Chair: D. Holmes

Members: W. Byrne, C. Doucet, H. Kreling, J. Legendre, M. Meilleur, M. McGoldrick-Larsen

M. Bellemare, R. Cantin, L. Davis

Note:
1. Underlining indicates a new or amended recommendation approved by Committee.
2. Reports requiring Council consideration will be presented to Council on 14 and 28 June 2000 in Transportation Committee Reports 63 and 64, respectively.

- Director Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 19 May 00

- Director Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 18 May 00

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

Philippe Landry, Safety and Traffic Studies Engineer advised that at this intersection, St. Joseph Boulevard is a four-laned urban arterial roadway surrounded by light commercial shopping facilities, a fast-food restaurant, a school and a church. Edgar Brault Street is a two-lane local road with residential homes. Currently, 102 vehicles turn left onto that street from St. Joseph in an 8-hour period, but this volume is expected to increase if a traffic signal is installed. There would have to be 255 vehicles/hour using this intersection before signals would be warranted. While staff do not recommend the installation of signals (Recommendation 1), as requested by the City of Gloucester, the Committee may wish to approve Recommendation 2, which provides for signal installation, with a westbound left-turn lane. While the City has requested that the Region forego this particular requirement, Mr. Landry pointed out that the lane is necessary to allow the traffic light to operate effectively and efficiently. A left-turn lane will:

- Director Mobility Services and Corporate Fleet Services report dated 19 May 00

- Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner report dated 29 May 00

- Planning and Development Approvals Commissioner report dated 4 Apr 00

The Committee received the following public delegations:

David Gladstone, Chair, Steering Committee for APETIS & City Centre Coalition stated that the real issue before committee is the future of the Airport Parkway/Bronson corridor. Following the Region’s acquisition of the Parkway from the NCC in the 1990’s and to address the residential and commercial growth in the areas, two major changes have been made to the Parkway: in 1992, it was connected to Bank Street and Albion Road via an extension of Lester Road and six years later, northbound ramps from Hunt Club Road were constructed. Consequently, both links have generated substantial volumes of additional car traffic, with the Lester Road extension being a key connection between the Rideau-Carleton Raceway/Casino and downtown Ottawa. As a direct result, these changes have brought parts of the Parkway and Bronson to capacity at peak hours, leading to cut-through traffic in Old Ottawa South and The Glebe and to delays in travelling to the Airport. He emphasized that Bronson has become a hazardous and unpleasant road for pedestrians and cyclists.

Mr. Gladstone indicated that the 1997 Official Plan foresaw the Airport Parkway reaching capacity and included two ways of addressing this via the twinning of the Parkway and building the Alta Vista Parkway. However, such measures would substantially increase car capacity in the area between the Rideau River and the Airport, and he wondered where those vehicles would go north and west of the Rideau River since there is clearly no room for more cars in peak hours on Bronson, Bank, Queen Elizabeth Driveway, Colonel By Drive, or Nicholas Street.

In summary, Mr. Gladstone pointed out that the recommendations of the Steering Committee call for the Region to emphasize its investment in bus and light-rail transit as a flexible and cost-effective means of handling the growth in transportation demand in the areas between the Airport and downtown Ottawa.

Greg Wright, Old Ottawa South Community Association supported the recommendations of the Steering Committee. He stated that the APETIS report means more and more traffic, with more cross-cutting through the various communities of City Centre. It also means that the effect of the Hunt Club ramps has made it evident that the traffic problems have simply been moved from one area to another. Prior to the ramps being installed, there were 2300 vehicles/hour at the intersection of Sunnyside and Bronson. It is projected there will be 3550 in 20 years, a phenomenal increase. The Association does not want to see any further expansion along this corridor such as the twinning of the Parkway or construction of the ramp at Walkley Road. He recommended that the committee adopt some of the innovative suggestions proposed by the Steering Committee and to give light rail a chance and to move aggressively towards traffic demand management instead of traffic supply demand management. Further, the Region should take steps to meet the legitimate transportation needs of all people in the region as they move north/south.

Joel Hugues, Airport Authority stated that the twinning of the Airport Parkway has been a part of the Region’s Official Plan for a long time and given the importance of the airport for the community and the observed and forecasted increases in traffic, not following through with this proposal would not constitute sound planning. In regards to staff Recommendation 3, he advised that at this point in time there is no provision for earmarking money for the extension of light rail to the airport in their plans.

