Pedestrian Crossing Study

Transcription

1 National Capital Commission Rideau Canal Corridor Pedestrian Crossing Study Queen Elizabeth Drive: Preston St. to Laurier Ave. Colonel By Drive: Hog s Back to Daly Ave.

2 Rideau Canal Corridor Pedestrian Crossing Study: Queen Elizabeth Drive: Preston St. to Laurier Ave. Colonel By Drive: Hog's Back to Daly Ave. June 13, 2011

3

4 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND STUDY DESCRIPTION Goal of Study CONSULTANTS MANDATE DETERMINATION OF CROSSING LOCATIONS TO BE EVALUATED WORKSHOP NO Problem Statement Development DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS DATA COLLECTION Prioritization Data Collected ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF DATA WARRANTS FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSING SIGNALS (PXO): INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: Stop Control: Single Lane Roundabouts: All-Way Stop Control Warrants: MEASURES CONSIDERED MEASURES CONSIDERED - PHYSICAL: MEASURES CONSIDERED TRAFFIC CONTROL: MEASURES CONSIDERED OTHER: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES SITE REVIEW SUMMARIES COLONEL BY DR. AT HARTWELL LOCKS: COLONEL BY AT BRONSON PLACE COLONEL BY AT ECHO DR. RAMP (W OF BANK) COLONEL BY AT ECHO DR. STAIRS COLONEL BY AT CLEGG ST COLONEL BY AT HERRIDGE & HAZEL COLONEL BY AT MAIN ST COLONEL BY AT CONCORD ST bch w:\active\ _rideau canal corridor _ped x-ing study\report\draft report may, 2011\draft report_rev_jun13_2011.doc i

5 Table of Contents 6.9 COLONEL BY AT UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT COMMISSIONERS PARK (MONUMENT) QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT CRESCENT HEIGHTS QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT LAKEVIEW TERRACE QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT QUEEN ELIZABETH PLACE QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT FIFTH AVENUE QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT PATTERSON CREEK CROSSING SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS APPENDICES: Appendix 1: Appendix 2: Appendix 3: Appendix 4: Workshop No.1 report Data Gathered and Analysis Data Evaluation Data Workshop No. 2 report ii bch w:\active\ _rideau canal corridor _ped x-ing study\report\draft report may, 2011\draft report_rev_jun13_2011.doc

6 1.0 Introduction 1.1 BACKGROUND Both Colonel By Drive and Queen Elizabeth Drive are designated National Capital Commission Parkways which parallel the (designated world class heritage site) Rideau Canal. Parkways can be loosely described to have the following characteristics: A system of curvilinear roadways in varying rights-of-way that followed topographic. contours, reduced grades, gentle corners, preserved native vegetation and landscape. Parkways were the first to introduce notion of limited access. NCC Parkways are 2 lanes, low speeds, limited access, no truck or commercial vehicle, continuous, network). Designed to suggest leisure, enjoyment, contemplativeness, and serenity. Scenic routes to enhance experience and enjoyment of visitors. These canal side parkways evolved over the past 100 years and are today heavily used corridors particularly by South Ottawa commuters during peak hours. In addition to vehicle and cycle movements on the parkways, the adjacent Capital Pathway System that parallel the canal and parkways are experiencing an increasing number of cyclists and pedestrians. Direct access to and usage of the canal (for summer and particularly heavy winter activities (Canal Skateway)) conflicts with the vehicle movements on the parkways. Most access points to the pathways and skateway cross either Queen Elizabeth Drive or Colonel By Drive. In early June 2008, the National Capital Commission initiated a study to identify current pedestrian (including, skaters, cyclists, etc.) issues for both parkways that run adjacent to the Rideau Canal between Hogs Back and Daly Avenue / Laurier Avenue namely Colonel By Drive and Queen Elizabeth Drive. bch w:\active\ _rideau canal corridor _ped x-ing study\report\draft report may, 2011\draft report_rev_jun13_2011.doc 1.1

7 1.2 STUDY DESCRIPTION Goal of Study To identify key crossing points along Queen Elizabeth Drive and Colonel By Drive and to develop solutions to enhance the level of comfort for crossing pedestrians. 1.3 CONSULTANTS MANDATE To identify potential problem crossing areas that warrant further study and select locations to be studied based on priorities and budgetary constraints and to: Collect and analyze data pertaining to crossings to be studied. Provide options on potential parkway corridor interventions. Evaluate options and draw conclusions. Prepare a study report. It should be noted that this is a big picture study with the intention of prioritizing locations for further evaluation and possible implementation of interventions. This study does not address pedestrian & vehicle volume issues involving special events such as Canada Day, Winterlude weekends, etc. 2.0 Determination of Crossing Locations to be Evaluated 2.1 Workshop No. 1 To solicit community involvement and help identify key crossing location areas of concern a workshop - Workshop No 1 ( June 11, 2008) was organized. This workshop with Community Associations and Interest Group representation focused on developing a problem statement to help identify crossing problem locations and prioritize locations for further study The statement criteria included the following questions relating to potential locations of concern: WHERE are they located? WHAT are the issues? WHEN do they occur (daily and seasonal)? WHO is affected? PRIORITY? 2.2

8 2.1.1 Problem Statement Development In review of the comments received during and after the workshop the problem statement was summarized as the following: Through workshop representation and NCC experience, the top priority locations for each of Colonel By Drive and Queen Elizabeth Drive were identified. They are as follows: Colonel By Drive between Hog s Back and Daly Avenue: 1. Hartwell Locks pedestrian crossing of Colonel by and locks 2. Bronson Ave. Bridge pedestrian connections & crossing of Col. By 3. Bank Street Bridge pedestrian connections 4. Echo Drive Stairs year round use of stairs and adequate stair landing 5. Clegg Street pedestrian crossing safety 6. Herridge/Hazel pedestrian crossing safety 7. Main Street pedestrian crossing safety 8. Concord Street pedestrian crossing safety 9. University of Ottawa pedestrian crossing safety Queen Elizabeth Drive: Preston Street to Laurier Avenue: 1. Commissioners Park (Sculpture location near Preston Street): pedestrian crossing safety 2. Crescent Heights- pedestrian crossing safety 3. Bronson Avenue Bridge Pedestrian connections 4. Bank Street Bridge/Queen Elizabeth Place pedestrian connections and crossing safety 5. Fifth Avenue pedestrian crossing safety 6. Linden Terrace pathway junctions issues at bridge crossing Numerous other crossing locations were identified as problematic. While beyond the mandate of this study both groups identified that two additional Rideau Canal Pedestrian crossing bridges are required, one in the vicinity of Fifth Avenue/Clegg and the other in the vicinity of Leonard Avenue. A workshop report was prepared following the receipt of all comments and material, describing the workshop and materials presented and collected is included in Appendix

9 3.0 Data Collection and Analysis Figure 1 below provides a graphical description of each of the site locations identified for review. 3.1 Data Collection Prioritization Prioritization of Intersection Evaluation: (Based on comments from workshop supplemented with NCC priorities). Location specific data collection needs were identified. The sites identified were then categorized seasonally with respect to relative usage or when to best collect data for analysis Data Collected Based on the specific needs of each location to be evaluated data collection needs were identified. Due to practical and budget constraints most data collection was undertaken during summer/ Fall seasons with a small portion collected in the winter season. Most data was collected by City of Ottawa under contract as identified below Data collection included the following: Site Visits: o Site visits to each location to witness the existing conditions and take photos were undertaken by the consultant. Sketches with dimensions as required for specific locations. Turning Movement counts o Existing available Turning Movement counts were acquired from City of Ottawa for all intersections along the two parkways within the study limits. These counts include pedestrian and bicycle movements. o New vehicle Turning Movement counts inventories identified, and purchased from the City of Ottawa at intersections of concern to supplement existing counts where required. These counts also include pedestrian and bicycle movements. o Summaries and dates of the vehicle turning movement counts for the whole site are provided in Figure 2. Intersection turning movements are provided at 9 locations. o Summaries and dates of the Pedestrian crossing counts (at intersections) and 8 hour bicycle approach volumes (Figure 3) and were acquired at ten locations. 3.4

