Transportation and Transit Committee/

Comité de transports et des services de transport en commun

Minutes 15/Proces-verbal 15

Wednesday, 7 November 2001, 9:30 a.m.

le mercredi 7 novembre 2001, 9 h 30

Andrew S. Haydon Hall, 110 Laurier Avenue West

Salle Andrew S. Haydon, avenue Laurier ouest

Present / Présents: Councillors / Conseillers M. Meilleur (Chair / Présidente), C. Doucet (Vice-Chair / Vice-président), E. Arnold, R. Bloess, A. Cullen, J. Harder, P. Hume, J. Legendre, P. McNeely

Declarations of Interest

DÉCLARATIONS D’INTÉRÊT

No declarations of interest were filed.

Confirmation of Minutes

Ratification des procÈs-verbaux

Minutes 14 of the Transportation and Transit Committee meeting of 17 October 2001 were confirmed.

During the consent agenda, a brief discussion arose on whether Item 4 could be moved ahead of Item 2 because the staff presentation was only anticipated to take 5 minutes. It was agreed, by the following vote, to consider that matter prior to Item 2:

YEAS (5): R. Bloess, J. Harder, J. Legendre, P. McNeely, M. Meilleur

NAYS (3): A. Cullen, E. Arnold, C. Doucet

The Minutes, however, reflect the order of Items as they appeared on the agenda.

PRESENTATION

PRÉSENTATION

1. PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE – PROFESSOR BARRY WELLAR – WALKING SECURITY INDEX

PRÉSENTATION AU COMITÉ - PROFESSEUR BARRY WELLAR – INDICE DE SÉCURITÉ DES PIÉTONS

ACS2001-CCS-TTC-0011

Mike Flainek, Director, Traffic and Parking Operations indicated that the Walking Security Index (WSI) was first approved by the former RMOC in 1996. The original work was intended to contribute to the understanding of the pedestrian perspective on the level of security, which was defined as comfort, convenience and safety. The project was based on an analysis of intersection design under different road networks and different traffic conditions in the Ottawa-Carleton area. He introduced the author of the WSI and its various components, Professor Barry Wellar of the University of Ottawa, who provided a detailed overview of the Basic Walking Security Index, the Quality of Intersection Conditions Index and the Driver Behaviour Index. A copy of the Professor’s PowerPoint presentation has been included as an annex to these Minutes.

Councillor Legendre asked where this matter ‘fits’ in the department and was advised by the Director that staff are currently looking at how to incorporate the indices into operational reviews, the Safety Improvement Program, et cetera. Staff have reviewed the documents supplied to date and will consult with Professor Wellar on the data already collected and how that data can be supplemented and made operational. He confirmed there is a need to determine how specifically to apply these indices to the city’s existing programs.

Councillor Legendre referred to the Red Light Camera Pilot Project and stated that one of the conditions the province placed on this pilot was that the city would compare the use of cameras alone, with more active police enforcement and he inquired whether the WSI can be incorporated into that process. The Director advised the department will be bringing forward a new program, which involves the police, and public health called ‘Road Safety’ and suggested that the WSI could perhaps be incorporated into that work plan.

The councillor questioned the validity of warrants, which have to do with vehicle and pedestrian counts. He indicated that when the desire is coming from pedestrians, he believed the system was faulty because if the person wants to cross at a particular unsignalized location, they would likely stay away from that location and therefore the actual warrant or need for lights would produce a false reading. Professor Wellar advised the councillor that they looked at warrants in the WSI design phase and found they favoured vehicles over pedestrians, and did not take into account the age or mobility of pedestrians.

Councillor Doucet indicated there have been several fatalities in his ward involving pedestrians and was uneasy how the city balances off the safety of pedestrians and the need to move cars through the community. He questioned how staff sees this study coming into work and balance the easy method of measuring the ethicality of roads with cars with the need to create a safe pedestrian environment. Mr. Flainek responded by stating staff will start looking at the way they typically undertake an engineering analysis, hopefully differently. He added that this is a start at some ways of reviewing some pedestrian attributes in a different light and staff is committed to looking at this and seeing how they can actually incorporate this into the way they essentially do business in the future.

Councillor Arnold indicated she would like to see the WSI applied as soon as possible and questioned if this information had been sent to the Mobility Issues Advisory Committee. When staff agreed this is something that could be forwarded to that body, the councillor indicated an interest in their feedback as well as that of staff, on how this information can be applied, in particular to the design of new intersections, the retrofit of existing intersections, the maintenance of intersections, especially in the winter, and in enforcement.

Charles Matthews, Disabled and Proud believed the WSI involves the disabled community and he indicated a desire to see more studies done with respect to intersection safety, especially the additional time it takes for a disabled person to cross a street. The intersection of King Edward and Rideau Street was cited as an intersection of particular concern because of the length of time required to cross the street. He suggested that a disability factor should be included in studies conducted on pedestrian safety at intersections.

Moved by J. Legendre

That staff prepare a report on the pre-test phase of the Intersection Volume Design Index, Quality of Intersection Condition Index and the Driver Behaviour Index by March 2002, with a view to making the city’s intersections safer, more comfortable and more convenient through regular use of these objective measures.