In response to a question raised by Councillor Legendre, Mr. Hugues advised that the Authority has a mandate to operate the airport facilities, but no mandate to operate or finance any infrastructure located outside of its property. The councillor interpreted his comments to light rail to be rather negative to which Mr. Hugues responded by stating very few airports have rail links to their facilities and even in the vast majority of cases, such links are not financially viable and are generally subsidized by the government. The councillor referred to a comment he made to the Authority’s Chief Executive Officer about whether they would still be in favour of the ramps at Hunt Club Road if the twinning of the Airport does not proceed. He was never provided an answer so the councillor hoped Mr. Hugues would convey to his Board that the Region has limitations on what it can do and it should try to put those things in the balance as well.

Claus Hafner asked that the committee refrain from adding more vehicular and truck traffic and to proceed with light rail. He stated that many studies indicate that the pressure on the drivers and passengers in cars in congestion is such that it adds significantly to the mental deterioration of the population. The intangible disadvantages include the affects on the health care system because more traffic means more chances for accidents. He believed such pressures would be very much alleviated by allowing people to use a train.

Pat Steenberg indicated that the Hunt Club ramps were justified on the grounds they would reduce cut-through traffic in the southern communities bordering the Parkway. Assurances were made at that time, that it was not an issue of additional cars but that the proposed ramps would merely redistribute existing traffic. However, she maintained that the study includes inconsistencies and omissions in the data makes it difficult to compare the before and after ramp conditions. Where the community has attempted to verify the volume figures in Appendix H, they have found them to be inconsistent with intersection counts drawn from the Region’s own data base. More importantly, she noted the intersection counts sometimes lead to conclusions that are the opposite of those sited in Appendix H. Also, there is no context given for those figures, i.e., when were the counts taken, might there be factors other than the opening of the ramps which could have accounted for the changes noted.

In her analysis of Appendix H, Ms. Steenberg stated that the report says the traffic volume changes resulting from the construction of the ramps, have emerged as anticipated, when in fact, increases in peak hour traffic on Bronson are double and triple the consultants projections. While the report says that the Bank Street corridor has benefited considerably from the new Hunt Club ramps, north of the Rideau River peak hour volumes on Bank Street have mostly increased or remained the same and the only reduction in traffic there occurred between Hunt Club and Heron. Further, Appendix H states that the volume of cars transferring from Bronson to the Queen Elizabeth Driveway has increased as has the volume on Fifth Avenue and minor roads in the Bronson Avenue corridor do not appear to have experienced any consistent negative impact. In fact, she exclaimed, 1000 cars use Findlay, Broadway and Torrington every morning in the peak period. And morning rush hour traffic on Glebe Avenue has increased by 67%.

In conclusion, Ms. Steenberg noted that the justification for building the ramps in the first place was seriously flawed and therefore the decision to proceed with their construction was based on faulty information. She maintained that neglecting to incorporate into those projections induced volumes is a serious deficiency. The results of the monitoring study clearly reveal that all the gain has accrued to communities in the south.

Councillor Meilleur inquired why there appeared to be discrepancies between the figures in the APETIS report and those referred to by the speaker. B. Reid, Manager, Infrastructure and Project Planning advised that the figures used in that report are counts that were carried out before and after, approximately one year following the opening of the ramps.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen inquired when the last origin-destination study was conducted for increased traffic volumes in the Region and staff advised it was last done in 1995 as preparatory work for the Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The councillor stated that since then and in the past couple of years, the TMP has been unable to keep pace with transportation needs. She was aware that staff are in the process of examining the priorities identified in 1997 and will be reporting back to committee. Mr. Reid confirmed that staff are in the process of updating the TMP to the extent of reporting on issues that have changes and will be reporting back before the end of the year.

Ed Foohey, Dow’s Lake Residents Association stated that as a visually-impaired individual, he has particular problems crossing the Bronson Avenue corridor. He explained that twice a day, he has the occasion to cross Bronson at Fifth Avenue and over the past two years, has seen the situation get much worse. Without the aid of an audible signal at this particular intersection, he often relies on the sounds of traffic to tell him whether or not to cross. However, during peak periods, this becomes nearly impossible because there is so ambient noise, he cannot discern whether a car with a quiet motor is turning or moving through the intersection. He asked that the committee do what it can to alleviate the situation and to make this road safer, especially by the elderly and by school children who have to cross Bronson twice a day during peak hours.

