May 7, 1999

To:Urban Environment and Development Committee

From:City Clerk

Subject:Installation of Traffic Control Signs at O'Connor Drive at Northridge Avenue; O'ConnorDrive at Glenwood Crescent; and O'Connor Drive at Four Oaks Gate - (Ward 1, EastYork)

Recommendations:

The East York Community Council on April 29, 1999, recommended to the Urban Environment and Development Committee:

(1)adoption of the report (April 20, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District1, subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) to provide that turn restrictions be instituted at St. Clair Avenue and St. Columba Place, and St. Clair Avenue and Rexleigh Drive, at the same time as the installation of traffic control signals at the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection, to ensure that there is no infill of traffic in the morning;

(2)for the 90 days following the installation of the traffic control signals at the O'ConnorDrive/Glenwood Crescent intersection, the Toronto Police Service be requested to give top priority to the enforcement of the turn restrictions in both directions in the morning and afternoon;

(3)that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to conduct further studies on additional means of improving Glenwood Crescent, in particular, the feasibility of turning Glenwood Crescent south of O'Connor Drive into a one-way street;

(4)that north bound left turn restrictions be implemented at Rexleigh Drive and GlenwoodCrescent during the morning peak period;

(5)that, should City Council not implement a left turn restriction on St. Clair Avenue at St.Columba Place, there be a right hand turn restriction implemented on St.ColumbaPlace and Glenwood Crescent;

(6)that right hand turns on a red light be prohibited at Glenwood Crescent and O'Connor Drive;

(7)that consideration be given to implementing one-way east bound operation on GlenwoodCrescent, east of St. Columba Place;

(8)that the Community Safety Zone currently in effect on O'Connor Drive between PapeAvenue and Woodbine Avenue be extended to St. Clair Avenue.

The East York Community Council reaffirmed its previous recommendation with respect to the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate; viz:

"That traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and FourOaksGate."

The East York Community Council reports having requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to submit a report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee when this matter is being considered with respect to:

(i)the feasibility of introducing an extended cycle length at the proposed traffic control signal at O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent to discourage people from using that intersection;

(ii)the feasibility of installing speed bumps on Glenwood Crescent;

(iii)further comment on "squaring-off" the corner of Glenwood Crescent;

(iv)the possibility of moving the location of the cross-walk at Glenwood Crescent and O'Connor Drive; and

(v)adjusting the prohibition times of left hand turns to 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.

Background:

The East York Community Council had before it a report (April 20, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1, recommending adoption of the report (February5,1999) from the General Manager Transportation Services, subject to traffic conditions in the Glenwood Crescent environs being assessed three months after the installation of traffic control signals at the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection, as follows:

(1)that the Urban Environment and Development Committee be advised that based on a technical assessment, staff concur with the recommendations of the East York Community Council with respect to the installation of traffic control signals at the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection, coincident with the removal of the existing pedestrian crossover, and that traffic conditions on Glenwood Crescent be investigated 6 months after installation of the traffic control signals to determine the degree of traffic infiltration during the morning and afternoon peak periods, with the findings reported to the East York Community Council;

(2)that in order to implement the East York Community Council recommendation to "square-off" the corner of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent, approval be given to realign the existing curbs at the northeast and southwest corners of O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection; and

(3)that the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto, including the introduction of the necessary Bill in Council.

The East York Community Council also had before it the following communications:

(i)(April 16, 1999) from the City Clerk forwarding Clause No. 2 of Report No. 4 of the UrbanEnvironment and Development Committee headed "Installation of Traffic Control Signs at O'Connor Drive at Northridge Avenue; O'Connor Drive at Glenwood Crescent; and O'Connor Drive at Four Oaks Gate - (Ward 1 - East York)", which was adopted, as amended, by City Council at its meeting on April13,14and 15, 1999;

(ii)(April 20, 1999) from Mr. Derek Gomes, East York, opposing the proposed installation of traffic control signals;

(iii)(April 22, 1999) from Mr. and Mrs. J. Cribben, East York, opposing the proposed installation of traffic control signals;

(iv)(April 22, 1999) from Mr. C. Kyroglou, East York, in support of the proposed installation of traffic control signals;

(v)(undated) from Mr. & Mrs. J. Bintas, East York, opposing the proposed installation of traffic control signals; and

(vi)(April 29, 1999) from Mr. Anthony D'Attolico, East York in support of the proposed installation of traffic control signals.

