CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

1. WARRANTS FOR PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS AND TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS

The Acting Environment and Transportation Commissioner provided a detailed overview of the report, followed by an explanation by Greg Kent, Operational Studies Engineer, of the warrant analysis and evaluation process for the pedestrian signal program.

Councillor Byrne stated that in some instances where there is no immediate crossing at a school, children will walk to the nearest signalized intersection and then double-back and she questioned whether staff consider those numbers as part of their count for that area. G. Kent advised they do not because they try to identify the volume that does not have a protected crossing. However, while every signal analysis has its own merits, it was suggested that staff could take the number of people crossing at a signalized intersection and add it to the volume crossing mid-block and if the total is over 200, that detail could be taken into consideration.

Councillor Davis did not believe the signal analysis captures the dangerous crossings in her ward because people generally stay away from such locations and she questioned whether staff have ever surveyed pedestrians to determine their preferred travel patterns to reflect a more accurate account of where the crossing demand would be located. By way of example, she indicated that the intersection of Parkdale at Tyndall was once warranted for a signal, but its standing was put on hold pending the completion of the Parkdale Area Traffic Study. Consequently, the intersection no longer meet the warrants because people have found other ways to get to their destination and the councillor was concerned that this particular location would drop from the warrant studies as a result. Mr. Brousseau assured the councillor that this particular intersection would not be forgotten. However, while he understood the dilemma faced by the councillor, he did not recommend installing signals just because people have said they would use it if it was there, because there are already nine locations that are warranted. The councillor suggested the budget should be such that all those locations can be accommodated in 1999 and D. Brousseau admitted the Department has provided for an increase in this program for next year’s budget.

G. Kent provided an overview of the warrants for traffic control signals. He indicated that before a signal is installed, other approaches must be tried first to see if they work. He explained the length of time it takes for a motorist to react to a signal, move into the intersection and complete the manoeuvre and this information indicates whether there will be enough gaps in the traffic to ensure that conflicts do not occur. D. Brousseau added that in addition to determining whether there are enough gaps in the traffic, it must also be determined how many hours in a day that is a problem and this is all part of the dilemma of whether to solve a problem that only occurs for a couple of hours in the morning, when there are other locations that have problems during the entire day.

In determining the number of vehicles, Councillor Cantin questioned whether staff give extra weight to heavy vehicles which take longer to pass through an intersection, thereby producing smaller gaps between vehicles. Staff advised they generally do not, although there have been cases where staff have made that argument to the Ministry of Transportation in the case of buses. As these vehicles tend to be moving at a slower speed, they will create a bigger gap in front of it, so there is a better chance for vehicles to get out of the intersection. The councillor was concerned that these vehicles take longer to stop if they have to and suggested that must be a factor in the calculation. Staff confirmed it was a factor from time to time. The councillor presumed that since this is the Region’s new standard, it can certainly make those changes accordingly. He further stated that some intersections have higher vehicle traffic most of the time and did not think it practical to count them like all other intersections. G. Malinsky, Manager, Safety and Traffic Studies Branch indicated that the Canadian Capacity Guide for Signalized Intersection includes expansion factors to convert heavy vehicles to passenger car equivalents and he believed the volume could be referred to as passenger car equivalents instead of total vehicles.

Councillor Bellemare requested clarification on the number of hours used for pedestrian and vehicle counts. G. Malinsky indicated that the Region’s practice (which is also the MTO guideline) stipulates a count over an 8-hour period for vehicles and the pedestrian count is done over the same length of time, however during that analysis those numbers are compared with 12-hour vehicle volumes. The councillor wondered that if the 8-hour requirement was reduced to 4-hours, would that eliminate the non-peak hour evaluation and focus primarily on the peak hours. Staff confirmed this fact, but added the number of warranted locations might rise considerably. For an intersection that is 75% warranted, the councillor questioned whether reducing the counting time from 8 to 6 hours would result in it becoming 100% warranted and inquired how staff equates the two in order to make a comparison. G. Malinsky indicated that at any given intersection, if over a 4-hour period it is 100% warranted, there may also be 4 hours where it is only 80% warranted, but since nothing is count in-between, the number is the average of those eight hours.