CARRIED

Moved by J. Legendre

That staff review the earlier Design report on the Basic Walking Security Index with respect to the system of warrants for intersection signalization and report back to the Committee.

CARRIED

That the Transportation and Transit Committee receive this presentation for information.

RECEIVED

TRANSPORTATION, UTILITIES AND PUBLIC WORKS

TRANSPORTS, SERVICES ET TRAVAUX PUBLICS

TRANSIT SERVICES

SERVICE DU TRANSPORT EN COMMUN

2. PARA TRANSIT SERVICES – DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

SERVICES DE TRANSPORT EN COMMUN ADAPTÉ – STRATÉGIES DE GESTION DE LA DEMANDE

ACS2001-TUP-TRN-0017

The committee received the following submissions:

a. St. Vincent Family Council Hospital, Family Council submission dated 28 Sep 01

b. J. Mazurek e-mail submission dated 6 Nov 01

c. SCO Health Service letter dated 2 Nov 01

d. Ottawa-Carleton Association for Persons with Developmental Disabilities letter dated 5 Nov 01

Staff introduced Steve Wilkes and Paul Sidle from the IBI Group.

Helen Gault, Manager, Transit, Schedule and Service Development advised that the consultation over the last few months has been very lively and well attended, with broad participation and many insights into the issues. The feedback provided was helpful and will result in improvements in accessibility of the regular transit system as well as the Para Transpo client interface. She stated that some serious concern arose because of a misconception that people in wheelchairs and on scooters would be forced onto regular transit and denied Para Transpo and this was never the intention. The use of low-floor buses provides an additional choice for those who wish to use them for some trips. These buses also make travelling by bus easier for seniors who have difficulty with stairs and their feedback has been positive.

Pat Larkin, Program Manager, Para Transpo, gave a brief overview of the report and the recommendations before committee.

In response to a question posed by Councillor Cullen, Mr. Larkin confirmed that in time for the 2002 budget process, a report will be brought forward, which will address the growth requirements for Para Transpo.

The committee received the following public delegations:

Carol Jarvis, Good Companions Seniors Centre stated that she also represents 17 senior day care providers throughout the city who provide daily therapeutic programs to isolated seniors and much needed support to care givers. She made the following comments:

- the older adult volunteers at the Centre require assisted transportation to remain totally involved in their community and seniors are using Para Transpo for medical appointments, social activities and volunteer involvement;

- the idea of an integrated system, although ideal, may be questionable because winter weather prevents access to bus stops and pathways and mounds of snow and ice are enough to deter seniors and the disabled from travelling by regular transit; also, she wondered whether OC Transpo could provide a safe environment for their walkers, wheelchairs, canes and the needed priority seating; OC Transpo operators do not have the time or the training to give the added support to older adults requiring that assistance because their main focus is to drive the bus;

- the suggestion for an optional taxi service raises some concern because many seniors require door to door service and drivers should have the desire and the ability to assist seniors with their walkers et cetera and she doubted whether Ottawa taxis have accessible vehicles in their fleet;

- many seniors who attend the Centre are below the poverty level and would find it difficult to pay anything extra for a service;

- access to the community is crucial to the health and well-being of the individual, regardless of the destination;

- suggested an enhancement of the present system, including improvements to the booking and cancellation system to co-ordinate trips.

In conclusion, Ms. Jarvis stated that restricting access to transportation simply compounds the limiting effects of the disabled and emphasized the need for OC Transpo to work closely with the disabled community to ensure they are given equal access to the services and activities the city has to offer.

Barbara Lajeunesse, Chair, Seniors Advisory Committee referred to their recommendation to reject the restricted use of Para Transpo (contained in the staff report) because seniors need to depend on Para Transpo for many other types of trips, including social, recreational and others. She was encouraged therefore, that staff are recommending that a consultation take place on this issue, and asked that it include representatives of Day Centre Providers and the Ottawa Community Support Coalition. She believed such representation would bring a great deal of expertise to that consultation. With respect to the second part of their Motion, that sufficient resources be provided to Para Transpo to meet the needs of the clients, she indicated that the rural communities do not currently enjoy this service, and that small community organizations provide volunteer transportation. Given that they are now residents of Ottawa, she believed that some planning must take place very quickly before they feel they are not being adequately represented by certain services. The increasing number of seniors in the community begs the needs for additional resources to meet these changing demographics.

Steve St. Denis believed the consultants did an excellent job addressing the issue of eligibility and certification. However, a more critical component is making conventional transit more attractive to mobility-impaired customers so they will voluntarily make the transition. He stated that what is required are minimum standards for quality of service and safety and he did not believe this has been adequately addressed in the report. With respect to quality of service, he noted the emphasis has been on secondary routes and of the few base accessible routes that do exist, some of them have gaps in service anywhere from 1.15 hours to 2.50 hours. This is totally unacceptable and users of regular transit would most certainly not use the system if such a deplorable level of service was offered. Mr. St. Denis emphasized the importance of tying down wheelchairs on conventional transit, noting that if disabled people feel their safety is being compromised, they simply won’t use regular buses. In closing, he asked that a committee member consider moving a Motion directing staff to take whatever action is necessary to ensure wheelchairs are properly secured. A copy of his written comments is held on file.