Mr. Brian Barron, Ward 2 Property Owner's, East York, appeared before the East York Community Council with respect to the proposed installation of traffic control signals at O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate.

The Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1 - East, gave an overhead slide presentation with respect to the proposed replacement of the existing pedestrian crossover at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent with traffic control signals.

The following persons appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the proposed replacement of the existing pedestrian crossover at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent with traffic control signals:

-Ms. Pam Holliday, East York;

-Mr. Ken Bott, East York;

-Mr. Mike Perovic, East York;

-Mr. Rodney Andress, East York, and gave a slide presentation, copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk;

-Ms. Joyce Nilsson, East York;

-Ms. Cheri Aitken, East York;

-Mr. Peter Fraser, East York;

-Mr. Brian Bates, East York,

-Mr. Kevin Smart, East York;

-Mr. Peter Krakus, East York;

-Mr. Brian Barron, East York;

-Mr. Garry Prentice, East York;

-Mrs. Grace Smith, East York;

-Mrs. Catherine MacDonald, East York;

-Ms. Rima Sterrett, East York;

-Mr. Dino Giardetto, East York; and

-Ms. Josee Konstantinou, East York.

City Clerk

Y. Davies/lr

Attachment

c.Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services

Director, Transportation Services, District 1

Interested Parties

0428-13

(Report dated April 20, 1999, addressed to the

East York Community Council from the

Director, Transportation Services, District)

Purpose:

To report as requested by City Council to the April 29, 1999 East York Community Council on the proposed replacement of the existing pedestrian crossover at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent with traffic control signals and on the recommendations made by East York Community Council to replace the pedestrian crossover at O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate with traffic control signals.

Financial Implications:

The funds associated with new traffic control signals are contained in the Works and Emergency Services Capital Program under Project No. C-TR031. In 1999, $1.6 million has been allocated for new traffic control signal installations. The estimated cost to install traffic control signals at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent is $53,000.00. The estimated cost to undertake the proposed curb realignment at this intersection is $40,000.00. This installation is subject to competing priorities.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the recommendations contained in the report (February 5, 1999) of the General Manager, Transportation Services (restated below) be adopted, subject to traffic conditions in the Glenwood Crescent environs being assessed 3 months after the installation of traffic control signals at the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection, as follows:

(1)that the Urban Environment and Development Committee be advised that based on a technical assessment, staff concur with the recommendations of the East York Community Council with respect to the installation of traffic control signals at the O'Connor Drive/ Glenwood Crescent intersection, coincident with the removal of the existing pedestrian crossover, and that traffic conditions on Glenwood Crescent be investigated 6 months after installation of the traffic control signals to determine the degree of traffic infiltration during the morning and afternoon peak periods, with the findings reported to the East York Community Council;

(2)that in order to implement the East York Community Council recommendation to "square-off" the corner of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent, approval be given to realign the existing curbs at the northeast and southwest corners of O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection; and,

(3)that the appropriate City officials be authorized to take whatever action is necessary to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.

Background:

East York Community Council, at its December 9, 1998 meeting, forwarded the following recommendations to the Urban Environment and Development Committee with respect to various traffic operations issues on O'Connor Drive (Clause No. 11 of Report No. 19 of East York Community Council):

(1)the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and GlenwoodCrescent in the year 1999;

(2)that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to conduct a review of traffic along Glenwood Crescent six months after the installation of the traffic lights to determine the degree of traffic infiltration during a.m. and p.m. rush hours and report such findings to the Community Council;

(3)that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to submit a report to the East York Community Council on the following:

(a)the feasibility of using red lights in place of amber lights at crosswalks; and

(b) the system that is currently used in the City of Vancouver;

4)that the Toronto Police Services be requested to increase radar enforcement along O'Connor Drive;

(5)that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to "square off" the corner of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent;

(6)that traffic control signals be installed at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate; and

(7)that the Boards of Education be requested to increase education with respect to pedestrian crossovers and community safety zones.

The Urban Environment and Development Committee at its meeting of February 8, 1999, in considering the above-noted recommendations of East York Community Council and a further report (February 5, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services, among other things, referred the report and Recommendations Nos. (1), (2), (4), (5) and (6) listed above back to the East York Community Council to enable further community consultation to take place, and requested the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services report to the East York Community Council on the following additional recommendations:

(1)the feasibility of using red lights in place of amber lights at crosswalks;

(2)the system that is currently used in the City of Vancouver;

(3)the possibility of creating a centre lane at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent to act as a holding lane; and,

(4)if lights are to be installed, that studies be conducted 3 months before and 3 months after the installation, on westbound Glenwood Crescent from Rexleigh to Glen Gannon, and southbound on St. Columba, from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.

