking and biking, long gaps between crossings create significant detours and encourage unsafe behaviour. Figure 5-5 identifies the Town’s priority locations for new highway crossings, including both traffic signals and crosswalks. Initial technical review indicates these locations have merit, though all improvements will require Provincial approval. In the Downtown, a new signal at Highway 3 and 89th Street would facilitate left turns from the side streets, and make it easier for local traffic to connect across the highway during busy times. Along the central section of Highway 3, a signal at Kingfisher Drive would provide a key connection for walking and biking (e.g., linking the Gyro Beach pathway and Kingfisher routes). It would also improve leftturn access and help shift local traffic off the highway. An enhanced crosswalk (or crosswalks) along Hotel Row would address existing safety concerns. In East Osoyoos, a signal at Lakeshore Drive would make it easier to turn onto and off the highway. A future roundabout at 45th Street, tied to development, would create a new north–south connection across the highway.

Adding Local Connections Exploring the development of frontage roads parallel to the highway (especially in East Osoyoos) is another key strategy. Frontage roads allow local residents to navigate their neighborhoods and run errands without mixing with heavy, high-speed provincial traffic.

Managing Highway Speeds The Town should consider partnering with provincial authorities to add physical design features that naturally encourage drivers to respect speed limits and pay closer attention as they enter the community.

Gateway Features Examples include installing curb extensions (like the ones currently at the crosswalk near 70th Avenue) to visually narrow the road. The planned roundabout at 45th Avenue could also present an opportunity to safely slow highway traffic entering the town limits. The Town should also advocate for moving the 50km/h speed limit zone to east of 45th Street with the new roundabout. Other potential actions include a landscaped median on the highway along Hotel Row.

Enforcement Supportive enforcement measures, such as speed reader boards, can help reinforce speed limits and raise awareness among drivers.

Table 5-3: Priority Highway Projects

PROJECT 60

PROJECT NAME Highway 97 / 74th Avenue Crossing Improvements

DESCRIPTION Install a crosswalk on the south approach of Highway 97 at 74th Avenue, including the completion of the sidewalk connections on 74th Avenue approaching Highway 97.

Highway 3 / Cottonwood Drive Intersection Improvements

Review and upgrade intersection laning at the Highway 3 / Cottonwood Drive intersection to include left-turns storage lanes on highway approaches.

Highway 3 / 45th Street Roundabout

Install a 2-lane roundabout at the Highway 3 / 45th Street intersection with a south leg to connect to the future 45 th Street extension. This project includes a multi-use pathway.

Highway 3 / Kingfisher Drive Intersection Upgrades

Hotel Row Crosswalk Upgrades

Upgrade the Highway 3 crosswalks outside Holiday Inn and Suites and Richter Pass Beach Resort to increase visibility and safety of pedestrians.

Lakeshore Drive Intersection Improvements

Install a pedestrian crossing on Highway 3 at Lakeshore Drive. This intersection should be considered for signalization depending on the implementation of the 45th Street roundabout.

Highway 3 / 89th Street Intersection Upgrades

Emergency Routing Highway 3 is the primary transportation route in Osoyoos, with the Osoyoos Trestle Bridge serving as a critical link in the network. Disruptions that close the bridge are a significant concern, as alternative routes around Osoyoos Lake are limited due to the nearby U.S. border and surrounding terrain. The most viable existing detour is the Mount Baldy / McKinney Road connection between Highway 3 and Oliver, although it is only partially paved. Given its potential importance during emergencies, the Town should advocate for the Province to maintain this route in good condition and consider upgrading it.

Figure 5-1: Sidewalk Condition Assessment

Figure 5-2: Recommended Bike Network

Figure 5-3: Road Classifications

Figure 5-4: Renewal Priorities

Figure 5-5: Town Priorities for Highway Crossings

6.0 SHARED RIDES & CLEAR PARKING Managing traffic during the peak busy season requires providing convenient, reliable alternatives to driving and parking. This section focuses on making it easier for visitors to park once and for residents to navigate town without parking hassles. By offering practical options, the Town can better manage summer demand while maintaining quality of life year-round.

6.1 PUBLIC TRANSIT Transit is an important travel option, particularly for longer trips and for people with limited mobility. The current system mainly supports travel to Penticton and Oliver for work, school, and medical appointments, but is less useful for short trips within Osoyoos. Improving local transit will help reduce reliance on driving, especially during peak periods.

6.1.1 TRANSIT SERVICE Expanding transit service presents a financial challenge. The current service is based in Penticton, and the existing bus schedule has no additional capacity. Increasing service would likely require adding a second bus, which involves a higher upfront cost but would allow for more trips to be added (either around town or to Oliver and Penticton).

Priorities for New Service There are several opportunities to improve service in a practical way. Better coordination with the school district could support direct service to the high school, while adjusting schedules could allow for later evening trips from Penticton and the introduction of weekend service.

On-Demand Service The Town should explore On-Demand transit with BC Transit. This model operates similarly to ride-hailing and is currently being trialed in communities like Kelowna, Squamish, and Powell River. On-Demand service can be more convenient for riders than fixed routes in smaller communities like Osoyoos.

6.1.2 SEASONAL SHUTTLES A seasonal shuttle is another potential strategy to manage peak tourism demand. Many resort municipalities in BC use a portion of their provincial tourism funding to operate seasonal shuttles. These are often run in partnership with a Chamber of Commerce or local business associations. Potential examples include systems in Tofino and Revelstoke. The Revelstoke shuttle now operates year-round and is gradually being integrated into the BC Transit system. A local shuttle would take advantage of the fact that most tourist accommodation areas in Osoyoos are located along a relatively straight line.

6.1.3 BUS STOPS Improving bus stops is a simple but important step in making transit more attractive. Shelters provide shade during hot summer months and improve overall comfort for riders. Upgrades should focus on key stops along Main Street, ensuring they are accessible and well connected to sidewalks and crossings.

6.2 PARKING The highest priority action identified in the public survey was improving parking in the Town Centre. There are few existing parking regulations in Osoyoos besides the two-hour time limits on Main Street and adjacent blocks. When prime spots have no time limits or costs, they are often occupied all day by employees or long-term visitors. This frustrates residents who simply need to run a quick errand. At the same time, increasing the number of parking spaces is not always the best solution. Building large new parking lots solely to handle the peak season creates a year-round maintenance expense. A balanced approach uses time limits and strategic pricing in the busiest areas to encourage constant turnover. This ensures that people can reliably find a convenient space.

6.2.1 INCREASING ON-STREET AVAILABILITY Introducing paid parking on Main Street was considered as a potential strategy to improve turnover and availability. Time limits alone can be difficult to enforce consistently, whereas pricing can both encourage turnover and provides revenue to fund enforcement. However, based on community feedback during Round #2 of the community engagement process, paid parking as a tool to manage parking is not recommended. Instead, the Town should extend the time-limit period to later in the evening and increase enforcement of the existing rules. In the long-term, if parking capacity and turnover becomes a greater challenge to manage with existing tools, the Town could re-consider paid parking.

A comprehensive Parking Management Strategy should follow in 2027.

6.2.2 EXPANDING OFF-STREET PARKING Providing convenient off-street parking helps reduce pressure on Main Street and supports a “park once” approach, where visitors can park and access multiple destinations on foot.

Day Use Parking Existing off-street lots can be better used to accommodate longer stays, allowing visitors to park once and walk to nearby destinations. This is particularly important for larger vehicles such as RVs. Improving signage and wayfinding will help direct drivers to these locations, while partnerships with property owners could allow for shared use of underutilized lots (e.g. at churches). There may also be opportunities to expand parking on underused municipal lands where appropriate.

Boat Trailer Parking The main boat launch is on one side of the lake, while trailer parking is on the other. The current rule requiring boaters to find separate parking for their vehicles creates multiple trips through the busiest part of the network. Consider allowing parking vehicles for a section of the parking lot to reduce the number of vehicle trips crossing the bridge. The potential seasonal shuttle (see Section 6.1.2) could also provide people with a means to get between the boat launch and parking.

6.3 SHARED MOBILITY Shared e-bikes and e-scooters provide an effective alternative to driving for short trips and are popular with visitors. The most common trip distance on these devices is 2km (or roughly 10 minutes), matching the length of most local trips in town. The Town currently has an operating company running a station-based system, where trips must start and end in designated locations. There are currently six locations, all at hotels and resorts. This station-based system successfully reduces sidewalk clutter but can make the service less useful if a rider's destination is not near a designated parking area.

6.3.1 EXPANDING PARKING AREAS To increase utility, the Town should consider establishing designated parking areas on public property in partnership with the operating company. Placing hubs at major destinations like Downtown, Gyro Beach Park, or Cottonwood Beach would improve the network. The required infrastructure does not need to be substantial. Establishing clear, designated parking areas on public property (parks, beaches, and downtown corners) keeps the devices organized and prevents them from blocking sidewalks and curb ramps.

6.3.2 SAFE RIDING AND ENFORCMENT E-scooters are frequently being ridden on sidewalks, causing conflicts with people walking. Since the town currently lacks a complete network of safe cycling infrastructure, riders naturally use sidewalks to avoid heavy vehicle traffic. While shared mobility operators should be held responsible for enforcing rules and penalizing improper user behavior, enforcement alone is insufficient to change behavior entirely. In the long term, the most effective way to keep e-scooters and bikes off sidewalks is to build dedicated routes, giving riders a designated and safer place to travel.

6.4 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY Table 6-1: Priority Actions for Parking/Shared Rides

ACTION

TIMEFRAME

REFERENCE

Consider allowing day-use vehicle parking in the Main St boat trailer parking

Short Term

Section 6.2.2

Consider using RMI funding for a seasonal shuttle service

Medium Term

Section 6.1.2

Consider pay parking on Main Street during peak season

Medium Term

Section 6.2.1

Consider shared mobility parking areas on public property

Short Term

Section 6.3.1

7.0 IMPLEMENTATION The TMP will guide the Town in building a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and easy to use for all modes of travel. Implementation will take time, as Osoyoos’ transportation system has developed over many years and will evolve gradually. Progress will be made step by step, with the Town advancing improvements incrementally over time. This section summarizes the estimated costs of priorities identified in the plan, potential funding opportunities, and future follow-up work. A full project list is provided in Appendix D.

7.1 FUNDING THE PLAN The TMP is intended to guide long-term investment decisions. It was developed with a strong focus on financial feasibility to ensure the plan is realistic and achievable. This section outlines proposed capital investments by category and over time. This is meant to serve a guide, although final funding decisions will continue to be made by Council through the annual budget process.

7.1.1 PROPOSED INVESTMENT BY CATEGORY Figure 7-1: Proposed Capital Investment by Category

$9.1M Renewal Walking and Biking Roadways

$20.3M $7.6M

7.1.2 INVESTMENT BY YEAR Figure 7-2 below presents proposed capital spending by year. In the short term, covering the first four years, projects are scheduled individually by year, followed by five‑year groupings for longer-term planning. Note that this chart does not include roughly $10M of capital projects where the timing is driven by development. The most notable project in this category is the 45 th Street Extension. Council will continue to make final funding decisions through the annual budget process. Figure 7-2: Proposed Capital Investment by Year $2.5 M

$2.0 M

Renewal

$1.75M

Walking and Biking

Roadways

$1.85M $1.7M

$1.7M $1.5M

$1.5 M

$1.2M

$1.0 M

$0.85M

$0.5 M

$0.0 M 2027

2028

2029

2030

2031 - 2035 (Avg.)

2036 - 2040 (Avg.)

2041 - 2045 (Avg.)

7.2 FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS This section summarizes important follow up work by the Town and other organizations that will impact the future of transportation in Osoyoos.

7.2.1 BYLAW AND POLICY AMENDMENTS Table 7-1: Recommended Bylaw/Policy Updates

BYLAW

DESCRIPTION

Traffic Bylaw

Formalize responsibility for snow clearing between property owners and the Town.

Snow and Ice Control Policy

Set target level of service for snow and ice control.

Zoning Bylaw

Add bike parking requirements for commercial and multi-family uses.

Official Community Plan

Update future road network (Map 8) to reflect proposed changes in the TMP / DCC program.

7.2.2 FOLLOW-UP STUDIES Table 7-2: Suggested Follow-Up Studies

STUDY

DESCRIPTION

Parking Management Plan

Comprehensive parking management study, considering public offstreet and on-street parking throughout the community.

SDS Bylaw Updates

Consider revising sidewalk widths to improve accessibility.

Cottonwood Drive Laning Review

Review traffic patterns at the Highway 3 / Cottonwood Drive intersection to identify if left turn lanes are warranted on Highway 3.

Oleander & Lobelia Intersection Study

Develop interim and longer-term strategies to improve safety and clarify intersection operations.

Crosswalk Treatment Reviews

Review existing and potential crosswalk locations on an annual basis to monitor effectiveness and implement improvements.

Intersection Traffic Modelling

Perform intersection traffic analysis reviews at high-volume intersections to understand mobility and active transportation needs.

Appendix A: Road Condition Assessment

Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment

PRESENTED TO

Town of Osoyoos MAY 28, 2026 ISSUED FOR USE FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01

Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

Suite 1000 – 10th Floor, 885 Dunsmuir Street Vancouver, BC V6C 1N5 CANADA Tel 604.685.0275 Fax 604.684.6241

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1

2.0

PAVEMENT DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................. 3

1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2

2.3

General .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Document Review .................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Definition .................................................................................................................................... 2

Network Definition and Plan for Data Collection.................................................................................... 3 Pavement Surface Condition Assessment ............................................................................................ 3 2.2.1 Pavement Surface Distress ....................................................................................................... 4 2.2.2 Front-Facing Right-of-Way (ROW) Imagery .............................................................................. 5 2.2.3 Pavement Roughness (IRI) and Rut Depth ............................................................................... 5 Unpaved Road Survey........................................................................................................................... 5

3.0

INCORPORATION OF ROAD INVENTORY AND TOWN ’S DATA .............................................. 6

4.0

PAVEMENT CONDITION INDICES ................................................................................................ 8

5.0

PAVEMENT CURRENT CONDITION SUMMARY ....................................................................... 10

6.0

SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 13

3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.2

6.3

7.0

Roadway Inventory Data ....................................................................................................................... 6 Traffic Data ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Committed Paving Projects ................................................................................................................... 7 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ........................................................................................................... 9 Pavement Damaged Surface Area Indices ........................................................................................... 9 Pavement Rutting ................................................................................................................................ 10 Pavement Roughness ......................................................................................................................... 10 Define Analysis Segments and Summarize Condition Data ............................................................... 10 2025 Paved Road Condition ................................................................................................................ 11 Overview of Unpaved Road Conditions ............................................................................................... 13 Sidewalk Condition Survey .................................................................................................................. 13 Development of Sidewalk Condition Metrics ....................................................................................... 14 6.2.1 Sidewalk Condition Index ......................................................................................................... 14 6.2.2 Sidewalk Accessibility Rating................................................................................................... 15 Current Sidewalk Condition and Accessibility Status .......................................................................... 16

METHODOLOGY FOR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS .............................................. 19 7.1 7.2

7.3 7.4

Pavement Performance Modelling ...................................................................................................... 19 Rehabilitation and Maintenance Treatments ....................................................................................... 19 7.2.1 Treatment Triggers................................................................................................................... 20 7.2.2 Treatment Resets..................................................................................................................... 21 Generate Feasible Rehabilitation Strategies and Optimization ........................................................... 21 7.3.1 Method to Measure Benefit of Each Strategy .......................................................................... 22 Budget Scenarios ................................................................................................................................ 23 i

RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

8.0

ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT .......................................................... 23

9.0

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 26

8.1 8.2 8.3

Unconstrained Budget Analysis ........................................................................................................... 23 Constrained Budget Analysis............................................................................................................... 24 Defragmented Multi-Year Pavement Rehabilitation Program ............................................................. 26

10.0 CLOSURE ..................................................................................................................................... 27 REFERENCE .......................................................................................................................................... 28

LIST OF TABLES IN TEXT Table 1: Road Network lengths based on Road Classification & Surface Type ....................................... 2 Table 2: Sidewalk Network lengths based on Surface Type..................................................................... 2 Table 3: Extent of Pavement Data Collection by PSP .............................................................................. 4 Table 4: Pavement Area of the Town Road Network................................................................................ 6 Table 5: AADT Averages for Different Road Classifications ..................................................................... 7 Table 6: PCI Ranges for Condition Description ........................................................................................ 9 Table 7: IRI Ranges for Condition Description........................................................................................ 10 Table 8: Average 2025 Pavement Condition for Road Classifications ................................................... 11 Table 9: Gravel Road Condition Description........................................................................................... 13 Table 10: Overall Condition of Gravel Road Segments .......................................................................... 13 Table 11: Types of Sidewalk Distress based on Surface Material .......................................................... 14 Table 12: SCI Ranges for Condition Description .................................................................................... 15 Table 13: SAR Ranges for Sidewalk Accessibility Description ............................................................... 16 Table 14: Sidewalk Condition by Surface Type ...................................................................................... 16 Table 15: Treatments and Unit Costs used in the Analysis .................................................................... 19 Table 16: Maintenance and Rehabilitation Triggers ............................................................................... 20 Table 17: Estimated Traffic Factor for Each Road Classification............................................................ 22 Table 18: Budget Scenarios used in the 2025 Analysis.......................................................................... 23

LIST OF FIGURES IN TEXT Figure 1: Example of Routes in GIS ......................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2: Example of PSP 7001 Digital Image Log................................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Example of Inventory Polygons ................................................................................................. 6 Figure 4: AADT for Town's Roads Based on Counted and Estimated Traffic Volume (2025) .................. 7 Figure 5: Committed Paving Projects for 2025 and 2026 ......................................................................... 8 Figure 6: 2025 Pavement Condition Distribution in Terms of PCI .......................................................... 12 Figure 7: 2025 Pavement Condition Distribution in Terms of IRI ............................................................ 12 Figure 8: Example of Defining Multiple Trip Hazards.............................................................................. 15 Figure 9: Distribution of Sidewalk Conditions by SCI for Different Surface Types.................................. 17 Figure 10: Sidewalk Accessibility Conditions by SAR for Different Surface Types................................. 18 Figure 11: Examples of Accessibility Issues (Faulting) in Asphalt Sidewalks ......................................... 18 ii RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Figure 12: Predicting Pavement Performance ........................................................................................ 19 Figure 13: Example of Feasible Strategies for Each Pavement Segment .............................................. 21 Figure 14: Example of calculating the benefit for an Overlay Strategy ................................................... 22 Figure 15: Rehabilitation Needs based on Unconstrained Budget Scenario .......................................... 24 Figure 16: Future Backlog Projection based on Various Rehabilitation Budget Scenarios .................... 25 Figure 17: Predicted PCI for Different Budget Scenarios ....................................................................... 25

APPENDIX SECTIONS APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D

Tetra Tech’s Limitations on the Use of this Document 2025 Pavement Condition Sidewalk Overall Condition and Accessibility Status Rehabilitation Program

iii RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

LIMITATIONS OF REPORT This report and its contents are intended for the sole use of Town of Osoyoos and their agents. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis, or the recommendations contained or referenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any Party other than Town of Osoyoos, or for any Project other than the proposed development at the subject site. Any such unauthorized use of this report is at the sole risk of the user. Use of this document is subject to the Limitations on the Use of this Document attached in Appendix A or Contractual Terms and Conditions executed by both parties.

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

General

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) as subconsultant was engaged by Urban Systems Inc. (Urban Systems) for an automated pavement condition assessment utilizing a Laser Crack Measurement System (LCMS) and the development of a pavement management plan for the Town of Osoyoos (the Town). An additional scope of this project is to visually assess the Town’s sidewalk segments to evaluate general surface condition and accessibility. Tetra Tech’s scope of work is defined under Task D of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 302-3051 for the Master Transportation Plan and Road Condition Assessment. This report outlines the methodology used to pavement and sidewalk data, presents the current condition of both pavement and sidewalk network, and identifies the funding required to maintain or improve existing service levels for the pavement network. All data and findings have been compiled into an ESRI-based Geographic Information System (GIS) project and are being delivered to the Town via a portable storage device for integration into its GIS platform.

1.2

Document Review

Tetra Tech conducted a review of the data/documents supplied by the Town and Urban Systems, as described below: For road condition assessment: 



Town's GIS geodatabase (TransportationNetwork_22-08-2025, Road layer) of road centerline network, including: −

Street name (Structured_Name) and Road Classification.

−

Unique Asset ID for each road segment and its corresponding Length.

−

Speed limit, Number of lanes and Road Surface Type.

Traffic Data – Including: −

PDF map of AADT (Annual Average Daily Traffic) volume for specific roads.

−

Excel file containing estimated AADT for the rest of the network.

Committed Paving Projects – covering the period after Tetra Tech’s data collection (June 2025) through 2026, as provided via email.

For Sidewalk condition assessment: 

Town's GIS geodatabase (TransportationNetwork_22-08-2025, sidewalk layer) of sidewalk network, including Unique Asset ID for each sidewalk segment.



PDF maps that indicate the surface types of sidewalks.

In addition, supplementary files including PDF map of snow removal priority plan was provided to Teta Tech. 1 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

1.3

Project Definition

The Town maintains a roadway network of approximately 46.6 centerline kilometers, consisting of both paved (asphalt) and unpaved (gravel) roads. A breakdown of the network by roadway classification and surface type is provided in Table 1. The gravel portion of the network totaling 1.77 km of local road was included in the data collection plan to capture road imagery.

Table 1: Road Network lengths based on Road Classification & Surface Type GIS Centerline (km)

Road Classification

Asphalt

Gravel

Road Network

% Network

Collector

COL

6.2

13%

Local

LOC

38.6

1.77

40.4

87%

44.8

1.77

46.6

100%

Road Network

The sidewalk network comprises approximately 30 km of various surface types, including asphalt, concrete, and brick. The majority of the network about 80% is constructed of concrete, as provided in Table 2. Some segments were observed to have two parallel rows made of different materials typically one row of concrete and one of brick. However, because the Town’s GIS system assigns only a single segment with a unique ID, these segments have not been divided in this report to maintain consistency with the source data.

Table 2: Sidewalk Network lengths based on Surface Type Surface Type

Length (km)

% Network

Asphalt

4.6

15%

Concrete

23.7

79%

Brick

1.7

Network

30.0

100%

2 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

2.0

PAVEMENT DATA COLLECTION

2.1

Network Definition and Plan for Data Collection

Tetra Tech considers accurately referenced data as one of the most crucial aspects of pavement data management. Location referencing is the method used to associate pavement distress, historical data, and road attribute data with the fundamental road inventory. Tetra Tech utilized linear referencing for this project, employing a standardized methodology based on a measure attribute assigned to a polyline known as PolylineM. This methodology is applied to the pavement segments within a GIS. These polylines, referred to as "Routes," enable the linkage of data defined by a linear distance from the origin of the line to specific locations along the polyline (refer to Figure 1). Tetra Tech also created a comprehensive "Master List" containing all route details, including essential location descriptions, starting points, and lengths. The Master List was then used in field quality control as the base layer for the “TT Surveyor” application. TT Surveyor graphically displays the status and logs the completion of each segment during collection along with any relevant field notes during the data collection program.

2.2

Figure 1: Example of Routes in GIS

Pavement Surface Condition Assessment

The Pavement condition assessment was conducted with the one of Tetra Tech’s Pavement Surface Profiler (PSP-7001) vehicles. the PSP was employed to automatically capture data on pavement surface distress, the International Roughness Index (IRI), and digital images of the roadways, as well as threedimensional Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data. Although LiDAR data was collected, it was not used in this study. However, it remains available as a resource for potential asset inventory extraction such as traffic sign identification if requested by the Town. In total, Tetra Tech surveyed 50.9 lane-km of paved roads, as summarized in Table 3. The survey was generally conducted in the outside lane of the northbound or eastbound direction for each segment. The survey included at least one lane in one direction for all roads. For divided and multi-lane roads primarily collectors data was collected in both directions, with one lane assessed per direction.

3 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Table 3: Extent of Pavement Data Collection by PSP Road Class

GIS Centerline (km)

Survey Lane-km

Collector

6.2

12.3

Local

38.6

Network

44.8

50.9

2.2.1 Pavement Surface Distress Tetra Tech utilized a 3D Laser Crack Measurement System (LCMS) for automated surface condition assessments. This LCMS generates detailed 3D elevation maps of the pavement surface, facilitating the automatic detection and classification of surface distresses. The system identifies and categorizes cracks based on variations in pavement surface elevation and differences in surface color. The elevation data is automatically processed to generate measurements of severity and extent for cracks and various other forms of roadway distress. Distress data was collected on all paved roads following the ASTM D6433 methodology. This method involves rating individual distresses according to their severity and extent. Surface distresses were reported across the width of the surveyed lane, with data provided at intervals of up to 30 meters. The recorded distresses for this project encompassed: 

Alligator Cracking (including longitudinal fatigue cracking).



Longitudinal Cracking (excluding fatigue cracking).



Transverse Cracking.



Weathering.



Raveling.



Potholes.



Rutting area.

While the LCMS doesn't directly detect or report patches, it does capture and report associated elements such as joints, cracks, and other distresses around or within patches. Representation of the LCMS

4 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

2.2.2 Front-Facing Right-of-Way (ROW) Imagery Digital images were collected for all PSP surveys using an integrated Digital Imaging System. This system provides a forward looking, right-of-way (ROW) full roadway view. The imaging system provides a fully referenced record of the roadway corridor at the time of survey for the identification, inventory, and referencing of all infrastructure and appurtenances located within the driven ROW. Images are organized in folders for each roadway and delivered at a nominal spacing of 5 m. The direct linking of the ROW images into the project GIS was used as a data quality assurance tool. It provides users the ability to “virtually drive down the street” while sitting at their desk and was used in the validation of the condition data and analysis results (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Example of PSP 7001 Digital Image Log

2.2.3 Pavement Roughness (IRI) and Rut Depth The PSP-8000 vehicle’s roughness measurement capabilities are provided by an inertial profiling system, which is an FHWA Class II profiler and is ASTM E950, AASHTO M328-10 and AASHTO PP70-10 compliant. The heart of this system is Tetra Tech’s Road Profiler with a high precision laser sensor array and two wheelpath accelerometers. Roughness data was collected and processed to provide IRI using a high precision laser sensor array and two wheelpath accelerometers. Data collection and processing for this project was conducted in conformance with the “Best Practice Guidelines”, as described in the Transportation Association of Canada document “Standardization of IRI Data Collection and Reporting in Canada.” The IRI data was provided for all segments where the data collection platform was able to record valid roughness data. The system requires survey speeds greater than 25 km/h for valid IRI measurements. Transverse profile rut measurements were collected using the LCMS. Rut depths are calculated for the left and right wheelpath using, depending on lane width, 3,000 to 4,000 relative height measurements across the survey lane. Both IRI and rut depth data were provided at intervals of up to 30 meters.

2.3

Unpaved Road Survey

As part of this study, 1.77 km of unpaved (gravel) road segments were collected using the PSP. Only forward-facing images were captured for office-based review of gravel conditions. It is important to note that some segments, such as Magnolia Place, were classified as gravel during the PSP assessment (due to ongoing reconstruction) but were paved after Tetra Tech’s data collection. These segments were incorporated into the life-cycle analysis as asphalt roads, resulting in 0.2 km being reclassified from gravel to paved.

5 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

3.0

INCORPORATION OF ROAD INVENTORY AND TOWN ’S DATA

3.1

Roadway Inventory Data

One of the key inventory data elements is the size of each pavement segment (area or width), which is essential for estimating pavement rehabilitation costs. To obtain this information, Tetra Tech developed GISbased polygons for each road segment to calculate its area and average width (an example is shown in Figure 3). A summary of pavement areas by roadway classification and surface type is presented in Table 4. Based on this data, the Town manages approximately 433,000 m² of asphalt roads and 10,000 m² of gravel roads, for a total of 443,000 m².

Figure 3: Example of Inventory Polygons

Table 4: Pavement Area of the Town Road Network Road Classification

Surface type

Average Width (m)

Calculated Area (m2)

Collector

Asphalt

10.8

67,000

Asphalt

9.5

366,000

Gravel

5.7

10,000

9.8

443,000

Local Road Network

Furthermore, Tetra Tech reviewed right-of-way (ROW) images from field assessments and orthophotos to identify the presence of curbs within each segment. The existence of curbs and gutters influences the selection of appropriate roadway treatment options. Detailed road inventory data, including curb presence for each road segment, is provided in Appendix B. Overall, approximately 37% of the network does not have curbs. By classification, about 17% of collector roads and 40% of local roads lack curbs.

3.2

Traffic Data

Traffic data, representative of 2025, was provided by Urban Systems in a PDF map for certain roads, along with an Excel file containing estimated traffic volumes for the remaining network, was used to assign AADT values across the majority of the road network. AADT ranged from 100 to 2,800, as illustrated in Figure 4. The traffic volumes do not clearly differentiate between local and collector roads, as high traffic volumes (up to 2,800 vehicles per day) occur in both classifications, as shown in Table 5. This level of traffic suggests that certain local roads, such as 45th Street, functionally operate as collector roads.

6 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Figure 4: AADT for Town's Roads Based on Counted and Estimated Traffic Volume (2025) The minimum AADT is 100 for local roads and 500 for collector roads. It is worth noting that some estimated traffic volumes were provided as ranges (e.g., 500–1,000 or 1,000–1,500) in the traffic Excel file. In such cases, the upper limit of the range was assigned to the corresponding road segments. Traffic volumes are provided in Appendix B. For a few local segments with no traffic data, an AADT of 99 vehicles per day was assumed.

Table 5: AADT Averages for Different Road Classifications

3.3

Road Classification

AADT (minimum)

AADT (Maximum)

AADT (Average)

Collector

500

2800

1600

Local

100

2800

590

Committed Paving Projects

The Town has provided a list of paving projects completed after Tetra Tech’s data collection primarily in September and October 2025 along with projects already scheduled for 2026. These have been flagged as “committed” projects for 2025 and 2026 within the pavement management analysis software as shown in Figure 5.

7 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Figure 5: Committed Paving Projects for 2025 and 2026 The 2026 paving plan will remain exclusive to the Town’s program, as it is notably large (approximately 1.1 km reconstruction projects with an estimated cost of $1.2 million). Therefore, this study will focus on developing a proposed paving plan for 2027 and beyond.

4.0

PAVEMENT CONDITION INDICES

A pavement condition index is a value which expresses the overall condition of a pavement by considering various factors such as surface distresses, structural defects, and ride quality. The selection of an appropriate pavement condition index depends on the objectives of whatever system is used to manage a particular pavement network. The following indices were used for this project: 

Pavement Condition Index (PCI) according to ASTM D6433-20 to report the overall pavement condition at the network level.



Pavement damaged surface area indices to be used for performance modelling, and treatment selection.



Pavement surface ruts depth (RUT); excessive rutting can pose a safety concern in wet weather on higher traffic speed roadways.



Pavement Roughness (IRI) to quantify riding comfort and used to report current pavement condition and historical condition comparison.

8 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

4.1

Pavement Condition Index (PCI)

The PCI is determined using the methodology outlined in the American Society for Testing and Materials standard ASTM D6433-20. This index, commonly used in North America, is useful for comparing the overall condition of one agency’s network to that of others. It reflects the condition of the pavement surface based on the severity and extent of visible surface distresses. The PCI is a numerical rating that ranges from 100 to 0, with 100 representing the best possible condition and 0 representing the worst. Pavement conditions are categorized into five groups, from "Good" to "Very Poor," as detailed in Table 6.

