Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOES 020/00���it � � ' � � . . � � � � - .. -. �� . � . _. . . . . .. , . Gw°� 045 ' REPORT TO COUNCIL FRObI: , Richard Holbom DATE: November 28, 2000 � Division Head � Municipal Property & Engineering REPORT NUMBER: OES 020-00 SUBJECf: Fairport Road Kingston Road to Finch Avenue Traffic Operational Review RECOMMENDATION: l. That Report OES 020-00 ba received for information; and 2. That Stnff be directed to prepare n Municipal Trnffic Calming Policy for Councii's consideration by March 2001; und 3. That, upon approval of a Municipal Traffic Calming Policy, Staf� bc dircctcd in cooperation with rcpresentatives of thc FnirpoA Road Action Committee to develop a Fairport Road countcrmcasures plan with u focus on improving safcq� along thc corridor whilc being respective of Ihc clnssification nnd intendcd function of the roadway. ORIGIN; A history of residcnt conccros and the rcccipt of a neighbourhood petition in May, 2000, respecling the exccssivc speed nnd volumc of traffic on Fuirport Itoad. AU'fHORITY: Not applicnble FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The development of a Municipal Traffic Calming Policy and examination of existing pilot traffic calming measures will be underiaken by Ciry staff. Consultants will be ntaincd on an as nccded basis to essist in certain components such as speed rationalization on roads, and thc Gamework preparntion of the policy. The develapment of a countertneasures plan for Feimort Road will be underiaken by City staff and the Fairport Road Action Committee at a nominal cost ovcr and above staff tima A budget estimate of 575,000 to support the initial implementation of ndditional traffic calming measures ttvoughout thc City has becn included in thc Operations 8c Emergency Srnices Department's Draft 2001 Capital Budget. Expendituees would not precedc tha wmpletion of thc Traffic Calming Policy or tha Fairport Road Countermeasures Plen, should tho funds be earmazked for Feirport Road. ��'- �� ' f � ; � 1 : �� � , '" 3 a� ' � k .� T.� �.., � kL� ..`.�. .. r �, ... .�4 . 4. . , x. . x.tF.. r x. ._ -+ __ . ..- . . "'E�s,. �s . 't, , . .4 _'\t_ ,.. .. ,y f ' . . , -. Rapart to Council OES 020-00 ` Datc: November 28, 2000 046� Subject: Faitport Road Tra�c Operetional Rcview Page 2 1.0 EXECUTNE SUMMARY: Traffic and its rclated effects have been a matter of longstanding concem on Fuirport Road. Initially the concems were addressed by means of installing an all-way atop at the intersection oC Feirport Road at Welrus Street and also by lowering the atetutory speed limit from 50 km/h to 40 �. Although thesa resolutions may have brought some short term perceived improvements to Fairport Road, the classification and design hus over ihe years dictatcd that higher volumes and operating speeds aze characteristic to this type of facility. As n result of these operating characteristics, it is now commonplace thnt the 40 km/h posted speed limit and the unwarranted stop signs located ut Fairpart Road at Weirus Street are regularly ignored. The rcconswction of Faiiport Road in 1995, to an 1 l.0 metre wide urban cross-section has inherently increased public uwareness regarding the speed and volume of tra�c on Fairport Road. The improved travel surface, smoother horizontal and vcrtical curve alignments and long sightlines provide motorists with a fcel that operating spceds in the 60 km/h range nrc very safe and acceptable. Given lhat most of Fairport Road is front lotted residentinl, howcver, these operuting speeds conflict with the desire for neighbourhood safety by residents. In May, 2000, the neighbourhood coordinated their tmfiic concems into a petition which was submitted by approximately twenty (20) rcsidents from Fairport Rond. Thc petition outiined the community's concems regarding the specd and volume of traffic on thcir strcet and also provided a number of recommended solutions on how to resolve