The councillor made reference to the perception/reaction times listed for the average driver and based on those estimated inquired whether there is in fact less than a one-second difference for drivers in the urban area between perception and reaction time. Staff indicated there are differences between the urban and rural environment and it is the individuals willingness to accept a smaller gap in the urban area has been proven to be as low as 6 seconds to make the decision and the crossing. The councillor stated that if the average driver takes 5.25 seconds to react to an opening in traffic, but the report states that the actual time is 6 seconds, it means that person has .75 seconds to react in order to get into that traffic. Staff advised that the 5.25 time is applicable more to a rural condition; in an urban situation, the assumption would be that the reaction time would be the same, but the perception time, because of the conditions, would be quicker. The councillor maintained that the perception/reaction time would be constant for each individual driver, no matter what type of setting they were driving in. D. Brousseau explained that ordinarily it takes 9 seconds for a driver to decide and to make the crossing, but in an urban environment, it has been observed that the decision and the crossing can happen as quickly as 6 seconds. The difference is that there is more traffic in an urban environment and motorists are more willing to accept the smaller gap in the traffic.

Councillor Hill indicated that over the last two decades, the population in Stittsville has escalated from 3000 to 12,000 and this increased growth has caused a problem along their Main Street. She introduced the following delegation:

Councillor Mike Bryan from the Village of Stittsville, explained how it often takes minutes, not seconds, to get onto Main Street from one of the local street because of the heavy flow of Regional traffic on that arterial. Compounding this issue is the fact that Main Street bisects Stittsville in a north/south direction and therefore anyone wanting to get anywhere in the village have to get out onto that street. While he recognized the warrant system has a role to play in determining whether or not signals should be installed, he claimed there are other factors involved that should determine signals and he did not support the "one size fits all" approach to this programme. He referred to the intersection of Wintergreen and Main where there have been frequent requests from residents, businesses and schools for traffic control signals and while this intersection may not meet the Regional warrants, it certainly meets the Township’s warrants as a hometown location. In closing, the councillor referred to the Mayor’s letter dated 21 October, which outlines their concerns with respect to Regional policies for implementing traffic control signals in their community. Essentially, the Township maintains these warrants may be appropriate for denser urban areas, but are inappropriate in a rural environment, such as Stittsville.

Councillor Hill reiterated these comments, emphasizing the difficulties experienced by residents when they want to move about in their own town. She reminded members that speed limits are considerably higher in the rural townships than those in the downtown core and with so many community facilities along Main Street including schools, seniors residences and churches, many people walk or take their bicycles and it is dangerous for them. Because the Township does not have the funding to install the signals on their own, she suggested staff might examine the possibility of allowing it to use funds from its Regional Development Charges contribution for this purpose. She urged committee members to recognize that Stittsville is unique and should be considered differently when it comes to signal installation.

Councillor Byrne agreed that this system does not address the reality that exists between the rural and urban/suburban communities. She supported the suggestion put forward by the Mayor of Goulbourn to introduce a merit system that allows the flexibility to address local conditions in a community. She questioned whether their Council had determined what factors would be taken into consideration in this regard and Councillor Bryan indicated they although their council has not had much discussion on this, he speculated that it might allow for a resolution from a local council in support of a particular intersection as one element of merit. Councillor Byrne suggested safety and the ability to cross the street could be included as well.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen indicated there are many residential communities off Regional roads that have a similar problem and sympathized with the concerns voiced by the councillors from Goulbourn. She questioned where the warrants are in regards to this intersection and staff advised they did not have that specific information, but confirmed there are high volumes in the peak hours but not over the 8-hour period. They recognized the problem, but given the existing warrant system, it will be Council that determines whether or not to install signals, warranted or not.

Councillor Doucet did not think this problem is unique because many urban wards have similar situations. He indicated he has heard the same concerns expressed by his constituents that they believe the Region does not take into account the danger factor. He sympathized with the delegations and suggested they examine other ways of improving the situation such as traffic calming efforts. He believed there may be other ways of improving the situation without having to install signals.

