STAFF REPORT
January 19, 2000
To: Works Committee
From: Acting Commissioner of Urban Development Services
Subject: Planning Comments on Proposed Road Classification System
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to respond to various requests for planning comments that have arisen from the public
discussion of the City's proposed road classification system.
Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
This report has no financial implications.
Recommendation:
That this report be received for information.
Background:
The Works Committee at its July 14,1999 meeting, in considering a report dated June 29, 1999 from the Commissioner of
Works and Emergency Services on a proposed road classification system, referred the report to all Community Councils
for consideration. The decisions of the six community councils can be found in Appendix 2 of the accompanying main
report of the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.
From Appendix 2 of the Works report, it can be seen that there are a number of requests for planning comments. The
specific questions raised at the September 14, 1999 meeting of the Toronto Community Council have already been
addressed in my October 6, 1999 report and it remains, for this current report, to respond to the other, more general,
planning issues that have been raised.
Comments:
Much of the general criticism levelled at the proposed road classification system focussed upon two questions: what is the
nature of such a classification system and to what purposes is it to be put?
The original instruction of City Council at its meeting of October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, was that:
"the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services give priority to the preparation of a road classification system and
associated traffic operations policies for review by the (now) Works Committee and Community Councils and adoption by
Council".
Consequently, a new, consolidated road classification system for the entire City has been developed based on operational
characteristics related to the ways in which different roads are used by various types of vehicles (cars, trucks, bicycles and
transit) and pedestrians. The criteria or characteristics used to distinguish among the five classes of City roads are
described in the row headings of Table 1 of the accompanying report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency
Services. These criteria produce a classification system that is inherently of an operational nature but the system cannot
then be faulted for achieving the task it was designed to accomplish.
City streets could be classed according to other criteria of a less traffic-operational nature. To varying degrees, elements of
alternative approaches to looking at City streets can be seen in such initiatives as "Main Streets"; the development of an
urban design "Streetscape Manual"; enhancing transit service through "transit priority" routes, and developing an on-street
bicycle lane and route network. Clearly, the nature of any classification system will be dependent on the purpose which it is
meant to serve. The currently proposed road classification system is designed primarily to define a hierarchy of roads for
administrative purposes related to road maintenance, design and traffic operations. As such it can assist with the
establishment of standards and guidelines for such matters as snow removal, street cleaning and litter removal, and
pavement, sidewalk and boulevard reconstruction and maintenance. It can also be applied in the development of guidelines
for right-of-way management for the accommodation of utilities, advertising, vendors and banners and pennants. The
accompanying report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services provides a full list of the operational
applications to which the proposed road classification system can be applied.
However, concern has been expressed that the road classification system will take on a meaning and significance that goes
far beyond the purely administrative and which will have profound implications for the long-term, strategic planning of the
City's transportation network. For example, the submissions of representatives of the City's Pedestrian Committee reflect
the view that the proposed road classification system represents an endorsement of the status quo and places a continued
emphasis on the movement of vehicles, particularly the private automobile, over the interests of other road users and
adjacent activities. There is the danger that any classification system might, to some extent, prejudice future thinking about
a given set of issues by establishing a framework of debate that may at times prove limiting. For the City, the risk is that
the road classification system might somehow acquire a life of its own that sees it dictate, rather than guide or inform,
Council decisions about the way city streets are designed, maintained and used.
Given the above concerns, it is important to note that it is not being proposed that the road classification system be
formally included in the City's new official plan which is currently in preparation. The new Official Plan will be a
long-term, strategic planning document. It is key that the processes of establishing, maintaining and modifying the road
classification remain entirely under Council's control as an administrative tool. The new Official Plan will include a range
of transportation planning principles directed towards reducing future dependency on the private automobile and including
strategic policies that give greater attention to the needs of other road users (pedestrian and cyclists; transit and commercial
vehicles) in the design and operation of the City's street system. Council can apply and adapt the road classification system
as necessary to help support and achieve these planning goals.
The proposed road classification system is essentially an operational device. It cannot be expected to directly tackle
substantive issues related to such broader City goals as improved public health, more sustainable transportation, enhanced
environmental protection and better pedestrian environments. These matters are addressed through the strategic planning
exercise of the new Official Plan where prescriptive directions for the future growth and development of the City will be
set. There is nothing in the road classification system which will compromise or contradict the transportation policy
directions of the new Official Plan.
As noted by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services in his October 8, 1999 follow-up report, the primary
purpose and intent of the proposed road classification system is:
"The development of a made-in Toronto road classification system was undertaken to assist staff and to inform the public
regarding the operation of the existing roads in the City and to respond to City Council's direction that a new road
classification system and accompanying policies be developed to clarify decision-making regarding road operation matters.
In this context, the road classification system is a tool in the management of the road system and while it articulates a
number of traffic operations policies, it is not a strategic policy instrument of Council. The road classification system was
not developed to meet all of the strategic needs of the City that are more properly undertaken as part of the development of
long-term transportation policy" (p.3)
Conclusions:
The general planning concerns raised by the proposed road classification system appear to be based largely on a
misunderstanding of the nature of the classification system and/or a mistrust over the purposes to which it might be put.
The road classification system, like any other, is essentially a way of describing what is, not what should be. The proposed
road classification system places each City street in one of five distinct classes or categories based on its current
operational characteristics.
Of itself, the classification system does not change the way in which a particular street is used and it is of limited
prescriptive force in directing how the use of a street might change in the future. Council's capacity to deal with changes to
the street system is not unduly constrained by the manner in which the roads are classified. The classification system is
designed and intended to be an operational tool of Council not a planning straightjacket.
Contact: Greg Stewart
Metro Hall
Telephone : 392-12691
Fax: 392-3821
E-mail : gstewart@toronto.ca
Reviewed by:
Paul J. Bedford James Ridge
Executive Director and Chief Planner Acting Commissioner
City Planning Division Urban Development Services
[p:\2000\ug\uds\pln\wk002095pln] -nbb