the perccived hazards. A copy of the petition is included with the rcport as attachmcnt #1. Commencing in June, 2000, staff began addressing these issues with the rcpresentatives of the Fairport Road Action Committce. A Neighbourhood Traffic Wntch was coordinated with residents as one means of elevnting thc averoge motorists awarencss of their travcl speed and its related efCects on the adjacent residcntial neighbourhood. Although thcse efforts were wazmly received by residents it ia cxpccted that lhc impucls on operaling spceds are only short tertn. Throughout lune, 2000, nnd 1u�y, 2000, a series of tra(iic volume and speed studies were completed to further detertnine the extent of the problems on Fairport Road and what matters of resolution may be npplicablc to address the concems of local residents. Duc to stnff shortages at the Durham Regional Police Service enforcemcnt initiatives huve been limitcd and infrcquent on Fairport Road. The content of this report discusses the current classification of Fairport Road and wtiat operating characteristics must ba cxpected for this type of facility. Potential countertneasures to addrcss public concems are outlined which place particulaz emphasis on a proper balance between engincering, enforcement and education. While it is recognized that residents pereeive the operating speeds on Fairpoct Road as being too high, these conditions must be carefully maintained in order to provide an efTective transportation system for thc City. Although staffs technical position wi(I not be acceptable to most Fairporl Road residents, this does not preclude that an opportuniry exists to cooperatively develop a countermeasures plan which is intent on improving safety along the corridor. It is therefore ra;ommended that staff be directed to prepare a Municipal Tmffic Calming Policy for Councii's consideration by March 2001. Following the approval of a Municipnl Tralfic Calming Policy ataff will, if directed, cooperate with rcpresrntativcs of the Fai�port Road Aclion Committce to develop a Fairport Road countcrtneasures plan with e focus on improving safcty along the corridor while being respective of the class and intrnd�d function of thc roadway. 2,0 HACKGROUND: 2.1 Existina Road and Aroa Charecteriatics . Fairport Road hae naturaUy cvolved over the period of ineny yeata from what was originally a oazrrow lo: al rype road W what ie now a much wider Type C Arterial facility. This type of ra ' . ;i 1�.�.��.- •...,.._-.. .F ... _ .,F.;:�.3 ,..._'sC# 4 �_...._.. �,�.wh.�.,d_ s. �.�.,�__.la.�.t'i,.y.,.0 ce_. r_� .... .... Report to Council OES 020.00 Subject: Fairport Road Trafiic Operational Review Datoc November 28, 2000 Page 3 � 4 7 clessification is not uncommon in older established areas as existing roads are typically upgraded to menago the incnasing volumes of traffic that are associated with new developmenl in the immediate area Other norih-south orientated roada in Ute City of Pickering which have also been upgraded to a Type C Arterial level or higher include Altana Road, Rosebank Road, Whitcs Road, Dixie Road, Liverpool Road, Valley Farm Road and Brock Road. Each of these Cacilities were originally constructed at about tha same time as Fairport Road nnd follow the original concession and lot grid system (single front surveying system) of roads present t}uoughout much of the Greater Toronto Area A similar progression of roadways can also be seen in the neighbouring City of Toronto where all of the original roadways such as Kennedy Road, McCowan Road, Merkham Road, etc. have also been upgraded and re-classified over lhe period of many years to a much higher level of service in lhe transportation system. Bellamy Road and Brimley Road from the fortner City of Scarborough closely resembie the current function of Fairport Road. Each of these facilities have wide urban pavement surface widths and operate as arterial roadwuys with posted speed limits of 60 km/h