|
1. CITY
OF OTTAWA SPEED ZONING POLICY
POLITIQUE DE LA VILLE
D’OTTAWA SUR LES ZONES DE LIMITATION DE VITESSE
|
transportation committee recommendations As amended
That Council approve:
1. The Speed
Zoning Policy for Urban and Rural Roads, including: the procedure for setting
speed limits on, rural gravel roads, posting 40 km/h speed limits on local
residential roads, and establishing school speed zones, as outlined in
Attachment 1;
2. The process
to review speed limits to expedite responses to speed-related inquiries, based
on roadway classification, as defined in the Transportation Master Plan, and as
outlined in this report;
3. That speed
limit reviews not be undertaken on any road within a three-year time period
unless there are major changes in traffic patterns along the roadway in
question;
4. That the
Public Works Department submit as part of the 2010 operating budget
$100,000 to be added to the Sign Maintenance Budget as outlined in the report;
5. That
staff be directed to prepare a Council Motion for the 28 October 2009 meeting,
seeking the support of other Ontario municipalities:
a. For the
ability to set alternate default speed limits (unsigned) on local roads in
residential communities; and,
b. The ability
to set alternate default speed limits (unsigned) as the speed limit by means of
gateway signing at the entrances of residential communities.
That staff be
directed to report back to Council on the findings on support from other
municipalities and the province.
6. That the City Request that the Province
amend the Highway Traffic Act to allow the doubling of fines within a school
zone;
7. That as part of the Site Plan Agreement
process that currently requires developers to install regulatory and warning
traffic signage, 40 km/h signs be included as applicable in new developments.
8. That the per cent agreement by
residential owners to have a speed limit changed be reduced to 60% from the
recommended policy of 75%.
agriculture and rural affairs Committee RecommendationS
That Council approve:
1.
The Speed Zoning Policy for Urban and Rural Roads,
including: the procedure for setting speed limits on, rural gravel roads,
posting 40 km/h speed limits on local residential roads, and establishing
school speed zones, as outlined in Attachment 1;
2.
The process to review speed limits to expedite
responses to speed-related inquiries, based on roadway classification, as
defined in the Transportation Master Plan, and as outlined in this report;
3.
That speed limit reviews not be undertaken on any road within
a three-year time period unless there are major changes in traffic patterns
along the roadway in question;
4.
That the Public Works Department submit as part of the future operating
budget process $100,000 to be added to
the Sign Maintenance Budget as outlined in the report;
5.
That the City
request that the Province permit the City to set default speed limits
other than 50 km/h on residential roadways;
6.
That the City Request that the Province amend the
Highway Traffic Act to allow the doubling of fines within a school zone;
7.
That as part of the Site Plan Agreement process that
currently requires developers to install regulatory and warning traffic
signage, 40 km/h signs be included as applicable in new developments.
RECOMMANDATIONS MODIFIÉES DU Comité des transports
Que le Conseil approuve:
1. la
politique sur les zones de limite de vitesse pour les routes urbaines et
rurales, comprenant notamment la procédure pour établir les limites de vitesse
sur les chemins ruraux en gravier, pour afficher une limite de vitesse de 40
km/h dans les rues résidentielles locales et pour créer des zones scolaires de
limitation de la vitesse, telle qu'elle est exposée dans la pièce 1;
2. le
processus d'examen des limites de vitesse permettant de répondre rapidement aux
demandes de renseignements à ce sujet d'après la classification des routes
établie dans le Plan directeur des transports, tel qu'il est exposé dans
le présent rapport;
3. l'interdiction
de procéder, à intervalle de moins de trois ans, à une révision de la limite de
vitesse dans une rue donnée, sauf s'il y a eu des changements majeurs des
mouvements de circulation dans la rue en question;
4. la
présentation par Travaux publics, dans le cadre de la préparation du budget
de fonctionnement 2010, d'une proposition d'augmenter de
100 000 $ le budget d'entretien des panneaux de signalisation, telle
qu'elle est résumée dans le présent rapport;
5. Par conséquent, il est
résolu que le personnel soit enjoint de préparer une motion pour la réunion du
Conseil du 28 octobre 2009, demandant l’appui d’autres municipalités de
l’Ontario
a. en ce qui a trait à la capacité de fixer d’autres limites
de vitesse par défaut (sans panneaux) sur les rues locales des collectivités
résidentielles;
b. en ce qui a trait à la capacité de fixer d’autres limites
de vitesse par défaut (sans panneaux) au moyen de panneaux de signalisation aux
points d’entrée des collectivités résidentielles
De plus, il est résolu que le personnel soit enjoint de faire part au
Conseil des conclusions relatives à l’appui d’autres municipalités et de la
province
6. une
requête adressée à la Province demandant que le Code de la route soit
modifié afin de permettre de doubler le montant des amendes dans une zone
scolaire;
7. la
modification du processus de réglementation des plans d'implantation, qui
impose actuellement aux promoteurs immobiliers l'obligation d'installer les
panneaux routiers de signalisation et d'avertissement, de manière à permettre
que des panneaux de limite de vitesse de 40 km/h soient installés, s'il y a
lieu, dans les nouveaux projets d'aménagement.
8. Que l'accord du pourcentage avec les propriétaires résidentiels pour
changé la limite de vitesse soit réduit à 60% de la politique recommandée de
75%.
RecommandationS DU Comité DE L’AGRICULTURE ET DES
AFFAIRES RURALES
Que le Conseil approuve:
1.
la
politique sur les zones de limite de vitesse pour les routes urbaines et
rurales, comprenant notamment la procédure pour établir les limites de vitesse
sur les chemins ruraux en gravier, pour afficher une limite de vitesse de 40
km/h dans les rues résidentielles locales et pour créer des zones scolaires de
limitation de la vitesse, telle qu'elle est exposée dans la pièce 1;
2.
le
processus d'examen des limites de vitesse permettant de répondre rapidement aux
demandes de renseignements à ce sujet d'après la classification des routes
établie dans le Plan directeur des transports, tel qu'il est exposé dans
le présent rapport;
3.
l'interdiction
de procéder, à intervalle de moins de trois ans, à une révision de la limite de
vitesse dans une rue donnée, sauf s'il y a eu des changements majeurs des
mouvements de circulation dans la rue en question;
4.
la
présentation par Travaux publics, dans le cadre de la préparation du futur
budget de fonctionnement, d'une proposition d'augmenter de 100 000 $
le budget d'entretien des panneaux de signalisation, telle qu'elle est résumée
dans le présent rapport;
5.
une
requête adressée à la Province demandant que la Ville soit autorisée à établir
des limites implicites de vitesse autres que 50 km/h dans les rues
résidentielles;
6.
une
requête adressée à la Province demandant que le Code de la route soit
modifié afin de permettre de doubler le montant des amendes dans une zone
scolaire;
7.
la
modification du processus de réglementation des plans d'implantation, qui
impose actuellement aux promoteurs immobiliers l'obligation d'installer les
panneaux routiers de signalisation et d'avertissement, de manière à permettre
que des panneaux de limite de vitesse de 40 km/h soient installés, s'il y a
lieu, dans les nouveaux projets d'aménagement.
