TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES
AND OTHER COMMITTEES
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999
URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT No. 4
1 A Rapid Transit Connection Between Pearson International Airport
and Union Station - Supplementary Report
2 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)
City of Toronto
REPORT No. 4
OF THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
(from its meeting on February 8, 1999,
submitted by Councillor Joe Pantalone, Chair)
As Considered by
The Council of the City of Toronto
on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999
1
A Rapid Transit Connection Between Pearson International Airport
and Union Station - Supplementary Report
(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:
"It is further recommended that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to review
and include the following in the discussions on the objective of creating a direct rail link between downtown Toronto and
Pearson International Airport:
(1) the potential of a link between the Dundas West Subway Station and the Dundas West GO Station; and
(2) the potential of a stop at Eglinton Avenue West and Black Creek Drive.")
(City Council on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council
to be held on April 13, 1999.)
--------
(Clause No. 4 of Report No. 3 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee)
The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that:
(1) the Mayor and Members of Council form a lobbying team to work with the Minister of Transport to achieve the
objective of creating a direct rail link between downtown Toronto and Pearson International Airport;
(2) City Councillors appointed to the City's energy agencies, Toronto Hydro and the Toronto District Heating
Corporation, initiate an exploration of the possibilities for electrification of the rail link with power to be provided
by a co-generation facility; and
(3) the two City Council appointees to the Greater Toronto Airport Authority be requested to play a leadership role
in achieving a direct rail link between downtown Toronto and the Pearson International Airport.
The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:
(1) received the report (January 7, 1999) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services; and
(2) requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to report to the Urban Environment and
Development Committee on passenger data with respect to Pearson International Airport and provide estimates of the
anticipated number of trips expected between the airport and downtown via a direct rail link.
The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the report (January 7, 1999) from the Commissioner
of Urban Planning and Development Services:
Purpose:
This report summarizes Council's motions regarding the planning of a rapid transit connection to Pearson International
Airport and provides an update to the report on this issue dated November 27, 1998 from the Commissioner of Urban
Planning and Development Services.
Financial Implications:
The recommendations of this report do not have any funding implications.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Council receive this report for information
Background:
At its meeting on October 1 and 2, 1998 Council adopted, as amended, Clause No. 1 contained in Report No. 10 of the
Urban Environment and Development Committee entitled "A Rapid Transit Connection Between Pearson International
Airport and Union Station". In doing so, Council adopted the recommendations in Appendix A.
Comments:
The following is an update on Council's request to other levels of government regarding the rapid transit connection to
Pearson Airport.
GO Transit
In 1994 GO estimated the cost to upgrade the entire corridor to Georgetown at $238m (1992 dollars) and to upgrade the
corridor to Bramalea at $132m (1992 dollars). The upgrades to Bramalea would provide the infrastructure necessary to
accommodate all-day airport rail service. In response to Council's request, GO Transit has advised in a letter dated
November 17, 1998 (attached) that their review of the improvements required to accommodate all-day rail service to the
vicinity of Pearson Airport has determined that the estimated cost could be reduced to $100m. The earlier estimate was
based on double tracking the entire corridor. The revised estimate is based on operating conditions with single trackage in
some locations.
Transport Canada
Transport Canada staff are finalizing a report on rapid transit access to Pearson Airport. It is anticipated that the report will
address options for providing transit access between Union Station and Pearson Airport including extension of the airport
transit system to the CN Weston rail corridor and a dedicated airport shuttle service. It is also expected that Transport
Canada will propose that the private sector be involved in the provision of the connection. In discussions with Transport
Canada, City staff have indicated that the rapid transit connection to the airport should be compatible with the regional
commuter services provided by GO Transit. Transport Canada staff are also engaged in discussions with the Greater
Toronto Airports Authority regarding the protection for the rapid transit connection in the terminal redevelopment plans. On
several occasions the federal Minister of Transport indicated that there may soon be an announcement about a transit link
between downtown Toronto and Pearson Airport. Transport Canada expects to release the report in the near future.
Conclusions:
City staff are continuing discussions with GO Transit, the GTAA, and Transport Canada regarding the rapid transit
connection between Union Station and Pearson Airport and will report further to Council as information becomes available.
