Newsletter February 2, 2022 – Are Council and Staff Protecting Your Interests and Safety?
Apparently not. Consider the following development application process and information: Council on January 24, 2022 approved a new mixed-use multiplex residential/ commercial development on the Casey’s Market property. This is on the northeast corner of the 713 St Patrick Street site at its intersection with Central Avenue. Although the building design is acceptable, Council’s approval of all the requested variances makes the building too big and too high, for the location’s single-family sized lot.
What should have influenced Council’s decision to approve this development is that there are already serious unsafe conditions and parking problems at this intersection and, as neighbours pointed out, approving the development will intensify these.
This is a classic case of Councils not addressing “first-things-first”: fix existing problems that need to be addressed before approving developments that will only make a bad situation worse. For example, Oak Bay’s end-of-life infrastructure and the over-building of lots.
Residents have a right to expect Council to make rational, well thought out decisions that take into account all the information and resident input.
The neighbours’ inputs and the extensive information in a resident’s submission were not factors. Council depended on the stakeholder/ applicant’s information and a staff report that provided limited information and also depended heavily on the development proponent’s information. As well there were Councillors’ personal reasons for approving this limited parking and setbacks, mixed-use complex.
What can residents' “takeaway” be from this process and this Council’s approval decision? This Council’s Oak Bay character-changing secondary suite and infill implementation initiatives have us “staring down the barrel”. If this is the kind of decision and resident collaboration we can expect, it’s just not good enough.
There was a mountain of impact information submitted and provided by residents' input at the Council meeting. This identified the serious intersection, safety and parking problems. However, not only was this not considered important by Councillors, but they played fast and loose with our liberal, uncorrected zoning bylaw.
The 5-to-1 Council majority’s reasons to approve ranged from:
This is notwithstanding that: Councils' Advisory Design Panel were concerned that approving this development would set a precedent and the neighbours' letters opposing the development because of impacts it will have on the neighbourhood. Also, a detailed resident submitted safety report (see Appendix #1- #9) that explained and illustrated (see Pictures Appendices #3,#4,#5) the unsafe conditions.
The neighbours' letters pointed out that:
The resident’s safety submission (Appendix #1) details the unsafe driving conditions at the intersection. The pictures (Appendix #3,#4,#5) clearly indicate that the limited sightlines and driver reaction times are far less than at any other Oak Bay intersection identified by the Engineering or Planning Departments.
The resident’s submission also provides a BC Transit Authority Publication and Reports from Canada-Wide Transport Administrators and Police. The documents identify serious intersection safety issues, many of which are present at the St Patrick Street and Central Avenue Intersection.
The above Authorities Safety Reports were published specifically to point out intersection safety improvements to prevent accidents. It is possible staff may not have been aware of the reports. However, when provided, why were they ignored?
The resident’s submission's lists how the new multi-plex development will make the already hazardous driving and parking problems that much worse.
As indicated, Central Avenue is a well travailed through-street and is only 27 feet wide. Two vehicles parked opposite each other, or a large truck or van, results in this busy roadway's driving lanes being reduced from two to one for two-way traffic.
None of this first-hand, knowledgeable “resident engagement”, that identified the existing serious safety and parking problems at this location, made any impression on the majority of 5 approving Councillors who, as indicated, had their own reasons to approve this development.
Councillors acknowledged that the development would result in a variety of difficult to solve logistical problems, but stated these would be addressed after the building was constructed.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective - Read on for more information and please read Appendices. The pictures illustrate, and the information explains, just how dangerous conditions are at this intersection.
What is confusing and has concerned us are:
- Council’s total disregard for resident safety. Also, the fact that Council ignored, not only all of the: neighbours' safety/ danger-warnings, but the BC and Canada-wide potential intersection accident information. Also, that the Staff stated that" Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street both meet the District's Bylaw Standards". This raises four important questions:
1. Are staff and/or the District's experts actually saying that the Bylaw sanctions a bus bay terminal directly in front of an intersection?
2. Does this mean that the BC Transit Authority, Canada-wide Police Forces and Transport Administrators and the resident submission have it wrong?
3. Why is it OK for staff to use a District bylaw's standards to justify not addressing a serious public safety threat, but on the other hand, disregarding the District's Zoning bylaw standards and specifications to justify approving this development's requested and excessive variances?