City Council, at its meeting on April 13, 14, 15, 1999 amended the Clause by further recommending that the General Manager, Transportation Services, be requested to submit a further report to the East York Community Council for its meeting to be held in April, 1999 outlining any additional information that may be available in this regard, and the appropriate Transportation Staff be requested to be in attendance at such meeting in order to respond to questions from the community. (Clause No. 2 in Report No. 4 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee)

Comments:

This report responds to the recommendations noted above and reiterates the rationale for replacing the existing pedestrian crossover at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent with traffic control signals. It also outlines why staff do not recommend the replacement of the pedestrian crossover at O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate with traffic control signals.

O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent

A pedestrian crossover currently exists at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent. This intersection was the subject of a number of investigations over the past few years in response to repeated requests to replace the pedestrian crossover with traffic control signals. In 1997 our Department concluded that the pedestrian volume justified the need for some type of pedestrian crossing facility. However, the operating speed (85^th percentile) is 66 km/hr on this section of O'Connor Drive and O'Connor Drive in this area carries approximately 46,600 vehicles per day. Furthermore, there are Toronto Transit Commission bus stops on either side of O'Connor Drive and driveways in the vicinity of the pedestrian crossover. The speed and volume led to the conclusion that the existing pedestrian crossover should be replaced with traffic control signals. In light of the historical concerns with neighbourhood infiltration in this area, it was suggested that community consultation take place prior to proceeding with the installation of traffic control signals. A public meeting was held by East York Community Council on December 9, 1998 which resulted in the recommendation to proceed with the installation of the traffic control signals.

Staff recognize that the installation of traffic control signals, even for safety reasons, can be controversial where they are planned to be installed in established neighbourhoods. Many residents of the neighbourhood, particularly those that live on Glenwood Crescent, have expressed concern that the installation of traffic control signals will increase the volume of traffic on Glenwood Crescent. They feel that additional traffic on Glenwood Crescent could arise due to motorists on St.Clair Avenue using Glenwood Crescent to bypass the traffic control signals at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and St. Clair Avenue and internal neighbourhood residents diverting to Glenwood Crescent to take advantage of the improved access to O'Connor Drive.

Recognizing these concerns, staff are proposing the following additional measures to reduce the potential impact of the traffic control signals at this intersection.

The curb radius of the northeast and southwest corners of the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent will be reduced. This will reduce the speed at which motorists will be able to turn the corner. It will also eliminate the opportunity for motorists, stopped behind eastbound through motorists at a red light, to pass on the right and access Glenwood Crescent.

A before and after study will be conducted by staff to determine the effect that the traffic control signals have had on traffic volumes in the neighbourhood. The results of this study will be reported to the East York Community Council.

The traffic control signals will only cycle to the side street (Glenwood Crescent) when it detects a vehicle or when a pedestrian pushes the push-button. This will minimize delays to O'Connor Drive motorists and therefore reduce the attractiveness of alternate routes through the neighbourhood.

The existing turn prohibitions on O'Connor Drive and in the neighbourhood will remain and could be supplemented with additional turn restrictions or other traffic management measures in the future depending on the outcome of the before and after study.

Some residents have suggested that additional turn prohibitions should be implemented in the area to minimize the impact of the traffic control signals and that these turn prohibitions should be installed at the same time as the traffic control signal. Suggested turn prohibitions include:

Westbound left turn prohibition at St. Clair Avenue and St. Columba Place;

Northbound left turn prohibition at O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent; and,

"No Right on Red" for eastbound motorists on O'Connor Drive at Glenwood Crescent.

Although staff have recommended that a study be conducted before introducing additional turn restrictions we would not object to implementing selected turn restrictions at the time of the installation of the traffic control signals if adequate community support was obtained.

The Feasibility of Using Red Lights in place of Amber Lights at Pedestrian Crossovers

Some residents have suggested that the amber flashing beacons at the pedestrian crossover be replaced with flashing red beacons, thus requiring the motorist to stop. All pedestrian crossovers in Ontario must be installed in accordance with the provisions of the Highway Traffic Act (Section 140) and Section 20 of Regulation No. 615. These regulations specify the types of signs and pavement markings that must be installed including the requirement that four amber flashing beacons be installed.