John Legg, Action Sandy Hill (ASH) believes the recommendations of the Steering Committee are more balanced than those of the consultant, because they attempt to reconcile the problem of moving people in and out of the central area, with the desire of the people living in the central area, to have communities which are safe, quiet and not polluted. The recommendations of the consultant, however, are based on an approach which usually seeks to accommodate automobile traffic. ASH believes staff Recommendation 4 to be the most objectionable in terms of maintaining the livability of the central communities; it takes a step towards studying the ramifications of twinning the Airport Parkway, which, in their view, is premature. Because the light rail pilot project has not been implemented or evaluated, this project will diminish some of the load on the Parkway and it is not known how much this will be.

Mr. Legg commented that the consultant estimates that light rail will reduce volumes on Bronson/Parkway by at least 100 vehicles/hour. However, to arrive at that figure, a number of assumptions have been made, all of which could vary significantly. The study which monitored the effects of connecting Hunt Club to the Parkway concluded that the actual amount of traffic attracted to the Bronson corridor has been greater than previously anticipated. Any step, therefore, which increases the capacity of arteries to carry more cars into the central core should only be taken following completion of the trial period for the light rail pilot project.

With respect to the Steering Committee Recommendation 5, to initiate a study on replacing the plan to build an Alta Vista Parkway with an Alta Vista public transit corridor, Mr. Legg commented that should that corridor be built, it would bring a new flood of cars into the central area through Nicholas Street in Sandy Hill. The twinning of the Parkway and the construction of an Alta Vista Parkway would result in more congestion, cut-through traffic and disruption of residential parking. Both these pro-automobile projects would contribute to the deterioration of the core of Ottawa and would result in increased use of automobiles for commuting, increased pollution and encouragement of more urban sprawl across the Region. He believed that Recommendation 2 of the Steering Committee sums it up nicely by suggesting "that the ROP’s emphasis on livable communities and mass transit be given priority over twinning the Airport Parkway".

John Kane, Glebe Community Association questioned where the twinning of the Airport Parkway would be. Further, he questioned what the Region plans to do with the problems it has put upon the downtown communities, problems which have occurred since the Hunt Club ramps were built. He urged committee to proceed quickly with the recommendations of the Steering Committee.

In response to his question of where the twinning would take place, Mr. Reid advised that one of the unexpected results of introducing the ramps at Hunt Club is that there is now quite a clear distinction between the traffic volumes north and south of Hunt Club. While the ramps have added considerably to the Parkway between Hunt Club and Brookfield, the reverse is happening in the south and less on the Parkway south of Hunt Club because motorists can now travel north on Bank and get onto the Airport Parkway at Hunt Club. There is now a clear break in the volumes of traffic on the Parkway and the twinning can now be divided into two distinct phases; north and south of Hunt Club Road.

David Jeanes, Transport 2000 advised that his main concern is access to and from the Airport from the point of view of public transportation, inner modalism and the needs of the high-tech sector in Ottawa. In 1997, he raised his concerns with the Airport Authority, the Board of Trade, the Tourist and Convention Bureau and taxi companies, because he felt the process was being advertised mainly in the south end of the city for the residents who would benefit from these ramps and the airport matter was not being addressed. He projected there would be severe problems for reliable access to the airport and these problems have materialized. He explained that one of the reasons there is less traffic south of Hunt Club is because there is less traffic in and out of the airport because some of it is being forced to find other ways of getting into town. He indicated that it has been proved everywhere that the most effective way of keeping traffic flowing on congested roadways is to have an alternative transit facility parallel to that road. Therefore, he supports the improvement of both bus and light rail facilities parallel to the Parkway. He noted that light rail can also provide good transit links to the high tech industry in the east and west of the Region, through links with the transitway and through development of the available east-west rail lines. He stood firmly behind the findings of the Steering Committee of the Light Rail project and issued his support for Recommendation 3 in the staff report.

Cam Robertson, City Centre Coalition spoke to the issue of the quality of life in the various communities along the Bronson corridor as well as in the communities further east which would be affected by the proposed Alta Vista expressway. The Max Group report and the City Centre Coalition’s response to that report, both provide an idea of the congestion and cut-through traffic that affect the communities during peak periods. The length of the rush hour congestion has increased as a result of increased volumes. The Steering Committee report addresses the overall movement of traffic in and around the areas, as well as recommending specific measures to ameliorate traffic at particular locations. It recommends putting transit solutions first, instead of providing more roads and ramps which will only generate more traffic. He believed the light rail project should have a chance to prove itself before any further work is done to twin the Parkway.