4. Whose interests are staff looking after?
This is particularly relevant as the former bylaw, that according to staff, sanctions the bus bay terminal's location, is likely a hundred years old when conditions at the intersection were markedly different.
- Also when informed, why was it so difficult for Councillors to understand the substantial taxpayer liability costs that could result given the significant probability of a serious accident?
- Why was this intersection, that has extremely limited sightlines and inadequate driver reaction times, not considered by the District for safety improvements? Particularly, given all the information that has been provided by the public, it is not clear what the Engineering Department’s criteria are to prioritize intersection improvements. Specifically this one, that is a threat to public safety.
For example, there must have been some justification to prioritize the three most recent intersection improvements at: Beach Drive and King George Terrace; Musgrave and Estevan Avenue and Beach Drive at Cadboro Bay Road. None of these intersections has a bus bay terminal: however, all have far better sightlines and allow a lot more driver reaction time to oncoming traffic in comparison.
In addition, we are not aware of any (announced) plans to build a residential/ commercial mixed-use complex at any of these intersections. We were also curious about what the reasons were for the Planning and Engineering Departments' decision: - that a traffic study was not required for this controversial development proposal.
A traffic study would have identified many of the safety issues present at the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection and this is “spelled-out” in the resident’s January 24, 2022 submission to Council (See Traffic Study Appendix #7).
We would have expected that, as approval of this development will add six residential units and 3 commercial businesses to this intersection and, given the end-of-life condition and failures of our present infrastructure, that Council should have inquired about, or staff should have provided
infrastructure impact information.
We certainly would have hoped for “lessons learned”, now that the 43 Unit “Bowker Condo Development”, at the Bowker Avenue and Cadboro Bay Road intersection, is costing the taxpayer over half a million dollars. This considerable infrastructure funding, for which only a very small portion was paid for by the developer, would have gone a long way to improve the District’s general infrastructure,
Councillor Zhelka attempted to get some warning for St. Patrick Street drivers so that they could be aware that the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection was a two way, not a four way stop sign intersection. Even this was rejected by the majority of Council after being warned by Staff they were "interfering in operations”
“Operations” (as the saying goes) "my foot" – there are enough warnings that injury prevention is the issue at hand. It seems to us that just providing two preliminary inexpensive traffic control devices would go a long way to improving driver safety until more permanent safety measures can be provided.
1. A stop sign for eastbound Central Avenue drivers at the southwest corner of Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street. This would provide a 3 way right of way situation for south and eastbound St. Patrick Street Drivers and eastbound Central Avenue Drivers.
2. Intersection marked crosswalks (hard to believe there aren’t any) would significantly enhance pedestrian safety and warn drivers they need to slow down in the event they have to stop for pedestrians.
There are, for example, several marked crosswalks on Windsor Road even though drivers entering and crossing Windsor Road can see for blocks in either direction.
There is no doubt the a more thorough analysis and more traffic control devices are needed at the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection before this new complex adds more street parking near the intersection and eliminates most of the northeast corner intersection sightlines.
We disagree with staff’s direction to council at the January 24, 2022 Council meeting,that Council cannot direct\ interfere in Staff operations at a time when major safety improvements were recommended. It is certainly in Council’s power to direct staff to reconsider certain actions. For example, the Planning and Engineering experts’ decision not to conduct a traffic study. Council can and certainly could have directed staff to follow the Engineering Department's original recommendation for a traffic study.
Also, now that Council has been provided with all the public safety information, deniability is removed – Council, in the event of a serious accident at that intersection, cannot say they were not aware of all the facts.
At Council, a resident recommended that, in order to protect the Community from a lawsuit, the District should obtain a legal opinion. This would determine what the liability and financial implications would be for Oak Bay Taxpayers, in the event a serious accident occurs due to the unsafe conditions at the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue Intersection.
The resident’s recommendation fell on deaf ears – so much for Council protecting the public interest.
A municipal area of responsibility is traffic control: therefore Oak Bay Watch, based on the newsletter's and neighbours' information and the Agencies' referenced reports, requests Council direct the Engineering Department to provide:
A stop sign for eastbound Central Avenue drivers at the southwest corner of Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street and,
Intersection marked crosswalks at Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street.