Table 6: PCI Ranges for Condition Description Condition Rating

PCI

Good

86-100

New or excellent pavement with minimal cracking

Satisfactory

71-85

Generally good condition with frequent minor cracks

Fair

56-70

Moderate condition with occasional low to medium alligator cracking or rutting

Poor

41-55

Poor condition with frequent alligator cracking and rutting

Very Poor

0-40

Very poor condition with extensive alligator cracking and rutting

4.2

Description

Pavement Damaged Surface Area Indices

The individual pavement surface distresses are an important element of pavement management. They are of particular use in the treatment selection process. Tetra Tech uses the individual pavement surface distress indices as defined by the World Bank’s Highway Development and Management Road Deterioration and Works Effects (HDM - RDWE) models. The pavement cracking is classified into two categories: structural cracking and non-structural cracking. Each of these two categories of cracking are divided into a low and a high severity. The structural and age-related cracks are included in the fatigue crack index which is defined as the percent of the pavement surface area with load and age-related fatigue cracks including: alligator cracking and wheelpath longitudinal cracking. It is modelled as: 

AFCL (%):

Narrow Fatigue Cracking Area;



AFCW (%): Wide Fatigue Cracking Area; and



AFCA (%):

All Fatigue Cracking Area (AFCL+ AFCW).

The non-structural cracks are included in a thermal crack index which is defined as the percent of pavement surface area with cracks that are induced by low temperature as well as other non-structural cracking. The index includes transverse cracking and non-wheelpath longitudinal cracking such as joint cracking. It is defined as: 

TCL (%):

Narrow Thermal and Other Cracking Area;



TCW (%): Wide Thermal and Other Cracking Area; and



TCA (%):

All Thermal and Other Cracking Area (TCL + TCW).

The ACA Index is defined as total area of cracking including all fatigue cracks and thermal cracks: 

ACA (%) = AFCA + TCA. 9

RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

4.3

Pavement Rutting

The pavement surface ruts can pose safety concerns where they are deep enough to affect the handling characteristics of a vehicle at higher speeds and can affect the ability of an agency to effectively clear snow and ice in the winter. The rut depth is measured in millimetres and the average of the inner and outer wheelpath rut depths have been used for the condition report and pavement performance modelling.

4.4

Pavement Roughness

Pavement roughness is a measure of surface irregularities that impact ride quality and vehicle dynamics, expressed as the International Roughness Index (IRI). Calculated from a longitudinal profile, IRI is reported in millimeters per meter (mm/m) or equivalently meters per kilometer (m/km). Introduced in 1986, IRI is widely used to evaluate and manage road systems. It correlates with vehicle operating costs such as fuel consumption and tire wear. Even on lower-speed municipal networks, IRI provides a consistent measure of overall pavement health and helps compare conditions over time. Drivers' perception of road roughness can vary based on their travel speed, with smoother roads (lower IRI values) preferred for higher speeds. Therefore, for this study, Tetra Tech assumed average travel speeds of 50 km/h for Collector roads and 40 km/h for Local roads. Table 7 illustrates the IRI ranges used to describe pavement conditions for different road classifications within the Town.

Table 7: IRI Ranges for Condition Description Rating

IRI (mm/m)1

Good

Collector < 2.28

Local < 2.86

Satisfactory

2.28 – 3.59

2.86 – 4.49

Fair

3.59 – 4.54

4.49 – 5.69

Poor

4.54 – 6.25

5.69 – 8.08

Very Poor

> 6.25

> 8.08

Colour Code

The IRI condition range is based on (Yu, Chou, & Yau, 2006), normal travel speed of 50 km/h for Collector and 40 km/h for Local Road

5.0

PAVEMENT CURRENT CONDITION SUMMARY

5.1

Define Analysis Segments and Summarize Condition Data

Pavement analysis segments are typically defined as roadway sections extending from one intersection to the next. These segments are used to evaluate current pavement conditions and support rehabilitation planning. Initially, Tetra Tech identified each block between intersections as a separate analysis segment, based on GIS route linework. Segments shorter than 30 meters were later consolidated to achieve a more practical and consistent segment length. Segments were created to be as homogeneous as practical. In some cases, to maintain homogeneity from the traffic or condition perspective, certain segments were split to achieve this purpose. Each segment was assigned a unique identifier (Analysis_ID), and where applicable, the Town’s road ID (Asset_ID) was also included as an attribute of the analysis segment.

10 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Pavement condition data indices from 30-meter unit samples, roadside inventory records, and historical sources were compiled and summarized within these segments using dynamic data transfer methods.

5.2

2025 Paved Road Condition

As outlined in Section 4.0, the pavement condition status is reported using percentage of cracking, RUT, PCI, and IRI. The current status is based on the average values within each pavement management segment and weighted by centreline length. Table 8 provides a breakdown of the average pavement condition in 2025 for each roadway classification. Detailed tabular data of 2025 pavement condition indices are presented in Appendix B.

Table 8: Average 2025 Pavement Condition for Road Classifications Road Class

Length (km)

Total Cracking (ACA %)

Total Fatigue Cracking (AFCA %)

RUT (mm)

PCI

IRI (mm/m)

Collector

6.2

9.2

4.5

3.30

Local

38.6

7.6

3.4

4.36

Network

44.8

7.8

3.5

4.21

As shown in Table 8, the network average PCI is 61. Collector roads, with an average PCI of 56, are approaching the threshold for poor condition (55). Low PCI scores are primarily driven by alligator cracking, while rutting also plays a significant role in reducing PCI values. In terms of surface smoothness, expressed as IRI, collector roads recorded a lower IRI value of 3.30 mm/m, indicating smoother surfaces compared to local roads. However, speed limits for each road class should be considered when evaluating ride quality, rather than relying solely on IRI values (50 km/h for Collector, 40 km/h for Local). Taking this into account, both road classes fall within the “Satisfactory” IRI category, overall. Figure 6 illustrates the distribution of PCI values across the entire network and within each roadway classification. Road segments falling into the 'poor to very poor' condition category are termed 'backlog roads'. The graph highlights that the Town currently has 33% of its pavements classified as backlog with a PCI less than 55. A map displaying the 2025 PCI is presented in Appendix C.

11 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

PCI 2025 100%

90%

16%

19%

18%

12%

15%

Poor Fair

80%

70%

Very Poor

30%

Satisfactory Good

% Length

60%

29%

34%

32%

COL (6.2 km)

LOC (38.6 km)

Network (44.8 km)

50%

40%

24%

30%

20%

22%

10%

Figure 6: 2025 Pavement Condition Distribution in Terms of PCI Figure 7 illustrates the distribution of IRI values across the entire road network of 43.8 km and within each roadway classification. Valid IRI measurements require survey speeds exceeding 25 km/h; therefore, approximately 1 km of primarily dead-end local roads were surveyed below this threshold and do not have recorded IRI values. The figure shows that approximately 16% of the overall network was classified as being in Poor or Very Poor condition based on IRI in 2025. A map displaying the 2025 IRI is included in Appendix C.

Figure 7: 2025 Pavement Condition Distribution in Terms of IRI 12 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

5.3

Overview of Unpaved Road Conditions

For this study, the Town’s unpaved road network consists of 1.74 km across five segments. Tetra Tech conducted a visual review using collected images to estimate the percentage of each segment affected by surface distress, such as potholes or other deformations. Gravel road conditions were classified into five categories, as shown in Table 9:

Table 9: Gravel Road Condition Description Rating Good Satisfactory

Description No distress / No dust <10% surface defects – negligible impact on ride comfort

Fair

10–20% defects – minor impact on ride comfort

Poor

20–30% defects – noticeable impact on ride comfort

Very Poor

≥30% affected – significant impact on ride comfort

Based on this visual assessment, the overall condition of gravel roads is summarized in Table 10. Detailed images for each segment are included in the GIS deliverables.

Table 10: Overall Condition of Gravel Road Segments 115th St

Length (m) 1041

Width (m) 5.3

Tamarack Dr

Maple Dr_1

251

7.0

Fair

Kingfisher Dr

83rd St

245

4.1

Poor

74th Ave

West End

Meadowlark Dr

104

Satisfactory

utility access road

West End

Cottonwood Dr

100

6.3

Satisfactory

Road Name

From

Strawberry Creek Rd

West End

Maple Dr Laneway (unnamed)

6.0

SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT

6.1

Sidewalk Condition Survey

Overall Condition Satisfactory

For the sidewalk condition assessment, Tetra Tech utilized a tablet-based ArcGIS platform (Field Maps) to record GPS locations of tripping hazards and surface distresses, identifying safety and accessibility issues and evaluating overall surface condition. The assessment followed a stop-and-go methodology: the team walked along each sidewalk segment and paused whenever a defect or distress was observed to measure and rate potential trip hazards and other safety concerns, capture images of the situation, and then continue the survey. Table 11 summarizes the types of distress recorded across the sidewalk network. Certain distress types are specific to particular surface materials, for example, alligator cracking occurs on asphalt surfaces, while broken slabs or panels are associated with concrete.

13 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Table 11: Types of Sidewalk Distress based on Surface Material Distress Severity

Low, Moderate, High severity

Surface Type

Distress Type

Asphalt

Alligator Crack/ Edge cracking/ Settlement/ Faulting/ Bump/ Longitudinal Crack/ Potholes

Concrete

Broken slab or panel/ Cracking/ Faulting/ Longitudinal gap/ Missing panel/ Settlement/ Surface roughness/ Curb degradation

Brick

Cracking/ Faulting/ Heave/ Settlement

Additionally, based on Tetra Tech’s past experiences, the following types of potential trip hazards were recorded: 

Vertical displacement/Faulting (greater than ½ inch or 12 mm)



Obstructions (Horizontal clear zones, width <1 m)



Excessive grades or slopes over 8%



Severe surface damage, such as missing or broken panels

In addition to capturing images of in the location of distress, selected images were also captured from sections in good condition to provide a comprehensive understanding of the overall sidewalk network condition.

6.2

Development of Sidewalk Condition Metrics

Unlike roadways, which utilize the standardized ASTM D6433 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) to assess surface distress and support asset management, sidewalk evaluation lacks a widely accepted industry standard. As a result, practices vary significantly across agencies. To address this gap, Tetra Tech developed and applied custom indices based on its previous work with several agencies in Alberta and British Columbia, along with a review of the accessibility design standards outlined in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): 

Overall Sidewalk Condition Index (SCI): Measures the general physical condition of sidewalk segments based on observed surface damage.



Sidewalk Accessibility Rating (SAR): Assesses sidewalk accessibility and potential trip hazards existence.

6.2.1 Sidewalk Condition Index The Sidewalk Condition Index (SCI) quantifies the level and spread of surface damage across individual sidewalk sections. It is scored on a scale from 0 to 100 with higher values indicating better condition. For this study, SCI was derived from the percentage of observed damage in each segment, based on the following criteria: 

Panels with medium to high severity distress were counted as one damaged slab.



Panels with low severity distress were weighted as 0.25 of a damaged slab (i.e., four low severity panels equal one damaged slab).

The calculated percent damage was then converted to SCI using the following formulas: SCI = Max(100 − 22.5 × % Damage 0.41 , 0) 14 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Table 12 provides the range of SCI and precent damage used for each sidewalk condition description.

Table 12: SCI Ranges for Condition Description Rating

% Damage

SCI

Good

0-0.4

85 – 100

Satisfactory

0.4-2.1

70 - 85

Fair

2.1-5.4

55 - 70

Poor

5.4-11

40 - 55

Very Poor

>11

0 - 40

The SCI formula was developed to align with the PCI used for roadway assessments, which Tetra Tech previously provided for the Town’s Road network. This alignment allows both SCI and PCI to share the same condition rating scale from "Good" to "Very Poor" making it easier to interpret and compare sidewalk and roadway conditions within a unified asset management framework.

6.2.2 Sidewalk Accessibility Rating The Sidewalk Accessibility Rating (SAR) is a metric used to evaluate the accessibility of sidewalks, focusing on pedestrian safety. In this study, the SAR is determined based on the presence of severe physical defects that impact the sidewalk profile such as vertical displacements (e.g., faulting, settlement), missing panels—as well as other accessibility-related issues and geometric factors, including obstructions and excessive crossfall. Trip Hazard Frequency In this study, sidewalk segment lengths range from 2 meters (retained short segments at intersections where sidewalk surface types differ from adjacent sections) to approximately 730 meters. Naturally, longer segments may contain more recorded potential trip hazards than shorter ones. However, a higher count does not necessarily indicate that the segment is unsafe. To better evaluate sidewalk accessibility independent of segment length, we introduce the concept of trip hazard frequency, which serves as a key parameter in calculating the SAR. Trip hazard frequency is defined based on the spacing between hazards. If hazards are spaced more than 100 meters apart, they are classified as single trip hazards, with a frequency of 1. If hazards are closer together, they are considered multiple trip hazards, with a frequency of 2 or more for that segment. Sidewalk blocks with multiple hazards are considered to pose a greater accessibility concern than those with single hazards. For example, along the Crowsnest Hwy, one sidewalk block contains two faulting events spaced at intervals of 33 meters while the total length of the segment is 64 meters. As shown in Figure 8, this results in a trip hazard frequency of 2, categorizing the segment as having multiple hazards.

Figure 8: Example of Defining Multiple Trip Hazards

15 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

SAR Calculation: 

For sidewalks with recorded trip hazards, the SAR is calculated using the following formula: SAR = 3.5 − 0.5 × All Hazards frequency

This results in an SAR of 3 or less. 

For sidewalk segments without recorded trip hazards, the SAR is based on the overall sidewalk condition (i.e., SCI), using the formula: SAR = 3.0 + 0.02 × SCI

This results in an SAR ranging between 3.1 to 5.

Table 13 provides the range of SAR Ranges for sidewalk accessibility description.

Table 13: SAR Ranges for Sidewalk Accessibility Description Accessibility Issue

SAR

Rare

4.5 – 5

No trip hazards recorded; overall sidewalk condition is good to satisfactory

Unlikely

4.1 – 4.4

No trip hazards recorded; overall sidewalk condition is fair

Possible

3 – 4.1

No trip hazards recorded; overall sidewalk condition is poor to very poor

Likely

2.6 - 3

Single Hazard recorded

Very Likely

1.0-2.5

Multiple Hazard recorded

6.3

Description

Current Sidewalk Condition and Accessibility Status

Table 14 summarizes the average SCI and SAR across the Town’s sidewalk network. Overall, these indices indicate that the sidewalks are in good to satisfactory condition.

Table 14: Sidewalk Condition by Surface Type Surface Type

Sidewalk Length (km)

SCI (0-100)

SAR (0-5)

Asphalt

4.6

4.2

Concrete

23.7

4.4

Brick

1.7

4.8

Network

30.0

4.4

16 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Figure 9 illustrates the distribution of SCI across the network by surface type. Approximately 4% of the Town’s sidewalks are classified as poor or very poor, while about 80% of the network is rated satisfactory or good. Poor conditions are concentrated mainly in asphalt sidewalks, where 8% have SCI < 55, indicating a need for repair or replacement. Detailed SCI distribution maps are included in Appendix D.

100%

1% 8%

90%

SCI

3% 14%

12%

% Length

16%

80% 70%

36%

Poor Fair

35%

33%

60%

Satisfactory Good

50% 40%

Very Poor

33%

77%

30%

50%

20% 10% 0%

47%

23%

Asphalt (4.6 km)

Concrete (23.7 km)

Brick (1.7 km)

Surface Type

Network (30 km)

Figure 9: Distribution of Sidewalk Conditions by SCI for Different Surface Types

Figure 10 illustrates sidewalk accessibility status, represented by the SAR. Asphalt surfaces exhibit the highest incidence of trip hazards (14%), totaling six hazards, all related to faulting (examples shown in Figure 11). Concrete sidewalks are also affected, with 10% of their length impacted 8% with a single hazard and 2% with multiple hazards. Overall, 11% of sidewalk segments across the Town present at least one potential trip hazard.

17 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

90% 80%

100%

11% 6%

SAR

2% 10%

8% 5%

14%

24%

70%

9% 5%

Likely 27%

% Length

Possible Unlikely

60% 50%

Very Likely

51%

Rare

40%

76% 61%

30%

58%

20% 10% 0%

29%

Asphalt (4.6 km)

Concrete (23.7 km)

Brick (1.7 km)

Surface Type

Network (30 km)

Figure 10: Sidewalk Accessibility Conditions by SAR for Different Surface Types

Figure 11: Examples of Accessibility Issues (Faulting) in Asphalt Sidewalks Appendix D includes GIS-based maps that identifies the locations of potential sidewalk hazards and displays the corresponding SAR ratings across the network.

18 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

7.0

METHODOLOGY FOR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS

7.1

Pavement Performance Modelling

Tetra Tech has applied the Highway Development and Management (HDM) modeling framework, developed by the World Bank, to forecast the progression of pavement distresses such as cracking, rutting, and surface roughness. Figure 12 outlines the modeling process, from input parameters to predicted pavement conditions. This model has been refined over more than two decades by a global team of experts.

Figure 12: Predicting Pavement Performance Tetra Tech also reviewed two Pavement Condition Index (PCI) deterioration models for Collector and Local roads. These models were developed using Tetra Tech’s experience with municipalities in British Columbia, as detailed construction history was not available to create a more specific model from one year of data collection. Based on this analysis, Collector roads are expected to reach the rehabilitation threshold of PCI 55 in approximately 24 years, while Local roads are projected to reach the same threshold in about 30 years.

7.2

Rehabilitation and Maintenance Treatments

Maintenance and rehabilitation treatments used were established based on the Town inputs. The treatments and their unit costs are shown in Table 15. Typically, crack sealing and patching are considered maintenance treatments, and the other treatments are considered resurfacing/major rehabilitation treatments.

Table 15: Treatments and Unit Costs used in the Analysis Type Maintenance

Resurfacing Major Rehabilitation

Treatment

Unit Cost

Crack Sealing

$3/L-m

Shallow Patching

$20/m²

Overlay (nominal 50 mm)

$30/m² + Ancillary Patching Cost

Max: $40/m²

Mill and Overlay (nominal 50 mm)

$35/m² + Ancillary Patching Cost

Max: $50/m²

COL LOC

Reconstruction

19 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

$155/m² $75/m

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

A brief description for each treatment is provided in below: 

Crack Sealing: This involves applying a hot sealant to a crack to reduce water infiltration. It is a cost-effective pavement preservation treatment that can slow deterioration and extend pavement life by a few years.



Shallow Patching: This includes repairing potholes or milling the localized cracked area. Patching is a crucial part of any pavement maintenance program. Pricing includes supply, placement, and compaction.



Overlay (nominal 50 mm): This treatment involves applying a new layer of asphalt to a deteriorating surface to add strength and support heavier loads. It is used where no curb is present. Costs vary based on the amount of cracking that needs additional patching.



Mill and Overlay (nominal 50 mm): This process involves removing approximately 50 mm of the pavement surface with a large milling machine, followed by overlaying with 50 mm of hot mix asphalt. This is the most common pavement treatment. Costs vary based on the extent of wide cracking requiring ancillary patching.



Reconstruction: Based on feedback from the Town, notable base issues have been identified, making reconstruction necessary for roads in very poor condition. This treatment includes base repair and full-depth milling and paving, with costs varying by road class and asphalt/base thickness. Reconstruction projects are also coordinated with underground utility upgrades and sidewalk renewals too.

7.2.1 Treatment Triggers The feasibility of applying a treatment on a given analysis segment is usually limited by physical or other constraints. For example, overlays cannot be directly applied to segments with curb and gutter. Similarly, a treatment should never be applied in the absence of any surface distress, and an overlay should not be considered if the pavement is too severely distressed. A set of “triggers” were developed so that only feasible strategies are explored. The triggers (shown in Table 16) limit the number of strategies to those that can feasibly be applied.

Table 16: Maintenance and Rehabilitation Triggers Treatment Crack Sealing Patching

Trigger Criteria PCI< 85 And Low Severity Crack > 3% PCI< 85 And Wide Cracking > 3% PCI < 55

Overlay (50 mm)

And

(IRI > 4.5 mm/m

PCI > 25 OR AFCW >8)

And

AFCW < 15

And Mill and Overlay (50 mm)

Overlay (50 mm):

No Curb Exist

Mill and Fill (50 mm)

Curb Exist

And

Reconstruction

PCI ≤ 25

OR AFCW> 15

20 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

7.2.2

Treatment Resets

With the selection and application of any given rehabilitation treatment, the condition of a road will improve. For example, with the treatment of a 50 mm overlay, ruts would be filled, cracking would be overlaid, roughness would decrease, and strength would increase. Therefore, to predict performance over time and account for and compare possible interventions, the performance models must adjust the measured and forecasted distress data to reflect the application of the treatment. These changes to the value of the analysis variables as a result of the application of a treatment are called resets. Some heavy rehabilitation treatments, such as reconstruction, might reset virtually all the analysis variables.

7.3

Generate Feasible Rehabilitation Strategies and Optimization

The objective of pavement management is to provide and preserve the network of pavements as economically as possible (lowest life-cycle cost). Tetra Tech used Deighton’s Total Infrastructure Management System (dTIMS), which is programmed by Tetra Tech engineers to perform Life-Cycle Cost Analyses (LCCA). The dTIMS software uses the decision trees to create multiple feasible alternative strategies for each pavement segment. A strategy is defined as a collection of successive treatments applied consecutively over a 20-year life cycle. The process results in a database of up to hundreds of feasible strategies for each pavement segment in the network. Each strategy has one predicted performance for each of the present status reporting condition indices. Each strategy also has a predicted remaining service life in each year of the analysis period, its own set of life-cycle costs (by treatment application year), and its own set of measured benefits as defined by the agency (Figure 13).

Figure 13: Example of Feasible Strategies for Each Pavement Segment Applying an agency defined real discount rate (4%) provides a present value cost for each strategy and a present value measure of the total value of the benefits of each strategy. Using this array of feasible strategies and given a trial budget for each roadway class or the whole network, Tetra Tech’s optimization routine can select strategies from the database that meet the client specified optimization criteria (typically maximize cost-benefit).

21 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

7.3.1 Method to Measure Benefit of Each Strategy One method to derive the benefit is to multiply the area under the pavement performance curve and the length of the pavement segment. The area under the curve was calculated by summing the present value of the difference between the condition index (such as PCI) resulting from a strategy and the condition index for the do-nothing strategy (base case strategy) for each year in the analysis period. A strategy is a collection of treatments over time that addresses the deficiency of the road segment. Figure 14 shows an example of calculating the benefit for a strategy with one overlay, early in the 20-year analysis period.

Figure 14: Example of calculating the benefit for an Overlay Strategy At this stage, all road segments with similar distress levels are treated equally, regardless of classification. For instance, a Collector road and a Local road with the same condition would rank similarly. However, Collector roads typically carry more traffic and should be prioritized, especially when funding is limited. To account for this, a traffic factor based on recent AADT (Annual Average Daily Traffic) is incorporated. In summary, the benefit of a strategy is defined as: 𝑩𝑩𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞 = 𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏 𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕𝐕 𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨 𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀 𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮𝐮 𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏 𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏 𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂𝐂 × 𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭

Table 17 presents the estimated traffic factors for various road classifications based on AADT ranges.

Table 17: Estimated Traffic Factor for Each Road Classification Road Class Collector Local

AADT (Average)

AADT Range 500 – 2,800

1,600 100

22 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

Average Traffic Factor 𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨

�(

𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏

4.0 1

)

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

7.4

Budget Scenarios

To support the Town’s decision-making for pavement rehabilitation, several budget scenarios have been modeled over a 20-year horizon. These scenarios are summarized in Table 18.

Table 18: Budget Scenarios used in the 2025 Analysis Budget Scenario

Annual Capital Budget for Pavement Rehabilitation (2027 and later)

1 (current funding)

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

Unconstrained Budget

As noted in Section 3.3, the 2026 paving plan is already committed under the Town’s program, which includes approximately 1.1 km of reconstruction projects with an estimated cost of $1.2 million. Therefore, this study focuses on budget analysis for 2027 and beyond. All budget scenarios are stated in real (base-year) dollars, meaning no inflation factor has been applied. By projecting future costs and benefits in constant dollars and then discounting them with a real discount rate, we obtain present-value figures directly in today’s money. This approach removes the uncertainty of forecasting longterm inflation and the need to inflate and subsequently strip out anticipated price changes when comparing alternatives. It is noted that routine maintenance (crack seal and patching) costs are part of a separate operations budget and therefore do not use the available capital budgets.

8.0

ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT

8.1

Unconstrained Budget Analysis

An unconstrained budget, also known as a needs-based budget, represents the funding needed in a theoretical scenario where each road segment receives rehabilitation in the first year it meets the trigger for treatment. While not intended as a practical scenario, it helps estimate the maximum potential workload.

23 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Figure 15 summarizes the rehabilitation costs based on the unconstrained budget scenario. Under this theoretical scenario, the Town would require around $5.2 million in the first year for rehabilitation of the paved road network, including $1.2 million for Collector roads and $4.0 million for Local roads.

$6 M

Rehabilitation Cost

$5.2 M $1.2 M

Collector Local Total

$4 M

$4.0 M $2 M

$1.4 M

$1.0 M

$0 M

2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044

Year

Figure 15: Rehabilitation Needs based on Unconstrained Budget Scenario In total, the Town would require $17.2 million (or $900,000 per year) for rehabilitation over a 20-year period to address all the needs triggered at the earliest possible time. In other words, the following capital budgets on average are required for each road classification to remove all segments in the backlog in the next 20 years: 

Collector:

$200,000 /year



Local:

$700,000 /year

8.2

Constrained Budget Analysis

A road is said to be in backlog when there is not enough money to construct the most cost-effective rehabilitation. In other words, the road segments in poor to very poor condition are defined as “backlog roads”. To evaluate the consequence of various budget scenarios, the backlog cost is used. The backlog cost would need to be applied in a single year to eliminate the backlog. If the backlog cost is growing over time, the network is getting worse (i.e., more expensive to repair). Figure 16 illustrates how various annual budget levels affect backlog cost. To maintain the current backlog of $5.2 million over the long term, an annual pavement rehabilitation budget of approximately $700,000 is required. Conversely, a lower budget of $500,000 per year could cause the backlog cost to rise to $9.7 million by 2044.

24 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Road Network

$12M

$500 k /Year $600 k /Year $700 k /Year $800 k /Year

$10M

$9.7 M $7.8 M

Backlog Cost

$8M

$6M

$5.2 M

$5.9 M

$4M

$4.0 M $2M

$0M

Year

Figure 16: Future Backlog Projection based on Various Rehabilitation Budget Scenarios Additionally, Figure 17 shows the predicted average PCI of the road network over a 20-year period under each budget scenario. With $700,000 in annual funding, the average PCI is expected to improve from 61 (fair condition) to 69 (threshold of satisfactory condition). Under the lower $500,000 budget, the average PCI will decline over time. Road Network

$500 k /Year $600 k /Year $700 k /Year $800 k /Year

85 80 75

75 69 64

PCI

65 60 55

50 45 40 35 30

Year

Figure 17: Predicted PCI for Different Budget Scenarios

25 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

8.3

Defragmented Multi-Year Pavement Rehabilitation Program

A budget scenario of $700,000 per year was selected to generate a multi-year rehabilitation program through dTIMS Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA). While LCCA provides a rigorous cost-optimization for each individual segment, its segment-by-segment approach can fragment what are, in reality, continuous corridors, e.g., a 1.5 km street divided into five 300 m units, each slated in different years. Such fragmentation complicates construction planning, increases mobilization costs, and reduces overall operational efficiency. Tetra Tech therefore performed an additional “defragmentation” analysis. We reviewed each LCCA-recommended segment, identified adjacent and contiguous sections, and consolidated them into common treatment years. The outcome is a streamlined, defragmented five-year rehabilitation plan still aligned with the $700,000 annual budget that groups work packages into more practical, constructible units. A map and spreadsheet outlining the proposed 10-year paving program is provided in Appendix D. This program includes only the rehabilitation treatments identified through the analysis and does not account for routine maintenance activities such as crack sealing or patching, which are funded separately through the operations budget.

9.0

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Tetra Tech completed a comprehensive condition survey of the Town’s paved roads, unpaved (gravel) roads, and sidewalks. Overall, the paved road network has an average PCI of 61 (Fair). Collector roads, with an average PCI of 56, are nearing the poor condition threshold (PCI 55). The sidewalk network is generally in satisfactory condition, although some poor segments are primarily found in asphalt sidewalks. For the paved road network, a detailed life-cycle cost analysis was conducted for each segment to forecast network performance under various budget scenarios. The objectives were to estimate long-term funding requirements, address backlog costs, and develop a sustainable rehabilitation program. Under the needs-based scenario (i.e., an unconstrained budget), an estimated total investment of $17.2 million would be required over a 20-year period to eliminate the backlog. This includes approximately $200,000 /year for Collector roads, and $700,000 /year for Local roads. Several constrained budget scenarios were also evaluated, including annual capital allocations of $500,000, $600,000, $700,000, and $800,000. The analysis indicates that a minimum annual funding of $700,000 is needed to maintain current backlog or improve current condition to threshold of satisfactory condition (PCI of 70) over the next 20 years. It is important to note that these figures are presented in current dollars and do not account for annual inflation. The pavement rehabilitation plan has been formulated at the network-level. During implementation, it is recommended to finalize project-level assessments and designs. It is recommended that the Town update the plan every 3–5 years using new condition data for the paved road network. This approach offers the opportunity to recalibrate deterioration models and incorporate new or rehabilitated pavements into the plan. This timeframe aligns with practices followed by other municipalities in western Canada.

26 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

10.0 CLOSURE We trust this report meets your present requirements. If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01

_________________________________

Prepared by: Nasrin Nazari, M.Sc., EIT Pavement Management Engineer-In-Training Resilient Infrastructure Management Solutions Direct Line: 604-685-0275 Nasrin.Nazari@tetratech.com

FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01

_________________________________

Prepared by: Kamran Rafiei, Ph.D., P.Eng. Senior Pavement Management Engineer Resilient Infrastructure Management Solutions Direct Line: 778.945.5855 Kamran.Rafiei@tetratech.com

FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01

_________________________________

Reviewed by: Alan Reggin, M.Sc., P.Eng. Pavement Management Specialist Resilient Infrastructure Management Solutions Direct Line: 778.945.5729 Alan.Reggin@tetratech.com

27 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

REFERENCE Paterson, W. (1987). Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects. Washington, D.C, USA: World Bank Publications. Yu, J., Chou, E., & Yau, J.-T. (2006). Development of Speed-Related Ride Quality Thresholds Using International Roughness Index. Transportation Research Record, No. 1974, 47-53.

28 RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

APPENDIX A TETRA TECH’S LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

LIMITATIONS ON USE OF THIS DOCUMENT DESIGN REPORT 1.1 USE OF DOCUMENT AND OWNERSHIP

1.3 STANDARD OF CARE

This document pertains to a specific site, a specific development, and a specific scope of work. The document may include plans, drawings, profiles and other supporting documents that collectively constitute the document (the “Professional Document”).

Services performed by TETRA TECH for the Professional Document have been conducted in accordance with the Contract, in a manner consistent with the level of skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided. Professional judgment has been applied in developing the conclusions and/or recommendations provided in this Professional Document. No warranty or guarantee, express or implied, is made concerning the test results, comments, recommendations, or any other portion of the Professional Document.

The Professional Document is intended for the sole use of TETRA TECH’s Client (the “Client”) as specifically identified in the TETRA TECH Services Agreement or other Contractual Agreement entered into with the Client (either of which is termed the “Contract” herein). TETRA TECH does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, analyses, recommendations or other contents of the Professional Document when it is used or relied upon by any party other than the Client, unless authorized in writing by TETRA TECH.

