Since the casino was located on the South Okanagan Events Centre campus, people attending hockey games have noticed a marked reduction in parking availability within a reasonable walking distance from the arena. I believe that the curlers have also been severely impacted.
The Urban Systems traffic study that formed the basis for allowing the casino on the SOEC site estimated that the casino structure itself would eliminate 106 parking spaces, the normal parking demand for casino customers would be 175 spaces, and peak demand 350 spaces. The casino has arranged to lease 70 spaces from the city in the main SOEC lot.
Based on the above, it would appear that the casino operator arranged to lease on the SOEC parking lot far fewer spaces than they would be using even on a normal basis, let alone peak demand.
Why the casino owner arranged for and was allowed by the city to lease far fewer parking spaces than the independent parking study revealed is unknown?
I understand that the casino, for the past year, has leased a property across the street from the casino for its employee’s use (number of spaces unknown). Even with this facility in place, the casino is obviously utilizing far more than the 70 spaces than they are leasing in the main SOEC parking lot.
The city could elect to enforce the conditions of the lease thereby restricting the casino usage on the main SOEC parking lot to the 70 spaces leased. This would free up many spaces for SOEC customers for use during busy periods.
An alternate more workable solution could be for the casino to arrange for more off-site parking for its customers, limiting their use to the 70 spaces currently leased. This could be verified by periodic on-site policing.
Claude Bergman
Penticton