A pedestrian crossover is a crossing device intended to provide pedestrians with more protection than an unsigned crossing at less cost and impact on vehicular movements than traffic control signals. To limit vehicular stops, the Highway Traffic Act requires that motorists must yield the right-of-way to pedestrians. The flashing amber beacon supplements this requirement. Red flashing beacons would indicate to motorists that they must stop. Motorists would only be allowed to continue after the flashing red beacon was turned off. The beacons flash for a period of time which allows an "average" pedestrian to cross the road. Requiring all motorists to stop for the red flashing beacons would increase levels of traffic congestion and increase the frustration of motorists especially when no one is using the crossover.

Pedestrian Crossing Devices Currently in Use in the City of Vancouver

We have contacted staff of the City of Vancouver Transportation Department to determine the devices currently used to facilitate pedestrian crossings in their City. Other than the typical traffic control signals installed to control vehicular and pedestrian movements at intersections, Vancouver installs intersection pedestrian signals and marked and signed pedestrian crosswalks. The following paragraphs highlight the operation of these two traffic control devices.

Intersection Pedestrian Signals

Intersection pedestrian signals (IPS) are also known as "Half Signals" because they do not directly control vehicular traffic of the minor street. The physical layout of an IPS is similar to that of a fully signalised intersection except for the absence of signal heads for traffic exiting the side street and pedestrians heads for pedestrian crossings the side street. Essentially, they are mid-block pedestrian signals installed adjacent to unsignalized intersections. They are intended to provide pedestrian crossings at a lower cost than fully signalizing the intersection. The signal is only activated when a pedestrian pushes the push-button. The side street is stop controlled.

Although the use of IPS's is allowed in Ontario, the following safety concerns preclude the installation of these types of devices in Toronto at this time:

• main street driver confusion

Vehicles can enter the intersection from the side street during the main street Green, presumably when the sidestreet motorists judge there to be a sufficient "gap" in main street traffic. However, given that the main street motorists face a green traffic signal, main street motorists may be confused and, therefore, unprepared to react to the observed conflict with the appropriate level of caution. Our concern in this regard is heightened when put in the context on Toronto's high volume roads, especially roads like O'Connor Drive.

• no sidestreet vehicle clearance interval

There is no warning displayed to the side street motorist that the main street signal is about to conflict with vehicles approaching on the main street before the side street vehicles are able to clear the intersection.

• pedestrian conflicts with sidestreet traffic

The presence of a main street green indication has preconditioned pedestrians to assume full right-of-way. Experience has demonstrated that under full signal operations there would be no expectation of a side street vehicle moving through the intersection or turning left during this main street indication. In the case of IPS', however, this is not true, and the less cautious pedestrian risks walking into the path of a vehicle.

Given these concerns, the installation of IPS in the City of Toronto would be problematic. Mid block pedestrian activated traffic control signals or fully signalized intersections are more appropriate safe crossing devices for pedestrians.

Marked and Signed Pedestrian Crosswalk

This crossing device is similar to pedestrian crossovers installed in the City of Toronto. The crossing consists of appropriate signs and pavement marking as well as an overhead illuminated pedestrian crossing sign and a flashing amber beacon. The flashing amber beacon is in effect throughout the day and is not actuated by a pedestrian. The flashing amber beacon in the City of Toronto, on the other hand, is only activated when the pedestrian pushes the push-button. According to staff of the City of Vancouver, this type of crossing is being replaced with intersection pedestrian signals, described above, or high intensity oversized signs.

The City of Vancouver does not use flashing red beacons in any pedestrian crossing device. Flashing red beacons are used in Vancouver as they are in Toronto, to supplement stop signs at select locations.

Feasibility of Introducing a Centre Lane

Residents have suggested that a centre median be introduced on O'Connor Drive at Glenwood Crescent to facilitate left turns from Glenwood Crescent.

O'Connor Drive, at this intersection is approximately 15 metres wide which provides for 4 traffic lanes. A centre lane could not be introduced by merely re-striping the road therefore a widening of O'Connor Drive would be required. Widening O'Connor Drive to essentially a 5 lane cross section would increase the crossing distance for pedestrians at the pedestrian crossover and exacerbate the operational deficiencies of the crossover. Crossing distances greater than 4 lanes are not suitable for pedestrian crossovers. Our experience indicates that motorists become frustrated with the length of time it takes for a pedestrian to cross 5 or more lanes of traffic. This frustration increases the potential for conflicts between pedestrians and motorists and decreases the safety of the pedestrian at the crossover. For this reason, we do not recommend that O'Connor Drive be widened to 5 lanes.