If any error or omission is detected by the Client or an Authorized Party, the error or omission must be immediately brought to the attention of TETRA TECH.

Any unauthorized use of the Professional Document is at the sole risk of the user. TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any loss or damage where such loss or damage is alleged to be or, is in fact, caused by the unauthorized use of the Professional Document.

1.4 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION BY CLIENT The Client acknowledges that it has fully cooperated with TETRA TECH with respect to the provision of all available information on the past, present, and proposed conditions on the site, including historical information respecting the use of the site. The Client further acknowledges that in order for TETRA TECH to properly provide the services contracted for in the Contract, TETRA TECH has relied upon the Client with respect to both the full disclosure and accuracy of any such information.

Where TETRA TECH has expressly authorized the use of the Professional Document by a third party (an “Authorized Party”), consideration for such authorization is the Authorized Party’s acceptance of these Limitations on Use of this Document as well as any limitations on liability contained in the Contract with the Client (all of which is collectively termed the “Limitations on Liability”). The Authorized Party should carefully review both these Limitations on Use of this Document and the Contract prior to making any use of the Professional Document. Any use made of the Professional Document by an Authorized Party constitutes the Authorized Party’s express acceptance of, and agreement to, the Limitations on Liability.

1.5 INFORMATION PROVIDED TO TETRA TECH BY OTHERS During the performance of the work and the preparation of this Professional Document, TETRA TECH may have relied on information provided by third parties other than the Client.

The Professional Document and any other form or type of data or documents generated by TETRA TECH during the performance of the work are TETRA TECH’s professional work product and shall remain the copyright property of TETRA TECH.

While TETRA TECH endeavours to verify the accuracy of such information, TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or the reliability of such information even where inaccurate or unreliable information impacts any recommendations, design or other deliverables and causes the Client or an Authorized Party loss or damage.

The Professional Document is subject to copyright and shall not be reproduced either wholly or in part without the prior, written permission of TETRA TECH. Additional copies of the Document, if required, may be obtained upon request.

1.6 GENERAL LIMITATIONS OF DOCUMENT

1.2 ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENT FORMAT

This Professional Document is based solely on the conditions presented and the data available to TETRA TECH at the time the data were collected in the field or gathered from available databases.

Where TETRA TECH submits electronic file and/or hard copy versions of the Professional Document or any drawings or other project-related documents and deliverables (collectively termed TETRA TECH’s “Instruments of Professional Service”), only the signed and/or sealed versions shall be considered final. The original signed and/or sealed electronic file and/or hard copy version archived by TETRA TECH shall be deemed to be the original. TETRA TECH will archive a protected digital copy of the original signed and/or sealed version for a period of 10 years.

The Client, and any Authorized Party, acknowledges that the Professional Document is based on limited data and that the conclusions, opinions, and recommendations contained in the Professional Document are the result of the application of professional judgment to such limited data. The Professional Document is not applicable to any other sites, nor should it be relied upon for types of development other than those to which it refers. Any variation from the site conditions present, or variation in assumed conditions which might form the basis of design or recommendations as outlined in this report, at or on the development proposed as of the date of the Professional Document requires a supplementary exploration, investigation, and assessment.

Both electronic file and/or hard copy versions of TETRA TECH’s Instruments of Professional Service shall not, under any circumstances, be altered by any party except TETRA TECH. TETRA TECH’s Instruments of Professional Service will be used only and exactly as submitted by TETRA TECH.

TETRA TECH is neither qualified to, nor is it making, any recommendations with respect to the purchase, sale, investment or development of the property, the decisions on which are the sole responsibility of the Client.

Electronic files submitted by TETRA TECH have been prepared and submitted using specific software and hardware systems. TETRA TECH makes no representation about the compatibility of these files with the Client’s current or future software and hardware systems.

LIMITATIONS ON USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

DESIGN REPORT

1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY ISSUES

the level of risk that has been incorporated into the project design, in consideration of the level of the geotechnical information that was reasonably acquired to facilitate completion of the design.

Unless so stipulated in the Design Report, TETRA TECH was not retained to explore, address or consider, and has not explored, addressed or considered any environmental or regulatory issues associated with the project specific design.

If a Geotechnical Report was prepared for the project by TETRA TECH, it may be included in the Design Report as appropriate. The Geotechnical Report contains Limitations that should be read in conjunction with these Limitations for the Design Report. 1.10 APPLICABLE CODES, STANDARDS, GUIDELINES & BEST PRACTICE

1.8 CALCULATIONS AND DESIGNS TETRA TECH may have undertaken design calculations and prepared project specific designs in accordance with terms of reference that were previously set out in consultation with, and agreement of, TETRA TECH’s client. These designs have been prepared to a standard that is consistent with current industry practice. Notwithstanding, if any error or omission is detected by TETRA TECH’s Client or any party that is authorized to use the Design Report, the error or omission should be immediately drawn to the attention of TETRA TECH.

This report has been prepared based on the applicable codes, standards, guidelines or best practice as identified in the report. Some mandated codes, standards and guidelines (such as ASTM, AASHTO Bridge Design/Construction Codes, Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code, National/Provincial Building Codes) are routinely updated and corrections made. TETRA TECH cannot predict nor be held liable for any such future changes, amendments, errors or omissions in these documents that may have a bearing on the assessment, design or analyses included in this report.

1.9 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS A Geotechnical Report is commonly the basis upon which the specific project design has been completed. It is incumbent upon TETRA TECH’s Client, and any other authorized party, to be knowledgeable of

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

APPENDIX B 2025 PAVEMENT CONDITION Figure B1 – 2025 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Figure B2 – 2025 Pavement Roughness (IRI) 2025 Pavement Condition Indices Spreadsheet

RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

LEGEND

322000

ae Br

rn bu

n Jubilee Dr

87th St

Park Pl

h gfis Kin

Nig hth awk Dr

r er D

Ha rbo

( Fort St. John !

5433000

62nd Ave

ur Ke y

45th St

85th St

89th St

Maple Dr

Wren Pl

115th St

Cactus Cres

er nd

Site

400

400 km

5432000

Lakeshore Dr

v 36th A

STATUS ISSUED FOR USE

TOWN OF OSOYOOS ROAD & SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT

2025 Pavement Condition Index (PCI)

s ur Co e

PROJECTION UTM Zone 11 CSRS

Pebble Beach D r

200

NOTES Base data source: Town of Osoyoos sidewalk centreline data provided by the Town. Imagery provided by ESRI Basemaps via Maxar, 2022.

e lia Lob

Fairwinds Dr

( Prince George !

( Kamloops ! ( Kelowna ! Vancouver ( ! ( Victoria !

41st St

a Ole

5432000

( Prince Rupert !

Pl se Ro

lf Go

DATUM NAD83

CLIENT

Scale: 1:18,500 250

125

250

Metres FILE NO.

5431000

ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_B1.mxd

5431000

G:\TRANSPORTATION\ASMT\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos\GIS\Maps\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_B1.mxd modified 5/27/2026 by AKANSHA.VAISH

Very Poor

5434000

Dr wlark

Finch Cres

74th Ave

Poor

51st St

o Mead

5434000

rt tC

Fair

t i Cr Fuj

er mb La

Tamarack Dr

e Av

Satisfactory

r nD

nd 92

Good

rta Spa

Em pi

kR d

ai Tr

wb er r yC r ee

l na Ca

Str a

Other Road

PCI Condition

5435000

io at ig

5435000

Irr

11 5

Town Of Osoyoos Boundary

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

322000

OFFICE Tt-VANC

DWN AV

CKD APVD REV KR KR 0

DATE May 27, 2026

PROJECT NO. TRN.ASMT03177-01

Figure B1

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

LEGEND

322000

ae Br

rn bu

n Jubilee Dr

87th St

Park Pl

h gfis Kin

Nig hth awk Dr

r er D

Ha rbo

( Fort St. John !

5433000

62nd Ave

ur Ke y

45th St

85th St

89th St

Maple Dr

Wren Pl

115th St

Cactus Cres

Site

41st St

er nd

400

400 km

5432000

Lakeshore Dr

v 36th A

STATUS ISSUED FOR USE

TOWN OF OSOYOOS ROAD & SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT

2025 Pavement Roughness (IRI)

s ur Co e

PROJECTION UTM Zone 11 CSRS

Pebble Beach D r

200

NOTES Base data source: Town of Osoyoos sidewalk centreline data provided by the Town. Imagery provided by ESRI Basemaps via Maxar, 2022.

e lia Lob

Fairwinds Dr

( Prince George !

( Kamloops ! ( Kelowna ! Vancouver ( ! ( Victoria !

Pl se Ro

a Ole

5432000

( Prince Rupert !

lf Go

DATUM NAD83

CLIENT

Scale: 1:18,500 250

125

250

Metres FILE NO.

5431000

ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_B2.mxd

5431000

G:\TRANSPORTATION\ASMT\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos\GIS\Maps\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_B2.mxd modified 5/27/2026 by AKANSHA.VAISH