Please read Appendices
_______________________________________________________________________
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch is a volunteer community association and its members have a variety of professional backgrounds in both the public and private sector.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Appendix #1: Resident Submission to Council
TO Oak Bay Council January 21, 2022
With reference to 713 St Patrick Street Development Application scheduled to be considered by Council on January the 24, 2022. I previously provided a traffic safety report to the Oak Bay Police and Engineering Departments regarding the safety Issues at the Central Avenue and St Patrick Street Intersection. They have not informed me that they plan any remedial actions or solutions.
Council previously decided more “traffic information” was required and delayed voting on a motion made by Councillor Appleton to approve the 713 St Patrick Street Development Application. Council also responded to resident concerns about parking and have asked staff to provide more information on this issue.
The Engineering and Planning Department have provided their written opinions to my safety report stating that, although there have been safety concerns about that intersection, there are a number of such intersections in the District with similar safety issues.
I have requested the Engineering and Planning Department to name one or any intersections with the same restricted sightlines and traffic reaction timelines however, so far have not received a reply. More importantly, even though they have indicated there are aware of the traffic safety warnings and concerns they have not indicated that they will take any corrective action.
The Planning Department also responded to my question: why wasn’t the District’s Engineering Department’s recommendation to conduct a traffic study (see Appendix #7 ) at this intersection not acted on, and Planning stated it was decided a parking study only was sufficient.
I have included a sketch of the Central Avenue and St Patrick Street Intersection that provides some of the measurements involved (See Appendix #2).
For Council’s information I have also included links to he following reports:
(See Appendices - #8 and #9)
The January 24, 2022 149-page Planning Department Report provides limited information and does not take into account the extensive information provided in the above Reports or the impacts the new 713 St Patrick Street Development will have on safety issues at the St Patrick Street intersection with Central Avenue.
I noted, although the Chief Administrative Officer signed off on the January 24, 2022 149-page Planning Report, the Planner, Engineering and Police Departments did not.
As the Reports referenced in Appendices #8 and #9 indicate – if the Canadian Transport Administrators, the BC Transit Authority and Police Departments, all over Canada identify intersections and bus bay and bus bay terminal locations as serious traffic safety concerns, then Oak Bay Council and the District’s Administration should also.
Police officers routinely visit schools and inform children intersections are dangerous places, and that a very high proportion of accidents happen at intersections.
BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery: See Appendix #9
The present St Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection configuration and the Bus Terminal Bay location do not meet any of the BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery recommendations or standards.
For the driving conditions for drivers at the St Patrick Street and Central Avenue Intersection: (See Appendix #6)
The Planning Report information only deals with the new 713 St Patrick Street Development parking impact and indicates on Page #5 that “standards set out in the (District) Bylaw, which Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street both already meet.”
Notwithstanding this, as indicated not all intersections have these safety issues and certainly the BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery recommendations and standards have not been complied with.
The impacts the new 713 St Patrick Street Development will have are:
Based on the information in the documents I reference in Appendix #7,#8,#9 and the information in my submission I respectfully request Council conduct an independent traffic study.
This will provide Council with a much better analysis of the unsafe safety issues involved, and if requested could provide solutions, and a plan of action.
Submitted respectfully for your consideration,
Oak Bay Resident
Appendix #2: (Rough Sketch not to scale)
Apparently not. Consider the following development application process and information: Council on January 24, 2022 approved a new mixed-use multiplex residential/ commercial development on the Casey’s Market property. This is on the northeast corner of the 713 St Patrick Street site at its intersection with Central Avenue. Although the building design is acceptable, Council’s approval of all the requested variances makes the building too big and too high, for the location’s single-family sized lot.
What should have influenced Council’s decision to approve this development is that there are already serious unsafe conditions and parking problems at this intersection and, as neighbours pointed out, approving the development will intensify these.
This is a classic case of Councils not addressing “first-things-first”: fix existing problems that need to be addressed before approving developments that will only make a bad situation worse. For example, Oak Bay’s end-of-life infrastructure and the over-building of lots.
Residents have a right to expect Council to make rational, well thought out decisions that take into account all the information and resident input.
