Inside Langford

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
Tuesday, March 9th, 2010 at 5:30 p.m.

Excerpts from Reports to committee:

a) Approving Officer’s 2009 Annual Report

In 2009, applications for developments north of the highway are continued to be on hold until such time that the Spencer Road Interchange is complete and operational. For 2010, we can anticipate continued development in all lands south of the Trans Canada Highway as the Storm Drainage plan for Walfred Road, and Happy Valley have now been completed and discussed with the development community. Walfred Road area and the Happy Valley/Luxton corridor continue to be the areas of significant activity. The north side of the Trans Canada Highway continues to experience minor development as sewers extend and common properties (or properties previously used for septic disposal) become available for residential development It is difficult to determine how much development could be anticipated on lands held by Bear Mountain, as there was little activity for the last 3 quarters of 2009. It should be noted that the number of lots that were applied for in 2009 exceeded the number of lots registered (created) in 2009, so there is a back-log of lots pending.

Areas of Probable Subdivision Activity for 2009:

Westhills – Westhills stop working on subdividing land and construction for a portion of 2008/2009, due to excellent sales figures, it is anticipated that lands will continue to move forward into subdivision.
McCormick Lands – currently in rezoning, these lands will move forward into a residential (single family homes, townhomes, and condominiums) phased subdivision in 2010.
Walfred Road – A significant amount of lands in the Walfred Road area have now completed rezoning and are ready to move forward into DP and Subdivision.
Luxton/Marwood/Happy Valley – a local concept plan has moved forward with the rezoning of
a majority of parcels within this block of land. This will allow for the block to development as a
single-family neighbourhood, with mixed residential uses including carriage house units, and small lots.
Sewers in the Setchfield/Treanor area continue to allow subdivisions of lands that were previously used as septic fields where current zoning allows.

b) Pedestrian Crosswalk Warrant System:

Warrants:
The Manual (Province of British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Highways Safety Branch published a manual for Pedestrian Crossing Control in British Columbia in 1994) offers some interesting general insight on pedestrian crossing control devices indicating that these issues are “often emotionally charged’ and that there can be a “tendency to assume that using more traffic control devices will resolve pedestrian safety problems”. According to the Manual, experience has shown that overuse of devices may reduce their effectiveness. The Manual continues on to say that “traffic control devices should be selected and implemented to ensure that the most troublesome locations receive attention commensurate with the problem”.

“The pedestrian crossing warrant system used in the Manual consists of a model that defines
crossing opportunities and pedestrian volume threshold levels for installation of appropriate
traffic control devices. The model uses information such as the:
• Gap or time a crosswalk is unoccupied by successive vehicles with an acceptable gap being the time needed to cross the travelled lanes of the roadway at a walking speed of1.2 m per second plus three seconds of perception and reaction time;
• Crossing Opportunities which are the number of times a pedestrian can cross the roadway over a given period of time;
• Travel Arrival Pattern which is the manner in which traffic arrives at the location (random, platoon etc.);
• Stopping Sight Distance or the length of road that must be visible to drivers to enable them to come to a safe stop before reaching an object; and
• Eguivalent Adult Units which takes into account the relative weighting of a child, senior or physically challenged person in comparison to a typical adult crossing at the same location.

Staff are suggesting that there be a formal warrant process in place to implement pedestrian
crossings in the City of Langford – to allow staff to:
• Consider each request for a pedestrian crosswalk in an objective manner;
• Rank the need for pedestrian crosswalks to address possible liability aspects; and
• Rank the need for pedestrian crosswalks for budgeting purposes.

With respect to existing crosswalks staff have identified three options:
1. Leave all existing crosswalks in place and consider them grandfathered in-situ as is; OR
2. Assess all existing crosswalks under the proposed warrant system and make adjustments to the crosswalks as or if needed. This may include removing some if they don’t meet the stipulations of the proposed warrant system; OR
3. Leave all existing crosswalks in place for a period of two years taking that time to implement the proposed pedestrian crosswalk warrant system. Following the proposed two year period bring a report back to Council with recommendations as to leaving existing crosswalks in place or undertaking a warrant assessment on existing crosswalks.

At this time, staff feel that option #3 above (the two year test timeframe) is the best option to consider should Council opt to adopt the pedestrian crossing warrant system.

c) 960 Firehall Creek Road – Access and Easement

- The access is being used by residents as an access between Firehall Creek Road and Sooke Road while the easement is also used by the commercial business located at 2673 Sooke Road for parking, storing and turning around of large trucks. 2673 Sooke Road requires this use due to vehicle movements on-site due to the buildings location on the lot and the location of the
buildings access doors……. The concern of the General Manager noted in the correspondence is the necessary use of the easement by heavy trucks and equipment as well as pedestrians and the potential safety conflict that exists between the two uses.

That the Transportation and Public Works Committee recommend that Council direct staff:
1. To request the owners of 2673 Sooke Road to install a temporary fence across the south
portion of the access, eliminating any pedestrian linkage at this time, at their cost, but that
when future connectivity is deemed available, that the pedestrian link can be re-opened and
the fence removed;
OR
2. To investigate the possibility of retaining a 2m wide access, or a width determined by Parks Manager and City Planner, along the west property line from Sooke Road to Firehall Creek Road for pedestrian thoroughfare as part of a revitalization plan and to work with the Administrator, and the owner to sell the remainder of the lot to the property owner at 2673
Sooke Road;
AND
3. That staff be directed to work with the owners of 2673 Sooke Road to install fencing at the
owners (of 2763 Sooke Road) expense and pavement markings to improve safety;
OR
4. To work with the Clerk Administrator to sell the City owned property, legally described as Lot 1 VIP81126, between 2681 Sooke Road and 2673 Sooke Road and behind 2673 Sooke Road, to the owners of 2673 Sooke Road;
OR
5. Do nothing at this time.