Chair: D. Holmes

Members: M. Bellemare, R. Cantin, L. Davis, C. Doucet, H. Kreling, J. Legendre, M. Meilleur

______________________________________________________________________________

Note:
1. Underlining indicates a new or amended recommendation approved by Committee.
2. Reports requiring Council consideration will be presented to Council on 12 July 2000 in Transportation Committee Report 66.

______________________________________________________________________________

- Motion TC-4-99

- Director, Engineering report dated 1 Jun 00

Councillor Hume advised that since the committee last dealt with this matter on 21 June 2000, the community has come to an agreement on a modified Option 4, essentially, extending the noise barrier further north to Pleasant Park Road. One resident has asked for some trees to be planted in front of his house. The barrier should be a wooden fence with some cladding to protect it from the elements.

When questioned how much this proposal would cost, Jim Miller, Director of Engineering advised it would be in the order of $950,000 to $1M for the entire program. There is currently $650,000 in the budget and the additional $350,000 would have to be transferred from another account and would be subject to Transition Board approval. Paul Clarke, Project Manager explained that in addition to the costs associated with the barrier itself, property would be required from CN Rail (60-65% of the total length of the barrier). Given that this is a significant undertaking and there are a number of unknowns with CN at this point, staff recognize that such negotiations could take some time. It was confirmed that the barrier would be built to the most recently approved standard, i.e. Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code.

Lubomyr Chabursky advised there were approximately 15 residents in attendance from Lamira Street and Pleasant Park Road to hear the committee deliberations. He reiterated the concerns these residents have, especially on the track side of Lamira Street because their backyards back onto the transitway and the wall on the opposite side reflects the noise back to their side. Following recent discussions with the consultant, he believed the noise on Lamira Street exceeds the decibel levels currently allowed under the Region’s new Noise Guidelines. He explained the community is pleased that staff have looked at this modified Option 4 and the fact all the residents of the affected area support this particular option.

Councillor Legendre proposed that a noise barrier (modified Option 4) be installed on the Southeast Transitway, Riverside Station/Billings Bridge Station. Chair Holmes suggested the Motion stipulate that the remaining funds of $650,000 in the transitway account be used for this purpose, and that the additional $350,000 be transferred from another account.

The Environment and Transportation Commissioner suggested staff could take immediate steps to look for those funds and to proceed with negotiations with CN.

Councillor Kreling questioned whether there were other things staff had identified in the account which would draw down on the remaining $650,000. Mr. Miller advised there was nothing outstanding. This issue has been under investigation for a number of months and as a result, staff kept the account alive until there was some resolution. The councillor recognized that the transitway is an expensive piece of infrastructure and the difficulties it has posed on the community; however, he was somewhat concerned about the cost of this option.

Councillor Legendre was glad to see consensus among residents because he believed this modified Option 4 was best from both the resident’s viewpoint, as well as from a technical point of view, since the barrier should be close to the source of the noise in order to be most effective. While he agreed it is an expensive option, he believed this is a cost the Region must assume in order to operate the transitway.

Mr. Miller informed committee that a technical noise analysis has not been done of this alternative to a large degree and advised there could be some consequences of reflection noise. Therefore, staff would proceed with further analysis and submit those findings to committee so that councillors may be made aware of the technical considerations. At the same time, staff could report back on the issue with respect to the transfer of funds.

Councillor Doucet inquired whether the proposal for a bridge at Sawmill Creek to the Billings Bridge station was included in this same transitway budget and staff advised that although it would have been included in that account, the crossing was discarded as an option for that station. The councillor recognized that if committee approves the noise barrier today, there will be no funds left in the budget for the bridge.

Moved by J. Legendre

- Director, Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 31 May 00

Sharon Lewinson, Nortel Networks provided an overview of their "GreenCommute" program.

Councillor Cantin inquired whether it was true that Nortel had been disappointed with transit support to the GreenCommute program. Ms. Lewinson advised that it was difficult to encourage employees to take transit from Kanata to the Carling Avenue campus, for example, when quite often those trips are longer than if they travelled by car. However, they are working with OC Transpo to try and get as much service as they can so the ridership can then be established. The councillor suggested that the Chair of the Transit Commission and the General Manager of OC Transpo work with Nortel to resolve this issue.

- Director, Infrastructure Maintenance report dated 6 Jun 00

Lorne Ross, Manager, Surface Projects provided committee with a PowerPoint presentation of the item. Related information was included in the agenda.