O'Connor Drive and Northridge Avenue

O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate

A pedestrian crossover is located between Northridge Avenue and Four Oaks Gate on O'Connor Drive. The East York Community Council has recommended that the pedestrian crossover be replaced with traffic control signals at Four Oaks Gate. The Transportation Division does not recommend the replacement of the pedestrian crossover with traffic control signals at Four Oaks Gate.

O'Connor Drive in this vicinity is a four-lane arterial roadway with a posted speed limit of 50 km/h and a two-way 24 hour volume of approximately 39,800 vehicles. Northridge Avenue is a local road and forms a "T" intersection on the south side of O'Connor Drive. A northbound stop sign on Northridge Avenue controls traffic at this intersection. Four Oaks Gate is also a local road and forms another "T" intersection on the north side of O'Connor Drive west of Northridge Avenue. Similarly, a southbound stop sign on Four Oaks Gate controls traffic at this intersection. The distance between Northridge Avenue and Four Oaks Gate on O'Connor Drive is approximately 35 metres. A pedestrian crossover (PXO) is located on the west leg of the O'Connor Drive/Northridge Avenue intersection. Adjacent traffic control signals are located approximately 450 metres to the west of Four Oaks Gate at Don Mills Road and 360 metres to the east of Northridge Avenue at Coxwell Avenue.

An eight-hour traffic control signal warrant study was conducted at both intersections and revealed that traffic control signals are not warranted at either location. The warrant study results are detailed below:

Warrant	Compliance
	O'Connor Drive and Northridge Avenue	O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate
Minimum Vehicular Volume	4 per cent.	7 per cent.
Delay to Cross Traffic	8 per cent.	4 per cent.
Collision Hazard	20 per cent.	7 per cent.

For the traffic control signal warrants to be satisfied, one of the "Minimum Vehicular Volume" or "Delay to Cross Traffic" warrants must be 100 per cent. satisfied or any two of the three warrants must be at least 80 per cent. satisfied. The "Collision Hazard" warrant is based on the number of collisions that occurred at the intersection in a three-year period which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. At Northridge Avenue, collision statistics provided by the Toronto Police Service indicate three collisions occurred over a three-year period from January1,1994 to December 31, 1996 which were potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. All three of these collisions involved pedestrians who were hit by vehicles while crossing at the PXO. In all three cases the pedestrians sustained minor injuries. Similarly, at Four Oaks Gate, one collision occurred over the same three-year period which was potentially preventable by the installation of traffic control signals. The collision involved two vehicles: one was proceeding westbound and the other was making a southbound left turn. Based on the above information, the technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not met.

During the most recent study, only 39 pedestrians were observed crossing O'Connor Drive at the PXO over an eight hour period. Of the 39 pedestrians, there were 27 adults, 6 assisted children, 3 unassisted children and 3 senior citizens. In addition, the operational characteristics of the existing PXO were evaluated according to the guidelines that were developed for the Audit of Operational and Physical Suitability at Pedestrian Crossovers in Metropolitan Toronto". The results are as follows:

A review of the PXO environmental criteria which were not satisfied revealed that they are either conditions that are presently being addressed or ones that have minimal impact on public safety in this case. For instance, the current speed profile of vehicles on O'Connor Drive is a concern and the Police are conducting speed enforcement. Traffic volume on O'Connor Drive is also a concern and will be monitored for any significant increases. Although there are several private driveways fronting on O'Connor Drive near the PXO, the volume from these driveways has a minimal impact on safety. Based on the low pedestrian volume and a review of the PXO environmental criteria, the location continues to be suitable for a PXO.

In order to address past safety concerns in the area, O'Connor Drive, between Woodbine Avenue and Pape Avenue is a test site to determine the effectiveness of Community Safety Zones (CSZs). The basic purpose of CSZs is to provide for double the minimum fines upon conviction of various HTA offences. We will be reporting back on the effectiveness of the CSZs at a future Committee meeting.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Peter Bartos

Manager, Traffic Operations

District 1 East

397-4486

Director

/pdb