City of Hamilton
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
FINAL REPORT
APRIL 2010
IBI G ROU P FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Client: City of Hamilton
Project Name: City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study
Report Title: City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study
IBI Reference: 20492
Version: V 1.0 - Final
Digital Master: J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\TTR_Truck_Route_Master_Plan_Study_FINAL_2010-04-23.docx\2010-04-23\J
Originator: Ron Stewart, Matt Colwill, Ted Gill, Scott Fraser
Reviewer: Ron Stewart
Authorization: Ron Stewart
Circulation List:
History: V0.1 - Draft
April 2010 IBI G ROU P FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Truck Route Master Plan ...... 1 1.2 Background ...... 1 1.3 Master Plan Scope ...... 2 1.4 Master Plan Goals and Objectives ...... 3 1.5 Consultation and Communication ...... 4 1.6 Implementation and Interpretation of the Truck Route Master Plan ...... 5 1.7 Organization of Report...... 5
2. BACKGROUND DOCUMENT REVIEW ...... 6 2.1 Airport Master Plan Update (2004) ...... 6 2.2 Hamilton Goods Movement Study Final Report (2005) ...... 7 2.3 Development of Policy Papers for Phase Two of the Transportation Master Plan for the City of Hamilton: Rural Road Standards Policy Paper (2005) ...... 8 2.4 Short Sea Shipping Market Study (2005) ...... 9 2.5 Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, Volume 2: Development of Policy Papers for Phase Two of the Transportation Master Plan for the City Of Hamilton – Summary of Proposed Recommended Policies (2005) ...... 9 2.6 Red Hill Valley Project (RHVP) Fact Sheet: Traffic (2005) ...... 10 2.7 Southern Ontario Gateway Council Strategic Plan: Building a Foundation for Prosperity (October 2006)...... 11 2.8 Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, Volume 1: Class Environmental Assessment Report (2007) ...... 11 2.9 Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, Volume 3: Public and Agency Consultation Report (2007) ...... 13 2.10 City of Hamilton Economic Development Review (2007) ...... 13 2.11 Metrolinx Green Paper #5: Moving Goods and Delivering Services: Development of a Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (2008) ...... 14 2.12 Road Classification and Right-of Way Width Project (2009) ...... 15
3. STRATEGIC VISION ...... 16 3.1 Introduction ...... 16 3.2 Truck Route Master Plan Goals ...... 18 3.3 Truck Route Master Plan Benefits ...... 18 3.4 Truck Route Master Plan Key Elements ...... 20
4. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY ...... 22 4.1 Other Key Considerations ...... 22
April 2010 Page i. IBI G ROU P FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D)
4.2 Analysis Approach ...... 24 4.3 Hamilton Downtown Evaluation ...... 31
5. DATA COLLECTION AND CONSULTATION ...... 37 5.1 Consultation ...... 37 5.2 Field Data ...... 41 5.3 Collision Data ...... 42
6. DEVELOPMENT OF TRUCK ROUTE NETWORK ...... 43 6.1 Geographic Regions ...... 43 6.2 Alternative 1 Network ...... 53 6.3 Alternative 2 Network ...... 56 6.4 Alternative 3 Network ...... 59
7. MANAGING THE TRUCK ROUTE NETWORK ...... 84 7.1 Time-of-Day/Time-of-Year Restrictions ...... 84 7.2 Engine Brake Signage ...... 85 7.3 Long Combination Vehicles ...... 86 7.4 Restrictive Signage ...... 86 7.5 “Specified Users” Classification ...... 87 7.6 Enforcement ...... 87 7.7 Education ...... 88
8. CONCLUSIONS ...... 88
9. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 89 9.1 Recommended Truck Route Network ...... 89 9.2 Capital Roadway Improvements ...... 91 9.3 Long-Term Management ...... 92
List of Exhibits
Exhibit 2-1: Hamilton Airport Landside Access ...... 7 Exhibit 3-1: Industry Clusters ...... 19 Exhibit 4-1: Roadway Classification ...... 25 Exhibit 4-2: Roadway Classifications – Urban Area Enlargement ...... 26 Exhibit 4-3: Draft Urban Structure ...... 27 Exhibit 4-4: City of Hamilton Business Parks ...... 28 Exhibit 4-5: Rural Land Use Designations ...... 28 Exhibit 4-6: Analysis Approach Flow Diagram ...... 31 Exhibit 4-7: Downtown Truck Patterns ...... 32