Councillor Cantin noted that traffic counts are done on weekdays during peak periods but not on the weekends which are often worse all day long in these areas. D. Brousseau advised there are core hours during which counts are made, but if there are specific times that need to be counted, they can do that as well. The councillor suggested the township identify to staff those hours that are difficult and the warrants may change as a result.

Councillor Bellemare made note of the fact there are many intersections that have not quite reached 100% of the warrants and speculated there was a need to inject some common-sense into these types of situations, rather than a purely mathematical calculation and evaluation. He proposed that staff examine the possibility of developing a policy where the Region would cost-share with local municipalities unwarranted traffic signals because he believed the intersections which are 75% and up warranted, could be eligible for that cost-sharing basis. D. Brousseau advised that while staff could respond to that Motion, he cautioned that there are already a number of warranted signals and not enough money to cover the associated costs and therefore if money is removed from the budget for unwarranted signals, it will mean less monies for those warranted intersections. The councillor agreed it was a money issue, but felt that since traffic signals are a core service there should be ample funding to cover all installations.

Councillor Bellemare spoke to the issue of the changes in traffic over the past three decades, including how the Region encourages more walking and cycling, and how this policy should evolve with those changes. He believed the Region should err on the side of safety and try to revise its expectations of what exactly is a warranted signal in a particular case and attempt to build as much flexibility in the system as possible. In addition to receiving the report, he proposed that staff be directed to bring forward a report with respect to cost-sharing with local municipalities for unwarranted traffic control signals. He believed such a report will identify a greater number of warranted intersections and will create pressure on the Region to devote more resources to this core service.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen noted that the Transportation Master Plan mentioned car-pooling and suggested that future consideration could be given to having a pilot project for developing a car-pool program in Goulbourn because of its isolation and since it is not served by OC Transpo. Councillor Hill remarked that Stittsville already contracts for bus service from OC Transpo for peak periods. With respect to the volumes, she explained that the roads in Goulbourn bring traffic from well beyond the boundaries of the Region including tourism buses and heavy trucks, which are not as common in the urban environment.

Councillor Byrne proposed that the pedestrian signal installation warrants be modified to use a shorter time period (6 hours) and that staff research and report on a policy that would include higher factors (to be defined) for seniors, children and disabled persons. She believed that if each ward can compete for dangerous intersections that require signals there’s a systemic problem that needs to be addressed with the warrants. With respect to budget implications, she noted that Council has indicated a desire to shift its priorities to traffic calming and perhaps traffic control signals would not have the contention that speed humps have. She further believed the warrant analysis must go beyond just counting pedestrians and vehicles because there is a need to examine the characterization and composition of the intersection and the warrants must be designed so they reflect those characteristics.

Councillor Kreling stated that the situation in Goulbourn is not all that different from what happened in Orléans a few years ago when its growth rate soared. Although the discussion seems to be on what the Region should be doing to address such concerns, he pointed out that there are development industries who are providing those service lots where people move to and where businesses locate and since this is part of the problem, they should also perhaps be part of the solution. He believed that with the growth in Stittsville over the last nine years, development agreements should have been adjusted to address that situation and hoped it was still possible to bring them on board. He recognized the need to have a warrant calculation based in part on traffic data.

Councillor Meilleur inquired whether the Region would be liable for accidents if it were to relax its criteria and increase the list of warranted intersections without having adequate funding to signal all those locations. The Solicitor did not believe it was a question of liability because Council has established a method by which it will install these devices and as long as it does the best it can in accordance with its budget, he did not think there would be any liability implications. The councillor was concerned that even with the proposed increase in the budget, there would still not be enough money to finance all those intersections which are 100% warranted, plus those that are not quite at the maximum warrants.

Moved by M. Bellemare

That staff develop a draft policy to cost share unwarranted traffic control signals with local municipalities, school boards, hospitals, et cetera.