Councillor Meilleur inquired whether trees were included in the right-of-way because problems have arisen during road reconstruction where trees are not planted because of the underground utilities. The Commissioner advised that the recently-approved Regional Road Design Guidelines include the locations for the above-surface street furniture and tree planting. He confirmed that when a road is reconstructed there will be a right-of-way protected to plant trees. The councillor referred to the reconstruction of Murray Street where a tree died or was removed at the Bistro 115. The owner of the restaurant has asked for another tree, but his request has been rejected because of the utilities in the road. The Commissioner stated he would investigate and report back to the councillor.

Councillor Cantin asked whether ducts could be placed under the road which utility companies would have to use instead of cutting up the road. The Commissioner advised that the issue of ‘utili-doors’ was discussed many years ago, but it floundered on the issue of who would front-end the cost of that installation. When the councillor questioned what the incremental cost would be of putting in a ‘utili-door’, Mr. Sheflin explained that the problem is not every utility/telecommunication company will agree in advance and therefore, the municipality would have to pay for it and then recover the cost as users come in. The councillor was interested in obtaining the costs associated with installing a communications corridor at the same time a road is being rebuilt for a sewer pipe. Mr. Sheflin advised that this has been done in some instances such as with Bell cable, but what the cost would be of installing a larger-type ‘utili-door’ has not been examined. The councillor expressed an interest in knowing what the additional cost would be per metre to the cost of a road, i.e., what is the cost of rebuilding a road completely and what would be the incremental cost of adding a communications corridor in the same trench.

Mr. Ross advised that staff put in extra ducts with the Wellington Street rehabilitation project last year, so that concept has been followed to some degree. Further, as part of the Municipal Access Agreements, if there is trenching done by the companies, they are required to put in extra ducts. The councillor recognized, therefore, that it would not be a major task to determine the costs for those extra ducts.

Councillor Davis referred to a letter sent to residents from the City of Ottawa with respect to the resurfacing of their street and the question asked about whether they were interested in converting their homes to natural gas at the same time, because the opportunity to do so may not exist in the future. She was surprised to see such a statement and questioned what the Region is doing elsewhere within the lower tier in the region. Mr. Ross advised that one of the tools staff have is the concept of a moratorium which is part of the co-ordination exercise with members of the public. This concept is used in other Canadian cities. With respect to her particular reference, the Commissioner indicated that the Transportation Committee received a presentation from Consumer’s Gas a few years because of the number of times they were working under the road and the difficulties this was posing to the Region. It was from that presentation that the gas company started using that particular notification. The councillor believed that in view of the amalgamation of the region and the 11 municipalities and the size of the new city to be created, it will be able to speak with one uniform voice so it should make it easier to streamline. The Commissioner agreed.

Councillor Davis referred to the reconstruction of Richmond Road and questioned whether staff would be interested in treating this as a pilot project to do that kind of analysis, i.e., a utili-door. She believed it would be more practical to look at that in advance rather than spending money for the reconstruction and then not having an opportunity to look at it again for several decades. Mr. Sheflin agreed and suggested it be included in the terms of reference for both that project, as well as for King Edward Avenue. He hoped it could be funded by a revenue charge on the various utilities. He added that there is a 32% loss in value of the region’s road system when these cuts are made and recognized this cannot continue to happen in the future.

The Committee Chair proposed that for all road reconstructions, a tree planting utility trench be provided, preferably for an inner boulevard. Mr. Ross confirmed that trees are an essential use of roads and where situations arise where trees cannot be provided, staff would report back to committee.

Moved by M. Meilleur

- Chair, Transportation Committee report dated 14 June 00

The Committee considered this item in conjunction with Item 10. Please refer to the Minutes contained at that item. Pursuant to the decision taken by committee, the following recommendation was dealt with as follows:

- Co-ordinator, Transportation Committee report dated 26 Jun 00

- Director, Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 4 May 00

Councillor Cantin indicated that several years ago, approximately $600,000 was taken from the $10M originally budgeted for the widening of St. Joseph Boulevard, on the understanding those funds would be used to fix three intersections along the regional road. However, the money ended up in a study account, even though the study had already been conducted for St. Joseph Boulevard. In view of the difficulties caused by traffic volumes to both businesses and pedestrians in this area and in lieu of the City of Gloucester’s commitment to fund the installation of the signals, he proposed that $600,000 be moved from the study of St. Joseph Boulevard to be used for the modifications required at this intersection. The Commissioner advised there was currently $660,000 in that study budget.

Roger Trudel, Préseault Homeowners Association explained that the real issue before committee is the level of activity there is at this intersection, i.e., pedestrian movement. The Association supports the installation of signals and, if it is important to construct a left-turn lane, he believed the Region should cover the costs associated with such construction.