but yet are predominately front lotted residential strcets. Although classified as a Type C Arierial Roadway, thc cxisting scrvice function of Fairport Road is currenlly more representative of a lower order Urban Collector Road in accordance with the GeoRetric Design Guide for Canadian Ronds. Urban Collector Roads are intended to cnrry traffic behvecn the surrounding local and arterial roads whilc providing full access to adjaccnt proper;ies. The properties on Fairport Road are predominately residential in nature. Urban collector roads have (low and operating chnractcristics which are typically interrupted by stop or signal coutrol, have volumes of tra(fic which range between 1,000 and 12,000 vehicles per dny, and operating speeds that vary belween 30 km/h and 70 km/h depending on the specific flow conditions. Fnirport Roud was reconstructed to its current dcsign and alignment as a Type C Arterial Rondway having an urban pavement width of 11.0 meters between Kingston Road and Finch Avenue in 1995. Scveral years prior to the reconswction, the speed limit on Fairport Road along this scction was reduced from thc statutory limit of 50 km/h to the curtently posted maximum of 40 km/h. 2.2 Analvsis of Existin� Conditions 2,2.1 Traffic Volumes Traf'fic volume count studies were conducted on Fairport Road during thc week of Monday, July 24, 2000, to Friday, July 28, 2000. The results of the studies confirmed an average daily traffic volume on Fairport Road of 4,893 vehicles in the atudy area just south of Strouds I.ane. This area of Fairport Road is located close to the midway point between Glenanna Road and Welrus Street where it can be expected that traffic volumes and speeds would be the highcst dua to thc location of the collector and local road connections end the ovecall length of the uninterrupted roadway section. Whrn the recorded volume of 4,893 vehicles is compazed to the typical range for an urban collector road of between 1,000 and 12,000 vehicles per day, the existing tra�c flow is considered very acceptable. If the recorded volume, however, was to be compared to the volumes characteristic of an urban erterial facility, as pa the designation of Fairport Road, the cuarnt volumes would not evcn roach lhe lower cnd of lhe range. Volumes on urban artetial roadways typically aro between 5,000 and 30,000 vahicles per day. Volumes in lhe highcr rnd of this capacity are not anticipated in the near future on Fairport Road even with continued dcvelopmrnt in the neighbourhood arca. _ ' � ar F i� � � . .. t, .. �'.R .. . .. . > ,....,, . 4 K,.. rf`� � ..,....,. � . « , °..� .r�, _ �. ... _r .. � .. . Report to Counctl O8S 020-00 Dato: November 28, 2000 � 4 8 Subjcet: Fairport Road Treffic Operational Revtew Page 4 2.2.2 Speed Surveys A series of spot speed studies were completed elong FeirpoR [:oad between Kingston Road and Finch Avenue between Monday, June 12, 2000, and Friday, July 7, 2000. The studies were undertaken in three specific areaa of Fairport Road during vazious times of the day in order to confirm an accurate operating speed profile for Fuirport Road. The specific areas of study were located between Welcus Street and Strouds Lane, between Strouds Lane and Bonita Avenue and between Bonite Avenue and Glenanna Road. The speed study results have co�cmed average spceds in the vurious sections which range between 523 km/h and 57.0 IrnJh while 85m percentile speeds, the speed at or below which 85 percent of motorists iravel, has been calculated to ranga between 61.0 km/h and 62.8 km/h. The highest compliance mte recorded for the 40 km/h posted meximum speed limit during ail of the study periods was 7.2%. The speed study rosults also indicated that if the findings were to be compazed to a statutory 50 km/h maximum speed limit, the best speed compliance rate would still only reach a high of 51.4 % Given the findings of the speed studies, it is evident ihat the reduced speed limit of 