10 Figure 1

11 Figure 2

12 Figure 3

13 Mid block vehicle counts o Multiple day mid block vehicle counts (ATR s) were requested and purchased from the City of Ottawa at specific locations along both corridors. These were acquired at nine locations and are also indicated in Figure 2. Speed Surveys o Spot speed surveys (radar) were requested and purchased utilizing City of Ottawa resources o Longer duration (multiple days) ATR speed surveys (tubes) were also purchased from City of Ottawa o Vehicle speed surveys (both types) are identified in Figure 4. A total of 9 speed surveys were undertaken. Pedestrian Signal Survey o Pedestrian Signal Surveys or Ped Crossing Delay counts (PXO s) were requested of the City of Ottawa and undertaken at numerous pedestrian crossing locations in mostly Summer and fall conditions with a few PXO s undertaken by the consultant through winter conditions. Collision Histories o 3 year total Jan 2005 to Jan 2008 o Collision histories are summarized and located on plan in Figure 5. The collisions summaries cover both mid block collisions and collisions at intersections for the period of January 2005 to January Rideau Canal Skateway Facilities o Figure 6 below provides in plan the locations of the existing (seasonal) access points to the canal for the general public as well as locations of other facilities namely, Kiosks, Toilets/ concessions. Signal Timing o Pedestrian signal timing Plans for the existing pedestrian signals on Colonel By at the University crossing were purchased from the City of Ottawa The raw data collected for all of the above is provided in Appendix 2. This study does not address the special event periods such as Tulip Festival, Winterlude weekends, Canada Day, etc. and accordingly data was not acquired during those specific events. 3.5

14 Figure 4

15 Figure 5

16

17 Analysis and Evaluation of Data The gathered data is provided in figures 2 through 6 and is worthy of review when presented in the context of the whole study limits. This aids in getting a perspective of the Parkway corridors as a whole. From review of these figures some general points of note include the following: Colonel By drive is utilized more heavily as a commuter route during peak hours than Queen Elizabeth Drive and typically has: o Approximately double the traffic volume during peak hours (vicinity of Bank St) in the inbound (city bound) direction and approximately 50% more traffic in the outbound direction. o Higher 85 percentile speeds (typically 8 km/hr.). o Collision history is typically greater along Colonel By Drive than Queen Elizabeth Drive. Local street access to the Parkway is more pronounced along Queen Elizabeth Drive (typically one-way exiting on to QED) than along Colonel By Drive where many roads have been terminated at Echo Drive which parallels Colonel By. 3.2 Warrants for Pedestrian Crossing Signals (PXO): Checking of pedestrian crossing signal warrants was undertaken using criteria developed by the City of Ottawa. These warrants, while not adopted by the NCC, give a measure of the priority to which various crossing locations could be considered for possible implementation of interventions. Pedestrian Crossing Signal Warrants were checked at seven locations along Colonel By Dr. and at six locations along Queen Elizabeth Drive. Two locations were checked in more than one season. The location and percentage met of each of the Pedestrian Signal Survey site locations are provided in Figure 4. Table 1 below provides a summary of the Pedestrian crossing and delay counts, 12 hour vehicle volumes and percent warrants met, etc. Four locations met warrants for pedestrian crossovers. 3.6

18 TABLE 1: Pedestrian Crossing counts and Warrants Summary Location of survey Date of survey 12 hr. vehicle volume Type and number of pedestrians crossing in the highest 6 hrs. Children Youth Adults Seniors Disabled Total Total peds delayed > 10 s Colonel By at Hartwell Locks Colonel By at Bronson Place Colonel By at Echo(W of Bank) Colonel By at Echo Stairs Colonel By at Clegg Colonel By at Main Street Colonel By at Concord Queen Elizabeth at Commissioners Park Queen Elizabeth at Crescent Heights Queen Elizabeth at Lakeview Terrace Queen Elizabeth at Queen Elizabeth Place Queen Elizabeth at Fifth Ave. Queen Elizabeth at Patterson Creek Wed, Oct. 8, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 185% Meets Warrants Yes Tue, Oct. 7, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 24% Meets Warrants No Tues, Aug 19, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 20% Meets Warrants No Tues, Aug 19, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 20% Meets Warrants No Wed, Oct 8, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 131% Meets Warrants Yes Tue, Feb 17, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 57% Meets Warrants No Tue, Aug 19, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 35% Meets Warrants No Wed, Oct 8, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 25% Meets Warrants No Tue, Aug 19, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 169% Meets Warrants Yes Tue, Aug 19, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 6% Meets Warrants No Fri, Feb 20, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 36% Meets Warrants No Thu, Oct 9, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 67% Meets Warrants No Fri, Feb 20, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 41% Meets Warrants No Tue, Aug 19, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 122% Meets Warrants Yes Wed, Oct 8, , Percent Pedestrian Signal Warranted 50% Meets Warrants No For the QED at Commissioners Park location it was noted at the time of survey that a significant number of pedestrian crossings were occurring to the east where a path brings pedestrians to QED located approximately 140 m east of the Commissioners Park (Monument crossing location). The 3.7

19 proximity of the two crossings can optimistically be combined or more practically be estimated to not be fully combined. This provides a range of percent met warrants from 169% assuming all pedestrians will utilize a single crossing location or assuming two crossing locations with the range of pedestrians utilizing either crossing varying to provide to percentage met in the ranges of 102 to 115% for the monument location and 82 to 100% for the more easterly crossing location. 3.3 Intersection Analysis: As part of the evaluation of some of the intersections that have been identified as having pedestrian issues, capacity analysis for vehicles (ped volumes included) was undertaken for a number of these intersections Stop Control: Two way stop control analysis was undertaken at the intersections of Colonel By Dr. at Clegg, Queen Elizabeth Dr. (QED) at Queen Elizabeth Place (QEP)and at QED and Fifth Avenue. These intersections currently function as two-way stop controlled intersections with exception to QED at Somerset St. which is currently all - way stop controlled and analyzed as All-way stop control for comparison purposes. As identified in Tables 2 & 3 below, the intersection of Colonel By and Clegg has a level of service F for both 2-way and all-way stop control. All-way stop control is at or near failure for each intersection except at Somerset St Single Lane Roundabouts: In addition to traffic analysis at the above intersections for two-way and All-way stop control, two of the locations appear to have sufficient right of way to construct a single lane roundabout. Both QED at QEP and QED at 5 th Ave. were analyzed from a traffic capacity geometric (functional) perspective. Both provide a very good (traffic operations) alternative to 2-way stop control. 3.8

20 Table 2: Un-signalized Intersection Summary - AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Control V/C (worst case) Ave. Delay (sec) Max Delay (sec) 95% Queue (m) LOS (worst direction) Somerset AM All-Way 0.75 (WB) (WB) 198(WB) C (WB) Queen Elizabeth Pl. AM 2-way 0.35 (SB) (SB) 20 (SB) B (SB) AM All-Way 0.47 (EB) (EB) B (EBT) AM Single lane Roundabout 0.32 (EB) (SB) 19 (EB) A (EB) Fifth Avenue AM 2-way 0.33 (EB) (EB) 25 (EB) C (EB) AM All-Way 0.64 (NB) (NB) 47 (NB) C (EB) AM Single lane Roundabout (NB) (EB) 30 (NB) B (EB) Colonel Clegg AM 2-way 1.03 (WB) (WB) AM All-Way 1.44 (NB) (NB) 69 (SB) F (WB) 245 (NB) F (NB) Table 3: Un-signalized Intersection Summary PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Control V/C (worst case) Ave. Delay (sec) Max Delay (sec) 95% Queue (m) LOS (worst direction) Somerset PM All-Way 0.49 (EB) (EB) 44(EB) B (E/WB) Queen Elizabeth Pl. PM 2-way (SB) 62 (SB) C (SB) PM All-Way 0.93 (WB) (WB) 53.1 E (WB) (WB) PM Single lane Roundabout.696 (WB) (SB) 63 (WB) B (SB) Fifth Avenue PM 2-way (EB) 55 (NB) E (EB) PM All-Way 0.98 (SB) (SB) 188 (SB) E (SB) PM Single lane Roundabout (EB) 49 (SB) B (EB) Colonel Clegg PM 2-way 1.43 (WB) (WB) 145 (WB) F (WB) PM All-Way 1.49 (SB) 1.18 (NB) (SB) 117 (NB) 278 (SB) 85 (NB) F (SB) F (NB) Intersection analysis data for the above intersections is provided in Appendix

