The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApril 28, 2002PICKERING Finance & Operations Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 28, 2002 at 1:30 P.M. Chair: Councillor Holland ADOPTION OF MINUTES Meeting of March 24, 2003 iff) 1. DELEGATIONS The Chair shall ask if there are any persons who wish to address an item on the agenda. {Iff) , MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION PAGE OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 10-03 INVESTIGATION FOR THE WARRANT OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS - PICKERING PARKWAY AND VALLEY FARM ROAD 1-11 OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 11-03 ROSEBANK ROAD AT SHEPPARD AVENUE INTERSECTION INVESTIGATION INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF INSTALLING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS 12-20 OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 13-03 INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC MOVEMENT OPERATIONS ON ROSEBANK ROAD AND WOODSMERE CRESCENT FRONTING ALTONA FOREST PUBLIC SCHOOL 21-29 OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 17-03 PICKERING SPORTS MEDICINE & WELLNESS CENTRE AMENDING LEASE AGREEMENT 30-34 Finance & Operations Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 28, 2002 at 1:30 P.M. Chair: Councillor Holland OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 12-03 REAR YEARD FENCING GREYABBEY COURT - 18T-98009 35-38 OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 16-03 TENDER AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION To be circulated under separate cover (IV) 1. CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION For Committee to consider a land matter. 39-42 {V) STAFF ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION {VI) OTHER BUSINESS {VII) ADJOURNMENT 001 RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Report OES 10-03 regarding traffic control at the intersection of Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road, be received; and That a by-law be enacted to amend Schedule 'A' to By-law 2632/88 to regulate the traffic at the above intersection of Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road. 002 PICKERING REPORT TO FINANCE & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Report Number: OES 10-03 Date: April 14, 2003 From: Richard W. Holborn, P. Eng Division Head Municipal Property & Engineering Subject: Investigation for the Warrant of Traffic Control Signals Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road Recommendation: 1. That report OES 10-03 regarding traffic control at the intersection of Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road be received; 2. That a by-law be enacted to amend Schedule 'A' to By-law 2632/88 to regulate the traffic at the above intersection of Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road. Executive Summary: Not applicable Financial Implications: The 1999 Development Charges Background Study forecasts the need for the installation of traffic control signals in 2008, and funding was also forecast at that time. The manufacture and installation of traffic control signals including applicable signage and pavement markings would cost approximately $90,000 in today's dollars but was not recommended or approved in the 2003 Capital Budget for External subdivision Works. If an all way stop is.approved as an interim measure, the manufacture and installation of regulatory stop signs, accessory tabs, applicable warning signs and pavement markings, costing approximately $1,000 can be accommodated within the Road's current budget account 2320-2409. Background: Pickering Parkway intersects with the south limit of Valley Farm Road presenting a condition commonly known as a T-intersection. Both roads are classified as type 'C' arterial roadways, with a daily vehicular volume on Pickering Parkway of approximately 9,000 vehicles and a daily vehicular volume on Valley Farm Road of approximately 2600 vehicles. Report OES 10-03 Date: April 14, 2003 Subject: Investigation for the Warrant of Traffic Control Signals, Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road Page 2 003 In response to a number of requests for the installation of traffic control at this intersection, staff have recently completed the necessary warrant analysis for either the installation of traffic control signals or an all way stop as per Ministry of Transportation guidelines. Given the an increase in traffic that has occurred on these two road facilities over the past number of years, the need for an investigation for traffic control signals or an all way stop at this intersection was justified. In the past three (3) years, there have been no right angle or turning movement collision occurrences reported that are correctable through the installation of traffic control signals or all way stop control at the intersection of Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road. However, there have been six (6) collisions occurring in proximity of the intersection. These collisions may be related to speed or driver error, which are not correctable by the installation of a traffic control device. In compliance with the Ministry of Transportation guidelines for the installation of traffic control signals, turning moverment count data studies, completed on March 20, 2003, confirm that the minimum vehicular volume, the volume split on the minor street, pedestrian volumes, and collision history warrants are not met for