LOST

YEAS: M. Bellemare, D. Holmes....2

NAYS: W. Byrne, R. Cantin, L. Davis, C. Doucet, H. Kreling,

M. McGoldrick-Larsen, M. Meilleur....7

In consideration of Councillor Byrne’s Motion, it was requested that the Motion be split for voting purposes.

Moved by W. Byrne

CARRIED

YEAS: M. Bellemare, W. Byrne, L. Davis, C. Doucet, D. Holmes....5

NAYS: R. Cantin, H. Kreling, M. McGoldrick-Larsen, M. Meilleur....4

Moved by W. Byrne

That staff research and report on a policy that would include higher factors (to be defined) for seniors, children and disabled persons.

CARRIED

Moved by M. Bellemare

That the eight-hour requirement to satisfy the guidelines for traffic signal warrants be reduced to six hours.

LOST

YEAS: M. Bellemare, W. Byrne, L. Davis, C. Doucet....4

NAYS: R. Cantin, D. Holmes, H. Kreling, M. McGoldrick-Larsen

M. Meilleur....5

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

2. TOURISM AND PUBLIC SERVICES SIGNING POLICY

The Acting Environment and Transportation Commissioner, Doug Brousseau indicated the Department is seeking approval of a draft policy to allow them to respond to requests for signage. As detailed in the report, the province has recently adopted the TODS program (Tourism-Oriented Directional Signing) for signing along provincial highways and the draft policy will clarify the relationship between provincial and local signing in the Region. It was noted that the Township of Cumberland has its own signing policy and staff will work with that municipality in relation to the proposed policy. It is recommended that the policy apply only to those areas outside the urban area.

He stated that Council has a policy that says there be no signs on the Regional right-of-way and he stressed the importance of keeping clutter off the streets. He added that Council must be cognisant of what the province has on its signs and ensure that the tourist is not left hanging i.e. a TODS sign may highlight an attraction, but wayfinding signs are necessary to ensure they find their way once they leave the highway. Staff suggest that those likely to use the signs will be tourists and emergency agencies and provision will allow for temporary directional information signs for events such as Winterlude, the United Way campaign, et cetera. He indicated the importance of a bilingual message on these signs and pointed out the TODS program does not currently sign in both official languages. Mr. Brousseau did not know how much demand the Region will receive for such signs, but an important aspect of this policy is how far out is it appropriate to place signage i.e. 10 or 20 kilometres from the signed attraction. Other issues to be addressed include: not signing to a place that is unsafe e.g. if it does not have adequate parking facilities to accommodate large numbers of vehicles; establishing a user pay system e.g. it is recommended that the Region cover the cost of removing the sign if it needs to be removed or replacing it if it is damaged. He recognized this as a revenue-generator program, but staff recommend that it be at cost i.e. cost of the sign. He indicated that the TODS program has an annual fee and should committee and council decide to implement a fee schedule, staff could put that in place.

Mr. Brousseau expressed interest in moving on this draft policy in order to provide tourists adequate direction to an attraction once they’ve left the highway. He indicated that while the current signing policy in Cumberland would not qualify with the new Regional policy because the signs are too small, staff would request a grandfather clause for the Township as part of this policy. In closing, he indicated the Department has met with all tourist bureau’s and Township of Cumberland staff to discuss this issue and staff are eager to put in place this draft policy until public consultation is completed.

Councillor Cantin suggested it would be worthwhile to charge a 15% administration fee. He believed businesses would take advantage of this opportunity to advertise a business that may be located off the main road, such as a grocery store or a pizza place. He did not feel the use of these signs should be limited to only those on the list in the report. D. Brousseau was concerned about the proliferation of signs on the Regional right-of-way, noting there are already many grocery stores and pharmacies, for example and to sign them all would have the potential for conflicting messages. He emphasized that the only signs that should be on the side of the road are the ones that make it safer for the motorist to drive and he strongly recommended the committee not pursue this.