In response to his concerns about safety, Gord Diamond, Director of Transit Services indicated that as part of the consultation held last month, there was a balance of concerns raised from people using walkers and people in wheelchairs about tie-downs and securing mechanisms and others did not want such restrictions. The primary issue was boarding and disembarking and he confirmed a working group is investigating these concerns and some of their suggestions will be implemented.

Laura Hayter complimented OC Transpo on the improvements she has seen made to the service, but submitted the following questions:

1. How will the proposed changes affect OC Transpo and Para Transpo operators and are their suggestions to improve the current system being considered?

2. What are the projected costs of all-barrier removal, i.e., during the winter months, a lot of bus stops on fixed routes are not accessible for able-bodied people, and so what will the costs be for ensuring they are accessible for the physically disabled?

3. If people are going to be moved to the fixed route system, consideration must be given to those who have limited mobility; some people with disabilities have difficulty expressing themselves verbally and have neither the stability or the ability to flag down a bus.

Mr. Diamond agreed to follow-up with the delegation to address the questions raised.

Donna Lynn Ahee, Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 279 indicated that disabled persons are integral members of society and are fully deserving of the basic human right to participate in the community. Such participation requires a transportation system that will allow them access to all opportunities enjoyed by able-bodied people. She remarked, however, that the Para Transpo system is straining to live up to that promise and the current inadequacies of the system must be resolved and further investments need to be made in order to provide better service to the disabled. She made the following comments:

- the ATU is concerned about the plan to divert 50% of Para Transpo service to taxis because of issues surrounding safety, security, accountability, availability, reliability and cost;

- the ATU are supportive in general of eligibility for Para Transpo being based on functional limitation rather than today’s physical limitation because it would be a better parameter to use; however, they question how ‘functional’ will be defined and are concerned it may preclude people who need the service from receiving it and people with cognitive disabilities will not necessarily be eligible if it is deemed they use the service simply as an attendant service;

- while low-floor buses have been successful in many aspects, there is still a way to go to achieve the desired outcome;

- with respect to transportation needs, there has to be an understanding that there are often situations whereby a person may be able to use the conventional system but they may not be able to transfer;

- the ATU is very concerned about Recommendation 2 because such a weighting evaluation system has not yet been developed;

- the ATU is also concerned about users having to go through a re-certification process and the costs associated with that;

- with respect to the subscription trip rules, the ATU are concerned this will revert back to identifying and prioritizing trips by purpose and by disability and the ATU feel that is discriminatory and does not recognize the importance of different trips for disabled people.

In response to the delegation’s concerns about weighted evaluation system, Councillor Cullen inquired whether that system will be brought to committee before it is implemented. The Director advised that staff will be bringing it to the Accessibility Advisory Committee and then to this committee if necessary.

Pat McGrath, Equity Representative, Person’s with Disabilities, PSAC felt she would be discriminated against if she has to prove her disability even though her doctor has provided a form proving that she requires the use of Para Transpo. She did not like the fact that Recommendation 3 qualifies the exceptions to those who have to reapply, stating it should not be limited to those exceptions – either everyone has to reapply or no one has to. Ms. McGrath did not appreciate having to going through an appeal panel if she is disqualified from applying for Para Transpo, stating that having to qualify her disabilities is degrading and embarrassing. With respect to trip bookings, she noted it has been considerably limited and does not allow for disabled people to have a social life. While the recommendations encourage the disabled community to use conventional transit, and while this may be acceptable to some, in her situation, she has to transfer to an STO bus in Hull, whose system does not have low-floor buses. This particular aspect should be addressed and she asked committee to consider that people who may be able to use regular transit, may not be limited to the confines of this city. In closing, Ms. McGrath felt the biggest problem is that disabled people are being pro-rated and judged; cognitive disabilities do not qualify for the service, which is discriminatory because a cognitive disability may preclude her from using Para Transpo, but it also precludes her from using regular transit because she does not have attendant care.

Councillor Cullen advised the delegation that staff is recommending a move to ‘functional’ limitation and that will include those with cognitive impairments with the limitation being that it is not an attendant service. When asked to further clarify that understanding, Mr. Larkin advised that if the requirement of the individual is to have a person to provide the direction to them, then they would require an attendant and as such, they can use the regular transit system. If the requirement is public transit/shared ride, then Para Transpo would have a point system that would take everything into account and a cognitive disability would be something that would be taken into account and persons with mild cognitive disabilities would potentially qualify for service. Dr. Gault added that if an individual has a cognitive disability to the point where they need an attendant and they are physically mobile, then it is expected that they can travel with their attendant on regular transit.

Mr. Wilkes explained that in the shared ride mode for Para Transpo, eligibility is driven by the inability to get on fixed route transit and not the attendant care service. A person therefore, with a mild cognitive disability, when incorporated with the travel-training program, may be eligible for Para Transpo for a period of time until they are able to use conventional transit independently. If the reason they cannot use conventional transit relates to severe disorientation, then it is suggested that Para Transpo is not an appropriate mode of public transit for that individual.