an all way stop control at Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road, but warrants are met for a traffic control signal. Recently, Council adopted the Safer Streets Traffic Management Strategy (SSTMS) as a guide and as a "toolkit" to help determine the best course of action to be taken in consideration for improving neighborhood traffic movement safely. According to the SSTMS reduced All-Way Stop Sign Policy warrant for the City of Pickering, the evaluation is based on 4 main warrant sections: 1. Traffic control signals are warranted but cannot be implemented immediately; 2. Minimum Vehicular Volume;' 3. Collision history; 4. Sightline requirements. If any individual warrant is fully satisfied, an all way stop is technically justified, however, if warrant guidelines oversee specific conditions, then traffic control devices may not be recommended. However, given that this intersection does meet the requirements for traffic control signals, recommending an all way stop, as an interim measure, would provide right of way between conflicting traffic movements and increase the level of safety at the intersection until such time as funds are approved for signals. OO4 Report OES 10-03 Date: April 14, 2003 Subject: Investigation for the Warrant of Traffic Control Signals, Pickering Parkway and Valley Farm Road Page 3 Attachments: 1. Draft By-Law 2. Location Map 3. Turning Movement Count Data/Warrant Summary Prepared By: Bill Starr /' Coordinator Traffic Engineering AP~Evgx.~tt B u n't~ma Y: Director Operations & Emergency Services Submitted By: ~_Ri~ard W. ~l'~lb-0rn .,Givision He,id (Municipal Property & Engineering Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City C~)u~cil // .:"7 \ ' ,, , ,~'/ /. Thorn's J~. Q~'~n, Cl~ef Admin' ative Officer ATTACHPIENT#_ I TOREPORT# ~)P'~ ~o-o_~ 005. THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to amend By-law 2632/88. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter H.8, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law 2632/88 provide the erection of stop signs at the intersections on highways under its jurisdiction. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: Stop signs shall be erected at the intersection of highways set out in Column I of Schedule A attached hereto, facing the traffic bound in the direction set out in Column II of the Schedule. 2. Schedule A to By-law 2632/88, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding hereto the following item: Column I Column II Intersection Facinq Traffic Pickering ParkwaY and Valley Farm Road Eastbound and Westbound on Pickering Parkway BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 5th day of May, 2003. Wayne Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk , ......... S-TOP--SIGN. ................ LOCATION ~ ~ OPE~TIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~,c,~ ~o~ TRAFFIC REPORT ENGINEERING DIVISION " ~o~ .,~, LOCATION OF PROPOSED "ALL WAY STOP" INTERSECTION 1:4000 ~ MAR 27/2003 L,, \ MP¢nd£\ Thematic Mrzpping \ Maps \ MP~E - Traffic\Attachment for Reporf \ 2003 T-tTep¢rf -12. d~g All-Way Stop Warrant (.~-terial and Major Coltec:or Streets) ' ATTACHMENT# , 3 TOREPORT#,O~ $ 10-0 / of,, -5 ~?r Road: ~)~C..F~ ~',":(~, t.'~.:~: Number of Lanes: Operating Speed of Major Road: (~:, ~ [~ Intersection Type: 'T-~ r~.~¢F~:,¢.;::~ Houm ~ Mino~ Total Exceeding, Pedestrmq, Peds+, Exceedin~ Maior ~inor ~Solit Ratio Ending Volum~ Volume Volume 3~0 Volume Minor '~40 t;~> ..... WARRANT EVALAUTION Warrant 1: Traffic Control Traffic control signals are warranted but cannot be implemented immecliately. :'::" - VCarram. 2--Ncm~um&:ehic,4eVolurae ;(}::i',. !. ' T~tal vetficle volume on all intersection approaches exceeding 70% o£ 500.(350) vehicles per Yes ~-] No hour for each of any 8 hours of the day; mud a combined vehicular and pedestrian volume on the side-street exceeding 70% of 200 (140) per Yes ~--] No · hour for each of the same 8 hours of the day and a delay of ~eater than 30 seconds; and ' a volume split that does not exceed 70/30. Volumes on the major street are vehicles only. Yes ~-] No Volumes on the minor street include pedestrians and vekicles. Warrant 3: Collision History Occurrence of three or more reportable right-angle collisions of a B~pe correctible through the installation.of an alt-way stop in a 12 month per/od averaged over 3 years. Yes B No 007' warrant 4: Si~htlJne Reouirements The minimum stopping sight distance at this intersection is less than the applicable critesa for wet pavement as specified in the Stopping Sight Distance table below, Yes F-~No Design Speed (kin/h) 40 50 60 70 Stopping Si2-Jm Distance Required (m) 5O 85 1t0 ]~7ote: For the muM-x,C¢~ szop ro be techni, caih.,juxtified,. . an)., indn,iduaJ warrant mus~ be.,?x/h,', satisfied,... · ATTACHMENT# 008 Z. Traffic Control Signal Warrant Total Count Diagram Municipality: cityof Picketing Weather conditions: Site #: 4000000007 Cloudy and Rain Intersection: Pickering Parkway & Valley Farm R( Person(s) who counted: TFR File #: ~ Renata Rozinger Count date: 20-Mar-03 ** Non-Signalized Intersection ** Major Road: Picketing Parkway runs W/E North Leg Total: 2220 Heavys 9 t 8 ' 27 ~ , Heavys 7 East Leg Total: 4678 North Entering: 1074 Trucks 3 6 9.,!i~:i~ Trucks 7 East Entering: 2270 North Peds: 30 Cars 632 406 1038 ~ Cars 1132 East Peds: 0 Peds Cross: ~ Totals 644 430 Totals 1146 Peds Cross: ~ ~ Valley Farm Road Heavys Trucks Cars Totals ~ Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 