3. Pleasant Park Area Traffic Management Study

Étude de gestion de la circulation locale du chemin pleasant park

Committee Recommendations as amended

That Council:

1. Approve the revised Pleasant Park Area Traffic Management Study recommendations, as indicated in Document 2, subject to stimulus funding availability for constructing the proposed new sidewalk along Pleasant Park Road.

2. Should stimulus funding for the new sidewalk not be available, approve the initial Pleasant Park Area Traffic Management Study recommendations, as indicated in Document 3.

3. Approve that the implementation of the recommended intersection narrowings and mid-block narrowings be in accordance with the process set out in the Area Traffic Management Guidelines and funding approval as part of future Capital Budget considerations.

4. Direct staff to report back to the Transportation Committee, via an IPD, with a review of the efficacy of the measures to facilitate safe crossing of Pleasant Park to the transitway one year after construction of the sidewalk.

Recommandations Modifiées du comité

Que le Conseil :

1. approuve les recommandations révisées de l’Étude de gestion de la circulation locale du chemin Pleasant Park, telles qu’indiquées dans le Document 2, sous réserve de la disponibilité de fonds de relance permettant la construction du trottoir proposé le long du chemin Pleasant Park.

2. En cas d’indisponibilité de fonds de relance pour la construction d’un nouveau trottoir, d’approuver les recommandations initiales de l’Étude de gestion de la circulation locale du chemin Pleasant Park, telles qu’indiquées dans le Document 3.

3. approuve que la mise en œuvre des avancées de trottoirs à l’intersection et à mi-pâté soit conforme au processus décrit dans les lignes directrices de gestion de la circulation locale et à l’approbation de financement, dans le cadre de l’examen à venir du budget d’immobilisation.

4. demande au personnel de faire rapport au Comité des transports par l’entremise d’une Information distribuée auparavant, un an après la construction du trottoir, sur l’efficacité des mesures mises en place pour favoriser la traversée en toute sécurité du chemin Pleasant Park vers le Transitway.

Documentation

1. City Manager’s report, Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability dated 01 June 2009 (ACS2009-ICS-PGM-0077).

2. Extract of Draft Minute, 17 June 2009.

Report to/Rapport au:

Transportation Committee

Comité des transports

and Council / et au Conseil

01 June 2009 / le 01 juin 2009

Submitted by/Soumis par: Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice municipale adjointe,

Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability/Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités

Contact/Personne ressource: Vivi Chi, Manager/Gestionnaire, Transportation Planning/Planification des transports, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

(613) 580-2424 x 21877, Vivi.Chi@ottawa.ca

Alta Vista (18)

Ref N°:ACS2009-ICS-PGM-0077

SUBJECT:	PLEASANT PARK AREA TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STUDY

OBJET:	étude de gestion de la circulation locale du chemin pleasant park

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That Transportation Committee recommend that Council:

2. Should stimulus funding for the new sidewalk not be available, approve the initial Pleasant Park Area Traffic Management Study recommendations, as indicated in Document 3.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité des transports recommande au Conseil :

1. D’approuver les recommandations révisées de l’Étude de gestion de la circulation locale du chemin Pleasant Park, telles qu’indiquées dans le Document 2, sous réserve de la disponibilité de fonds de relance permettant la construction du trottoir proposé le long du chemin Pleasant Park.

3. D’approuver que la mise en œuvre des avancées de trottoirs à l’intersection et à mi-pâté soit conforme au processus décrit dans les lignes directrices de gestion de la circulation locale et à l’approbation de financement, dans le cadre de l’examen à venir du budget d’immobilisation.

BACKGROUND

The City received a petition for a traffic study signed by a contingent of local residents living on Pleasant Park Road. Their request for a traffic study was prioritized against all similar requests and, as a result of this process, an area traffic study was undertaken.

The initial recommendations of the Pleasant Park Road Area Traffic Management study included both intersection and mid-block roadway narrowings. Not included in these recommendations, however, was a request for a controlled pedestrian crossing (i.e. signals or stop controls) on Pleasant Park Road between Alta Vista Drive and Riverside Drive. Existing vehicular and pedestrian conditions do not meet the minimum warrants for a controlled crossing.

The approval of the Pleasant Park Road Area Traffic Management study recommendations was initially intended to proceed under the delegated authority process approved by Council. Given the community’s concerns regarding the need for a controlled pedestrian crossing, the Ward Councillor, Councillor Hume, has lifted delegated authority, and asked staff to prepare a report to Transportation Committee for their consideration.

DISCUSSION

Study Process and Initial Recommendations

The Pleasant Park Road Area Traffic Management (ATM) study was undertaken as a “localized” area traffic management study covering the section of Pleasant Park Road between Alta Vista Drive and Riverside Drive, within the Alta Vista Ward 18 (see Document 1). The 800-metre long study area is flanked by the signalized intersection at Alta Vista Drive, and the signalized intersection at Riverside Drive. Pleasant Park Road crosses the Transitway at a grade-separated overpass, and crosses the VIA railway track at a level crossing immediately east of the Transitway.