Gerard Boyer, a resident of Edgar Brault Street indicated his support for the traffic control signal at this location.

Chair Holmes made reference to a letter dated 4 July 2000 from Damien Ravignat of Edgar Brault Street. While he was unable to attend the meeting, his letter conveyed his comments about this issue and his objection to the installation of signals at this intersection.

Moved by R. Cantin

- Director, Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 16 Jun 00

- Director, Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 6 Jun 00

Councillor Legendre noted that sidewalks are not recommended as part of this modification, although according Recommendation 1(a) of the Arterial Sidewalk Implementation Program report (Item 9 on today’s agenda), sidewalks will be provided when a regional road is altered. The Commissioner explained that the intersection is within the greenbelt and therefore does not demand such a facility. The councillor opined, however, that the region should be looking to the future and suggested it would be less expensive to install a sidewalk now rather than waiting until there is a need. He proposed that whatever decision is taken on this item, it should be consistent with what is being proposed in the sidewalk report.

The Director advised that if committee votes to put in sidewalks, it will postpone this modification for the rest of the year.

Moved by J. Legendre

- A/Regional Solicitor report dated 19 Jun 00

The Commissioner advised that after Toronto, Ottawa-Carleton has the largest number of traffic signal installations so staff have a lot of experience in this regard and believe these are appropriate levels necessary to ensure public safety. Councillor Cantin referred to the number of bulbs he sees burned out at intersections and requested an update of the relamping program. Staff agreed to provide that information to the councillor.

Lois Smith suggested the following items did not appear in the report, but should be added:

- Motion TC-28-97

- Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner report dated 26 Jun 00

Councillor Cantin suggested the report include an overriding proviso that sidewalks only be constructed "where appropriate". He explained that where there are no people within reasonable walking distance of an intersection, and there is no sidewalk leading up to the intersection, it did not seem logical that the region provide the facility. He was trying to save tax dollars by eliminating the need to even design a sidewalk where the need for one may never exist. He believed that the priority should be that these facilities be provided where the area is urbanized.

In response to a question posed by Councillor Legendre about the provision of sidewalks in the Greenbelt, Brendan Reid, Manager, Infrastructure and Projects Planning advised that the Regional Official Plan recommends the provision of sidewalks on both sides of regional roads in the urban area and a sidewalk or pathway on at least one side in the Greenbelt. This policy was established to enhance safety and security for people, especially in situations where they may be forced to walk alongside the road in the event of car failure. The provision of sidewalks in a program will have to be based on a priority system and he suggested that one of the criteria might be the number of pedestrians in the area.

Chair Holmes questioned whether staff expect the municipalities to bring with them as part of the amalgamation process, a separate budget for these "missing links" and B. Reid advised that this policy is for regional roads and will be applied to the new arterial roads in the new City of Ottawa; there would be a similar policy required for the local collector roads. The Committee Chair proposed that if the budget staff recommends is not provided in the 2001 budget, that this item be brought back to the new Council in January 2001.

Lois Smith referred to the issue of winter maintenance and indicated that in her involvement with the Audible Pedestrian Signals Advisory Committee, it was made known that snow should be plowed from the outside towards the centre so it does not end up on the sidewalk. Also, in the rural area where there are particularly icy conditions, she referred to a machine that ridges the road parallel to the direction of the vehicle, so it roughens the surface for ease of driving. By modifying this machine so the edge of the snow plow is on the sidewalk, Ms. Smith believed it can create similar ridges thereby making it easier for pedestrians to get along.

Moved by R. Cantin

D. Brousseau asked committee for direction about intersections in the rural areas. The Commissioner of Planning and Development Approvals confirmed that the policy states there will be sidewalks on both sides of the road in an urban setting and on one side in a rural setting (Greenbelt).

- Inquiry TC-27-00

- Director, Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 27 June 00

Doug Brousseau, Director of Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services stated that the issue of drivers and fatigue and size of vehicles, has been before committee in the past and Council has adopted a position on numerous occasions. Canadians for Responsible and Safe Highways (CRASH) is very concerned with these issues and the Ministry of Transportation is in the process of reviewing hours of work for truck drivers. He introduced Paul Cavalier, Supervisor, Driver Training Section, Fleet Operations who has 30 years experience in the driver-trainer business and is quite familiar with the Commercial Vehicle Operator’s Registry (CVOR). Also with him is Cliff Wall, Driver-Trainer, who has spent 22 years in the trucking industry and who has experience in local pick-up and delivery as well as short and long-haul highway driving.

