|
Transportation Committee Comité des transports
Minutes 24 / ProcÈs-verbal 24
Wednesday, 4 May 2005, 9:30 a.m. le mercredi 4 mai 2005, 9 h
30 Champlain
Room, 110 Laurier Avenue West
Salle Champlain, 110, avenue Laurier ouest |
Present / Présents : Councillor / Conseillers
J. Stavinga (Chair /
Présidente), C. Doucet (Vice-Chair / Vice-président), G. Bédard,
R. Bloess, A. Cullen, D. Thompson, M. McRae
Absent / Absents : Councillors / Conseillers E. El‑Chantiry (Ottawa Police Services Board Business / Affaires
de la Commission de
services policiers d’Ottawa), J. Legendre (Regrets / excuses)
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
DÉCLARATIONS D’INTÉRÊT
No declarations of interest were filed.
Ratification du procÈs-verbal
Minutes 23 of the Transportation Committee Meeting of Wednesday, 20 April 2005 were confirmed.
Chair Stavinga advised that Councillor McRae would be arriving late as she had a prior obligation at a local school.
PRESENTATION
PRÉSENTATION
1.
VERBAL
PRESENTATION BY THE MICHELE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY REGARDING TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUES
IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD - REQUEST FOR SPEED HUMPS
ExposÉ
de la communautÉ Michele Heights sur les questions de sécuritÉ routiÈre dans le
quartier – Demande de ralentisseurs de type dos d’Âne allongÉ
Appearing before Committee to answer questions on
the matter were Public Works and Services staff members Mike Flainek, Director,
Traffic and Parking Operations, and Rob Orchin, Manager, Mobility and Area
Traffic Management.
Representing the Michelle Heights Community were
delegations Tammy Corner, Chelsey Wynne, Pam Hepinstall, and Kiffanie Dunne,
who appeared before Committee to request that speed humps be installed in their
community to control problems with traffic and speeding. The comments and background information
related to their request is contained in the Brief that was prepared and
distributed with the Agenda for this meeting.
A copy of the Brief is held on file with the City Clerk, along with
material from the group that was distributed just prior to their presentation.
Catherine Dextras, a resident of the Michelle
Heights Community reported that it is
very dangerous for children to cross the street on Michelle, and she described
a few of the serious accidents and close calls that have occurred on Michelle
Drive since she has lived there, including the death of one child.
In answer to questions from Committee members, staff
provided the following responses:
·
The Traffic and Parking
Operations division has received 5 or 6 different requests from the community
since 1999, asking staff to examine the occurrence of speeding on Michelle and
Penny Drives. Staff has undertaken
those reviews and has reported their findings to the residents of the area.
·
There is currently no review
of the area pending in the Area Traffic Management Review program.
·
Committee has the authority
to direct staff to install a three-way stop sign at the area of Penny and
Michelle Drives, should they so choose.
·
There are two ways that
speed humps get installed today:
o
Through the Area Traffic
Management Guidelines, an analysis of speeds, cut-through traffic, and etcetera
would be carried out to determine if speed humps would be the appropriate
measure, and, if considered a priority, they would be installed through the use
of the capital budget;
o
Recommendations that have
been inherited from traffic calming and area traffic management studies
conducted by former municipalities are still being carried out through the Area
Traffic Management Guidelines Review, and staff look for opportunities, such as
road reconstructions, in which they can implement some of those recommended
measures.
·
Approximately 10-15% of the
budget for traffic and parking operations is put towards reviewing the adequacy
of the various traffic calming devices that have been put in place. Staff has yet to complete that review but do
expect to report back to Committee on it within the year.
·
Michelle Drive is a public
street and staff is under the impression that Penny Drive has both a public and
a private section, which would affect the decisions on this request, and which
staff is currently investigating.
·
Staff will perform an
on-site investigation and report back on any accidents that have occurred in
the area, including in their data the police reports and discussions with
residents of the community.
·
During the debate on Area
Traffic Management Guidelines, it was decided that all area traffic studies
will be examined on an equal basis and may not be funded through alternate
means such as local improvement charges, but it is possible, however, that the
implementation of measures that come out of such a study could be funded in
that way.