21 3.3.3 All-Way Stop Control Warrants: All-way stop control warrants (City of Ottawa) were checked the intersections of QED and Queen Elizabeth Pl. and at QED and Fifth Ave. Neither of the intersections met the warrants as indicated in the summary Table 4 below. Urban Arterial Streets Warrants were checked. Warrant evaluation sheets provided in Appendix 2. Table 4: City of Ottawa: All-Way Stop Control Warrants: Location Volume 1) total vol: 500 veh/hr over 8 hr 2) minor vol 200/hr incl peds No Major 100% Minor 74% Urban Arterial Warrants Met Collision (3 Rt angles in past 3 years) Min. Directional Split (70/30) Sight Distance Is visibility restricted? Q. E. Dr. at Q. E. Place No (84/16) No 2 No Q. E. Dr. at Fifth Ave. No Major 100% Minor 61% No (92/8) No 2 No 4.0 Measures Considered Potential measures for consideration varied for each of the sites depending on their specific requirements such as geometry, corridor/road width, sight distance issues, vehicle speeds, severity of the issue, crossing location (intersection or mid-block), ability to re-direct pedestrians to alternate crossing locations, etc. Each of the fifteen site locations identified for evaluation were typically evaluated separately and are presented as such below. There were considerations for nearby adjacent sites where the solution for one site would/could impact the solution for the other site. 4.1 Measures Considered - Physical: Road Narrowing & Intersection Narrowing: Typically these are not practical considerations for most locations along the two parkways as the parkways are designed to accommodate bicycles through the use of shared lanes. Road & intersection narrowing s typically are not cycle friendly. There are limited opportunities for these options. 4.10

22 Refuge Island/ median: Refuge islands split the crossing distance in to two separate crossings with the pedestrian able to concentrate on looking in one direction only to identify a gap in traffic and cross the reduced distance to the median/ island. This same maneuver is repeated in crossing from the island to the far side. The refuge island would typically have depressed curbs at the appropriate locations and be at least 2.4 m wide in order to accommodate bicycles as well as handicapped persons and pedestrians. Grade Separation: Considered at locations where Pedestrian signal warrants are very high. 4.2 Measures Considered Traffic Control: All Way Stop Control: Unsuitable due to capacity issues and not meeting of warrants. Two-Way Stop Control: Current situation for most intersection along the Parkway (Status quo). Pedestrian Signals (Half Signals): Considered at locations where Pedestrian Signal warrants have been met. This can occur at intersections and midblock locations. Roundabout: Considered at intersection locations with sufficient property availability to satisfy geometry and with acceptable vehicle turning movements. 4.3 Measures Considered Other: Alter pedestrian routes/ access/ walkway: Considered where practical. Maintenance: Improvements to maintenance (year round) of existing walkways/stairs etc. Landscape Enhancement/reduction: Relocation of other NCC Facilities: Winter Canal access steps, Kiosks, pathways, etc. Signage: Addition of advisory signage such as WC

23 Below are some of the benefits and detractors of the most common measures considered: Table 5: Benefits and Detractors of Options (Generic) Measure Benefits Detractors Pedestrian Signals Refuge Island Grade Separation Roundabout Signage Intersection Improvements Controlled legal crossing Controls vehicles & pedestrians Pedestrian comfort level Reduces (splits into two) pedestrian crossing distance Easier for pedestrian to cross deals with traffic from one direction (and typically one lane) only for each stage of crossing Aesthetics Landscape feature Does not increase vehicle emissions No wait time for pedestrian/cyclists No conflict between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. Reduces (splits into two) pedestrian crossing distance Easier for pedestrian to cross deals with traffic from one direction (and one lane) only for each stage of crossing Reduces vehicle speeds at intersection. Reduces vehicle conflicts with other vehicles, peds & cyclists Can enhance the vista & aesthetics Improves noise and air quality Reduced collisions: particularly the severity of collisions & injuries Cheap to install Provides warning to vehicle of upcoming change in conditions (peds) Site specific to improvement of pedestrian s movement/comfort through the intersection. Takes away from the pleasurable driving experience Disrupts traffic flow Aesthetics Pollution (stop, idle & start of vehicles in red cycle) Not a legal crossing. Pedestrians do not have right of way over vehicles. Pedestrians must wait for a gap in traffic prior to crossing. Refuge Island storage may be a constraint for higher volume of pedestrians Road widening to accommodate refuge island and approach tapers. Very expensive May have user security issues Can impact on Aesthetics, vistas, etc. for overhead / drainage for U/G Not all pedestrians will utilize grade separation if easier to cross road at grade (shorter path). Pedestrians must yield to vehicles at roundabout crosswalks. Utilizes more land at intersection. More costly to construct May increase vehicular access to the parkway. Warning signs no regulatory status Too many signs can be unsightly More costly. May utilize additional land at intersection 4.12

24 5.0 Evaluation of Alternatives An evaluation committee was established comprising of professionals from the NCC representing the disciplines of Transportation, Property Management, Parkways, Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture. The committee was brought together on September 15, 2009 for half a day to undertake the evaluation. Utilizing the Pairwise Comparison approach: two stages of evaluation were undertaken: Stage 1: A set of evaluation criteria to compare options for each site was identified by the consultant. These evaluation criteria were then exposed to a Pairwise Comparison to establish the relative importance of the identified criteria (in percentage). Table 6 below identifies the relative importance criteria established and the results of the relative importance comparison of these criteria. Table 6: Stage 1 Relative Importance of Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criteria Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Total Percentage Safety % Environment % Aesthetics & Heritage % Social % Operations % Capital & Maintenance cost % 5.13

25 Stage 2: involves evaluating the identified options for each location against each other based on the above criteria (stage 1) utilizing pairwise comparison techniques then multiplied by the relative importance of that established criteria to establish a weighted score for each of the options compared. The above ranks the options against each other for each of the individual locations. Each location is evaluated independently of the others. Appendix 3 provides all of the completed sheets (stage 1) and a completed sheet for each of the 15 sites (stage 2) being reviewed and provides the order of ranking of each of the options for each site location. Each of the sites being reviewed were evaluated independently and no comparison of the merits of each location against another location has been undertaken. 6.0 Site Review Summaries Each of the fifteen site locations reviewed are individually presented below with a summary of: the major concerns identified at the workshop Data collected and utilized for evaluation of the site Analysis information (meets warrants, etc.) Opportunities for improvement Practical options/alternatives considered Evaluation of options Conclusions 6.14

26 6.1 COLONEL BY DR. AT HARTWELL LOCKS: Concerns identified at workshop: Major pathway (ped and cycling) connection from Colonel By Dr. and University to Experimental Farm Crossing sight distance. Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Wednesday 8 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 8,800 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 2 Youth - 5 Adults Seniors - 1 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway 6.15

27 Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 185% Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 66 km/hr 85 percentile: 72 km/hr AADT: 10,500 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 12 (mid block between University Ave & Bronson) Peds & cyclists: 1 ped (non-fatal) Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Fair (appears to meet 110 m requirement for signals) Vertical: Good (no vertical curve) Road crossing width: 9 m Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: 175 m. Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No. Road Narrowing: No Refuge median Yes Maintenance Issues: No Potential for signalized Mid Block pedestrian crossing Yes Warning signage at approaches to crossing. Yes Potential for grade separated crossing Yes (meets warrants) Comments: Majority of pedestrian & cyclists are commuting to and from Carleton University through experimental farm and Colonel By canal side multi-use pathway. Crossings anticipated to peak in spring and fall with least during winter months (during periods of snow and extreme cold) and moderate during summer months. Options: 1) Do Nothing. Maintain status quo. 2) Signalized pedestrian crossing (half signals) meets warrants. Appears to meet minimum sight distance requirements for signals. Must be confirmed with more detailed review. 6.16

28 Option 2 Signalized Pedestrian Crossing 3) Widen Colonel By to accommodate a centre splitter island suitable to provide refuge to crossing pedestrians (minimum 2.4 m wide). Refuge would provide greater opportunities (additional gaps) for pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic and wait on island until suitable gap occurs for a crossing of the second direction of traffic. (Does not constitute a crosswalk). Option 3 Splitter Island 6.17

29 4) Crossing Grade separation: As this site meets warrants for a pedestrian crossing, consideration should be given to a grade separated crossing. Advantages would include; elimination of the minimal sight distance for the at grade crossing, less delay for pedestrians crossing during peak hours, safer for pedestrians and a potential (marginal) increase of pedestrians and cyclists due to increased comfort level at the crossing. Disadvantages would include; considerably higher capital and maintenance costs over the other options, potential personal security issues for pedestrians, potential impact on vista along the Parkway at this location, and the potential for pedestrians not utilizing the grades separated crossing due to its increased crossing length combined with ramps (short cutting across Col By). Option 4 - Crossing Grade Separation 6.18

30 Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Do Nothing /2 Signals - Peds Ped Refuge Island Ped Grade Separation Conclusions: The following options warrant consideration: Pedestrian Refuge Island Signalized Pedestrian Crossing 6.19

31 6.2 COLONEL BY AT BRONSON PLACE Concerns identified at workshop: Heavy West bound left turn movements at Bronson from Colonel By. High Pedestrian crossing volume High vehicle volume DATA ACQUISITION Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Tuesday 7 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 15,200 veh In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 0 Youth - 0 Adults - 57 Seniors - 1 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 24% Not Warranted 6.20

32 Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 58 km/hr 85 percentile: 65 km/hr AADT: 18,500 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 15 (Intersection of Colonel By & Bronson Place) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Poor (East bound approach < 90m) Good (West bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 15 m Median (+/-) both sides Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: 150 m. Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No. Road Narrowing: No Refuge Median Yes Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Intersection Geometry Improvements Yes Signage Yes Comments: Sight distance is an issue for eastbound vehicles. Currently, EB approach is two lanes wide. A second lane along Col By is introduced at the Bronson Ave. SB right turn ramp to Col By and acts as a merge/weaving lane for the distance between the ramp and Bronson Place. This lane also serves as a right turn lane at the approach to Bronson Place. The EB departure lane is 7.9m wide running parallel for approximately 40 m before tapering down to the standard 2-lane undivided NCC cross section (runout of acceleration lane from Bronson ramp) WB approach is two lanes wide including a dedicated left turn lane consisting of approx 20 m of storage and 50 taper. 6.21

33 Median is narrow at intersection for both EB and WB approach. EB approach median is +/- 2.5 m wide in vicinity of Bronson Ave. Bridge. The SB to EB Bronson Avenue and NB to EB - Colonel By ramp constitutes the only intersection where yield approach and merge lanes are utilized within this study area for either Colonel By or Queen Elizabeth Drive. It is anticipated that this was provided to accommodate vehicular volume. A byproduct of this configuration may contribute to a higher volume of collisions at and prior to (EB) the Col By Bronson Place intersection due to merging vehicles conflicting with other intersection vehicle movements. Options: 1) Does not meet warrants for pedestrian crossing signals. Do nothing. 2) Intersection Improvements to mitigate existing pedestrian crossing issues: Reduce pedestrian crossing distance and provide median refuge by undertaking the following: Widen centre median at WB approach to minimum 2.5 m to accommodate pedestrian refuge and reduce pedestrian crossing distance. Option 2 Geometric changes to intersection 6.22

34 Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Do Nothing Intersection Improvements Conclusions: Intersection Improvements warrant consideration. 6.23

35 6.3 COLONEL BY AT ECHO DR. RAMP (W OF BANK) Concerns identified at workshop: Poor access from bridge (Bank St.) to Col By. Existing path not maintained in winter High vehicle-ped conflict area unsafe crossing Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Tuesday 7 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume: 13,600 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 10 Youth - 32 Adults - 61 Seniors - 8 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 71% Not Warranted 6.24

36 Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 58 km/hr 85 percentile: 65 km/hr AADT: 16,000 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 6 (Col. By Dr at Echo Dr. (S)) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Poor (EB ) Horz curve, bushes etc. +/- 100m Poor (WB) Horz curve, Bridge piers, +/- 100m Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) Median Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: Opportunities for improvement: 8.5 m none adjacent Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No Warning signage at approaches to crossing. Yes Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds No Maintenance Issues: Yes Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Comments: No history of pedestrian/cyclist collisions with vehicles in previous 3 years Pedestrian ramps from Col By to canal path appear to have a slope greater than 1:20. Options: 1) Do Nothing. Does not meet warrants for signalized pedestrian crossing. 2) Provide improvements to existing pathway. Works to include: Reconstruct pedestrian walkway adjacent to curb of Echo Drive (ramp) to eliminate steps. This will improve universal access plus provide easier winter maintenance. Reconstruct pedestrian ramps between Rideau Canal path and Col By at crossing location to reduce slope, provide additional refuge. Provide year round path accessibility (including winter clearing). 6.25

37 Analysis Results: Option 2 Pathway improvements Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Do Nothing Pathway Improvements Conclusions: Pathway Improvements warrant consideration 6.26

38 6.4 COLONEL BY AT ECHO DR. STAIRS Concerns identified at workshop: Stair landings at base provide insufficient storage Existing stairs not maintained in winter Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Tuesday 19 August 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 13,100 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 1 Youth - 3 Adults - 32 Seniors - 0 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 20% Not Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr 6.27

39 Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 60 km/hr 85 percentile: 67 km/hr AADT: 15,300 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 28 (midblock between Echo Dr. (S) & Clegg) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) Median 8.5 m none Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: adjacent Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds No Maintenance Issues: Yes Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Signage Yes Comments: Does not meet warrants for pedestrian signals. No curb depressions at either side of Colonel By Dr. No recent history of pedestrian collisions with vehicles. Not universally accessible - no ramps (steps only) Retaining wall (+/- 150m to south & +/- 275 m to north) along edge of Colonel By. Storage at base of steps is approx 7 sq m. per landing excluding the 1.3 m strip between the stairs and road immediately in adjacent to the steps. The maximum pedestrian volume counted during the pedestrian delay count was a total of 44 persons. 23 of those were delayed 30 seconds or greater in waiting for a gap to cross. Delay of greater than 30 second occurred approximately 50% of the time. Max number of persons crossing in one hour was 4. Therefore the existing landings provides sufficient storage for pedestrians for both crossing the road or using the stairs under normal circumstances may be an issue during special events when significant increased in pedestrian volumes occur (due to significant delay to cross). Steps are utilized in winter months even when not maintained. Snow clearing issue. Options: 1) Do nothing. Does not meet warrants for signalized crossing. 6.28

40 2) Reconstruct existing pedestrian access with ramps to provide Universal Access for cyclists and handicapped. This option will provide for substantially easier winter maintenance as well as increased pedestrian storage during special (higher use) events. Analysis Results: Option 2 Ramp Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Do Nothing Stairway/Access Improvements 6.29

41 Conclusions: Do nothing option is the preferred option. Subsequent to Workshop No 2. NCC to consider addition of winter maintenance and addition of bicycle ramps to existing steps. 6.30

42 6.5 COLONEL BY AT CLEGG ST. Concerns identified at workshop: Major access location for pedestrians, cyclists & skaters. Minimal green buffer between road and recreational path. High Pedestrian crossing volume. High desire for canal crossing bridge for pedestrians and cyclists DATA ACQUISITION Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Wednesday 8 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 14,000 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 1 Youth - 4 Adults Seniors - 1 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway 6.31