The neighbours’ inputs and the extensive information in a resident’s submission were not factors. Council depended on the stakeholder/ applicant’s information and a staff report that provided limited information and also depended heavily on the development proponent’s information. As well there were Councillors’ personal reasons for approving this limited parking and setbacks, mixed-use complex.
What can residents' “takeaway” be from this process and this Council’s approval decision? This Council’s Oak Bay character-changing secondary suite and infill implementation initiatives have us “staring down the barrel”. If this is the kind of decision and resident collaboration we can expect, it’s just not good enough.
There was a mountain of impact information submitted and provided by residents' input at the Council meeting. This identified the serious intersection, safety and parking problems. However, not only was this not considered important by Councillors, but they played fast and loose with our liberal, uncorrected zoning bylaw.
The 5-to-1 Council majority’s reasons to approve ranged from:
- Their perceived need for more rental housing in Oak Bay;
- Councillor’s objective to set a precedent for future developments comparable to this multi-use complex’s excessive massing, variances and very limited parking;
- That the building, although overbuilt for the lot, would improve “the look” of that intersection
This is notwithstanding that: Councils' Advisory Design Panel were concerned that approving this development would set a precedent and the neighbours' letters opposing the development because of impacts it will have on the neighbourhood. Also, a detailed resident submitted safety report (see Appendix #1- #9) that explained and illustrated (see Pictures Appendices #3,#4,#5) the unsafe conditions.
The neighbours' letters pointed out that:
- “My neighbour informed me about this and I had no idea what he was talking about – we did not receive any of this (planning technician’s) material”.
- Parking is already a challenge what with the present businesses, homes, rental suites and Airbnb’s, the variance requested for parking is almost laughable - the request goes far beyond the existing zoning”
- “I would like to reiterate my strong opposition - the building height will dwarf the adjacent homes” and “It is completely out of proportion for our lovely neighbourhood and “sets a worrisome precedent for other properties on the corner”.
- “Considering the 425% parking variance – adding this additional parking load is absurd and will make an already busy corner even more dangerous”.
- “The problem with the project is it brings to light the double parking that is allowed on Central Avenue.” Note: Central Avenue is only 27 ft wide.
The resident’s safety submission (Appendix #1) details the unsafe driving conditions at the intersection. The pictures (Appendix #3,#4,#5) clearly indicate that the limited sightlines and driver reaction times are far less than at any other Oak Bay intersection identified by the Engineering or Planning Departments.
The resident’s submission also provides a BC Transit Authority Publication and Reports from Canada-Wide Transport Administrators and Police. The documents identify serious intersection safety issues, many of which are present at the St Patrick Street and Central Avenue Intersection.
The above Authorities Safety Reports were published specifically to point out intersection safety improvements to prevent accidents. It is possible staff may not have been aware of the reports. However, when provided, why were they ignored?
The resident’s submission's lists how the new multi-plex development will make the already hazardous driving and parking problems that much worse.
As indicated, Central Avenue is a well travailed through-street and is only 27 feet wide. Two vehicles parked opposite each other, or a large truck or van, results in this busy roadway's driving lanes being reduced from two to one for two-way traffic.
None of this first-hand, knowledgeable “resident engagement”, that identified the existing serious safety and parking problems at this location, made any impression on the majority of 5 approving Councillors who, as indicated, had their own reasons to approve this development.
Councillors acknowledged that the development would result in a variety of difficult to solve logistical problems, but stated these would be addressed after the building was constructed.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective - Read on for more information and please read Appendices. The pictures illustrate, and the information explains, just how dangerous conditions are at this intersection.
What is confusing and has concerned us are:
- Council’s total disregard for resident safety. Also, the fact that Council ignored, not only all of the: neighbours' safety/ danger-warnings, but the BC and Canada-wide potential intersection accident information. Also, that the Staff stated that" Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street both meet the District's Bylaw Standards". This raises four important questions:
1. Are staff and/or the District's experts actually saying that the Bylaw sanctions a bus bay terminal directly in front of an intersection?
2. Does this mean that the BC Transit Authority, Canada-wide Police Forces and Transport Administrators and the resident submission have it wrong?
3. Why is it OK for staff to use a District bylaw's standards to justify not addressing a serious public safety threat, but on the other hand, disregarding the District's Zoning bylaw standards and specifications to justify approving this development's requested and excessive variances?