Charles Matthews, Disabled and Proud stated that this is affecting many people in some unfair ways. As an example, he stated Recommendation 3 requires all existing Para Transpo customers to renew their application with the exception of wheelchair or scooter users; this is discriminatory and there are a lot of people with permanent disabilities. Some of their members have muscular dystrophy, which is a degenerative disease that disables an individual over time, and he saw no reason for people with this illness to have to requalify. With regards to the suggestion to re-register people over three years, he wondered at what point a person will be told they are permanently disabled and not have to keep reapplying every three years. If that is the case, he was concerned about the cost involved and noted how many people cannot afford this additional cost. Mr. Matthews emphasized the importance of investigating the ability to tie wheelchairs in place on regular transit, because users do not feel safe and is the reason many won’t use conventional transit. With respect to regular and subscription bookings, he commended the consultant for recommending the addition of attending church or volunteer work, but noted other trips such as recreation and shopping are important because some users rely totally on getting their groceries with regular subscription bookings.

Tom Charlebois, Amalgamated Transit Union, Para Transpo stated the ATU supports the initiatives to date to integrate and align Para Transpo and regular transit for optional means of transportation for the disabled and all methods to achieve this goal, including travel training. He noted that OC Transpo does not prioritize regular transit based on whether or not a person is going to work, school or the doctor and therefore dividing the disabled community is what this report does because it prioritizes need, and customers have to reapply for a service they have already met.

Denyse Baizana voiced the concerns she had about using regular transit because of not being able to have her wheelchair secured on the bus. She was aware of legislation that stipulates that if there are rear-facing persons in wheelchairs on fixed route transit, it is not necessary to have a tie-down system. However, this does not take into consideration those persons, such as herself, whose wheelchairs cannot be faced towards the back of the bus. She made two proposals to the final decision of the IBI Group:

1. In order to see an improvement to the disabled community’s transportation needs, she suggested a survey be conducted on behalf of the consumers at no cost; that the Laidlaw drivers have approval to go over to OC Transpo Para Division and get a staff person to ride their bus with their assigned daily schedule.

2. That a Para Transpo staff experience first hand how effective the system is by putting themselves in a manual wheelchair and instructed to get their way to and from work.

Bernard Ullyett, SCOH-Family Council Rep., St. Vincent Hospital referred to the discriminatory rules with respect to the IBI Group’s recommendation for subscription trip process, i.e., restricted to work, education and medically related trips. In this regard, the Council supports the recommendation of the Seniors Advisory Committee contained in the staff report. In particular, social interaction, such as restaurant outings and family visits, appears to be under some restriction and the Council is seeking clarification about that. He indicated that for the past six years and virtually every week with minimal cancellation, they have subscribed to weekly bookings for family gatherings every Sunday and to see this taken away would be disastrous for the therapeutic effect it gives the patient. He believed the activities that are allowed by these routine bookings relieve the boredom of hospital living. In closing, Mr. Ullyett explained that he wanted to see better clarification of the rules and that these be included in the final process of recommendations.

Carolyn Horricks, “Club 2000” advised that their organization is a social club for physically challenged adults. She indicated the majority of their members travel to the club by Para Transpo and so the requirement to have regular bookings for social and recreational outings is a very significant issue because it is a quality of life and mental health issue. They believe there will be some challenges with respect to partnering Para Transpo with conventional transit, i.e. sometimes the ramps on low-floor buses do not always work; some bus shelters have a step up into them thereby preventing wheelchair access; disabled people who choose to use regular transit still have to rely on low-floor buses coming along, whereas able-bodied individuals can take any bus. She also raised a serious concern about the inability to secure people in wheelchairs on fixed route transit and the safety concerns this will cause to that person and other passengers if the bus were to stop suddenly. Para Transpo also offers peace of mind for those members travelling at night because it is door-to-door service. She saw the matter of eligibility and certification as an issue of dignity and she did not want to see another level of paid administration deciding how they are going to classify and sort out the physically challenged citizens, i.e., who is functional and those with questionable eligibility. A copy of her written comments are held on file.

John Mazurek believed Para Transpo and OC Transpo should be amalgamated so everyone can enjoy equal access to the entire system. He further suggested the Para Transpo service should be brought in-house rather than contracting out to taxi service, which have proven to be inefficient in other cities.

Moved by A. Cullen

That Recommendation 7 be amended to include representation from the Senior Day Care Providers Association and the Ottawa Community Support Coalition on the task force.

CARRIED

Moved by A. Cullen

That staff report to the Transportation and Transit Committee on the safety issues related to wheelchair security on OC Transpo low-floor buses.

CARRIED

In response to a question raised by Councillor Legendre, staff confirmed that travel training will be partnered with community-based organizations for both Anglophones and Francophones.

Councillor Cullen proposed the following Motion that would effectively replace Recommendation 3:

That current registered users of Para Transpo be exempted from the new re-registration process.

With respect to Recommendation 3, which states that existing Para Transpo customers will be required to renew their application with the exception of wheelchair and scooter users, the councillor understood this would involve approximately 7000 people who originally came onto the system by a medical practitioner confirming they had physical limitations that did not permit them to use regular transit. In light of the comments heard today, he believed that forcing these people to re-register will be an onerous process and in effect, questions the integrity of those physicians who signed their forms originally. And, while he recognized that moving to a functional limitation is a worthwhile objective, he believed more time would be saved by simply ‘grand fathering’ those individuals already on the system. Further, two-thirds of Para Transpo customers are seniors and he did not believe it was worth the time and effort to have a small number of people go through this process.