Contact Name:
Rod McPhail, Director, Transportation Planning, Metro Hall
Telephone: 392-8100, Fax: 329-3821
--------
Appendix A
Summary of Council Motions Re:
A Rapid Transit Connection Between Pearson International Airport and Union Station
Council (October 1 and 2, 1998) amendments to Clause No. 1 of Report No. 9 of The Urban Environment and Development
Committee:
It is further recommended that:
(1) the federal Minister of Transportation be invited to make a presentation respecting this matter to the next meeting of the
Urban Environment and Development Committee to be held on November 2, 1998; and
(2) the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to submit a report to Council in
November 1998, if possible, or in December 1998, with an update on whether here has been any movement from the
provincial or federal governments with respect to the foregoing matter, so that Council can be informed on the progress of
this project.
Urban Environment and Development Committee (July 13, 1998) recommendations:
(1) the adoption of the following report (June 26, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development
Services, subject to Council's support being conditional upon the project including a portion of the financial cost of the
required upgrades to the subway platform at Union Station; and
(2) that Council support the addition of a $1.00 airport fee to be used for the proposed rapid transit connection between
Pearson International Airport and Union Station:
Staff recommendations (in report dated June 26, 1998):
It is recommended that City Council:
(1) endorse the concept of a rapid transit connection between Pearson International Airport and Union Station;
(2) endorse the conclusions of Provincial and Federal studies that the corridor adjacent to Highways 409 and 427, as shown
in Figure 1, should be protected for a rapid transit connection between Pearson Airport and the CN Weston rail corridor,
and request the Province of Ontario, Transport Canada, the City of Mississauga, Region of Peel, and the Greater Toronto
Airports Authority to pursue measures to protect the corridor;
(3) support upgrading of the Weston rail corridor to accommodate a new station in the vicinity of the Woodbine Racetrack
and all-day GO service from Union Station to the new station, and request GO Transit to advise on costs;
(4) support the extension of the internal airport transit system from the airport to upgraded GO rail service in the CN
Weston rail corridor as the preferred rapid transit option in the five to ten-year time frame, and request Transport Canada (in
conjunction with the City of Toronto, Ministry of Transportation, GO Transit, Greater Toronto Airports Authority, Region
of Peel, and City of Mississauga) to conduct a physical, operational, and financial feasibility study for this extension;
(5) request the Greater Toronto Airports Authority to consider technologies for the internal airport transit system which
would be capable of being extended into the CN Weston rail corridor for a transfer-free connection to Union Station;
(6) request the Province and GO Transit to ensure that the upgrading of the CN Weston rail corridor for all-day GO service
to the airport is a high priority for GO Rail expansion;
(7) request the Greater Toronto Airports Authority to continue to plan for an internal airport transit system in a manner
which serves passenger convenience, and to be prepared to build the transit system in conjunction with the upgraded GO
rail service, or prior to, if demand warrants;
(8) request the Mayor and the Chair of the Urban Environment and Development Committee to meet with the Federal
Minister of Transport to discuss Federal support for the feasibility study and for the early implementation of the rapid transit
connection; and
(9) direct the City Clerk to distribute copies of this report to Transport Canada, the Ministry of Transportation, GO Transit,
the Region of Peel, the City of Mississauga, the City of Brampton, and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority, the Toronto
Olympic Bid Corporation, the Toronto Board of Trade, and Tourism Toronto.
--------
The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it the following communications, which were
forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its
meeting of February 8, 1999, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
- (January 14, 1999) from the Chair, Urban Environment and Development Committee, inviting the Minister of Transport,
the Honourable David Collonette, to give a presentation to the Committee's February 8, 1999 meeting;
- (November 27, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, providing an update on the
status of the responses from the federal and provincial governments with respect to the proposal for a rapid transit
connection between Pearson International Airport and Union Station, and recommending that consideration of this matter
be deferred until the Urban Environment and Development Committee meeting in January 1999 in order to allow additional
time for responses from the Provincial and Federal Governments;
- (October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk, forwarding the communication addressed to the Minister of Transport enclosing a
copy of Clause No. 1 of Report No. 10 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee, headed "A Rapid Transit
Connection Between Pearson International Airport and Union Station", which was adopted, as amended, by the Council of
the City of Toronto at its meeting held on October 1 and 2, 1998; and drawing the Minister's attention to the amendment by
Council found at the beginning of the Clause, viz:
"It is further recommended that:
(1) the federal Minister of Transportation be invited to make a presentation respecting this matter to the next meeting of the
Urban Environment and Development Committee to be held on November 2, 1998; and
(2) the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to submit a report to Council in
November 1998, if possible, or in December 1998, with an update on whether there has been any movement from the
provincial or federal governments with respect to the foregoing matter, so that Council can be informed on the progress of
this project."