In an overview of how the Region got to where it is with the current safety regulations (federally and provincially), P. Cavalier explained that in the 1980’s it was determined that the transportation industry should be deregulated for entry into the industry for trucking, i.e., they wanted to allow size and demand to regulate the size of the industry. In 1989, Transport Canada, through the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), developed legislation removing these regulations and replaced the regulatory controls with 16 safety standards called the National Safety Code (NSC) (Ontario’s version is the CVOR). The NSC and the CVOR makes all carriers responsible for: safe driving, the actions of their vehicles (including condition and maintenance) and ensuring the load is secure.

Mr. Cavalier stated that the hours of service under the NSC, regulates the number of hours driven, hours on duty and the total number of hours in specific periods of time. Initially, the NSC wanted to mirror the United States (U.S.) standards of 10 hours driving, 15 hours on-duty and a minimum of 8 hours off-duty after 15 hours. However, this was not to be in Canada, partially because of the longer distances between rest areas. So, it was lobbied for and achieved in Canada, that a driver can travel 13 hours a day and be on duty for 15 hours in a 24-hour period (60 hours in a 7-day cycle, 70 hours in an 8-day cycle and up to 120 hours in a 14-day cycle). It results in a 23-hour day and in actuality, the driver can be on duty for 16 hours.

C. Wall explained the differences between the current Transport Canada regulations, the proposed regulations and what CRASH has proposed. The details of his presentation are contained at Annex A of the staff report. A chart depicting the comparison between the three is held on file. In summary, he noted that the intent of both reports (Transport Canada and from CRASH) is to increase the level of road safety. He further noted that:

P. Cavalier added that once the legislation goes through public input, the provinces will have to modify their own regulations. He confirmed there will be an opportunity to submit comments to Transport Canada.

Councillor Cantin recalled how the weigh stations on Highway 7 are seldom open so he was skeptical about the amount of inspections being conducted on large trucks on this highway. He was very concerned about the increasing size of loads on some trucks and the impact this has on other road users. Staff advised that maintenance requirements for these vehicles are very stringent.

Councillor Legendre found it incredible that drivers can work to the period of time they are allowed to, in view of the fact that others will pay for their errors. He wondered how tamper-proof the on-board monitoring devices will be, as recommended by CRASH in its submission. Staff advised that on-board devices can be tampered with, but progress is being made to create ones that are tamper proof.

Councillor Cantin thought the Ontario Labour Code limited the number of hours a person can work to 48 hours each week. The Solicitor, Ernest McArthur, advised that federal legislation takes precedent over any provincial legislation and since this is a regulation of inter-provincial trucking and business, the Ontario Labour Code would not apply. Also, some truck drivers are independent contractors and would therefore not fall under the Code’s provisions of limited working hours. The councillor thought federal legislation still had a limit on the number of hours a person could work, so the Solicitor agreed to research the legislation and report back to the councillor before the item goes to council.

Bob Evans, CRASH was of the opinion that operational efficiencies (longer working hours) and economic benefits to the economy are driving the recommended proposals put forward by Transport Canada. However, CRASH maintains that fatigue kills and according to the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, it may be a factor in as many as 30-40% of all serious accidents involving large trucks. According to the Transport Canada expert panel report, a driver working an 84-hour shift is a danger to not only themselves, but to other road users as well. CRASH believes that the regulations being proposed in Canada are far more lax than those being proposed in the U.S and are not compatible with the U.S. regulations. Further, the Canadian proposal lacks a lot of necessary information to justify what is being proposed. Mr. Evans believed it was totally inappropriate to expect a truck driver to work 120 hours in 14 days (one of the cycles being proposed). He asked that committee endorse the safer U.S. plan, which incorporates the recommendations of the scientific expert panel, or alternatively, amend the staff recommendations to include those scientific recommendations. A copy of his submission is held on file.

Councillor Legendre proposed three modified recommendations which were put forward in the CRASH document:

When asked to provide his opinion on Recommendation 5, the Director advised that staff are not experts in the trucking industry and could therefore not determine whether or not it would be acceptable. He suggested there may be economics involved; hauling from Toronto to Montreal, for example, might require a 14-hour period to make that trip economically viable. While he appreciated this comment, the councillor explained that his focus was road safety and he queried what the scientific experts had to report on that particular issue. Mr. Wall advised that their recommendation was that when only an 8-hour off-duty rest time is provided, the resulting time left for sleep was 5.5 hours. Therefore, if drivers were only going to be allowed to shut down for 8 hours at the end of the shift, there should be an additional 2 hours given to the driver, during the course of that shift, to take ‘power naps’. Staff recommended, therefore, that the shift be extended from 8 to 10 hours, based on the expert panel suggestion on recommended hours of rest for drivers. The modified Recommendation 5 would add 2 more hours to that cycle. The councillor stated therefore that his Recommendation 5 would be an amendment to staff Recommendation 4.