·
The Environmental
Assessment Act clearly states that traffic calming measures and vertical
measures like speed humps, including removable ones, are subject to the EA
process, and the EA process would cost much more than the actual measure would.
·
Staff has a long list of
commitments right now, but they extended an invitation to the community to get
in touch with staff to set up speed boards and an accompanying educational
program about driver speed and behaviour, which they anticipate could be
conducted within the next 2-3 months.
Such programs have been carried out for other communities in the past by
staff, in partnership with the Ottawa Police.
Moved by Councillor Cullen:
1.
That staff be directed to add the Michelle Heights Traffic Calming (i.e.
speed bumps) to the Area Traffic Management Workplan; and
2.
That a three-way stop sign be installed at Michelle Heights and Penny
Drive.
3. That staff be directed
to provide for the 2006 budget process a capital budget proposal to improve the
25-year waiting list for outstanding Area Traffic Management projects within 5
years.
CARRIED
As per Committee’s direction, staff will report
back, via memorandum, prior to the next Transportation Committee meeting (May
18th) on a date that the three-way stop sign could be installed.
The Committee received
the presentation from the Michelle Heights Community that was included with
this Agenda and approved the aforementioned directions to staff.
PUBLIC WORKS AND SERVICES
SERVICES ET TRAVAUX
PUBLICS
TRAFFIC AND PARKING OPERATIONS
CIRCULATION ET STATIONNEMENT
2. WAIVER TO THE
ENCROACHMENT BY-LAW 2003-446 FOR STEPHEN LEACOCK PUBLIC SCHOOL
EXEMPTION DE L’APPLICATION DU RÈGLEMENT 446-2003 SUR L’EMPIÉTEMENT EN
FAVEUR DE L’ÉCOLE PUBLIQUE STEPHEN-LEACOCK
ACS2005-PWS-TRF-0008
The Committee approved the following Report
Recommendations as contained in the staff report dated 6 April 2005:
That the
Transportation Committee recommend Council approve the following:
1. A waiver of Section
3(2) of the City of Ottawa Encroachment By-Law 2003-446 to permit the
construction of a permanent surface encroachment at 25 Leacock Drive; and,
2. That the Acting Deputy
City Manager, Public Works and Services Department, be given authority to enter
into a legal agreement with the applicant.
CARRIED
3. WAIVER TO THE
PRIVATE APPROACH BY-LAW 2003-447 FOR 415-421 RICHMOND ROAD
DÉROGATION AU RÈGLEMENT SUR LES VOIES D’ACCÈS PRIVÉES POUR LE 415-421, CHEMIN RICHMOND
ACS2005-PWS-TRF-0009
The Chair noted that Committee members received an e-mail from Councillor Shawn Little, the Councillor for Kitchissippi Ward, who is in support of the staff recommendation.
The Chair also noted that one delegation, Ron Silver, Westboro Village Association, was present to express his approval of the report recommendation.
The Committee approved the following Report Recommendation as contained in the staff report dated 13 April 2005:
That the Transportation
Committee recommend Council approve a waiver of Section 25 (l) (i) of the City
of Ottawa Private Approach By-Law 2003-447 to permit the construction of a
private approach which is located less than 18.0 metres from the nearest
intersecting street line.
4.
GLEBE AREA - SATURDAY FREE ON-STREET PARKING PILOT
PROJECT
SECTEUR DU gLEBE - PROJET-PILOTE DE STATIONNEMENT sur
rue GRATUIT le samedi
ACS2005-PWS-TRF-0017
Moved by Councillor Doucet
That, the
Transportation Committee approve the addition of this late report for
consideration by the Committee at today’s meeting, pursuant to Section 81(3) of
the Procedure By-Law (being By-Law No. 2003-589).
CARRIED
Appearing before Committee to make a presentation and answer questions on this matter were Mike Flainek, Director of Traffic and Parking Operations, Public Works and Services (PWS), Peter Bula, Program Manager of Parking Operations and Development, PWS, Troy Leeson, Program Manager of Parking Enforcement, PWS, and Susan Jones, Director of By-Law Services, Community and Protective Services (CPS). A copy of the aforementioned PowerPoint presentation is held on file with the City Clerk.
