CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

  That the Transportation Committee approve the Minutes of the meeting of

1. PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY TRANSFERS

- Environment & Transportation Commissioner reports dated 12 and 30 Sep 97

The Environment and Transportation Commissioner advised it has been Regional Council’s position that transportation acts as a utility and the principle funding for the maintenance should come from gas tax and license fees. He believed it is the public’s perception that a portion of the tax they pay for these is used to maintain the transportation system. The committee listened to a brief recording of an interview with the Premier of Ontario, in which he states the province reinvests substantial dollars from the gas tax back into roads, transit and other areas of transportation. However, M. Sheflin stated that after January 1998, the Region will not receive any funds from the fuel tax and license fees to put toward its transportation infrastructure.

With respect to highway transfers, the Commissioner stated there are two streams of funding provided; one for permanent transfers with a permanent cost attached; and, a transition fund (one-time money) which includes funds related to highways. The Commissioner indicated the Region’s comments are in response to the shortfall in this transition fund as it relates to the application of the Ministry’s policy as it currently stands i.e. each municipality will receive one year’s maintenance and five years capital funding. He emphasized the Region has supported the rationalization of the road system and the transfer back and forth of different categories of roads. However, the most recent, and retroactive transfer of Highway 16 was carried out without the same consideration and the transfer of Highways 17 and 31 could have been done on a more equitable basis with respect to the value of maintenance and construction.

With respect to the assumption of a portion of Highway 16, the Commissioner stated the Region had originally agreed to assume this road in 1993 under the provinces’ previous terms i.e. five years maintenance and a capital allotment. However, the province withdrew its offer and now that the transfer is complete, it is the Commissioner’s opinion this is a breach of contract and an arbitrator has been requested to step in because staff believe the province should honour the offer they originally made.

2. MEADOWS FOR MILLIONS - AN INITIATIVE TO PLANT DAFFODILS ON REGIONAL RIGHT OF WAYS

- Director, Infrastructure Maintenance Division report dated 19 Aug 97

Gus Barrieau of BDO Dunwoody, provided members with a revised proposal from Meadows for Millions. Further to the details of that proposal, Mr. Barrieau indicated public participation will be a major focus of this initiative and all events will be established through the partnership with the RMOC and Meadows for Millions.

Councillor Legendre questioned how this proposal differs from the landscape advertising proposal recently approved by Council. Staff advised landscape advertising would be situated in specific locations, whereas the Meadows for Millions proposal is for random planting of bulbs. It is a simpler proposal which would only display a sign at the area where the bulbs have been planted to indicate the corporate sponsor of that daffodil field. The Department views these as two separate initiatives; one raises funds for charities and the other generates revenues for the Region to maintain the right-of-way.

Councillor Legendre inquired whether prospective sites for bulb planting would conflict with sites for landscape advertising and questioned whether there would be any competition for such locales. The Commissioner clarified that corporate advertising would appear in very selective whereas the Meadows for Millions proposal is potentially for very open areas. He confirmed that at no time would the latter be denied a site because a corporation wishes to advertise at the same location.

Lois K. Smith applauded the idea of this proposal, but was opposed to the installation of more signs on the public roadways. She felt they would just be another intrusion on the landscape and emphasized the beauty of the roadways should be preserved and not cluttered with excess signs. She suggested small plaques instead.

Staff assured the signs would be no bigger than those used for the "Adopt a Highway" program.

CARRIED

3. TERRY FOX DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY

- Director, Policy and Infrastructure Planning Division report dated 9 Sep 97

Councillor Legendre noted this study will not undertake a complete examination of planning/design alternatives for the interchange at Highway 417 since these are matters that can only be addressed by the Ministry of Transportation in accordance with their provincial environmental assessment requirements. He thought they should be involved with this study and to combine it with their assessment of the interchange. B. Reid, Manager, Multi-Modal Planning Branch confirmed the Ministry is involved because they have a staff representative on the Technical Advisory Committee. Staff do not recommend expanding the study to examine the details of the changes to the existing Terry Fox interchange as that would be a proposal for the Ministry to proceed with and they would be the proponents of modifications to the interchange, whereas the Region is the proponent for the road only. Each governing body has different conditions pertaining to environmental assessments for Ministry facilities such as interchanges. Further, the Ministry is not planning a modification to the interchange for several years.

Councillor Legendre questioned whether that information could be transmitted to the Region in writing and if not, he preferred to see the work plan modified so it does include the examination of the interchange. Concern was raised about the appropriateness of his request and in response to questions raised by committee members, staff confirmed that from the Ministry’s work plan, it would be premature to proceed with an environmental study report of the interchange at this time. Councillor Legendre maintained that their input would be appropriate because of the overlapping of jurisdictions in this area and would be a wiser use of tax dollars if both exercises were done together.

