Loading...
Lakeshore Advance, 2011-10-12, Page 3.4 Wednesday, October 12, 2011 • Lakeshore Advance 3 COUNCIL Port Franks speed flmIt Issues resolved in a compromise, some residents not Impressed Lynda HINman-Rapley Lakeshore Advance The Port Franks speed limits came 'lick to council last week with a compro- ise of resolutions. They have decided it is best to go back to the original speed limits for two segments and keep the other one as status quo. Some Port Franks residents thought this council, except for the deputy mayor did them a disservice. 'Ibis issue first arose in the summer of 2009. A report went to council recom- mending that speed limits be reduced by lOkm/hr in each of the three speed limit segments that make up the main trans- portation corridor through Port Franks. At that time a number of public com- plaints had been received about vehicu- lar traffic in those areas. Staff review of the situation noted concerns about the safety of pedestrians and cyclists amongst the vehicular traffic. 'technical data was not provided as part of that report. 'Ihe rationale for the change was a desire by staff to resolve the complaints through a cost effective action and improve safety. Council supported this report and a bylaw was passed to reduce the speed limit in each segment by 10km/hr. Com- munity Services Staff male the neces- sity arrangements to install signage with the new limits throughout the area shortly afterwards. 'Ihe changes were: Segment 1 reduced from 60knl/hr to 50km/hr, Segment 2 reduced from 50km/hr to 40km/hr. and Segment 3 reduced from 80kn1/hr to 70km/hr. This change generated opposition from local residents who felt that the change was unnecessary. In response to the public concerns another report was presented to council in October 2010. 'Ihis report provided further information regarding technical specifications including the geometric properties and sight lines of the subject roads. The report highlighted specific areas of con- cern lacking sight distance in the urban '4Okm/hr' zone. Resolution on the mat- ter was deferred pending a legal opinion • the matter. 1 hen, in March 2011 another report was brought before council outlining a legal opinion on the matter. The legal opinion presented a number of possibil- ities relating to liability resulting from potential changes. The opinion stated that the original decision should have been based more on a more objective approach. Now that the change has been made it would he more prudent to look at infrastructure impmvements in order to maintain a level of confidence about safety if the decision was made to restore the original limits. Again the matter was deferred pending further information. Peg? Van Mierlo West said there is a lot of debate on whether lowering speed limits is an effective method to improve safety. "Unfortunately for the Munidpal- ity it is one of the few methods available that has a low cost of implementation." After receiving safety com- plaints it was deemed neces- sary to respond in sotne way in order to address the situa- tion. Staff review at that time determined that the lower limits were the best way to address the complaints. Due to the concerns of the public and council the issue has remained without resolution. Three options came to the table at the October 4 council meeting. Options: Maintain Current Status 'Ibis option would propose to maintain the current posted limits throughout the subject roadways. Benefits of this option are no costs. This option also encourages active and healthy living by slaking pedestrian and cyclist access safer, Cost: None. Restore Previous lin tits and install Pedestrian Signage This option would be restoring the previous speed limits while adding signage that would provide warnings to motorists that they are in a community area anti should be cautious of pedestrian and cyclist traffic. This 01)11011 is fairly cost effective as placing signage is not an extravagant expense. Benefits of this option are the satisfaction of public concerns and relatively low cost. 'this option is not the most safety positive solution. Cost: $2500.00 to replace the existing limit signage to the previous limits $2500.00 to install new Pedestrian Safety signs Maintain Current Status until Road Upgrades are Complete This option would propose to maintain the current posted limits but also commit to the construction of upgrades to improve the level of safety throughout the corridor. Cost estimates for this option will vary depending on the scope of upgrades. Road upgrades would include widening of the road surface through the urban corridor with an objec- tive of providing an improved dedicated pedestrian and cyclist pathway. Also creation of pathways through the 'Rural' Portions of the corri- dor would be an option. The benefits of this option are the most positive safety solution. This option also encourages healthy and active living as well as an opportunity to include street scoping and community improvements through the core. This option however is the most cost pro- hibitive and time consuming from inception to completion. Cost: Street widening anti pedestrian improvements $150,00( to $5tx),(XX). Installa- tion of rural pathways $350,000 (3.7km). Also.... In the summer months Community Services staff sought to obtain more infor- mation about the existing conditions throughout the subject area. Traffic counts and vehicular speeds were obtained at four different locations in the subject area. Annual Average Daily Traffic: Measured speed levels at the Mud Creek and F3L.UEW�r p*w�ncw,a_�ry oATER IM��►M ��M • ILS • NV��1 _/1�M� 1 • 2012 DOG TAOS ider NOW AVM. LE! b One b molder your dog sib a r it d i dog tap. Pie itirrellm-1 leg permits IINLt cortrL1 errs you sleadd your pat beam) loot Tags met be pnrcIrmed by February * a1 sitz WW1 a late Ilea tail apply. Your dog must be occluded for white prior le pradta■rq a dog tad Far me dabds lade*tp gess. plow mall 519.23141351 w wtdl the Dem edrrailu t scam of the newicked sails tyomr no Misr Awe a mia Mr dmf mea blow as we new amanmf our Rani. tram Odimom•.i Doomiummm 14 azuls w aro 204 Mail maim son nn Erie/Riverside locations are both approximately where they would be expected based on the limits. 'Ihe loca- tions on Outer Drive and the Comtnu- nity Centre are well above the posted limit.'lhese measurements provide evi- dence that the existing geometry of the road, particularly through the center portion, has geometric properties to limit motorist's speeds. The remaining areas appear to allow motorists to travel at higher speeds. Councilor John Russell made a motion for one and three to be put back to their original speed limits and two stay as is. It was also agreed that signage will go up and the "deaf child sign" that was erected many years ago will conte down. From a resident In a letter to council after the meet- ing, Karen Simon said, "The deed is done. 'Ihe council- true to form avoided having any backbone to snake a sensi- ble 'decision: Obviously having colabo- rated before the meeting, they decided to dazzle us with 'compromise' The arrogance of this council to think that this 'compromise' makes any sense is unbelievable. Councillors Russell and Scott introduced their idea of compro- mise. They suggested that the speed limit in section 1 and 3 be raised by 10km. The existing 40 km speed limit to remain the same. The other councillors Jumped on this as a wonderful 'compromiser "The only councillor with any com- mon sense Elizabeth Davis-Dagg tried to reason with council. She stated there has only been one accident in the last five years. Council's own legal advice stated there was no basis for such a reduction- so the speed limit should not have been changed in the first place. She said this will also set a prec- edence for other communities to request these limits. (Ed Note-Davis- Dagg was informed most of the other communities already have the 40 limit). Our representative Councillor Scott avoided contact with us in the months prior to this sleeting. She never returned our calls or made any attempt to meet with us. Apparantly a few pro - 40 km people met with her by ringing her doorbell. I guess that is the only way to have a meeting with her. We thought it was the job of a councillor to return calls, have an open mind, and meet with people to discuss their concerns. Councillor Scott failed miserably in all of the above" •