Documentation
1.
Deputy
City Manager's report, City Operations dated 24 September 2009
(ACS2009-COS-PWS-0021).
2.
Transportation
Committee, Extracts of Draft Minutes, 7 October 2009.
3. Extract of Draft Minutes, 22
October 2009.
Report
to/Rapport au:
Transportation Committee
Comité des transports
and/et
Agriculture
and Rural Affairs Committee
Comité de l'agriculture et des questions rurales
and Council / et au Conseil
24 September 2009/le 24 septembre
2009
Submitted by/Soumis par :
Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager/Directeur municipal adjoint
City Operations/Opérations municipales
Contact
Person/Personne ressource :
John Manconi, General Manager/Directeur général
Public Works/Services des travaux publics
(613)
580-2424 x 21110, john.manconi@ottawa.ca
|
|
Ref N°: ACS2009-COS-PWS-0021
|
SUBJECT:
|
city
of ottawa speed zoning policy
|
|
|
|
OBJET :
|
POLITIQUE DE LA VILLE D’OTTAWA SUR
LES ZONES DE LIMITATION DE VITESSE
|
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Transportation
Committee and Agriculture and
Rural Affairs Committee recommend that Council approve:
1. The
Speed Zoning Policy for Urban and Rural Roads, including: the procedure for
setting speed limits on, rural gravel roads, posting 40 km/h speed limits on
local residential roads, and establishing school speed zones, as outlined in
Attachment 1;
2. The
process to review speed limits to expedite responses to speed-related
inquiries, based on roadway classification, as defined in the Transportation
Master Plan, and as outlined in this report;
3.
That speed limit reviews not be undertaken on any road
within a three-year time period unless there are major changes in traffic
patterns along the roadway in question;
4.
That the Public Works Department submit as part of the future operating
budget process $100,000 to be added to
the Sign Maintenance Budget as outlined in the report;
5.
That the City
request that the Province permit the City to set default speed limits
other than 50 km/h on residential roadways;
6.
That the City Request that the Province amend the
Highway Traffic Act to allow the doubling of fines within a school zone;
7.
That as part of the Site Plan Agreement process that
currently requires developers to install regulatory and warning traffic
signage, 40 km/h signs be included as applicable in new developments.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU
RAPPORT
Que le Comité des transports et le Comité de
l'agriculture et des affaires rurales recommandent au Conseil d'approuver :
1.
la
politique sur les zones de limite de vitesse pour les routes urbaines et
rurales, comprenant notamment la procédure pour établir les limites de vitesse
sur les chemins ruraux en gravier, pour afficher une limite de vitesse de 40
km/h dans les rues résidentielles locales et pour créer des zones scolaires de
limitation de la vitesse, telle qu'elle est exposée dans la pièce 1;
2.
le
processus d'examen des limites de vitesse permettant de répondre rapidement aux
demandes de renseignements à ce sujet d'après la classification des routes
établie dans le Plan directeur des transports, tel qu'il est exposé dans
le présent rapport;
3.
l'interdiction
de procéder, à intervalle de moins de trois ans, à une révision de la limite de
vitesse dans une rue donnée, sauf s'il y a eu des changements majeurs des
mouvements de circulation dans la rue en question;
4.
la
présentation par Travaux publics, dans le cadre de la préparation du futur
budget de fonctionnement, d'une proposition d'augmenter de 100 000 $
le budget d'entretien des panneaux de signalisation, telle qu'elle est résumée
dans le présent rapport;
5.
une
requête adressée à la Province demandant que la Ville soit autorisée à établir
des limites implicites de vitesse autres que 50 km/h dans les rues résidentielles;
6.
une
requête adressée à la Province demandant que le Code de la route soit
modifié afin de permettre de doubler le montant des amendes dans une zone
scolaire;
7.
la
modification du processus de réglementation des plans d'implantation, qui impose
actuellement aux promoteurs immobiliers l'obligation d'installer les panneaux
routiers de signalisation et d'avertissement, de manière à permettre que des
panneaux de limite de vitesse de 40 km/h soient installés, s'il y a lieu, dans
les nouveaux projets d'aménagement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City’s Speed Zoning Policy
was first established over thirty years ago and requires updating to keep in
step with best practices for
establishing speed limits. The Policy
will also, confirm speed zoning
methodology, address residential 40 km/h speed limits, establish a community
engagement process for setting speed limits on local residential roads, set
speed limits on gravel roads, streamline the speed zoning process, implement
school speed zones and empower the community by creating an “engagement”
approach to setting speed zones.
The original policy sets out a
comprehensive engineering criteria for determining the appropriate speed for
all classes of roads and considers various physical (road geometry, medians, etc.)
and human factors (pedestrian volumes, collision data, etc.). Current best practices for establishing
speed limits utilize the 85th percentile speed of the road, based
upon the fact that generally the public acts in a safe and appropriate
manner. The updated Speed Zoning policy
will utilize this method of determining the appropriate speed of a roadway,
while retaining the full engineering criteria for complex locations.
Many local residential roads are
not signed within the community and the Highway Traffic Act regulates that 50
km/h is the default speed limit and any variation of this requires
signing. The City has received numerous
requests to implement a 40 km/h speed zone on local residential roads. The Public Works Department recognizes that
there are often other factors related to driver and community perception in a
residential environment where a 40 km/h limit makes sense. The revised Speed Zoning Policy has a
process similar to the one used for parking regulation requests that engages the
whole community. Within a residential
neighbourhood, the request to change the speed limit on local roads will affect
all residents of the street and therefore, it is important to determine if
there is a consensus among residents.
Where 75% of residents agree with the speed limit change, Public Works
will change the speed limit on the local road.