The Committee then heard the following delegation:
Liam McGahern, Glebe Business Group Representative stated that the group would like to see free parking in the Glebe
on Saturdays, with a 2-hour time limit.
The group has created and distributed a petition to this effect that has
been signed by many businesses within the Glebe and customers. The group feels that parking is the largest
problem they face, even more so than high property tax rates, and they want to
be treated fairly and equally, having the same parking regulations afforded to
some other neighbourhoods in the city’s downtown core. Mr. McGahern pointed out that the Glebe
is the only community on Bank Street to have paid parking on Saturdays, which
is unfair and confusing for customers.
Elgin Street has free parking on Saturdays and Westboro, which is currently
not metered, has free parking seven days a week. Free parking on Saturday would help to keep the Glebe competitive
and insure it continues as a successful shopping district. As city suburbs continue to grow, residents
spend more of their money at larger corporate stores and other centres that
offer free parking, and it is increasingly difficult to convince customers to
come to the Glebe and pay for parking and risk getting a $25 or $50 fine for
being a few minutes late in returning to their meter. Many of the shops in the Glebe are destination shops that draw
customers from across the city and depend on free parking. Mr. McGahern also added that the Glebe
Community Association has been consulted and supports the request of the Glebe
Business Group.
In response to
questions from Committee members, Mr. McGahern provided the following
responses:
§
Some of the statistics provided by staff, which suggest that the free
parking would not improve the situation, may be outdated and do not take into
account the amount of fines that are now imposed for expired meters.
§
The two-hour limit would allow for turnover while still allowing for
parking enforcement.
§
A pay-and-display box operation such as is used in the Byward Market,
with a five-minute leniency, might be a feasible solution, but that would take
time to install and implement. The
group would like a more immediate solution, as they are losing business daily,
due to the current parking restrictions.
§
The number of complaints received from customers has increased with the
increase in the amount of the fines.
§
It would be at the discretion of Parking Enforcement staff to determine
at which two-hour intervals they would carry out their checks.
§
None of the members or businesses in the Glebe Business Group is
requesting this change because of staff parking issues; most staff park
elsewhere and have other options available to them.
The Chair noted that Committee received correspondence from June Creelman, President of the Glebe Community Association (GCA), which is dated 15 April 2005 and states the support of the GCA for the elimination of paid parking on Saturdays.
In response to
questions from Committee members, staff provided the following clarifications:
·
The statistics quoted in the presentation were based on Consumer and
Business surveys that were undertaken in 1995 and 1999, and the on-street
license plate survey was conducted last month.
The fine for an on-street parking time violation is currently set at $25
and has been so since 1995; the fine has doubled to $50, however, in the City
parking lots.
·
The meters currently in place do allow a five-minute grace period, as do
the pay-and-display boxes elsewhere in the City.
·
The Central Area Parking Study was carried out in 1995 and 2000 and the
intent of the study is to continually update data on the supply and demand of
short term parking in the downtown core (north of Gloucester Street, from
Bronson to the Byward Market), because these situations can change rapidly
within a five-year time frame. Many of
the daily decisions related to cash-in-lieu and zoning applications rely on
this parking data.
·
Staff will include the discussions of this meeting in the Terms of
Reference for the next parking study.
·
The Bylaw that governs the use of the Cash-in-lieu parking fund states
that the fund is specifically allocated for the provision of parking citywide,
but is not accessible for this type of studies.
·
The capital program for parking studies is only $50,000 and therefore
must be used diligently.
·
Staff feels that the magnitude of the Central Area Parking Study necessitates
that it be done on a five-year basis, but also feels it could be delayed this
time for 6-12 months without too much impact, if it is necessary to delay it
because of a study of the Glebe issues.
·
Staff has historically looked at parking studies on a per-area basis
because each area has its own specific issues to deal with, but they could look
at doing a citywide parking study within the 2005 budget if Committee so
directed. The Planning and Growth
Management Department would also need to be involved in such policy-related
discussions.