34 11 2302 2347'~ 558 5 4 567 ~ 1670 8 25 1 7O3 Picketing Parkway 2225 13 29 W~ ~'- E Heavys Trucks Cars Totals ~ Picker[ng_Pa[kw~Y 16 13 1949 1978 Cars Trucks Heavys Totals 19 15 2523 2355 19 34 2408 Peds Cross: West Peds: 2 West Entering: 2557 West Leg Total: 4904 Comments South T-intersection ATTACHMENT#. Traffic Control Signal Warrant Count Date: 20-Mar-03 Intersection: Picketing Parkway & Valley Farm Road Municipality: Cityof Picketing Major Road: Pickering Parkway Major Road Runs: EAN one lane each way Operating Speed of Major Road: 60 km/hr Operating under free flow conditions Warrant #t: Minimum Vehicular Volumes. A, All Approaches, 80% Satisfied Minimum Requirements No. of Lanes 1 Lane Each Way 2 Lanes Each Way 3 Lanes Hours Ending Flow 1 Lane 1 Lane 2Lane 2 Lane or More Percentaoe F, Flow R. Flow F. Flow R. Flow R. FIow 7:00 8:00 9:00 12:00 13:00 16:00 17:00 18;00 Warrant Condition (Code 1) (Code 2) (Code 3) (Code 4) (Code 5) 100% 480 720 600 ' 900 1125 100% 274 '447 607 651 827 904 1015 1135 Yes: 80% 385 575 480 720 900 No: X 100% Fulfilled 100 100 100 100 100 100 600 All A~Droa- 80% Fulfilled 80 80 ches Actual % if Below 80% 57 57 Total: 737 Actual Average (Total/8): 92% B. Minor Street Both Approaches. 100% 120 170 120 170 170 100% 97 17'5 186 92 124 121 134 136 Yes: 80% 95 135 95 135 135 No: X 100% Fulfilled 100 100 100 100 100 100 600 Minor Street Both 80% Fulfilled 80 80 ~ Aooroa- ches Actual % if Below 80% 77 77 Total: 757 Actual Average (Total/8): 95% ATTACH PIENT#._~,, .....70 REPOR'I' ;~ OI~..S 0 t 0 4 Traffic Control Signal Warrant Count Date: 20-Mar-03 Intersection: Picketing Parkway & Valley Farm Road Municipality: City of Picketing Major Road: Picketing Parkway Major Road Runs: E/W one lane each way Operating Speed of Major Road: 60 km/hr Operating under free flow conditions Warrant #2: Delay to Cross Traffic. A, Major Street Both Approaches. 80% Satisfied Minimum Requirements No. of Lanes 1 Lane Each'Way 2 Lanes Each Way 3 Lanes Hours Ending Percentage ! Flow 1 Lane 1 Lane 2Lane 2Lane or More F, Flow R. Flow F.'FIow R. Flow R. Flow 7:00 8:00 9:00 12:00 13:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Warrant l 3ondition (Code 1) (Code 2) (Code 3) (Code 4) (Code 5) 100% 480 720 600 900 1125 100% 177 272 421 559 703 783 881 999 Yes: 80% 385 ,575 480 720 900 No: X 100% Fulfilled 100 100 100 100 100 500 All 80 ApDroa- 80% Fulfilled 80 ches Actual % if BeloW 80% 37 57 94 Total: 674 Actual Average (Total/8): 84% B. Traffic Crossing Major Street. 100% 50 75 50 75 75 100% 30 57 61 36 51 64 69 60 Yes: 80% 40 60 40 60 60 No: X 100% Fulfilled 100 100 100 100 100 100 600 All ADProa- 0 ches 80% Fulfilled Actual % if Be[ow 80% 60 72 132 Total: 732 Actual Average (Total/8): 92% ATTACHMENT#. . . TORI:PORT# OE.S Traffic Control Signal Warrant Count Date: 20-Mar-03 Intersection: Picketing Parkway &Valley Farm Road Municipality: City of Picketing Major Road: Pickering ParkwaY Major Road Runs: E/VV one lane each way Operating Speed of Major Road: 60 kin/hr Operating under free flow conditions Warrant #3: Accident Experience. Not Satisfied A. Renortable accidents within a twelve month period averaged over 36 consequtive months susceptible to correction by a traffic signal. Minimum Requirements Actual Number of Accidents Average Number of Accidents Fulfilled 5 0 in 3 years 0 per year 0% B. Adequate trial of less restrictive remedies has failed to reduce accident frequency. No c. Either Warrant t (Minimum Vehicular Volume) or Warrant 2 (Delay to Cross Traffic) satisfied 80% or more, Yes Warrant #4: Combination Warrant. (Used if no warrant satisfied 100%) Satisfied Minimum Requirements Warrant Satisfied 80% or More Fulfilled ....... -Two \A.~rr~Pc}~ ........ W~rr~r~t '1 .-(Mir3imL- .r~ V~.h e. ~r \/nh ~m~_/{ _. Yes ~ . Satisfied 80% Warrant 2 (Delay to Cross Traffic) Yes Warrant 3 (Accident Experience) No Conclusion: Traffic signal warranted, 012 RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY 1. That Report OES 11-03 regarding the investigation into the feasibility of installing traffic control signals at Rosebank Road and Sheppard Avenue, be received. PICKERING REPORT TO FINANCE & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Report Number: OES 11-03 Date: April 10, 2003 013 From: Richard W. Holborn, P.Eng. Division Head Municipal Property & Engineering Subject: Rosebank Road at Sheppard Avenue Intersection Investigation into the feasibility of installing Traffic Control Signals Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 11-03 regarding the investigation into the feasibility of installing traffic control signals at Rosebank Road and Sheppard Avenue be received; Financial Implications: There are no direct cost implications related to the investigation at this time. Future capital costs, however, related to the re-construction of the intersection, and necessary land acquisition based upon the design option selected, will be included in future capital budget forecasts. Background: Report OES 54-02, recommending a Stop Sign By-law Amendment for Rosebank Road at Sheppard Avenue (West Intersection), was considered by the Finance & Operations Committee at their regular meeting of November 25, 2002. The resolution resulting from the consideration of the report approved the installation of an all-way stop at the west intersection on an interim basis but also directed staff to further investigate the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection and to report back on the matter. Based