Very Poor

5434000

Dr wlark

Finch Cres

74th Ave

Poor

51st St

o Mead

5434000

rt tC

Fair

t i Cr Fuj

er mb La

Tamarack Dr

e Av

Satisfactory

r nD

nd 92

Good

rta Spa

Em pi

kR d

ai Tr

wb er r yC r ee

l na Ca

Str a

Other Road

IRI Condition

5435000

io at ig

5435000

Irr

11 5

Town Of Osoyoos Boundary

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

322000

OFFICE Tt-VANC

DWN AV

CKD APVD REV KR KR 0

DATE May 27, 2026

PROJECT NO. TRN.ASMT03177-01

Figure B2

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

Ana-001-010

TRD0241

115th St

Pebble Beach Dr

46th Ave

12.5

Collector

1700

7.3

20.3

4.2

2.66

Ana-001-020

TRD0242

115th St

832

46th Ave

62nd Ave

784

13.4

Collector

1700

Ana-001-030

TRD0255

115th St

833

1080

Southeast End

turning lane_6

247

10.8

Local

100

4.5

10.3

3.1

2.05

1.3

2.3

2.61

Ana-001-040

TRD0176

115th St

1080

1251

turning lane_6

Strawberry Creek Rd

171

10.2

Local

100

2.8

6.1

2.1

2.03

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

Ana-001-050

TRD0175

115th St

1251

2365

Strawberry Creek Rd

Northeast End

1114

11.7

Local

100

5.6

23.1

2.4

2.31

Ana-002-010

TRD0313

36th Ave

154

Lakeshore Dr

Chardonnay Crt

154

6.4

Collector

500

7.5

24.6

6.5

4.34

Ana-002-020

TRD0312

36th Ave

154

181

Chardonnay Crt

East End

8.2

Local

500

20.5

2.5

4.49

North End

208

8.4

Local

500

0.1

0.8

1.9

2.37

44th Ave

143

5.9

Local

100

38.5

52.4

7.1

8.98

Ana-002-030

TRD0315

36th Ave

182

390

South End

Ana-003-010

TRD0214

41st St

143

South End

Ana-004-010

TRD0215

44th Ave

256

Lakeshore Dr

41st St

256

5.9

Local

100

13.8

4.6

3.95

Ana-005-010

TRD0260

45th St

1091

South End

North End

1091

9.1

Local

2800

20.3

34.9

4.4

3.56

Ana-007-010

TRD0188

51st St

South End

56th Ave

12.3

Local

100

2.3

5.4

1.5

2.83

Ana-007-020

TRD0318

51st St

293

56th Ave

North End

244

7.5

Local

100

32.3

45.9

6.5

6.44

Ana-008-010

TRD0187

56th Ave

131

Lakeshore Dr

51st St

131

8.4

Local

30.7

41.8

3.9

5.46

Ana-009-010

TRD0451

62nd Ave

358

115th St

turning lane_2

358

9.1

Collector

1700

9.5

3.4

3.06

Ana-009-020

TRD0450

62nd Ave

358

410

turning lane_2

turning lane_3

10.1

Collector

1700

1.3

4.7

2.7

5.75

Ana-009-030

TRD0306

62nd Ave

410

545

turning lane_3

Quail Pl

135

11.5

Collector

1300

5.3

13.1

3.4

2.08

Ana-009-040

TRD0059

62nd Ave

545

626

Quail Pl

Nighthawk Dr

10.5

Collector

1300

14.7

29.6

3.6

2.59

Ana-009-050

TRD0165

62nd Ave

626

693

Nighthawk Dr

Osprey Pl

11.3

Collector

1300

7.5

19.1

3.5

3.07

Ana-009-060

TRD0303

62nd Ave

693

750

Osprey Pl

62nd Ave_1

Collector

1300

6.1

16.5

3.3

3.89

Ana-009-070

TRD0302

62nd Ave

750

823

62nd Ave_1

89th St

9.6

Collector

1300

16.2

37.6

7.7

7.77

Ana-010-010

TRD0301

62nd Ave_1

89th St

62nd Ave

10.8

Collector

1300

25.5

48.6

5.9

8.18

Ana-011-010

TRD0152

66th Ave

121

68th Ave

83rd St

121

6.6

Local

100

1.7

5.6

2.2

5.38

Ana-011-020

TRD0153

66th Ave

121

255

83rd St

East End

134

8.5

Local

100

7.6

21.7

4.5

5.35

Ana-012-010

TRD0233

68th Ave

165

87th St

85th St

165

14.1

Local

1000

5.9

2.9

3.2

Ana-012-020

TRD0147

68th Ave

165

208

85th St

66th Ave

15.5

Local

1000

6.3

13.9

4.4

2.25

Ana-012-030

TRD0146

68th Ave

208

287

66th Ave

83rd St

10.6

Local

1000

4.9

12.5

1.9

2.21

Ana-012-040

TRD0145

68th Ave

287

367

83rd St

East End

18.1

Local

1000

12.2

19.9

4.9

11.78

Ana-013-010

TRD0085

70th Ave

121

89th St

87th St

121

Local

500

7.2

17.2

1.8

2.82

Ana-013-020

TRD0160

70th Ave

122

271

87th St

85th St

149

6.1

Local

500

4.6

13.4

3.8

5.63

Ana-013-030

TRD0373

70th Ave

271

399

85th St

83rd St / Main St

128

8.2

Local

500

6.8

15.3

2.8

7.02

Ana-014-010

TRD0134

72nd Ave

130

89th St

87th St

130

5.3

Local

500

21.2

3.5

8.2

Ana-014-020

TRD0012

72nd Ave

130

276

87th St

85th St

146

6.9

Local

500

3.7

8.5

2.4

4.1

Ana-014-030

TRD0356

72nd Ave

276

405

85th St

East End

129

9.7

Local

500

3.2

9.3

3.36

Heron Lane

Ana-015-010

TRD0030

74A Ave

Nighthawk Dr / Swan Cres

5.3

Local

500

15.4

10.9

Ana-015-020

TRD0031

74A Ave

171

Heron Lane

89th St

120

6.6

Local

500

11.4

23.3

11.26

Ana-015-030

TRD0032

74A Ave

171

312

89th St

87th St

141

9.5

Local

500

15.6

32.3

5.6

7.33

Ana-015-040

TRD0141

74A Ave

312

457

87th St

85th St

145

6.4

Local

500

4.9

12.7

8.5

8.12

Ana-015-050

TRD0033

74A Ave

457

587

85th St

East End

130

5.8

Local

500

36.6

5.2

6.78

Ana-016-020

TRD0441

74th Ave

104

275

Meadowlark Dr

Wren Dr

171

6.2

Local

400

9.8

31.3

3.6

3.84

Ana-016-030

TRD0440

74th Ave

275

419

Wren Dr

Hwy_97

144

8.6

Local

400

6.4

20.9

4.4

5.8

Ana-016-035

TRD0079

74th Ave

419

489

Hwy_97

Finch Cres

9.9

Local

1700

7.2

25.5

3.1

11.42

Ana-016-040

TRD0078

74th Ave

489

544

Finch Cres

Sandpiper Pl

Local

1700

6.2

17.5

2.2

4.03

Ana-016-050

TRD0077

74th Ave

544

636

Sandpiper Pl

Nighthawk Dr

10.4

Local

1700

5.3

17.5

1.9

3.95

Ana-016-060

TRD0076

74th Ave

636

701

Nighthawk Dr

Heron Lane

10.1

Local

1700

1.7

3.2

0.7

2.86

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

Ana-016-070

TRD0075

74th Ave

701

770

Heron Lane

Loon Cres

10.6

Local

1700

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

100

2.97

Ana-016-080

TRD0129

74th Ave

770

821

Loon Cres

89th St

10.8

Local

1700

0.5

4.2

1.1

2.88

Ana-016-090

TRD0074

74th Ave

821

961

89th St

87th St

140

13.7

Local

1700

4.3

12.2

2.1

2.81

Ana-016-100

TRD0073

74th Ave

961

1106

87th St

85th St

145

11.9

Local

1700

4.3

9.7

2.2

2.72

Ana-016-110

TRD0364

74th Ave

1106

1235

85th St

East End

129

Local

1700

3.6

8.2

1.5

2.54

Ana-017-010

TRD0010

78th Ave

114

89th St

87th St

114

14.6

Local

1000

4.3

2.8

6.58

Ana-017-020

TRD0009

78th Ave

114

199

87th St

Gravenstein Dr

Local

1500

4.8

25.8

3.3

3.82

Veterans Way

Ana-017-030

TRD0008

78th Ave

199

258

Gravenstein Dr

14.2

Local

1500

7.1

31.1

4.3

2.77

Ana-017-040

TRD0007

78th Ave

258

388

Veterans Way

Spartan Dr_1

130

15.6

Local

1500

13.5

3.4

2.57

Ana-018-010

TRD0083

83rd St

Kingfisher Dr

unnamed lane_2

11.6

Local

500

6.2

13.5

1.9

2.16

Ana-018-020

TRD0082

83rd St

unnamed lane_2

66th Ave

Local

500

1.3

1.6

2.82

Ana-018-030

TRD0158

83rd St

135

66th Ave

68th Ave

9.9

Local

500

1.1

1.9

1.5

3.28

Ana-018-040

TRD0179

83rd St

135

195

68th Ave

70th Ave / Main St

14.4

Local

500

3.7

6.7

1.6

4.36

Ana-019-010

TRD0016

85th St

68th Ave

70th Ave

8.7

Local

1000

7.9

2.7

5.97

Ana-019-020

TRD0017

85th St

110

70th Ave

unnamed lane_1

9.4

Local

1000

3.9

10.5

3.1

6.25

Ana-019-030

TRD0018

85th St

110

162

unnamed lane_1

72nd Ave

9.7

Local

1000

3.2

9.5

4.9

4.89

Ana-019-040

TRD0019

85th St

162

257

72nd Ave

74th Ave

11.4

Local

1000

6.5

2.8

3.43

Ana-019-050

TRD0020

85th St

257

306

74th Ave

74A Ave

14.1

Local

1000

14.3

36.1

4.5

5.23

Ana-019-060

TRD0021

85th St

306

361

74A Ave

Veterans Way

Local

1000

7.6

4.2

4.73

Ana-020-010

TRD0148

87th St

68th Ave

70th Ave

Local

700

46.5

2.9

4.92

Ana-020-020

TRD0149

87th St

110

70th Ave

unnamed lane_1

13.5

Local

700

2.8

11.7

2.4

3.99

Ana-020-030

TRD0161

87th St

110

157

unnamed lane_1

72nd Ave

11.7

Local

700

5.5

17.9

2.3

2.31

Ana-020-040

TRD0023

87th St

157

256

72nd Ave

74th Ave

12.5

Local

700

16.7

42.2

7.3

3.19

Ana-020-050

TRD0024

87th St

256

305

74th Ave

74A Ave

13.1

Local

700

15.2

42.3

7.1

2.98

Ana-020-060

TRD0025

87th St

305

362

74A Ave

Hwy_3

12.8

Local

700

9.6

23.7

1.88

Ana-020-065

TRD0026

87th St

362

464

Hwy_3

78th Ave

102

15.2

Local

1700

11.7

24.7

4.8

7.39

Ana-020-070

TRD0137

87th St

464

803

78th Ave

Jubilee Dr

339

10.4

Local

1700

1.5

1.81

Ana-020-080

TRD0027

87th St

803

953

Jubilee Dr

Quince Lane

150

11.3

Local

1700

5.6

13.1

2.3

2.27

Ana-020-090

TRD0028

87th St

953

1026

Quince Lane

Santa Rosa Pl

11.2

Local

1700

3.8

8.8

1.9

1.65

Ana-020-100

TRD0124

87th St

1026

1144

Santa Rosa Pl

Gala Cres

118

11.4

Local

1700

3.1

5.8

1.9

2.18

Ana-020-110

TRD0125

87th St

1144

1222

Gala Cres

92nd Ave

11.9

Local

1700

3.6

8.8

2.5

1.92

Ana-021-010

TRD0123

89th St

151

South End

Primrose Lane

151

Collector

1000

6.6

4.07

Ana-021-020

TRD0060

89th St

151

336

Primrose Lane

Cactus Cres

185

7.4

Collector

1000

29.3

50.6

8.1

4.51

Ana-021-030

TRD0121

89th St

336

498

Cactus Cres

Oleander Dr

162

10.1

Collector

1000

2.1

5.5

2.2

2.96

62nd Ave_1

12.4

Collector

2200

4.8

13.5

3.4

3.18

62nd Ave

119

10.8

Collector

2200

22.3

4.6

3.63

Ana-021-040

TRD0304

89th St

498

585

Oleander Dr

Ana-021-050

TRD0305

89th St

585

704

62nd Ave_1

Ana-021-060

TRD0299

89th St

704

775

62nd Ave

Kingfisher Dr

11.9

Collector

2800

34.5

43.2

6.8

5.58

Ana-021-070

TRD0300

89th St

775

831

Kingfisher Dr

Kingfisher Dr_1

11.7

Collector

2800

14.2

23.5

5.6

4.47

Ana-021-080

TRD0131

89th St

831

1227

Kingfisher Dr_1

70th Ave

396

9.9

Collector

1500

9.4

23.2

4.3

3.5

Ana-021-090

TRD0063

89th St

1227

1289

70th Ave

72nd Ave

9.4

Collector

1500

8.2

22.5

3.36

Ana-021-100

TRD0064

89th St

1289

1387

72nd Ave

74th Ave

9.7

Collector

1500

5.1

4.9

3.01

Ana-021-110

TRD0065

89th St

1387

1436

74th Ave

74A Ave

9.7

Collector

1500

3.1

4.6

3.28

Ana-021-120

TRD0130

89th St

1436

1496

74A Ave

Hwy_3

9.6

Collector

1500

5.7

21.4

3.3

4.76

Ana-021-125

TRD0370

89th St

1496

1597

Hwy_3

78th Ave

101

7.6

Local

600

7.9

13.2

3.5

7.48

Ana-021-130

TRD0091

89th St

1598

1934

78th Ave

Jubilee Dr

336

Local

600

2.6

5.5

1.7

1.82

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

Ana-022-010

TRD0113

92nd Ave

124

West End

Royal Ann Crt

124

9.7

Local

1000

1.2

Ana-022-020

TRD0115

92nd Ave

124

354

Royal Ann Crt

Jubilee Dr

230

8.5

Local

1000

12.4

26.9

5.1

6.05

Ana-022-030

TRD0103

92nd Ave

354

658

Jubilee Dr

87th St

304

9.4

Local

1000

43.2

5.9

4.03

Ana-022-040

TRD0122

92nd Ave

658

900

87th St

Braeburn Pl

242

7.7

Local

1000

8.5

23.5

3.9

3.16

Ana-022-050

TRD0251

92nd Ave

900

1016

Braeburn Pl

Spartan Dr

116

7.4

Local

1000

28.1

4.4

1.88

Ana-023-010

TRD0177

Acacia Crt

119

Southeast End

Oleander Dr

119

6.9

Local

100

11.5

39.8

8.3

9.79

Ana-024-010

TRD0045

Alyssum Crt

Heather Pl

Northwest End

10.6

Local

100

3.1

3.2

Sawgrass Dr

129

10.7

Local

100

4.7

9.7

1.2

3.75

Local

100

8.3

17.5

3.1

6.1

Ana-025-010

TRD0286

Augusta Lane

129

Fairwinds Dr

Ana-026-010

TRD0093

Bartlett Pl

Jubilee Dr

Sunrise Crt

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

7.1

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

2.2

2.53

Ana-026-020

TRD0094

Bartlett Pl

122

Sunrise Crt

Northwest End

13.8

Local

100

2.9

11.9

2.4

4.3

Ana-027-010

TRD0196

Bayview Cres

309

Bayview Cres_1

Lakeshore Dr

309

7.8

Local

100

12.4

6.49

Ana-028-010

TRD0190

Bayview Cres_1

101

West End

Lakeshore Dr

101

9.2

Local

100

11.1

19.7

5.1

8.49

Ana-029-010

TRD0240

Birch Crt

West End

Lombardy Lane / Maple Dr_1

13.3

Local

100

1.6

7.4

4.4

Ana-030-010

TRD0252

Braeburn Pl

234

92nd Ave

Northwest End

234

7.9

Local

100

3.6

17.8

2.1

2.82

Ana-031-010

TRD0052

Cactus Cres

197

Northwest End

Cactus Cres_1

197

8.3

Local

500

18.4

2.3

3.62

Ana-031-020

TRD0054

Cactus Cres

197

328

Cactus Cres_1

89th St

131

6.7

Local

500

3.5

9.6

2.1

5.05

Ana-032-010

TRD0051

Cactus Cres_1

191

Southeast End

Cactus Cres

191

8.7

Local

500

2.2

11.2

2.2

3.45

Ana-033-010

TRD0227

Cedar Lane

146

Maple Dr / Tamarack Dr

East End

146

7.6

Local

100

5.4

23.4

2.9

4.32

Ana-034-010

TRD0314

Chardonnay Crt

129

36th Ave

North End

129

11.3

Local

100

6.3

21.8

2.4

3.2

Ana-035-010

TRD0144

Chickadee Crt

147

Kingfisher Dr

North End

147

Local

100

6.6

15.4

4.5

6.08

Ana-036-010

TRD0189

Cottonwood Dr

South End

Harbour Key Dr

9.1

Local

700

4.4

1.2

5.14

Ana-036-020

TRD0197

Cottonwood Dr

217

Harbour Key Dr

Hwy_3

122

10.4

Local

700

1.1

7.6

2.2

4.47

Ana-036-030

TRD0185

Cottonwood Dr

217

316

Hwy_3

Maple Dr

12.7

Local

1900

0.3

2.3

3.43

Ana-036-040

TRD0276

Cottonwood Dr

316

776

Maple Dr

Cottonwood Dr_1

460

9.9

Local

1900

6.6

17.7

4.5

3.72

Ana-036-050

TRD0278

Cottonwood Dr

776

1207

Cottonwood Dr_1

utility access road

431

10.4

Local

1900

2.2

7.4

3.2

2.58

Ana-038-010

TRD0248

Crabapple Crt

Spartan Dr

East End

11.7

Local

0.7

3.4

5.4

Ana-039-010

TRD0238

Curlew Crt

118

West End

Killdeer Pl

118

10.5

Local

100

6.9

3.4

4.04

Ana-040-010

TRD0272

Cypress Hills Dr

151

Pebble Beach Dr / Torrey Pines Dr

Olympic View Dr

151

12.4

Local

500

3.6

9.9

1.9

3.99

Ana-040-020

TRD0271

Cypress Hills Dr

151

383

Olympic View Dr

232

13.3

Local

500

4.3

12.8

2.8

3.48

Ana-041-010

TRD0234

Dogwood Pl

111

89th St

Southeast End

111

9.6

Local

100

3.8

13.4

3.7

Ana-042-010

TRD0327

Eagle Crt

West End

turning lane_4

9.4

Local

1500

8.7

22.3

3.2

5.07

Ana-042-020

TRD0330

Eagle Crt

172

turning lane_4

turning lane_5

10.1

Local

1500

9.5

26.8

2.1

4.71

Ana-042-030

TRD0324

Eagle Crt

172

213

turning lane_5

Northeast End

Local

1500

0.7

3.4

1.97

Ana-043-010

TRD0342

Empire St

468

Irrigation Canal Trail

Empire St_1

468

Local

8.5

2.4

2.16

Southeast End

3.75

Ana-043-020

TRD0400

Empire St

468

520

Empire St_1

10.1

Local

5.1

12.8

3.6

Ana-044-010

TRD0345

Empire St_1

Strawberry Creek Rd

Empire St

12.4

Local

3.2

10.3

2.2

Ana-045-010

TRD0259

Fairwinds Dr

231

Augusta Lane

Olympic View Dr

231

12.3

Local

500

6.1

16.3

4.1

5.65

Ana-045-020

TRD0034

Fairwinds Dr

231

341

Olympic View Dr

La Costa Lane

110

12.5

Local

500

5.7

18.6

6.1

9.64

Ana-045-030

TRD0166

Fairwinds Dr

341

464

La Costa Lane

Pinehurst Pl / Quail Ridge Pl

123

11.7

Local

500

4.2

3.3

7.1

Ana-045-040

TRD0171

Fairwinds Dr

464

568

Pinehurst Pl / Quail Ridge Pl

Golf Course Dr

104

Local

500

5.7

3.1

3.79

Ana-046-010

TRD0114

Finch Cres

365

74th Ave

Swan Cres

365

7.5

Local

500

3.4

8.6

1.9

5.06

Ana-046-020

TRD0086

Finch Cres

365

467

Swan Cres

East End

102

9.9

Local

500

2.1

6.5

2.6

4.69

Ana-047-010

TRD0322

Frontage Rd

166

Lakeshore Dr

51st St

166

7.7

Local

500

3.1

10.4

2.2

4.29

Ana-048-010

TRD0097

Fuji Crt

122

Spartan Dr_1

North End

122

7.6

Local

100

2.3

2.2

7.73

Ana-049-010

TRD0222

Gala Cres

256

Gravenstein Dr

Quince Lane

256

8.2

Local

500

8.8

21.5

5.25

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

Ana-049-020

TRD0275

Gala Cres

256

632

Quince Lane

87th St

376

7.3

Local

500

22.1

3.2

3.32

Ana-050-010

TRD0168

Glen Abbey Crt

Pinehurst Pl

Northeast End

17.3

Local

Ana-051-010

TRD0262

Golf Course Dr

133

Northwest End

Fairwinds Dr

133

11.3

Local

500

1.9

2.4

3.9

15.5

2.9

3.33

Ana-051-020

TRD0263

Golf Course Dr

133

437

Fairwinds Dr

Pebble Beach Dr

304

12.3

Local

500

6.7

22.4

3.1

3.92

Ana-051-030

TRD0267

Golf Course Dr

437

476

Pebble Beach Dr

turning lane_1

12.5

Local

500

6.4

22.8

Ana-051-040

TRD0274

Golf Course Dr

476

752

turning lane_1

Torrey Pines Dr

276

12.5

Local

500

8.5

24.8

4.7

10.03

2.5

2.69

Ana-051-050

TRD0393

Golf Course Dr

752

1372

Torrey Pines Dr

Southeast End

620

8.9

Local

500

22.9

41.2

Jonagold Pl

5.6

5.09

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

Ana-052-010

TRD0004

Gravenstein Dr

185

78th Ave

185

Local

1000

15.6

2.3

3.87

Ana-052-020

TRD0354

Gravenstein Dr

185

375

Jonagold Pl

Gala Cres

190

8.3

Local

1000

10.7

28.5

3.4

4.08

Ana-052-030

TRD0136

Gravenstein Dr

375

525

Gala Cres

McIntosh Crt / Quince Lane

150

7.6

Local

1000

14.4

30.7

4.6

6.69

Ana-053-010

TRD0229

Harbour Key Dr

264

Northwest End

Cottonwood Dr

264

Local

500

0.5

6.4

1.5

3.42

Ana-053-020

TRD0213

Harbour Key Dr

264

846

Cottonwood Dr

Southeast End

582

Local

500

29.3

40.4

5.6

5.95

Ana-054-010

TRD0044

Heather Pl

Southwest End

Alyssum Crt

10.5

Local

100

4.1

18.9

4.2

Ana-054-020

TRD0043

Heather Pl

163

Alyssum Crt

Oleander Dr

7.8

Local

100

7.2

24.3

3.4

4.41

Ana-055-010

TRD0013

Heron Lane

169

South End

74th Ave

169

6.2

Local

100

0.3

1.6

Ana-055-020

TRD0014

Heron Lane

169

239

74th Ave

74A Ave

10.9

Local

100

3.1

14.3

2.1

4.88

Ana-055-030

TRD0015

Heron Lane

239

314

74A Ave

North End

12.6

Local

100

4.4

12.2

3.1

2.89

Ana-056-010

TRD0492

Hibiscus Ct

West End

Lobelia Dr

6.1

Local

100

2.1

1.2

Ana-057-010

TRD0067

Hummingbird Lane

154

West End

Killdeer Pl

154

7.8

Local

1000

3.8

10.1

1.4

5.04

Ana-057-020

TRD0066

Hummingbird Lane

154

235

Killdeer Pl

Nighthawk Dr

6.8

Local

1000

3.8

13.4

3.2

4.56

Ana-060-010

TRD0204

Jackpine Lane

605

Cottonwood Dr

Tamarack Dr

605

6.2

Local

500

5.8

19.7

3.1

4.8

Ana-061-010

TRD0174

Jasmine Dr

399

Southeast End

Oleander Dr

399

6.5

Local

5.8

16.9

5.12

Ana-062-010

TRD0243

Jonagold Pl

149

Gravenstein Dr

Northeast End

149

10.2

Local

100

4.2

12.9

2.1

3.97

Ana-063-010

TRD0105

Jubilee Dr

100

92nd Ave

Redhaven Crt

100

8.2

Local

1000

4.1

12.5

2.4

5.52

Ana-063-020

TRD0119

Jubilee Dr

100

193

Redhaven Crt

Vedette Dr

8.8

Local

1000

2.4

9.8

1.4

2.19

Ana-063-030

TRD0096

Jubilee Dr

193

346

Vedette Dr

Bartlett Pl

153

8.6

Local

1000

15.8

36.1

4.3

3.5

Ana-063-040

TRD0095

Jubilee Dr

346

394

Bartlett Pl

89th St

9.7

Local

1000

24.8

46.3

4.6

8.04

Ana-063-050

TRD0369

Jubilee Dr

394

497

89th St

87th St

103

8.9

Local

1000

11.9

35.5

4.4

4.47

Ana-064-010

TRD0068

Killdeer Pl

114

Hummingbird Lane

Curlew Crt

114

Local

100

6.3

16.7

2.8

2.28

Ana-064-020

TRD0237

Killdeer Pl

114

276

Curlew Crt

West End

162

Local

100

4.6

12.5

2.1

2.46

Ana-065-020

TRD0296

Kingfisher Dr

140

Kingfisher Dr_1

Chickadee Crt

10.9

Collector

1800

18.7

27.9

4.58

Ana-065-030

TRD0155

Kingfisher Dr

140

324

Chickadee Crt

unnamed lane_2

184

Collector

1800

11.4

21.6

5.6

4.28

Ana-065-040

TRD0156

Kingfisher Dr

324

505

unnamed lane_2

83rd St

181

10.3

Collector

1800

20.3

32.4

6.4

4.65

Ana-065-050

TRD0374

Kingfisher Dr

505

675

83rd St

Northeast End

170

12.1

Collector

1800

10.6

22.9

5.5

4.93

Kingfisher Dr

Ana-066-010

TRD0298

Kingfisher Dr_1

89th St

12.1

Collector

2800

0.4

4.3

2.2

4.37

Ana-067-010

TRD0269

La Costa Lane

409

Fairwinds Dr

Pebble Beach Dr

409

10.7

Local

500

5.9

19.6

2.9

4.92

Ana-068-010

TRD0439

Lakeshore Dr

588

Southwest End

36th Ave

588

13.1

Local

8.9

2.2

2.29

Ana-068-020

TRD0377

Lakeshore Dr

588

1016

36th Ave

44th Ave

428

11.1

Collector

999

12.4

27.3

5.4

2.63

Ana-068-030

TRD0378

Lakeshore Dr

1016

1859

44th Ave

Bayview Cres_1

843

10.7

Collector

999

7.2

4.8

2.61

Ana-068-040

TRD0192

Lakeshore Dr

1859

2016

Bayview Cres_1

56th Ave

157

11.1

Collector

2100

11.4

3.3

3.71

Ana-068-050

TRD0193

Lakeshore Dr

2016

2107

56th Ave

Bayview Cres

11.7

Collector

2100

0.3

1.2

1.6

2.53

Ana-068-060

TRD0320

Lakeshore Dr

2107

2264

Bayview Cres

North End

157

12.2

Collector

2100

2.4

2.9

2.66

Ana-069-010

TRD0087

Lambert Crt

189

Southwest End

Northeast End

189

9.6

Local

100

8.2

3.4

5.71

Ana-070-010

TRD0042

Larkspur Pl

117

Southwest End

Lobelia Dr

117

9.6

Local

100

3.9

14.4

4.5

4.55

Ana-071-010

TRD0048

Lilac Crt

West End

Magnolia Pl

14.5

Local

100

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

Ana-072-010

TRD0173

Lobelia Dr

325

South End

Hibiscus Ct

325

7.6

Local

200

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

0.2

4.7

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

1.8

3.48

Ana-072-020

TRD0173

Lobelia Dr

325

415

Hibiscus Ct

Oleander Dr

8.7

Local

200

3.3

14.9

4.5

Ana-072-030

TRD0046

Lobelia Dr

415

579

Oleander Dr

Larkspur Pl

164

7.8

Local

200

0.5

11.2

2.9

4.04

Ana-072-040

TRD0047

Lobelia Dr

579

695

Larkspur Pl

Oleander Dr

116

9.9

Local

200

4.1

5.5

4.45

Ana-073-010

TRD0239

Lombardy Lane

253

Birch Crt / Maple Dr_1

Tamarack Dr

253

6.4

Local

100

5.8

30.2

2.5

3.46

Ana-074-010

TRD0084

Loon Cres

190

89th St

74th Ave

190

6.7

Local

100

0.9

4.14

Ana-075-010

TRD0139

Magnolia Pl

102

Oleander Dr / Rose Pl

Lilac Crt

102

6.8

Local

100

North End

12.6

Local

100

North End

Local

0.6

4.3

3.33

Ana-075-020

TRD0049

Magnolia Pl

102

154

Lilac Crt

Ana-076-010

TRD0081

Main St

70th Ave / 83rd St

Ana-077-010

TRD0211

Maple Dr

253

Cottonwood Dr

Poplar Crt

253

8.2

Local

500

20.9

42.3

3.8

3.35

Ana-077-020

TRD0181

Maple Dr

253

346

Poplar Crt

Maple Dr_1

7.7

Local

500

24.3

44.8

4.8

4.04

Ana-078-010

TRD0198

Maple Dr_1

Maple Dr

Sumac Lane

5.9

Local

500

33.7

5.4

5.34

Ana-078-020

TRD0199

Maple Dr_1

227

Sumac Lane

Birch Crt / Lombardy Lane

129

8.1

Local

500

15.9

28.6

2.3

4.39

Ana-078-030

TRD0235

Maple Dr_1

227

377

Birch Crt / Lombardy Lane

Northeast End

150

6.9

Local

500

3.7

15.1

5.15

Ana-079-010

TRD0006

McIntosh Crt

113

Gravenstein Dr / Quince Lane

Northwest End

113

9.4

Local

100

2.1

13.1

2.1

6.47

Ana-080-010

TRD0069

Meadowlark Dr

121

South End

Unnamed_2

121

6.6

Local

100

3.2

9.5

3.7

7.14

Ana-080-020

TRD0069

Meadowlark Dr

121

185

Unnamed_2

Unnamed_1

7.2

Local

100

3.1

2.2

3.37

Ana-080-030

TRD0363

Meadowlark Dr

185

244

Unnamed_1

74th Ave

7.1

Local

100

2.3

5.1

1.8

2.98

Ana-080-040

TRD0112

Meadowlark Dr

245

880

74th Ave

North End

635

7.1

Local

100

4.2

13.5

2.4

2.46

Ana-081-010

TRD0056

Nighthawk Dr

300

62nd Ave

Hummingbird Lane

300

8.3

Local

1000

3.6

16.4

3.5

3.06

Ana-081-020

TRD0057

Nighthawk Dr

300

715

Hummingbird Lane

74th Ave

415

10.3

Local

1000

22.8

2.8

3.51

Ana-081-030

TRD0120

Nighthawk Dr

715

816

74th Ave

74A Ave / Swan Cres

101

5.6

Local

4.3

21.8

5.2

5.34

Ana-081-040

TRD0058

Nighthawk Dr

816

900

74A Ave / Swan Cres

North End

9.9

Local

14.2

48.1

8.38

Ana-082-010

TRD0040

Oleander Dr

120

West End

Lobelia Dr

120

8.1

Local

1000

3.5

19.9

3.6

8.21

Ana-082-020

TRD0041

Oleander Dr

120

176

Lobelia Dr

Jasmine Dr

6.7

Local

1000

12.2

3.8

9.51

Ana-082-030

TRD0226

Oleander Dr

176

295

Jasmine Dr

Acacia Crt

119

6.9

Local

1000

27.9

41.6

6.7

10.28

Ana-082-040

TRD0142

Oleander Dr

295

487

Acacia Crt

Lobelia Dr

192

9.9

Local

1000

7.6

25.6

5.6

5.62

Ana-082-050

TRD0036

Oleander Dr

487

682

Lobelia Dr

Magnolia Pl / Rose Pl

195

10.9

Local

1500

29.6

4.7

4.48

Ana-082-060

TRD0138

Oleander Dr

682

829

Magnolia Pl / Rose Pl

Primrose Lane

147

10.4

Local

1500

8.1

22.5

5.1

6.57

Ana-082-070

TRD0367

Oleander Dr

829

1205

Primrose Lane

89th St

376

9.8

Local

1500

4.7

21.3

4.09

Ana-083-010

TRD0258

Olympic View Dr

West End

Fairwinds Dr

12.3

Local

500

1.3

8.7

2.6

Ana-083-020

TRD0224

Olympic View Dr

119

Fairwinds Dr

Sawgrass Dr

10.7

Local

500

3.8

13.1

4.1

7.86

Ana-083-030

TRD0225

Olympic View Dr

119

237

Sawgrass Dr

Cypress Hills Dr

118

Local

500

12.5

2.2

2.99

Ana-083-040

TRD0273

Olympic View Dr

237

528

Cypress Hills Dr

291

12.3

Local

500

9.6

2.2

3.96

North End

242

9.2

Local

100

2.8

9.2

2.5

4.45

East End

19.8

Local

1000

1.5

3.9

3.3

Ana-084-010

TRD0164

Osprey Pl

242

62nd Ave

Ana-085-010

TRD0001

Park Pl

Spartan Dr_1

Ana-086-010

TRD0270

Pebble Beach Dr

345

Cypress Hills Dr / Torrey Pines Dr

La Costa Lane

345

9.5

Local

500

3.8

12.3

2.1

4.4

Ana-086-020

TRD0265

Pebble Beach Dr

345

522

La Costa Lane

turning lane_1

177

Local

500

4.8

3.1

3.91

Ana-086-030

TRD0266

Pebble Beach Dr

522

565

turning lane_1

Golf Course Dr

Local

500

11.7

31.7

4.5

5.65

Ana-086-040

TRD0264

Pebble Beach Dr

565

977

Golf Course Dr

115th St

412

11.7

Collector

1700

5.1

2.83

Ana-087-010

TRD0169

Pinehurst Pl

163

Southwest End

Glen Abbey Crt

163

10.8

Local

100

6.5

21.2

3.76

Ana-087-020

TRD0170

Pinehurst Pl

163

288

Glen Abbey Crt

Fairwinds Dr / Quail Ridge Pl

125

8.6

Local

100

3.9

12.8

2.8

3.3

Ana-088-010

TRD0221

Ponderosa Dr

250

South End

Cottonwood Dr

250

7.7

Local

500

19.7

54.7

7.2

11.96

Ana-089-010

TRD0180

Poplar Crt

135

Maple Dr

North End

135

8.8

Local

100

16.3

2.5

4.85

Ana-090-010

TRD0050

Primrose Lane

176

89th St

Oleander Dr

176

7.8

Local

500

20.7

41.1

4.3

6.21

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

Ana-091-010

TRD0055

Quail Pl

193

62nd Ave

Northeast End

193

7.8

Local

100

4.9

18.8

5.5

5.23

Ana-092-010

TRD0167

Quail Ridge Pl

254

Fairwinds Dr / Pinehurst Pl

East End

254

Local

100

Ana-093-010

TRD0109

Quince Lane

87th St

Gravenstein Dr / McIntosh Crt

6.7

Local

500

3.5

13.3

2.3

4.75

3.1

11.8

3.76

Ana-093-020

TRD0108

Quince Lane

196

Gravenstein Dr / McIntosh Crt

Gala Cres

100

6.4

Local

500

5.5

2.6

3.12

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

Ana-094-010

TRD0446

Raven Crt

Wren Dr

Raven Crt_1

Local

100

1.3

4.3

1.9

Ana-095-010

TRD0447

Raven Crt_1

South End

Raven Crt

Local

100

0.8

2.3

Ana-095-020

TRD0448

Raven Crt_1

Raven Crt

North End

Local

100

3.3

9.5

2.5

Northeast End

110

10.9

Local

100

3.8

10.6

2.1

3.5

195

Local

100

1.8

9.7

3.8

5.38

Ana-096-010

TRD0106

Redhaven Crt

110

Jubilee Dr

Ana-097-010

TRD0135

Rose Pl

195

Northwest End

Magnolia Pl / Oleander Dr

Ana-098-010

TRD0104

Royal Ann Crt

116

Southwest End

92nd Ave

116

11.2

Local

500

2.3

10.3

3.2

5.52

Ana-099-010

TRD0080

Sandpiper Pl

160

Southwest End

74th Ave

160

11.8

Local

100

5.6

21.3

3.6

5.5

Ana-100-010

TRD0107

Santa Rosa Pl

155

Northwest End

87th St

155

10.2

Local

100

5.3

2.9

4.57

Ana-101-010

TRD0284

Sawgrass Dr

South End

Augusta Lane

11.4

Local

100

2.2

6.3

2.3

3.99

Ana-101-020

TRD0285

Sawgrass Dr

225

Augusta Lane

Olympic View Dr

187

11.4

Local

100

3.5

9.5

2.3

2.68

Ana-102-010

TRD0186

Solana Key Crt

276

South End

North End

276

10.2

Local

500

11.8

22.9

4.4

4.75

Ana-103-010

TRD0250

Spartan Dr

570

Spartan Dr_1

92nd Ave

570

6.6

Local

1500

4.2

10.6

2.8

3.24

Ana-103-020

TRD0249

Spartan Dr

570

632

92nd Ave

Crabapple Crt

Local

1500

14.6

45.6

4.7

3.74

Ana-103-030

TRD0245

Spartan Dr

632

700

Crabapple Crt

unsigned

6.9

Local

1500

6.8

19.5

2.5

1.64

Ana-103-040

TRD0246

Spartan Dr

700

888

unsigned

Northwest End

188

8.4

Local

1500

8.4

27.8

2.8

2.5

Ana-104-010

TRD0101

Spartan Dr_1

103

Park Pl

78th Ave

103

19.7

Local

1500

19.6

35.3

3.75

Ana-104-020

TRD0100

Spartan Dr_1

103

319

78th Ave

Fuji Crt

216

15.2

Local

1500

10.5

32.4

3.15

Ana-104-030

TRD0098

Spartan Dr_1

319

440

Fuji Crt

Spartan Dr

121

7.9

Local

1500

4.9

10.4

2.2

2.74

Ana-104-040

TRD0099

Spartan Dr_1

440

480

Spartan Dr

North End

Local

1500

2.8

12.4

2.8

Ana-105-010

TRD0182

Spruce Crt

Maple Dr_1

Southeast End

10.3

Local

100

4.1

13.2

4.1

3.7

Ana-106-020

TRD0111

Strawberry Creek Rd

1041

1124

115th St

Empire St_1

12.4

Local

3.9

19.3

3.1

3.27

Ana-107-010

TRD0209

Sumac Lane

Maple Dr_1

Willow Cres

7.1

Local

100

20.7

3.1

5.06

Ana-108-010

TRD0092

Sunrise Crt

Bartlett Pl

Northeast End

13.3

Local

100

3.8

1.9

6.07

Ana-109-010

TRD0117

Swan Cres

203

Finch Cres

74A Ave / Nighthawk Dr

203

9.3

Local

100

20.7

6.78

Ana-110-010

TRD0201

Tamarack Dr

157

South End

Jackpine Lane

157

14.1

Local

700

12.5

25.3

5.4

5.89

Ana-110-020

TRD0203

Tamarack Dr

157

199

Jackpine Lane

Cedar Lane / Maple Dr

12.5

Local

700

8.9

28.8

3.1

5.6

Ana-110-030

TRD0202

Tamarack Dr

199

250

Cedar Lane / Maple Dr

Willow Cres

7.3

Local

700

11.5

27.1

3.9

Ana-110-040

TRD0206

Tamarack Dr

250

338

Willow Cres

7.3

Local

700

42.6

57.2

5.4

4.78

Ana-110-050

TRD0205

Tamarack Dr

338

425

Willow Cres

Lombardy Lane

7.7

Local

16.7

5.6

5.58

Ana-110-060

TRD0236

Tamarack Dr

425

630

Lombardy Lane

North End

205

5.1

Local

9.8

25.6

8.86

Torrey Pines Dr_1

118

12.5

Local

100

3.7

13.2

2.2

4.32

Golf Course Dr

277

13.6

Local

100

4.4

11.7

2.1

3.15

Ana-111-010

TRD0336

Torrey Pines Dr

118

Cypress Hills Dr / Pebble Beach Dr

Ana-111-020

TRD0433

Torrey Pines Dr

118

395

Torrey Pines Dr_1

Ana-112-010

TRD0335

Torrey Pines Dr_1

Torrey Pines Dr

Southeast End

Local

100

4.3

15.3

5.59

Ana-113-010

TRD0268

turning lane_1

Pebble Beach Dr

Golf Course Dr

13.4

Local

6.4

24.1

4.5

4.79

Ana-114-010

TRD0452

turning lane_2

62nd Ave

turning lane_3

11.7

Collector

999

3.2

8.3

3.3

Ana-115-010

TRD0310

turning lane_3

62nd Ave

turning lane_2

Collector

999

7.5

2.4

Ana-116-010

TRD0328

turning lane_4

Southwest End

Eagle Crt

9.6

Local

16.3

2.9

5.78

Ana-117-010

TRD0329

turning lane_5

Eagle Crt

North End

10.8

Local

5.1

17.2

2.5

5.85

Ana-118-010

TRD0486

turning lane_6

122

115th St

Southeast End

122

5.9

Local

2.5

7.5

3.7

5.85

Ana-119-010

TRD0478

turning lane_7

South End

Empire St_1 / turning lane_8

6.4

Local

3.4

11.4

2.6

3.04

Ana-120-010

TRD0481

turning lane_8

West End

Empire St_1 / turning lane_7

12.4

Local

1.8

4.7

1.9

4.22

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix B2 -2025 Pavement Condition Indices Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb

AADT (veh/day)

Ana-121-010

TRD0163

unnamed lane_1

144

87th St

85th St

144

6.1

Local

9.7

PCI

RUT (mm)

IRI (m/mm)

19.1

5.4

9.81

AFCA (%) ACA (%)

Ana-123-010

TRD0494

Unnamed_1

170

Meadowlark Dr

Wren Dr

170

Local

0.3

100

1.1

2.21

Ana-124-010

TRD0493

Unnamed_2

167

Meadowlark Dr

Southeast End

166

8.8

Local

100

3.55

Ana-127-010

TRD0353

Valiant Lane

West End

Vedette Dr

8.9

Local

100

16.4

6.7

Ana-128-010

TRD0352

Vedette Dr

163

Valiant Lane

Jubilee Dr

163

9.2

Local

100

2.8

5.4

1.6

Ana-129-010

TRD0358

Veterans Way

103

Veterans Way

78th Ave

15.6

Local

13.7

30.5

2.6

Ana-130-010

TRD0390

Wildflower Crt

137

Southeast End

North End

137

10.3

Local

100

3.5

8.9

1.8

3.27

Sumac Lane

223

7.6

Local

100

3.1

15.8

2.5

3.88

Tamarack Dr

217

7.3

Local

100

3.1

16.6

4.52

2.57

Ana-131-010

TRD0207

Willow Cres

223

Tamarack Dr

Ana-131-020

TRD0208

Willow Cres

223

440

Sumac Lane

Ana-132-010

TRD0444

Wren Dr

Wren Pl

Raven Crt

Local

100

8.7

4.8

7.27

Ana-132-020

TRD0445

Wren Dr

152

Raven Crt

Unnamed_1

Local

100

3.2

9.2

2.7

6.03

Ana-132-030

TRD0445

Wren Dr

152

222

Unnamed_1

74th Ave

Local

100

3.4

7.4

1.6

2.79

Ana-133-010

TRD0443

Wren Pl

South End

Wren Dr

7.1

Local

100

1.2

3.7

1.6

2.14

Ana-133-020

TRD0442

Wren Pl

164

Wren Dr

East End

7.6

Local

100

1.5

10.2

2.6

4.4

Ana-134-010

TRD0118

Yucca Pl

154

Cactus Cres

Northwest End

154

10.1

Local

100

7.1

23.7

3.4

6.18

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

APPENDIX C SIDEWALK OVERALL CONDITION AND ACCESSIBILITY STATUS Figure C1 – Sidewalk Overall Condition- SCI Figure C2 – Sidewalk Accessibility Condition

RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

ae Br rn bu

Town Of Osoyoos Boundary

Sidewalk Condition Index (SCI) 85 - 100 (Good) 70 - 85 (Satisfactory) 55 - 70 (Fair) 40 - 55 (Poor)

5435000

LEGEND

322000

0 - 40 (Very Poor)

rta Spa r nD

Jubilee Dr

87th St

Maple Dr

h gfis Kin

r er D

Nig hth awk Dr

Wren Pl

Ha rbo

( Fort St. John !

5433000

62nd Ave

ur Ke y

115th St

Cactus Cres

( Prince Rupert !

Site

a Ole

400

er nd Dr

400 km

5432000

Lakeshore Dr

STATUS ISSUED FOR USE

TOWN OF OSOYOOS ROAD & SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT

Sidewalk Overall Condition – SCI

s ur Co e

PROJECTION UTM Zone 11 CSRS

Pebble Beach D r

200

NOTES Base data source: Town of Osoyoos sidewalk centreline data provided by the Town. Imagery provided by ESRI Basemaps via Maxar, 2022.

e lia Lob

Fairwinds Dr

5432000

( Prince George !

( Kamloops ! ( Kelowna ! Vancouver ( ! ( Victoria !

Pl se Ro

lf Go

DATUM NAD83

CLIENT

Scale: 1:18,500 250

125

250

Metres FILE NO.

5431000

ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_C1.mxd

5431000

G:\TRANSPORTATION\ASMT\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos\GIS\Maps\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_C1.mxd modified 5/27/2026 by AKANSHA.VAISH

5434000

85th St

89th St

74th Ave

Park Pl

Tamarack Dr

Dr wlark

Finch Cres

51st St

o Mead

5434000

rt tC

t i Cr Fuj

er mb La

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

322000

OFFICE Tt-VANC

DWN AV

CKD APVD REV KR KR 0

DATE May 27, 2026

PROJECT NO. TRN.ASMT03177-01

Figure C1

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

ae Br rn bu

Town Of Osoyoos Boundary

Accessibility Issue

Broken Slab; Missing Panel

+ $

d Excessive Grade _ Faulting ^ 5435000

5435000

LEGEND

322000

Vegetation Encroachment

( !

Sidewalk Accessibility Rating (SAR) 1 -2.5 (Very Likely)

rta Spa

2.6 - 3 (Likely)

r nD

3 - 4.1 (Possible) 4.1 - 4.5 (Unlikely)

Jubilee Dr

87th St

Maple Dr

h gfis Kin

r er D

Nig hth awk Dr

Wren Pl

Ha rbo

( Fort St. John !

5433000

62nd Ave

ur Ke y

115th St

Cactus Cres

( Prince Rupert !

Site

a Ole

400

er nd Dr

400 km

5432000

Lakeshore Dr

STATUS ISSUED FOR USE

TOWN OF OSOYOOS ROAD & SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT

Sidewalk Accessibility Condition

s ur Co e

PROJECTION UTM Zone 11 CSRS

Pebble Beach D r

200

NOTES Base data source: Town of Osoyoos sidewalk centreline data provided by the Town. Imagery provided by ESRI Basemaps via Maxar, 2022.

e lia Lob

Fairwinds Dr

5432000

( Prince George !

( Kamloops ! ( Kelowna ! Vancouver ( ! ( Victoria !

Pl se Ro

lf Go

DATUM NAD83

CLIENT

Scale: 1:18,500 250

125

250

Metres FILE NO.

5431000

ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_C2.mxd

5431000

G:\TRANSPORTATION\ASMT\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos\GIS\Maps\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_C2.mxd modified 5/27/2026 by AKANSHA.VAISH

5434000

85th St

89th St

74th Ave

Park Pl

Tamarack Dr

Dr wlark

Finch Cres

4.5 - 5 (Rare)

51st St

o Mead

5434000

rt tC

t i Cr Fuj

er mb La

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

322000

OFFICE Tt-VANC

DWN AV

CKD APVD REV KR KR 0

DATE May 27, 2026

PROJECT NO. TRN.ASMT03177-01

Figure C2

ROAD AND SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | MAY 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

APPENDIX D REHABILITATION PROGRAM Figure D1 – Five-Year Paving Plan ($700,000 per year) Rehabilitation Program Spreadsheet

RPT-Roadway and Sidewalk Condition Assessment-Osoyoos-IFU.docx

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

LEGEND

322000

ae Br

rn bu

n Jubilee Dr

87th St

2031

Park Pl

h gfis Kin

Nig hth awk Dr

r er D

Ha rbo

( Fort St. John !

5433000

62nd Ave

ur Ke y

45th St

85th St

89th St

Maple Dr

Wren Pl

115th St

Cactus Cres

Site

41st St

er nd

400

400 km

5432000

Lakeshore Dr

v 36th A

STATUS ISSUED FOR USE

TOWN OF OSOYOOS ROAD & SIDEWALK CONDITION ASSESSMENT

Five-Year Paving Plan ($700,000 per year)

s ur Co e

PROJECTION UTM Zone 11 CSRS

Pebble Beach D r

200

NOTES Base data source: Town of Osoyoos road centreline data retrieved from the Client. Imagery provided by ESRI Basemaps via Maxar, 2022.

e lia Lob

Fairwinds Dr

( Prince George !

( Kamloops ! ( Kelowna ! Vancouver ( ! ( Victoria !

Pl se Ro

a Ole

5432000

( Prince Rupert !

lf Go

DATUM NAD83

CLIENT

Scale: 1:18,500 0.25

0.125

0.25

Kilometres FILE NO.