43 Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 131% Warranted Note: The survey sheets indicate that significant number of the crossings recorded were cyclists as opposed to pedestrians. Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 63 km/hr 85 percentile: 68 km/hr AADT: 16,300 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 11 Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good (North bound approach) Fair (South bound approach +/- 110m) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) Median Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: 9 m None adjacent Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No. Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds Yes Signage Yes Potential for signalized (half signals) pedestrian crossing Yes Opportunity for grade separated crossing Yes (meets warrants) Comments: Southbound turn restrictions during weekday peak hours High pedestrian signal crossing warrant (131%). Significant number of cyclists crossing. The City of Ottawa is currently undertaking an Environmental Assessment Study to investigate a potential pedestrian (multi-use path) crossing bridge of the Rideau Canal in the vicinity of Fifth Avenue (QED side) and Clegg St. Analysis: 1. Signalized pedestrian crossing will operate with a high level of service. 2. All-way stop control at intersection was evaluated and determined to not be suitable at this location. (V/C of 1.44 Colonel By NB - LOS F) 6.32

44 Options: 1. Install signalized pedestrian crossing at intersection. Option 1 Signalized Intersection 2. Construct centre refuge islands (min 2.4 m) to accommodate pedestrian & cyclist refuge. This will reduce pedestrian crossing distance. Road widening to accommodate medians will be to the east and will provide improved northbound sight distance. Option 2 Refuge Islands 3. Crossing Grade separation: This location has heavy vehicle and pedestrian movements. Crossing grade separation will achieve; less delay, increased safety for pedestrians, a potential increase in pedestrian crossings, and may collect a percentage of pedestrians currently crossing at Herridge St. Disadvantages would include; considerably higher capital and maintenance costs over other options, potential impact on vista provided by Parkway at this location. Some peds/cyclists will not utilize a grade separation. Grade separation could likely be 6.33

45 integrated with potential Rideau Canal pedestrian crossing bridge with crossing access from both sides of Colonel By Dr. 4. Do nothing. Analysis Results: Option 3 Grade Separation Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion /2 Signals - Peds Ped Refuge Island Ped Grade Separation Do Nothing 6.34

46 Conclusions: The following options warrant further consideration: Pedestrian Refuge Island Signalized Pedestrian Crossing Incorporation of grade separation with any proposed canal crossing located in the vicinity of Clegg Ave. & Fifth Ave. as identified in the Rideau Canal Crossing Environmental Assessment Study. Depending on the timing of the Rideau Canal Crossing Study the NCC will prioritize the above improvements as part of their capital budget 5-year plan update. 6.35

47 6.6 COLONEL BY AT HERRIDGE & HAZEL Concerns identified at workshop: Close proximity of Echo Dr. to Colonel By Dr. Pedestrian crossing safety Limited visibility sight distance at both crossing locations Winter time skater access point (steps to water s edge adjacent to Herridge and adjacent to Hazel). Data Collection and Analysis Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 63 km/hr 85 percentile: 68 km/hr AADT: 15,300 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 9 (mid block between Clegg & Echo/Graham) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at Herridge: Horizontal: Good (North bound approach) Poor (South bound approach) < 100m Sight distance at Hazel: Horizontal: Fair (North bound approach +/-110 m) Fair (South bound approach +120 m) 6.36

48 Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 9 m Median None Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: Herridge: adjacent Hazel: adjacent Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: Yes Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds No Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Improve sight distance clear bush/trees Yes Comments: No detailed pedestrian crossing data collected NCC monitoring identified that pedestrian crossing volumes are low => no counts & signals not warranted. Separation between Colonel By Dr. and Echo Dr. edge of pavements is between 5 m and 8 metres, minimizing the opportunity to accommodate placement of centre median. Headlight glare due to close proximity of Echo and Colonel By at Herridge. Alleviated by existing landscaped separation at other locations. No path between Colonel By and Canal path at Hazel. No curb depressions at path crossing between Colonel By and Echo at Hazel. No curb depressions at path crossing of Colonel By at Herridge. Options: 1) Do Nothing. 2) Increase sight distance in vicinity of Herridge (SB approach) by removing trees/shrubs between Colonel By and Echo Dr. 3) Close off access (remove pathway) between Echo and Colonel By at Herridge. Pedestrians and cyclists to access Colonel By crossing at Clegg via Echo. Increase landscaped buffer/separation between Echo and Colonel By where needed between Herridge and Hazel to 6.37

49 cut down on glare effecting drivers on both roads and to discourage pedestrian crossings. Improved ped crossing at Clegg (Grade Separation (likely to be located between Herridge and Clegg) / Ped signals will draw some of the pedestrian crossings from Herridge and possibly a few from Hazel (older and those with children). Maintain/improve parkway and adjacent residence vistas. Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Do Nothing Landscape - Sight Distance Discourage Crossings - Add landscape buffer Conclusions: Adding a Landscape Buffer warrants consideration. 6.38

50 6.7 COLONEL BY AT MAIN ST. Concerns identified at workshop: Natural Crossing location Data Collection and Analysis: Winter Pedestrian crossing counts were undertaken during the midweek between the second and third Winterlude weekends. The OCTranspo bus strike was finished and all routes except some of the express routes were in operation. Vehicle counts utilized undertaken in the late summer. Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Tuesday February 17, 2009 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 Weather: Clear, -11 C 12 hr traffic volume 14,200 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 10 Youth - 5 Adults - 87 Seniors - 5 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to 6.39

51 cross the roadway. Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 57% Not Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 57 km/hr 85 percentile: 65 km/hr AADT: 16,300 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 17 Peds & cyclists: 1 cyclist (non-fatal) Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good (North bound approach) Good (South bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 13.2 m Median 2.8 m (south of Main) 1.0 m (@ SB LT lane) Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: 250 m. Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No. Road Narrowing: No Geometric improvements to provide refuge for pedestrians Yes Potential location for signalized pedestrian crossing No Signage Yes Comments: Natural location for pedestrian crossing of Colonel By. One of the highest (3 yr) collision histories of all the intersections along both Col by and QED No adjacent stairway access to Canal Skating in winter closest stairwell is near Concord St. Good canal pathway access. No left turns permitted from Main St. to Colonel By southbound No pedestrian crossing of Main St. at Colonel By intersection. SB approach includes a dedicated left turn lane. Current median at south approach to intersection stops well short of intersection relative to turning vehicles. Options: 1) Do Nothing. Does not meet warrants for pedestrian crossing. 2) Intersection improvements: 6.40

52 Extend centre median at northbound approach (Colonel By) to provide an improved pedestrian refuge for Main St. crossing. Provide cross walk at Main St. intersection crossing Main Street to facilitate pedestrian and cyclist crossings. This improvement will facilitate /encourage some pedestrians from Concord St. to divert to Main St. to cross Colonel By. Analysis Results: Option 2 Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Conclusions: Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Do Nothing Intersection Improvements Intersection Improvements warrant consideration. 6.41

53 6.8 COLONEL BY AT CONCORD ST. Concerns identified at workshop: Natural Crossing location Skater access crossing Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian signal warrants were checked both in the summer and in the fall at this location. Both are provided below: Pedestrian Delay Survey (summer): Undertaken: Tuesday 19 August 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 0 Youth - 5 Adults - 62 Seniors - 1 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway 6.42

54 Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 35% not warranted Pedestrian Delay Survey (fall): Undertaken: Wednesday 8 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 14,200 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 0 Youth - 0 Adults - 69 Seniors - 5 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway. Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 25% not warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 57 km/hr 85 percentile: 65 km/hr AADT: 17,500 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 9 (Mid block collisions between Main St. and University of Ottawa) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Poor (South bound approach < 100 m) Fair (North bound approach +/- 110 m) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 9.2 m Median none Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: adjacent Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: Yes. Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds No 6.43