on the direction received, correspondence was sent to the Region of Durham on December 13, 2002 requesting technical assistance to determine the feasibility of installing traffic control signals at the intersection. The response received from the Region of Durham on February 7, 2003 (copy attached) confirmed the City staff position, that, given the existing 35 metre offset configuration of the intersection, a traffic control signal could not be installed and operated safely without a realignment of Rosebank Road. Furthermore, it was also noted that the installation and operation of two independent traffic control signals would not meet with acceptable design standards due to the short distance that exists between the sidestreet approaches of Rosebank Road. 014 Report OES 11-03 Subject: Rosebank Road at Sheppard Avenue Date: April 10, 2003 Page 2 Based on the outcome of the investigation, the following capital improvement options are available to better manage traffic volumes at the intersection in the longer-term: 1. Full Re-alignment and Signalization As determined during the design and reconstruction phases of the south leg of Rosebank Road in 1998, a number of property frontages along the west side of Rosebank Road must be purchased in order to accommodate a full re-alignment. Unfortunately purchase agreements could not be reached with the majority of property owners during the period of reconstruction resulting in the delay of the realignment plan that would have allowed for the future installation of traffic control signals. Although it is uncertain whether or not land acquisition agreements could be reached at this time, the full re-alignment of Rosebank Road is the preferred option even though this particular design is likely the most expensive. A copy of the full realignment design plan is attached as Option #1. 2. Signalization and Minor Re-alignment It has been identified in the investigation that a traffic control signal could be installed and operated safely if the offset distance between the north and south legs of Rosebank Road did not exceed 15 metres. In order to accommodate this re-alignment the acquisition of additional property would still be required. The phasing of the signal would require a longer cycle time resulting in the potential for longer vehicle queues. The preliminary design exercise that has been completed so far suggests that a minor re-alignment could occur at this location. A copy of the preliminary minor re-alignment design plan is attached as Option #2. 3. Alternative Design Roundabout (Traffic Circle) As an alternative to the provision of either of the aforementioned realignment and signalization options, it is also possible that a roundabout (traffic circle) design could be developed to accommodate future traffic volumes within the existing municipal property boundaries. This non-traditional type of design would be less expensive to construct and would require less additional property than a realigned and signalized intersection, but it may also create an element of confusion for some motorists, as traffic circle designs are not very common in this area. Considerable effort, however, would be made to develop a design that clearly guides the motorist through the circle yet is effective in its nature. A copy of the preliminary traffic circle design plan is attached as Option #3. Report OES 11-03 Subject: Rosebank Road at Sheppard Avenue Date: April 10, 2003 Page 3 Although the new all-way stop condition that presently exists at the west intersection of Rosebank Road at Sheppard Avenue has improved the operational efficiency and safety of the intersection, it is still regarded as an interim measure only. Considerable queuing is currently present during peak periods on Sheppard Avenue and some confusion is also experienced as motorists enter Sheppard Avenue from the south approach of Rosebank Road. As traffic volumes increase over time, the need for intersection improvements such as those presented in this report will be required. Staff will continue to evaluate each available option and initiate the necessary design and capital budget estimating and forecasting to bring this project to an approval and construction stage in the near future. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Region of Durham correspondence dated February 7, 2003 Preliminary design plan for full re-alignment and signalization, Option #1 Preliminary design plan for minor re-alignment and signalization, Option #2 Preliminary design plan for roundabout (traffic circle), Option #3 Prepared By: Ri,f~ard W. I~lborn, P. Eng. I~vision Head Municipal Property & Engineering Director Operations & Emergency Services RWH:ds I:\COUNCIL\OES 11-03.docApr-03 Copy: Chief Administrative Officer IRecommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ~uinn,~~' ~"h~o/mas J' uin ~h'~'^:'--~"-'/L/'"'Z/"'" 'J 616 ATTACHMENT#_ February 7, 2003 The Regional Municipality of Durham Works Department PO BOX 623 :105 CONSUMERS DR. WHITBY ON LIN'6A3 CANADA (905) 668-7721 Fax: (905) 668-2051 E-Mail: works@region.durham.on.ca www.region,durham.on.ca J.R. McCorkell, P. Eng. Commissioner of Works Please ouote our ref: Tra-pick-Sig City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade PICKER!NG ON L1V 6K7 Attention: Mr. C. Stephen Brake Supervisor, Traffic Engineering and Waste Management RE: Sheppard Avenue and Rosebank Road Traffic Control' Si.q nal On behalf of'the City of Pickering, we have completed a review on the feasibility