With respect to the issue of ‘grand fathering’, Mr. Wilkes indicated there are several reasons they suggest that registrants complete Part A of the application: it would not be an onerous task and they would not be requested to have a medical practitioner or health care professional fill out Part B of the application. It will provide Para Transpo to have an adequate client data base with respect to travel needs and constraints of the registrant population and will assist in the planning of services and ensuring those services are delivered that will best meet the functional limitations of their clients. He noted that an estimated 5-7% of the existing registrants may not be eligible under the proposed guidelines, so there is the potential to reduce the registration population by approximately 700 individuals.

Some councillors, notably Councillors Bloess and Legendre did not support the Motion to grandfather existing users. They stated that the disabled community have come forward and said there are people abusing the service, effectively using up a valuable resource that would be better applied to those in greater need. Grand fathering existing users will only serve to add to this continued abuse.

Moved by A. Cullen

That current registered users of Para Transpo be exempted from the new re-registration process.

LOST

YEAS (1): A. Cullen

NAYS (7): R. Bloess, J. Harder, J. Legendre, E. Arnold, C. Doucet, P. Hume,

M. Meilleur

Councillor Cullen proposed the following Motion to replace Recommendation 4:

That the costs of registration, i.e., doctor’s certificate, be waived for any applicant on Ontario Disability Support Plan (ODSP) or Guaranteed Annual Income Supplement.

In speaking to his Motion, he indicated that generally, there is a fee charged by most physicians to provide a form proving the applicant cannot travel by conventional transit; however, two-thirds of the clients are seniors and the other third are people, for the most part, who are on ODSP. For them to have to pay $35 or more for that form, it is a financial burden and he suggested, therefore, that where that charge is applied, that clients be reimbursed by the city.

Rose Leclair, General Manager, Transportation, Utilities and Public Works advised that if the average cost of a form is $35-50 and if there are 1000 potential customers, the city would have to absorb approximately $50,000. She indicated there is no budget within the Department to provide for that cost, adding that these type of support functions are generally managed through the People Services Department.

In response to the suggestion that the Motion be raised by the councillor at the People Services Committee, Councillor Cullen indicated there is no program in place in that Department to accommodate this suggestion and emphasized it is a Para Transpo initiative and should rightly remain with this committee.

Moved by A. Cullen

That the costs of registration, i.e., doctor’s certificate, be waived for any applicant on Ontario Disability Support Plan or Guaranteed Annual Income Supplement.

LOST

YEAS (4): J. Harder, A. Cullen, C. Doucet, M. Meilleur

NAYS (4): R. Bloess, J. Legendre, E. Arnold, P. Hume

Moved by A. Cullen

That committee at its next meeting reconsider the preceding Motion.

CARRIED *

YEAS (3): J. Harder, A. Cullen, C. Doucet

NAYS (5): R. Bloess, J. Legendre, E. Arnold, P. Hume, M. Meilleur

Section 61(1) of the Council Procedure By-law provides for acceptance of the Motion if supported by one-third of committee members present and voting.

The Committee Chair indicated a Legal opinion would be requested with respect to determining whether or not the entire issue will again be before committee at the next meeting. Such opinion was later provided on 9 November 2001 indicating that “acceptance of the notice of motion of reconsideration has the effect of retaining the report at the committee level until such time as the reconsideration is dealt with.”

That the Transportation and Transit Committee recommend Council approve the following changes to the way transportation is provided to persons with disabilities:

Eligibility and Certification

1. Eligibility for Para Transpo service be based on functional limitation, rather than today’s physical limitation;

2. Applicants eligibility be assessed using a weighted evaluation system;

3. All existing Para-Transpo customers will be required to renew their application with the exception of wheelchair or scooter users;

4. That re-registration for existing customers be implemented in a 3 year period;

5. An appeal panel, to include a staff representative, two members from the disability community and a health care professional be established to consider appeals for the certification process. Their decision will be final;

Para Mobility Management Services

6. Para Transpo continue to offer charter services on a cost-recovery or cost-sharing basis, to organizations that require a higher level of transportation for their clients than Para Transpo provides;

Subscription Trip Rules

7. A task force which will include staff and existing Para Transpo customers be formed to review the current subscription trip rules and to develop recommendations on how to continue providing as much transportation as possible through the subscription trip process, while minimizing customer cancellations and maintaining an appropriate level of service for casual bookings;

Fare Policy

8. The Department implement a six-month pilot project starting in the spring of 2002 in which up to 500 Para Transpo customers would receive free service on OC Transpo’s regular transit service;

Travel Training

9. The Department explore opportunities to partner with one or more community based organizations in the development and the administration of a travel-training program for Ottawa’s disabled community and report to the Transportation and Transit Committee on the travel training program and related costs in the spring of 2002.

CARRIED as amended

INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

SERVICES ET TRAVAUX PUBLICS

3. WAIVER TO THE PRIVATE APPROACH BY-LAW 170-73 875 CARLING AVENUE

DÉROGATION AU RÈGLEMENT MUNICIPAL 170-73 SUR LES VOIES D’ACCÈS PRIVÉES – 875, AVENUE CARLING

ACS2001-TUP-INF-0024

That the Transportation and Transit Committee recommend Council approve the waiver of Section 13(a)(iv) of the Private Approach By-law to permit a second two-way private approach.

