DISPOSITION OF PROPOSED BY-LAW REGARDING

THE ALTERATION OF PUBLIC HIGHWAYS

(ATLAS AVENUE, CHERRYWOOD AVENUE, NORTHCLIFFE BOULEVARD AND WESTMOUNT AVENUE)

Ward 28, York Humber.

(REFERRED BACK BY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 1, 2000)

Reference public meeting held on January 18, 2000.

(A) Clause No. 8 of Report No. 11 of the York Community Council which was adopted without amendment by City Council on November 23, 24 and 25, 1999.

Clause No. 8 of Report No. 11 of the York Community Council, which was adopted without amendment by City Council at its meeting held on November 23, 24 and 25, 1999.

8

(1) Speed and Volume Study and Resident Survey Results

regarding Traffic Calming on Various Streets; and

(2) Traffic Calming on Atlas Avenue, Cherrywood Avenue,

Northcliffe Blvd & Westmount Ave - Ward 28, York Eglinton

(City Council on November 23, 24 and 25, 1999, adopted this Clause without amendment.)

The York Community Council recommends that:

(1) in view of the number of schools located in the foregoing area and concerns for the safety of the children, that the following traffic calming measures be implemented:

(a) a total of two speed humps on Atlas Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West and Dundurn Crescent and construction of tabled intersections at Atlas Avenue and Graham Gardens and Atlas Avenue and Normanna Avenue;

(b) a total of four speed humps on Cherrywood Avenue from Maplewood Avenue and Vaughan Road and construction of a tabled intersection at Cherrywood Avenue and Valewood Avenue;

(c) a total of four speed humps on Northcliffe Boulevard from St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue; and

(d) a total of four speed humps on Westmount Avenue from St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue;

(2) the City Solicitor prepare the road alteration by-laws for the traffic calming measures described above and that authority be granted to introduce the necessary Bills in Council;

(3) the City Clerk provide public notice to introduce the above-noted traffic calming measures; and

(4) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

The York Community Council reports for the information of Council, having requested the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

(1) to have available at the public meeting, the statistics with respect to the traffic volume and speed studies conducted; and

(2) to report on ways to inform parents of the City's safety concerns, particularly with regard to the children attending the several schools in the area; and on an initiative to educate the parents through the school system.

The York Community Council submits the following report (September 27, 1999) from the Director, Transportation Services, District 1:

Purpose:

To respond to requests from Councillor Joe Mihevc for reports on the feasibility of installing traffic calming on various street sections on Atlas Avenue, Cherrywood Avenue, Northcliffe Boulevard and Westmount Avenue.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None required.

Recommendation:

That this report be received for information.

Background:

York Eglinton Councillor Joe Mihevc has requested that Transportation Services staff report to York Community Council on the results of volume and speed studies undertaken on various street sections of Atlas Avenue, Cherrywood Avenue, Northcliffe Boulevard and Westmount Avenue.

Comments:

The following summarizes the results of those studies for each of the individual streets:

1. Atlas Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Dundurn Crescent:

Atlas Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Dundurn Crescent operates two-way in a north/south direction, with a pavement width of 7.3 metres. The speed limit is 40 km/h.

Volume and speed studies conducted over a seven-day period in May 1999, recorded an average combined daily total of 2500 vehicles travelling at a combined average speed of 34 km/h, with 19 per cent of these vehicles travelling at speeds greater than 40 km/h. We recorded a combined daily operating speed (the speed at which 85 per cent of the vehicular traffic travels at or below) of 42 km/h over the period of the survey.

2. Cherrywood Avenue between Maplewood Avenue and Vaughan Road:

Cherrywood Avenue between Maplewood Avenue and Vaughan Road operates two-way in a north/south direction, with a pavement width of 7.3 metres. The speed limit is 40 km/h.

Volume and speed surveys conducted over a seven-day period in May 1999, recorded a combined average daily total of 530 vehicles travelling at a combined average speed of 36 km/h, with 34 per cent of these vehicles travelling at speeds greater than 40 km/h. We recorded a combined operating speed (the speed at which 85 percent of the vehicular traffic travels at or below) of 48 km/h over the period of the survey.

3. Northcliffe Boulevard between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue:

Northcliffe Boulevard between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue operates one-way northbound, with a pavement width of 7.3 metres. The legal speed limit is by-lawed and signed as 40 km/h.

Volume and speed studies conducted over a two-day period in April 1999, recorded an average daily total of 2840 vehicles travelling at an average speed of 40 km/h, with 50 percent of these vehicles travelling at speeds greater than 40 km/h. The operating speed (the speed at which 85 percent of the vehicular traffic travels at or below) was 49 km/h over the period of the survey.