4. Whose interests are staff looking after?
This is particularly relevant as the former bylaw, that according to staff, sanctions the bus bay terminal's location, is likely a hundred years old when conditions at the intersection were markedly different.
- Also when informed, why was it so difficult for Councillors to understand the substantial taxpayer liability costs that could result given the significant probability of a serious accident?
- Why was this intersection, that has extremely limited sightlines and inadequate driver reaction times, not considered by the District for safety improvements? Particularly, given all the information that has been provided by the public, it is not clear what the Engineering Department’s criteria are to prioritize intersection improvements. Specifically this one, that is a threat to public safety.
For example, there must have been some justification to prioritize the three most recent intersection improvements at: Beach Drive and King George Terrace; Musgrave and Estevan Avenue and Beach Drive at Cadboro Bay Road. None of these intersections has a bus bay terminal: however, all have far better sightlines and allow a lot more driver reaction time to oncoming traffic in comparison.
In addition, we are not aware of any (announced) plans to build a residential/ commercial mixed-use complex at any of these intersections. We were also curious about what the reasons were for the Planning and Engineering Departments' decision: - that a traffic study was not required for this controversial development proposal.
A traffic study would have identified many of the safety issues present at the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection and this is “spelled-out” in the resident’s January 24, 2022 submission to Council (See Traffic Study Appendix #7).
We would have expected that, as approval of this development will add six residential units and 3 commercial businesses to this intersection and, given the end-of-life condition and failures of our present infrastructure, that Council should have inquired about, or staff should have provided
infrastructure impact information.
We certainly would have hoped for “lessons learned”, now that the 43 Unit “Bowker Condo Development”, at the Bowker Avenue and Cadboro Bay Road intersection, is costing the taxpayer over half a million dollars. This considerable infrastructure funding, for which only a very small portion was paid for by the developer, would have gone a long way to improve the District’s general infrastructure,
Councillor Zhelka attempted to get some warning for St. Patrick Street drivers so that they could be aware that the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection was a two way, not a four way stop sign intersection. Even this was rejected by the majority of Council after being warned by Staff they were "interfering in operations”
“Operations” (as the saying goes) "my foot" – there are enough warnings that injury prevention is the issue at hand. It seems to us that just providing two preliminary inexpensive traffic control devices would go a long way to improving driver safety until more permanent safety measures can be provided.
1. A stop sign for eastbound Central Avenue drivers at the southwest corner of Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street. This would provide a 3 way right of way situation for south and eastbound St. Patrick Street Drivers and eastbound Central Avenue Drivers.
2. Intersection marked crosswalks (hard to believe there aren’t any) would significantly enhance pedestrian safety and warn drivers they need to slow down in the event they have to stop for pedestrians.
There are, for example, several marked crosswalks on Windsor Road even though drivers entering and crossing Windsor Road can see for blocks in either direction.
There is no doubt the a more thorough analysis and more traffic control devices are needed at the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection before this new complex adds more street parking near the intersection and eliminates most of the northeast corner intersection sightlines.
We disagree with staff’s direction to council at the January 24, 2022 Council meeting,that Council cannot direct\ interfere in Staff operations at a time when major safety improvements were recommended. It is certainly in Council’s power to direct staff to reconsider certain actions. For example, the Planning and Engineering experts’ decision not to conduct a traffic study. Council can and certainly could have directed staff to follow the Engineering Department's original recommendation for a traffic study.
Also, now that Council has been provided with all the public safety information, deniability is removed – Council, in the event of a serious accident at that intersection, cannot say they were not aware of all the facts.
At Council, a resident recommended that, in order to protect the Community from a lawsuit, the District should obtain a legal opinion. This would determine what the liability and financial implications would be for Oak Bay Taxpayers, in the event a serious accident occurs due to the unsafe conditions at the St. Patrick Street and Central Avenue Intersection.
The resident’s recommendation fell on deaf ears – so much for Council protecting the public interest.
A municipal area of responsibility is traffic control: therefore Oak Bay Watch, based on the newsletter's and neighbours' information and the Agencies' referenced reports, requests Council direct the Engineering Department to provide:
A stop sign for eastbound Central Avenue drivers at the southwest corner of Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street and,
Intersection marked crosswalks at Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street.