CARRIED

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

SERVICES D’AMÉNAGEMENT

PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY

POLITIQUES D’URBANISME, D’ENVIRONNEMENT ET D’INFRASTRUCTURE

4. INNES ROAD WIDENING (417 TO BLAIR; ORLÉANS BOULEVARD TO TRIM ROAD) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY

ÉLARGISSEMENT DU CHEMIN INNES (DE LA 417 AU CHEMIN BLAIR; DU BOUL. ORLÉANS AU CHEMIN TRIM) ÉTUDE D’ÉVALUATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE

ACS2001-DEV-POL-0035

Vivi Chi, Manager of Transportation Infrastructure introduced Ron Jack of Delcan, who presented an overview of the report before committee.

Councillor Cullen recognized that this project will increase capacity to facilitate cars and questioned whether or not the option of a bus-only lane was ever considered. Mr. Jack advised that such an option was not considered at this stage of the process, noting there is a requirement in the Official Plan for the need to widen the road to accommodate commuter demands. While bus-only lanes could be accommodated within the proposed widening, the actual use of the lanes is an operational issue and the Environmental Assessment (EA) process simply shows how the road should be widened.

Ned Lathrop, General Manager, Development Services advised committee that the Eastern Cumberland Transitway, which is south of Innes Road, is intended to carry the commuter bus system. He suggested that if there were to be transit ridership within the Innes Road right-of-way, they would be co-existing within the traffic environment that is presently projected. He indicated that although the EA process for the Cumberland transit has been completed, the completion for that project not yet been scheduled.

Councillor Cullen expressed concern that the widening of Innes Road is an immediate capital project, but which does not contemplate transit. Given that the Cumberland transitway will be prioritized against other transitway extensions and will not be constructed for many years, he questioned how bus-only lanes could be considered in this project. Mr. Lathrop indicated that if an operational choice is made, i.e., that two lanes are dedicated for travel and the other two for buses, that is not necessarily a design and construction concern. The councillor differed in this opinion, however, because putting in bus-only lanes changes turning lanes, cycling lanes, et cetera and therefore does have an impact on design.

Mr. Jack advised that the transportation needs of the east urban community have been addressed in previous studies, i.e., the Official Plan and the Transportation Master Plan, which identified the combination of transit and road travel demand management strategies to address those needs. In particular, Innes Road was identified and approved at those studies, as being widened to four lanes to address the capacity, operational and safety issues along the corridor and the direction given to Delcan was to build upon those previous reports and Council decisions.

Councillor Cullen proposed the following:

That this report be referred back to staff to include as part of the Innes Road Widening Environmental Assessment Study consideration of bus-only lanes.

While he could appreciate the councillor’s interest in providing the best possible service to residents in Orléans, Councillor Bloess indicated that the widening of Innes Road is the best opportunity for commuters because it would dramatically improve the movement of buses along this road. He noted that if the widening of Innes Road between Blair Road and Highway 417 had gone ahead as planned many years ago, Routes 28, 125 and 128, which currently use Innes, would not get caught up in the congestion that currently occurs.

Chair Meilleur inquired if it was possible to have one lane on Innes Road dedicated to transit during peak periods and was advised by Mr. Jack that dedicating one lane for transit would reduce the commuter travel lane at the time when it is needed most. Mr. Lathrop interjected that a dedicated lane was possible, but the restriction would be that the volumes would go back to what the two lane volumes are now so there would be no improvements to commuters travelling by car. He reminded councillors that when the eastern community was designed, it was done so with all of these considerations in mind and is the reason the transitway was split from the roadway cross section because it would be more efficient on its own corridor. Also, there is currently a re-evaluation of the transit system in terms of priority and the basis upon which staff bring it forward to committee and Council as a rethinking of how the east, south and west urban communities should be handled. He stated there would always be a background transportation network, but more emphasis will be placed on transit traffic.

Councillor McNeely supported the concerns raised by Councillor Bloess about buses getting caught in traffic on Innes Road and suggested that now is not the time to start talking about creating bus-only lanes. He reiterated that the widening of Innes Road is included in the Official Plan and the Transportation Master Plan and has been well thought out with a lot of community input. He believed the city should proceed with this much-needed project.

When asked what the impact would be on this project if the Motion were approved, Mr. Jack advised it would affect the construction costs and the whole EA would have to be reopened, including the public consultation process. This could take up to 18 months.

The committee received the following public delegation:

Donna Lynn Ahee, OC Transpo Operator agreed that Innes Road is a problem for the buses that travel on it, and suggested a short-term solution would be to widen the road. However, she believed the suggestion of a dedicated bus lane would address the long-term problem, especially when one bus lane carries the equivalent of 3 to 4 lanes of vehicular traffic during peak periods. She explained that simply widening the road will address the problems caused by traffic congestion for now, but in five years, the roadway would be at capacity again. Further, she believed that adding another vehicular lane may reduce congestion in one area, but would generate more traffic, hence more congestion, in other areas. Ms. Ahee suggested that if the city wants to make public transit a priority, it has to invest in it, and perhaps look at slowing down the investments that are made towards increasing automobile use.