55 Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Comments: NCC pathway following east side of Colonel By to Laurier Ave. starts at Concord St. Adjacent stairway access to Canal Skating (and Concord Rest Area) in winter. Beaten path only between Colonel By and Canal pathway. Winter canal access is provided by temporary wooden stairway (4 steps) construction and placement. Guiderail separating Colonel By and Canal pathway transitions (starts & heads southward) adjacent to crossing location. Grade difference +/- 1 m. Natural access route to canal/colonel By for pedestrians and cyclists from Greenfield community. Options: 1) Do Nothing. Winter use of temporary steps to access canal level steps. 2) Discourage / eliminate existing crossing opportunities at Concord St. (remove path) and direct pedestrian and cyclist crossings to University of Ottawa signalized pedestrian crossing or to Main St. intersection with Colonel By. Relocate winter skateway pedestrian access steps to Main St. Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Do Nothing Discourage crossings Conclusions: No options identified that warrant further consideration. 6.44

56 6.9 COLONEL BY AT UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA Concerns identified at workshop: Increased pedestrian crossings since placement of pedestrian crossing signals Too long of wait time for lights to change once pedestrian signal is activated Many pedestrians not waiting for walk signal before crossing DATA ACQUISITION Vehicle and pedestrian counts prepared in 2007 were collected by City of Ottawa signals group and utilized in a signals optimization review undertaken in April/May Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 57 km/hr 85 percentile: 65 km/hr AADT: 14,000 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 7 Peds & cycles: 2 bicycles (non-fatal) Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good (South bound approach) Good (North bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 7.3 m 6.45

57 Median none Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds No Adjustment of signal timing Yes Comments: Signals are fully actuated (respond to ped calls and vehicles crossing over detectors). The wait time (delay experienced once pushing the pedestrian crossing button) is a necessity in that the minimum green time for vehicles must be obtained prior to the yellow and all red requirements of the pedestrian signals. A recent study by City (April 2008) included undertaking a pedestrian delay 8 hour count similar to that undertaken for a pedestrian crossing warrant analysis. The analysis indicated that the average delay for pedestrians was 17 s, 14 s, and 20 s during am peak, pm peak and off peak periods respectively. The longest pedestrian delays were 47 s, 47 s, and 38 s respectively. The City signals group made adjustments to the signal timing in May 2008 to reduce the pedestrian wait times as follows: o Cycle Green time for vehicles was reduced for each period plan by 5 to 10 seconds. o o Minimum green time for vehicles was set to 18 seconds. Pedestrian button activation now initiates a cycle change to walk immediately (after yellow and all red) when: A minimum of 18 seconds of green time for vehicles has passed and Sensors register a gap in vehicles for a period of 5 seconds. Or, if The green time for the current phase has been reached. The above signal timing changes have reduced the average waiting time as mentioned above and will hopefully reduce the number of persons from crossing Colonel By during the don t walk phase. Human nature, particularly that of students, indicates that there will never be an elimination of pedestrians crossing during the don t walk phase. Options: 1) Do Nothing. Recent signal timing adjustments by City of Ottawa signals group undertaken. Conclusions: Do Nothing. 6.46

58 6.10 QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT COMMISSIONERS PARK (MONUMENT) Concerns identified at workshop: Unsafe crossing High Pedestrian crossing volume DATA ACQUISITION Pedestrian Delay Survey: Date of Survey: Tuesday 19 August 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic vol - 8,100 veh In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 16 Youth - 11 Adults Seniors - 12 Disabled - 1 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway Crossing at monument & up to +/-140 m east of monument) 6.47

59 Percent pedestrian signal warranted: 169% Pedestrian signal warranted Note: The survey showed a high volume of pedestrians crossing in two distinct areas; at the sculpture, and at a pathway approximately 140m to the east. The percent warrant (169% as indicated above) assumes all pedestrians crossing in all zones would use a signalized crossing placed somewhere in the survey area - this is a rather optimistic assumption. If one were to assume the pedestrian signals were placed near the monument a more realistic assessment indicates that the signal would be 102% to 115% warranted. If the signal were placed at the pathway south of the sculpture, the signal would be 82% to 100% warranted. Reduced crossing areas: Location 1: At monument Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 115% Pedestrian signal warranted Location 2: Crossing +/- 140 m east of monument at existing path Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 100% Pedestrian signal warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 49 km/hr 85 percentile: 55 km/hr AADT: 9,500 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 6 (midblock between Preston St & Crescent Heights) Peds & cyclists: 1 cyclist with car (non-fatal) 6.48

60 Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: Location 1 Location 2 +/- 150 m Adjacent Sight distance at crossing: Location 1: Horizontal: Poor (<110 m) (East bound approach) Poor (80 m) (West bound approach) Vertical: Good Location 2: Horizontal: Poor (<110 m) (East bound approach) Good (>110 m) (West bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 8.5 m Median None Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: Yes. Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds Yes Maintenance Issues: No Pedestrian Crossing Grade Separation Yes (meets crossing warrants) Comments: Pedestrian crossing counts identified that there are significant pedestrian crossing movements at the monument (location 1) plus also at the next pathway intersecting with Queen Elizabeth Drive (location 2) some +/- 140 m to the east. Pedestrian crossing warrants identified that the monument crossings alone justify signalization and the more easterly crossing have also just met the warrants. Combined, there are a significant number of pedestrians crossing QED at this location. Location 1: Monument crossing: Sight distance is less than the minimum (110 m at 60 km/hr.) for west bound approach and borderline for EB approach not suitable for signalized crossing due to limited sight distance. 6.49

61 Location 2: East path crossing: Sight distance is less than the min (110 m at 60 km/hr.) for east bound approach not suitable for signalized crossing due to limited sight distance. Options: 1) Widen road to accommodate a centre median for pedestrian refuge. Pedestrians will not have right of way but the crossing will be easier, likely require less time wait time, and provide for a safer crossing than what is currently available. This would be more environmentally friendly than controlled crossing and could occur at locations 1 and 2. Option 1 - Location 1 Refuge Median 2) Construct a wider median (say 5 m) for the full distance between both crossings (locations 1 & 2) with a path the full length of the median and availability to cross at each path crossing. 6.50

62 3) Construct grades separated crossing: This option would place the grade separation somewhere between locations 1 and 2 in conjunction with a relocated/realigned pathway system through Commissioners Park. Crossing is indicated in sketch below. Further pathway and location evaluation required. UA must also be evaluated. Option 3 - Location 3 Grade Separation 4) Do nothing. 6.51

63 Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria 30 Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion Median Refuge(s) Divided Parkway Ped Grade Separation Do Nothing Conclusions: In conjunction with review of Commissioners Park pathway alignments, the following options warrant consideration: Pedestrian Refuge Islands Divided Parkway (median) Pathway re-alignments may also create opportunities for pedestrian crossing signals and warrants further consideration by the NCC. 6.52

64 6.11 QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT CRESCENT HEIGHTS Concerns identified at workshop: Unsafe crossing High vehicle speeds Left turning vehicles Wide road at this location Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Tuesday 19 August 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 7,700 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 0 Youth - 6 Adults - 38 Seniors - 4 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway 6.53

65 Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 6% Not Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 50 km/hr 85 percentile: 57 km/hr AADT: 9,300 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 0 (Intersection of QED & Crescent Heights) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good (>110 m) (East bound approach) Good (>110 m) (West bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: Median (+/-) 12.5m to 15.5 m 0.5 m + (varies) Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: +/- 200 m Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No. Road Narrowing: Yes Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds Yes Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Comments: Low pedestrian crossing volumes did not meet warrants for potential pedestrian crossing signals QED is wider than normal at intersection likely due to previous construction of EB LT lane and bypass at intersection of QED with Lakeside Avenue. A centre median exists from east side of intersection to Lakeside Ave. to accommodate EB LT lane at Lakeside Ave. No median at west leg of intersection. Measured average and 85 percentile speeds are below posted speed limit. Conclusions: Do nothing. 6.54

66 6.12 QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT LAKEVIEW TERRACE Concerns identified at workshop: Blind Crossing Conflict between vehicles and pedestrians Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Friday February 20, 2009 Weather: Overcast, -13 C, occasional flurries - max accum. 1 cm Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic vol - 7,400 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 2 Youth - 14 Adults - 73 Seniors - 0 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway Note: Bronson Ave. Bridge Rehabilitation during survey south (Canal) pathway closed at bridge. Joggers were crossing QED at each approach and departure. Surveyor recorded each jogger 6.55

67 as one crossing. However, these joggers were not included in the warrants analysis as they would not normally cross Queen Elizabeth Drive at this location were it not for the construction. Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 36% Not Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 56 km/hr 85 percentile: 61 km/hr AADT: 8,600 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 1 (Intersection of QED & Lakeview Terrace) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Vertical: Bad (+/-75m) (East bound approach - Curve) Good (West bound approach looking through Bridge Subway) Good Road crossing width: (+/-) m Flairs from 10.5m at west leg to incorporate divided road east of Bronson Bridge Median None Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: adjacent Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: Yes Road Narrowing: Yes Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds Yes Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Signage Yes Comments: QED is flaired out beneath the Bronson Ave. Bridge. At both pedestrian crossing locations (either side of the bridge) the road is wider than the normal 9 m (or 5 m for separated lanes with a median). Tight horizontal curve immediately west of Lakeview Terrace does not provide for adequate sight distance for pedestrian crossing. Crossing on east side of bridge has sufficient sight distance. Options: 1) Do not encourage pedestrian crossings at this location. Do nothing. 2) Improve pedestrian crossing opportunities and redirect pedestrians (winter skateway) as follows: 6.56

68 Extend median westwards (from current western limit just east of the Bronson Bridge) to reduce existing pavement width and provide safer pedestrian crossing opportunities in vicinity of this intersection (substandard site distance notwithstanding). Relocate winter skateway steps to east of Bronson structure - approximately adjacent to existing pedestrian crossing. Lakeview Terrace and Bronson Bridge SB peds pedestrians would likely divert to cross QED with pedestrians from NB Bronson bridge. Analysis Results: Option 2 Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) 1 Do Nothing 2 Extend Median/Redirect Pedestrians Score for Each Criterion

69 Conclusions: The following warrants consideration: Extend median and redirect pedestrians to existing crossing north of Bronson Ave. Relocate skateway stairway to north side of Bronson Bridge to coincide with existing Parkway crossing. 6.58

70 6.13 QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT QUEEN ELIZABETH PLACE Concerns identified at workshop: Bicycle route access to Queen Elizabeth Drive High pedestrian volumes Bad sight lines Turning vehicles Accident waiting to happen Data Collection and Analysis: Two pedestrian crossing surveys were undertaken for this location as identified below. Pedestrian Delay Survey (Fall): Undertaken: Thursday 9 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 8,200 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 0 Youth - 4 Adults Seniors - 6 Disabled - 1 Total

71 54 of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 67% Not Warranted Note: The survey sheets indicate that significant number of the crossings recorded were cyclists (91) as opposed to pedestrians. Pedestrian Delay Survey (Winter): Undertaken: Friday February 20, 2009 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 Weather: Overcast, -13 C, occasional flurries max accumulation <1 cm 12 hr traffic vol - 8,200 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 3 Youth - 12 Adults - 99 Seniors - 0 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway. 3 bicyclists crossed. Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 41% Not Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 57 km/hr 85 percentile: 62 km/hr AADT: 9,200 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 2 (Intersection) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Poor (West bound approach - skew in bridge abutments) Good (East bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 14m 20.5m (either side of intersection) Median 1.7+ m East leg None West leg Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: Adjacent 6.60

72 Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: Intersection & Road Geometrics: Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing Signage No. Yes Yes No (Does not meet Warrants) Yes Comments: Eastbound (single) departure lane at bridge is approximately 9.1 m wide. East bound approach (through and left turn lanes) at throat is approximately 8.5 m wide Westbound approach (through and right turn lanes) at bridge is approximately 9.1 m wide Bridge abutment separating EB and WB lanes imposes considerable sight distance restrictions Heavy cyclist usage of intersection (entering and exiting community & crossing Queen Elizabeth Drive). Does not meet warrants for All-way stop control. Options: 1) Maintain 2-Way stop control with Geometric changes including: Widen centre median at both EB and WB approaches to accommodate pedestrian refuge including pedestrians with bicycles and reduce pedestrian crossing distance Re-align QED westbound approach through and right turn lanes to align with WB departure lane (with consideration for island on west leg) Narrow QED eastbound departure lane using road narrowing to reduce pedestrian crossing distance. Option 1 2) Same as option 1 but eliminate WB right turn lane and combine with WB through lane. Provides less conflict and crossing distance for pedestrians on westbound approach. But will increase average intersection vehicle delay (intersection LOS B to LOS C). 6.61

73 3) Provide a single lane roundabout. Improved pedestrian safety, reduced ped delay, improved intersection operation, significantly enhanced vista, landscape, etc. 4) Do Nothing. Option 3 Roundabout Option Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) Score for Each Criterion 1 Intersection Improvements Intersection Improvements Single lane Roundabout Do Nothing Conclusions: The following options warrant consideration: Convert intersection to a single lane Roundabout Maintain minor road stop control with new splitter island on south side and elimination of southbound right turn lane. 6.62

74 6.14 QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT FIFTH AVENUE Concerns identified at workshop: High volume, all season pedestrian crossing including visually impaired. Major skater access location. Restaurant access location. Prime location for Rideau Canal Pedestrian/cycle bridge crossing. Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey (summer): Undertaken: Tuesday 19 August 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic vol - 8,800 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 16 Youth - 19 Adults Seniors - 43 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway 6.63

75 Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 122% Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 52 km/hr 85 percentile: 60 km/hr AADT: 9,600 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 4 (Intersection) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good (East bound approach) Good (West bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) 9 m Median None Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: adjacent Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds Yes Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing Yes Signage Yes Pedestrian Crossing Grade Separation Yes (meets crossing warrants) Comments: NCC multi-use path is adjacent to QED (pulls away from adjacent canal) at Fifth Ave. Fifth Ave is a City of Ottawa (shared lane) bicycle route The Ritz Restaurant is a year round operation which draws all of its clients as pedestrians, most of which must cross QED at this location. This intersection acts as a prime crossing location for the Glebe community for; walkers, joggers, cyclists, etc. to access the canal and pathways. An NCC Winterlude rest area is situated on the canal adjacent to this location Does not meet warrants for All-way stop control. The City of Ottawa is currently undertaking an Environmental Assessment Study to investigate a potential pedestrian (multi-use path) crossing bridge of the Rideau Canal in the vicinity of Fifth Avenue and Clegg St. (Col By Dr.). 6.64

76 Options: 1) Install crosswalk and pedestrian crossing signals at intersection. 2) Construct a centre refuge median (island) at both EB and WB approaches to reduce pedestrian crossing distance. Option 2 3) Construct single lane roundabout. Will improve pedestrian safety. Traffic will move better than with other intersection options, less delay for peds and vehicles over 4-way stop and signals. Option 3 4) Install grade separation for pedestrians. Consideration for inclusion of grade separation with potential future pedestrian/ cyclist crossing of Rideau Canal. Not all pedestrians will utilize grade separation. 5) Do Nothing. 6.65

77 Analysis Results: Options Safety Environment Aesthetics & Heritage Social Operations Capital & Maintenance cost Weighted Score Rank Relative Criteria Weight (%) 1 Pedestrian Crossing Signals 2 Refuge Islands 3 Single lane Roundabout 4 Grade Separated Ped Crossing 5 Do Nothing Score for Each Criterion Conclusions: The following options warrant consideration: Convert Intersection to a single lane Roundabout Add refuge islands and maintain minor road (Fifth Ave.) stop control Signalized Pedestrian crossing In addition, the NCC should consider incorporation of grade separation with any proposed canal crossing located in the vicinity of Clegg Ave. & Fifth Ave. as identified in the (currently underway) Rideau Canal Crossing Environmental Assessment Study as this study develops. Depending on the timing and outcome of the Rideau Canal Crossing Study as it develops it may be prudent for the NCC to move forward with one of the above options as an interim measure. 6.66

78 6.15 QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE AT PATTERSON CREEK CROSSING Concerns identified at workshop: Pathways from both sides of QED are funnelled to roadside High use of pathways Pathways link with park and First Ave. School at this location - congested High winterlude usage Data Collection and Analysis: Pedestrian Delay Survey: Undertaken: Wednesday 8 October 2008 Hours of Survey: 7:30-9:30, 11:30-14:00, 14:30-18:00 12 hr traffic volume 7,500 veh. In the highest 6 hours the following "types" of pedestrians crossed: Children - 3 Youth - 31 Adults - 59 Seniors - 14 Disabled - 0 Total of the pedestrians that crossed were delayed for more than ten seconds before proceeding to cross the roadway 6.67

79 Percent pedestrian signal warrant: 50% Not Warranted Posted Speed: 60 km/hr Measured Vehicle speeds: Average 52 km/hr 85 percentile: 61 km/hr AADT: 9,200 veh Collisions (3 yr. History) vehicles: 0 (Mid block between First Ave. & Linden Trce) Peds & cyclists: 0 Sight distance at crossing: Horizontal: Good (North bound approach) Good (South bound approach) Vertical: Good Road Crossing width: (+/-) Median Proximity to (winter) skateway steps: 9 m None adjacent (both sides of Patterson Creek) Opportunities for improvement: Redirection of pedestrians to alternative road crossing: No Road Narrowing: No Median to separate opposing traffic and provide refuge for peds No Potential for signalized pedestrian crossing No Signage Yes Comments: Canal side multi-use pathway diverts to roadside to cross Patterson Creek at bridge. Roadside (bridge) sidewalks are 2.1 m wide (including curb). West side path (sidewalk) provides interconnection to pathways following both sides of Patterson Creek as well as pathways from First Avenue and Linden Terrace (2). Options: 1) Do nothing. 2) Signage Conclusions: The addition of signage warrants consideration. 6.68

80 7.0 Conclusions The goal of this study was to identify key crossing points along Queen Elizabeth Drive and Colonel By Drive and to develop solutions to enhance the level of comfort for crossing pedestrians. Through workshop No 1 representation and NCC experience fifteen key crossing locations were identified. Considerable data was collected, and analysis was undertaken pertaining to each location. At each location various measures were identified as potential options for improvement to pedestrian crossing comfort and safety. These were compared against each other utilizing a Pairwise Comparison approach which rated (individually at each location) the proposed options against each other with a set of common evaluation criteria which was established by the consultant and NCC professionals. The results and investigation conclusions for each of the fifteen locations as presented in Chapter 6 have been summarized in Table 7 below. Colonel By Drive at: TABLE 7A SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS: LOCATION Hartwell Locks Bronson Place Echo Drive (West of Bank St.) CONCLUSIONS The following options warrant consideration: Pedestrian Refuge Island Signalized Pedestrian Crossing Intersection Improvements warrant consideration as follows: Widen centre median to min. 2.5 m to accommodate pedestrian refuge and reduce pedestrian crossing distance. Pathway Improvements warrant consideration, including: Reconstruct pedestrian walkway adjacent to curb of Echo Dr. (ramp) to eliminate steps to improve universal access and facilitate winter maintenance operations. Reconstruct pedestrian ramps between Rideau Canal path and Col By at crossing location to reduce slope and provide additional refuge. 7.69

81 Provide year round path accessibility including winter maintenance. Echo Drive Stairs Clegg St. Herridge/Hazel Main Street Concord Street University of Ottawa Do nothing option is the preferred option. NCC to consider addition of winter maintenance and addition of bicycle ramps to existing steps. The following options warrant further consideration: Pedestrian Refuge Island Signalized Pedestrian Crossing Incorporation of grade separation with any proposed canal crossing located in the vicinity of Clegg Ave. & Fifth Ave. as identified in the Rideau Canal Crossing Environmental Assessment Study. Depending on the timing of the Rideau Canal Crossing Study the NCC to prioritize the above improvements as part of their capital budget 5-year plan update. Adding a Landscape Buffer warrants consideration. Intersection Improvements warrant consideration. No options identified that warrant further consideration. Do Nothing. TABLE 7B: SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS: Queen Elizabeth Drive at: LOCATION Commissioners Park Crescent Heights Bronson Avenue Bridge/ CONCLUSIONS In conjunction with review of Commissioners Park pathway alignments, the following options warrant consideration: Pedestrian Refuge Islands Divided Parkway (median) Pathway re-alignments may create opportunities for pedestrian crossing signals and warrants further consideration by the NCC. Do nothing. The following options warrant consideration: 7.70

82 Lakeview Terrace Extend median and redirect pedestrians to existing crossing north of Bronson Ave. Relocate skateway stairway to north side of Bronson Bridge to coincide with existing Parkway crossing. Bank Street Bridge/Queen Elizabeth Place Fifth Avenue The following options warrant consideration: Convert intersection to a single lane Roundabout Maintain minor road stop control with new splitter island on south side and elimination of southbound right turn lane. The following options warrant consideration: Convert Intersection to a single lane Roundabout. Add refuge islands and maintain minor road (Fifth Ave.) stop control. Signalized Pedestrian crossing. In addition, the NCC should consider incorporation of grade separation with any proposed canal crossing located in the vicinity of Clegg Ave. & Fifth Ave. as identified in the (currently underway) Rideau Canal Crossing Environmental Assessment Study as this study develops. Linden Terrace Depending on the timing and outcome of the Rideau Canal Crossing Study as it develops it may be prudent for the NCC to move forward with one of the above options as an interim measure. The addition of signage warrants consideration. (It was identified in the Workshop No 2 that crossing issues were at Linden Terrace and points north and not at the bridge crossing. The NCC has identified that they are committed to consider refuge islands farther north of Linden Terrace in the context of their planning initiatives, including the update to the Plan for Canada s Capital and the Urban Lands Master Plan). Four of the locations evaluated have met the City of Ottawa Warrants for pedestrian signalization and as such should be considered priority locations for improvements. These locations are: Colonel By Drive at Hartwell Locks, Colonel By Drive at Clegg St., Queen Elizabeth Drive at Commissioners Park, and Queen Elizabeth Drive at Fifth Avenue. Further to the location specific conclusions identified above, some additional comments that have been brought forward from Workshop No. 2 are worthy of mention. Responses to these have typically been provided in the workshop No 2 report which is in Appendix 4 and are identified below for further consideration by the NCC: Improved winter maintenance at crossing points of paths in general. 7.71

83 Installation of additional advisory pedestrian signage. The NCC to consider a separate investigation into appropriate use of Sharrows along NCC Parkways. Sharrows are described below. Sharrows : a chevron style lane marking combined with a cycle lane marking to indicate a shared lane for vehicles and cycles as noted in adjacent photo. Consultation with residents and stakeholders on detailed designs. It is understood that the outcome of the current Lansdowne Park redevelopment may impact traffic and pedestrian patterns along Queen Elizabeth Drive. The NCC should monitor the projected/actual changes to these movements as this redevelopment progresses. Next Steps: It is understood that upon acceptance of this report the NCC staff will: Prepare recommendations to management. Plan improvements of higher priority individual pedestrian crossing locations, develop cost estimates and prepare recommendations for NCC senior management. Prioritize improvements as part of the capital budget 5-year plan update, which occurs annually. The prioritization will consider other initiatives, such as: the Landsdowne Park redevelopment; the planning exercise currently underway with respect to a new pedestrian bridge across the Rideau Canal in the vicinity of Landsdowne Park; and a future sector plan for Commissioner s Park near Dow s Lake. The NCC has also identified that future planning initiatives, including the urban lands master plan preparation, which forms a part of the NCC's "planning framework", and is currently under development, will inform on lower priority crossing locations and broader issues identified by the public during Workshop No. 2. Brian Harris, P. Eng Stantec Consulting Ltd. 7.72