Please read Appendices
_______________________________________________________________________
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch is a volunteer community association and its members have a variety of professional backgrounds in both the public and private sector.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Appendix #1: Resident Submission to Council
TO Oak Bay Council January 21, 2022
With reference to 713 St Patrick Street Development Application scheduled to be considered by Council on January the 24, 2022. I previously provided a traffic safety report to the Oak Bay Police and Engineering Departments regarding the safety Issues at the Central Avenue and St Patrick Street Intersection. They have not informed me that they plan any remedial actions or solutions.
Council previously decided more “traffic information” was required and delayed voting on a motion made by Councillor Appleton to approve the 713 St Patrick Street Development Application. Council also responded to resident concerns about parking and have asked staff to provide more information on this issue.
The Engineering and Planning Department have provided their written opinions to my safety report stating that, although there have been safety concerns about that intersection, there are a number of such intersections in the District with similar safety issues.
I have requested the Engineering and Planning Department to name one or any intersections with the same restricted sightlines and traffic reaction timelines however, so far have not received a reply. More importantly, even though they have indicated there are aware of the traffic safety warnings and concerns they have not indicated that they will take any corrective action.
The Planning Department also responded to my question: why wasn’t the District’s Engineering Department’s recommendation to conduct a traffic study (see Appendix #7 ) at this intersection not acted on, and Planning stated it was decided a parking study only was sufficient.
I have included a sketch of the Central Avenue and St Patrick Street Intersection that provides some of the measurements involved (See Appendix #2).
For Council’s information I have also included links to he following reports:
- The Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrator’s 2002 Road Safety Vision - a nationwide, evidence-based road safety strategy
- The BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery
- Canada’s Road Safety Strategy
(See Appendices - #8 and #9)
The January 24, 2022 149-page Planning Department Report provides limited information and does not take into account the extensive information provided in the above Reports or the impacts the new 713 St Patrick Street Development will have on safety issues at the St Patrick Street intersection with Central Avenue.
I noted, although the Chief Administrative Officer signed off on the January 24, 2022 149-page Planning Report, the Planner, Engineering and Police Departments did not.
As the Reports referenced in Appendices #8 and #9 indicate – if the Canadian Transport Administrators, the BC Transit Authority and Police Departments, all over Canada identify intersections and bus bay and bus bay terminal locations as serious traffic safety concerns, then Oak Bay Council and the District’s Administration should also.
Police officers routinely visit schools and inform children intersections are dangerous places, and that a very high proportion of accidents happen at intersections.
BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery: See Appendix #9
The present St Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection configuration and the Bus Terminal Bay location do not meet any of the BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery recommendations or standards.
For the driving conditions for drivers at the St Patrick Street and Central Avenue Intersection: (See Appendix #6)
The Planning Report information only deals with the new 713 St Patrick Street Development parking impact and indicates on Page #5 that “standards set out in the (District) Bylaw, which Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street both already meet.”
Notwithstanding this, as indicated not all intersections have these safety issues and certainly the BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery recommendations and standards have not been complied with.
The impacts the new 713 St Patrick Street Development will have are:
- Almost all of the northeast 12 ft setback of the existing Casey’s market, adjacent to the bus terminal bay and the parked bus sidewalk and the bus, will be eliminated. This will also almost eliminate the Central Avenue eastbound, already restricted view, of a southbound St Patrick Street driver.
- There will be added traffic leaving and entering Central Avenue from the 4-parking stalls in the parking area at the east side of the new development. The 713 St Patrick Street driver’s view is partially obscured when a bus, and on occasion 2 buses, are parked in the bus terminal bay.
- Although the Parking Study indicates that, “there are approximately 54 vacant spaces on surrounding streets during the peak time”. In practice, however, this is not a relevant statistic. Car driver’s park as near as possible to their intended destination. For example, homeowners park outside their homes, particularly when unloading heavy groceries and other objects. This means that residents, visitors, the not yet specified, commercial-use customers, and certainly delivery and furniture moving vehicles, will use the closest parking spots on the four streets adjacent to the St Patrick Street and Central Avenue intersection.
Based on the information in the documents I reference in Appendix #7,#8,#9 and the information in my submission I respectfully request Council conduct an independent traffic study.