The councillor further stated that the problem with most people putting up signs (e.g. posters) is that Regional staff end up taking them down when the time has expired and therefore, he believed the Region should certainly encourage a by-law that will allow some legal signs to be there. D. Brousseau indicated that the approach is to have a proper signs by-law in the municipality and to try and enforce that by-law, however, such signs should be on private property. The councillor suggested that municipalities could at least be encouraged to include the business address on the sign itself so it is easy for motorists to find them.

Councillor van den Ham believed the conditions listed in the report which stipulate whether or not a business can qualify for signage were too restrictive, especially D1(c) "be open at least five days a week during its operating season or year round on set days and times" and D1(d) "have a reception structure such as a controlled gate, staff reception...". He explained that since it is the tourism industry that would apply, he questioned whether staff felt these were too restrictive for some of those operations. D. Brousseau explained that the policy is meant to be restrictive and his concern is that with an official system of signing, he did not want people to be lead to a place that is not open specific times or to an empty lot and there is not enough room on the sign to specify the times and days, et cetera in both languages. The councillor agreed with this argument, but suggested the nature of some of the rural tourism business is perhaps ad hoc and staff must recognize the restrictions this policy will place on them. He also noted that some municipalities would like to have a "Welcome to...." sign at the entrance to their village and questioned how those types of signs would fit into this policy. Mr. Brousseau indicated that staff could examine this, but reminded the councillor of the Region’s policy that the sign be bilingual. The councillor pointed out that that stipulation only applies to major tourism attractions, according to the report, but suggested some municipalities may find it difficult to fit both languages on the sign. Staff advised that signs for communities are within another policy and can be accommodated. The councillor just wanted to bring to staff’s attention the fact that signs at the entrances to villages are not identified in Schedules A, B or C.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen questioned whether communities such as Barrhaven would qualify under this policy and staff advised it would, keeping in mind that for discussion purposes, staff thought the greenbelt would be a good boundary to draw where those signs could be located. The councillor stated that with as many suburban communities outside the greenbelt, staff may want to re-think that; she was concerned about the proliferation of signs and noted this policy will add to it. She was inclined not to approve the report at this point, but rather to receive it for discussion.

Councillor Kreling questioned why bed and breakfast inns were not included in the policy and staff advised this was because there are too many of them. He questioned what the size of the tourism signs would be and staff advised that most of the signs would be 1’ X 4’ on average and the major attraction signs would be twice as large. The councillor stated that the restrictions included for tourism signs would probably not encourage a lot of signs, and for suburban businesses, he did not know whether they would be interested and therefore believed it would apply more to the rural component. However, with the limitations being proposed, he wondered whether any of those businesses would actually qualify for signage. He was concerned that if the Region is going to have something like this is needs to be something more workable and he questioned if it was possible to superimpose on top of these regulations something that might lessen up that criteria a little bit for the rural component. D. Brousseau confirmed it is possible and staff do intend to consult with the BIA’s or their appropriate agencies in the rural areas. However, he emphasized that this would not change the fundamental principle that the Region does not want a proliferation of signs in its right-of-way. He confirmed the signs will not be costly and it is not unreasonable that these tourist attractions would advertise in the newspaper on the dates they are open for business, et cetera. Councillor Kreling agreed but also concurred with the comments about the restrictive nature of some of the criteria and agreed the Region should be charging an administration fee too, perhaps instead of such restrictions. He saw this draft policy as addressing an identified need and as part of staff’s consultation with the area municipalities and others, he asked that they address the following:

Councillor Doucet preferred the item be approved as a discussion paper as opposed to a policy because he believed there was much more information to be gathered prior to the policy being finalized, including what the Region expects out of such a policy and what is driving the need for this policy. Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen agreed with this direction because she preferred that public consultation be authorized for this draft policy rather than the committee endorsing it at this time.

The Committee Chair supported user pay and agreed that whatever the administration cost is it should cover the cost of staff time and maintenance of the signs and this stipulation should form part of the final draft. However, she did not agree with the recommendation that this policy exclude signs within the greenbelt, because a vast majority of visitors to the National Capital Region want to see its museums and she hoped some directional signage could be placed along Regional roads to assist those visits. She suggested the National museums be asked to comment in this regard.