Mr. Evans believed staff was referring to 10 continuous hours, so what they are recommending is taking away the two hours that are required under the proposal that drivers take for power naps while they are working, and put it into the 8 hours of continuous time. In his view, that is better than the Transport Canada proposal because he believed it was essential that drivers take the 10-hours consecutive time. Mr. Wall added that if committee adopts Recommendation 5, it is exactly what the U.S. proposes under its regulations.

Chair Holmes inquired whether CRASH interprets the staff recommendations to be reflective of what is being proposed by the industry and Mr. Evans confirmed he was of that opinion.

Councillor Cantin wondered whether Transport Canada plans to hold specific public meetings to discuss the issue. Mr. Evans explained that they have stepped out of the process and the work is being developed through the CCMTA, a federal/provincial body, and they are leaving it to the provinces to conduct their own public consultation. Meanwhile, he stated that CRASH has been anxious to have this issue addressed by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport. Mr. Evans added that what will drive this exercise, once the policy is formally agreed on by the CCMTA, is a revision to the Federal Hours of Service Regulations, which is one area where the senior government has regulations that are meaningful in terms of trucking industry operation. Their regulations apply to all extra-provincial carriers, i.e. any company that crosses a boundary.

In view of these comments, the councillor proposed that the Ottawa-Carleton Liberal Caucus request the Transport Minister to conduct public consultation and that AMO and FCM be asked to be an intervenor because all municipalities have an interest in ensuring that when these drivers get off the highway and get into the cities, that they drive safely.

Lois Smith referred to recent studies that speak to the physiological effect on the body when a person drives from east to west and north to south and from working varying work shifts. She concluded that sleeping in stages is not good for the body. Also, the kind of road being driven affects the driver’s capabilities, i.e., miles of straight highway can be hypnotic over a long period of time, driving on roads alongside cliffs can be stressful, et cetera. She opined that these are very real issues that should be examined because of the effect they have on the fatigue level in a driver.

Councillor Cantin recollected that Canada used to have a very good rail service, but because trucks were given all kinds of leeway, they negatively affected the railway system as an effective means of transporting goods. The result is an enormous number of large trucks on public highways and consequently, more fatal collisions. He maintained that if the Region does not encourage MPP’s and the Minister of Transport to have public hearings on this important issue, it will miss its opportunity to change the legislation being proposed.

Moved by J. Legendre

Councillor Meilleur agreed the Region must join forces to lobby both the provincial and federal levels of government because big companies such as General Motors and Ford, plus the tire industry, are lobbying strongly for the adoption of these new regulations.

- Director, Engineering Division memorandum dated 14 Jun 00

Councillor Legendre referred to his memo dated 5 July 2000 which detailed the current system for traffic control signal warrants. He explained that while the system apparently has a component which addresses pedestrians, the tools do not seem to reflect that fact. He believed the committee needs this information tool in order to make sound decisions and he suggested that staff be directed to look at how other jurisdictions deal with these situations and, should nothing better exist elsewhere, suggested staff undertake some research along the lines of the Walking Security Index.

The Commissioner advised committee that the Department is coming under severe constraints with respect to the availability of staff resources and he believed the matter should more appropriately be examined by the new city of Ottawa.

The councillor suggested that in order to at least get the process moving, staff could initiate the research into other jurisdictions. Chair Holmes suggested that staff be asked to do some research on what other cities across Canada do this year and report back next year.

Councillor Davis expressed frustration at the delay of completing the final overlay on Kirkwood Avenue. She noted there have already been three cut-backs on the traffic calming measures, causing more frustration and complaints from the public. It has been this way for almost a year and consequently, has been a negative reflection toward traffic calming. Staff agreed to report back to the councillor.

Councillor Meilleur asked staff to increase the cleaning of Rideau Street, including the sidewalk, between Sussex Drive and King Edward Avenue.

Councillor Legendre asked that the word "(pedestrian)" be deleted from the last paragraph at page 5. He explained that was not what he had said and the sentence should appropriately read as follows: "The councillor referred to the transportation hierarchy adopted by Council in 1997 and the fact the focus was on moving people."

The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.