40 krMi is ineffective on Fairport Road. 1'he wide straight design of the facility gives the majority of reasonable motorists, those that are typically within the 85'" percentile speed, the nerception and fceling that trnvel in the 60 km/h range is very safe and quite ucceptablc on Fairporl Road. Although it is commonly believcd that motorists will ulways travcl 10 to 15 km/h above the maximum postcd speed limit this perception is not accurate. Studies regularly prove that most reasanablc motorists will travel ut 1he speed for which they feel safe regardless of the specd posting that mey be in effect. 2.2.3 Collision Data Due to the fnct that excessive vehicle operating speeds can be directly related to collisions, a history of accident experiencc on Faicport Road haz bccn preparcd for tlic period from lanuary 1, 1997, to November 24, 2000. Thc results of this review has confirtned thc occurrcncc of a total of nineteen (19) reported collisions on Fairport Road between Kingston Road nnd Finch Avenue during the review period. Of these collisions twcive (12) occurred at the intcrscction of Sheppard Avenue at Fairport Road and were of a rear-end or angle type. A high collision rate is present at lhis pnriiculaz location due to the poor vcrtical alignment that exists on Sheppard Avenue just west of Fairport Road. Of the remainder of thc accidents, four (4) occurred at the intersection of Glenanna Road, and one (1) each at the intersections of Bonita Avenue, Strouds Lane and Welrus Street. These sevrn (� accidents cnn be attributed to insufficient gap times, health rensons, speed and the location of unwarranted trafiic control devices. It should be noted that only one of tl�e collisions on record, a single vehicle accident, appears to have been directly related to excessive vehicle speed on Fairport Road. Although it does not appear to be prevalent, it is worth noting that a spced difi'erential created by the posting of an unrealistic maximum r•peed limit may result in an increase in collisions. The posted 40 krn/h maximum speed limit ot_ Faicport Road has created a wide range of travel speeds that may increase the frequrncy of rear end collisions, irtegularities in luming movemrnt gaps and driver f�ustration. Such results may inherenqy lead to wsafe passing and overall highar operating speeds on Faicport Road. 2.3 Public identified Recommrndations and Solutions In May of 2000, a neighbourhood petition was received from approximately lwenty (20) sepatate households on Fairpart Roed. Each of the householda eubmitted a standeed Covn letter which in some casea were amrnded to represent the epecific beliefe and recommended solutions of each reaident. The atandard pedtion, however, requested that the following measuns be implemrnted on Fairport Road in an eftori to control tho increasing volumea ond speod of uatTc: ;, ; ' S j 3 ! a Z!' . ,. .s .,._ , c.i �����_ „� .. . . . . ., _, s _;n� s . ..., . . �. . . Report to Council OES 020;00 Date; Novembm 28, 2000 Subjxt: Fairport Road Traflic Operallonal Rcview pa8� � 4 9 1, the speed limit remain at 401an/h 2. parking onroad continue to be allowed and appropriate road markings bc painted on thc road 3. the proposed light as Strouds Lane be installed as soon as possible 4. some accommodation Cor pedestrians MUST be made at Sheppazd, Dunbarton, Welrus, Strouds Lane, Bonita and Glenanna 5. hvo signs be installed, e.g. Drive Slowly "Children Playing" at intervals on the road as soon as possible 6. a traffic calming device 6e installed at Welrus, e.g. speed bump 7. a light be instnlled at Dunbarton and Fai�port to slow southbound traffic for the tricky interscetion at Sheppard Avenue Although each of the above recommended solutions has merit in terms of perceptionally addressing the public's specific concems, tha appropriateness and effectiveness of these measuns will likely be extremely limited. As part of the proposed invcstigative process with the Fairport Road Action Committee, however, each of the public recommended solutions should be reviewed further and supported if deemed elfective and wuranted. My resulting solutions from the cooperative invatigative process will be subject to budget approval prior to implementation. 