5431000

ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_D1.mxd

5431000

G:\TRANSPORTATION\ASMT\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos\GIS\Maps\ASMT03177-01_Osoyoos_Figure_D1.mxd modified 5/27/2026 by AKANSHA.VAISH

2029

5434000

Dr wlark

Finch Cres

74th Ave

2028

51st St

o Mead

5434000

rt tC

2027

t i Cr Fuj

er mb La

2026 (Committed Projects)

2030

Tamarack Dr

e Av

Treatment Year

r nD

nd 92

No Treatment

rta Spa

Em pi

kR d

ai Tr

wb er r yC r ee

l na Ca

Str a

Five Year Paving Plan

5435000

io at ig

5435000

Irr

11 5

Town Of Osoyoos Boundary

317000

318000

319000

320000

321000

322000

OFFICE Tt-VANC

DWN AV

CKD APVD REV KR KR 0

DATE May 27, 2026

PROJECT NO. TRN.ASMT03177-01

Figure D1

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix D2: Ten-Year Paving Plan ($700 K / Year )

Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb Exist

Traffic Factor

Treatment

Treatment Cost

Treatment Year (Before Defragment)

Treatment Year (After Defragment)

Committed Year

Ana-071-010 Ana-075-010 Ana-075-020

TRD0048 TRD0139 TRD0049

Lilac Crt Magnolia Pl Magnolia Pl

0 0 102

42 102 154

West End Oleander Dr / Rose Pl Lilac Crt

Magnolia Pl Lilac Crt North End

42 102 52

14.5 6.8 12.6

Local Local Local

N N N

1 1 1

Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct

$0 $0 $0

2025 2025 2025

Ana-021-080 Ana-021-090 Ana-021-100 Ana-021-110 Ana-021-120 Ana-021-125 Ana-057-010 Ana-091-010 Ana-021-060 Ana-021-070 Ana-065-020 Ana-065-030 Ana-065-040 Ana-065-050 Ana-009-040 Ana-009-050 Ana-009-060 Ana-009-070 Ana-010-010 Ana-021-050 Ana-022-020 Ana-022-030 Ana-052-020 Ana-052-030 Ana-053-020 Ana-082-030 Ana-082-040 Ana-082-050 Ana-082-060 Ana-015-050 Ana-017-010 Ana-017-020 Ana-017-030 Ana-017-040 Ana-019-050 Ana-019-060 Ana-020-065 Ana-063-030 Ana-063-040 Ana-063-050 Ana-102-010 Ana-104-010 Ana-036-040 Ana-077-010 Ana-077-020 Ana-088-010 Ana-110-010 Ana-110-020 Ana-110-030 Ana-110-040 Ana-110-050 Ana-110-060 Ana-005-010 Ana-002-010

TRD0131 TRD0063 TRD0064 TRD0065 TRD0130 TRD0370 TRD0067 TRD0055 TRD0299 TRD0300 TRD0296 TRD0155 TRD0156 TRD0374 TRD0059 TRD0165 TRD0303 TRD0302 TRD0301 TRD0305 TRD0115 TRD0103 TRD0354 TRD0136 TRD0213 TRD0226 TRD0142 TRD0036 TRD0138 TRD0033 TRD0010 TRD0009 TRD0008 TRD0007 TRD0020 TRD0021 TRD0026 TRD0096 TRD0095 TRD0369 TRD0186 TRD0101 TRD0276 TRD0211 TRD0181 TRD0221 TRD0201 TRD0203 TRD0202 TRD0206 TRD0205 TRD0236 TRD0260 TRD0313

89th St 89th St 89th St 89th St 89th St 89th St Hummingbird Lane Quail Pl 89th St 89th St Kingfisher Dr Kingfisher Dr Kingfisher Dr Kingfisher Dr 62nd Ave 62nd Ave 62nd Ave 62nd Ave 62nd Ave_1 89th St 92nd Ave 92nd Ave Gravenstein Dr Gravenstein Dr Harbour Key Dr Oleander Dr Oleander Dr Oleander Dr Oleander Dr 74A Ave 78th Ave 78th Ave 78th Ave 78th Ave 85th St 85th St 87th St Jubilee Dr Jubilee Dr Jubilee Dr Solana Key Crt Spartan Dr_1 Cottonwood Dr Maple Dr Maple Dr Ponderosa Dr Tamarack Dr Tamarack Dr Tamarack Dr Tamarack Dr Tamarack Dr Tamarack Dr 45th St 36th Ave

831 1227 1289 1387 1436 1496 0 0 704 775 69 140 324 505 545 626 693 750 0 585 124 354 185 375 264 176 295 487 682 457 0 114 199 258 257 306 362 193 346 394 0 0 316 0 253 0 0 157 199 250 338 425 0 0

1227 1289 1387 1436 1496 1597 154 193 775 831 140 324 505 675 626 693 750 823 65 704 354 658 375 525 846 295 487 682 829 587 114 199 258 388 306 361 464 346 394 497 276 103 776 253 346 250 157 199 250 338 425 630 1091 154

Kingfisher Dr_1 70th Ave 72nd Ave 74th Ave 74A Ave Hwy_3 West End 62nd Ave 62nd Ave Kingfisher Dr Kingfisher Dr_1 Chickadee Crt unnamed lane_2 83rd St Quail Pl Nighthawk Dr Osprey Pl 62nd Ave_1 89th St 62nd Ave_1 Royal Ann Crt Jubilee Dr Jonagold Pl Gala Cres Cottonwood Dr Jasmine Dr Acacia Crt Lobelia Dr Magnolia Pl / Rose Pl 85th St 89th St 87th St Gravenstein Dr Veterans Way 74th Ave 74A Ave Hwy_3 Vedette Dr Bartlett Pl 89th St South End Park Pl Maple Dr Cottonwood Dr Poplar Crt South End South End Jackpine Lane Cedar Lane / Maple Dr Willow Cres Willow Cres Lombardy Lane South End Lakeshore Dr

70th Ave 72nd Ave 74th Ave 74A Ave Hwy_3 78th Ave Killdeer Pl Northeast End Kingfisher Dr Kingfisher Dr_1 Chickadee Crt unnamed lane_2 83rd St Northeast End Nighthawk Dr Osprey Pl 62nd Ave_1 89th St 62nd Ave 62nd Ave Jubilee Dr 87th St Gala Cres McIntosh Crt / Quince Lane Southeast End Acacia Crt Lobelia Dr Magnolia Pl / Rose Pl Primrose Lane East End 87th St Gravenstein Dr Veterans Way Spartan Dr_1 74A Ave Veterans Way 78th Ave Bartlett Pl 89th St 87th St North End 78th Ave Cottonwood Dr_1 Poplar Crt Maple Dr_1 Cottonwood Dr Jackpine Lane Cedar Lane / Maple Dr Willow Cres Willow Cres Lombardy Lane North End North End Chardonnay Crt

396 62 98 49 60 101 154 193 71 56 71 184 181 170 81 67 57 73 65 119 230 304 190 150 582 119 192 195 147 130 114 85 59 130 49 55 102 153 48 103 276 103 460 253 93 250 157 42 51 88 87 205 1091 154

9.9 9.4 9.7 9.7 9.6 7.6 7.8 7.8 11.9 11.7 10.9 11 10.3 12.1 10.5 11.3 11 9.6 10.8 10.8 8.5 9.4 8.3 7.6 8 6.9 9.9 10.9 10.4 5.8 14.6 14 14.2 15.6 14.1 13 15.2 8.6 9.7 8.9 10.2 19.7 9.9 8.2 7.7 7.7 14.1 12.5 7.3 7.3 7.7 5.1 9.1 6.4

Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Local Local Local Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Collector Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Collector

B B B B B B N B B B B B B B B B B B N B N N N N N B B B B N N B B B B B B B B B N B B N N N N N N B N N N B

3.87 3.87 3.87 3.87 3.87 1 1 1 5.29 5.29 4.24 4.24 4.24 4.24 3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61 4.69 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2.24

Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct Mill_50 Reconstruct Reconstruct Mill_50 Reconstruct Mill_50 Reconstruct Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Reconstruct Mill_50 OL_50 Reconstruct OL_50 OL_50 Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct Mill_50 Mill_50 Reconstruct OL_50 Mill_50 Reconstruct Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Reconstruct Mill_50 OL_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 OL_50 Reconstruct Reconstruct OL_50 OL_50 OL_50 Reconstruct

$607,662

2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2029 2027 2034 2027 2034 2027 2027 2032 2033 2027 2033 2027 2029 2030 2029 2027 2031 2029 2043 2029 2029 2031 2033 2031 2041 2030 2027 2029 2027 2030 2029 2029 2030 2027 2032 2027 2030 2034 2030 2029 2029 2027

2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2027 2027 2027 2027 2027 2027 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 2029 2029 2029 2029 2029 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2030 2031 2031 2031 2031 2031 2031 2031 2031 2031 2031 2032 2033

2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026

Reconstruct Mill_50

$90,334 $147,343 $73,672 $89,280 $57,570 $42,250 $112,905 $130,960 $28,798 $119,955 $86,732 $288,967 $87,693 $34,385 $30,639 $23,388 $28,693 $108,810 $56,771 $72,141 $214,320 $56,305 $42,408 $349,200 $61,583 $142,560 $85,329 $59,788 $56,550 $54,684 $47,809 $62,835 $81,637 $25,523 $26,991 $60,738 $48,652 $34,920 $35,191 $108,701 $88,987 $173,961 $81,654 $53,708 $144,375 $85,476 $18,116 $13,085 $48,180 $50,243 $78,413 $744,608 $37,147

2028 2031

2025 Road and Sidewalk Condition Assessment FILE: 704-TRN.ASMT03177-01 | May 28, 2026 | ISSUED FOR USE

Appendix D2: Ten-Year Paving Plan ($700 K / Year )

Analysis_ID

Town_AssetID

RoadName

From

From_Description

To_Description

Length (m)

Width (m)

Class

Curb Exist

Traffic Factor

Treatment

Treatment Cost

Treatment Year (Before Defragment)

Treatment Year (After Defragment)

Ana-013-030 Ana-020-040 Ana-020-050 Ana-021-020 Ana-052-010 Ana-068-040 Ana-081-020 Ana-086-030 Ana-014-010 Ana-016-020 Ana-016-040 Ana-020-010 Ana-022-040 Ana-042-010 Ana-042-020 Ana-068-020 Ana-082-070 Ana-103-020 Ana-104-020 Ana-021-040 Ana-051-030 Ana-051-050 Ana-082-010 Ana-086-040 Ana-001-040 Ana-002-020 Ana-013-010 Ana-016-035 Ana-016-050 Ana-051-040 Ana-063-010 Ana-068-030 Ana-078-010

TRD0373 TRD0023 TRD0024 TRD0060 TRD0004 TRD0192 TRD0057 TRD0266 TRD0134 TRD0441 TRD0078 TRD0148 TRD0122 TRD0327 TRD0330 TRD0377 TRD0367 TRD0249 TRD0100 TRD0304 TRD0267 TRD0393 TRD0040 TRD0264 TRD0176 TRD0312 TRD0085 TRD0079 TRD0077 TRD0274 TRD0105 TRD0378 TRD0198

70th Ave 87th St 87th St 89th St Gravenstein Dr Lakeshore Dr Nighthawk Dr Pebble Beach Dr 72nd Ave 74th Ave 74th Ave 87th St 92nd Ave Eagle Crt Eagle Crt Lakeshore Dr Oleander Dr Spartan Dr Spartan Dr_1 89th St Golf Course Dr Golf Course Dr Oleander Dr Pebble Beach Dr 115th St 36th Ave 70th Ave 74th Ave 74th Ave Golf Course Dr Jubilee Dr Lakeshore Dr Maple Dr_1

271 157 256 151 0 1859 300 522 0 104 489 0 658 0 81 588 829 570 103 498 437 752 0 565 1080 154 0 419 544 476 0 1016 0

399 256 305 336 185 2016 715 565 130 275 544 60 900 81 172 1016 1205 632 319 585 476 1372 120 977 1251 181 121 489 636 752 100 1859 98

85th St 72nd Ave 74th Ave Primrose Lane 78th Ave Bayview Cres_1 Hummingbird Lane turning lane_1 89th St Meadowlark Dr Finch Cres 68th Ave 87th St West End turning lane_4 36th Ave Primrose Lane 92nd Ave 78th Ave Oleander Dr Pebble Beach Dr Torrey Pines Dr West End Golf Course Dr turning lane_6 Chardonnay Crt 89th St Hwy_97 Sandpiper Pl turning lane_1 92nd Ave 44th Ave Maple Dr

83rd St / Main St 74th Ave 74A Ave Cactus Cres Jonagold Pl 56th Ave 74th Ave Golf Course Dr 87th St Wren Dr Sandpiper Pl 70th Ave Braeburn Pl turning lane_4 turning lane_5 44th Ave 89th St Crabapple Crt Fuji Crt 62nd Ave_1 turning lane_1 Southeast End Lobelia Dr 115th St Strawberry Creek Rd East End 87th St Finch Cres Nighthawk Dr Torrey Pines Dr Redhaven Crt Bayview Cres_1 Sumac Lane

128 99 49 185 185 157 415 43 130 171 55 60 242 81 91 428 376 62 216 87 39 620 120 412 171 27 121 70 92 276 100 843 98

8.2 12.5 13.1 7.4 10 11.1 10.3 14 5.3 6.2 10 12 7.7 9.4 10.1 11.1 9.8 8 15.2 12.4 12.5 8.9 8.1 11.7 10.2 8.2 10 9.9 10.4 12.5 8.2 10.7 5.9

Local Local Local Collector Local Collector Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Collector Local Local Local Collector Local Local Local Collector Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Collector Local

N B B B N N B B B N B B B B B N B N B B B N N B N B B N B B N N N

1 1 1 3.16 1 4.58 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.16 1 1 1 4.69 1 1 1 4.12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.16 1

OL_50 Reconstruct Reconstruct Reconstruct OL_50 OL_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 OL_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 OL_50 Mill_50 OL_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 Reconstruct OL_50 Mill_50 OL_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 OL_50 Mill_50 Mill_50 OL_50 OL_50 Reconstruct

$33,946 $92,813 $48,143 $212,195 $60,901 $57,735 $162,487 $22,822 $26,962 $33,632 $20,658 $25,924 $71,638 $29,898 $34,843 $169,150 $140,212 $15,966 $125,253 $40,770 $18,141 $413,850 $32,054 $193,781 $61,496 $8,303 $45,658 $22,525 $35,884 $131,371 $28,159 $318,904 $43,365

2031 2033 2032 2032 2032 2030 2032 2029 2033 2030 2033 2027 2033 2029 2029 2031 2033 2029 2033 2035 2035 2035 2035 2035 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036

2033 2033 2033 2033 2033 2033 2033 2033 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2034 2035 2035 2035 2035 2035 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036 2036

Committed Year

Appendix B: Engagement Summary

Town of Osoyoos

Transportation Master Plan What We Learned Report Round One Engagement April 2026

Executive Summary

The Town of Osoyoos is creating a Transportation Master Plan (TMP)to guide long-term transportation planning in Osoyoos. The TMP looks at all travel modes, including walking, cycling and rolling, driving, and transit. This What We Learned Report presents the feedback received during the first round of engagement (February – March 2026), which explored the community’s transportation priorities and concerns. Round One engagement included an online community survey (222 responses), an interactive “Mark the Map” activity (85 location-based comments), and an in-person pop-up event at the Sonora Community Centre. Project information was communicated through a StoryMap website, social media, eNews, posters in the community, and a news release.

Overview of Round One Engagement Findings •

Safety is the top priority. People want streets that feel safer for everyone, especially safer crossings of major roads, better lighting and visibility, and improvements at problem intersections.

•

Walking: the biggest barrier to walking is crossing major roads (41%). The top ways to encourage more walking are safer crossings (50%), more sidewalks and pathways (36%), and better lighting/visibility (23%).

•

Cycling and rolling: key barriers to cycling are feeling unsafe beside vehicle traffic (38%) and not having dedicated routes (35%). Priorities include more multi-use pathways (45%), more separated bike lanes (35%), and safer crossings of major roads (28%).

•

Driving: summer traffic congestion is the top concern (76%), followed by unsafe intersections (40%), and parking challenges (33%). Suggested improvements include separating highway and local traffic (44%), traffic calming in neighbourhoods (33%), and increased enforcement (31%).

•

Main Street: common challenges on Main Street include difficulty turning left (57%), conflicts from angled parking and vehicles backing into traffic (44%), and difficulty finding parking (37%). Suggested actions include adding parking off Main Street (58%), adding safer places to cross on foot (42%), and improving sidewalks so they line up with crosswalks (30%).

•

Micromobility (e-scooters and e-bikes): people raised concerns about unclear rules and unsafe riding (for example, riding on sidewalks). Many comments asked for clearer guidance, signage, education, and enforcement.

The feedback from Round One will be used to shape the TMP’s draft Vision and Goals and to help identify options for improvements across the transportation network. A second round of engagement is planned for June 2026, when the Town will share the draft Transportation Master Plan for public review and input.

Table of Contents 1.0

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4

1.1

Engagement Process ............................................................................................... 4

1.2

Round One Engagement Opportunities ................................................................. 4

1.2.1

Community Survey ............................................................................................... 5

1.2.2

Mark the Map ....................................................................................................... 5

1.2.3

Pop-up Event ........................................................................................................ 5

2.0

What We Learned ......................................................................................................... 6

2.1

Mark the Map (Online + Pop-up Event).................................................................. 6

2.1.1

Driving.................................................................................................................... 6

2.1.2

Walking .................................................................................................................. 7

2.1.3

Cycling and Rolling .............................................................................................. 8

2.1.4

Transit ..................................................................................................................... 8

2.2

Community Survey ................................................................................................... 9

2.2.1

Who We Heard From ............................................................................................ 9

2.2.2

Travel Modes ........................................................................................................10

2.2.3

Walking .................................................................................................................13

2.2.4

Cycling .................................................................................................................15

2.2.5

Driving...................................................................................................................17

2.2.6

Transit ....................................................................................................................19

2.2.7

Main Street ...........................................................................................................21

2.2.8

Transportation Priorities........................................................................................23

2.2.9

Additional Comments .........................................................................................26

Appendices Appendix A: Mark the Map Comments (Pop-up) ……………………………………………...28 Appendix B: Mark the Map Comments (Online)………………………………………………..31 Appendix C: Survey Results Export…………………………………………………………………33

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Town of Osoyoos is developing a Transportation Master Plan (TMP) to guide the future of long-term transportation planning in Osoyoos. The TMP will outline a vision for creating streets that are safe, comfortable, accessible, and well-connected for all users. It encompasses all modes of transportation, including walking, cycling and rolling, driving, and transit. As part of this planning process, the Town is engaging with residents to ensure the community’s priorities and interests are reflected in the TMP. Two rounds of engagement are being undertaken, as described below. This report summarizes the key findings from the first round of engagement.

1.1 Engagement Process Round One: Issues, Opportunities and Goals (February – March 2026) We are here The first round of engagement focused on gathering input on local transportation issues, challenges, and concerns. It also sought to understand the community’s values and priorities. The feedback collected during this round will inform the development of the TMP’s Vision and Goals. Round Two: Review the Draft Plan (June 2026) The second round of engagement will present the draft TMP for public review and input to ensure it reflects the community’s long-term values, vision, and goals.

1.2 Engagement Opportunities In February and March 2026, the Town invited residents to participate in an online survey, interactive map, and a pop-up event. The engagement opportunities described below were communicated to the public through the following channels: • • • • •

Project StoryMap website: osoyoostmp.ca Town of Osoyoos Facebook page Town of Osoyoos eNews Posters in key community locations News release

1.2.1 Community Survey An online survey was open February 13 to March 15, 2026 to gather input on local transportation priorities, issues, and concerns. Hard copies of the survey were also available at the pop-up event. A total of 222 responses were received.

1.2.2 Mark the Map An interactive map of the Town’s existing transportation network was embedded on the project’s StoryMap website. The map allowed respondents to add location-based feedback on issues or potential improvements for walking, cycling or rolling, driving, and transit. A hard copy of the mapping activity was also available at the pop-up event. A total of 85 comments were pinned on the maps.

1.2.3 Pop-up Event The project team hosted a pop-up event in the foyer of the Sonora Community Centre on February 18, 2026. The booth featured poster boards to present information about the project and to collect feedback. Approximately 28 community members were engaged at the event

Figure 1. Sonora Centre Pop-up Event

2.0 WHAT WE LEARNED This section presents a summary of the engagement findings.

2.1 Mark the Map (Online + Pop-up Event) Feedback from the Mark the Map activity (both online and in-person) is compiled and summarized below by mode of transportation. Verbatim comments are included in Appendix A and Appendix B.

2.1.1 Driving The table below summarizes the key themes by location. Location

Highway 97

Highway 3 / Main Street

Theme High vehicle speeds (6) 1

Description Vehicle speeds are a concern along Highway 97, particularly between the border and the Highway 3 & Main Street intersection. There are suggestions to reduce the speed limit near residential areas.

Unsafe intersection (5)

Confusing signage at the intersections of Highway 97 & 62nd Avenue and Highway 97 & 82nd Avenue causes driver uncertainty. There are also concerns about limited visibility and drivers failing to reduce their speed.

Restricted left turns (2)

There is a desire to allow left turns from Eagle Court onto Highway 97.

Traffic congestion (2)

Congestion is a concern along Highway 3 / Main Street. There is interest in exploring a truck bypass route to help alleviate heavy vehicle traffic through the city centre.

Intersection upgrades and turning restrictions (3)

Suggestions include a roundabout at Highway 3 & 49th Street, traffic signals at Lakeshore Drive, and concerns about seasonal left-turn restrictions.

Unsafe maneuvers (2)

There are concerns about vehicles reversing from angled parking and disrupting traffic flow, as well as unsafe u-turns.

1 The bracketed number indicates the number of comments that referenced this theme.

Additional parking (1)

Additional parking off of Main Street is desired.

Unsafe intersections (7)

Limited visibility and unsafe intersection design at 89th Street & 62nd Avenue and 89th Street & 74th Avenue make it challenging for drivers to navigate. There is also concern about blocked sightlines at the intersection of 89th & 70th.

Speed reduction (1)

There is a desire to add speed bumps to reduce vehicle speeds in the areas along the school, daycare centre, playground, and beach.

Kingfisher Drive

High vehicle speeds (3)

Vehicles speed along Kingfisher Drive and use it as a shortcut to bypass Main Street.

Spartan Drive Boat Launch

Lack of lighting (2)

Inadequate lighting at the boat launch is dangerous and a safety concern.

General (no location specified)

Road and pedestrian safety (5)

Drivers ignoring crosswalks, speeding in pedestrian-heavy areas, and a need for increased enforcement and signage are ongoing concerns.

89th Street

Less frequently mentioned locations include: • • •

Legion Beach area: Concern about potholes. Vedette Drive: Desire to re-open. Intersection of Lobelia and 32nd: Desire for a 4-way stop to improve visibility.

2.1.2 Walking The table below summarizes the key themes by location. Location

Theme Unsafe crossing (4)

Description Pedestrian crossings at Highway 97 & 74th Avenue are described as dangerous, with high traffic volumes and frequent pedestrian activity. There is interest in implementing crossing lights to improve safety.

Unsafe crossings (2)

There are observations that drivers don’t stop for pedestrians at the crosswalks of Highway 3 & 85th Avenue and Highway 3 & 87th Avenue.

Highway 97

Highway 3

General (no location specified)

Accessibility (2) There is desire for larger numbers and higher pitched beeps for crosswalk countdowns to improve accessibility.

Less frequently mentioned locations include: • • • •

Legion Beach and 62nd: The yellow painted area is slippery in winter months. Richter Pass Hotel: Crosswalk doesn’t line up with the stairs, which is an accessibility concern. Finch Crescent: Consider adding sidewalks as many people walk along this route. Lobelia Drive: Extend sidewalk north to connect to the existing sidewalk.

2.1.3 Cycling and Rolling The table below summarizes the key themes for cycling and rolling. Location

General (no location specified)

Theme Dangerous riding and lack of regulation (11)

Description Regulations for e-scooters and e-bikes are unclear and not widely understood by riders, leading to dangerous behaviours (e.g., riding on sidewalks). There are calls for greater enforcement, signage, and education on how to properly and safely ride bikes and scooters.

Better cycling and rolling infrastructure (3)

There is a desire for more designated and separated bike paths, particularly routes that connect to the broader network. Additionally, there is interest in more places to park bikes and scooters.

2.1.4 Transit The table below summarizes the key themes for transit. Location

Within Osoyoos

Theme Expand local transit service (8)

Description There is a desire for more bus stops and transit service within Osoyoos, particularly in the following areas: • 62 South to 32nd • Birch Court • Lombardy Lane • Willow Crescent • Highway 3 towards the airport • Pebbles Beach Drive

Outside of Osoyoos

On-demand transit (1)

There is a suggestion to provide an on-demand bus service with small buses to increase service within town.

Expand regional transit service (2)

There is a desire for more bus service outside of Osoyoos, including to Oliver, Penticton, and Kelowna.

2.2 Community Survey An overview of the survey results is presented below. A detailed export of the results can be found in Appendix C.

2.2.1 Who We Heard From What is your connection to the Town of Osoyoos? Select all that apply. (n=221) Majority of respondents (81%) are full time residents of Osoyoos. Fourteen percent (14%) work in Osoyoos, 12% are seasonal or part-time residents, and 8% are business owners.

I am a full-time resident of Osoyoos

I work in Osoyoos

14%

I am a seasonal or part-time resident of Osoyoos

12%

I own a business in Osoyoos

I live outside of Osoyoos

10, 5%

Other (please specify)

9,4%

I go to school in Osoyoos

81%

180

1, 0% 0

100

120

140

160

180

200

2.2.2 Travel Modes How often do you currently travel within Osoyoos using each of the following travel methods? (n=221) Respondents most frequently travel within Osoyoos by driving a personal vehicle, followed by walking. Being a passenger in a personal vehicle and biking are less common travel modes, while few take transit or ride a scooter or skateboard.

Drive my own personal vehicle

121

Walk

Passenger in a personal vehicle

Bicycle (including e-bike)

146

154

8 12

Transit 4 9 11

Scooter or skateboard (including e-scooter)

8 9 37

103

9 6

100

Daily

A few times a week

A few times a month

A few times a year

Once a year or less

Never / N/A

120

140

160

180

Monthly

For each travel mode, select the trip purpose(s) you typically use it for. Select all that apply for each mode. (n=220) For most trip purposes, driving a personal vehicle is the most common mode of travel. Walking and cycling are popular for exercise and recreation; however, few people use these modes for other purposes. Transit and scooter / skateboarding are not widely used.

Drive my own personal vehicle

32% 34%

Walk 16%

Passenger in a personal vehicle 14%27%

Bicycle (including e-bike)

Transit

86%

83%

84%

63%

48%

44%

59%

56%

62%

49%

11% 10% 14%

8% 6%

Scooter or skateboard (including e-scooter)

64%

40%

32%

60%

11%

43%

88%

93%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Work or school

Exercise or recreation

Shopping

Errands or appointments

Social activities

Dining out

N/A

Which modes of transportation would you like to use more often to get around Osoyoos? Select all that apply. (n=213) Walking (49%) and driving a personal vehicle (46%) are the most common transportation modes that respondents would like to use more often, followed by bicycling (31%) and public transit (24%).

Walk

49%

105

Driving my own vehicle

Bicycle

46%

31%

Public transit

Other (please specify)

Carpooling or getting a ride with someone

Micro mobility (e-scooter, skateboard, rollerblade)

8 0

24%

4% 20

100

120

2.2.3 Walking What are the main barriers to walking around Osoyoos? Select your top 3. (n=210) Difficulty crossing major roads (41%) is the most significant barrier to walking around Osoyoos. Other barriers include disconnected sidewalks and paths (29%), lack of pedestrian routes (20%), and pathways/sidewalks being too narrow or blocked by obstacles (20%). Twenty-two percent (22%) say that there are no barriers for them to walk around Osoyoos. Difficultly crossing major roads

Sidewalks and pathways are not connected

41%

29%

There are no barriers for me walking

Lack of pedestrian routes (e.g., sidewalks, multi-use pathways or trails)

20%

Sidewalks and pathways are too narrow, or blocked by obstacles (e.g. utility poles)

20%

Lack of shade or areas to rest (e.g., benches)

19%

Weather conditions (e.g., too hot, cold or windy)

18%

I do not feel safe / comfortable walking next to vehicle traffic

16%

Sidewalks and pathways are not accessible (e.g., no curb ramps, uneven surfaces)

16%

Poor winter maintenance of sidewalks and pathways

15%

Lack of street lighting

14%

Walking distances are too far

13%

Other (please specify)

11%

Need to transport others (e.g., aging parents, children) or carry items

11%

Physical or health condition limits walking

11%

N/A

22%

3 1% 0

100

What would encourage you to walk more often? Select your top 3. (n = 204) Respondents indicated that safer road crossings (50%), more sidewalks and pathways (36%), and more street lighting and visibility at night (23%) would encourage them to walk more often.

Safer road crossings (e.g. flashing lights)

50%

103

More sidewalks or pathways

36%

More street lighting and visibility at night

23%

Repaving of sidewalks and pathways

22%

Wider sidewalks

22%

Better clearing of snow and ice in winter

16%

Other (please specify)

16%

I’m not interested in walking more often

16%

More accessible infrastructure (e.g., curb letdowns, features for people with vision and hearing loss, etc.)

Better wayfinding / signage

Living closer to work, school and activities

11 0

13% 7%

5% 20

100

120

2.2.4 Cycling What are the main barriers to cycling around Osoyoos? Select your top 3. (n = 202) The main factors that discourage respondents from using a bicycle include: feeling unsafe on routes next to vehicle traffic (38%), lack of dedicated cycling routes (35%), and a lack of secure storage and fear of theft (17%). Cycling routes next to vehicle traffic do not feel safe

Lack of dedicated cycling routes (e.g., bike lanes or bike paths)

38%

N/A

35%

Fear of theft / lack of secure storage

There are no barriers for me cycling

17% 14%

Weather conditions (e.g., too hot, cold or windy)

10%

Cycling routes are in poor condition (e.g., bumpy, blocked by debris, snow, or ice)

Cycling routes don’t go where I need to go

Other (please specify)

Physical limitations (not physically able to bicycle)

Need to transport others (e.g., aging parents, young children, people with mobility challenges)

My usual destinations are too far away

I don’t have the necessary gear (e.g., bicycle, helmet, etc.)

31%

What would encourage you to cycle more often? Select your top 3. (n=189) Respondents indicated that to bicycle more often, there needs to be more trails and multi-use pathways (45%), more separated bicycle lanes (35%), and more safe places to cross major roads (28%).

More trails or multi-use pathways

45%

I’m not interested in cycling more often

More bicycle lanes that are separated from traffic

40%

More safe places to cross major roads

35%

28%

More secure bicycle parking

22%

More bicycle routes on quieter local streets

22%

Better sweeping and maintenance of bike routes

Better wayfinding (e.g., signage showing safe routes and shortcuts)

Other (please specify)

More street lighting and visibility at night

Bike share program

Showers, lockers, or change rooms at destinations 2 1% 0

2.2.5 Driving What are your main concerns regarding driving around Osoyoos? Select your top 3. (n=207) The main concern regarding driving around Osoyoos is summer traffic congestion (76%), followed by unsafe intersections (40%,) and difficulties finding parking (33%).

Summer traffic congestion

157

Unsafe intersections (e.g., poor visibility, confusing layouts)

76%

40%

Difficulties finding parking

33%

Speeding in residential neighbourhoods

32%

Other (please specify)

I do not have any concerns

14%

Poor pavement condition (e.g., potholes or cracks)

13%

Unclear or confusing wayfinding (e.g., difficulty 3 not knowing where to go or which route to take)

16%

100

120

140

160

What could be done to improve driving? Select your top 3. (n=200) Separation of highway and local traffic (44%), more traffic calming measures in neighbourhoods (33%), and increased traffic law enforcement (31%) are the top desired changes to improve driving in Osoyoos.

More separation of highway and local traffic

44%

Traffic calming measures in neighbourhoods (e.g., speed bumps, lower speed limits)

33%

Increase enforcement of traffic laws (e.g., police presence)

31%

Provide more parking at major destinations

Improve walking, cycling and transit to reduce the need to drive

29% 27%

Other (please specify)

21%

Fix potholes or repave roads

19%

There is nothing that needs improvement

Introduce more parking time limits or permit zones to manage demand

Improve wayfinding (e.g., directional signage)

I do not drive

100

2.2.6 Transit What are the main barriers to using transit in Osoyoos? Select your top 3. (n=200) The main barriers to using transit in Osoyoos are: infrequent service within Osoyoos (36%), infrequent service to Penticton and Oliver (32%), and bus routes not travelling to desired locations/destinations (24%). Thirty-five percent (35%) indicated they had no interest in taking the bus. Bus service within Osoyoos is infrequent

36%

I’m not interested in taking the bus

36%

Bus service to Penticton and Oliver is infrequent

Bus routes do not go where I need to go

32%

There are no bus stops near my home or destination

24%

21%

Routes and schedules are hard to find or understand

16%

Service does not start early or continue late enough for my schedule

16%

I do not have any concerns about using transit

Other (please specify)

12%

Bus stops lack seating, shade, or shelter

12%

Service is unreliable (i.e. buses are often late or cancelled)

Bus is too expensive

Bus stops or buses do not feel safe

Accessibility challenges (e.g., mobility devices, strollers)

14%

4 2% 0

What would encourage you to take transit more often? Select your top 3. (n=199) The top factors that would encourage respondents to take the bus more often are: increased regional service (39%), more service within Osoyoos (33%), and service on weekends (26%). A significant portion of respondents (40%) were not interested in taking the bus.

I’m not interested in taking the bus

40%

Increased regional bus service (e.g. to Oliver or Penticton)

39%

More frequent service within Osoyoos

Add service on weekends

33%

26%

Add service in evenings

20%

On-demand transit (e.g. booking via an app or phone)

20%

Park and ride (e.g. for trips to Penticton)

17%

Better bus stops (e.g. more shelters, benches, and lighting)

17%

Other (please specify)

Improve reliability of service

Lower bus fares

8 0

4% 10

2.2.7 Main Street What are the key challenges when visiting or travelling along Main Street? Select your top 3. (n=202) The key challenges when visiting or travelling on Main Street are: difficulty turning left onto or off Main Street (57%), parked cars reversing into traffic (44%), and difficulty finding parking (37%).

Difficulty turning left (i.e., turning onto or off Main Street) Parked cars reversing into traffic

44%

Hard to find parking

37%

Walking across the street feels unsafe

32%

Lack of safe cycling access (i.e. it is hard to ride to Main Street)

22%

Other (please specify)

18%

Sidewalks feel too narrow or crowded

Lack of parking for trailers and RVs

10%

I have not experienced any challenges in this area

Sidewalks are not accessible (e.g., no curb ramps, uneven surfaces)

Traffic noise or air quality

Lack of wayfinding signage (e.g., directional signs)

57%

115

5 0

12%

2% 25

100

125

What could be done to improve travel conditions on Main Street? Select your top 3. (n=187) The top actions that could be taken to improve travel on Main Street include: providing more parking areas off Main Street (58%), more safe places to cross Main Street on foot (42%), and upgrading sidewalks to better align with crosswalks (30%).