- (November 17, 1998) from Mr. Richard C. Ducharme, Managing Director, GO Transit, responding to Council's action
taken on October 1 and 2, 1998 (Clause No. 1 of Report No. 10 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee
refers) in which GO Transit was requested to provide a preliminary cost estimate for upgrading the Weston Corridor to
accommodate all-day GO Service from Union Station to a new station in the area of the Woodbine Racetrack and advising
that improvements associated with this service would include a rail/rail grade separation at West Toronto; track additions
(full extent of additions required subject to detailed analysis), and; a new station at the Woodbine Race Track. The
preliminary cost estimate for these improvements is in the order of $100 million. This estimate is also based on the
assumption that no major platform improvements/changes at Union Station would be required to accommodate this service;
- (January 28, 1999) from Councillor Jack Layton, Don River Ward, recommending:
That the new City of Toronto Council formally endorse the creation of a direct rail link between downtown Toronto and the
Pearson International Airport;
That the Mayor and Members of Council form a lobbying team to work with the Minister of Transport, David Collenette,
to achieve this objective;
That Councillors sitting on the City's energy agencies, Toronto Hydro and Toronto District Energy Corporation, initiative
an exploration of the possibilities for electrification of the rail link with power to be provided by a co-generation facility;
That the two City Council appointees to the Greater Toronto Airport Authority be requested to play a leadership role in
achieving a direct rail link between Toronto's downtown and the Pearson International Airport;
- (February 4, 1999) from Harve Sokoloff, forwarding a copy of a letter to the Honourable David Collonette.
(City Council on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a communication
(January 27, 1999) from the City Clerk, The Corporation of the City of Brampton forwarding recommendations adopted by
the Council of the City of Brampton on January 25, 1999, with respect to a rapid transit connection between Pearson
International Airport and Union Station.)
(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, again had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a
communication (January 27, 1999) from the City Clerk, the Corporation of the City of Brampton, forwarding
recommendations adopted by the Council of the City of Brampton on January 25, 1999, with respect to a rapid transit
connection between Pearson International Airport and Union Station.)
2
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)
(City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:
"It is further recommended 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 Services' staff be requested to be in attendance at such
meeting in order to respond to questions from the community.")
(City Council on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council
to be held on April 13, 1999.)
--------
(Clause No. 7 of Report No. 3 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee)
The Urban Environment and Development Committee recommends that:
(1) the Police Chief be requested to increase radar enforcement along O'Connor Drive; and
(2) the Boards of Education be requested to increase education with respect to pedestrian crossovers and community
safety zones.
The Urban Environment and Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the report
(February 5, 1999) from the General Manager, Transportation Services Division and Recommendations (1), (2), (4), (5) and
(6) of the East York Community Council contained in the communication (December 21, 1998) from the City Clerk to East
York Community Council to enable further community consultation to take place, and requested the Commissioner of
Works and Emergency Services to report to East York Community Council on the following:
(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) 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 three months before and three months after the installation, on
westbound Glenwood from Rexleigh to Glen Gannon, and southbound on St. Columba, from 7.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.
The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (February 5, 1999) from the
General Manager, Transportation Services Division:
Purpose:
To provide staff input and background respecting recommendations of the East York Community Council, at its meeting of
December 9, 1998, which have been forwarded to the Urban Environment and Development Committee regarding proposed
traffic control signals at the intersections of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent and O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks
Gate and a minor realignment of the former.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
The funds associated with new traffic control signals are contained in the Works and Emergency Services Department's
1999 Capital Budget request. The estimated cost to install traffic control signals at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and
Glenwood Crescent is $53,000.00. The funds necessary to undertake the proposed curb realignment at this intersection, in
the estimated amount of $40,000.00 can also be accommodated within the Capital Budget request.
Recommendations:
(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 the installation of the traffic control signals to
determine the degree of traffic infiltration during the a.m. and p.m. 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 the
O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection, generally as shown on the attached Figure 2; 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 11
in Report No. 19 of East York Community Council):
(1) the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent 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.
This report addresses the recommendations concerning the intersections of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent and
O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate (recommendations 1, 2, 5 and 6). The request to study the feasibility of using red lights
in place of amber lights at pedestrian crossovers (recommendation 3) will be dealt within a subsequent report.
Comments:
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 (85th 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. 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.