2.4 Potential Countermeasures • 2.4.1 Neighbourhood Trn(Tic Watch Program Representatives of thc community wcre providcd with the ncccssary equipment to undertake a Neighbourhood Traffic Watch in June, 2000, The results of the watch retumed details on the speed and licencc plate number of cach vehicle rccorded which was travelling above 50 kmlh during each period of study by thc residents. Although quitc literally n few hundred results were retumed by the residents many vehicles cauld not bc recorded due to the fact that almost every motorist was found to bc speeding. Commcnts wcrc actualiy made on the report fortns which confirtn staffs technical obscrvations that unrcalistic spccd limits create speed differentials which encouragc unsafe passing and increase operating specds. [t wus ulso noted on the report forms thut unwarranted stop signs incrcase intcrscction hnzards as motorists frequently run the controls in place. The Neighbourhood Traflic Watch program can be an effective tool for local type streets where trafEic volumes are much lower, however, the effectiveness of this type of program on an arterial roadway such as FairpoR Road is questionable. Although the progra►n may have had some short tertn effects on driver behaviour and possibly increased public nwareness, it is expected that travel speeds on Fairport Road have now retum«I to the 60 km/h range. 2.4.2 Tra�c Control Signal — Fairport Road at Strouds Lane The installation of a traffic control signal at the intersection of Fairport Road at Strouds Lane is expected to be complete and operational by the cr.d of December, 2000. This traffic signal will F:ovide a safe point for pedestrians wishing to cross between the east and west sides of Fai�pon Road. As with all olher haftic conUol devices, however, the traffic signal must be used correctly in order for its function to be effective, Pedestrians should be encouraged to cross ut the signal rather than mid-block if safe gaps in traffic flow are not present. Operaling speeds on Fairport Road may also be affected by the operation of the traf&c control signal. If cycled frequently enough, the traffic control signal may actually provide a brcak in treffic flow which will act to lower operating spceds on Fairgort Road. If, however, the traflic control aignel is operated with too much 'ted dMe" on Fairport Road, the opposito efl`'ect may occur. Mororista will bxome frustrated wilh being stopped unnecessarily, resulting in red light running end qwte poasibly hlgher operating apeeds on Fairpod Road. Efforta will be made with the Region of Durhem, who aza cuirenUy installing this eignal on behelf of tho City of Pickering, to adJust the signal timing to best achievc tho desired cffxts. .. �r�*.:� __. . ., . ., , . - -.,. , . ,. ' Report to Council OES 020-00 � 5 � Subject: Fairport Road Treffic Operational Reviow 2.4,3 Speed Limit Increase Date: November 28, 2000 Page 6 Consideration should be given to increasing thc apeed limit on Fairport Road to a speed more realistic of the actual opecating speed or 85� percentile speed. Concems respecting the number of vehicles ignoring lhe posted 40 km/tt speed limit wili alv: ays rcmain unless major changes are mnde to lhe engineered design of the tacility or enfa;cement end education levela are greatly improved. Given the roadways intended function and classification, however, such major changes or improvements to kcep an unrealistic operating spced of 40 km/h in check are not recommended or even considered feasible. The benefits of increasing the maximum speed to a reazonable limit would include a narrower speed band and a component of the traffic flow which can be rcusonably enforced. A nartower speed differential will reduce the frequency of unsafe passing, control excessive operating speeds and reduce the number of rear-end and angle type collisions as @aps in traffic Ilow can be better judged. Although il is technically supported thnt eff'orts should be made to post a maximum speed which is representntive of thr. intcnded function and classification of Faiiport Road, foresight should not be lost to ensure that the movements of traftic are sufe for the roudway and its environment. 