of installing a traffic control signal 'at the subject intersection · and .operating the system within acceptable deSign standards. The subject location is considered both a "long-offset" and a "far-right offset" intersection, as Rosebank Road is offset by 35 metres from the north approach and sOuth approach as it intersects Sheppard Avenue. Long-offset intersections required two independent sets of traffic control signals as the distance between the side roads exceeds 15 metres and a maximum viewing distance of 55 metres cannot be obtained from the primary signal head on the main-Street and the' painted stop bars. A "far-right offset" intersection is defined as an intersection where the intersecting road on the right of either main-street approach is farthest from the motorist. The "far-right offset" creates conflicts for motorists as to whether or not to.stop, when turning left from the side road when Confronted with a red signal indication on the main street. This configuration further complicates the operation because the distance between each side road,is of insufficient length to accommodate storage vehicles trapped by the red signal indicationS. .,,2 "SERVICE EXCELLEN. CE for our COMMUNITY" Post Consumer ATTACHMENT# j TO REPORT# ,OE.$ [[-0~ -2- 017 Based on the physical constraints, we cannot recommend signalization of-this intersection without realignment of Rosebank Road. Two independent traffic controi signals cannot be operated safely within the short, spatial 'distance of the two intersecting side roads. /trust that the aforementioned will be of assistance to you and please call should you require fUrther information. Yours trUly, 'Manager, Traffic .Engineering & Operations Transportation and Field Services Branch /ps CC: C. Curtis, Director, Transportation and Field Services J.' Walker, Coordinator, Traffic Signals G. Borchul~, Project Manager, Traffic Engineering and Operati°ns ATTACHHENT# '~ TOR~PORT# 0~'5 11-0.5 l~f I 618 , ,, c SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~,~,~[ ~.o~..~ ~ OPTI O N ~1 .,~N...~,~ D~WS~ON FULL RE-ALIGNMENT AND SIGNALIZATION 1:750 MAR 27/2003 L:\mpande\cod work\drawJnge\2OO3\sheppard avenue - traffic clrcle\Sheppard - Traffic Circle.dwg ATTACHHENT# ~ TOP~PORT#O~/i~ lof l 61,9 SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~,c,~[ ~o~[~ ~ 0 PTI ON ~2 ENGINEERING DIVISION MINOR RE-ALIGNMENT AND SIGNALI~TION 1:650 MAR 27/2003 L:\mpande\cad work\drowlnge\2OOS\eheppcrd avenue - traffic circle~Sheppard - Traffic Circle,dwg ATTACHMENT#__.~ TOREPORT# OES !1~ /of / ~ ~ ?? S~ ~ ~ ~510 OPE~TIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~,~ ~ws~o. ALTERNATIVE DESIGN (T~FFIC GIRGLE) ~ :750 MAR 27/2003 L.'\MP&E\THEMAD9 MAPPIIVG\MAPS\S?REET BASE\OE&S DIRECFOR\AT?ACHMENT FOR REPORT\ 021 RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Report OES 13-03 regarding traffic movement operations on Rosebank Road and Woodsmere Crescent, be received; and That a By-law be enacted to amend Schedule 'A' By-law 2359~87 regulating stopping restrictions and prohibitions on certain highways; and That a By-law be enacted to amend By-law 264/75 regulating the speed of vehicles on certain highways. 022 PICKERING REPORT TO FINANCE & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Report Number: OES 13-03 Date: April 15,2003 From: Richard W. Holborn, P. Eng. Division Head Municipal Property & Engineering Subject: Investigation and Evaluation of traffic movement operations on Rosebank Road and Woodsmere Crescent fronting Altona Forest Public School Recommendation: That Report OES 13-03 regarding traffic movement operations on Rosebank Road and Woodsmere Crescent be received; That a By-law be enacted to amend Schedule 'A' By-law 2359/87 regulating stopping restrictions and prohibitions on certain highways; and That a By-law be enacted to amend By-law 264/75 regulating the speed of vehicles on certain highways. Executive Summary: Not applicable Financial Implications: The manufacture and installation of regulatory No-stopping and speed limit signs costing approximately $1500.00 will be accommodated within the Roads current budget account, 2320-2409. Background: In Ontario, new initiatives are used to reduce the vehicular and pedestrian congestion associated with schools. The "Kiss and Ride" or "Parent Safety Patrol" program has been specifically designed to address the safety concern associated with school and residential community traffic. The "Kiss and Ride" zone is an area allocated to drop-off and pick-up students in the parking lot of the school. These zones facilitate the safe coordinated arrival and departure of parent vehicle traffic on school property without creating traffic congestion on municipal roadways. Report OES 13-03 Date: April 15, 2003 Subject: Investigation and Evaluation of Traffic Movement Operations Page 2 023 In response to several inquiries, staff of the Operations & Emergency Services Department, Municipal Property & Engineering Division recently investigated and evaluated traffic movement operations on Rosebank Road and Woodsmere Crescent adjacent to Altona Forest Public School. Site visits confirm there is a high level of unsafe traffic and pedestrian crossing movements resulting from the high volumes of parent vehicle traffic accessing the property during the morning and afternoon periods. Altona Forest Public School presently is operating a "mock .... Kiss and Ride" program in place. The "loop" driveway configuration, off of Woodsmere Crescent is