D. Brousseau suggested the public consultation would take approximately six months to complete.

Moved by H. Kreling

CARRIED

Moved by C. Doucet

CARRIED as amended

3. PROVINCIAL OFFENCES ACT TRANSFER - UPDATE

- Regional Solicitor report dated 6 Oct 98

RECEIVED

4. NON-POLICE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT

- Motion TC-1-98

- Co-ordinator, Transportation Committee report dated 6 Oct 98

- deferred on 16 Sep 98

RECEIVED

5. RED LIGHT CAMERAS

Jean Marc Lalonde, MPP explained how he would like the Transportation Committee and Council to support Bill 20. He made reference to the progress Toronto has made with regards to red light cameras and how it is important for this project to be put in place immediately to obtain statistics to assist in prosecuting red light runners.

Mr. Laporte shared with Committee his feelings about having red light cameras installed and how important it is to prevent unnecessary, sometimes fatal, accidents such as the one that took his son’s life. He explained that the Provincial Governments’ objections for installing these cameras becomes futile when a member of your family has been killed, and while he feels these cameras may not be the best solution, it really is all that can be done to help prevent unnecessary accidents. He made reference to a poster he designed which states "This car stops at red lights" and which could be circulated as an insert in the daily newspapers. Mr. Laporte explained how he has been actively fighting to have Bill 20 passed and has prepared a petition which he will present to the Premier, in addition to a letter he sent to him, requesting the enabling legislation be passed. He hoped his efforts to bring this technology to Ottawa-Carleton will not be in vain and perhaps something good might come out of his family’s personal tragedy.

The Committee Chair referred to a memo to Council dated 8 October from staff which detailed a survey of major intersections in the Region during peak and off peak periods; in most cases, at least one vehicle per cycle ran a red light. She explained to the delegation that Council, as well as the Police Services Board, have supported the use of red light cameras and have been aggressive in seeking the enabling legislation from the province. She emphasized that the program is intended to change driver behaviour and would therefore be an educational tool for the public if they are warned in advance of the monitored intersection.

Committee members commended Mr. Laporte for his strength and determination and reassured him of the Regions support for red light cameras. It was stated that his poster was very thought-provoking and would work well to convince drivers that this problem needs to be addressed

Moved by H. Kreling

CARRIED

Moved by H. Kreling

CARRIED

Moved by M. McGoldrick-Larsen

CARRIED

6. VERBAL PRESENTATION RE: COMMUTER TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

- Co-ordinator, Transportation Committee report dated 6 Oct 98

Victoria Mason provided an overview of her written brief which addressed the issue of light rail and her concerns with respect to this matter. Ms. Mason believed that the recent pilot project approved by Council is not light rail, but more closely resembles the concept of commuter rail, although the latter is intended to bring people into the centre core from the outer limits of the region - not to move them inside the urban areas. To support this argument, she referred to the excerpts she provided from the 2nd and 3rd editions of the Canadian Transit Handbook, which state that the features common to light rail vehicles include: steel wheels/steel rail suspension guidance, electric propulsion and overhead power supply. Similar statements are also included in the Region’s Transportation Master Plan’s (TMP) Rapid Transit Report. The report also states that electric vehicles are more energy efficient, less polluting and provide a smoother, quieter ride than one that is diesel-powered.

Ms. Mason also made reference to a document entitled: "Technology Evaluation and Implementation Programme" dated October 1978, prepared by Delew-Dillon-IBI Group, which states that bus technology would offer a significant advantage over light rail transit. Ms. Mason found it particularly interesting that part of that consultant team are now part of the KPMG Consortium for the light rail pilot project.

Ms. Mason concluded her presentation by stating the Region is spending millions of dollars on a system which is not what the public was led to believe it is, that duplicates an existing transitway system and for which no proven need has been established.