For collector roads, it is proposed that the 40 km/h residential speed
limit warrant, approved by Council in 2003, be applied to determine the
appropriate speed limit. On major
collector and arterial roadways, the 85th percentile operating speed
will be used as a basis to determine speed limits. It is also recommended that speed limit reviews on any roadway
will not be undertaken within a three-year time period unless there are major
changes in traffic patterns and development along the roadway in question.
It is widely recognized that
motorists must be more diligent around schools, especially on busy arterial and
collector roads. A new School Speed
Zone program is included in the updated Speed Zoning Policy, including criteria
for implementing school speed zone signage and in some cases flashing beacons.
Speed limits are not posted on
many collector and gravel roads in the rural area and the default speed limit
is governed by the Highway Traffic Act.
Most of these roads are lightly travelled and self-regulating and do not
require signing. Public Works is
proposing to review speed limits on these roads on a case by case basis or
where there are other safety concerns present (i.e.: collision data suggests
there is a problem). The Speed Zoning Policy includes a process for reviewing
gravel roads starting with the 85th percentile criteria above and
considering the unique nature that gravel driving surface presents.
Financial
Implications:
Funds are in place, within the
current signing budget, to cover the cost of implementing a reasonable number
of speed limit changes each year, when those changes are substantiated
utilizing the criteria outlined in the Speed Zoning Policy. Should the number of requests achieving
resident consensus exceed the Department’s expectations (installing more than
200 signs in any given year – approximate cost is $50,000), a budget pressure
will be identified during regular budget deliberations.
Funds are in place to install a
limited number of school speed zones each year (approximately 5 locations)
without flashing beacons within the current signing budget. However, the demand for implementing school
speed zones will most likely be higher than this amount and some locations will
need to be supplemented with flashing beacons.
Therefore, additional funds are required to address school speed zones
speed limits. It is recommended that the base signing budget be increased by
$100,000 in the 2011 Operating Budget.
This would allow for the installation of approximately 20 additional
school speed zones. Additionally, for
those locations where a school speed zone review results in the requirement for
flashing beacons, this additional funding could result in 3 installations per
year.
The operating impact of the
installation of new signs is estimated at $4,400 per year and will be requested
in the year following the installation of the signs.
Public
Consultation/Input:
Councillors have been consulted
regarding The Speed Zoning Policy and Rural Councillors were also consulted
regarding establishing speed limits on gravel roadways. Also, both Federal and Provincial
transportation organizations and various North American municipalities have
provided comments. The Ottawa Police, Legal Services and the Ottawa School
Boards were also asked to provide comments.
All comments received from stakeholders were supportive of the Speed
Zoning Policy.
BACKGROUND
At the 18 October 2006
meeting, Transportation Committee approved the following motion:
“That Staff be directed
to bring forward, in the new year, a City of Ottawa Speed Limit Policy, which
would build on the 40 kilometres per hour interim speed zone warrants (approved
by Council in October 2003), in conjunction with the previously approved
Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton (R.M.O.C.) Speed Limit Policy.
This policy would set out
the methodology to determine appropriate speed limits on all City roadways.”
”That Traffic and Parking Operations staff be directed to review the
criteria for designating reduced speed zones in school zones in rural areas.”
Prior to amalgamation in 2001,
safe and appropriate speed limits on the arterial road network were determined
using the criteria and methodology set forth in the Speed Zoning Policy for
Urban and Rural Roads, approved in 1975 by Council of the former Regional Municipality
of Ottawa-Carleton. Since then, no significant changes or amendments have since
been made resulting in an operating policy that appeared out of date and not
always in step with current trends, requirements, or local community needs.
Also, there was no formal process for community engagement.
Updating the City’s Speed Zoning
Policy involved the following five components:
·
A process for implementing residential 40 km/h speed
limits (approved by City Council in October, 2003), including a formal process
to involve local communities;
·
Retaining speed warrants for some cases (minor
collector roads);
·
Revised process to review speed limits and timelines to
expedite responses to speed-related inquiries;
·
A School Speed Zone program, including the background associated
with the Adult School Crossing Guard Program; and
·
A procedure for setting appropriate speed limits on
rural road sections with gravelled surfaces.
DISCUSSION
Generally, speed zoning is based
upon several concepts deeply rooted in our system of government and law
including that:
·
Driving behaviour is an extension of social attitude,
and the majority of drivers respond in a safe and reasonable manner as
demonstrated by their consistently favourable driving records;
·
The normally careful and competent actions of a
reasonable person should be considered legal;
·
Laws are established for the protection of the public
and the regulation of unreasonable behaviour on the part of individuals; and,
·
Laws cannot be effectively enforced without the consent
and voluntary compliance of the public majority.
Public acceptance of these
concepts is normally instinctive. However, there are also widely held
misconceptions regarding speed zoning policy, such as:
·
Speed limit signs will slow the speed of traffic;
·
Speed limit signs will decrease the collision rate and
increase safety;
·
Raising a posted speed limit will cause an increase in
the speed of traffic; and,
·
Any posted speed limit must be safer than an un-posted
speed limit, regardless of the traffic and prevailing roadway conditions.
All technical details contained
within the revised Policy are based on several sources including extensive
research conducted by the United States Transportation Research Board (USTRB)
(Special Report 254 - Managing Speed - Review of Current Practice for Setting
and Enforcing Speed Limits), but also augmented by the currently accepted ‘best
practices’ used in North American, European, and Australian jurisdictions. Both the USTRB and accepted best practices
continually confirm that speed limits are most appropriately based on 85th
percentile operating speeds.
Requests to lower posted speeds
are most often made in the belief than any reduction in the speed limit will
automatically result in a corresponding decrease in the speed of traffic, and
thereby, an increase in safety for residents. Although the majority of
speed-related complaints originate in residential communities, some involve the
collector and arterial roadway system.
The former Municipalities
maintained differing positions in determining speed limits on roadways under
their jurisdiction to the extent that the Cities of Cumberland, Gloucester,
Kanata, and Nepean allowed for 40 km/h speed limits regardless of roadway
classification. This disparity in the
approach to established posted speed limits, notably on residential roadways,
resulted in a perceived inequity in the treatment of neighbourhoods within the
amalgamated City of Ottawa and a clear lack of direction for staff on
appropriate procedures for reviewing and recommending speed limits on
residential streets.
Several municipalities in Ontario
have considered and signed lower speed limits on their roadways. In these municipalities, 40 km/h speed
limits are posted in school zones, on residential streets, and on minor collectors
near schools. The City of Toronto and
Hamilton use a warrant criteria for posting 40 km/h speed limits, which is
similar to the warrant criteria approved by City Council in 2003, as described
in Attachment 2.