Moved by J. Legendre

LOST

YEAS: J. Legendre....1

NAYS: D. Beamish, R. Cantin, L. Davis, D. Holmes, H. Kreling, M. Meilleur,

V. Waddell....7

CARRIED

4. NORTEL CARLING CAMPUS EXPANSION - MODIFICATIONS TO MOODIE DRIVE (REGIONAL ROAD 59) FROM CARLING AVENUE (REGIONAL ROAD 38) TO HIGHWAY 417 AND TO THE INTERSECTION OF CARLING AVENUE AND GRANDVIEW ROAD/NORTEL SITE ACCESS

Andrew Hope of the Planning and Development Approvals Branch provided a brief background to the proposed expansion (Project 98), which will add one million square feet of new space to the existing facilities by the turn of the century. He noted it will be the centrepiece for Nortel’s drive to expand the local work force by approximately 5000 jobs. Throughout the course of the summer, Nortel scheduled two formal public open houses to solicit comment on its harmonized federal-provincial environmental assessment and further formal and informal consultation took place with the community at large, associations and special interest groups.

He explained that part of Nortel’s transportation schedule is a pioneering travel demand management (TDM) program that has been instrumental in minimizing the need for extensive roadway modifications. Details of that program will require extensive planning efforts from all partners i.e. Nortel, the City of Nepean, the Region and OC Transpo over the next several months. Discussions with the Ministry of Transportation on the nature of the changes proposed at the Moodie Drive underpass are underway and Ministry planning staff have generally accepted the need for functional and safety modifications to this structure to better accommodate pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and motor vehicles. The modifications proposed are required in order to support the scale of Project 98.

Ron Jack of Delcan Corporation gave a detailed presentation of the roadway modifications as outlined in the staff report. In addition, he highlighted the following:

Councillor Davis questioned whether it was known where existing employees were coming from and where the new traffic to be generated will emanate from. Mr. Jack presumed the same general distribution of traffic will occur because the existing employees come Region-wide. When the councillor asked how many employees are from the Outaouais region, Mr. Jack indicated that information would be provided to the councillor.

Councillor Davis was also interested in knowing what additional OC Transpo costs would be incurred as a result of the increased service. Staff confirmed the intent is to maximize the potential use of transit in the knowledge that the overall cost to the Region as a whole would be less if those people were carried on transit rather than building Regional roads to accommodate them. The councillor further inquired whether there had been a decline in transit ridership since cut-backs have reduced service to that site. Mr. Jack advised surveys were conducted by OC Transpo and Nortel and suggested that if there was a trend in service reduction, he was not aware when that occurred relative to those surveys. The councillor asked that clarification be provided from OC Transpo if there has been an impact.

Councillor Davis questioned whether the public will have an opportunity to comment to members of Council on the Nortel site plan. The Committee Chair reminded committee that site plan approval is set at the municipal level and is not the Region’s responsibility. The councillor maintained that this project impacts on Regional roads so she believed there is an overlap. A. Hope advised that Nepean Council, on 22 September 1997, approved the site plan and Regional staff had input to the conditions imposed at that time. He confirmed that all the Region can deal with at this point in time are the transportation issues before committee today. Councillor Davis suggested an examination of traffic patterns be carried out one year after the project is completed and A. Hope confirmed Regional staff have asked Nortel to provide them with an annual report on the TDM program and if there are any problems with the implementation plan adjustments will be made.

In response to questions raised by Councillor Holmes, Mr. Costern with HOK Canada and the Project Manager for Nortel’s "Project 98", indicated a number of TDM initiatives will be implemented in Phase 1 and it is hoped there will be an improvement in the non-auto modes before new employees come on stream. Given Nortel’s intention to improve the modal split as part of this expansion, Councillor Holmes questioned why new employees will be given parking spaces. Mr. Costern advised it would be more economical and less disruptive to provide those spaces now, rather than later; should spaces need to be decommissioned, they will be from those that currently exist. The councillor questioned whether there was anything tied to the Region’s approvals of this project which could insist on the decommissioning. A. Hope responded by stating a condition in the site plan approval addresses Nortel’s commitment to implement the employee parking strategy consistent with the achievement of the TDM program objectives. He confirmed decommissioning could be imposed as part of the site plan agreement which will be prepared by the Legal Department in consultation with the Planning and Development Approvals Department. He confirmed if committee wishes to discuss this agreement, it can do so at this time. In light of this information, Councillor Holmes proposed that in the site plan agreement there be statements concerning the decommissioning and the final total of 4200 parking spaces on the site. The Committee Chair hoped that with increased transit, there will be even fewer parking spaces necessary. He suggested consideration be given to putting in a surface that is not fully paved so if it is not needed, it would be less expensive to remove than a fully-developed parking lot.