East York Community Council also recommended that traffic along Glenwood Crescent be investigated 6 months after the
traffic control signals are installed to determine the degree of traffic infiltration resulting from the signal installation. Local
residents expressed a concern that the proposed traffic control signals will increase traffic infiltration through the
neighbourhood from motorists using Glenwood Crescent to access St. Clair Avenue. Various turn prohibitions are already
present in the neighbourhood to mitigate traffic infiltration. Advisory signs are posted at O'Connor Drive and Glenwood
Crescent indicating that access to St.Clair Avenue is prohibited during the afternoon peak period. Notwithstanding the
existing turn prohibitions in the area, the Transportation Division will review traffic movements in the area 6 months after
the traffic control signals are installed in order to determine the effect the traffic control signals have had on traffic
operations at the intersection and in the immediate neighbourhood.
Minor Realignment of the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent Intersection
East York Community Council recommended that the corners of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent be "squared-off"
to a more typical intersection geometry. Local residents are concerned that the current radius allows motorists on O'Connor
Drive turning into Glenwood Crescent to do so at a high rate of speed. Figure 1 shows the current geometry of the
intersection.
The current radii at the northeast and southwest corners of the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection are fairly
generous, in the range of about 30 m. This is due, in part to the somewhat skewed angle of the intersection. The current
configuration allows east and west bound right-turning vehicles to negotiate the corner at relatively high speeds.
In reviewing the geometry of this intersection, staff have concluded that it would be feasible to reduce the radii at the two
above-noted corners, to approximately 15 m (exact dimensions will be determined during detailed design stage). This would
encourage right turning vehicles from/to the arterial to make the turns at slower speeds and also reduce the expanse of
pavement that pedestrians are now required to cross. The proposed intersection reconfiguration is illustrated in Figure 2.
The proposed realignment of the northeast and southwest corners of the O'Connor Drive/Glenwood Crescent intersection
constitute an alteration to a public highway pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act. The intent of Council to enact a
by-law to authorize any physical changes resulting in the alteration of the pavement configuration must be advertised and
subsequently be subject to a public hearing (recommended to be a deputation item at a future East York Community
Council meeting). This work is pre-approved in accordance with Schedule A of the Class Environmental Assessment for
Municipal Road Projects.
O'Connor Drive and Northridge Avenue/Four Oaks Gate
A pedestrian crossover is located between Northridge Avenue and Four Oaks Gate on O'Connor Drive. Figure 3 illustrates
the location of the pedestrian crossover in the context of the surrounding area. East York Community Council has
recommended that the pedestrian crossover be replaced 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. The 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 conditions do
not satisfy the warrants 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 percent |
7 percent |
| Delay to Cross Traffic |
8 percent |
4 percent |
| Collision Hazard |
20 percent |
7 percent |
For the traffic control signal warrants to be satisfied, one of the "Minimum Vehicular Volume" or "Delay to Cross Traffic"
warrants must be 100 percent 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 were reported over a three-year period from January 1, 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 was reported 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 close to being satisfied.
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 guidelines that were developed for
the "Audit of Operational and Physical Suitability at Pedestrian Crossovers in Metropolitan Toronto". The results are as
follows:
| Standards or Criteria to be met for Physical
Suitability of a PXO |
Met/Not Met |
Comments |
| Vehicle operating speed less than 60 km/h |
Not met |
85th percentile is above 60 km/h |
| Not more than four lanes wide |
Met |
4 lanes |
| Traffic volume less than 35,000 vehicles per day |
Not met |
39,800 per day |
| No driveways or entrances nearby |
Not met |
Several private driveways to detached homes
fronting on O'Connor Drive. |
| No significant volume of turning movements
which interfere with the PXO |
Met |
Low volumes from Northridge Avenue |
| No visibility problems exist for either pedestrians
or vehicles |
Met |
None |
| No loading zones (including TTC) in the
immediate vicinity |
Met |
None |
| Not less than 215 metres to another PXO or traffic
control device |
Met |
475 metres to Don Mills Road;
370 metres to Coxwell Avenue. |
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. 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.
Conclusions:
The Transportation Division has concluded that the installation of traffic control signals at O'Connor Drive and Glenwood
Crescent to replace the existing pedestrian crossover is warranted. We will also conduct a study to determine the effect that
the traffic control signals have had on traffic infiltration in the immediate neighbourhood. With respect to "squaring-off" the
intersection, realignment of the northeast and southwest curbs to reduce the existing radii would deter higher speed right
turns from the arterial onto the local street and reduce the pedestrian crossing distance.
The technical warrants for the installation of traffic control signals are not close to being satisfied at either O'Connor Drive
and Northridge Avenue or at O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate. O'Connor Drive at Northridge Avenue is a suitable
location for a PXO. O'Connor Drive will be a test site to determine the effectiveness of increased fines through the newly
approved "Community Safety Zone" legislation.