4. Westmount Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue:

Westmount Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue operates one-way southbound, with a pavement width of 7.3 metres. The legal speed limit is by-lawed and signed as 40 km/h.

Volume and speed surveys conducted over a two-day period in April 1999, recorded an average daily total of 1820 vehicles travelling at an average speed of 41 km/h, with 56 percent of the vehicles travelling at speeds greater than 40 km/h. We recorded an operating speed (the speed at which 85 per cent of the vehicular traffic travels at or below) of 51 km/h over the period of the survey.

Based on these study results staff undertook a survey of resident owners, non-resident owners and tenants on each of the individual street locations to determine the levels of support for traffic calming plans. It was concluded that traffic calming is supported if more than 50 percent of property owners responded and more than 50 percent of those responses were favourable.

The attached Appendix details the results of the residents survey for each individual street section.

Conclusions:

The survey results reveal the total number of responses received on all four streets was less than 50 percent of the total number surveyed. In view of the low response rate traffic calming is not recommended at this time on the following sections of streets:

1. Atlas Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Dundurn Crescent;

2. Cherrywood Avenue between Maplewood Avenue and Vaughan Road;

3. Northcliffe Boulevard between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue; and

4. Westmount Avenue between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue.

Contact:

Jacqueline White

Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1

397-5021; 392-8504 (fax)

APPENDIX 1

1. ATLAS AVENUE between St. Clair Avenue West and Dundurn Crescent

Survey Group

Total # SurveyedTotal # Responses ReceivedReplies Supporting Traffic CalmingReplies Not in Support of Traffic Calming

Owner	32	9	8	1
Tenant	23	1	1	0
Non-Resident Owner	7	2	2	0
Total	62	12 (19%)	11(92%)	1 (8%)

* In Total # of Replies Supporting Traffic Calming

7 - support tabled intersection and speed humps

1 - support only speed humps

2.CHERRYWOOD AVENUE between Vaughan Road and Maplewood Avenue

* In Total # of Replies Supporting Traffic Calming

16 - support tabled intersection and speed humps

2 - support only speed humps

1 - supports only tabled intersection

3. NORTHCLIFFE BOULEVARD between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue

4. WESTMOUNT AVENUE between St. Clair Avenue West and Cloverlawn Avenue

(B) Ms. Carolyn Ussher and Mr. Derek Pallandi, 44 Cherrywood Avenue

(February 1, 2000)

We recently received the "traffic calming survey" for Cheerywood Avenue in the former City of York. WE were quite pleased that the City is addressing the issue. However, we are concerned that a 50% support rate is a bit unrealistic. You only allow for a 10 day response time frame during a time of year when many residents are away on summer vacation. Further, we were unaware that any studies were even being conducted in our area, and therefore, this initiative took us by surprise. In addition, basic sampling and statistics knowledge informs one that requesting respondents to mail surveys without providing pre-paid envelopes drastically reduces the percentage of surveys returned. We are specifically concerned that you may not received the desired response and this proposal may not pass Council.

In your letter to the residents, there is mention that speed humps will assist to calm traffic and reduce speed without "relying on police enforcement". I must state quite strongly that on the 2.5 years that we have lived at the corner of Valewood and Cherrywood, we have never seen police ticket any motorists for speeding or failing to stop at the stop sign. This intersection is most commonly used by children going to school, daycare and to the playground on the school property. I would estimate that 70% of cars do not stop at the intersection and further, most of the ones that do stop only do so in a "rolling stop". I contacted Sgt. Schofield of the 13 Division Traffic Unit in 1998 and have yet to see any difference in our community and as mentioned, I have never seen a police car dedicated to this intersection. Residents have noticed the increase speed with which cars are travelling down our residential street and the fact that he vast majority have little regard for the stop sign at the intersections alarming. I trust that this situation will be remedied by Council and police before someone is seriously injured.

In closing, I would like to add our support to this traffic calming initiative. The safety of the children and resident in this community relies on decisive action from our Council members.

(C) Ms. Cathy Cassano, CSAC Executive, Catholic School Advisory Council

St. Clare Catholic School

(January 26, 2000)

We were not aware that a meeting was held on January 18, 2000 to address the issue of traffic calming in front of St.Clare School. A requets was made to install speed bumps on Northcliffe Boulevard north of St. Clair Avenue West. Discussions as previous Bus Safety Meetings and School Advisory Council Meetings have proven that there is a great concern in the community for our children's safety.

We are hoping that this issue will be brought forward again at the next York Community Council meeting.