Garry Lindberg, Alta Vista Drive Residents Association spoke against Recommendation 5 of the Steering Committee, which suggests the initiation of a study to replace the plan for an Alta Vista parkway with an Alta Vista public transit corridor. He reminded committee that the Alta Vista parkway has been a transportation corridor for more than 50 years and has been included in the ROP since its formation 30 years ago. Its present configuration was developed for the current ROP after more than two years of environmental assessment. It presented a comprehensive set of recommendations on the transportation demands to and from the southeast sector. It recommended that the Alta Vista Parkway be for vehicles and HOV/buses. The Steering Committee’s recommendation should not be considered until there has been full consultation with community associations such as Canterbury, Alta Vista, Faircrest Heights, Ridgemount, Alta Vista Drive, Riverview, Southkeys Greenboro, as well as interest groups directly affected by the recommendation. He believed that Recommendation 5 is premature given the current study being conducted in the Alta Vista Drive/Smyth Road transportation strategy. He urged that should this recommendation be on the table for consideration, that the committee reject or defer consideration until after the Alta Vista Drive/Smyth Road transportation strategy is complete and until all the community associations are consulted.

Lois K. Smith suggested that the Audible Pedestrian Signals Committee be consulted as part of the Glebe Area Transportation Study, as referenced at Section (b) under "Discussion of Consultants Recommendations". The intersections of Bronson and Carling and Bronson and Fifth are of particular concern for the installation of audible signals. Also referenced in that section, is the proposal to install a speed bump on Broadway Avenue and she believed this should more appropriately be a hump. Ms. Smith was not in favour of allowing parking on Carling west of Cambridge at all times except week-day peak periods, and if approved, that the peak times be extended to ensure congestion does not occur. In reference to the Bronson/Sunnyside traffic circle which was mentioned in the City of Ottawa’s letter at Annex C, Ms. Smith believed that these facilities only work when there is a very small amount of traffic.

Harry Halliwell opined that building wider roads does not solve the problems of traffic; it simply offer motorists another route of travel and when that route fills up, people will be demanding a wider road.

Ida Henderson, Dalhousie Community Association fully endorsed the report and recommendations put forward by the Steering Committee. Their community has a great deal of experience with traffic and given the geographic realities of Ottawa, they do require major north/south routes. However, they are not prepared to have their community seriously damaged in order to accommodate this. As indicated in the ROP, the DCA believe it is time to focus on moving people, not cars, hence their disappointment with the consultant’s report which starts with the premise that keeping cars moving is the desirable outcome. The DCA feel that moving people in the most environmentally-friendly cost-efficient manner is the desirable outcome. She urged committee to support the recommendations of the Steering Committee.

Patrick O’Brien, Carleton University advised that they have been involved in the Steering Committee and its report. He noted that a number of commuters using Bronson Avenue are coming to the university and he recognized that these numbers will increase. Their major concerns, however, include the volume of traffic and the speed at which motorists are travelling down Bronson. He strongly endorsed the recommendation to give the light rail pilot project a true assessment period in the hopes it may be an answer to some of the traffic problems.

Linda Hoad, City Centre Coalition indicated that from this exercise, they have learned that transportation engineers do not have the tools to accurately predict induced traffic. This is evidenced by the exceeded anticipated volumes as a result of the opening of the Hunt Club ramps. The same can be applied to a new transitway infrastructure; more people will use something that wasn’t formally there, or that has been improved, but it is not known exactly how many people and what will be the magnitude of the change. She recognized the importance of taking things slower; to evaluate new infrastructure and find out what it will actually do before rushing ahead to build more, particularly in the same corridor. She suggested the Region should be working on transportation demand management, stating it has a greater potential than some experts believe it has and it should be given a fair chance before moving ahead with more road building.

Councillor Doucet proposed the following:

Councillor Meilleur proposed the addition of the following to Recommendation 4, above: "not until the Light Rail Pilot Project has been completed and evaluated."

