The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOES 017/00. Of4 ��FP/� h p REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Richard W. Holbom DATE: September 14, 2000 Division Head Municipai Property & Engineering REPORT NUMBER: OES 017-00 SUBJECf: Pedestrian Crossing Safety Pickering Parkway at Village East Park RECOMMENDATION: 1. That Report OES 017-00 be received for information; and 2. That stafC be directed to complete further studies on Pickering Parkway in the azea of Vilinge East Park in 2001, following thc completion of the on-going conswction activities on Pickering Parkway and Brock Rond (Regional Road 1). ORIGIN: Ward Councillor initiated request Cor pedestrian crossing suCety review. AUTHORITY: Not applicable FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Not applicable. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The completion of various traffic studies on Pickering Parkway at Village East Park has confirtned that the installation of additional crossing protection is currently unwarranted. It should be noted, however, that a minor increase in vehicular or pedestrian traffic in the area may satisfy the minimum waRant requirements. Council may choose to direct that staff completa further studies next year to re-evaluate the June, 2000, 6ndings. Seasonal variations in trafTc flows and the presence of major road reconsWction and development activities in the area of thc Brock Road at Pickering Parkway intersection may presently cause an inaccuracy of study deta. BACKGROUND: Aa the result of an incrcasing number of complainta received by Ciry Councitlors and Staff, a review of the need for pedestrian crossing protection has been completed in thc area of Villuge East Park on Pickering Pazkway. -� .� .. Report to Council OES 017•00 Date: September 14, 2000 Q"!3 Subjech Pedestrian Crossing Safety Review — Pickering Parkway Page 2 Pickering Parkway is classified within the Official Plan as a Type `C' Arierial Roadway which is under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering. The existing service function oC Pickcring Parkway, however, is more representative of an Urban Collector Road which cames traffic between the surrounding local and arterial roads while providing full access lo adjacent properiies. These specific properties include a various mix of commercial and low, medium and high density residentit4. The rcsults of lhe various traffic studies completed between June 7, 2000, and lune 20, 2000, aze detailed as follows: Sueed Studies A series of speed studies were completed on Pickering Parkway in the area of Village East Park between the dates of June 15, 2000, to June 20, 2000. The current spced limit on Pickcring Parkwuy is the statutory unposted muximum limit of 50 km/h which is in keeping with the operating speeds for this type of facility. Operating speeds for Urban Collector Roads are expected to range benveen 30 lan/h and 70 km/h with the higher speed vulues prevailing in more suburban type areas. As displayed in the table below, daily avcrage speeds recorded on Pickering Pazkway during the period of study ranged to a high of 52 km/h whilc the daily 85'" percentile speed was recorded at a maximum of 59 km/h. The speeds which were recorcied on Pickering Parkway during thc period of study ure typical of an Urban Collector Road that has unintcrrupted Gcc flow conditions. Although residcnts may consider these speeds high, attempts should not be made to arbitrarily adjust the operating range by lowering spced limils to 40 km/h or posting unwarrnnted stop signs. Volume Studies Traffic volumes on Urban Collector Roads such as Pickcring Parkway usually range between I,000 nnd 12,000 vehicles per day. Traffic tlows on most Urban Collector Roads in and ncaz the central business district aze frequently intertupted by signalizcd intersections so that the safe movement of traffic nnd pedestrians can occur. Converscly, however, Pickering Parkway currently aperates between Liverpool Road (Regional Road 29) and Denmar Road under frce tlow conditions. Existing trafTic volumes on the sidestreet intersections have not yet reached a limit where the installation of higher order all-way stop signs or traffic control signals arc justified. The intersection of Pickcring Pazkway at Glenanna Road, presently the busicst intersection, along this section of Pickering Parkway is not forecasted to be signalized until 2008. The table below provides an outline of the daily traffic volumes recorded on Pickering Pazkway in tho area of Village East Park betwecn June 15, 2000, and Junc 20, 2000. Date Tola! Volumes Thursday, June 15, 2000 8619 vehicles Friday, June 16, 2000 9473 vchicles Saturday, Junc 17, 2000 847t vchicles Sunday, June 18, 2000 6842 vehicles Monday, June 19, 2000 8104 vohicics Tuesday, Junc 20, 2000 8022 vehicles Report to Council OES 017-00 Data September t4, 2000 ,0�� Subject: Pedestrian Crossing Safety Roview — Pickering Parkway Page 3 The unintertupted flow of haffic undoubtedly creates higher consistent operating speeds and also an increase in the difficulty for pedesttians and motorists on the sidestreets to cross over or enter onto Pickering Pazkway. Although breaks are expecled ut such intersections as Glenanna :toad and Valicy Farm Road in the 1'ubire, higher operating specds muy always exist between Valley Fwm Road nnd Denmar Road due to tha fact that no other Arteriai or Collector Roads intersect with Pickering Parkway whera a justified break could bc instnlled. As noted eaziier, the posting of unwamanted stop signs to control vehicle speeds or inappropriately control intersection right- of-wuy is not recommended. Vehicle Gan Studies A vehicle gap study provides data to detecmina the avuilable number of crossing gaps in traftic flow. Adequate safe crossing gaps are based on the minimum required walk time for an averagc person to cross n specific width of roadway. Pickering Parkway in the area of Village East Park has a roadway width of 1 t.0 metres which requires a safe walking time tor an average person of npproximately 13.0 seconds. Additional crossing time is usually permitted when a high percentnge of the pedestrians are seniors or school agcd children. By dctermining the numbcr of gaps in tmfTc Aow that exceed 13 seconds, a good indication of delay and the extent