properly positioned to allow children to be dropped off and picked up in a safe manner. The driveway area is large enough to store approximately 24 vehicles at one time and allow for a safe egress from the school property. To "formalize" this program, regulatory signage must be installed along with pavement markings to direct students to the collection area. Volunteer parents must also be trained in the procedures of the program. The school board, Regional Police and the City of Pickering must agree as to the operation of this program. It is recommended that the attached by-law regulating stopping in the streets be enacted to aid in the success of the "Kiss and Ride" program. in order to evaluate if safe pedestrian traffic movement exists, a school crossing study was performed to determine the number of pedestrians crossing Rosebank Road at Woodsmere Crescent and Woodsmere Crescent at Wildflower Crescent. School crossing studies were conducted during the morning, noon, and afternoon peak periods for both intersections. Between May 2000 and January 2003, two studies were conducted at the intersection of Woodsmere Crescent at Wildflower Crescent. Results of the studies indicate that a Iow percentage of pedestrians that crossed Woodsmere Crescent experienced delays due to insufficient gap opportunities and therefore, school crossing protection is not warranted. However, to increase safety while crossing Woodsmere Crescent, the proposed "no-stopping" by-law would increase sightline visibility for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic crossing Woodsmere Crescent. This should alleviate the traffic movement congestion fronting AItona Forest Public School and increase safety and visibility. School crossing studies were performed on December 6, 2000, October 2, 2002, and March 18, 2003 at the intersection of Rosebank Road at Woodsmere Crescent. Results of the studies indicate that a Iow percentage of pedestrians that crossed Rosebank Road experienced delays due to insufficient gap opportunities and this intersection does not warrant school crossing protection. The posted speed limit on Rosebank Road is 60 km/h approaching the intersection of Rosebank Road and Woodsmere Crescent, and the speed limit decreases to 40 km/h through the school zone. According to the Ministry of Transportation guidelines, "on any arterial or other road supporting 2, 4, 6, or more lanes of traffic with any volume of traffic where the speed limit is in excess of 60 km/h, crossing guards shall not be used to stop traffic, Ontario HTA, section 176 (2)." Stopping traffic at high rates of speed is not recommended due to the higher risk of collisions that could result in injury or fatality. Report OES 13-03 Date: April 15, 2003 Subject: Investigation and Evaluation of Traffic Movement Operations Page 3 Spot speed studies were conducted between February 4, 2003 and February 11, 2003 during peak and off peak periods. The spot speed study results confirm the average operating speeds range between 54 km/h and 59 km/h and the total average is 56 km/h. The avera..ge 85"' percentile was.recorded to range between 58 km/h and 62 km/h and the total 85m percentile average is 62 km/h. The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85% of the vehicles travel. Given that the speeds are relatively close to the posted speed limit, but high for approaching a school zone of 40 km/h, the reduction of the speed limit from 60 km/h to 50 km/h is recommended so that Rosebank Road can be included for consideration of a guarded school crossing protection in the future. In the meantime, the reduction in the posted speed limit may create greater gap opportunities, less delay for pedestrians and be a more appropriate speed limit for this now built up area. In conclusion, the existing number of pedestrians and delay does not warrant school crossings, however, it does not preclude that Council may propose the need for school crossing protection at this intersection in the future as conditions change. The reduction of the speed limit from 60 km/h to 50 km/h is recommended since this area of Rosebank Road has built up significantly in the last few years and to allow for school crossing protection in the future. Attachments: 1. Draft by-law Amendment - No stopping 2. Location Map 3. Draft By-law Amendment- Speed Limit 4. Location Map Report OES 13-03 Date: Subject: Investigation and Evaluation of Traffic Movement Operations April 15, 2003 Page 4 Prepared By: Renata ~/.Y. Roz'~gef' Technician Traffic Engineering Approved / Endorsed B : Director Operations & Emergency Services Ri,¢6ard W. I--~lborn _ _~,ision Hea~l ~unicipal Property & Engineering Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer City Clerk Superintendent, Municipal Operations Manager, By-law Services Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council T~S~-~-~ ~"-~,~"n, Ch(le/~ Adm,n~ 026 A'~'TACHMENT# / TO REPORT# OC:: ..% I of I THE CORPORATION OF THE CITYOF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to amend By-law 2359/87 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter M.45, sections 218.52, 210.73, 210.123 - 126, 210.131,310,314.7, and 314.8, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law 2359/87 regulating parking, standing and stopping on highways and on private and on municipal property; NOW THERFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORTION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Schedule 'A' to By-law 2359/87, as amended, is hereby amended by deleting there from the following items: Highway Side Between/And Prohibited Times And Days Rosebank Road West Stroud's Lane and 116.5 meters north thereof. 