2.4.4 Traffic Calming Mensures The introduction of traffic calming measures on Fai�port Road mny result in lower operating speeds and quitc possibly thc reduction of traffc volumes. Altliough this specific cowtermeasure may uppear to be the most effective solution to resoivc rcsident concems, very careful considerntion must be givcn beCoro implemcnting any type of trafiic calming measures on Fairport Road. Experiencc with tha City's tra�c calming pilot projccts hus shown that not nlways is this type of traffic control unanimously acccptcd by all residcnts. The effects of severe physical tra�c calming measures will rcducc emergency response times, incrcase noise, impact on snow plowing and street mainlcnuncc operations and may also have profound impacts on other roadways in other neighbourhoods. City stafT' are anticipating to complete a municipal tmffic calming policy in March, 2001. This policy will provide a framcwork a�id guideline on the future applicution of traftic calming measures in the City. It is presumed that the policy will discuss and incorporate such components as the rationalization of spceds on ronds in order to protect the intended design and function of higher order collector and arterial claJsed facilities. 2.4.5 EnCorcement Regulaz enforcement of the 40 km/h posted speed limit on Fairpori Road by tlie Durham Regionat Police Service is ultimately unachievnble. Although the police service reports thnt oceasional radar support is provided, the studies indicate that neazly all drivers are speeding. The resources oF the police service for tra�c enforcement are currently very limited and as such should be dedicated to capturing the excessive end dungerous speeds of only those motorists that arc traveling above the 85� percrntile speed. Additional police msources to provide moro frequent enforcement on Fairport Road would be of benefit but it ahould be cecognized that only a short-term improvement will be noted. The purpose oF police enforcement is to assist in maintaining a wnstant reasonable speed of traffic along any particular facility. ]t is not uncommon to Find that roadways with highly variable apeed rat�s ero inherently morc dnngerous. 3.0 SUMMARY Thc potenUal countermeasures outlined above represrnt the thrca componenls of tratiic operationn. `These three componente are epecitically Engineedng, Bnforcemrnt and Education. � .. , ... .,. .. :. ......... �, ,... .,.�,_... . _.._..�1 , . ..r t .Pi.,.��.._ �i � ]"�; . ;t� kepoR to Council OES J20-00 '; I Date: Novcmber 28, 2000 Subject: Fairport Road Traffic Operntionsl Review ?age 7 Q 51 Each of the disciplines are required to be present in good hazmony on eny rondway in order Cor.it to function with safe opereting principles. From the traffic operational review of Fairport Road it is evident that these components have not Ueen coordinated or maintaincd at suitable levels to ensure a safe movement of tra�c that is acceptable to local residants. It is therefore, recommended that each of the components bc reviewed and where necessary improvements be imptemented. Tht engineering aspect of Fairport Road specificaily pertains to the design nnd opcnting chazacteristics of the roadway. As outlineJ earlier in this report, FaicpoR Road is classified as a Type C Arterial Roadway but cucrenUy has the operating characteristics of an Urban Collector Road. To 6e respective of either of these designations lhe