The matter of a default speed
limit on City of Ottawa roadways without the installation of speed limit
signing is addressed by the Province of Ontario Highway Traffic Act, Section
128 (1); ‘No person shall drive a motor vehicle at a rate of speed greater
than, (a) 50 kilometres per hour on a highway within a local municipality or
within a built-up area;’
Section (2) states that:
‘The council of a municipality may, for motor vehicles driven on a
highway or portion of a highway under its jurisdiction, by by-law prescribe a
rate of speed different from the rate set out in subsection (1) that is not
greater than 100 kilometres per hour and may prescribe different rates of speed
for different times of day. 2006, c. 32, Sched. D,
s. 4 (3).’
To implement a speed limit other
than outlined in Section (1), (for example, 40 km/h) regulatory speed limit
signing must be installed at a minimum spacing of 300 m (Ontario Traffic
Manual).
Staff reviewed various
options/scenarios to address the issue of 40 km/h on residential streets. They included:
Staff comments, describe the
effect on enforcement and initial costs and are described in Attachment 3.
In order to
obtain information on how other municipalities are dealing with 40 km/hr speed
limits on residential streets as well as to aid in completing the City of
Ottawa’s speed limit policy review, various municipalities throughout Ontario
and Canada were asked specific questions as summarized in the following table
along with results (25 municipalities responded to this survey but did not
necessarily respond to all questions):
Question
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Has your
municipality considered a default 40 km/h speed limit without signing?
|
8
|
17
|
|
If your
Province/Territory does not support an unsigned default 40 km/h speed limit,
have you considered approaching the Province/Territory?
|
4
|
21
|
|
Does your
municipality support reduced speed limits within neighbourhoods with the installation
of 40 km/h speed limit signs on entrance roadways only?
|
6
|
19
|
|
Is your
municipality receiving many requests for reducing speed limits to 40 km/h on
residential streets from Councillors or residents? If so, how many on average would your department receive/month?
|
14
Number of requests range between 1-7.
|
5
|
Based on the above-mentioned
information, staff is recommending the following guideline be used to determine
the speed limit for each class of roadway, as defined in the Transportation
Master Plan, within the City of Ottawa.
1. Local Roads - 40 km/h Speed
Limit
Within a residential neighbourhood, the request to
change the speed limit will affect all residents of the street and therefore,
it is important to determine if there is a consensus among residents. The Public Works Department recognizes that
there are often other factors related to driver and community perception in a
residential environment where a 40 km/h limit makes sense. Setting a lower speed limit has often had a
limited impact on traffic flow, as these types of roads do not see large
volumes of traffic.
To ensure a fair and
equitable response to the numerous speed related inquires received by the
Department within residential communities, on local streets, it is proposed that
any review of a speed limit be based not on individual requests, but rather by
petition proving consensus that 75% of residents support a change in the speed
limit on the roadway in question.
Currently, this method has proven successful to assess parking
regulations on City of Ottawa roadways. Where consensus is achieved, the
Department will proceed to lowering the speed limit to 40 km/h.
2. Minor Collector Roads – 40 km/h Speed Limit
·
In October 2003, the Transportation Committee and
Council approved a warrant for posting 40 km/h speed limits on residential
roadways that meet the criteria. This
warrant is included in the attached Speed Zoning Policy as attached. For minor collector roads, which are
distinct from local residential roads.
The modified
residential 40 km/h speed limit warrant has proven to be a technically sound
methodology used with success in establishing posted 40 km/h speed limits. The warrant takes into account various
criteria, i.e. schools or playgrounds.
It is recommended that the warrant be retained to determine if 40 km/h
is an appropriate speed limit for the minor collector roadway being
reviewed.
3. Major Collector and Arterial Roads
Within the
City, all major collector and arterial roads are currently signed and the speed
limit well established (with the exception of non-arterial rural and gravel
roads as outlined below). The City does
not receive many requests to implement a speed review on these types of
roadways.
To determine
the appropriate speed limit on a major collector and arterial road, the 85th
percentile operating speed will be used as a starting point. The review first determines if anything has
changed in the immediate area, such as new development in the area. As per the policy if there are no other mitigating
factors, the speed survey confirms the posted speed limit and the ward
councillor has been consulted, then generally there will be no further
action. Should the ward councillor not
agree with the staff recommendation, staff would prepare a report for
consideration by Transportation Committee and Council.
Funds are in place, within the
current signing budget, to cover the cost of implementing a reasonable number
of speed limit changes each years, when those changes are substantiated
utilizing the criteria outlined in the Speed Zoning Policy. Given that this is
a new policy and under the new policy the demand for speed limit changes are
not known, the Department is proposing to proceed without additional
funds/resources and undergo an evaluation phase. Should the number of requests achieving resident’s consensus
exceed the Department’s expectations (installing more than 200 signs in any
given year – approximate cost is $50,000), a budget pressure will be identified
during regular budget deliberations.
Additionally, it is recommended
that further speed limit reviews will not be undertaken within a three-year
time period unless there are major changes in traffic patterns along the
roadway in question. If however there
are new mitigating factors or the speed survey does not confirm the posted
speed limit, then under the policy a detailed study would be conducted.
There are other measures that the
Department uses to control speed on problem roads, including:
l
Radar trailers for arterial and major collector roads
showing the actual speed compared to the speed limit to remind drivers to slow
down;
l
Smaller speed boards for residential neighbourhoods
used in the same manner as the radar trailers; and,
l
Education campaigns such as Slow Down/Ralentissez and
Speeding Cost You Campaign.
These education measures, coupled
with enforcement programs, are very effective in controlling speed for roads
where a lower speed limit cannot be implemented but speeding is still a
concern.
4. Default Speed Limit
As a result of requests from
Councillors and the public to have a default speed limit of 40 km/h on
residential streets and the fact that this can only occur if the province
changes the legislation in the Highway Traffic Act, staff have included a
recommendation requesting that a resolution from City Council be sent to the
Province requesting that the Highway Traffic Act be revised to allow
municipalities to set their own default speed limits on residential
streets. This would allow the City to
erect boundary signage and for non-posted local residential roads and would be
a much more cost effective option.
Finally, staff routinely requires
developers to install a wide range of regulatory and warning signs as part of
the Site Plan Agreement process, prior to roads being assumed by the City. As part of this process, 40 km/h signs will
be included (as applicable) in new developments.
