South Eglinton Area (East) Traffic Calming Project (Phase 1) -

Poll Results (North Toronto)

The Toronto Community Council recommends the adoption of the following report (July8,1998) from the Director, Infrastructure Planning and Transportation, City Works Services.

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to report to the Toronto Community Council, at its meeting to be held on October 14, 1998 on traffic calming, the various elements of traffic calming, and the experience so far, such report to provide options for the consideration of the Toronto Community Council and City Council.

The Toronto Community Council submits the following report (July 8, 1998) from the Director, Infrastructure Planning and Transportation, City Works Services:

Purpose:

To report the results of a poll of residents and business owners and operators in the South Eglinton Area (East) bounded by Mount Pleasant Road, Eglinton Avenue East, Bayview Avenue and the Mount Pleasant Cemetery concerning the existing traffic calming measures in this area and recommend a course of action reflecting the poll results.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funds to cover the costs of removing traffic calming islands and reinstating the prior traffic and parking conditions in this area, in the estimated amount of $100,000, can be accommodated under Capital Fund Code No. 296702 for traffic calming.

Recommendations:

1.That in order to authorize the removal of the traffic islands in the South Eglinton Area (East) illustrated schematically in the attached Drawing No. 421F-4556, revised January 9, 1997, and restore the roads to their pre-existing conditions, as reflected in the results of the poll of area residents, the following should be approved:

a)By-law No. 1996-0141 authorizing the narrowing of sections of streets in the area bounded by Eglinton Avenue East, Bayview Avenue, Mount Pleasant Cemetery and Mount Pleasant Road be rescinded;

b) The parking regulation changes implemented in conjunction with the traffic calming plan be rescinded to reinstate the prior parking conditions, as indicated in

Appendix C of this report;

2. That in light of the mandate from a majority of poll respondents in the South Eglinton Area (East) to pursue the development of alternative traffic management measures, Works and Emergency Services staff be authorized to provide technical assistance to the Ward Councillors and/or residents= traffic committee(s) that express an interest in developing such plans; and

3.That the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.

Background:

Toronto Community Council, at its meeting of February 18, 1998, in considering a Works report (February 10, 1998) outlining the results of initial technical monitoring of the first phase of the South Eglinton Area (East) Traffic Calming Project, referred the matter to the North Toronto Ward Councillors to enable them to obtain public input and feedback.

Based on the results of two public meetings convened in the community in late March/early April by Councillors Anne Johnston and Michael Walker, and discussed in a subsequent Works status report (April 22, 1996), City Council at its meeting of May 13, 1998 authorized City staff to conduct a poll of residents in the South Eglinton Area (East) to determine whether the community wished to retain and improve the existing traffic calming measures, remove them or pursue other forms of traffic management.

Comments:

As authorized by Council, a ballot was conducted for adult area residents and business owners and operators. Individually-addressed ballots were sent out by mail commencing June 10, 1998. The poll closed on June 30, 1998. Each ballot was accompanied by a postage-paid reply envelope and a two-page background sheet. The ballot for residents and background sheet are attached as Appendix A of this report.

The response rate was 37%. The overall results were as follows:

In addition, 53 ballots were spoiled (no option selected, multiple options) and not included in the above results. A detailed breakdown of the results by street is contained in Appendix B.

Overall, there was a clear majority (72%) of respondents in favour of removal of the traffic islands as soon as practicable (Options 1 and 3 combined). This was also the result for each individual street, although the level of support varied from 55% (Merton Street) to 100% (on Harwood Road, a small street with no traffic islands). Based on this result, it is apparent that the removal of the traffic islands as soon as practicable throughout the area is the appropriate course of action.

The first phase of the South Eglinton Area (East) traffic calming plan, as it currently exists in the field is illustrated schematically in the attached Drawing No. 421F-4556, revised January 9, 1997. In all, 85 traffic islands are installed to narrow roadways and intersections at 41 locations. In the event that Recommendation No. 1 above is adopted, Works would undertake the removal of the islands and reinstatement of the pre-existing parking regulations as soon as possible. Appendix C attached to this report sets out the corresponding parking regulation amendments needed to restore the previous parking arrangements. In addition, 15 m to corner parking prohibition signs were installed at the intersections listed in Appendix D to ensure adequate turn manoeuvring space in the vicinity of certain islands. With the removal of the islands the signs will also be taken out, leaving the statutory 9 m to corner parking prohibition in effect.

The removal of the traffic islands would constitute alterations to public highways pursuant to the Municipal Act. Given the extensive polling that has just taken place of all adult residents and business operators, not to mention the previous public meetings and ongoing dialogue in this community, and that the proposal represents a continuation of the on-going process for traffic management in this area, there would not appear to be a requirement to re-advertise.

Although there is a clear result to remove the existing traffic islands, a majority of respondents (59%) also expressed support for the development of additional or other forms of traffic management (Options 2 and 3 combined). As was pointed out on the ballots, the process of developing and installing new traffic management measures as envisaged by Options 2 or 3 would involve residents, staff and the Ward Councillors. Public meetings and further polling in the neighbourhood once a proposal is advanced could be expected.

It is evident from the poll results that interest in pursuing other traffic management alternatives is stronger on some streets, such as Merton Street (74%) than others. Residents on these streets may wish to initiate a review of options within a shorter time frame. It is also important to note that the option of speed humps is available now which was not authorized at the time the South Eglinton plan was developed. A review of the primary criteria as set out in the Council-approved policy indicates that many of the area streets would qualify for consideration of this measure. The policy also establishes a formal polling procedure to determine whether residents would support the installation of speed humps.

Given the poll results that indicate residents support the development of alternate traffic management measures, it is appropriate to authorize staff to assist residents who wish to pursue such plans as indicated in Recommendation No. 2 above. These alternatives may continue to emerge on an area-wide basis or can be considered on individual streets if the impacts would not be overly detrimental on other streets.

Conclusions:

The results of a poll of residents and business owners and operators in the South Eglinton Area (East), bounded by Eglinton Avenue East, Bayview Avenue, Mount Pleasant Cemetery and Mount Pleasant Road, indicate that 72% of respondents favour removal of the existing traffic islands in the neighbourhood. It is therefore recommended that authority be granted to remove these measures as soon as practicable.

On the other hand, 59% of respondents indicate that they support the development of alternative traffic management measures. In view of this mandate, it is also recommended that staff be authorized to assist the Ward Councillors or residents= traffic committee(s) who express interest in pursuing such plans.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Andrew Macbeth

Manager, Transportation Management Branch

392-1799

CCCC

Insert Table/Map No. 1

South Eglinton

Insert Table/Map No. 2

Appendix B

Appendix C -Parking Regulation Amendments Required to Rescind South Eglinton Area (East) Traffic Calming Plan

1. Delete the following

400-77 - Schedule XXIV - No Stopping

2.Add the following

400-77 - Schedule XXIV - No Stopping

1. Delete the following:

400-76 - Schedule XXIII - No Parking Certain Times

1. Add the following:

400-76 - Schedule XXIII - No Parking Certain Times

Appendix D -Statutory 15 m Corner Parking Prohibition Signage To Be Removed

CCCC

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it during consideration of the foregoing matter, a communication (July 22, 1998) from the Chair, South East Residents and Ratepayers Association Traffic Committee, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.

(A copy of Appendix A, referred to in the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of the Toronto Community Council with the agenda for its meeting on July 22, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk).