REQUEST FOR DECISION
DATE: December 3, 2018 Report No. EPW-18-034
TO: Laurie Hurst, Chief Administrative Officer
FROM: Jeff Miller, Director of Engineering and Public Works
SUBJECT:
Title
Parklands Drive Parking RestrictionEnd
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
That Council does not approve the implementation of Traffic Order 1294 “No Parking” along Parklands Drive, as set out in Staff Report EPW-18-034.
Body
RELEVANT POLICY:
Streets and Traffic Regulation Bylaw, 2017, No. 2898
STRATEGIC RELEVANCE:
Healthy and Liveable Community - Ensure Multi-modal Traffic Strategies
BACKGROUND:
Parklands Drive is one of the two entrance roads into the Parklands neigbourhood. Under the Official Community Plan, this road has been designated a local road, but functions like a residential collector road during rush hours. It is also a bus route.
The property management firm on behalf of Strata Plan VIS2876 (850 Parklands Dr.) has requested that a no parking restriction be implemented along the west side of Parklands Drive from Admirals Road to McAdam Place. This strata contains 86 units. The remainder of the affected area consists of single family units or duplexes (total of 8 properties). See Attachment 1 for location map and proposed Traffic Order.
The management company proposes that the current road cross section that allows parking on both sides of the road segment is a very dangerous situation for vehicles and pedestrians exiting from the on street homes including McAdam Place and the Strata. See Attachment 2 for parking restriction petition.
Engineering has not received any concerns from Public Works (garbage collection), first responders (Ambulance, Fire, Police) or BC Transit about difficulty navigating this road segment in its current configuration.
ISSUES:
1. Rationale for Selected Option
In accordance with Council Policy E&PW-03 Township Guide to Parking Restrictions, the lead resident undertook the canvassing of the residents on the streets. This survey is slightly unusual due to the difference in the number of property owners that front directly onto the street (8) versus the number of property owners that have an entrance to the street, but do not front it (86).
The results of the survey are:
• Number of properties canvassed
o Strata: 86
o Fronting road segment: 8
• Test 1 - 90% of properties canvassed
• Number of properties signed the petition:
o Strata: 78 out of 86 (91%)
o Fronting road segment: 1 (13%)
o Total 79 out of 94 (84%)
• Test 2 - 80% of properties signed the petition
As per the Guide, the petition meets both tests.
The petition submitter has raised the concern that the road is dangerous for vehicles entering and leaving 850 Parklands Drive, for pedestrians leaving 850 Parklands Drive, and for residents leaving McAdam Place.
The cross section was reviewed by Engineering. The following items were noted:
• A total of eight on street parking stalls will be lost if the parking restriction is implemented
• No concerns have been raised by large vehicle operators
• The current cross section is a common cross section for road corridors within the Township and is considered functional for multi-modal movements
• Removal of on street parking will create two travel lanes but for only this road segment, not the rest of the road corridor
• The creation of two travel lanes will primarily benefit vehicle and bicycle traffic with minor benefit to pedestrian traffic
• The current cross section will remain on the remainder of the road segments that compose Parklands Drive
• The current cross section does not include a sidewalk component. This cross section is a common road cross section throughout the Township and is being addressed by the New Sidewalk Program.
Based on the noted items, the staff recommendation is that the road cross section for this road segment not be modified.
If the proposed new parking restriction is implemented it would involve no parking from the intersection of Admirals Road and Parklands Drive to the intersection of Parklands Drive and McAdam Place on the west side of the road. Signage would be installed as per Part IV, Division 1, section 14 (q) of the Streets and Traffic Regulation Bylaw.
2. Organizational Implications
If the Traffic Order is not implemented, Engineering and Community Safety Services Department (Bylaw) anticipate that further conversations will be held with the petition submitter about the decision and concerns the residents have. These activities would not impose any organizational implications.
3. Financial Implications
There are no financial implications if the Traffic Order is not implemented.
4. Sustainability & Environmental Implications
There are no sustainability or environmental implications to the Traffic Order.
5. Communication & Engagement
Engineering will be in contact with the petition submitter and update them on the results of the Council decision.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. That Council does not approve the implementation of Traffic Order 1294 “No Parking” along Parklands Drive, as set out in Staff Report EPW-18-034.
2. That Council does approve the implementation of Traffic Order 1294 “No Parking” along Parklands Drive, as set out in Staff Report EPW-18-034.