Provide more parking areas off Main Street

58%

109

More safe places to cross Main Street on foot

42%

Upgrade sidewalks to better align with crosswalks

30%

Other (please specify)

23%

More trees, landscaping, or space for patios

19%

Switch to parallel parking (to create space for wider sidewalks/patios)

19%

Make it easier to reach places on Main Street by bicycle

17%

Provide wider sidewalks

Better wayfinding (i.e. signage for visitors and people walking)

10 0

9% 5% 20

100

120

2.2.8 Transportation Priorities Which of the following transportation outcomes are most important to you? Rank the following options in order of priority from 1 to 8. (n = 190) Designing streets for safety is the highest priority transportation outcome, followed by maintaining roads and other assets, and expanding affordable transportation options. Designing streets for safety

2.7

Maintaining roads and other assets

High

Expanding affordable transportation options

4.2

Promoting physical health through active travel

4.3

Ensuring accessibility for all ages and abilities

4.6

Minimizing travel delays

4.8

Reducing climate impact

PRIORITY

3.6

5.5

Enhancing streetscapes and aesthetics

Low

6.2 0

Average Priority

Are there any other transportation outcomes not listed above that you believe should be a priority? If so, please describe the outcome and what you would rank it. (n=71) A summary of the key themes is presented below. This summary only includes themes that were referenced at least twice. A full export of all comments is available in Appendix C. Driving • Support for alternate truck route to bypass Main Street. (7) • Better parking enforcement to prevent illegal parking that blocks sightlines. (3) • Make it safer and easier for drivers to make left turns, with suggestions for a left turn lane at Cottonwood, a traffic light at Lakeshore and Highway 3/Main Street, and improvements to turning left onto Main Street from Kingfisher. (3) • Better enforcement of vehicle traffic on Main Street to reduce speeding and illegal u-turns. (2) • Address parking concerns on Main Street by adding more parking off of Main Street and do not allow vehicles to reverse onto Main Street. (2) • Improve road maintenance. (2) 23

Active Transportation / Micromobility • More awareness of micromobility riding rules (e.g. e-scooters, e-bikes) and better enforcement to prevent people from riding dangerously. (8) • Add more pedestrian crossings and improve the safety of existing crossings (e.g., pedestrian controlled lights in high traffic areas, proper visibility and sightlines). (6) • Concerns about people riding bikes and scooters on sidewalks. (2) • Concerns about pedestrian and cyclist safety on roadways, with calls to prioritize safety for active transportation users. (2) • Ensure infrastructure is accessible for all ages and abilities. (2) • Provide a safe connection to the hike and bike trail. (2) Transit / Rideshare • Increase transit service within Osoyoos. (4) • Introduce ride share services to provide more transportation options (e.g. Uber, Lyft). (4) • Expand transit service to destinations outside of town (e.g. Oliver, Lakeshore Drive). (2) • Improve reliability of taxi services. (2) Other • Increase vibrancy of downtown by promoting outdoor dining areas, plazas, and expanding commercial areas to side streets off of Main Street. (2)

What investments in Osoyoos’ transportation system should be considered the highest priority? Rank the following options in order of priority from 1 to 14. (n = 185) The highest priority investments in Osoyoos’ transportation system are improving onstreet parking in the Town Centre, resurfacing existing roads, and providing more safe places to walk or roll across major roads. Improving on-street and off-street parking in Town Centre

4.2

Resurfacing of existing roads

4.4

High

Providing more safe places to walk or roll across major roads

5.0

Expanding roads or adding new connections

5.1

Adding more sidewalks on neighbourhood roads

6.1

Adding more routes for biking (e.g., bike lanes, multi-use pathways)

6.3

Improving sidewalks on major roads Improving boat launch conditions (options, accessibility to trailer parking)

8.8

Increasing regional bus service (e.g., to Oliver and Penticton)

8.9

Increasing bus service within town

8.9

Improving accessibility for pedestrians

9.4

Adding landscaping and improving aesthetics on visitor-facing streets

9.5

PRIORITY

6.7

Traffic calming on neighbourhood roads

10.5

Enabling new ways of getting around (e.g., bike/scooter sharing, small EVs)

10.6 0

Low 12

Average Priority

Are there any other investments not listed above that you believe should be a priority? If so, please describe the investment and what you would rank it. (n=37) A summary of the key themes is presented below. This summary only includes themes that were referenced at least twice. A full export of all comments is available in Appendix C. Driving • Support for an alternate route to bypass Main Street. (4) • Address traffic congestion downtown / Main Street. (2) • Improve road maintenance. (2) • Improve dangerous intersections (e.g. poor visibility on 62nd and 89th). (2) Active Transportation • Improve the safety of existing crossings by adding more pedestrian controlled crossings at busy intersections and better crosswalk lighting. (6) • Improve the condition of existing sidewalks and add more sidewalks around town, especially along high traffic roadways (e.g. highways). (7) • Add more street lighting. (3) • Add pedestrian crossing bridges on busy roadways. (2) Transportation Options • Expand transportation options such as ride share services, more transit services, and rental car services. (6)

2.2.9 Additional Comments Do you have any additional comments regarding transportation in Osoyoos? (n=52) A summary of the key themes is presented below. This summary only includes themes that were referenced at least twice. A full export of all comments is available in Appendix C. Driving • Improve dangerous intersections, add traffic lights and create dedicated left turn lanes (e.g. Highway 3 and Lakeshore, Cottonwood, Kingfisher). (7) • Reduce congestion on Main Street and the bridge, including rerouting highway and truck traffic. (4) • Increase traffic enforcement and address speeding and unsafe driving behaviours. (3) Active Transportation • Improve bike and e-bike safety, infrastructure and connectivity (e.g. protected bike lanes, continuous routes, paved trails). (5) 26

• •

Improve pedestrian crossings and add pedestrian bridges or over-street walkways, particularly on Highway 3 and near commercial areas. (3) Encourage active transportation and make it easier and safer for pedestrians to walk around town. (3)

Transportation Options • Expand and improve local and regional bus service (e.g. more frequent service, expanded routes and stops). (8) • Improve the availability and reliability of taxi and ride share services. (3) • Introduce shuttles to the Kelowna airport and a seasonal downtown shuttle. (2) • Allow the use of golf carts to travel within town. (2)

Town of Osoyoos

Transportation Master Plan What We Learned Report Round Two Engagement August 2026

1.1 Engagement Process Round One: Issues, Opportunities and Goals (February – March 2026) The first round of engagement focused on gathering input on local transportation issues, challenges, and concerns. It also sought to understand the community’s values and priorities. The feedback collected during this round will inform the development of the TMP’s Vision and Goals. Round Two: Review the Draft Plan (June - July 2026) The second round of engagement presented the Draft TMP for community review and feedback. Residents were invited to review the draft plan and provide input on the proposed vision, goals and recommendations. The feedback gathered through this process was used to refine the Draft TMP and confirm the proposed direction of the plan, ensuring it reflects local priorities and interests.

1.2 Engagement Opportunities The engagement opportunities described below were communicated to the public through the following channels: • • • •

Project StoryMap website: osoyoostmp.ca Town of Osoyoos Facebook page Town of Osoyoos eNews News release

1.2.1 Pop-up Event On July 4 2026, the project team conducted a pop-up engagement event at the Osoyoos Farmers' Market to raise awareness of the Draft TMP, share details of the draft plan, and gather public feedback. The event provided residents and visitors with an opportunity to speak directly with the project team, ask questions, and learn more about the proposed vision, goals, and transportation improvements. A total of 15 people were engaged.

1.2.2 Online Survey An online survey was available July 2 to 31, 2026 to gather input on the Draft TMP. The questions asked participants to indicate their level of support for the draft plan’s vision, goals, and recommendations. A total of 75 responses were received.

2.0 WHAT WE LEARNED This section presents a summary of the survey results.

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the proposed vision and goals? (n=75) 40 45%

# of respondents

30 33% 20 13%

7% 1% 0 Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the recommendation to combine new transportation projects with road repairs and utility work? (n=57) 40 53%

# of respondents

30 20

25% 16%

0 Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the recommendation to update the layout of complex intersections (e.g. 89th Street and 62nd Avenue) to make them easier to navigate? (n=56) 30

# of respondents

41% 32%

18%

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

0 Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the recommendation to connect the pathway network across town, with separate spaces for people walking and biking? (n=58) 30

# of respondents

36% 20

34%

14%

12% 3%

0 Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the recommendation to consider paid parking on Main Street during the busy season to encourage turnover? (n=58) 30

# of respondents

38% 20

14%

17%

21%

10%

0 Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the recommendation to advocate for new signals and crosswalks on Highway 97 and Highway 3? (n=57)

# of respondents

44%

30%

12%

11% 4%

0 Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

On a scale of 1 to 5, how supportive are you of the recommendation to consider a shuttle service around the community in the summer? (n=58)

# of respondents

31%

28%

29%

10 7%

Oppose

Strongly Oppose

Strongly Support

Support

Neutral

Do you have any comments about the Draft TMP that you would like to share with the project team?1 Theme Crossing and intersection safety

Description Respondents identified several intersections and crossings as unsafe or in need of improvement. They expressed support for safer pedestrian crossings, including controlled crosswalk lights and additional crossings on busy roads. Safety concerns were raised about the Highway 3 and Highway 3/62nd Street intersection, the intersection of 74th and 89th, the 87th Street intersection, the Eagle Court and Highway 97 intersection, and the corner of Highway 3 and Lakeshore Drive.

Accessibility and sidewalks

Respondents raised concerns about accessibility for wheelchair users and others with mobility challenges. They noted a lack of curb ramps at crosswalks and sidewalks, as well as a need for more accessible parking spaces that support a wider range of mobility needs. Some raised concerns about gaps in the sidewalk network, particularly between Highway 97 and Lambert, the intersection after Blue Barn, and on Highway 3 south of the Highway 97 intersection.

Priority of infrastructure investments

Several respondents viewed the TMP as a lower priority than more urgent infrastructure needs, such as sewer and water systems. They suggested that investment in these areas should come before the transportation improvements identified in the TMP.

Paid parking

Some respondents felt that residents should not have to pay for parking, and suggested resident permits if paid parking is introduced. Others were concerned that paid parking on Main Street would push people to park in other nearby residential streets.

Road condition and maintenance Transit service

There were calls for prioritizing road repairs before focusing on other transportation improvements. Few noted that increased transit service is needed, particularly weekend service to Penticton and service to the Penticton and Kelowna airports.

1 The table represents the key themes of the comments received through both the survey and

the pop-up event.

What is your connection to the Town of Osoyoos? Select all that apply. (n=57) I live outside of Osoyoos

I go to school in Osoyoos

I own a business in Osoyoos

I work in Osoyoos

14%

I am a seasonal or part-time resident of Osoyoos

I am a full-time resident of Osoyoos

89% 0

# of respondents

If you live in Osoyoos, how long have you lived in the Town? (n=55) Not applicable

21+ years

31%

16 to 20 years

11%

11 to 15 years

11%

6 to 10 years

15%

5 years or less

29% 0

# of respondents

What is your age group? (n=57) 65+

42%

55-64

23%

45-54

18%

35-44

25-34

18-24

Under 18

Prefer not to answer

4% 0

# of respondents

Appendix C: Existing Conditions

EXISTING CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN & ROAD CONDITION ASSESSMENT TOWN OF OSOYOOS August 13, 2026

CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 COMMUNITY CONTEXT & BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................. 1 2.1 POPULATION ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 LAND USE ............................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.3 PREVIOUS PLANS AND STUDIES ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 CITY BYLAWS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 2.5 REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL PLANS & STUDIES ....................................................................................... 3

3.0 TRAVEL AND TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 4 3.1 MODE SHARE ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.2 COMMUTING TRAVEL TRENDS ............................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 TRAFFIC VOLUMES .......................................................................................................................................................... 5

4.0 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK CONDITIONS ........................................................ 9 4.1 EXISTING MULTI-USE PATH AND TRAIL NETWORK ................................................................................. 9 4.2 EXISTING PEDESTRIAN NETWORK....................................................................................................................... 9 4.3 EXISTING CYCLING NETWORK .............................................................................................................................. 10 4.4 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION DATA ........................................................................................................................ 12 4.5 MICRO-MOBILITY ............................................................................................................................................................ 14

5.0 ROAD NETWORK CONDITIONS ..................................................................................... 15 5.1 ROAD NETWORK & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ........................................................................................... 15 5.2 ROAD DESIGN CRITERIA............................................................................................................................................ 19 5.3 COLLISION SCREENING & COLLISION TRENDS........................................................................................ 20

6.0 TOWN CENTRE STREETSCAPE, CURBSIDE & PARKING ................................................. 24 6.1 TOWN CENTRE STREETSCAPE ............................................................................................................................. 25 6.2 TOWN CENTRE INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................................................... 27

7.0 ACCESSIBILITY, SAFETY & TRANSIT ............................................................................ 31 7.1 TRANSIT STOPS ............................................................................................................................................................... 34

8.0 SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES ......................................................................................... 36 8.1 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT............................................................................................................ 36 8.2 ROAD NETWORK ........................................................................................................................................................... 37 8.3 TOWN CENTRE ................................................................................................................................................................ 38

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | i

APPENDICES APPENDIX A: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COUNT SUMMARY

TABLES Table 2.1: Summary of Study Area Census Profile .......................................................................................................... 2 Table 3.1: Traffic Data Collection Details ............................................................................................................................... 6 Table 4.1: Crosswalk Treatment Assessment ................................................................................................................... 13 Table 5.1: Collector Road Speed Limits ................................................................................................................................ 16 Table 5.2: Road Design Standards .......................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 5.3: BCAT Guidance - Sidewalks ................................................................................................................................. 19 Table 5.4: Top Collision Locations (ICBC, 2020-2024) ............................................................................................... 20 Table 5.5: Top Intersection Collision Screening Summary ..................................................................................... 21 Table 6.1: Town Centre Streetscape Elements .............................................................................................................. 25 Table 6.2: Town Centre Pedestrian Infrastructure ...................................................................................................... 28 Table 7.1: Accessibility and Safety Review ......................................................................................................................... 31

FIGURES Figure 2.1: Town of Osoyoos and Surrounding Area...................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2.2: Osoyoos Land Use Designation (2022 OCP) ............................................................................................ 4 Figure 3.1: Mode Split (2021 Census) ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3.2: Commuting Duration (2021 Census) ............................................................................................................. 5 Figure 3.3: Traffic Data Collection Plan ................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 3.4: Traffic Volume Map (2025 AADT) .....................................................................................................................8 Figure 4.1: Existing Active Transportation Map .............................................................................................................. 11 Figure 4.2: Active Transportation Counts (Aug. 2025)............................................................................................... 12 Figure 5.1: Road Classification Map (2025) ......................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 5.2: Collision Map (ICBC, 2020-2024) ................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6.1: Town Centre Districts (Town Centre Renewal Plan, 2018) ........................................................... 24

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | ii

Existing Conditions Assessment

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Town of Osoyoos (the Town) is undertaking the development of a comprehensive Master Transportation Plan and Road Condition Assessment. This initiative is designed to support the modernization of the Town’s asset management program by incorporating the road network into its long-term planning. This report summarizes the existing conditions assessment of the community’s current transportation network. This review is critical to develop an understanding of the current issues and opportunities which will guide the development of the long-range TMP vision and recommendations. The key findings from the existing conditions assessment will directly inform future directions, network plans, and improvement projects for Osoyoos’ Transportation Master Plan.

2.0 COMMUNITY CONTEXT & BACKGROUND INFORMATION As shown in Figure 2.1, the Town of Osoyoos is located in the southern interior of British Columbia within the Okanagan-Similkameen Regional District (RDOS), just 3.6km north of the United States border. It lies at the junction of Highway 97 and Highway 3 (Crowsnest Highway), making it a strategic gateway for cross-border traffic and regional connectivity. The town is nestled on the shores of Osoyoos Lake and is surrounded by orchards, vineyards, and desert terrain. As the only living desert in Canada, Osoyoos is a popular resort destination, attracting thousands of visitors each year for its recreational amenities, wineries, and cultural events. The Town shares deep-rooted connections with the Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB), located adjacent to the Osoyoos 1 reserve, which occupies approximately 32,000 acres of land in the north and east of the Town. Figure 2.1: Town of Osoyoos and Surrounding Area

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 1

Existing Conditions Assessment

2.1 POPULATION Population growth in Osoyoos can be attributed to the strong economic opportunities, a high quality of life as a desirable tourist destination, and an appealing lifestyle or retirement migration. Based on the 2021 Canadian Census Profile, the Town of Osoyoos has a population of 5,556 residents, which is an increase of 10% since 2016 (5,505). The average age of residents in Osoyoos is 57 years.

5,556

2021 Population

Average Age

The following table summaries key demographic indicators from the 2021 census for the Town of Osoyoos, RDOS, and the Osoyoos 1 Reserve. Table 2.1: Summary of Study Area Census Profile

CATEGORY Population and Dwellings

Household Characteristics

Labour and Income

INDICATOR

OSOYOOS

RDOS (AREA A)

OSOYOOS 1

Population

5,556

2,139

1,426

Dwellings

3,279

1,050

878

Dwellings occupied by usual resident1

2,647 (81%)

873 (83%)

565 (64%)

Average Age

Median Household Income

$66,000

$82,000

$73,000

Median Income of Individuals

$33,600

$34,800

$36,400

Population in the labour force

2,140 (44%)

1,015 (54%)

375 (34%)

Population Regularly Commuting2

1,665 (30%)

745 (35%)

280 (20%)

A private dwelling occupied by usual residents refers to a private dwelling in which a person or a group of persons is permanently residing. Also included are private dwellings whose usual residents are temporarily absent on May 11, 2021. 2 Defined as the share of the total population employed at a usual place of work, or no fixed workplace (i.e. excluding people who primarily work from home)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 2

Existing Conditions Assessment

2.2 LAND USE The Town of Osoyoos is predominantly agricultural and residential land use, with residential land being characterized largely by detached housing. There are pockets of multi-family developments throughout the community, specifically in areas close to the Downtown. Commercial and mixed-use zones are concentrated along Main Street (Highway 3), forming the Town’s Central Business District. The Main Street corridor includes retail, hospitality, and service-oriented businesses that support both residents and seasonal visitors. The Town’s industrial lands are primarily located in the northwestern edge of the Town. The Town is divided east to west by Osoyoos Lake, with Highway 3 serving as the only route linking the two halves of the community. This creates a challenging of balancing the role of Highway 3 as an interprovincial connector and local main street, especially given infrastructure limitations such as the narrow width of the existing bridge. Figure 2.2 illustrates the Town’s Land Use Designation as found in the 2022 Official Community Plan (Map 2).

2.3 PREVIOUS PLANS AND STUDIES The development of the TMP is guided by previously published policies and plans and is intended to support and reinforce the aspirations outlined in each document. The following Town of Osoyoos policies and plans are among the resources that have been used to develop the TMP: •

Official Community Plan (2022)

•

Active Transportation Network Plan (2023)

•

Tourism Osoyoos 5-year Strategy

•

Accessibility Plan (2023)

•

Town Centre Renewal Plan (2018)

Furthermore, regional and provincial plans and studies that are applicable to the TMP process were reviewed, including the following: •

South Okanagan Regional Growth Strategy (2017)

•

Move, Commute, Connect – BC’s Active Transportation Strategy

•

BC Active Transportation Design Guide (2019)

•

CleanBC (2018)

It is also worth noting that there are several transportation design guidelines applicable to provincial and municipal highways and where needed, these have been referenced including: •

TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads

•

B.C. Supplement to TAC Geometric Design Guide

•

2018 Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide (TAC)

•

2021 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada (TAC)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 3

Existing Conditions Assessment

Figure 2.2: Osoyoos Land Use Designation (2022 OCP)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 4

Existing Conditions Assessment

2.4 CITY BYLAWS The following section summarizes key Bylaws related to the transportation system in the Town of Osoyoos.

2.4.1 THE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN (202 2) The Town’s current Official Community Plan (OCP) was updated in 2025. The purpose of the plan is to provide the Town with a framework to guide growth and development that aligns with the community’s vision for the year 2040.

“In 2040, Osoyoos will be a connected and innovative small community that is a desirable place to live, work, and play for all with a strong sense of community, quality amenities and facilities, prosperous local economy, thriving cultural scene, and beautiful natural space.” The key transportation objectives outlined in the OCP are listed below: •

Enhance the pedestrian experience by enabling the development of complete streets and ensuring the Town Centre is a place for people, while recognizing Main Street is also a major thoroughfare.

•

Prepare a Sidewalk Plan that identifies new sidewalk routes and where upgrades to existing sidewalk infrastructure are needed.

•

Integrate trails into highway improvements where possible; improve connectivity and accessibility between neighbourhoods, the town centre, the waterfront, and regional destinations with multi-use trails.

•

Support multi-modal transportation such as walking, cycling, and transit as viable alternatives to private use vehicles through mode share targets, a community ride share program, and other options to support active transportation modes.

•

Work with the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MOTT) to allow for the efficient movement of goods and people on Highway 97 and Highway 3.

•

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable transportation choices and intentional development procedures.

•

Adhere to accessibility standards in the design of all infrastructure.

2.4.2 ZONING BYLAW (UPDATED 2024) The Town’s Zoning Bylaw (updated for 2024) provides property, development, and other requirements for different types of land uses, including parking and loading areas. The Zoning Bylaw also records different land use throughout the Town which can be referenced to indicate potential land use density. This will help inform the TMP to ensure appropriate transportation facilities are provided to serve various land uses around the Town and in determining appropriate road classifications to meet the needs of each land use context.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Co

Existing Conditions Assessment

2.4.3 SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICING BYLAW ( 1998) The Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw regulates the provision of services for subdivisions and developments within the Town. These services include drinking water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, roads, street lighting, and landscaping. The Bylaw defines the level of service that is required for each subdivision or development. Section 7.0 of the Bylaw defines the design standards for roads, including standard drawings for each road classification in the Town. Seven road classifications are described: Arterial, Collector, Urban Residential, Urban Local (Low Volume), Cul de Sac (Residential), Industrial., and Rural Residential.

2.4.4 DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES BYLAW (TECHNICAL APPENDIX, 202 4) The Technical Appendix to the Development Cost Charges (Bylaw No. 1322) provides a summary of future water, sanitary, storm, roads, parks, and waste management projects required to service new developments. Section 7.0 of the document identifies the municipal roads projects to be constructed, which include the following: •

Project R1: 74th Ave Water Main Upsizing, Heron Lane and Leeon Crescent Replacement, and Loon Crescent Looping (Complete)

•

Project R4: Roads Condition Assessment (Part of the current TMP & RCA Project)

•

Project R5: Roads Master Plan and Traffic Analysis (Part of the current TMP & RCA Project)

•

Project R9, R10, R11: 89th Street Reconstruction

•

Project R12: Intersection Improvements at 89th Street and 62nd Avenue

•

Project R16, R17, and R18: 92nd Avenue Reconstruction

•

Project R26: Tamarack to Cottonwood Local Road Linkage

•

Project R27: Main St. (Highway 3) and Tamarack Dr. Intersection Upgrades

•

Project R28: Main St (Highway 3) and 45th St. Intersection Roundabout Upgrades

•

Project R29: 45th St. Extension from Main St. to Lakeshore Dr.

•

Project R30: 56th Ave. From 51st St. to 45th St.

•

Project R32: Main St. (Highway 3) and 89th St. Intersection Upgrades

•

Project R33: Oleander Drive Reconstruction 89th Street to Magnolia Place

Transportation Master Plan & Road Co

Existing Conditions Assessment

2.5 REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL PLANS & STUDIES Four regional and provincial plans and studies were reviewed and are summarized below, as they relate to the Osoyoos TMP & RCA.

2.5.1 SOUTH OKANAGAN REGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY (2017) The Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) is a long-term strategic framework adopted by the Regional District of Okanagan-Similkameen to guide growth and development across the South Okanagan over a 20-year horizon. The purpose of the document is to promote social, economic, and environmental health while making efficient use of land, services, and resources. As a Primary Growth Area, Osoyoos is expected to concentrate development within its urban boundaries, align its OCP with RGS goals through a Regional Context Statement, participate in regional collaboration, incorporate multi-modal transportation planning and climate resilience into local infrastructure decisions, and engage with regional partners such as the Osoyoos Indian Band, Okanagan Water Basin Board, and South Okanagan Similkameen Conservation Program.

2.5.2 MOVE, COMMUTE, CONNECT – BC’S ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY (2019) B.C.’s Active Transportation Strategy lays out the Province’s intent to promote and invest in active transportation. The strategy contains several short-, medium-, and long-term initiatives that aim to double the percentage of trips taken with active transportation by 2030. Initiatives including expanding education and encouragement programs, reviewing the Motor Vehicle Act, promoting Vision Zero principles, improving active transportation facilities and end-of-trip facilities, incorporating active transportation in provincial highway design, partnering with the tourism sector to promote active transportation, and expanding active transportation funding, which resulted in the updated B.C. Active Transportation Infrastructure Grants Program.

2.5.3 BRITISH COLUMBIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION DESIGN GUIDE (2019) The BC Active Transportation Design Guide (BC AT Design Guide) is a comprehensive set of planning and engineering guidelines offering recommendations for the planning, selection, design, implementation, and maintenance of active transportation facilities across the province. The Design Guide covers pedestrian, cycling, and multi-use facilities, intersection design, amenities, wayfinding, multi-modal integration, new mobility, and post implementation considerations such as monitoring and maintenance. An updated revision to this guide is anticipated in 2026.

2.5.4 CLEANBC (2018) The Province’s CleanBC initiative lays out a framework for climate action including green buildings, cleaner industry and waste, green jobs, and sustainable transportation, targeting greenhouse gas emission reductions from 2007 levels of 40%, by 2030, 60% by 2040, and 80% by 2050. An outcome of CleanBC is the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act (ZEVA), which requires that all new light-duty cars and trucks sold in the province will be zero-emission vehicles by 2040, using a phased-in approach (10% by 2025, 30% by 2030, and 100% by 2040).

Transportation Master Plan & Road Co

Existing Conditions Assessment

3.0 TRAVEL AND TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS Travel characteristics such as mode share, commute duration, and time leaving for work have been collected from the 2021 Census, as well as supplementary traffic demand data based on traffic counts completed by Urban Systems as part of the study. A summary of the census survey findings and additional transportation data is included in the following sections, providing a comprehensive overview of travel behaviour and traffic patterns in Osoyoos.

3.1 MODE SHARE Figure 3.1: Mode Split (2021 Census) Based on the 2021 Census data, personal vehicles remain the dominant mode of transportation in Osoyoos, with 82.3% of commuters indicating they travel to work as either a driver (91%) or passenger (9%). Walking is the second most common mode of commuting to work or school. The remaining 3.3% of commutes are divided into the following modes: •

1.2% - Bicycle

•

1.5% - Other method

•

0.6% - Public transit

3.3% 14.7% Car, truck or van - as driver or passenger Walked

Other

82.3%

While travel modes may differ for other trip purposes, such as shopping, social, and recreational, it is highly likely that personal vehicle trips make up a similar proportion for all trip purposes. Compared to the provincial average, Osoyoos has a higher proportion of commuters travelling by car and on foot—82.3% and 14.7%, respectively—versus 79.9% and 6.5% provincially. In contrast, only 0.6% of Osoyoos commuters use public transit, significantly lower than the provincial rate of 9.3%.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Con

Existing Conditions Assessment

3.2 COMMUTING TRAVEL TRENDS Figure 3.2: Commuting Duration (2021 Census) 4%

22% 63%

Less than 15 minutes

15 to 29 minutes

30 to 44 minutes

45 to 59 minutes

60 minutes and over

The 2021 Census surveyed the approximate travel times of commuters in Osoyoos, which is illustrated in the figure to the left. Osoyoos commuters typically spend less than 15 minutes travelling to work or school (63% of commuters), and 22% spend between 15- and 29-minutes commuting. The shorter commute times are likely due to the small size of the community. The remaining 15% of commuters spend 30 minutes or more travelling. Nearly half of commuters reported typically leaving for work between 7:00am and 9:00am, with 20% of commuters leaving before 7:00am and 35% leaving after 9:00am, according to the 2021 Census data.

In the 2021 Census, there were approximately 1800 workers with a usual place of work in Osoyoos (i.e. not including tradespeople without a fixed workplace). Just over half of the workforce in Osoyoos also lives in the town (53%). Roughly one-quarter come from Electoral Area A or Osoyoos 1 (24%). Other notable origins of commuters are Oliver (7%) and RDOS Electoral Area C (5%), with a smaller proportion commuting from Penticton (2%), Keremeos (1%), and Kelowna (1%). The most common destinations for Osoyoos residents commuting outside the town are Oliver work destination are Oliver and RDOS Electoral Area C (17% of residents commuting). Smaller proportions of the workforce are commuting to Penticton (2%), Keremeos (1%), and Kelowna (1%).

3.3 TRAFFIC VOLUMES Network usage characteristics were gathered from multi-modal intersection and crosswalk counts performed between Tuesday, August 26th and Thursday, August 28th, 2025. The most recent Ministry of Transportation and Transit highway counts were also obtained from the MOTT Traffic Data Program website. Traffic data was collected at twelve count locations throughout Osoyoos; six using Miovision traffic cameras and six by manual counting methods. Supplementary traffic volumes were retrieved from two short count stations on Highway 97 and Highway 3, provided by the MOTT Traffic Data Program. A summary of the traffic count dates and locations are summarized below in Table 3.1.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Co

Existing Conditions Assessment

Table 3.1: Traffic Data Collection Details

LOCATION

COUNT TYPE

DATE

Highway 3 / 45th Street

TMC (Camera)

Tues. Aug. 26/25

Highway 3 / Lakeshore Drive

TMC (Manual)

Tues. Aug. 26/25

Highway 3 / Tamarack Drive

TMC (Manual)

Tues. Aug. 26/25

Highway 3 / Cottonwood Drive

TMC (Camera)

Tues. Aug. 26/25

Highway 3 Crosswalk at Holiday Inn

Crosswalk (Manual)

Wed. Aug. 27/25

Highway 3 / Kingfisher Drive

TMC / Crosswalk (Camera)

Wed. Aug. 27/25

Highway 3 / 89th Avenue

TMC (Camera)

Wed. Aug. 27/25

Highway 3 / 87th Avenue

TMC / Crosswalk (Manual)

Wed. Aug. 27/25

32nd Avenue / Lobelia Drive

TMC (Manual)

Thur. Aug. 28/25

Highway 97 / 62nd Avenue

TMC / Crosswalk (Camera)

Thur. Aug. 28/25

Highway 97 / 74th Avenue

TMC (Camera)

Thur. Aug. 28/25

89th Street / 62nd Avenue

TMC /Crosswalk (Manual)

Thur. Aug. 28/25

MOTT Short-Count Station

Wed. Aug. 24 - Thur. Aug. 25/22

MOTT Short-Count Station

Wed. Aug. 24 - Thur. Aug. 25/22

Highway 97 (north of Highway 3 junction) Highway 3 (east of Osoyoos Trestle Bridge)

A map summarizing the traffic counts collected by Urban Systems Ltd. is illustrated below in Figure 3.3.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Co

Existing Conditions Assessment

Figure 3.3: Traffic Data Collection Plan

3.3.1 AVERAGE VEHICLE TRAFFIC VOLUMES Osoyoos typically has higher traffic volumes in the summer months when tourism is high. The traffic counts collected in August 2025 reflect higher traffic volumes than the annual average; therefore, each reported traffic volume has been adjusted to reflect the 2025 estimated Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume. The estimated roadway AADT volumes are illustrated below in Figure 3.4. Highway 97 and Highway 3 volumes are significantly higher than the local road network, with AADT volumes of approximately 10,000 vehicles on Highway 3 between Highway 97 and Cottonwood Drive. Of the local roads, 89th Street (south of Highway 3), 87th Street (north of Highway 3), 62nd Avenue (east of Highway 97), Kingfisher Drive, Cottonwood Drive (north of Highway 3), and Lakeshore Drive have an estimated AADT between 1,500 and 2,800 vehicles per day, showing characteristics of collector type roadways. Traffic volumes on remaining local roads very likely to be lower than 1,000 vehicles per day.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Co

Existing Conditions Assessment

Figure 3.4: Traffic Volume Map (2025 AADT)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 8

Existing Conditions Assessment

4.0 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK CONDITIONS The Town of Osoyoos has developed an active transportation network that allows pedestrians and cyclists to access most areas of the Town via trails and sidewalks. Both residents and visitors can enjoy active transportation routes that provide both recreational and connectivity to major destinations. The following sections describe the existing active transportation network.