(D) Mr. John Neralich, Principal, St. Clare Catholic School

(January 26, 2000)

Our School community has been working closely with Councillor Joe Mihevc's office regarding the issue of safety and traffic calming in front of our school. Part of our request included the installation of a Cross Walk and speed bumps for this immediate area. We were, however, unable to attend the January 18, 2000 meeting of York Community Council regarding our request as Councillor Mihevc's office was unaware this meeting was called. The traffic calming project was initiated at our school Joint Safety Committee Meetings and is an important component of our School Bus Safety initiatives.

We are therefore making a request to have our concerns brought forward again on the next York Community Council meeting. Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.

(E) Ms. Joanne Dileo, Chair, St. Alphonsus School Advisory Council

(January 21, 2000)

Unfortunately, we were not able to attend the meeting of the York City Council on Tuesday, January 18, 2000 regarding our request for traffic calming in front of the school. The request included two raised intersections and two pinch points.

We regret that York Community Council was deadlocked on the issue as only two Councillors were present at the meeting.

We hereby request that either:

a) Toronto City Council passes necessary by-laws to ensure the installation of traffic devices to slow traffic in front of our school;

b) send back the issue to York Community Council to enable the St. Alphonsus Advisory Council to make a presentation endorsing the plan.

The traffic calming project is an integral part of our outdoor "Playground Renewal" scheme which is already supported by the City of Toronto, Toronto Catholic District School Board and St.Alphonsus Advisory Council.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

(F) Mr. Paul Rivett, 50 Cherrywood Avenue

(February 1, 2000)

Further to my telephone conversation of Thursday, August 19, 1999 with Mr. Stephen Brown of your office, I would like to than you and your colleagues for the work which has been conducted to date to address the traffic problems on Cherrywood Avenue, I appreciate the time and effort which has been dedicated to both the recent speed study on the street, and the traffic calming survey.

The recent speed study validates the concerns of the residents on the street who have observed, with increasing frequency, the "34% of the total volume of traffic" which exceeds the speed limit as described in your August 13, 1999 letter. I have personally witnessed numerous vehicles speeding on Cherrywood Avenue and driving through the Cherrywood-Valewood intersection leading to Humewood Elementary School, without even attempting to stop. As much as I am impressed by your work confirming that there is a traffic issue on Cherrywood Avenue, I am equally distressed by the excessive threshold required for this problem to be addressed by Council: "Council will only consider proceeding if the results of this survey indicate that more than 50% of the total municipally-addressed residences support this initiative."

Given the clear evidence of a speeding problem and the obvious safety concerns raised by such a problem, the threshold for merely bringing this matter to the attention of our elected officials on the Council should be extremely low. The current 50% threshold for raising this matter with Council appears inappropriate and excessive for the following reasons:

(a) the lives of children are being put at risk. The population immediately surrounding Humewood School is made up of a large number of young families with young children. These children living west of Cherrywood's Humewood School (particularly on adjacent Valewood Avenue, and Rushton Road) must cross Cherrywood in order to access Humewood School. However, despite the obvious danger to these children, parents who do not live on Cherrywood have not been consulted or allowed to influence the decision to bring this issue to Council. While it is not entirely clear from your August 13, 1999 letter whether the 50% threshold is limited to residents of Cherrywood or some broader sample size, clearly parents with children attending Humewood School have an interest in this matter.

(b) the application of inappropriate polling methods. There are several flaws in the polling method applied in this case which will limit the number of surveys received by your office and, accordingly, increase the likelihood that this matter will not be brought before Council. These include the following:

(i) it appears that out-date information has been used concerning the residents which have been polled. I have been living on Cherrywood for over a year but the survey which was delivered to my home was addressed to the previous owners;

(ii) the population of Cherrywood consists of a number different cultural groups, many of whom do not speak English as a first language, but the survey information is drafted solely in English; and

(iii) the survey package did not contain a stamped return envelope which is an obvious deterrent to maximizing survey responses.

(c) decreased ability to address the traffic offenses being committed. By restricting Council's review of this matter on the pretense of a prohibitive 50% threshold, the Transportation Services Division is effectively blocking Council's access to information which could lead to the reduction in the number of traffic offenses committed daily on Cherrywood. By comparison, if studies indicated that 34% of the people accessing Cherrywood committed assault or theft, it is hard to imagine that in order for this information to be brought to the attention of Council, it would require a 50% threshold. Although the crimes in question may be characterized as merely Highway Traffic Act offences, they represent a very real risk to the safety of the neighborhood families.

Based on the above information, I urge you to bring the results of the recent Cherrywood speed study to the attention of Council regardless of the result of the survey. Alternatively, I suggest that the 50% threshold be amended to a threshold of 20% of the surveys returned (research has found that response rates by mail of 10% are typical). If you determine that this criteria review is not feasible, please telephone me at 863-2266 so that I may arrange to canvas Cherrywood and surrounding homes to obtain signatures required. Thank you.