The flow chart found in
Attachment 4 illustrates the process City staff will follow to review a speed
limit related inquiry and the timelines associated with these reviews.
School Speed Zone Program
There are two programs related to
traffic safety and schools, the School Area program and the School Speed Zone
program. The School Area program consists of warning signs installed in general proximity to
a school and can be considered
primarily for roadways near elementary and middle schools, where there is a
possibility of children entering the roadway.
Currently, all primary, middle schools and most high schools within the
City have School Area warning signage.
The School Speed Zone
program consists of warning signs, a reduced speed limit and in some instances,
flashing beacons and is applicable to elementary, middle and high schools. The Transportation Association of
Canada (TAC), of which the City of Ottawa is a sponsor, prepared “School and
Playground Areas and Zones: Guidelines for Application and Implementation”
in October, 2006.
The intent of these guidelines is
to “provide engineers and practitioners across Canada with a tool to help
them decide where school and playground areas and zones may be considered, and
to prioritise the locations which are most in need of such areas and
zones. Due to variances in local
practices, there is a need for a set of uniform guidelines towards the
establishment of school and playground areas and zones and the application of
traffic control devices in such areas and zones”.
The factors to be considered in the
establishment of School Zones and Areas are:
·
School type;
·
Road classification;
·
Fencing characteristics;
·
Property line separation;
·
Location of school entrance; and,
·
Location of sidewalks.
In some
instances there are other mitigating factors present that are not contemplated
by the TAC guidelines. These are taken
into account on a case-by-case basis, in consultation with the school
principal, parent advisory council and student representatives.
Finally, it is recommended that a
resolution to the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario to amend the Highway
Traffic Act to allow for the doubling of fines within school speed zones
(currently fines are doubled within construction zones and community safety
zones).
Speed Limits on
Rural Roadways Other Than Arterials
In the
Province of Ontario, since the 1960’s or before, if a rural roadway had no
speed limit signs posted, the default speed limit was governed by the Highway
Traffic Act. Municipalities are
permitted to change speed limits, however, that new limit must be both posted
in the field, and incorporated into a local by-law.
Currently,
many gravel roads and non-arterial roadways in the rural area are not signed
and therefore default to the limit prescribed in the Highway Traffic Act. All
arterial roads in the rural area have posted limits.
Past practice
has been that the Public Works Department conducts a speed study upon request
from the public, Councillor or when there are other safety related factors
present, i.e. collision statistics indicate a problem. The Public Works Department intends to
continue the practice of initiating studies primarily on a request basis.
Traffic
volumes, in rural areas, are typically quite low when compared to the volume of
traffic on urban roadways and in addition, drivers’ speeds are essentially
self-controlling on gravel, rough, or narrow paved roads in relatively poor
condition, especially when limits are not posted. Gravel roadways, in particular, present a special challenge when
deciding a level of speed limit to post as the conditions of these roads can
vary dramatically. However, as with
other roadways, the recommended speed limit reflects driving under ideal road,
weather and traffic conditions.
It is obvious
that a narrow, winding, gravel roadway simply cannot sustain the high-speed
traffic of a smooth, paved, wide arterial urban road (i.e. 80 km/h). As the population increases in the rural
areas of the City of Ottawa there are increasing requests to reduce the speed
limit in an effort to reflect driving conditions and the ‘residential’ nature
of the new neighbourhoods.
Similar
problems exist for narrow paved roadways across the rural areas of the
City. Although the road surface can be
a better condition than on gravel roads, the same concerns are expressed but
now include comments regarding pedestrian activity as shoulders are too narrow
on which to walk or too rough for strollers and bicycles, and if the speed
limit were reduced, traffic would become slower, therefore improving the safety
of non-vehicle users of the road.
The Speed
Zoning Policy recommends that the speed limit on gravel roadways will be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
Should there be a sufficient number of vehicles (typically a minimum of
30 vehicles per direction within a two-hour time period), a spot speed survey
will be undertaken to confirm the average speed and 85th percentile
speed of traffic to provide a good starting point to assess the level of the
speed limit. Experience indicates the
minimal study has proven successful in providing a previously unsigned roadway
with a speed limit that the majority of drivers will observe. In addition to the speed survey, a thorough
review of warning and regulatory signing will be undertaken. The upgraded signing provides drivers, both
local and those unfamiliar with the road with a clear indication of the driving
environment. Additionally, with police
enforcement a posted speed limit will successfully address those drivers who
choose to disregard the law and travel at excessive and potentially dangerous
speeds.
The Speed
Zoning Policy has a mechanism to review speed limits on rural paved roads as
the summary tables used to determine the appropriate speed limit on any given
roadway take into consideration but are not limited to, 85th
percentile speed, pavement width, shoulder width and degree of pedestrian
activity, community, Ward Councillor and police input in recommending an
appropriate and safe speed limit.
Accordingly, this method will continue to be used.
Funds are in
place, within the current signing budget, to cover the cost of implementing a
reasonable number of speed limit changes each year, when those changes are
substantiated utilizing the criteria outlined in the Speed Zoning Policy.
CONSULTATION
As part of the update of the
Speed Zoning Policy for the City of Ottawa, staff has consulted with the City
Councillors, City Legal Services, Ottawa Police Service, Transportation
Association of Canada, Ministry of Transportation of Ontario, other Ontario and
Canadian Municipalities, School Boards, and the trucking industry. All comments received were supportive of the
Speed Zoning Policy.
In June 2009, City staff met with
the principal of St. Mary’s School, Ottawa-Catholic School Board, residents of
Greely and the Construction Association to review the proposed School Speed
Zone guidelines being recommended. All
attendees agreed with the proposed guidelines.
As well, staff reviewed the warrants for the installation of a school
speed zone on Bank Street in the vicinity of St. Mary’s school and determined
that a school speed zone was indeed warranted and will also be supplemented
with flashing beacons. The installation
was completed prior to the start of the 2009/2010 school year.
In July 2009, staff sent a copy
of the update on the setting of speed limits on rural paved and gravel roadways
to the four rural Councillors for their review and comments. In addition, the four rural Councillors where
briefed on the report.
LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT
IMPLICATIONS:
There
are no legal/risk management impediments to the implementation of
recommendations 1 to 4, and the second part of recommendation 5. However, with respect to the first part of
recommendation # 5, while there are no legal impediments to petitioning the
Province for a "default speed limit other than 50 km/h", there may be
legal implications were the Province to allow municipalities to set default
speed limits other than 50 km/h. Were
the Province to agree to a default speed limit for municipalities (that is, no
signage), and were the City to implement a 40 km/h default speed limit, without
signage, there would be some confusion between the HTA default speed of 50 km/h
(without signage) and the City default speed of 40 km/h (without signage). While the City By-law would provide for the
default speed limit of 40 km/h, and an offence would therefore in technical
terms be enforceable, the Courts may pick up on the ambiguity between the
Province wide default limit of 50 km/h and the City of Ottawa default limit of
40 km/h, both without signage, and may dismiss charges. While drivers are presumed to "know the
law", as it is expressed in the City's Traffic and Parking By-law, in the
absence of any signage there will be confusion between the provisions of the
HTA and the City By-law.
The
City may try to overcome this confusion between the two default speeds by
posting "perimeter" or "gateway" signs but City residents
and visitors would not necessarily see these, and moreover, it seems that
residents are not generally aware of unsigned default speed limits.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
With
respect to Speed Zoning no additional budget authority is being requested.
For School
Speed Zones beginning in 2011, Public Works would be directed to submit as part
of the 2011 Draft Operating Budget for Council consideration that $100,000 be
added to the Sign Maintenance Budget to allow for the installation of
approximately 20 additional school speed zones and supplementing three locations
with flashing beacons per year.
In subsequent years following the
prior year’s installation of additional school speed zones, an annual budget
pressure of $4,400 per year would be added as a budget pressure for maintenance
requirements.
SUPPORTING
DOCUMENTATION
Attachment 1 Speed Zoning Policy for Urban and Rural
Roads
Attachment 2 40 km/h Residential Warrants (Immediately
follows the report)
Attachment 3 Options to implement 40 km/h speed limit (Immediately
follows the report)
Attachment 4 Process to Review Speed Limits and General
Timelines to Implement (Immediately follows the report)
Attachment 6 Illustration of the signing of a school speed zone. (Immediately follows the report)
DISPOSITION
Upon Council
approving the recommendations contained in this report, action will be taken to
assess requests for speed limit changes through the application of the revised
City of Ottawa Speed Zoning Policy.
City of Ottawa Speed ZONING Policy
POLITIQUE DE LA VILLE
D’OTTAWA SUR LES ZONES DE LIMITATION DE VITESSE
The following submissions were received and distributed
in advance of the meeting:
a. J. Ritz, e-mail dated 1 October 2009
b. G. Gander, e-mail dated 2 October 2009
c. I. Price, e-mail dated 6 October 2009
John Manconi, General
Manger, Public Works, Phil Landry, Manager, Engineering Technical Services and
Tom Carmody, Specialist, Traffic Assessment gave a detailed overview of the
report. A copy of the presentation is
held on file.
The following public delegations were received:
James Knowls was concerned that
a blanket rule for all residential roads, regardless of their design, will
create a disparity in traffic speeds that would make the roads less safe. He offered examples of roads (portions of
Cedarview, Gladstone and Moodie), which have a posted speed of 40 km/h and yet
the actual travelled speed is ridiculously higher. He suggested that motorist behaviour would not change without
introducing traffic calming measures.
Councillor Harder
asked the delegation whether the roads he mentioned should have a different
posted speed and Mr Knowls responded by stating that the roads should be
redesigned more as a residential type of road, where motorists travel at or
around the 40-50 km/h speed. The
councillor noted that in former Nepean, new residential streets were signed at
40km/h but under the City of Ottawa, such streets are 50 km/h and it is very
confusing for the residents. Mr.
Manconi explained that for the examples referred to by the delegation, the rule
in the report would not apply since they are arterial and collector roads. He added that the process to review them
would be with the ward councillor and their community.
In response to a question posed by the Chair, the General
Manager advised that if Committee approves the 75% support rule, staff would
work with councillors to get residential streets set at 40 km/h. And, if the Committee approves staff
petitioning the province and the province approves non-default being something
other than 50km/h, then all the studies would not have to be done since all the
residential streets would be 40 km/h.
Kim
Sheldrick-Bates, Castor Valley Elementary School Council reported how staff
have worked with the School Council to implement school speed limits. She indicated that while staff have
consulted with the federal and provincial Transportation Organizations, the
police, legal services and school boards, they have been actively getting the
approval of the people and groups out in the community. She reported that the Osgoode Ward School
Councils have all been involved and the community associations are all in
favour of this report. Further, she has
been in touch with the following groups who are in support of lowering speeds
in school zones: Health Promotion
Injury Prevention at CHEO; Safe Kids Canada; the Ottawa-Carleton Association of
School Councils; the Ontario Federation of Home School Associations; Public
Heath; Lyons Clubs; and, Women’s Institutes.
No one is opposed to lowering the speeds in school zones during regular school
times.
Jennifer McKenzie,
OCDSB Trustee explained that in Kitchissippi and Somerset wards, traffic is the #1
safety issue around schools. She asked
whether it would be possible to also reduce speeds during the lunch period,
which is when a lot of the high schools and intermediate schools have kids on
the streets.
In response to her
latter query, Mr. Landry advised that staff would consider such a request on a
case-by-case basis, noting that they try to keep it consistent in the urban
areas. Ms. McKenzie asked if it would
be possible to start the process sooner rather then later and how soon they
could start the process in terms of the petition to the province.
The Chair advised
the delegation that the school boards could start petitioning as soon as
Council approves the report. Ms.
McKenzie advised that she would be pleased to put forward a Motion at the
School Board meeting seeking their support accordingly.
Councillor
Desroches recognized the correlation between cut-backs to school transportation
and the impact on the City vis à vis additional requests for school crossing
guards and police enforcement. Ms.
McKenzie commented that she would like to see kids walk to school as much as
possible and the biggest problem is traffic.
She agreed that the municipality and the school boards should work
closely with respect to busing because if a crossing guard is put in, they can
reduce the need to bus kids across hazardous roads and intersections. The councillor noted that school boards
contract buses and it becomes a download on the City financially to implement
crossing guards.
Councillor
Wilkinson thought it would be virtually impossible to obtain a 75% approval
rating from a community and thought 60% would be more appropriate. Mr. Manconi explained that parking
restrictions require 80% community support and so 75% seemed to be a lower
threshold. Councillor Legendre
mentioned that it would be up to Council to give guidance in that regard. He asked whether special situations where a
40 km/h speed limit was requested would require the 75% support or whether they
could be handled on an item by item basis.
Mr Manconi advised that there would be flexibility for unique
circumstances and if there were a geometric issue or history, it would still be
the common sense approach applied to this.