This will provide Council with a much better analysis of the unsafe safety issues involved, and if requested could provide solutions, and a plan of action.
Submitted respectfully for your consideration,
Oak Bay Resident
Appendix #2: (Rough Sketch not to scale)
Appendix #3
Appendix #4
Appendix #5
Appendix # 6: Unsafe Driving Conditions
Appendix #7: Traffic Study Information - if provided
A Traffic Study Identifies traffic impacts of a proposed development, The impacts are primarily congestion or safety related.
The items that typically go into a traffic study are:
Appendix #8: Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrator’s 2002 Road Safety Vision Strategy
Report for Oak Bay Council – Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrator’s Road Safety Vision Strategy
While it is understood the Oak Bay Police Department do not have specified traffic police personnel, however patrol officers enforce traffic laws.
Traffic Police Officer Duties
Traffic officers may write reports about any problems they typically encounter and make recommendations for changes.
Before 2002, police forces in Canada generally enforced traffic laws more or less on a random basis. Police officers went on patrol and pulled drivers over as they witnessed infractions or set up check points based on an assessment of where the problem areas were. This approach didn't really impact outcomes: serious collisions, injuries and fatalities on our roads remained a problem. Everyone in a uniform, from senior brass to beat cops, realized that random enforcement was not working.
Since 2002, Police Forces and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport partners in the transportation sector across Canada have been working together to reduce traffic-related injuries and deaths and make Canada's roads the safest in the world. Enforcement is part of the equation but so is research, analysis and monitoring.
In 2002 this resulted in the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) introduced Road Safety Vision 2010 (RSV 2010 a nationwide, evidence-based road safety strategy that focused resources on the most high-risk driver behaviours and set targets for reductions in injuries and fatalities on Canada's roads. It was a major change to traffic safety and enforcement at all levels.
RSV 2010 also caused major changes to the Police traffic enforcement and service delivery model. Under the RSV 2010 model, contributing factors to local fatal and serious injury collisions were analyzed, and public education and enforcement campaigns were implemented along with targeted enforcement. The days of random enforcement were over.
RSV 2010 identified the top five contributing factors one of these.was intersection control and unsafe speed. Urban intersections where most serious accident occur.
The RSV approach has been the core of Police local road safety strategy since 2002. Crime analysts and traffic officers crunch numbers, to help identify collision and “road safety hotspots” so police can target resources, work more effectively with partners like ICBC and School Districts and have the greatest possible impact on road safety.
It is recognized the Oak Bay Police Department provide some of the duties traffic officer perform, and they target specific locations for traffic enforcement. However, it is not clear if they “read files” and “review public complaints”, and identify road safety hotspots or intersections.
Appendix #9: Reports for Council’s consideration.
Home“BC Transit strongly recommends bus stops be located after an intersection, driveway or crosswalk, This location allows for transit vehicles to move through intersections more efficiently and for other road users to safely pass a bus while it is stopped.”
General Components:
- A westbound vehicle on Central Avenue traveling at the 40 Kilometre speed limit approaching the intersection with St Patrick St, is traveling at 36.45 ft per second.
- A transit bus is often parked in a bus terminal bay, for extended time periods, on the north-side of Central Avenue, approximately 24 feet from the intersection with St Patrick St. The transit bus length is approximately 40 feet and it is 10 1/2ft high.
- When a westbound Central Avenue driver’s vehicle is parallel with the bus parked on the driver’s passenger side, the driver would have less than 11/2 seconds before his vehicle reached the intersection with St Patrick St. (see Appendix #3)
- A southbound St Patrick Street driver stopped at the stop sign at the intersection with Central Avenue has equal or even less time to react to approaching eastbound Central Avenue traffic. The driver at the stop sign first has to look EAST towards the parked bus. Then, WEST to see eastbound Central Avenue traffic that could also be approaching the intersection also at 36.45 feet per second. However, the St Patrick Street driver’s eastbound Central Avenue view is also restricted by a 10-foot-high hedge on the property-line of a home on the northwest side corner of the 770 block of Patrick Street and Central Avenue (see Appendix #4). The St Patrick Street driver then has to look EAST again and would only see a westbound vehicle when the front of that vehicle was passing the front of the parked bus (See Appendix #5).