·
Staff anticipates undertaking a smaller parking study next year within
the Glebe.
·
Staff feels they are dealing with parking issues appropriately within the
guidelines of the Transportation Master Plan and Official Plan.
·
Staff could look at reducing the fine in City lots from $50 to $25, for a
trial period of 6 months, as well as look at improving enforcement. Previously, staff have dealt with Saturday
parking issues by placing a Parking Enforcement officer in the community to
patrol the area and issue fines where required for the entire day on Saturdays,
and this resulted in the issuance of 25-150 tickets per day. In the last few weeks, staff has had an
officer patrol the area just once in the morning and once in the afternoon, and
this has still resulted in the issuance of approximately 70 tickets per
day. Staff could continue to enforce in
that regard and in instances of illegal parking in undesignated or unsafe
parking zones, as well as continued enforcement in response to calls from the
community.
·
There are other locations that have paid parking on Saturdays, such as
the ByWard Market, Rideau Street, Mooney’s Bay, Montreal Road, and etc. These are situations that have evolved over
time through various Councils and community business groups. The ByWard market is currently discussing
with staff the possibility of reinstating paid parking on Sundays to deal with
specific parking issues there.
·
Staff will report back on the feasibility of working with the businesses
to generate some sort of advertisement or informative material to explain the
area-specific parking regulations to patrons coming from outside the local
area.
Councillor Doucet proposed the
following:
That no-charge Saturdays be
implemented in the Glebe, retaining a two-hour limit for a six-month pilot and
that the fines be reduced to $25 for the off-street parking in the Glebe.
The Councillor pointed out that
this is a measure being requested by the community. He noted that it is hard to compare Saturday parking turnover
with Sunday because turnover is not as high on Sundays as many people park for
longer periods at a time in order to attend church, and the community would
therefore have a big problem with paid parking on Sundays. He felt that it is unfair to business owners
in the Glebe to lose business because their customers are getting parking
tickets when there is free parking at shopping locations within a kilometre
away. He also pointed out that this
would be a pilot that could be terminated if it doesn’t produce the desired
results.
Councillor Bédard felt it would be
unfair to delay the Central Area Parking Study in order to carry out this pilot
study and did not support that part of Councillor Doucet’s proposal. However, he was in favour of reducing the
fine for off-street parking and thus suggested that the motion be split into
those two elements for voting purposes.
In response to questions from
Committee, staff provided the following clarifications:
·
The
2005 Workplan has been prioritized and approved by Council and that any
additional studies, such as the one being suggested here, would have the
inevitable effect of delaying those already in the queue.
·
Staff
feels that a fine reduction and subsequent adaptation to enforcement measures,
rather than a pilot study, would be much more cost-efficient and appropriate to
resolve the issues in the area. Staff
could follow-up with the ward councillor and the community and then report back
to Committee in future on the progress of these measures and the financial
impact to the operating budget.
·
There
will be inevitable confusion and frustration within the community if the pilot
project is implemented and then discontinued in six months if staff conclude
that it does not work well. There would
also be additional requirements of staff to increase enforcement and to make
proper communications to the residents of Ottawa of the parking changes as they
occur.
·
Staff
could expand the Glebe Study in the 2006 Workplan to include a consideration of
the issues presented here and the possibility of free parking on Saturdays,
should Committee so direct.
The Committee considered the
following motions:
Moved by Councillor Doucet:
1.
That no-charge Saturdays be implemented in the Glebe, retaining the
two-hour limit for a six-month pilot; and
LOST
Yeas (2): A. Cullen, C. Doucet
Nays (5): G. Bédard, R. Bloess, M. McRae, D. Thompson, J. Stavinga
2.
That the fines be reduced to $25 for the off-street parking in the
Glebe.
CARRIED
Moved by Councillor Bloess:
That parking enforcement in the Glebe be adapted to ensure safe
circulation, to promote the flow of traffic, and to provide adequate parking
turnover.
CARRIED
The Committee
then considered the report dated 3 May 2005, as amended by preceding
recommendations.
1. That
the fines be reduced to $25.00 for the off-street parking in the Glebe.