April 2010 Page ii. IBI G ROU P FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D)
Exhibit 4-8: Perimeter Road Concept ...... 33 Exhibit 4-9: Existing Downtown Truck Routes ...... 35 Exhibit 4-10: Downtown Road Classifications ...... 35 Exhibit 5-1: Consultation Flow Diagram ...... 38 Exhibit 6-1: Waterdown/East Flamborough ...... 44 Exhibit 6-2: West Flamborough ...... 46 Exhibit 6-3: Glanbrook/Airport ...... 47 Exhibit 6-4: Parkways Corridor ...... 48 Exhibit 6-5: Stoney Creek ...... 49 Exhibit 6-6: Downtown Core ...... 50 Exhibit 6-7: East Hamilton/Portlands ...... 51 Exhibit 6-8: West Hamilton/Dundas ...... 52 Exhibit 6-9: Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing” Truck Route Network ...... 54 Exhibit 6-10: Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing” Truck Route Network (Zoom) ...... 55 Exhibit 6-11: Alternative 2 Truck Route Network ...... 57 Exhibit 6-12: Alternative 2 Truck Route Network (Zoom) ...... 58 Exhibit 6-13: Arterial Links Not Included in the L1 System ...... 59 Exhibit 6-14: Level 2 Analysis Variance Summary ...... 60 Exhibit 6-15: Alternative 3 Truck Route Network ...... 82 Exhibit 6-16: Alternative 3 Truck Route Network (Zoom) ...... 83 Exhibit 7-1: Engine Brake Signs...... 85 Exhibit 9-1: Recommended Additions and Upgrades ...... 89 Exhibit 9-2: Recommended Removals ...... 90
List of Appendices
Appendix A – PIC Summary Reports Appendix B – Technical Advisory Committee Appendix C – Level 1 Analysis Results Appendix D – Level 2 Analysis Results Appendix E – City of Hamilton By-Law and Schedules
April 2010 Page iii. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
1. INTRODUCTION
This introductory section discusses the purpose, scope, goals and objectives of the Truck Route Master Plan, provides background for the study, and describes the organization of the remainder of this report. 1.1 Purpose of the Truck Route Master Plan
The City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan (TRMP) provides a comprehensive, consolidated update to the existing truck route network. Furthermore, it provides recommendations for future action, policies for truck route signage, and a methodology for dealing with truck route network issues in the future.
The Truck Route Master Plan Study is a key component of the Transportation Master Plan as part of the Council-approved Growth Related Integrated Development Strategy. The Goods Movement Cluster, including air, port, road, rail, warehousing, logistics and distribution, has been identified within the Council approved Economic Development Strategy and listed within the related Draft soon to be presented for input. The Truck Route Master Plan Study compliments other initiatives including the Metrolinx Urban Freight Study, Niagara to GTA Corridor Environmental assessment, Ontario Quebec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor as well as the McMaster Institute for Transportation and Logistics, and Southern Ontario Gateway Council activities. 1.2 Background
In mid-2005 City Council approved a study to review the truck route system in the City of Hamilton. In 2007, the Truck Route Sub-Committee of the next Council met for the first time, approved a mandate and directed staff to proceed with the project.
The city‟s traffic by-law requires a vehicle weighing more than 4500 kg to follow the city‟s designated truck route system. Vehicles are only permitted to deviate from the truck route system when making a delivery or a pick-up and to do so they must take the shortest distance from the truck route system to the point of pick-up or delivery and then return immediately via the shortest route to the truck route system. Therefore, trucks can legally travel on streets that are not designated truck routes.
The designated truck route system has not been comprehensively reviewed in a very long time, if ever. The characteristics of transportation in Hamilton have changed over the years, with reduced emphasis on heavy industry in the north-east quadrant of the lower city, and with the implementation of major transportation facilities such as the Lincoln Alexander Parkway / Red Hill Valley Parkway system.