Councillor Qadri was concerned about the default speed
limit of 40km/h, noting that in a survey of his community, 81% of 360
respondents preferred to leave the default speed limit as it is and 94% being
in support applying a lower speed limit in sensitive areas such as schools and
parks. He further noted that 92%
support increased education and enforcement.
Mr Manconi recognized that the same survey conducted in another ward
would have resulted in different responses and that the goal is to have
communities take ownership for local issues.
The councillor offered that most residents do not adhere to speed limits
in their neighbourhoods because they are familiar with the streets. He recognized that there are streets that
should be 40 km/h because of the natural make up and engineering of the street,
while others would function best at 50 km/h.
When asked by
Councillor Deans why staff believe a lower default speed on unsigned roads
would change driver behaviour, Mr. Manconi explained that the biggest shift is
that staff are not going to do long drawn out speed surveys anymore. Instead, they are recommending empowering
the community to make that change, although enforcement would be dependent on
available resources. Councillor Deans
believed a social study should have been part of the report because people
behave differently when they are driving, as opposed to being a pedestrian or
cyclist and a 40 km/h speed limit is not looked at quite the same. She believed there should be a layer of
consultation on the principles behind the report.
Chair McRae asked
if the petition to the province for a blanket speed limit is tied to a specific
number or if it is to give the authority as a municipality to set the default
to other than 50 km/h. Ernest McArthur,
Legal Counsel advised that Council could petition for a higher default if it
chose to do so. Following on this, the
Chair suggested that if Ottawa does get permission to change the default, there
should be public consultation carried out before proceeding. Mr. Manconi agreed, adding that if the
municipality is granted to set at other than 50 km/h, staff would report back
with a consultation plan for the Committee and Council to consider.
Councillor Legendre noted that page 3 of Attachment 1
should be amended to reflect 75% instead of 80% for the percentage of residents
in support of changing the speed limit on a roadway. The councillor referred to previous comments about driver behaviour
and how a change in signing would not change that and suggested that what was
needed was education encouraging people to drive appropriately. Mr. Manconi confirmed this would be part of
the program. The councillor was in
support of the recommendations, and would be asking the Committee to support
some Motions he would be bringing forward which spoke to seeking support from
other municipalities.
Councillor Monette
referred to a move by one of the school boards in his ward about implementing
community safety zones for all schools and he wondered what the cost would be
to the City of doing that, noting the speeds would have to be reduced and there
would be increased fines and enforcement.
Mr. Landry estimated it would be in the millions of dollars. The councillor inquired what it would cost
if the City were to use the community zone provisions to establish higher fines
in school zones, and still ask the province to establish school speed zones and
Mr. Landry indicated that to make those zones enforceable, the City would have
to sign all the school zones so the cost would be about the same.
Councillor Monette
noted that the report speaks to increasing the operating budget by $100,000 to
allow installation to approximately 20 schools in 2011 and he wanted the
Committee to consider an amendment to Recommendation 4 to read as follows:
4. That the Public Works Department submit as part of the 2010 operating
budget $100,000 to be added to the Sign Maintenance Budget as outlined in
the report.
Mr. Manconi was
very supportive of the amendment but cautioned Committee that it may be more
appropriate to state “2011” so as not to add a burden to an already difficult
budget year. The councillor believed
specifying the year would show the City is serious about moving forward on this
initiative. And, if it is supported, he
hoped that staff would take the initiative to ask each councillor which schools
would rate a priority in their wards.
In closing, the councillor felt it would be difficult to implement a
blanket 40 km/h default speed limit and wondered what discussions have taken
place with the province on this. Mr.
Manconi indicated that there have been verbal conversations with them and early
indications are that they are not supportive.
Other cities have not been asking for it either. The councillor realized therefore, that even
if Council supports the initiative, it might be very difficult to move
ahead. Councillor Bloess indicated his
willingness to put the Motion forward on behalf of the councillor.
While he was
encouraged by a move to reduce the posted speed on residential streets,
Councillor Bédard was concerned about areas in his ward where there are no
sidewalks and pedestrians, including children, are put at risk because they
have to walk on the street. He wondered
if staff had considered automatically making those streets 40 km/h, or if 75%
of the community would still have to be in support of that change. Mr. Landry explained that staff would apply
the 40 km/h warrant to any road that, from a safety perspective, should be set
thus. When asked to explain that
process to him, Mr. Landry indicated that the reports speaks to that warrant
system and mentions that some of the things staff would examine are: width of the road; proximity to a school and
parkland; different grades in the road, parking, et cetera. He suggested that the councillor could
provide a list of those streets for staff to review, with respect to
determining whether or not there is a requirement to have 75% of the residents
support the reduced speed.
Committee members congratulated
staff for the work done and in their consultations conducted with schools and
the community. In particular, they
recognized that communities want control over their residential streets and
this is a first step to encouraging a change in the mind-set of people who
drive through the city.
Councillor Leadman wondered if Recommendation 1 was
predicated on approval of Recommendation 5 and Mr. Manconi explained that the
two recommendations are independent. By
supporting Recommendation 1, the Committee is indicating support for the
community setting speeds on their streets (with 75% support). When asked how Recommendation 5 impacts this
policy, the General Manager advised
that what makes Recommendation 5 different is that the City would not have to
sign the lower speed limit, whereas the current policy dictates that if the
City wants to assign a speed on a residential street that is lower than 50
km/h, it has to erect signage.
The councillor
felt it was somewhat premature to support a policy if the province does not
support the recommendation to change the default. Mr. Manconi confirmed his feeling that the province would not
support the City’s request.
In light of this
information, the councillor suggested that it might be better for the Committee
to direct staff to approach the province first, before proceeding further. The General Manager agreed with this
suggestion, indicating that staff would ask the province if they are going to
permit the City to go to another default speed limit, then report back on the
results of that discussion. The
councillor indicated she would prepare the appropriate Motion.
The Chair believed
this would give staff an opportunity to report out and in the event the City’s
policy is permitted to be changed, it gives the community an opportunity to
respond and to ensure their voices are heard.
Mr. Manconi
clarified that such a Motion would have two impacts to the report: on the assumption the Committee is going to
approve the other recommendations, Recommendation 5 would get pulled out and
Recommendation 7 would have to be addressed because it refers to a default to
40 km/h for new development. He
explained that staff would like to establish the 75% rule on residential
streets, but would hold off until the City learns what the province says with
respect to a lower default speed limit.
He confirmed they would also hold off on new subdivisions.