Pleasant Park Road is classified as a collector roadway in the City’s Official Plan, and is a two-lane, two-way road approximately 11 metres wide, with a sidewalk on the south side. Parking is generally permitted along both sides of the road. Peak hour traffic volumes in the study area range between 400 and 500 vehicles, with heavy vehicles accounting for three to four per cent of the totals. These volumes are consistent with nearby roads with a similar classification; an example being Kilborn Avenue to the south, having peak hour volumes between 500 and 600 vehicles. The speed limit for Pleasant Park Road is 50 km/h. Motor vehicle speeds recorded during the study indicated that 85^th percentile speeds were approximately 10 km/h higher than the 50 km/h speed limit.

Pleasant Park Road fulfils its collector function by providing access to area residents from surrounding local roads to the higher order major collector and arterial roads. While the high level of service provided by Pleasant Park Road is considered a positive characteristic of the community when viewed in isolation, it has, in recent times, become a concern for some area residents, particularly those who front directly onto this collector road. Area residents suggested that traffic volumes, traffic speeds, and the use of the street by non-local traffic, has increased to the point that some area residents now perceive the level and type of traffic to be a safety hazard and detrimental to the quality of the local environment they expect within the community.

The purpose of the ATM study was to address the concerns raised by area residents with regard to speeding, aggressive driving practices, and conditions for pedestrians crossing Pleasant Park Road. Consistent with the ATM Guidelines approach, a number of alternatives were considered and evaluated over the course of the study. These measures included centre medians, speed humps, and a variety of roadway narrowings. A number of service providers expressed concerns over the effect that speed humps could have on their passengers, clients and equipment. As the result of input from agencies such as OC Transpo, and Emergency Services, a series of road narrowings were initially recommended through the ATM study process over the more aggressive vertical measures.

A number of the concerns that were raised over the course of the study were related to pedestrians having to cross Pleasant Park Road in order to access the Transitway station. Since the Pleasant Park Transitway station has only two access towers (stairs/elevators), one to access each of the northbound and southbound buses, local Transitway users are required to cross Pleasant Park Road without the benefit of a controlled crossing location at least once at the beginning or end of a round trip.

The initial ATM study recommendations included eight intersection and mid-block roadway narrowings on the subject section of Pleasant Park Road (see Document 3). These measures were developed through the process described in the City Council approved Area Traffic Management Guidelines and were intended to emphasize to drivers the residential nature of the street.

The estimated cost of construction of these intersection narrowings and mid-block narrowings, as a stand-alone project, is $70,000. If approved, these narrowings would be placed on the waiting list of approved ATM measures for future implementation. Funding for the implementation of Area Traffic Management measures is subject to annual budget deliberations, and either funded as an Area Traffic Management project through the Strategic Initiatives funding envelope within the Capital Budget, or included as part of a future roadway reconstruction project. Currently the list of approved ATM measures on the implementation waiting list is approximately $7 million.

Controlled Pedestrian Crossings

During the course of the study, staff responded to requests for a controlled pedestrian crossing of Pleasant Park Road by undertaking a number of assessments:

The requests for multi-way stop controls at the Cavendish Road intersection, as well as at the Rodney Crescent intersection were reviewed using the City’s standard warrant analysis. It was determined that existing traffic conditions at these intersections did not meet minimum warrants for the implementation of multi-way stop controls.

The request for a signalized pedestrian crossing on Pleasant Park Road was reviewed on two separate occasions (July 2005, May 2006). This assessment included counting and classifying all pedestrians crossing Pleasant Park Road between Cavendish Road and Leslie Avenue over an eight-hour period. As a result of this review it was determined that the existing conditions did not meet minimum warrants for the installation of a pedestrian signal.

A supplementary review was requested by senior staff in order to reconsider all opportunities for improving pedestrian access to and from the local Transitway station and bus stops. A number of scenarios were considered in order to determine whether they were operationally feasible, even though they were not technically warranted. Through this review, staff confirmed that providing a signalized crossing in the vicinity of the Transitway station was both technically unwarranted and prohibitively expensive due to the requirement for pre-emption equipment tied into the operation of the at-grade railroad crossing. Also, multi-way stop controls on Pleasant Park Road near the at-grade railway crossing would not be permitted by the railway authority, due to safety concerns over the potential for vehicle queues to extend across the railway. The most feasible option for facilitating pedestrian crossings was determined to be an option that included a new sidewalk on the north side of Pleasant Park Road between Alta Vista Drive and Rodney Crescent, and multi-way stop controls on Pleasant Park Road at Cavendish Road.

At the time the Pleasant Park Road Study was being undertaken, there was no funding source available for constructing the additional sidewalk on Pleasant Park Road, since there was already a sidewalk on one side of this collector road. This additional sidewalk did not qualify for funding under any of the existing sidewalk funding programs. As well, the Area Traffic Management program, the program through which this study was undertaken, was seen to have limited funding available for funding the estimated $203,000 required to construct this new sidewalk. As a result, the sidewalk and multi-way stop controls option was not included in the initial Pleasant Park Study recommendations that were presented to the public through the ATM study process.