The City of Hamilton is a major transportation centre in Ontario. It is a major port, serves as an air cargo hub for express packages (i.e. courier companies), and it is strategically located for road and rail routes that serve both domestic and trans-border trade. Previous studies, dating back to 1995 have dealt with trucking strategies, recognized the importance of the truck route system, and promoted its continuity.
While the driving force behind the decision to undertake a truck route study was primarily the impact of heavy trucks on areas such as residential and business improvement areas, trucking has significant impact on the city‟s economic development and growth and how the city is positioned as a major transportation hub. In the new millennium, virtually everything that is used by industry, commerce or private consumers in the City of Hamilton is delivered by truck. Therefore, on one
April 2010 Page 1. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
hand, trucks are vital to the economic health of the city, and in fact the city is attempting to position itself as a major transportation hub due to its excellent rail, air and water transportation services, allowing Hamilton to become a trans-shipment point. On the other hand, heavy vehicles, particularly large trucks, cause negative impacts through visual impacts, real or perceived safety issues, and noise issues. The purpose of the truck route study can be characterized by the classic “three-legged stool” where the social and environmental impacts of heavy vehicles on shopping areas and local residences need to be balanced against the financial and economic advantages of trucks toward the city‟s prosperity.
One of the emerging challenges with maintaining the truck route network is that there have recently been a number of requests to remove individual links due to local concerns. This has the impact of fragmenting the truck route network and undermining its effectiveness. Therefore, an important policy area is to maintain, protect and, if possible, enhance the existing system of designated truck routes.
Ultimately, the definition of a truck route system for Hamilton must be equitable for both residents and industry. The truck route network must allow for the efficient movement of goods in a manner that is safe and respective of the environment.
The approach to examining, and eventually defining the truck route network relies on a combination of technical analysis, public and stakeholder input and detailed route by route assessments. 1.3 Master Plan Scope
It is important to clearly state the scope of a transportation master plan. According to the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process (2007), a master plan is defined as:
“A long range plan which integrates infrastructure requirements for existing and future land use with environmental assessment principles.”
“The scope of a Master Plan is broad and usually includes an analysis of the system in order to outline a framework for future works and developments. Master Plans are not typically undertaken to address a site-specific problem.”
Following on these Environmental Assessment definitions, a transportation master plan examines the overall transportation system, not site or area-specific components of that system such as specific roads or intersections. Where roads and intersections are considered, they are reviewed in the context of the larger area road network in which they function. Other descriptors of a transportation master plan that have established the scope of this project are:
Comprehensive, strategic-level planning;
Provides direction for municipal transportation investment and priorities;
Multi-modal scope considering all modes of transportation under municipal jurisdiction including roads, transit, cycling and walking;
Long range, planning 20-25 years into the future, usually in increments of the short term (0-5 years), medium term (5-10 years) and long term (10-20 years). In some cases the longer 25 year-plus planning horizon is included for transportation corridor protection;
The master plan sets policy direction for the municipality‟s Official Plan;
April 2010 Page 2. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
A master plan is a package of actions, with no single solution to meet existing and future needs;
Master plans should be dynamic documents that are flexible to changing conditions over time;
In Ontario, master plans should be prepared to satisfy Phase 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process dealing with Need or Opportunity, and Alternative Planning Solutions; and
The master plan is custom-made for the municipality it covers, while often also referring to best practice experience from comparable municipalities. 1.4 Master Plan Goals and Objectives
The goal and objectives developed by the City of Hamilton for this Truck Route Master Plan are described below.
1.4.1 TRUCK ROUTE MASTER P LAN GOAL
To develop a new comprehensive Truck Route Master Plan that recommends a truck route network, and the policies and implementation strategy that will assist the City in managing the truck route network over the next five years.