- To further complicate driving conditions for westbound Central Avenue, cars vans or trucks are often parked in the lay-by on the southside of Central Avenue, directly opposite the bus terminal bay. A westbound Central Avenue driver could be distracted by one of these entering or leaving the lay-by.
- Other factors that southbound St Patrick Street drivers might have to contend with are: Any adverse weather conditions; a northbound St Patrick Street vehicle traveling towards them, stopped at the opposite stop sign at Central Ave; or any cars, vans or trucks parked on Central Avenue, west of St Patrick St. (see Appendix #4). Some of these unsafe safety conditions would also apply to pedestrians.
Appendix #7: Traffic Study Information - if provided
A Traffic Study Identifies traffic impacts of a proposed development, The impacts are primarily congestion or safety related.
The items that typically go into a traffic study are:
- Proposed development land uses, sizes and phasing
- Study locations, primarily intersections
- Existing traffic, usually turning movement counts including cars, trucks, pedestrians and bikes, and hose counts
- Times of days, days of week, and horizon years (future years to be studied)
- Expected nearby (off-site) developments
- Crash history
- Additional lanes
- Signs
- Markings
- Signals
- Roundabouts
- Sidewalks
- Bike paths
- Sight distance improvements
- Lighting
Appendix #8: Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrator’s 2002 Road Safety Vision Strategy
Report for Oak Bay Council – Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrator’s Road Safety Vision Strategy
While it is understood the Oak Bay Police Department do not have specified traffic police personnel, however patrol officers enforce traffic laws.
Traffic Police Officer Duties
Traffic officers may write reports about any problems they typically encounter and make recommendations for changes.
Before 2002, police forces in Canada generally enforced traffic laws more or less on a random basis. Police officers went on patrol and pulled drivers over as they witnessed infractions or set up check points based on an assessment of where the problem areas were. This approach didn't really impact outcomes: serious collisions, injuries and fatalities on our roads remained a problem. Everyone in a uniform, from senior brass to beat cops, realized that random enforcement was not working.
Since 2002, Police Forces and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport partners in the transportation sector across Canada have been working together to reduce traffic-related injuries and deaths and make Canada's roads the safest in the world. Enforcement is part of the equation but so is research, analysis and monitoring.
In 2002 this resulted in the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) introduced Road Safety Vision 2010 (RSV 2010 a nationwide, evidence-based road safety strategy that focused resources on the most high-risk driver behaviours and set targets for reductions in injuries and fatalities on Canada's roads. It was a major change to traffic safety and enforcement at all levels.
RSV 2010 also caused major changes to the Police traffic enforcement and service delivery model. Under the RSV 2010 model, contributing factors to local fatal and serious injury collisions were analyzed, and public education and enforcement campaigns were implemented along with targeted enforcement. The days of random enforcement were over.
RSV 2010 identified the top five contributing factors one of these.was intersection control and unsafe speed. Urban intersections where most serious accident occur.
The RSV approach has been the core of Police local road safety strategy since 2002. Crime analysts and traffic officers crunch numbers, to help identify collision and “road safety hotspots” so police can target resources, work more effectively with partners like ICBC and School Districts and have the greatest possible impact on road safety.
It is recognized the Oak Bay Police Department provide some of the duties traffic officer perform, and they target specific locations for traffic enforcement. However, it is not clear if they “read files” and “review public complaints”, and identify road safety hotspots or intersections.
Appendix #9: Reports for Council’s consideration.
- The Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrator’s 2002 Road Safety Vision - a nationwide, evidence-based road safety strategy: This Document has as been archived, however, it is available for reference on request: https://www.canada.ca/en/news/archive/2004/04/2002-annual-report-road-safety-vision-2010-released.html. Appendix #6 details the relevant content.
- The BC Transit Infrastructure Design Summery: https://www.bctransit.com/documents/1507213895398
Home“BC Transit strongly recommends bus stops be located after an intersection, driveway or crosswalk, This location allows for transit vehicles to move through intersections more efficiently and for other road users to safely pass a bus while it is stopped.”
General Components:
- Bus stops should be located after a crosswalks or an intersection
- Sight distances should be achieved for motorists approaching the bus stop as well as transit customers crossing the road from the bus stop
- Canada’s Road Safety Strategy: https://tc.canada.ca/en/road-transportation/publications/road-safety-canada