In considering his Motion, Councillor Cullen indicated this road is already at capacity and is proposed to be widened in advance of the residential development scheduled to come on stream by 2006. The city’s transportation hierarchy, however, has to look at transit first and while he understood the need to widen the road, he suggested it should not occur without first looking at including transit as part of the project. He maintained there should be an ability to reduce pressure on capacity by including a transit component. Given that there is no money currently in the budget for this project, it is unlikely that any work will be done until 2003. Therefore, if financing and time are not impediments to the project, he suggested considering something that will offer commuters a full range of alternatives of travel.

Councillor McNeely stated that Innes Road was never intended to be widened to six lanes, but suggested that that is what would be necessary in order to accommodate a dedicated bus lane. He further believed such a widening would require extensive expropriation, thereby increasing the cost of the project. He maintained that while the Cumberland transitway will come on stream in the future, the proposed widening is needed now and will greatly improve travel for several years.

Councillor Doucet indicated he would support the Motion with the addition of the following amendment:

And the reduction in car commuters be calculated based on a bus lane express service.

He opined that this project is a perfect example of why public transit does not work and agreed with the comment made by the delegation that in order to increase ridership on transit, the city has to invest in it. He believed that the best way to free up roads is to get people on buses and trains and stated that the city is not going to be the kind of community it wants to be, by building just for the private automobile.

Councillor Kreling, Orléans Ward stated that this road widening is not something that has come about quickly and suggested that those committee members who are not satisfied with the terms of reference for the consultants, should have made their comments known several years ago when the process for this project first commenced. He referred to the success of the dedicated bus lane on Regional Road 174 and the fact that residents of the Orléans community have the highest modal split of bus usage of any other community; this is all part of the community’s commitment to be a part of a sustainable city, while at the same time, living in a sustainable community. He indicated that residents want to have the ability to live and work in the same area, but in Orléans that is not an option. He stated that widening Innes Road is not just to provide a commuter route to the downtown. It will provide an opportunity for access to properties along that road, thereby opening them up for development and contributing to a sustainable community. He added that Innes Road is nothing more than a rural cross-section which needs to be brought into current standards for economic sustainability, for the sustainability of the community and for the benefit of residents. He strongly encouraged committee to approve the staff recommendations and not to hold up the whole project to consider the addition of a dedicated bus lane.

Councillor Legendre suggested that when roads become congested in future, part of the solution should be to dedicate part of the road for buses only during peak hours, which does not require having to change the road or add width to accommodate additional lanes. He referred to the poorly enforced bus-only lanes (during peak periods) on Montreal Road as an example, and suggested there will be a need in future for stricter enforcement to ensure the system operates better and encourages more use of transit.

In his closing statement Councillor Cullen remarked that his Motion is not intended to stop the widening of Innes Road, but to ensure that a transit component is included. Sending the report back so that consideration of bus-only lanes is done, does not presuppose a further widening, but simply a direction to look at the concept and what needs to be done to meet the transportation needs of the Orléans community within that context. He opined there is time to incorporate this into the process, as he believed it should have been included when the process began two years ago because the EA process is obliged to look at alternatives. Summarily, if the project is accepted as presented, it will only deal with accommodating cars which is not sustainable and is not in keeping with the Official Plan.

Moved by C. Doucet

That the Motion be amended to include: “and the reduction in car commuters be calculated based on a bus lane express service.

LOST

YEAS (3): A. Cullen, J. Legendre, C. Doucet

NAYS (6): R. Bloess, J. Harder, E. Arnold, P. Hume, P. McNeely, M. Meilleur

Moved by A. Cullen

That this report be referred back to staff to include as part of the Innes Road Widening Environmental Assessment Study consideration of bus-only lanes.

LOST

YEAS (2): A. Cullen, C. Doucet

NAYS (7): R. Bloess, J. Harder, J. Legendre, E. Arnold, P. Hume, P. McNeely,

M. Meilleur

That the Transportation and Transit Committee recommend Council approve:

1. Modifications to Innes Road from Highway 417 east to Blair Road including the provision of sidewalks, bicycle lanes, noise attenuation, and an additional traffic lane in each direction.

2. Upgrading of Innes Road from Orléans Boulevard east to Trim Road from a two-lane road to a four-lane divided urban arterial including the provision of sidewalks, bicycle lanes, noise attenuation, landscaping, lighting, and traffic control.

3. The preparation and filing of an Environmental Study Report (ESR) for the above-noted modifications to Innes Road.

4. The inclusion of the identified unequal widening requirements for the section of Innes Road east of Orléans Boulevard in the appropriate schedule(s) of the new City of Ottawa Official Plan.

CARRIED

Councillors A. Cullen and C. Doucet dissented

INQUIRIES

DEMANDES DES RENSEIGNMENTS

1. Notice of Motion – 94 James Street

Councillor Arnold proposed that the following be considered by the committee at its next meeting:

Whereas Section 4 of the former City of Ottawa Encroachment By-law 167-73, as amended, provides that, “no person shall construct, erect or alter any encroachment without first obtaining a permit to do so, but in no circumstance shall an encroachment permit be granted for a hedge, fence or wall”;

And Whereas Section 6 of the By-law 167-73, as amended, provides that, “no person shall hereafter erect any permanent surface encroachment;

And Whereas the property owner of 94 James Street wishes to retain the current chain link fence located within the James Street road allowance;

Therefore Be It Resolved that Sections 4 and 6 of the By-law 167-73, as amended, be waived to permit the existing chain link fence to remain within the James Street road allowance, subject to the following conditions.