Councillor Legendre
indicated that he had two Motions that build on, but which do not amend, the
staff report that the Committee may wish to consider:
a. That Council seek the support of other
Ontario municipalities for the ability to set 40 km/h as the “default speed
limit” on local roads in residential communities.
2. That Council seek the support of other
Ontario municipalities for the ability to set 40 km/h as the “speed limit” by
means of “gateway signing” at the entrances of residential communities.
He explained that
the intent of these Motions is to seek support from other municipalities to
lobby the province. Staff confirmed
that both would require an amendment to the Highway Traffic Act. He believed these would assist in gaining
the political support necessary if they hope to ever have a chance of this
happening. He was concerned that based
on what staff have indicated to the Committee, simply asking the province for
the ability to change the default will be met with a negative response, and so,
the councillor maintained that in the crafting of Councillor Leadman’s Motion,
she might simply ask that it be a two-step process and not seek to eliminate
Recommendations 5 and 6. The General
Manager agreed with this approach, i.e., seeking the support of other
municipalities (through the FCM or AMO) before approaching the province.
Councillor Wilkinson supported this approach, stating
that confusion arose when the former municipalities were amalgamated and there
were varying local speed limits on residential streets.
She indicated that she would be putting forward a Motion
seeking a reduction in the percentage of residents required to support a
reduced speed limit on a local road.
She believed requiring 75% may be difficult to obtain and preferred the
lesser percentage of 60% which is well over half. She also agreed that a lower speed on local roads and in school
zones sends a distinct message to motorists, especially when most people drive
10 km/h over the posted speed. It will
make communities safer for all users, including children. Staff were in support of the recommendation
for 60%.
The Chair advised
that she would not be supporting the reduction from 75% to 60% because when she
has to deal with similar issues in her ward and they often get as much as 80%
signing. So, while she appreciated the
councillor’s argument, she preferred to support the staff recommendation.
Councillor Legendre
reintroduced his amalgamated and amended Motion. Staff were in support of the Motion with a minor amendment to
include the words “unsigned” in both portions.
The councillor was amenable to this additional wording.
Councillor Desroches
indicated his willingness to support the Motion, as long as the direction is
clear that the City is going to be seeking and asking the province for that
authority. He believed it was Council’s
right to do so as it regulates many facets of the city that are just as
important.
Councillor Leadman
asked that given the different levels of roadways in the city, is it within the
provincial purview to control the roadways, with the exception of the federal
roads. Mr. McArthur explained that the Highway
Traffic Act assumes responsibility for speed limits and rates on the roads
and he did not think the province would relinquish that to the
municipality. He offered that it may
change the Act to say the municipality can set its’ own default limits, but
overall it will retain the authority over speed limits within the province,
with the exception of those under federal jurisdiction. He estimated it would take at least 12
months to change the Act to allow municipalities to set the default.
Councillor
Wilkinson inquired about the impact of the amendment proposed by Councillor
Monette. Mr. Manconi reiterated the
fact that staff were not proposing it for 2010, but for future years to avoid
adding pressure to next year’s budget.
He added that 2011 was the earliest year they were looking to introduce
this additional funding to the Sign Maintenance Budget.
Moved by J.
Legendre
That
Recommendation 5 be replaced with the following:
5. That staff be
directed to prepare a Council Motion for the 28 October 2009 meeting, seeking
the support of other Ontario municipalities:
a. For the
ability to set alternate default speed limits (unsigned) on local roads in
residential communities; and,
b. The ability
to set alternate default speed limits (unsigned) as the speed limit by means of
gateway signing at the entrances of residential communities.
That staff be
directed to report back to Council on the findings on support from other
municipalities and the province.
CARRIED,
as amended
In considering the
Motion from Councillor Bloess, on behalf of Councillor Monette regarding an
amendment to staff Recommendation 4, Councillor Legendre wondered if it would
generate a weakness in terms of budget stability and preparation. Mr. Manconi responded by stating that the
Motion makes it date-specific. Staff
did not want to specify 2010 because of the already existing budget pressures
and they could not assign the funding to 2011 because they are unable to commit
a future Council.
Moved by R. Bloess
That
Recommendation 4 be amended to read as follows:
That the Public Works Department submit as part
of the 2010 operating budget $100,000 to be added to the Sign
Maintenance Budget as outlined in the report.
CARRIED
Moved by M.
Wilkinson
That the per cent
agreement by residential owners to have a speed limit changed be reduced to 60%
from the recommended policy of 75%.
CARRIED
YEAS (6): R.
Bloess, M. Wilkinson, S. Desroches, J. Legendre, D. Thompson, C. Leadman
NAYS
(2): G. Bédard, M. McRae
That the Transportation Committee and Agriculture
and Rural Affairs Committee recommend that Council approve:
1. The Speed Zoning Policy for Urban and
Rural Roads, including: the procedure for setting speed limits on, rural gravel
roads, posting 40 km/h speed limits on local residential roads, and
establishing school speed zones, as outlined in Attachment 1;
2. The
process to review speed limits to expedite responses to speed-related
inquiries, based on roadway classification, as defined in the Transportation
Master Plan, and as outlined in this report;
3. That speed limit reviews not be
undertaken on any road within a three-year time period unless there are major
changes in traffic patterns along the roadway in question;
4. That the
Public Works Department submit as part
of the 2010 operating budget $100,000 to be added to the Sign
Maintenance Budget as outlined in the report;
5. That staff be
directed to prepare a Council Motion for the 28 October 2009 meeting, seeking
the support of other Ontario municipalities:
a. For the
ability to set alternate default speed limits (unsigned) on local roads in
residential communities; and,
b. The ability
to set alternate default speed limits (unsigned) as the speed limit by means of
gateway signing at the entrances of residential communities.
That staff be
directed to report back to Council on the findings on support from other
municipalities and the province.
6. That the City Request that the Province
amend the Highway Traffic Act to allow the doubling of fines within a school
zone;
7. That as part of the Site Plan Agreement
process that currently requires developers to install regulatory and warning
traffic signage, 40 km/h signs be included as applicable in new developments.
8. That the per cent agreement by
residential owners to have a speed limit changed be reduced to 60% from the
recommended policy of 75%.
CARRIED*,
as amended
YEAS (7): R. Bloess, M.
Wilkinson, S. Desroches, G. Bédard, J. Legendre, D. Thompson, C. Leadman,
M. McRae
NAYS (0)
* Chair McRae
dissented on Recommendation 8.
Process
to Review Speed Limits and 
Attachment 6