roadway must have a wider pavement width than that of a locnl road, smoother horizontal and vertical curves and should also have a higher operating speed to effectively maz:nge the additional volumes of traffic. A engineering review of Fairport Road could consider that such matters as posted speed limit, stop sign controls, traflic signal operetions, streetiighting, intersection operations, waming signs, on-street pazking, pavement markings and other traffic calming techniques are all effectively and properly applied. Traffic calming rhay include both visua! and physical measures but in this case severely restrictive physical t�a�c calming featwes are not recommendcd on Fai►port Road. Enforcement is also e very important component nf roadway operations. Unfortunately, the Durham Regional Police Servicc has had staff shortages for mnny ycars which ultimately has led to an inadequate amount of t�a�c enforcement. It should be noted, however, that Fairport Road with its posted speed limit of 40 kmh� cannot be rcasonnbiy cnforccd. As confirmed during our spot speed studies a maximum of only 7.2% of ihe motorists ure nctually iravelling at or below the speed limit. The Policc Servicc neals to be dedicated to cnforcing the speed of those motorists which are traveling beyond thc 85m percentile and are actually the root of concem on Fairport Road. Recent plans nt the Durham Regionai Police Scrvice indicute that a new unit will be fortned in 2001 which will be dedicatcd to Uaffic enforcement. This proposal does not mean that Fairport Road will rceeive constant or even rcgulaz cnforccmcnt, but it ducs suggest that �ccasional enforcement may be availablc. ]mproved education is believcd to be the most important factor effccting Fairport RoaJ. Residents must F�IIy understand thc intended function of Fairport Road und what consequences will occur to thc Transportalion System if thc operating characteristics sire dramatically change�i. The existing roadway hiera,chy must be maintaincd wiU�in the City to pmvide reasonabb; havel routes to nnd :rom tha various origin-destinations. Although enforcement and enginecring measures can radically change the operating characteristics of Fairport Road such differcnces are not d:sired. The invoduction of severcly restrictive physical trnflic calming measures such as speed humps may satisfy the concems of Fairport Road msidents but the efCects of such convols will be faz reaching into other neighbourhoods. 4.0 CONCLUSION ' It is recognized that the operating speed of Fairport Road is much higher tha�i the posted speed limit, however, this chazactecistic is justifiably representative of the desi�natiost and design of thc facility. Eff'orts to radically change the operating conditions of Fairpori Road from 60 � to 40 km/h will require significent capital expenditures and will have fer reaching eCfects onto other toadways and other neighbourhoods. Although a City Traffic Calming Policy has not yet bcen prepared and adopted, it is expected that severely restrictive traffic calming measures wiU not be supported or rccommended for these types of facilities. Thia technical position, however, does not preclude that additional improvemenls can be identified and implemented on FairpoA Road as a means to achicvc a lown and a perccived safa operating speed. It ie thoreforo recommended that Statf be directed to inidate a countermeasuces plen in cooperation with reprearntatives of tho Faicport Road Action Committec. The countertneasures plan ehall be intent on tmproving asfety along the corridor through Bngincering, ,'�, _ . '.- _ .�..