7:30 am to 4:30 pm Monday to Friday 2. Schedule 'A' to By-law 2359/87, as amended, is hereby amended by adding thereto the following items: Highway Side Between/And Prohibited Times and Days Rosebank Road West Stroud's Lane and Woodsmere Crescent 7:30 am to 4:30 pm Monday to Friday Woodsmere North and Crescent South Rosebank Road and 138.5 meters westerly thereof. 7:30 am to 4:30 pm Monday to Friday September 1st to June 30th BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this 5th day of May 2003. Wayne Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk ~ .627 SAUGE~N MONTCLAIR LAN E "~ . R ~ DEERHAVEN SUMME~PAFRK C E~. LANE ' ' ' x z, z ~ E m~ ~ SP~iNGVIEW D~IVE u jui ~, , ' z ~ z r:~o a~- ~:~ r~-~) ~ - ~ ~z/l SEPT~-J~)O' /RESCS~T ~~ .... ~~, , ~ [,~lr ~ clCHARNWOOD~~{I / 4k ~ l[ Z .. ,, WO~ERE FOREST Il Il ~PARK PUBLIC SCHOOP~ 11 II II II ~~1 II II II ~1 I,~ OPE~TIONS & EMERGENCY ZO~ SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~u"'~'~A~o~ T~FFIC REPORT ENGINEERING DIVISION ~o: ~,~: LOCATION OF PROPOSED NO STOPPING ZONE 'po~-O2.dwg 028 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITYOF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to amend By-law 264/75 to establish a 50 kilometers per hour speed limit on Rosebank Road WHEREAS, By-law Number 264/75 allows Council to authorize speed limits on highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to establish the speed limit on Rosebank Road at 50 kilometers per hour; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Schedules 'C' to By-law Number 264/75 is hereby amended by deleting there from the following: HIGHWAY FROM TO Rosebank Road Sheppard Avenue Finch Avenue BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 5th day of May 2003. Wayne Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk FINCH AV~NU~ FINCM CHANGE 60km/h to -- STATUTORY 50km/h EXISTI WOODSMERE r~ SPRINGVIEW HIGHVIEW Z LANE STROUDS CHANGE 60k STATUTORY FOXWOOD WEYBURN SHEPPARO AVENUE OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING DIVISION SCALE; PLOT DATE: 1:10000 APRIL 16/2003 SHEPPARD AVENUE TRAFFIC REPORT LOCATION OF PROPOSED SPEED CHANGE AVENUE 1"1( ;K liNlN(; L:\MF'endK\~;~emotic Maop[nff\Mop.-\Mp~:E- TrrtRTc\Att~chment for Reporf\2OOJ T-Report--F4. dwg 030 RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Report OES 17-03 regarding the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre Lease Agreement, be received; and That a by-law to enacted to authorize the execution of an Amending Lease Agreement to which the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre will be permitted to continue to operate a Wellness Centre and Wellness Spa for a five year term. PICKERING REPORT TO THE FINANCE & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Report Number: OES 17-03 Date: April 11,2002 c 31 From: Stephen Reynolds Division Head, Culture & Recreation Subject: Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre - Amending Lease Agreement - File: CO3000 Recommendation: That Report to Council OES 17-03 regarding the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre Lease Agreement be received and; that A by-law be enacted to authorize the execution of an Amending Lease Agreement to which the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre will be permitted to continue to operate a Wellness Centre and Wellness Spa for a five year term. Executive Summary: At the Finance & Operations Committee Meeting held on Monday, September 23, 2002, Council approved a request to expand the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre and develop a Wellness Spa. An Amending Lease Agreement is required to reflect the change in the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre operating a Wellness Centre and a Wellness Spa for a five year term. Financial Implications: Revenues 2OO3 2004 2005 2006 2007 $1,049.00 minimum to $3,000.00 maximum per month $1,049.00 minimum to $3,000.00 maximum per month $1,049.00 minimum to $3,000.00 maximum per month $1,049.00 minimum to $3,000.00 maximum per month $1,535.00 minimum to $3,000.00 maximum per month $68,772.00 minimum to $180,000.00 maximum over 5 years 032 Report OES 17-03 Subject: Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Spa - Amending Lease Agreement Date: April 11,2003 Page 2 Projected annual revenue is based on monthly lease plus an anticipated monthly utilization fee. Background: On Monday, October 18, 2000, Council enacted By-law #5762/00 authorizing the execution of a Licence Agreement with Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre for the lease of space at the Pickering Recreation Complex for the operation of a Wellness Clinic. At the Finance & Operations Committee Meeting held on Monday, September 23, 2002, Council approved a request for the Picketing Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre to expand and construct a Wellness Spa at the Pickering Recreation Complex. The Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre is currently operating as a sports medicine out-patient clinic with the services of Physiotherapy, Massage Therapy and visiting Orthopaedic Surgeon. This business is owned and operated by Angela Dye, a Registered Physiotherapist and services are implemented by Health Care Professionals. The Wellness Spa is a new extension of