2. That parking enforcement in the Glebe be adapted to
ensure safe circulation, to promote the flow of traffic, and to provide
adequate parking turnover.
CARRIED as
amended
Moved by
Councillor Doucet:
That staff
consider a city-wide parking study to evaluate the possibilities of raising
parking revenue in all commercial areas that reflects the cost to the City of
providing and maintaining roadways which service commerce, and that this study
include Councillor Legendre’s petition to the Province for the real-cost
accounting pricing of mall lots.
Committee members
felt this motion would be best referred to staff so they could examine it and
report back on the cost and implications of it to the budget.
Moved by
Councillor Cullen:
That the
aforementioned Doucet Motion be referred to staff.
CARRIED
MOTIONS OF WHICH
NOTICE HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY GIVEN
MOTIONS AYANT FAIT L’OBJET D’UN AVIS PRÉCÉDENT
COUNCILLOR / CONSEILLER C. DOUCET
5. NEWSPAPER
BOX PROLIFERATION
Prolifération des distributeurs automatiques
de journaux
Appearing
before Committee to answer questions on this issue were Public Works and
Services staff, Mike Flainek, Director of Traffic and Parking Operations, and
John Buck, Manager, Traffic and Safety Services.
In
response to questions from Councillor Bloess, staff confirmed that there has
been an increase in the amount of newspapers that are littered around the City
and that fill garbage bins because there are many more boxes containing free
publications now. In response to
questions from Councillor Bédard, staff clarified that their report back on
this matter will address the concerns brought forward by Councillor Holmes in
her email dated 28 April 2005, a copy of which is held on file with the City
Clerk. Councillor Holmes’ concerns were
also addressed in the staff response to Transportation Committee Inquiry 15-05,
dated 2 May 2005, a copy of which was distributed to Committee and is also held
on file with the City Clerk.
Councillor Bédard noted that there is an abundance of graffiti on the newspaper boxes and the difficulty encountered in attempting to have it removed, and he proposed Councillor Doucet’s motion be amended include a staff review of measures to control the graffiti.
Moved by Councillor Bédard
That staff investigate the undertaking of the responsibility for
removing graffiti off newspaper boxes on a charge back system.
CARRIED
When asked by Chair Stavinga about a timeframe for a report back on this matter, staff responded that while the Bylaw does currently allow for the removal of offending or unsafely placed distribution boxes, it will take some time for staff to first do an inventory and determine how many boxes are currently in place, in addition to the extra time constraints associated with peak season for the traffic division. At the request of the Chair, staff agreed to come back with the report by the middle of September.
The Committee then considered Councillor Doucet’s recommendation as amended by Councillor Bédard’s motion.
Whereas the
City’s current sidewalk encroachment by-law regulates the placement of
newspaper boxes so that they do not interfere with sightline or pedestrian
mobility;
Whereas the
City’s current sidewalk encroachment by-law does not regulate the quantity of
boxes;
Whereas this
results in certain corner locations storing a total of nine newspaper boxes;
Whereas this density of
boxes is sometimes duplicated at consecutive blocks, as is the case for Bank
and Third, and Bank and Second;
Whereas this is
excessive, unnecessary, and ugly;
Be it resolved
that City staff report back on limiting the number of newspaper boxes at any
one location, balancing the City’s right to rent out its right-of-way with the
right of the community to maintain an uncluttered streetscape aesthetic; and
That staff investigate the undertaking of the responsibility for
removing graffiti off newspaper boxes on a charge back system.
CARRIED as
amended
INQUIRIES
DEMANDES DES RENSEIGNEMENTS
“1. Can
staff report back to all members of Council on the policy regarding the
placement of garbage and recycling containers at or near bus shelters?
2. What
is the City policy for collection of waste at or near bus shelters where
garbage or recycling containers are not present?”
LEVÉE DE LA SÉANCE
Chair Stavinga noted that the next three Committee
meetings would be very long and asked members to ensure that the entire day be
free of any other engagements.
The Committee adjourned the meeting at 12:05 p.m.
Original signed by Original
signed by
Anne-Marie Leung Councillor
Janet Stavinga
Committee Coordinator Chair