Having read the article in the Vernon Morning Star newspaper dated Nov. 16, I must say that I was somewhat surprised if not shocked that a delegation of my neighbours has requested the privilege of driving their golf carts on the streets/sidewalks of the streets in the vicinity of the Royal York golf course.
The very fact that these people have made a request of this nature causes me to wonder about the common sense factor. I was one of the first to build my house backing onto the golf course in 1994 and on purchasing my building lot from the owners of Royal York the purchase price included a free membership to the club for one year.
Over the past couple of years I have taken notice that many of my neighbours have been driving their golf carts on the streets and sidewalks to the golf course, the majority of these people obviously being retired seniors who seemed comfortable doing so and as time went on more and more of them drove to and from the golf course on a daily basis.
Being a retired police officer it immediately came to mind that these golf cart drivers were, in fact, contravening the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act Regulations and I wondered if any of these drivers had been contacted by local RCMP in that regard.
Once again in the interest of safety for our good residents of Armstrong and my neighbourhood, I will present my observations/suggestions:
(1) Investigate the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act in co-operation with the RCMP regarding the use of golf carts on public highways/sidewalks.
(2) Conduct a survey of the residents in the neighbourhood of the golf course regarding their opinions in this regard.
(3) Consult with Royal York golf course on the lacking parking for golf club members and guests utilizing the course who use their personal carts.
(4) Ask the operators of the golf course why they do not provide free or less expensive use of their provided golf carts which sit un-used on their property, especially for paid membership.
(5) Is the City of Armstrong prepared to take on civil litigation accountability in event of property damage or personal injury involving these golf carts?
(6) Are the owners/drivers of these golf carts required to produce documentation that they are in fact covered by an insurance company for the privilege of driving on the streets/sidewalks in event of an incident involving a golf cart?
(7) What will be defined as operating within the vicinity of the golf carts or for that matter the “streets” of Armstrong?
(8) What is the definition of a “golf cart” or similarities thereof?
(9) Will a golf cart be driven by electricity/battery only with designated horsepower, inclusive of gas driven?
(10) Will the operator of a golf cart be required to possess a proper driver’s license and appropriate age be defined?
(11) Will a non-licensed driver pertaining to the Motor Vehicle Act (due to a restrictive medical condition) be allowed to operate a golf cart?
(12) Will there be a yearly fee for the owner/operator of a golf cart to operate on city streets?
(13) Will the city have an open consultation with the property owners within the city and in particular residents in the vicinity of the golf course?
It is respectfully requested that Armstrong city officials give serious consideration to my remarks bearing in mind the possibility of civil litigation involving incident with these “illegal” operators of the golf carts on our city streets.
Take note that the majority of these gold cart owners do not have a means of getting their carts to the golf course other than by being driven which supports my comment regarding assumed privilege to do so.
I suggest once again that city officials conduct their due diligence and fact checking before any further consideration to such a City bylaw which will ultimately contravene the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act regulations.
We simply cannot have the minority ruling the majority in the city of Armstrong.
Should the city have an open public consultation meeting in this regard I will be in attendance.
Len Eddy