If Recommendation 4, as amended, is approved, Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen questioned how long it would be before the report for the twinning of the Parkway could be brought forward. B. Reid advised that since the light rail project is anticipated to be in place by June 2001, operate for two years and then assessed, it is unlikely the report requested of staff (Motion 34) would be brought forward until approximately 2005. Pam Sweet, Director, Policy and Infrastructure Planning, clarified that staff would report back after the first year of the implementation of the light rail project and at the end of the second year, Council will have to decide whether to continue it as a pilot project, to make it permanent or to drop it altogether. In light of these clarifications, Councillor Legendre proposed that the amendment proposed by Councillor Meilleur be further amended to incorporate "that the evaluation be after two years of the Pilot Rail Project". Councillor Meilleur concurred with this amendment.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen referred to a recent announcement in the newspaper that there is a possibility the Region’s population will expand 100% and not 40% as projected in the OP. She questioned what the anticipated rate of growth actually is and how a higher population projection will affect transportation planning in the next few years. The Commissioner of Planning and Development Approvals, Nick Tunnacliffe, advised that since the Region last reviewed its OP, growth as a whole is almost exactly what has been predicted. While staff do not have good figures for economy and growth of employment as a whole, those quoted in the announcement the councillor referred to, were based on projections of high tech employment, which were then extrapolated to the rest of the economy as a whole. He was doubtful there would be growth of the order speculated.

Councillor Doucet spoke passionately about the concerns expressed today by the residents and communities living along the Bronson Avenue corridor. He recognized and understood their concerns, fears and anger at the unbelievably high volume of traffic that has been pumped through this corridor since the ramps were open at Hunt Club. The result of the monitoring report clearly shows the devastating impact it has had on the communities, especially with an increase in the traffic on local streets. He empathized with the comments made today by residents who have to live with this burden of additional traffic and the danger it poses to their lives and the impact on their quality of life. He believed his Motions address these concerns and will provide an opportunity for an in-depth review of the recommendations brought forward by the Steering Committee.

Councillor Stewart requested clarification of Recommendation 2 as proposed by Councillor Doucet. The Committee Chair confirmed that the matters which relate to the NCC, RCAG, OC Transpo and Carleton University would be referred to those agencies and anything that relates to the Region would be brought back and reported to the appropriate committee by staff.

The Committee Chair excused herself from the meeting to attend another function, but conveyed her support for the Motions before committee. The committee meeting was resumed, with Councillor Legendre as Acting Chair.

Councillor Stewart referred to the increasing growth in the south and how the communities in Capital and River wards will be impacted. She noted that many community associations from her ward had submitted comments on this issue, including Canada Post, supporting the immediate construction of the Walkley ramps. The monitoring report clearly shows that building that one off-ramp will have no negligible impact on the Glebe as it affects southbound traffic only. The two major benefits of the ramp are that it will allow residents heading to the communities of Riverside south and Hunt Club north, to get off at Walkley instead of having to go all the way to Brookfield Road and cutting through a residential community. It will actually alleviate that congestion on the Parkway and will not put a single additional car into the Glebe or Ottawa south communities. She believed it was unacceptable to continue to defer this simple, logical infrastructure project which is a high priority for the Region.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen stated that residents living in the suburbs do not have the level of public transit they need to get in and out of the city. And until that occurs, there will be no relief on Bronson Avenue. She agreed that the light rail pilot project is a great idea, but until there is an established ridership, there will be no change. She opined that all communities in the Region will be affected by the projected population growth and she believed some of the remedial measures suggested by the Steering Committee were the appropriate steps to be taken, until it is understood more clearly where the traffic growth is being generated. She suggested that it was time for another origin/destination study before moving forward with many of the transportation planning issues.

Councillor Meilleur believed that communities should work collaboratively to address these issues, but was not in favour of moving traffic from one community to another. With respect to the differences in statistics referred to by one of the delegations, she suggested staff and community representatives meet to discuss where and why there are differences. She encouraged committee to support her amendment because to do a study when it is not known what the positive or negative effect of light rail will be, is a waste of money because the facts will be different.

The Committee voted on the Motions as follows:

Moved by C. Doucet

Moved by M. Meilleur

Moved by M. McGoldrick-Larsen

Councillor Legendre requested information with respect to the proposal about the installation of waste receptacles in the urban area. He was advised through his office that this is an item being considered by the City of Ottawa. The Environment and Transportation Commissioner confirmed there was a proposal that was to come forward on waste receptacles. Staff decided it would wait until next year with the new City of Ottawa and the city now wishes to proceed and it is to come to the Transportation Committee and Council because these receptacles will be on Regional roads.

On a similar issue, Councillor Meilleur expressed concern about the bench/waste receptacle that has been installed at the bus stop on Beechwood Avenue because it appeared to block visibility of the shelter. The Commissioner indicated that staff would examine this particular location and if there is a problem, the seat/receptacle can be moved.

The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m.