Councillor Legendre noted this site and its connections to the Regional roads must conform to the Region’s Transportation Master Plan (TMP); however, the final version of that document is still not printed and he questioned what input Nortel could provide in conjunction with the Region’s new policies. Harry Beere of the Environment and Transportation Department advised staff have provided input from the TMP throughout this whole process. The councillor wanted assurance the public will be in a position to properly comment on this proposal as it relates to the TMP and staff advised the document would be available for their review prior to the public hearing.

In summarizing the staff presentation, Doug Brousseau, Director of Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services reiterated that the recommendations proposed are necessary to accommodate this expansion. Staff will continue to work with Nortel and OC Transpo to ensure the modifications succeed and if necessary, will report back to committee for further input. He made reference to the fact that a sidewalk is proposed to be constructed as part of this project, as is Council policy to install sidewalks on new and reconstructed roadways. However, staff anticipate very few pedestrians in the area so he suggested committee might wish to review this decision to determine if this is the best investment for TDM. He confirmed that transit will be adequately served by the roadway modifications being proposed.

Vicki Mason, a resident of Corkstown Road expressed her concern that residents of Corkstown Road were never consulted as part of this process and was extremely dismayed by the lack of consultation provided to the Lakeview community. She was also concerned that the report made reference to automobiles that may use Moodie Drive and Carling Avenue to directly access the site, stating the word should be changed to would to ensure motorists do not use other local roads such as Corkstown as a shortcut to access the site. She stressed it is a collector road and is not built to carry heavy buses which cause homes to shake as they go by. At her request, the Commissioner defined a collector road as one that collects traffic from a local area to lead to an arterial road and is not to be used as an alternative to an arterial road. Hence, she was extremely agitated by the amount of cut-through traffic already present on Corkstown and was amply worried about increased volumes with the proposed expansion of Nortel. She was concerned that not enough care has been given to the residents’ quality of life and was seeking some assurance that excess traffic will not use Corkstown Road to get to the site. She posed the hypothetical question of who would pay for the roadworks if this company were to go bankrupt after everything was in place. The Commissioner advised the Region would receive a letter of credit (a legal binding agreement), that the work is completed.

Based on its geographic location in relation to this site, Councillor Legendre did not understand why motorists would choose Corkstown Road over the more direct links of Carling or Moodie, via the Queensway. R. Jack confirmed there is through traffic now on that street, but believed these were motorists traveling east on the Queensway towards Carling Avenue. He noted the Nortel campus on Corkstown road also generates traffic on that road.

Doug Collins, Chair, Planning and Economic Development Committee, City of Nepean indicated the City is aware of the situation on Corkstown Road and have put in some stop signs to reduce the amount of cut-through traffic. However, he claimed the situation occurring on Corkstown Road is not directly related to this particular site plan and the municipality recommends the Region proceed to the public hearing process as is proposed. He confirmed the community was involved in this process and the site plan was passed unanimously by Nepean Council.

Henry Carter spoke to the issue of bicycle paths and suggested the Committee take the opportunity presented by this development to design a stand-alone bicycle path for cyclists travelling to and from the Nortel site. He explained this could then be used as a model for the rest of the Region.

In response to his comments, the Committee Chair indicated that while roads are built to move traffic, they also serve pedestrians, cyclists and recreational uses and he questioned whether the Region could exclude those uses from using a path constructed only for bicycles. The Environment and Transportation Commissioner hoped the higher modal split to be achieved will be in the number of pedestrians accessing this site. He did not believe it was an advantage to eliminate pedestrian activity in favour of cyclists, because the former will make up the larger portion of the environmentally-friendly modal split.

Councillor Holmes believed Mr. Carter was concerned about the safety of pedestrians on recreational pathways and indicated many seniors refuse to use these paths because of potential conflicts with other users. She stated it is the Region’s responsibility for providing commuting services for pedestrians and cyclists and agreed the Region does its best to provide for the commuter cyclist using recreational pathways. She supported the inclusion of a sidewalk as part of this expansion. Staff confirmed the City of Nepean does not support the construction of a sidewalk as part of this project and would not maintain that facility if it is built. Councillor Beamish proposed that a sidewalk not be included as part of the roadway design.

The Committee acknowledged receipt of a letter dated 1 October 1997 from the Centretown Citizens Community Association, conveying their concern about the lack of detail contained in the staff report for service improvements to OC Transpo.

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

(H. Kreling dissented)

Moved by D. Holmes

Councillor Beamish was absent from the room when the vote for his following Motion was called:

That road modifications to Moodie Drive at the Nortel site not include a sidewalk.