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen noted that the key point raised is that Council has named its light rail pilot project other than what is shown in the manuals referred to by Ms. Mason. Pamela Sweet, Director, Policy and Infrastructure Planning Division, indicated that the volumes quoted are from 1985 and at that time, the technology for light rail vehicle to be run by diesel fuel was not available because it is a very recent development and is only now coming to North America. She emphasized that the Region is on the leading edge of looking at light rail diesel so when those manuals were written, there did not exist such a technology. In response to Ms. Masons comments in her brief about the vehicles to be acquired, she advised that the Region will get "new" vehicles for its pilot project which are referred to as light rail transit vehicles.

Councillor Cantin agreed with the comments made by the presenter and believed that the actual total for the pilot will be above the $16M anticipated at this point in time.

The Committee Chair suggested the manuals the delegation referred to might be found in the Corporate Resource Centre.

RECEIVED

INQUIRIES

Walking Security Index

Councillor Byrne indicated that the final report of the Walking Security Index prepared by Dr. Barry Wellar of the University of Ottawa has been received and while staff is preparing a report with respect to commenting on this Index, she suggested that Dr. Wellar be invited to make a presentation to the Committee on or before the last meeting in November 1998.

Bus-only lane on Queen Street

Councillor Doucet inquired whether this lane could be maintained following the completion of the rehabilitation of Wellington Street/Confederation Square. D. Brousseau advised that staff would approach OC Transpo with this request but reminded committee that Queen Street is a local road and the buses would be back on Wellington Street when that reconstruction is complete.

Request for Selective Traffic Enforcement

Councillor Cantin made reference to two occasions where he witnessed heavy trucks losing some of the loads they were carrying and the danger this caused to other motorists. He asked whether the police could be requested to look into this matter and the committee agreed to refer to the Police Services Board, a request that selective traffic enforcement be conducted of the local truck traffic to ensure loads are properly secured.

Assumption of Cedarview Road between Baseline and Lytle

Councillor McGoldrick-Larsen inquired about the status of the Motion she put forward at the last meeting with respect to her request that the Region not accept Cedarview Road between Baseline and Lytle back into its system, until the Ministry has addressed the very serious safety concerns related to that portion of the road. D. Brousseau advised that following the last meeting, staff had taken the initiative and approached the local office of the Ministry to convey the Committee’s position on the matter. He cautioned committee that the province could very well convey the road back to the Region in its existing condition, but indicated staff are working with MTO staff to come up with a remedial solution to address the dangerous curves in the road. The councillor indicated her preference that the committee have an opportunity to vote on her Motion, as it was simply given as direction to staff at the previous meeting for a report back and was not voted on at that time.

Moved by M. McGoldrick-Larsen

CARRIED

Notification to Councillors re: Closure of Roads

As a follow-up to a question she raised at the previous meeting, Councillor Meilleur indicated Colonel By Drive had again been closed last Saturday and was used for parking buses during a demonstration. She explained that the Rideau Street BIA was particularly concerned about these sporadic closures. D. Brousseau advised that under the Special Events By-law, staff do circulate notice of such closures when they are aware of them, but suggested that enough advance notice may not have been provided for the last closure.

The councillor was concerned about the impact such closure has on congestion on the local streets and on routes leading into the core, as well as the negative impact it has on local businesses. She inquired whether the Region could take steps to ensure proper notice is provided so that all concerned parties can be prepared. D. Brousseau believed the most recent closure was taken to accommodate a demonstration and was a request from the police for safety and security reasons. He confirmed they have the right to close a road when they want to and may not always be sensitive to the affects this may have on the surrounding community. Councillor Meilleur stated she would bring this issue before the Police Services Board for consideration because she believed there should be strict criteria when the police make a decision to close a road.

Opening of Mackenzie Avenue

Councillor Meilleur inquired when this road will be re-opened and D. Brousseau advised this closure has been problematic since August and during some waterworks excavation, the gas company discovered they had a problem and decided to do repairs. He explained that the Department had to make a decision whether to open the road temporarily until the gas company could make their repairs, or leave the road closed until they were able to get in and fix the problem and they opted for the latter. The councillor indicated she would have liked to have been notified of the situation beforehand.