Recent Opportunity for Funding Sidewalk Through Federal Economic Stimulus Package

As part of its 2009 Budget, the federal government announced an economic stimulus package that provides significant infrastructure funding opportunities for municipalities across Canada. On 8 April 2009, City Council approved a City of Ottawa Priority List of Ready-To-Go Infrastructure Projects, which included $3 million being requested for sidewalk funding, with a further report intended to be brought to Committee, prior to the end of Q2 2009, to identify which specific sidewalk locations can be completed (see Corporate Services and Economic Development Report 40, Document 1, Appendix A). On 5 June 2009, the Province of Ontario and the Government of Canada announced a funding commitment and partnering with the City on multiple infrastructure projects, which includes $3 million for sidewalks.

This recently announced economic stimulus package presents an opportunity for funding a sidewalk along Pleasant Park Road that was not previously available. Staff is recommending the Pleasant Park Road sidewalk be included in the list of sidewalk locations on the City of Ottawa Priority List of Ready-To-Go Infrastructure Projects. As a result of this opportunity, revised Pleasant Park Road Area Traffic Management Study recommendations are being brought forward to Committee for consideration, which now includes a sidewalk and multi-way stop controls, as described in Document 2.

The revised recommendations of the Pleasant Park Road Area Traffic Management study, subject to stimulus funding availability for constructing the new Pleasant Park Road sidewalk, now include the following:

Intersection narrowings along both sides of Pleasant Park Road at the intersections of Leslie Avenue and at Rodney Crescent (at an estimated cost of $30,000)
A new sidewalk within the existing pavement area along the north side of Pleasant Park Road, between Alta Vista Drive and Rodney Crescent (at an estimated cost of $203,000, gross, with net City costs being $67,700).
All-way stop controls at the Cavendish Road intersection, as a means of facilitating improved pedestrian crossing opportunities (the costs associated with the All-way Stop controls can be accommodated within the Operating Budget of Public Works).

Of note, constructing the sidewalk within the existing pavement area, as opposed to within the boulevard, would achieve the same traffic calming effect intended with the narrowings that were previously recommended and also minimize the disruption to properties located along the north side of Pleasant Park Road.

CONSULTATION

Public consultation has not been undertaken regarding the revised recommendations (a sidewalk along the north side of Pleasant Park Road, between Alta Vista Drive and Rodney Crescent, and all-way stop controls at the Cavendish Road intersection), as these were not considered a feasible option until the recently announced federal government economic stimulus package. In light of this, notices of these revised recommendations being considered at Transportation Committee will be hand delivered to all households along Pleasant Park Road, in advance of the Committee meeting.

Consultations for the Area Traffic Management Study for Pleasant Park Road between Alta Vista Drive and Riverside Drive included the following:

28 June 2005 - Initial information session with a group of local residents

This information session served to introduce interested residents to the Area Traffic Management process, and to generate feedback on their concerns related to traffic on the subject section of Pleasant Park Road. This session was not a formal Public Advisory Committee (PAC) meeting; however, participants were advised that a PAC would be created as part of this localized traffic study.

21 March 2006 - Public Advisory Committee (PAC) #1

Primary purpose was to review the information that was going to be presented at the upcoming POH meeting, and identify any missing information. In addition, since there were new people attending this PAC meeting, the study process was reviewed and study expectations were discussed. This meeting outlined the process that the study would follow, reviewed the types of issues that had been raised to date, raised additional issues to be considered, and touched on potential solutions.

28 March 2006 - Public Open House (POH) #1

Attendance included 10 individuals including one university newspaper reporter. A series of boards were displayed which conveyed the traffic data that had been gathered to date. This information included historic traffic volumes, traffic speeds, heavy vehicle volumes, pedestrian crossing volumes, and collision statistics.

27 June 2006 – PAC #2

Discussions centered on the list of issues/concerns that had been generated by PAC#1, and POH#1. A plan of the study area was tabled. This plan included a scenario with six narrowings. In addition a four-page handout containing alternative options for curb extensions, mid-block narrowings and median islands was distributed to the PAC members for discussion purposes. There was a desire on the part of the group for more comprehensive comments regarding the issues/concerns that have been raised and documented to date.

18 January 2007 – PAC #3

Discussions centered on the revised list of issues and concerns and the corresponding information provided by various City staff to address/explain these issues. The types of issues responded to in this information package included: signalized pedestrian crossing warrants, level railway crossing history, pedestrian access to the Transitway, on-street parking, speed zoning policy, truck traffic volumes, and traffic signal timing. The group also discussed the POH#1.

1 February 2007 – POH #2

Attendance included 17 individuals. Nine comment sheets were submitted: four supported the plan, two did not support the plan, and three had other comments. A series of boards were displayed which conveyed the updated traffic data that had been gathered to date. In addition, the recommended scenario was displayed for review and comment by those in attendance.

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no Legal/Risk Management impediments to the implementation of this Report's recommendations.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no immediate financial implications to approving the recommendations of this report. Implementation will be subject to project prioritization and funding availability within the Federal Economic Stimulus Package or determined through Capital Budget deliberations in future years.