Councillor Legendre requested that staff bring forward a report at the public hearing, detailing what is being proposed at the interchange on Moodie Drive to improve cyclist safety. He proposed the following:

5. PROPOSED MEDIAN EXTENSION ON HAZELDEAN ROAD (REGIONAL ROAD

36) 64 M EAST OF EDGEWATER DRIVE

- Director, Mobility Services & Corporate Fleet Services report dated 24 Sep 97

CARRIED

6. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS - TENTH LINE ROAD (REGIONAL ROAD 47) AND ACCESS OF FALLINGBROOK SHOPPING CENTRE/RAY FRIEL CENTRE

- Director Mobility Services & Corporate Fleet Services report dated 9 Sep 97

Moved by H. Kreling

CARRIED

7. Traffic Control Signals - RICHMOND ROAD (Regional Road 59) and SEYTON DRIVE

Councillor Legendre inquired whether a signal at this location would pose a safety problem for motorists coming around the corner. Staff advised they did not consider it a visibility problem and agreed to monitor the situation and report back if problems occur.

Moved by D. Holmes

8. ROAD CLOSING - PART OF HUNT CLUB ROAD AT THE CORNER OF BANK STREET - CITY OF OTTAWA

John Buck, Supervisor, Traffic Investigation and Survey Section, presented to Committee a detailed description of the report, including the problems experienced by the non-compliance at the existing through prohibition.

In reference to some of the letters received, Councillor Legendre expressed concern about the apparent lack of consultation with emergency services. The Director of Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services advised that it was not an issue at that time, but he confirmed proposals for roadway modifications are circulated to the fire department(s) involved as well as ambulance services and police for comment.

Andy Doyle, McEvoy Shields objected to the staff recommendation and did not feel there was a need to extend the prohibition to a 24-hour/day restriction. He believed it would be onerous and show a lack of consideration to the businesses, residents and consumers that use this intersection. He was concerned that if motorists had to drive several blocks out of their way to find parking, they may avoid travelling downtown altogether. In reference to the accident statistics outlined in the report, Mr. Doyle compared these to other intersections in the core that have experienced a similar number of accidents, and yet no turn restrictions have been imposed. He was frustrated about the lack of consultation carried out by the Regional councillor for the ward, as three business directly affected by this proposal were not consulted. He submitted a petition signed by local residents objecting to the staff proposal.

Newton Steacey, St. Patrick’s Basilica agreed there had been a lack of consultation with the immediate community and was concerned representatives of the church had not been called upon to seek their opinion, especially given the fact this facility attracts thousands of people each day. He was concerned the church may lose parishioners if they are forced to attend the church in a more round-about fashion.

Jim Kargacos, resident, reiterated the points and concerns raised by the previous speakers and supported their objection to the through prohibition. He believed such a restriction is unrealistic and unwarranted as there is no need, especially during the night or on weekends when traffic is considerably less than during the day.

Councillor Holmes explained she had distributed flyers to residents on Lisgar Street between Lyon and Bank. She recognized a through prohibition would have a major impact on those residents and was interested in knowing their viewpoints. She noted some residents are opposed to a traffic signal, which is warranted, as they believe it will attract more traffic. The councillor was adamant this local road should not be used as a short-cut to the Queensway.

Councillor Legendre questioned whether the existing prohibition includes cyclists. D. Brousseau replied that cyclists were not exempt from the prohibition implemented in 1990 although such exemption could be recommended if the staff report is approved. The councillor stated that if the prohibition included cyclists, there should have been some record of accidents to justify it.

10. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS - BRONSON AVENUE AT LAURIER

Moved by D. Holmes

11. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS - HUNT CLUB AND CAHILL

DEFERRED

CARRIED

Councillor Davis inquired about the status of the traffic calming studies for Parkdale Avenue and for Island Park/Kirkwood/Churchill. She emphasized this issue is a priority in her community and was anxious to see some resolution. Staff advised the Region is partners with the City of Ottawa on the Parkdale Avenue Traffic Calming Study and have received a copy of the draft report. They had not brought it forward yet until they received recommendations from the municipality. At the request of the councillor, however, the Commissioner agreed to bring forward components of the report as they relate to Parkdale Avenue at the next meeting.

In addition, Councillor Davis asked that components of the other traffic calming study be brought forward i.e. Kirkwood and Churchill for the committee’s consideration.

Tree Planting

Councillor Holmes requested the status of the tree-planting program and the Commissioner confirmed that where there is a water line rehabilitation, the Region would contribute 1/3 of the City of Ottawa’s program for tree planting on a local street. In light of the fact the municipality was not planning on doing any tree planting, the councillor hoped the Region would continue with its tree planting budget. The Commissioner noted that program is the responsibility of the City of Ottawa.