�,... . .. _. ,. . _, ,. , ... . .. , . . . . . j Rcport to Council OES 020-00 Date: November 28, 2000 O rj 2 SubJect: Fairport Rued Trafiic Operationnl Review Page 8 Enfor�ement and Educadon but must elso remain respcctive of the classification and intended function of Fairport Road.. ATTACHMEIv"TS: 1. Fairpott Road residents petition Prepared By: � Step en Brake Coordinator, Traffic & Waste Management Submitted By: � Rich d Holbo Div' ion Hcad M icipal Property & Engineering C S B /T„e, �... �,.,,,., �. Approved / Endorsed By: tt Bunt Dircctor, Operations & Emcrgency Services Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Ciry Council . �� t � U �� . . � � � � � Th J. Quinn, C efA inistrat Offi r , { � r � �: ; r � i� � # . t - � ! t . i . s '- y ,� t � .+ � ji ; � t , . 1 _,r� , �. ' 4 � ! }} ( t DI i . � i ' " ' .'"',. S S .t_: ,r ee`... t .,.s, ,t �..r,:� ,i, ...+,.., -Y--=.. .� .,x,. , , • � 11TTACHMENTN�TOREPOR7tt6ES_'OZO. �ww+v.;;d.d„� �` � . =, . I�Z �_ P'�=`��"� ,Y� n5s . pECEIVED . . MAY 1 12000 ,%;tc. R. H�l�or� CITYOF PICKERINO nivision Head �u�oe[�TVSCUm[�� • Municipal Yroperty + hngi�eering City of Pickeri�� • Dear �dr. Y.olbor�, qs a resident of Fairport Ro�d I am concer�ed aoout the in- creRSi�, volune 1nd speed of traffic. I an requeatin3 that� 1•. the si�eed limit remain at 40 lnn per hour • 2. parkil., onroad co�ti�ue to be allowed an�l a?propriate road :�3rki�se be gai�ted o� the road 3, the proposed lisht 3t Strouds Lane be inst�ll.e�: as soon as possible 4. some accorl�datio� for pedestriane �UST be n�de at 5he�oard, Aunb�rtol, �+�1rue, Strouds Lahe, 3o�ita ft11a GZP.'lA'1'13 5, two si;ns he installed,e�.Drive 3lowly, Children rlayi:��,at intervals on the road as so�n as Possible . 6. a traffic cal�ing device be �1Rt�lled at .lelrus,e;. s�eed l�ump . 7� bou�dhtrafficefor1theRtricky3i��ersectio�ratrShe��pardN 9outh- Thank you. 3i�cerely, Pairpor Road lction Coamittee N.ember ' cc Tt�yor Arthurs • Councillors 3renner, Dickerso�, Joh�son,Ry3n, Hclland a7d Yickles Joyce iierzog L'+�CA • ,., � �� - � .. . - :�.r � _ . . - � � ,.r t.� . ti - . � � � c , }a t ' S v �. {{ �`� q �� f � ... t � � � ; ' . r , �_ S t �. S ,. � { . k � � � ��'1 ' t 3 � � _^} � �� i r�4 4 e .�k 5 _�� e�� t:� �: t� �q i� '�a j� q � y { `. �.�it :aa..,..'�:5't�; ...� �-�: '4., �xi�� .t.,.�.".� . �.a'�d ;.., yY 1r;..v at+: � � �« � . . ��,; ��„ .�2r., .. .. � � " � , ' ATTACHMENT#�TOREPORTt1Q�S-02� , � Z , n 5� � rr.mo naere.,a� " c�ty . roia�coae Ms. VivIan 1757 Faicport'Road Pickering, ON LIV 1T1 Vandenhazel _ . � �Ms. Ludy (iibson 1748 Faicpor� Road pickering, ON Ll V 138 • Mr. & b1cs. Alaa 1750 Fairport Road Plckering, ON L1V 1S8 ThomWn . Ms. I.�urel 1758 Fai�wrt Road (iownn & Mr. Steve'llupin Ms. Gayle Clow 1811 Fairport Roed Ms. Sue Peschke 1831 Fairport Road Ms. Cindy Wang 1845 Faicport Roed Ms• Cynlhia 1835 Fairport Road Sparkes Ms. Eleirie 1915 Fairport Roed Anderson Mme�a Nanji 1965 Failport Road Brien Hotmes 1977 Fairpo�t Road Mr. VictorLesiuk 1773 Fairpoct Road Mr. Sid Latchana 1857 Faitport Road J. Anderson 1915 Fairport Road Ma Rick 1935 Faicport Road Comncchia • . Mt. Guy WeUs 1975 Fairport Road Ms. Lynn HoLnes 1977 Fairporc Road Ms. Lorraine 1910 Fairport Road Beloufn-Castle & . Mr. Crnig Castle 1v1r. & Mts. E. 1973 Faitport Road Mtony Ms. Jenc 1970 Faitport Roed Bathgete Pickering,ON L1V IS8 Pickering, ON L1V 1T2 Pickering, ON L1V 1T2 Pickering,ON L1V1T2 Pickering,ON L1V 1T2 3ddbifob M�. Vandenhaul I�Li. ()ibsoa Mr. & Mrs. Thoraton Ms. (iowan 8i Mr. Ttupin Ms. Clow Ms. Peschke Ms. Weng. Ms. Sparkes Pickering, ON LIV 1T5 . Ms. Anderson Pickering, ON L1V 4M2 Resident Pickering, ON LIV 4M2 Mr. Holmes , Pickering, ON LLV 1T1 Mc, Lesiuk . Pickering, ON � L1V 1T2 Mr. Latchana Picketiag, ON Ll V SJt Resident Pickoring,ON LIVITS Mr. Cotnecchia Pickering, ON LI V 4M2 Mr, Wolls . Pickering, ON LIV 4M2 Ms. Holmes •Pickering, ON L1V 1T4 Ms. Belouin- Cestle & Mr. Cestle Pickeriag, ON L1V 4M2 Ivir, & Mrs, AntonY . Pickering, ON LIV 1T4 ' Ms, gathgate • • , ., . . . . t - �'• r � , ' ,� � i , t .�, � s � �w : k � r , h s, � � n s �: �7� �' �> 7` �� eL i� n -> , x �. .Y4 �� *� i �YS -f f - Y.' �i. } ry S y.. L�i� .1 _','��c1... �G .._, v .. r .1 . ,.. .. �.7 .....�i�. .. �.. a!� -.. .. .... .._ .. ..,.4 . 1,.� ,. ., . . ..r . _ .