1. That the property owner agrees to maintain this fence, at no cost to the Corporation.

2. That the height of material used for this existing fence be retained and no deviations are permitted without the written permission of the General Manager of Transportation, Utilities and Public Works or her delegate.

3. That the property owner agrees that this fence is a temporary encroachment subject to removal and reinstatement of the Corporation’s road allowance within 30 days receipt of a written notice to do so.

4. That the property owner agrees to provide a 10 feet sight triangle at this fence and the adjacent properties to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Transportation, Utilities and Public Works or her delegate.

5. That the owner acknowledges and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the Corporation for all loss, damages, costs and expenses of every nature and kind whatsoever arising from or in consequence of the fence within the James Street road allowance, whether such loss, damages, costs or expenses are incurred by reason of negligence or without negligence on the part of, and whether such loss, damages, costs or expenses are sustained by the Corporation or the owner or their several and respective employees, workmen, servants and agents, or any other person or persons, corporation or corporations whatsoever.

6. That the owner acknowledges and agrees to be responsible and liable for any damage caused to this fence within the James Street road allowance howsoever may be caused by the Corporation’s maintenance operations.

2. Difficulty Meeting OC Transpo Service

Councillor Legendre referred to a memo from TUPW, which talked about the difficulty of meeting service. He questioned whether the public is aware of those circumstances and was advised by staff that members of the public were not notified, but that staff would look into the situation.

3. Litter/Recycling Bins RFP

Councillor Legendre referred to a memo from TUPW dated 24 October regarding the request for proposals (RFP) for the city’s litter/recycling bin program. He indicated that all the recommendations approved by Council on 13 June 2001 have been met, with the following exception: That the RFP include the possibility of a one-for-one program involving an equal number of recycling bins with advertising and recycling bins without advertising. The memo explained this was not economically feasible for the proponent.

He noted the city already has this process on its bus-bench advertising process and he wanted clarification from staff as to why this Council decision was not imposed.

The General Manager explained that there was only one respondent to the RFP and is the reason why staff elected to accept the program offered. She confirmed it was not staff’s choice of proponents to provide those bins.

The councillor was concerned that this is a similar situation to one, which occurred at the city prior to amalgamation, whereby the municipality allowed a sole source proponent to supply the bins and as a consequence, it is this organization that establishes the rules. He asked staff to provide a written response to his query, including a proper review of all the circumstances.

4. Timing of Work - Fallowfield/Woodroffe Reconstruction

Councillor Harder explained that the above-noted intersection is a constant problem and asked staff to get back to her regarding the city’s commitment to addressing this issue.

5. Roadside Maintenance Procedures

Councillor Harder recalled seeing a convoy of city vehicles in Bells Corners recently and noted that some of the workers were planting trees while others were emptying litterbins. It appeared to be somewhat wasteful to have a number of different vehicles used to do various jobs, and inquired if there was a procedure in place for roadside maintenance/tree planting.

6. Extension of Transitway

Councillor Harder inquired what the status is of the timing of the extension of the transitway south from the Fallowfield Station to the South Nepean Activity Centre.

7. Cordova and Baseline

Councillor Harder inquired whether or not it was feasible to install stoplights at Cordova and Baseline.

8. Traffic Circles

Councillor Harder inquired whether the city is moving back to the concept of using traffic circles in development.

9. Smoking Huts for OC Transpo Drivers

Councillor Cullen inquired whether it was true there was going to be smoking huts for OC Transpo drivers. Staff confirmed this story was false.

10. Budget 2002

Councillor Doucet stated that it does not appear to make much sense for there to be a budget line for staff associated with streetscaping projects and not have such a line for these projects. He asked if it would be possible to have a line in the 2002 budget process that clearly indicates a capital budget line for streetscaping projects?

11. Queensway Damage Causing House Foundations to Crack

Councillor Doucet indicated that repair work currently being done on the Queensway has caused damage to the foundation at 143 Hawthorne. Ministry of Transportation staff intend to repair the damage in 2002 when the repair work has been completed, but in the meantime, and in order to ensure the damage to the property is properly documented, he asked staff to investigate and document the current condition so that baselines can be established.

12. Need for Sound Barriers along Nicolas Avenue

Councillor Doucet inquired as a consequence of the construction of the new Computer Science building on the University of Ottawa campus, the traffic noises along Nicolas Avenue ricochet towards the community and have had an adverse impact on residents living on the vicinity of Greenfield and Echo Drive.

He asked that staff investigate this situation and report back to committee with a solution that involves sound barrier installation for the residents.

OTHER BUSINESS

VERBAL PRESENTATION - IN CAMERA

Moved by J. Legendre

That the Transportation and Transit Committee approve the suspension of the rules of procedure (Section 82 (3) to consider the addition of an In-Camera agenda item.

CARRIED

Moved by J. Legendre

That this matter be considered by the Transportation and Transit Committee In-Camera pursuant to Section 12(1)(b), personal matters about an identifiable individual, including staff, of the procedure by-law.

CARRIED

Following an in-camera session, the committee moved out of camera and resumed in open session.