Contact Name and Telephone Number:
Peter Bartos, P.Eng.
Manager, Traffic Operations, District 1, Transportation Division
397-4486
Insert Table/Map No. 1
Figure 1 - O'Connor Drive at Glenwood Crescent Proposed Traffic Control Signals
Insert Table/Map No. 2
Figure 1 - O'Connor Drive at Glenwood Crescent Proposed Traffic Control Signals
Insert Table/Map No. 3
Figure 1 - O'Connor Drive at Glenwood Crescent Proposed Traffic Control Signals
The Urban Environment and Development Committee submits the following report (December 21, 1999) from the
City Clerk:
Recommendation:
The East York Community Council on December 9, 1998, recommended to the Urban Environment and Development
Committee:
(1) the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent 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 this 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 the 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 East York Community Council reports for the information of the Urban Environment and Development Committee
having received the following communications:
- (November 6, 1998) from the Acting Manager, East Traffic Region;
- (September 18, 1998) to Councillor C. Ootes, from the Acting Manager, East Traffic Region;
- (June 6, 1997) to Councillor C. Ootes, from the Acting Manager, East Traffic Region; and
- (December 8, 1998) from Mr. Raymond White and Mrs. Mary Floro-White, East York.
Background:
The East York Community Council had before it the following communications:
- (November 6, 1998) from the Acting Manager, East Traffic Region, advising the East York Community Council that the
installation of traffic control signals at O'Connor Drive and Northridge Avenue; and O'Connor Drive and Four Oaks Gate
are not justified at this time and advising that the area of O'Connor Drive from Woodbine Avenue to Pape Avenue will be
tested as a Community Safety Zone;
- (September 18, 1998) from the Acting Manager, East Traffic Region, advising the East York Community Council of the
results of investigations regarding various safety-related issues on O'Connor Drive;
- (June 6, 1997) from the Acting Manager, East Traffic Region, advising the East York Community Council of the results of
investigations regarding the installation of traffic control signals at O'Connor Drive and Northridge Avenue; and at
O'Connor Drive and Glenwood Crescent; and
- (December 8, 1998) from Mr. Raymond White and Mrs. Mary Floro-White, East York, opposing the installation of traffic
control signals at O'Connor Drive and Northridge Avenue.
The following persons appeared before the East York Community Council in connection with the foregoing:
- Mr. Paul Newton, East York;
- Ms. Sherry Aiken, East York;
- Mr. Christopher Stavrou, East York;
- Mr. Brian Barron, President, Ward 2 Property Owners Association of East York, East York;
- Mr. A. Baxevanidis, East York;
- Mr. Peter Krakus, East York;
- Mr. Dino Giardetti, East York;
- Mr. David Wright, East York;
- Mr. Allan Graham, East York;
- Mrs. May Achermann, East York;
- Mr. Gary Prentice, East York;
- Mr. Robert Lee, East York;
- Ms. Joyce Nelson, East York; and
- Mr. Anthony Labile, East York.
--------
The Urban Environment and Development Committee also had before it the following communications, which were
forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Urban Environment and Development Committee for its
meeting of February 8, 1999, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
- (February 2, 1999) from Peter Krakus, supporting the installation of a traffic light at the intersection of Glenwood and
O'Connor;
- (February 3, 1999) from Kevin Smart, requesting deferral of this matter until after the next meeting of the East York
Community Council;
- (February 4, 1999) from Katherine and Darryl Parsons, objecting to the installation of traffic lights;
- (February 5, 1999) from Frank A. Tulipano;
- (February 5, 1999) from Dino Giardetti;
- (February 2, 1999) from Geoff and Rochelle Tupling
- (February 5, 1999) from Dr. and Mrs. B.J. Reilly;
- (undated) from Mr. and Mrs. Sterrett;
- (February 5, 1999) from Pam and Greig Holliday;
- (undated) from Brian Bates
- (February 5, 1999) from Laila Rintamaki
The following persons appeared before the Urban Environment and Development Committee in connection with the
foregoing matter:
- Ken Bott;
- Cheri Aitken;
- Kathy Parsons;
- Ms. Rima Sterrett;
- Councillor Prue; and
- Councillor Ootes.
Respectfully submitted,
JOE PANTALONE
Chair
Toronto, February 8, 1999
(Report No. 4 of The Urban Environment and Development Committee, including an addition thereto, was adopted, as
amended, by City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999.)