the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre. It will provide spa services to include skin care, facials, body wraps, manicures and pedicures to our clients. The construction of the Wellness Spa involves an investment of capital dollars to significantly enhance the area previously known as the Snack Bar, located in the central core area on the second floor. The base monthly rent will not be increased for the next four years to compensate for the cost of capital improvements (approximately $67,000.00). The base monthly rent will be increased in the fifth year for the additional 750 square foot Wellness Spa. Enactment of the draft by-law attached will authorize the execution of an Amending Lease Agreement, as discussed at the September 23, 2002 Committee Meeting, to be prepared in a form acceptable to the Solicitor for the City, in consultation with the appropriate City Departments and existing City practice. Attachments: 1. Draft By-Law Report OES 17-03 Subject: Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Spa - Amending Lease Agreement Date: April 11,2003 Page 3 Prepa~---~ Stepheq. Rey~blds Division eFl~d, Culture & Recreation SR:Ig A~achments Director, Operations & Emergency Services Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer City Solicitor Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City~ Cou~.jJ--, The"~'s"J. ~uin ,~hief ,z~ ~inistr'~a~~..._ 17-0S THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to authorize the execution of an Amending Lease Agreement with Picketing Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre for the lease of space at the Picketing Recreation Complex for the operation of a Wellness Centre and Wellness Spa. WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 207.58 and 191 of the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter M.45, as amended, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering may pass by-laws for leasing premises owned by the Corporation, NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute an Amending Lease Agreement, in a form acceptable to the Solicitor for the City, between the Corporation of the City of Pickering and the Pickering Sports Medicine & Wellness Centre for the operation of a Wellness Centre and Wellness Spa at the Pickering Recreation Complex. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 5th day of May, 2003. Wayne Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk 035 RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY 1. That Report OES 12-03 regarding rear yard fencing, be received; and 2. That staff be directed to initiate' appropriate action to ensure compliance with the Subdivision Agreement for installation / replacement of rear yard fencing on Greyabbey Court; OR 3. That staff be directed to authorize exemptions from the fencing requirements of the Subdivision Agreement at the request of residents on Greyabbey Court. PICKERING REPORT TO Finance & Operations Committee Report Number: OES 12-03 Date: April 2, 2003 Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Rear Yard Fencing -' Greyabbey Court- 18T-98009 - File: MPE1000 Recommendation: 1. That report no. OES 12-03 be received; and 2. That staff be directed to initiate appropriate action to ensure compliance with the Subdivision Agreement for installation / replacement of read yard fencing on Greyabbey Court; OR 3. That staff be directed to authorize exemptions from the fencing requirements of the Subdivision Agreement at the request of residents on Greyabbey Court. Executive Summary: Council has authorized the entering into of Subdivision Agreements with various conditions. The Subdivision Agreement for Brydale Development (Greyabbey Court) 18T-98009 requires that a rear yard fence be installed to protect the natural features along Dunbarton Creek. This fence was installed but was subsequently removed by several homeowners. City staff has attempted to have the fence replaced. The residents have requested the intervention of Council to not have the fence installed. Financial Implications: Unknown Report OES 12-03 Subject: Rear yard fencing - Greyabbey Court Date: April 2, 2003 Page 2 Background: In July of 2002 the Director, Operations & Emergency Services was advised that a rear yard fence installed by Brydale Developments had been removed from a new residence on Greyabbey Court. Correspondence was initiated to have the fence reinstated. After several items of correspondence, it was found that an impasse was reached. To confirm the desired direction of Council in this matter the recommendation has been provided to allow Council to approve either Option 2 or Option 3 of the recommendations. Council should be aware that staff has been working diligently to have this fence reinstated as per the requirements of the Council approved Subdivision Agreement. The Solicitor for the City has advised that amendments/changes to the Subdivision Agreement conditions requires Council approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map Director, Operations & Emergency Services EB:mld Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City ,Council Thef~' J. Quinnk/Chief A~f"mini~.~,,..Office'r .ATTACHMENT #__~TO REPORT #~.~ ~ ~ 0 ~ OLENAF OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING DIVISION SCALE: DATE: 1:4 000 APRIL 4~2003 ATTACHMENT FOR OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT LOCATION OF FENCING - GREYABBEY COURT PICKERING L:\MP&E\THEMATIC MAPPIN¢\MAP$\STREET BASE\OE&$ D/RECTOR\ATTACHMENT FOR REPORT\