4.1 EXISTING MULTI-USE PATH AND TRAIL NETWORK The Town has approximately 11 kilometers of trail, including just less than one kilometer of gravel trails and the remaining paved. Residents and visitors can walk and bike on from Lions Park in the north of town to the southern extent of Lakeshore Drive on separated pathway, except for the Trestles Bridge, where sidewalks are provided. Another significant trail within the Town extends from just north of the Osoyoos Airport (Irrigation Canal Trail, shown in the image to the right) to Pebble Beach Drive in the Dividend Ridge neighbourhood. The Irrigation Canal Trail is well lit south of Highway 3; no lighting is provided on the trail segment north of Highway 3.

Canal Trail

Outside of the Town boundaries, the sẁiẁs (Haynes Point) Provincial Park is a popular recreational trail alongside several trail networks at Mount Kruger, accessible from the Irrigation Trail and Dividend Ridge neighbourhood. The existing trail network is shown in the Existing Active Transportation Network Map below in Figure 4.1.

4.2 EXISTING PEDESTRIAN NETWORK In addition to the multi-use trail network, pedestrians have access to a well-established sidewalk network, which connects key destinations such as major tourist areas, beaches and parks, and commercial amenities. Sidewalks are often present on both sides of the road close to Downtown and commercial areas are sparser and often only on one side of the road in the residential areas. The existing sidewalk network is shown in the Existing Active Transportation Network Map below in Figure 4.1.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 9

Existing Conditions Assessment

4.3 EXISTING CYCLING NETWORK The cycling network in Osoyoos mainly consists of shared pathways connecting major tourist destinations and supporting recreational cyclists. There are only two dedicated cycling facilities (nonshared): On-street bike lanes on Cottonwood Drive between Highway 3 and Cottonwood Beach, and a separated bike path along Pioneer Walkway. Pioneer Walkway serves as an essential active transportation link between east and west Osoyoos, offering cyclists a dedicated pathway adjacent to Highway 3. At present, the pathway is not directly connected to cycling facilities at either end. On the west side, cyclists are advised to dismount and walk across the Trestles Bridge, while on the east side, cyclists use the road or sidewalk. Residential roads in the Town do not have bike facilities. While this is common and often vehicle volumes and speeds are low enough that cyclists and motorists can share the roadway, it is important to note that shared vehicle and cyclist environments are not considered to support all ages and abilities (AAA). An AAA cycling facility will provide physical separation between cyclists and vehicle traffic to increase safety and comfort. Many cyclists were observed riding on sidewalks during the August 2025 site visit and mentioned in conversations with residents. Cyclists using sidewalk on 89th Street

The existing cycling network is shown in the Existing Active Transportation Network Map below in Figure 4.1.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 10

Existing Conditions Assessment

Figure 4.1: Existing Active Transportation Map

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 11

Existing Conditions Assessment

4.4 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION DATA Pedestrian and cyclist data was collected between August 26th and 28th, 2025 through both manual and video counts. The manual counts were conducted from 10:00am to 12:00pm and 3:00pm to 5:00pm (4 hours of data), the video counts were collected from 9:00am to 5:00pm (8 hours of data). Figure 4.2 below illustrates the average hourly pedestrian and bike volume observed at each count location. The average volume encompasses both pedestrian and bike traffic for all intersection approaches and all directions, accounting for bicycles traveling on crosswalks as well as on the roadway. The highest pedestrian activity was observed in the Downtown on Main Street, with 175 and 88 pedestrians per hour counted at the 87th Avenue and 89th Avenue intersections, respectively. Significant pedestrian volumes were also observed on Highway 3 at the Kingfisher and Cottonwood Drive intersections with over 300 pedestrians counted between 9:00am and 5:00pm. The greatest cyclist activity was observed at the Highway 3 / Cottonwood Drive intersection, with 160 cyclists using the crosswalk and 135 cyclists on the road between 9:00am and 5:00pm. Detailed active transportation count reports are provided in Appendix B. Figure 4.2: Active Transportation Counts (Aug. 2025)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 12

Existing Conditions Assessment

4.4.1 CROSSWALK TREATMENT WARRANTS Existing pedestrian crossing facilities were reviewed where count data was available. To assess whether current treatments align with the best practices, crosswalk treatment warrants were completed to based on the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) 2018 Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide. The guide uses the operational speed (or speed limit), average daily traffic, and number of lanes (crossing distance) to determine the recommended crossing control treatment. Treatments can include sidemounted signs, enhanced crosswalks with side-mounted signs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB), special crosswalks with overhead flashers, and traffic signals. Table 4.1 below summarizes locations with data collected at existing crosswalk facilities and the findings from the warrant assessment. Crossing locations at existing traffic signals or on minor road stop-control approaches were excluded from this assessment. Table 4.1: Crosswalk Treatment Assessment

CROSSWALK LOCATION

2025 ADT

POSTED SPEED LIMIT

NUMBER OF LANES

EXISTING TREATMENT

Highway 3 at Holiday Inn & Suites

10,000

50km/h

4 lanes (two-way)

Side-mounted signs

Overhead Flashers (or RRFB with curb extensions)

Highway 3 at Kingfisher Drive

10,000

50km/h

4 lanes (two-way)

Side-mounted signs

Overhead Flashers (or RRFB with curb extensions)

Highway 3 at 87th Avenue

9,400

50km/h

3 lanes (two-way)

Overhead Flashers

RRFB or Overhead Flasher

Highway 3 at 89th Avenue

9,400

50km/h

3 lanes (two-way)

Side-mounted signs*

RRFB

Enhanced crosswalk with side-mounted signs

Side-mounted signs

Highway 97 at 62nd Avenue

3,900

60km/h

3 lanes (two-way)

89th Street at 62nd Avenue

2,200

50km/h

3 lanes (two-way)

TAC RECOMMENDED TREATMENT

Highway 3 Crosswalk at Holiday Inn & Suites The mid-block pedestrian crossing on Highway 3, located at the entrance to the Holiday Inn and Suites, was reviewed in greater detail. This location connects the Pioneer Walkway south of Highway 3 to hotels on the north side. Existing midblock crosswalks in this area are known to feel uncomfortable for pedestrians. A pedestrian count conducted on August 27th, 2025, recorded 88 equivalent adult units (EAU) using the crosswalk during a 4-hour period. Observations noted general safety concerns: large vehicles often park close to—or within—the crosswalk, creating significant sightline issues for both pedestrians and motorists. As a result, pedestrians are often not visible until they enter the crosswalk, and motorists were observed failing to yield.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 13

Existing Conditions Assessment

The current treatment at the crossing is side-mounted signs with zebra crosswalk markings. Given the high traffic volumes and wide crossing distance (approximately 15m across two travel lanes and two parking lanes), the recommended treatment includes a combination of RRFBs and curb extensions, with side-mounted signs, zebra crosswalk markings, and advanced warning signs. The inclusion of curb extensions is important to reduce the pedestrian crossing distance. Alternatively, a higher-order treatment involving a Special Crosswalk with Overhead Flashers should be considered given the wide crossing distance. Highway 3 Crosswalk (facing east)

Highway 3 Crosswalk (facing west)

4.5 MICRO-MOBILITY

Sparrow Scooters on Main Street

The introduction of micromobility is transforming movement within communities. Options such as escooters, e-bikes, and shared mobility can reduce traffic congestion, lower emissions, and support accessible transportation. Sparrow Scooters currently operate in Osoyoos, proving an additional transportation option. The scooters were observed being used within the Town Centre, Hotel Row, and on multi-use pathways.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 14

Existing Conditions Assessment

5.0 ROAD NETWORK CONDITIONS The Town of Osoyoos has approximately 47 kilometers of road, 45 kilometers of which is paved and 2 kilometers unpaved, based on GIS data provided by the town and Tetra Tech’s 2025 road condition survey. The Town’s road network features many irregular intersections and curved road segments shaped by a combination of geography (e.g. lakes and hillsides) and historical development. Within the Town Centre, adjacent to Main Street (Highway 3), the road network follows more of a typical grid-style network.

5.1 ROAD NETWORK & CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM The Town of Osoyoos has four road classifications outlined in the 2022 OCP Road Network Plan (Map 8); Highway, Arterial, Collector, and Local. The current Road Network Map and road classifications are illustrated below in Figure 5.1.

5.1.1 HIGHWAY Two provincial highways intersect in Osoyoos. Highway 3, also known as the Crowsnest Highway, is a primary east-west route connecting Vancouver to Alberta. Highway 3 also serves as the Town’s Main Street, bisecting the Town Centre and connecting east and west Osoyoos via the Trestles Bridge. Highway 97 is a major north-south highway connecting the Okanagan Valley and providing crossborder travel to the USA. Both highways are 2-lanes throughout Osoyoos. In the Town’s 2022 OCP Road Classification, Highway 3 is designated as an Arterial Road between Highway 97 and 45th Street, while Highway 97 is designated as an Arterial Road between Highway 3 and 62nd Avenue. The speed limit on Highway 3 is posted at 80km/h east of Highway 3, where it transitions to a limit of 50km/h throughout the Town. The speed limit on Highway 97 within Osoyoos is posted at 60km/h.

5.1.2 ARTERIAL The Town’s only roads classified as Arterial Roads are Highway 3 and a segment of Highway 97, as described in the section above. Arterial roads have the primary function of moving vehicles over longer distances, connecting one area of town to another. Arterials are typically high capacity and prioritize traffic flow; however, Highway 3 through Osoyoos’ Town Centre supports an urban context which also prioritizes multi-modal traffic, specifically a high volume of pedestrians. Throughout the Town, Highway 3 is designated as Main Street. The east-west segment of Main Street between 89th Street and Spartan Drive / Park Place has angled parking on both sides of the road and wide travel lanes. The section of Main Street between Spartan Drive / Park Place and Cottonwood Drive includes on-street parallel parking on both sides of the road, which changes to on-street parking only on the north side of the road east of Cottonwood Drive.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 15

Existing Conditions Assessment

Example of Highway / Arterial Road – Main Street (Highway 3, facing east)

5.1.3 COLLECTOR The Town has several Collector Roads. The 2022 OCP classifies the following roads as collectors: •

89th Street (south of Highway 3)

•

Lakeshore Drive (between Highway 3 and 36 Avenue)

•

36th Avenue

•

Kingfisher Drive

•

62nd Avenue

•

115th Street

•

Pebble Beach Drive (west of Golf Course Drive)

Collector roads have the primary function of connecting local roads to arterial roads with the purpose of collecting and distributing traffic between neighbourhoods and providing access to homes, schools, and businesses. Collector roads typically carry moderate traffic volumes, have lower speed limits, and can include traffic calming measures and multi-modal facilities. Based on the traffic data collected in August 2025, Collector Roads in Osoyoos carry an annual average of approximately 1,300 to 2,800 vehicles per day. The posted speed limit for Collector Roads in Osoyoos are summarized below: Table 5.1: Collector Road Speed Limits

POSTED SPEED LIMIT ROAD 89th Street (south of 62nd Avenue) Lakeshore Drive 50km/h

36th Avenue 62nd Avenue (west of Nighthawk Drive) 115th Street (outside of School Zone) Pebble Beach Drive 89th Street (between Highway 3 and 62nd Avenue)

30km/h

62nd Avenue (east of Nighthawk Drive) Kingfisher Drive 115th Street (School Zone)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 16

Existing Conditions Assessment

Example of a Collector Road - 89th Street @ 62nd Avenue (facing north)

5.1.4 LOCAL

Example of a Local Road – Hibiscus Court (facing west)

Most roads in Osoyoos are designated as Local Roads. The primary function of Local Roads is to provide access to individual properties, connecting residences and businesses to collector and arterial roads. Local Roads have lower traffic volumes and speeds. Based on the traffic data collected in August 2025, designated Local Roads in Osoyoos were observed to serve volumes as high as 1,900 vehicles per day (annual average). The posted speed limit on Local Roads ranges between 30 and 50 km/h.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 17

Existing Conditions Assessment

Figure 5.1: Road Classification Map (2025)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 18

Existing Conditions Assessment

5.2 ROAD DESIGN CRITERIA Road design specifications for each classification are outlined in the Town’s Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw (Bylaw No. 1100, 1998). The bylaw identifies road classifications, standard widths for key elements, and associated drawing standards. Compared to the 2022 OCP, the bylaw includes a broader range of classifications. Given the more recent update of the OCP, the bylaw classifications are outdated and no longer align with the OCP. Each road classification in the bylaw has been evaluated against best practices outlined in the TAC Geometric Design Guide, which is summarize below in Table 5.2. Table 5.2: Road Design Standards Osoyoos Bylaw No. 1100

TAC Design Guide (2018)

Sidewalk Width (m)

No. of Lanes

Lane Width (m)

Arterial

1.65

3.5

1.5 min

3.0 – 3.7

Collector

1.65

3.5

2.5

1.5 min

3.0 – 3.7

2.8

Urban Residential

1.65

5.0

1.5 min

3.0 – 3.7

2.4

Urban Local*

1.65

4.0

1.5 min

3.0 – 3.7

2.4

Industrial**

5.0

Rural Residential**

Road Class

Parking Lane Width (m)

Desired Sidewalk Width (m)

No. of Lanes

Lane Width (m)

Parking Lane Width (m)

n/a -

3.0 – 3.7

*Urban Local is designated for only short cul-de-sacs and crescents in residential areas. **There are no standard drawings for the Industrial and Rural Residential road classifications.

The Town’s bylaw provides limited guidance on active transportation, focusing solely on sidewalks; bike and multi-use facilities are not included. Where sidewalks are specified, the standard width is 1.65m for all road classifications, which is greater Table 5.3: BCAT Guidance - Sidewalks than the bare minimum of 1.5m Desired recommended by TAC. Land Use Context Road Type Width (m) When comparing to the BC Active Transportation Design Guide (BCAT), the bylaw widths do not meet desirable best practice. Table 5.3, to the right, summarizes the BCAT desired sidewalk widths for each road type and adjacent land use. Road classification in the bylaw and OCP do not incorporate adjacent land use in road design standards.

Single-Family Residential

Local

1.8

Collector/Arterial

1.8

Multi-Family Residential

Local

2.1

Collector/Arterial

2.4

Industrial

Any

2.1

Commercial

Any

2.4-3.0

Areas of high pedestrian activity*

Any

3.0-4.0

*Pedestrian volumes >400 pedestrians/peak 15-minutes

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 19

Existing Conditions Assessment

5.3 COLLISION SCREENING & COLLISION TRENDS ICBC Crash Data was reviewed to identify high collision intersections and collision trends to gain an understanding of the existing safety performance of the road network. Intersections within the Town of Osoyoos were ranked based on the number of collisions reported within the last 5 years (between January 1st, 2020 and December 31st, 2024). The top intersections of concern, based on total number of collisions occurring within the five-year period include: Table 5.4: Top Collision Locations (ICBC, 2020-2024)

NUMBER OF COLLISIONS

PER INTERSECTION

NO.

INTERSECTION

Highway 3 & Highway 97

Main Street (Highway 3) / Park Place & Spartan Drive

Highway 97 & 62

Avenue

Main Street (Highway 3) & 87 Street th

4. & 5. 6. & 7.

74th Avenue & 89th Street Main Street (Highway 3) & Kingfisher Drive Main Street (Highway 3) & 89th Street

9 8

Main Street (Highway 3) & 85th Street 8. to 10.

Main Street (Highway 3) & Eagle Court

Main Street (Highway 3) & Harbour Key Drive A map showing the location of all reported collisions based on the user reported coordinates is included below in Figure 5.2.

5.3.1 KEY OBSERVATIONS The following key observations and trends were identified at the top collision locations. Further description of collision data observations with a breakdown by intersection is included below in Table 5.5. •

Intersections with high collision frequencies are typically on Highway 3 and 97, with the highest collisions recorded at the intersection of Highway 3 / Highway 97.

•

72% of collisions resulted in property damage only (PDO); the remaining 28% of collisions resulted in injury.

•

Collisions are more frequent during the summer months (July and August) and daytime hours (between 9am and 5pm), aligning with increased in traffic within Osoyoos due to seasonal tourism and the typical summer travel patterns.

•

Approximately 6% of the collisions at the top locations involved a heavy vehicle.

•

The most frequent reported collision configuration is ‘side impact’, followed by ‘single vehicle’ and ‘rear end’.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 20

Existing Conditions Assessment

Table 5.5: Top Intersection Collision Screening Summary

Total

PDO

Casualty

LOCATION

KEY OBSERVATIONS Observations are consistent with the overall trends described above, unless noted in the table below.  Collisions were highest in the last 3 months of the year (October,

November, December). Highway 3 & Highway 97

 Most collisions occurred during the weekday, with Tuesday

having the highest number of collisions (11).

 No reported collision involved a pedestrian or cyclist.  4 of the 45 collisions involved a heavy vehicle and 7 involved an

animal. Highway 97 & 62nd Avenue

 No reported collision involved a heavy vehicle, pedestrian or

cyclist.

 1 collision involved an animal.  6 of the 9 collisions occurred in 2022.

74th Avenue & 89th Street

Main Street (Highway 3) & Eagle Court

 No reported collision involved a heavy vehicle, pedestrian, cyclist

or animal.  No reported collision involved a heavy vehicle, pedestrian or

cyclist.

 1 collision involved an animal.

MAIN STREET (DOWNTOWN) Main Street (Highway 3) / Park Place & Spartan Drive Main Street (Highway 3) & 85th Street



 2 of the 40 collisions involved a heavy vehicle; 1 collision

involved a pedestrian.  No reported collision involved a cyclist or animal.  1 of the 7 collisions involved a parked vehicle.

 No reported collision involved a heavy vehicle, pedestrian, cyclist

or animal.  2 of the 9 collisions involved a heavy vehicle.

Main Street (Highway 3) & 87th Street

Main Street (Highway 3) & 89th Street

Main Street (Highway 3) & Kingfisher Drive

Side Impact (15) was the leading collision configuration.

 35% of reported collisions involved a parked vehicle.

 1 of the 9 collisions involved a parked vehicle.  No reported collision involved a pedestrian, cyclist, or animal.

 1 of the 8 collisions involved a heavy vehicle.  No reported collision involved a pedestrian, cyclist, or animal.  Rear End (4) and Single Vehicle (3) were the leading collision

configurations.  No reported collision involved a heavy vehicle, pedestrian, cyclist

or animal.

MAIN STREET (HOTEL ROW) Main Street (Highway 3) & Harbour Key Drive

 2 of the 7 collisions involved a cyclist.

 1 of the 7 collisions involved a parked vehicle.  No reported collision involved a heavy vehicle, animal or

pedestrian.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 21

Existing Conditions Assessment

MID-BLOCK COLLISIONS A significant collision occurred in July 2021 when a pedestrian was fatally struck by a vehicle at the Highway 3 crosswalk near the Richter Pass Beach Resort. While not included in the intersection collision analysis above, this tragic event highlights the importance of pedestrian safety along major corridors such as highways.

Highway 3 Pedestrian Crossing @ Richter Pass Beach Resort (facing west)

ICBC crash data for the 5-year period between 2020 and 2024 includes 13 reported collisions on this segment of Highway 3 near the Holiday Inn & Suites and Richter Pass Beach Resort. A high-level summary of these collisions is as follows: •

3 of the 13 reported collisions involved a pedestrian

•

1 of the 13 reported collisions involved a cyclist

•

6 of the 13 reported collisions involved a parked vehicle

These collision history findings indicate there is a concerning collision trend and safety concern along this segment of Highway 3 and that improvement options should be investigated. Improvements could include opportunities to reduce pedestrian crossing distances, improve active transportation separation and consider adjustments to curbside / parking management.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 22

Existing Conditions Assessment

Figure 5.2: Collision Map (ICBC, 2020-2024)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 23

Existing Conditions Assessment

6.0 TOWN CENTRE STREETSCAPE, CURBSIDE & PARKING This section provides an overview of the multi-modal connectivity, safety, and streetscape conditions within the Town Centre of Osoyoos. For the purposes of this report, the Town Centre primarily encompasses Main Street (Highway 3) between 89th Street and Spartan Drive / Park Place – designated as ‘Core Main Street’ in the 2018 Town Centre Renewal Plan. The Town Centre districts outlined in the 2018 Town Centre Renewal Plan are illustrated below in Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: Town Centre Districts (Town Centre Renewal Plan, 2018)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 24

Existing Conditions Assessment

6.1 TOWN CENTRE STREETSCAPE

Main Street (facing east)

The Town Centre serves as the heart of the community, supporting a vibrant mix of retail and hospitality. The Town Centre connects residential neighbourhoods, businesses, and Gyro Park and is one of the drivers of the Town’s economic success. The streetscape of a community is essential to maintain accessibility for residents and visitors alike and can shape how residents and visitors experience and interact with Osoyoos’ downtown. The following tables summarize an inventory of physical streetscape elements in the Town Centre. A review of physical infrastructure elements such as sidewalks and curbs is provided in the section below.

Table 6.1: Town Centre Streetscape Elements

CATEGORY

ELEMENT

Benches

Street Furniture

Trash Receptacles

DESCRIPTION Rest areas (e.g. benches) can improve the functionality of a streetscape by supporting the accessibility and equity of road users, encouraging social interactions, health, and wellness, and enhancing the visual character of the street. Osoyoos’ Town Centre provides a place to rest approximately every 50m along Main Street. Along Main Street, this is typically provided in the form of a bench on the boulevard. The 85th Street Plaza provides a variety of shaded rest areas for the public. Trash receptacles are essential for maintaining cleanliness and discouraging littering in a community’s downtown. Osoyoos’ Town Centre provides a place to dispose of trash approximately every 30m along Main Street. Bike racks support cycling as a viable alternative to vehicle travel, helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and traffic congestion, while also promoting a healthy lifestyle.

Bike Racks

Osoyoos’ Town Centre provides designated bikes racks on average every 50m along Main Street. The bike racks are ‘post & ring’ style, allowing for secure short-term bike parking with the use of a bike lock. The bike racks are typically located along the boulevard, as shown in the image below. The 85th Street Plaza provides five racks of similar style.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 25

Existing Conditions Assessment

CATEGORY

ELEMENT

Boulevard Patios

Utilities

Lighting

Street Trees

DESCRIPTION Patios on boulevards and sidewalks can transform a streetscape into a vibrant space, enhancing pedestrian activity, encouraging foot traffic, and creating a more welcoming atmosphere. On Main Street, several businesses utilize the boulevard and sidewalk for seating, including: 

Dolci Thai Bistro



Gino’s Coffee House



Mami’s Pizza



Moolix

Queen of the South Café & Tapas Bar

As a provincial highway, Main Street (Highway 3) features Davit pole streetlights approximately every 60m. Additionally, between 87th Street and Spartan Drive, the Town has installed decorative, doubleheaded streetlamps which feature two hanging baskets per lamppost. Street trees help improve air quality, manage stormwater runoff, reduce heat island effects, and support urban biodiversity. They also provide mobility and safety enhancements through traffic calming and providing shade for pedestrians and cyclists. Osoyoos’ Town Centre features large mature trees along the Main Street boulevard between 87th Street and Spartan Avenue.

Vegetation

Planters

Bike Rack on Main Street

To enhance the beautification on the Town Centre, the Town has installed various planters on boulevards and hanging baskets on the decorative streetlamps. This additional vegetation supports a vibrancy for local and visiting pedestrians along Main Street.

Main Street Sidewalk and Boulevard

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 26

Existing Conditions Assessment

The 85th Street Plaza is a pedestrian plaza at Main Street (Highway 3) and 85th Street. The existing road was closed off to vehicle traffic and converted into a pedestrian space, which opened in 2021 as a pilot project. Support from businesses and residents led to the pedestrian only space being made permanent in 2024. The public space features various opportunities for rest, such as chairs, benches, and picnic tables, shade sails, vegetation, garbage receptacles, bike racks, and a bike fixing station. 85th Street Pedestrian Plaza

6.2 TOWN CENTRE INFRASTRUCTURE The following report section outlines the current inventory and state of transportation infrastructure in Osoyoos’ Town Centre, including Main Street from 89th Street to Spartan Drive / Park Place (as specified above).

6.2.1 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE The following tables summarize an inventory of pedestrian infrastructure in the Town Centre.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 27

Existing Conditions Assessment

Table 6.2: Town Centre Pedestrian Infrastructure

ELEMENT

DESCRIPTION Main Street Sidewalk Types

Sidewalks

Curb Letdowns

Sidewalks in Osoyoos’ Town Centre are well-established, offering pedestrian access to shopping, restaurants, and the waterfront. The sidewalks along Main Street are a mix of brick and concrete segments. The sidewalk width is extended by the adjacent boulevard.

The curb letdowns within the Town Centre are in generally good condition, providing a smooth transition to the road level. Generally, a tactile warning strip is installed on the letdown to aid visually impaired pedestrians, except at the Main Street / Spartan Drive / Park Place intersection, where tactile warning strips are not provided.

Main Street Curb Extensions

Curb Extensions

Curb extensions are present on Main Street at the 89th Street, 87th Street, and 85th Street intersection. These shorten the crossing distance on Main Street. However, the crossings of side-streets are not aligned with the sidewalk along Main Street. It was observed that many pedestrians do not use them when crossing minor roads. It is best practice to keep pedestrian through zones straight or connected with guiding infrastructure where possible, particularly for people with limited vision. Some locations crossing Main Street have curb extension and letdown, but no additional paint marking or signs indicating that pedestrians have a right-of-way at the crossing.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 28

Existing Conditions Assessment

ELEMENT

DESCRIPTION Various types of crosswalks are provided in the Town Centre along Main Street:

Crosswalks



Signalized crosswalk at the Spartan Drive / Park Place intersection



Pedestrian activated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) at 87th Street



Overhead mounted sign with painted zebra stripes at 85th Street



Side mounted signs with painted zebra stripes at 89th Street



Unmarked (with curb letdowns) at 89th Street, 87th Street, and 85th Street.

Crosswalks on the minor roads typically include double parallel lines with zebra stripes, although the paint condition was noted to be poor at the time of traffic counts. Design guidance suggests that only parallel bar line markings are needed for crosswalks with stop-controlled approaches. As such, the Zebra markings on stopcontrolled approaches is optional and may require more repainting maintenance than required.

Pedestrians crossing unmarked crosswalk

Pedestrian crossing push button and crosswalk landing pads

The push button at the pedestrian activated RRFB at 87th Street is poorly positioned for crosswalk users. The overhead signal arm is at the location of the former crossing landing pad, which is now offset from the new curb extensions. As a result, pedestrians often miss the push button entirely. When a pedestrian does use the push button to activate the flashing beacons, motorists sometimes decide to continue through the crosswalk before the pedestrian reaches the landing pad to cross.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 29

Existing Conditions Assessment

6.2.2 PARKING The Town offers residents and visitors parking with few restrictions both on-street and off-street. Parking demand in the Downtown fluctuates significantly with seasonal tourism and can become congested in the summer months. Free on-street parking:  Main Street angled parking between 89th Street and Spartan Drive (posted 2-hour limit)  Main Street parallel parking between Spartan Drive and 45th Street  Typical on-street parking (parallel) in most commercial and residential areas

Free off-street parking:  Gyro Beach lot  Pioneer Walkway lot

Angled parking on Main Street increases the number of available parking spaces directly adjacent to businesses compared to parallel parking, offering convenient access for residents and visitors. However, during the busy summer months, the angled parking configuration can pose safety concerns and disrupt traffic flow, as drivers must reverse into oncoming traffic to exit their stalls. Due to the Towns popularity as a boating destination, the Town has designated two lots for boat trailer parking:  

Free vehicle and boat trailer parking at Osoyoos Marina; very limited number of spots. Paid boat trailer-only parking at 6901 Main Street; a large lot but relatively far from the Osoyoos Marina.

Boat trailers (and utility trailers) are not permitted to park in most on-street parking locations throughout the Town. The majority of trailer parking capacity is located at 6901 Main Street, requiring boaters to travel approximately 2km through a congested segment of the network to park after launching their boat. Boat Trailer Parking Restrictions (right) and trailer parking wayfinding signage (left) on Highway 3

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 30

Existing Conditions Assessment

7.0 ACCESSIBILITY, SAFETY & TRANSIT The following report section presents a high-level review of the Town’s current accessibility and safety features, maintenance, and transit amenities. Table 7.1 outlines the specific measures in place that promote accessibility and safety for all road users. The information provided highlights both existing strengths and areas where further improvements may be needed to enhance accessibility and safety throughout the community. Table 7.1: Accessibility and Safety Review

CATEGORY

ELEMENT

Detectable Warning Systems

Accessibility

DESCRIPTION The Town utilizes Tactile walking surface indicators (TWSIs) in highly utilized pedestrian crossing locations. TWSIs can be found at various locations in the Town Centre along Main Street, and the Multiuse Pathway connecting Cottonwood Drive and Lakeshore Drive along Highway 3. The Town’s TWSIs consist of truncated domes and score lines on curb ramps that alert pedestrians of elevation changes at the base of curb letdowns, typically at crosswalks. The use of tactile detectable warning systems throughout the Town is currently inconsistent, although it appears that truncated domes are being implemented alongside recent and new infrastructure improvements.

Audible Warning Systems

The Town does not currently utilize audible pedestrian signals to indicate when it is safe to cross a road. Audible signals can assist visually impaired pedestrians in safely navigating intersections and crosswalks. As the Town’s only traffic signals are located on MoTT highways, upgrading the pedestrian signals to provide audible information would require joint collaboration.

Curb Letdowns

Curb letdowns are an essential design element to provide mobility for all users. Various crosswalks in the Town were observed to not have any curb letdown or curb ramp, restricting the use of the crosswalk for many mobility assisted users.

Missing curb letdown at marked crosswalk (62nd Ave)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 31

Existing Conditions Assessment

CATEGORY

ELEMENT

DESCRIPTION Motorist and pedestrian sightlines are generally acceptable throughout the Town. The following problematic locations were noted during the August 2025 Crosswalk at Main St / 87th St site visit: 

The small perpendicular parking area along Highway 3 at Rattlesnake Canyon impedes the sightlines for motorists approaching the Highway from Tamarack Drive.



Parked vehicles along Highway 3’s ‘Hotel Row’ impede both motorist and pedestrian sightlines at the two marked crosswalks, creating unsafe crossing conditions.



Minor roads approaching Main Street in the Town Centre (e.g. 89th Street and 87th Street) have challenging sightlines for motorists at the stop bars. It was often observed that motorists pull forward to check and wait for a gap in traffic, blocking the crosswalk.

Sightlines

Safety Driver behaviour can contribute to the safety and feeling of comfort for all users within a community’s transportation network. The following driver behaviours were noted during the August 2025 site visit: 

At the Main Street / 87th Street crosswalk, vehicles were observed creeping into the Overhead Flasher crosswalk while pedestrians were still crossing. The general vehicle behaviour at this crosswalk showed driver impatience and aggressiveness.



Vehicles performing a left turn from a minor road onto Main Street in the Town Centre were observed making high risk maneuvers, likely due to impatience from long wait times.