of crossing haznrd can be determined. Thc results of the vehicic gap study perfortncd between Junc I5, 2000, and June 20, 2000, are provided in the following tnble: The findings of the gap study confirtn that of the total number of gaps available in the daily traffic flow, a minimum of 33% were in excess of the 13.0 second saCe walking time. Although these summary findings may nppcar quite good thcy cun, howevcr, be somewhat misleading since fewer safe gaps are typically available during the peak traf(ic hours. The peak traf(ic hours nre also thc times when the majority of pedestrians are altempting their crossing movements. Pedestrian Crossins Studv The pedestrian crossing study is completed to determine the actual number of pedestrians crossing in a typical eight-hour period, the type and age of pedestrians crossing and ulso thc length of delny experienced by the pedestrians. A pedestrian crossing study was completed on Pickering Pazkway in the area of Village East Perk on Wednesday, June 7, 2000. Thc results of the study confirtned a total of 221 pedestrian crossings during thc highest eight hours rccorded. If the playground equipment was available in Village East Park the pedestrian count may have been higher. Of the pedestrians observed, however, the majority were crossing over Pickering Pazkway to access Pickering Transit Bus stops or visit the Village Enst Park. Few pedestrians were identified to be either seniors or school aged children. The length of delay or "difficulty" experienced when waiting for a safe gap in trafiic flow was minimnl. A"difficulty" us dcfined in the Ministry of Transportation's guidelines for the installation of Pcdcstrian Crossovers is u delay to the pedestrian in excess of 40 seconds. The number of crossing difticullics is crucial �vhen evaluating the minimum wnrrants for lhe instellation of pedestrian crossing protcction. , Report to Council OES 017•00 Datc: Septomber 14, 2000 0� 5 Subjxt: Pedestrian Crossing Safety Review — Pickering Perkway Page 4 Pedestrian Sianal Warrant The Pedestrian Signal Warrant is an assessment process developed by thc Ministry of Transportntion for the installation of Pedestrian Crossing protection. The guideline requires that basically four matters be satisfied to justify the installntion of a signal to improve pedcstrian crossing safety. The conditions required to meet the warrant are as follows: 1. that in accordance with a calculated ratio a required number of crossing difficultics be experienced in rclation to the total number ofpedestrian crossings; 2. that ut least 100 pedestrians cross for an eight-hour study period; 3. that the location is located more than 215 metres from adjacent signals; and 4. that the roadway has a width of more than 4 continuous lanes or that it has an operating speed in excess of GO IQn/h. In accordance with tha findings from the pedestrian crossing study the minimum number of difficulties required, I5, were not cxperienced when compared to thc octual numbcr of pedestrian crossings, 221. Conclusion As the Town Centre and ViUage Eazt Neighbourhaods continue to grow with additional commercial nnd residential dcvelopment, traCfic volumes will undoubtedly increase on Pickering Pnrkway. In tum these volumes will add further pressurc to the pcdestrians and vehicles attempting movements onto or across Pickering Parkway. When warranted, pedestrian crossing saCety on Pickcring Parkway in the area of Village East Park would best bc improved by installing cither a Mid-Block Pedestrian Signal or an Intcrsection Pedestrian Signal. Thcse types of devices which cost approximately $50,000 nre technically the same in terms of hardware and operating principles but their location as suggested by their names can result in differcnt operating eftects on thc roadway. The rationale for installing either u Mid-Block Pcdestrian Signal or an Interscction Pedestrian Signal is largcly dependent on the location that woulJ prove lo capturc and best serve thc majority of pedestrian crossings. Pcdestrian crossings ovcr Pickcring Pazkway in the �rca of Village East Park arc primarily completed to visit the park and its amenities, to utilizc the continuous sidewalk ulong the west and north side of Pickering Pazkway and to gain access to the Pickering Transit Bus slops Given the number of residential �Ievelopments, the dif%rent density levels and the specific needs of the various residents it is brlieved that, when warranted, the installation of nn Intersection Pedestrian Signal would be recommended ut the intersection of Pickering Parkway at Portlund Court. The development charges forecast indicates the installation of an Interscction Pedestrian Signal nt this location in 2003. Recommendntion It is recommended that this report be received for infortnation only. The wamant vnlucs confirmed during the study process in June, 2000, do not satisfy the minimum requirements for improved crossing protection. It should be recognized, however, thnt the adjusted tm�c pattems relating to the on-going B��ck Road and Pickering Parkway renlignment and widcning and commercial re-development ere unknown at this time. The instnllation of ncw pluyground equipment at Village East Pnrk may also impact on the number und age of pedestrians crossing over Pickering Parkway in this area. As a result oCthesc factors Council muy choosc to direct staff to conduct a follow-up etudy next year whcn seasonel tra�c vuriations and construction activities will have less of an effect on ihe study results, �, Qrrs� RepoR to Council OES 017-00 Data Septembec 14, 2000 Subject; Palostrian Crossing SaCery Review — Pickering Perkway Page 5 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map Prepared By: �.� C. Step en Brake, Coo nator Trafiic & Waste Management Iv�Ri� H om. Di�tision Head nicipal perly & Engineering CSB/T,.k,..`....�■w-. Copy: Chief Administrntivc Officer Director, Plunning & Devclopment Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Ciry Council �G� omes J. Quinn, Chief Administ tive O�cer Approved / dorsed B,y' � E. Buntsma, Director Operations & Emergency Services i.` ,t , . , . . . _. , .. . � .�<., .,,. ,,. .. �i� .j orrx oF prc�n�a TRAFFIC REPORT �,,,,� ,� � �, �� Q ,W LOCATION OF PROPOSED INTERSECTION PEDESTRIAN wu �:s000 - sErrt�a :000 SIONAL AND SAFETY REVIEW AREA 7