Drivers were occasionally observed to not comply at crosswalks (ignoring flashers, not stopping for pedestrians). This was especially notable at the Highway 3 crosswalk at the Holiday Inn & Suites, where pedestrians were observed to wait for 2 to 3 vehicles to cross before a vehicle stopped.



High vehicle speeds were observed on 89th Street at 62nd Avenue during traffic counts.



A vehicle was observed driving in the opposing direction of travel up the ‘chute’ at 89th Street / 62nd Avenue.

Driver Behaviour

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 32

Existing Conditions Assessment

CATEGORY

ELEMENT

Pedestrian and Cyclist Behaviour

DESCRIPTION Pedestrians generally cross roads at locations with provided crosswalks; however, a significant number of pedestrians were observed crossing Highway 3 between Solana Key Court and Tamarack Drive, where no crosswalks are provided. Cyclists were observed disregarding traffic regulation, such as riding on sidewalks or travelling in the opposite direction as traffic on the road. This behaviour likely stems from the absence of dedicated bike facilities. Outside of the Town Centre, road lighting generally includes traditional cobra-head streetlights mounted on wooden utility poles along most roads in the Town to provide visibility in dark conditions. These light standards are designed for local and collector roads.

Lighting

The lighting along Highway 3 and on local roads is generally sufficient. Multi-use pathways and trails in Osoyoos are generally lit, except for the Irrigation Trail, which does not feature any lighting. Non-regulatory speed sign

Signage

Osoyoos’ road network features a suite of regulatory, warning, and information signs. Generally, signs are implemented correctly; however, there are currently inconsistencies in speed signage (locations where non-regulatory speed signs are installed) and crosswalk signage (incorrect sign placement on approach).

Due to topography and a unique road layout, Osoyoos’ road network features several intersections that present safety challenges:

Intersection Design



89th Street / 62nd Avenue – Increased driver confusion and driver error while navigating the ‘chutes’.



Oleander Drive / Acacia Court – Although there is minimal traffic on Acacia Court, Oleander Drive features a curve that is both steep and tight, with narrow lanes.



Lobelia Drive / Oleander Drive – The two roads converge in an awkward skewed configuration with challenging sightlines.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 33

Existing Conditions Assessment

7.1 TRANSIT STOPS Osoyoos is part of the South OkanaganSimilkameen Transit System, with the following routes serviced in Town: •

Route 40 (Osoyoos-Oliver-Penticton)

•

Route 41 (Osoyoos Local)

Route 40 connects Osoyoos to Oliver, Okanagan Falls, Kaleden, and Penticton, which also operates as an internal route (Route 41) through Osoyoos. The routes are serviced twice daily on weekdays. Service is generally focused on commuters and connecting residents of Osoyoos to amenities in Penticton; the local service does not serve the secondary school. The 2015 Okanagan-Similkameen Transit Future Plan includes the short-term priority of increasing the regional transit service between Penticton and Osoyoos to four round trips per weekday. The plan also identifies a future expansion for the local network within Osoyoos, servicing a broader network within the Town in addition to an increase in service hours. This is identified as a medium- to long-term priority.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 34

Existing Conditions Assessment

Transit stops serve as key access points for transit users; stop amenities can support rider safety and comfort at the beginning and end of trips. Osoyoos has five transit stop locations with varying amenities, as shown in the images below. In general, limited amenities are provided for riders. A list of amenities provided at each of the five stops is provided below.

Route 41 Transit Bus

A – Cottonwood – Stop information sign, bench B – Main and Cottonwood – Stop information sign, bench C – 89th St. and Primrose – Stop information sign D – Jonagold Pl. – No amenities provided EE – Main and 89th St. – Stop information sign, bench, garbage receptacle

BC Transit stop at Main and 89th St. (servicing Routes 40 and 41)

BC Transit stop at 89th St. and Primrose (servicing Route 41)

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 35

Existing Conditions Assessment

8.0 SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES The following provides a summary of the key findings identified throughout the Existing Conditions Report. The insights described below are intended to inform opportunities for transportation planning and transportation infrastructure investments in Osoyoos’ Transportation Master Plan. The findings are based on a technical review of existing conditions and site observations. This information will help to inform public engagement activities and to collect further community input on issues and opportunities to support the development of this TMP.

8.1 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT Active Transportation Network Gaps: Limited dedicated cycling facilities, sidewalk network gaps, and crosswalk safety concerns. Active transportation options, such as cycling and walking, are hindered by several network limitations. There are few dedicated cycling facilities, limiting safe and convenient routes for cyclists. Cyclists are often observed riding on sidewalks in the absence of bike facilities. The Town Centre has a wellconnected pedestrian network with sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian spaces; however, sidewalks are limited on many local roads outside of the Town Centre. Most existing crosswalks that were reviewed meet the recommended treatments outline by TAC, except the Highway 3 crosswalks at Kingfisher Drive and connecting Hotel Row to the Pioneer Trail. These crosswalks lack proper treatment considering the high traffic volumes and significant crossing distance required for pedestrians. The crosswalks located outside the hotel row present notable concerns regarding visibility and a perceived lack of safety. The lack of crosswalks on Highway 3 west of Cottonwood Drive limits the safe mobility of pedestrians.

Pedestrians observed crossing Highway 3 and local roads west of Cottonwood Road

Transit Service: Limited service hours and stop amenities.

A review of the five existing transit stops in Osoyoos reveals a significant gap in passenger amenities. While some stops, such as Main and 89th St., are equipped with benches, stop information signs, and garbage receptacles, others—like Jonagold Pl.—offer no amenities at all. Currently, the Town is serviced by two routes: Route 40, a regional route connecting to Penticton, and Route 41, a local route. Both routes have limited service hours, having just two round trips on weekdays and no service on weekends. The 2015 Okanagan-Similkameen Transit Future Plan identifies the expansion of regional transit service between Penticton and Osoyoos as a short-term priority, specifically recommending an increase to four round trips per weekday, and a medium- to long-term goal of growing the local transit network within Osoyoos.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 36

Existing Conditions Assessment

Active Transportation Accessibility: Missing curb letdowns at crosswalks creates accessibility concerns within the active transportation network. Many areas, particularly those outside the Town Centre, lack consistent accessibility features, making navigation difficult for individuals with mobility impairments. The absence of curb ramps at several crosswalks restricts universal access, posing mobility barriers for wheelchair users, pedestrians with strollers, and seniors.

Missing curb ramp at Highway 3 crosswalk

8.2 ROAD NETWORK Road Safety: Sightline challenges on minor road approaches and aggressive driver behaviours increase safety risks for both motorists and pedestrians. Road safety remains a prominent concern in Osoyoos. Critical issues include inadequate sightlines at many minor road approaches, which heighten the risk of collisions for drivers and pedestrians; vehicles often wait for a gap within designated crosswalks. Driver behaviours observed on site further compound these risks, with crosswalk conformance issues and risk driving maneuvers being performed after long queue waits. Addressing these safety challenges is vital to fostering a secure environment for all road users.

Signage: Inconsistent and improper signage placement in several locations.

Inconsistent and improperly placed signage has been identified at several locations throughout Osoyoos. These inconsistencies can result in confusion, misdirection, and increased risk of accidents for both drivers and pedestrians. Standardising signage placement and ensuring clear, visible, and timely wayfinding are essential steps toward improving network legibility and safety. Oleander Drive and Lobelia Drive (facing north) Intersection Design: Challenging and complex intersections increase driver confusion and safety risks. The design of several intersections presents unique safety challenges, particularly at complex or unconventional junctions. Poor sightlines, ambiguous lane markings, and non-standard configurations can contribute to driver confusion and increased collision risk. Notable locations include the Oleander Drive / Lobelia Drive and 89th Street / Kingfisher Drive intersections.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 37

Existing Conditions Assessment

8.3 TOWN CENTRE Main Street Role and Function: An increase in population and tourism in the summer months intensifies congestion in the Town Centre road network. The role of Main Street as a regional highway connection and seasonal fluctuations in traffic intensify existing infrastructure pressures in the Town Centre, where Main Street (Highway 3) frequently experiences long vehicle queues in the summer. The additional summer traffic significantly increases delays on the side street movements, where drivers have been observed either changing routes (turning right instead of left onto Main Street) and making high risk maneuvers into traffic after long wait times.

Main Street Vehicle Queues

Although the angled parking on Main Street provides needed access to businesses, conflicts between through traffic and vehicles reversing out of parking spots are frequent and sometimes hostile.

Boat Trailer Parking: Trailer parking near the boat launch is limited and alternate trailer parking is at an inconvenient location relative to the boat launch. The town faces limited and inconvenient parking options for boat trailers, which can lead to congestion and unauthorised parking in residential or commercial areas. Many boat users must drive on the Town’s Main Street and through the network’s bottleneck (Trestle Bridge) to access most available trailer parking, with limited transportation options to return to the launch after parking.

Accessibility and Active Transportation Gaps: There is a lack of infrastructure supporting accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists in the Town Centre. The active transportation network within the Town Centre exhibits notable gaps in accessibility and supporting infrastructure. There are currently no cycling facilities within the Town Centre road network. Although the pedestrian network is well-established, accessibility concerns limit the mobility and safety for users. The offset alignment of sidewalks with respect to crosswalks along Main Street results in pedestrians crossing minor roads outside of designated crosswalk areas, and the placement of the push button for pedestrian flashers at the 89th Street crosswalk is frequently overlooked by pedestrians. Additionally, there are curb extensions and letdowns but no other crosswalk treatments at multiple locations along Main Street.

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | 38

APPENDIX A: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COUNT SUMMARY

Transportation Master Plan & Road Condition Assessment | C

Appendix D: Project List

Osoyoos Transportation Master Plan - Draft Project List

Project Name

1 of 4

ATNP_ID

DCC_ID

TMP_ID

Project Description

Road Name

From

W29

Kingfisher Drive Road Renewal and Protected Bike Lanes

Installation of quick-build style protected bike lanes on Kingfisher Road. The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

Kingfisher Drive

Highway 3

89 Street

Harbour Key Drive Sidewalk: Part A

Harbour Key Drive

Highway 3

Cottonwood Drive

W39

74th Avenue Neighbourhood Bikeway

74 Avenue

Highway 97

MU8

87th Street Multi-Use Pathway: Part A

87 Street

C14

East Osoyoos Neighbourhood Bikeway: Part Neighbourhood Bikeway (including traffic calming) along Maple Drive. A

C11

Harbour Key Drive Sidewalk: Part B

74th Avenue Neighbourhood Bikeway

Facility Type

RCA Priority Utility Project

Alignment with TMP Goals

Evaluation Score

Priority

Total Cost for TMP

Cost Estimate Notes Source

Protected Bike Lanes High (Quick Build)

Yes

High

2027

999,750 2025 DCC

DCC project for water does not include active transportation; planning level linear cost added to total DCC amount.

Sidewalk

Null

High

2027

98,000

Linear Estimate

Expected high pedestrian volume on road / access to boat launch.

89th Street

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Low

Yes

High

2028

38,096 ATNP

70th Avenue

68th Avenue

MUP

High

Medium

2028

33,280 ATNP

Maple Drive

Cottonwood Drive

Maple Drive

Neighbourhood Bikeway

High

Medium

2028

166,908 ATNP

Construct a sidewalk on north side of Harbour Key Drive from Cottonwood Drive to Solana Key Pathway. This project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

Harbour Key Drive

Cottonwood Drive

Solana Key Gravel Pathway

Sidewalk

High

Medium

2028

377,200

Neighbourhood Bikeway (including traffic calming) along 74th Avenue between 89th Street and Highway 3.

74 Avenue

89th Street

Highway 3

Low

Medium

2028

40,103 ATNP

Maple Drive

Lombardy Lane

Low

Medium

2028

143,916 ATNP

Construct a sidewalk on north side of Harbour Key Drive from Cottonwood Drive to Highway 3. Neighbourhood Bikeway (including traffic calming) along 74th Avenue between Highway 97 and 89th Street. Construction of a new multi-use pathway on the west side of 87th Street to connect Osoyoos Elementary School and the Sonora Community Centre to 70th Avenue. This project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

Neighbourhood Bikeway Neighbourhood Bikeway

Linear Estimate

C14

East Osoyoos Neighbourhood Bikeway: Part Neighbourhood Bikeway (including traffic calming) along Maple Drive. B

MU2

R33, W55

Oleander Drive Reconstruction and Active Transportation Improvements: Part A

Upgrades to roadway with the implementation of protected active transportation facilities (multi-use pathway or protected bike lanes). The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

Oleander Drive

89th Street

Magnolia Place

MUP

Medium

Yes

High

2029

1,005,451 2025 DCC

MU2

Oleander Drive Reconstruction and Active Transportation Improvements: Part B

Upgrades to roadway with the implementation of protected active transportation facilities (multi-use pathway or protected bike lanes). The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

Oleander Drive

Magnolia Place

Lobelia Drive

MUP

Medium

High

2029

109,285 ATNP

74th Avenue Bike Lanes

Implement bike lanes or shoulders along 74th Avenue to connect the Irrigation Canal Trail to Highway 97.

74 Avenue

Meadowlark Drive

Highway 97

Bike Lane

Low

Medium

2029

75,367 ATNP

78th Avenue Multi-Use Path

Extend the newly constructed 89th Street multi-use pathway from 89th Street / Highway 3 to 87th Street / 78 Avenue.

78 Avenue

89th Street

87th Street

MUP

Medium

2029

106,700

MU2

Oleander Drive Reconstruction and Active Transportation Improvements: Part C

Upgrades to roadway with the implementation of protected active transportation facilities (multi-use pathway or protected bike lanes). The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

Oleander Drive

Lobelia Drive

Acacia Court

MUP

Very Low

High

2029

166,216 ATNP

C14

East Osoyoos Neighbourhood Bikeway: Part Neighbourhood Bikeway (including traffic calming) along Tamarack Drive. D

Tamarack Drive

Highway 3

Lombardy Lane

Neighbourhood Bikeway

High

Medium

2030

255,762 ATNP

62nd Avenue Active Transportation Improvements

62 Avenue

Osprey Place

Highway 97

MUP

Medium

High

2030

167,300

MU1

Kingfisher Trail

Acacia Crescent

swiws Park

MUP

Null

High

2030

46,740 ATNP

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Very Low

Medium

2030

153,500 ATNP

MUP

Medium

High

2031 - 2035

109,095 ATNP

Implement active transportation improvements on the Kingfisher Trail connecting Acacia Crescent to swiws Park. East Osoyoos Neighbourhood Bikeway: Part Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Lombardy Lane C between Maple Drive and Tamarack Drive. 68th Avenue Active Transportation Construct a multi-use pathway along 68th Avenue. Improvements Install sidewalk on the west side of Nighthawk Drive to fill the sidewalk gap north of Nighthawk Drive Sidewalk Infill Hummingbird Lane. Kingfisher Trail Improvements

C14

MU8

89th Street Bike Lanes: Part C

MU1

Linear Estimate

Lombardy Lane

Maple Drive

Tamarack Drive

68 Avenue

87th Street

85th Street

Nighthawk Drive

Hummingbird Lane

End of Sidewalk

Sidewalk

Medium

2031 - 2035

216,500

Construct bike lanes along 89th Street from Primrose Lane to Highway 97.

89 street

Primrose Lane

Highway 97

Bike Lane

Low

2031 - 2035

229,173 ATNP

Lobelia Drive Sidewalk Infill

Install sidewalk along west side of Lobelia Drive to fill current sidewalk gap.

Lobelia Drive

Hibiscus Ct

Larkspur Pl

Sidewalk

Very Low

High

2031 - 2035

101,600

Finch Crescent Sidewalk Infill

Continue sidewalk along Finch Crescent from Swan Crescent to 74th Avenue.

Finch Crescent

74th Avenue

Swan Crescent

Sidewalk

Very Low

Medium

2031 - 2035

Kingfisher Trail Improvements

Construct a multi-use pathway to connect the future Oleander Drive active transportation improvements to the Kingfisher Trail and swiws Park.

Acacia Crescent

Oleander Drive

End of Pavement

MUP

Very Low

Medium

2031 - 2035

36,546 ATNP

78th Avenue Bike Lanes

New protected bike facility on 78th Avenue between 87th Street and the Osoyoos Beach Walk Parking Lot. The project includes a crosswalk review at Spartan Drive to integrate safe walking and biking connection from 78th Avenue to Gyro Beach. The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

78 Avenue

Osoyoos Beach Walk parking Lot

87 Street

Protected Bike Lanes Medium

High

2036 - 2040

196,489 ATNP

C10

Trestles Bridge Active Transportation Connection

Construct an protected active transportation facility to connect Kingfisher Road to Harbour Key Drive.

Highway 3

Kingfisher Drive

Harbour Key Drive

Protected Bike Lanes Null

High

2036 - 2040

446,064 ATNP

MU8

83rd Street Multi-Use Pathway

Construct a multi-use pathway connecting Kingfisher Drive to 68th Avenue.

83 Street

68th Avenue

Kingfisher Drive

MUP

Null

Medium

2036 - 2040

15,087 ATNP

Linear Estimate

Linear Estimate Linear 240,700 Estimate

AT Cost from Project P14

Osoyoos Transportation Master Plan - Draft Project List

ATNP_ID

DCC_ID

TMP_ID

MU8

MU7

C11

Project Name

Construction of a new multi-use pathway on 87th Street to connect the proposed MUP south of 70th Avenue to the proposed neighbourhood bikeway on 74th Avenue. To be completed alongside road renewal.

Continue Gyro Beach Drive Multi-Use Path

Extend the existing Gyro Beach multi-use path north to 92nd Avenue.

Cottonwood Drive Active Transportation Improvements Dividend Ridge Neighbourhood Active Transportation Improvements

Construct bike lanes on Cottonwood Drive between Highway 3 and Harbour Key Drive. Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Fairwinds Drive between Augusta Lane and Olympic View Drive.

Facility Type

RCA Priority Utility Project

Alignment with TMP Goals

Evaluation Score

Priority

Total Cost for TMP

Cost Estimate Notes Source

Road Name

From

87 Street

74th Avenue

70th Avenue

MUP

Low

Medium

2036 - 2040

165,308 ATNP

Spartan Drive

End of existing pathway

92nd Avenue

MUP

Low

Medium

2036 - 2040

166,848 ATNP

Cottonwood Drive

Highway 3

Harbour Key Drive

Bike Lane

Very Low

Medium

2036 - 2040

81,528 ATNP

Low

Very Low

2036 - 2040

110,339 ATNP

Fairwinds Drive

Augusta Lane

Olympic View Drive

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Lobelia Drive between Oleander Drive and 32nd Avenue.

Lobelia Drive

Oleander Drive

32nd Avenue

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Very Low

Medium

2036 - 2040

124,313 ATNP

89th Street Bike Lanes: Part B

Construct bike lanes along 89th Street from Cactus Crescent to Primrose Lane.

89 Street

Cactus Crescent

Primrose Lane

Bike Lane

Medium

2041 - 2045

234,955 ATNP

Cottonwood Drive Active Transportation Improvements

Implement new biking facilities connecting the existing Cottonwood Drive bike lanes to the Sol Vita entrance.

Cottonwood Drive

End of existing bike lanes

Entrance to Sol Vita

MUP

Medium

2041 - 2045

217,329 ATNP

32nd Avenue Bike Facilities

Construct a paved shoulder (or other facility) for bikes along 32nd Avenue to connect to swiws Park.

32 Avenue

Lobelia Drive

swiws Park

Paved Shoulder

Null

Low

2041 - 2045

3,097 ATNP

68th Avenue Active Transportation Improvements

Construct a multi-use pathway along 68th Avenue.

68 Avenue

85th Street

83rd Street

MUP

Very Low

High

2041 - 2045

94,695 ATNP

Highway 97

92nd Avenue

74th Avenue

MUP

Null

Low

2041 - 2045

100,885 ATNP

Highway 97

74th Avenue

62nd Avenue

MUP

Null

Low

2041 - 2045

84,025 ATNP

Lobelia Drive Neighbourhood Bikeway

MU10

Project Description

87th Street Multi-Use Pathway: Part B

MU8

2 of 4

Construct a multi-use path along Highway 97 to connect 92nd Avenue to 62nd Avenue. Construct a multi-use path along Highway 97 to connect 92nd Avenue to 62nd Avenue.

MU4

Highway 97 Multi-Use Pathway: Part A

MU3

Highway 97 Multi-Use Pathway: Part B

87th Street Bike Lanes: Part A

Implement on-street bike lanes on 87th Street between 92nd Avenue and Jubilee Drive.

87 Street

92nd Avenue

Jubilee Drive

Bike Lane

Very Low

Medium

2041 - 2045

335,674 ATNP

87th Street Bike Lanes: Part B

Implement on-street bike lanes on 87th Street between Jubilee Drive and 78th Avenue.

87 Street

Jubilee Drive

78th Avenue

Bike Lane

Very Low

Medium

2041 - 2045

264,618 ATNP

89th Street Bike Lanes: Part A

Construct bike lanes along 89th Street from Oleander Drive to Cactus Crescent.

89 Street

Oleander Drive

Cactus Crescent

Bike Lane

Very Low

Medium

2041 - 2045

86,526 ATNP

Highway 3

Irrigation Canal Trail

Highway 97

MUP

Null

Very Low

2041 - 2045

70,105 ATNP

Highway 3

51st Street

East Town Boundary

MUP

Null

Low

Beyond 20Years

46,205 ATNP

44th Avenue

Bike Lane

Medium

Low

321,613 ATNP

Low

519,966 ATNP

960,776 ATNP

71,834 ATNP

186,080 ATNP

468,201 ATNP

MU5

MU13

C16

C13

MU12

Construct a multi-use path along Highway 3 that connects the Irrigation Canal Trail to Highway 3 Irrigation Canal Trail Connection Highway 97. Extend the existing Highway 3 multi-use pathway from 51st Street to the east town Highway 3 Multi-Use Pathway boundary. The project should be completed alongside or after the segment between Lakeshore Drive and 51st Street. Lakeshore Road Bike Lanes

Construct on-street bike lanes on Lakeshore Drive.

Lakeshore Drive

36th Avenue

Lakeshore Drive

44th Avenue

45 Street

Town North Boundary

Cedar Lane

Paved Shoulder

Very Low

Low

45 Street

Cedar Lane

Highway 3

MUP

Very Low

Low

Very Low

Low

Bike Lane

Very Low

Low

Lakeshore Road Bike Lanes

Construct on-street bike lanes on Lakeshore Drive.

45th Street Active Transportation Improvements 45th Street Active Transportation Improvements Cottonwood Drive Active Transportation Improvements

Construct paved shoulder for active transportation users alongside pavement renewal. Construct a multi-use pathway between the future roundabout at Highway 3 and 45th Street to Cedar Lane. Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Cottonwood Drive between Sol Vita and the north cul-de-sac.

C12

C16

Lakeshore Road Bike Lanes

Future Road Connection Bike Lane

Neighbourhood Cottonwood Cul-de-sac Bikeway

Beyond 20Years Beyond 20Years Beyond 20Years Beyond 20Years Beyond 20Years Beyond 20Years

Cottonwood Drive

Entrance to Sol Vita

Construct on-street bike lanes on Lakeshore Drive.

Lakeshore Drive

South Town Boundary

36th Avenue

Dividend Ridge Neighbourhood Active Transportation Improvements

Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Cypress Hill Drive between Olympic View Drive and Pebble Beach Drive.

Cypress Hill Drive

Olympic View Drive

Pebble Beach Drive

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Very Low

Beyond 20Years

201,840 ATNP

Dividend Ridge Neighbourhood Active Transportation Improvements

Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Olympic View Drive between Fairwinds Drive and Pebble Beach Drive.

Olympic View Drive

Fairwinds Drive

Cypress Hill Drive

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Very Low

Beyond 20Years

94,414 ATNP

Dividend Ridge Neighbourhood Active Transportation Improvements

Implement a neighbourhood bikeway (including traffic calming) on Pebble Beach Drive between Golf Course Drive and Cypress Hill Drive.

Pebble Beach Drive

Golf Course Drive

Cypress Hill Drive

Neighbourhood Bikeway

Very Low

Beyond 20Years

257,206 ATNP

MU7

R16

92nd Avenue Reconstruction: Part A

Upgrades to roadway and intersections with the implementation of active transportation facilities, curb and gutter, lighting, and landscaping. The project should be completed alongside pavement renewal.

92 Avenue

Highway 97

Jubilee Drive

MUP

High

Medium

By $ Development

1,359,725 2025 DCC

AT Cost from Project P9-11

MU7

R17

92nd Avenue Reconstruction: Part B

92 Avenue

Jubilee Drive

87th Street

MUP

High

Medium

By $ Development

1,234,119 2025 DCC

AT Cost from Project P9-11

MU7

R18

92nd Avenue Reconstruction: Part C

92 Avenue

87th Street

Spartan Drive

MUP

Medium

By $ Development

1,711,188 2025 DCC

AT Cost from Project P9-11

C16

R29, S48, W71

45th Street Extension

New local road link from Highway 3 to Lakeshore Drive, including implementation of active transportation facilities such as a multi-use pathway.

New Road

Highway 3

Lakeshore Drive

Road

Null

Low

By $ Development

2,374,500 2025 DCC

AT Cost from Project P12

R30, S48, W72

56th Avenue Extension

New local road link from 51st Street to the 45th Street Extension, including active transportation facilities.

New Road

Highway 3

56th Street

Road

Null

Low

By $ Development

1,879,051 2025 DCC

AT Cost from Project P13

Osoyoos Transportation Master Plan - Draft Project List

ATNP_ID

DCC_ID

TMP_ID

Project Name

MU13

Highway 3 Multi-Use Pathway

R26

Tamarack to Cottonwood Local Road Linkage

3 of 4

Project Description

Facility Type

RCA Priority Utility Project

Alignment with TMP Goals

Evaluation Score

Priority

Total Cost for TMP

Cost Estimate Notes Source

Road Name

From

Extend the existing Highway 3 multi-use pathway from Lakeshore Drive to 51st Street.

Highway 3

Lakeshore Drive

51st Street

MUP

Null

Low

By $ Development

20,075 ATNP

Construction of a new local road to improve local road links and reduce traffic on Highway 3. Includes curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lighting. Reconstruct Cottonwood Road from Lombardy Lane.

New Road

Tamarack Drive

Cottonwood Drive

Road

Very Low

Medium

By $ Development

1,339,000 2025 DCC

Osoyoos Transportation Master Plan - Draft Project List

ATNP_ID

DCC_ID

TMP_ID

Project Name

4 of 4

RCA Priority

Utility Project

Alignment with TMP Goals

Priority

Estimated Construction Cost

2027

112,500

Planning Level Estimate

Cost assumes bollard and chain system for 5 crossing locations.

High

2027

172,500

Planning Level Estimate

Cost includes overhead flashers, curb extensions for one crosswalk location.

High

2028

750,000

Planning Level Estimate

Cost assumes intersection signalization.

Null

Yes

Low

2029

75,000

Planning Level Estimate

Cost includes updates to line paint (lanes, parking setbacks). Assumes maintaining existing permissive signal timing.

Project Description

Location

Main Street Crosswalk Alignment Improvements

Update minor road crossings along Main Street (Highway 3) to encourage pedestrians to use designated crosswalks, such as a bollard and chain fence system.

Main Street (Highway 3)

85th Avenue to 89th Avenue

Null

High

Hotel Row Crosswalk Upgrade

Work with MOTT to upgrade the Highway 3 crosswalk(s) on Hotel Row to include curb extensions and overhead flashers to increase visibility and safety of pedestrians.

Main Street (Highway 3)

Holiday Inn and Suites and Richer Pass Beach Null Resort

Kingfisher Drive

Main Street (Highway 3)

Null

Cottonwood Drive

Main Street (Highway 3)

Evaluation Score

Cost Estimate Source

Notes

W29

Main Street and Kingfisher Drive Intersection Improvements

Explore intersection upgrades such as a new signalized intersection, a roundabout, adding a left-turn storage lane on Kingfisher Drive, and/or upgraded crosswalk treatments to improve mobility and pedestrian connectivity and safety. This project should be completed alongside the utilities project, which includes improvements to the existing crosswalk on Main Street (Highway 3).

W34

Cottonwood Drive Intersection Improvements

Review and upgrade intersection laning at the Highway 3 / Cottonwood Drive intersection to include left-turns storage lanes on highway approaches.

W39

Highway 97 / 74th Avenue Crossing

Advocate to work with the MOTT to install a crosswalk connecting 74th Avenue east and west of Highway 97. This project includes filling the sidewalk gaps connecting to each side of the Highway 97 highway, and could be coordinated with water main upgrades.

74th Avenue

Low

Yes

Medium

2030

223,000

Planning Level Estimate

Cost assumes RRFB crosswalk, curb, and dry wells for storm.

Lakeshore Drive Intersection Improvements

Highway 3

Lakeshore Drive

Null

High

2030

120,000

Planning Level Estimate

Cost includes RRFB crosswalk, curb, and storm.

Lobelia Drive / 32nd Avenue Intersection Control Review

Install a traffic button and curb at the Lobelia Drive / 32nd Avenue intersection to manage vehicle speeds and improve safety on all approaches.

32nd Avenue

Lobelia Drive

Null

Medium

2030

150,000

Planning Level Estimate

Cost includes building out intersection with curbs (3 corners, no drainage) and a traffic button.

C4, C5

R12, S46, W30

89th Street and 62nd Avenue Intersection Improvements

Updates to intersection configuration to include a single, level intersection to improve traffic flow and safety. This includes road reconstruction on 89th Street between Kingfisher Drive and 89 Street Oleander Road, and 62nd Avenue from 89th Street to Osprey Place. Includes active transportation improvements through the intersection.

62nd Avenue

High

Yes

High

2031 - 2035

Oleander & Lobelia Intersection Study

Develop interim and longer-term strategies to improve safety and clarify intersection operations.

Oleander Drive

Lobelia Drive

Low

High

2031 - 2035

3,230,409 2025 DCC

Cost is for a study to review intersection and develop improvement concepts.

75,000

MU12

R28, W70

Highway 3 / 45th Street Roundabout

Install a 2-lane roundabout at the Highway 3 / 45th Street intersection with a south leg to connect to the future 45th Street extension. This project includes a multi-use pathway.

Main Street (Highway 3)

45th Street

Null

Yes

Low

2036 - 2040

4,305,700 2025 DCC

R32

Main Street (Highway 3) and 89th Street Intersection Upgrades

Intersection upgrades to Main Street (Highway 3) / 89th Street to accommodate increasing vehicle and pedestrian demands, including a review of the current crosswalk treatments and potential improvements.

Highway 3

89th Street

Null

Medium

2041 - 2045

962,000 2025 DCC

Perform annual safety reviews to identify intersection modications, local crossing improvements, or traffic calming that require upgraded treatments. Initial locations that were identified for potential crossing improvements include: •89th Street / Cactus Crescent Various Locations •87th Street (north of Hwy especially) •74th Street / Nighthawk Drive •Lakeshore Drive / 56th Ave

Null

High

Annual

30,000 ATNP

Various Locations

Null

High

Annual

73,000 ATNP

Various Locations

Null

High

Annual

10,000 ATNP

Various Locations

Null

High

Annual

65,000

Local Street Safety Reviews

Sidewalk Review and Renewal

Accessibility Improvements

Neighbourhood Traffic Calming

Complete annual review of sidewalk condition and accessibility, upgrading and maintaining where required. Review current accessibility challenges throughout the Town's network and improve infrastructure accessibility annually. Annually review locations where vehicle speeds are a concern and implement traffic calming measures to reduce vehicle speeds.

Planning Level Estimate