1.4.2 TRUCK ROUTE MASTER P LAN OBJECTIVES
The objectives are as follows:
1. Identify the purpose and goals of a truck route system, along with technical justification, in order to achieve the goals of the truck route system;
2. Set the basic criteria for selecting routes to be included in such a system; and a review of the overall system structure, specific “hot spots”, and boundary roads;
3. Satisfy Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA process dealing with transportation system problems or opportunities, and alternative planning strategies respectively;
4. Summarize the information that should be contained in the City‟s by-law to support the truck route system; and the by-law and by-law schedules to provide a new comprehensive by-law;
5. Develop the operational specifics such as signing methodology, including engine brakes noise issues; and
6. Revise the truck route mapping to be compatible with the City‟s GIS system.
1.4.3 MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONFORMITY
The TRMP has been prepared following the Master Planning Process of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process 2007 (Class EA), which is a five-phase process required to initiate construction of municipal roads, and water and wastewater projects in Ontario.
The TRMP is a stand-alone document with a broad level of assessment to describe the overall City of Hamilton Truck Route Network, and provides the context for implementing specific projects within
April 2010 Page 3. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
this system by satisfying Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA Process dealing with the system problems and opportunities, and alternative solutions respectively. More detailed investigations will be required for specific Schedule B and C projects recommended in this Plan.
Schedule B projects will require the filing of the project file for public review, while Schedule C projects will have to fulfill Phases 3 and 4 of the Class EA process prior to filing an Environmental Study Report (ESR) for public review. In both cases, the public review period includes a Part II Order appeal mechanism, where an individual can make a written request to the Minister of the Environment to extend the project to a higher level of EA investigation. A Part II Order request can only be made on a project-specific EA, and not on a master plan on which such a project is based. Schedule A and A+ projects generally involve normal maintenance and operational activities with no or minimal environmental effects, and so are pre-approved.
The study was a master planning exercise. This means that it was conducted at a higher level and decisions were made based on overall principles. While some detailed reviews were made of more controversial sections, the study was not intended to, and did not, review the impacts of changes in the truck route system on property values, physical impacts to specific properties or geotechnical road structures. Such detail is not consistent with a master planning study and would have greatly expanded the project scope and cost. In any case, since the large majority of changes recommended by this study are removals of road segments from the truck route system, the transfer of traffic to alternate parallel routes which are already truck routes was assumed to have minimal overall effect on these factors.
The guiding principles that evolved from the study are: Balancing social, environmental, and economic factors; Consistency in decision-making; Minimizing the demand for enforcement; Minimizing dead ends in the network; Transferring of truck traffic to higher quality facilities; and Matching relationship of trucks to road category and roadway configuration. 1.5 Consultation and Communication
The study included extensive consultation of stakeholders. The consultation process has consisted of three coordinated streams:
The Truck Route Master Planning process has been directed and overseen by the Truck Route Sub-Committee of Public Works Committee;
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was created. It consisted of key industry stakeholders, including representatives of the port, airport, Chambers of Commerce, trucking associations, Hamilton Police Service, the Ministry of Transportation Ontario and the Ministry of the Environment; and
The Truck Route Master Plan has followed the Public Consultation requirements of Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process, as per the Municipal Engineers Association document (Oct. 2000, as amended in 2007). Public consultation included two sets of public information centres and a web portal for public information and input.
April 2010 Page 4. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
A more detailed discussion of the consultation and communication activities undertaken as part of the Truck Route Master Plan study is provided in Section 5.1. 1.6 Implementation and Interpretation of the Truck Route Master Plan
When the current truck route by-law was consolidated after amalgamation in 2001, a number of minor housekeeping errors were introduced. As well, the truck route schedule is segregated by former municipalities. The multiple truck route by-law schedules sections have been consolidated into a single schedule, and the known errors relative to the way the current truck route system is signed and operated have been corrected as part of this process.
As part of the Truck Route Master Plan study, the issue of engine retardant brakes sometime known as “jake brakes” was addressed. When properly maintained engine brakes on large trucks are not supposed to make any more noise than the same vehicle travelling uphill. However it is known that poorly maintained or intentionally modified engine brakes can be quite loud. A procedure was developed recommending the process for dealing with engine brake noise complaints, and when signing for such complaints is appropriate.
The signing system used for the truck route system in the City of Hamilton is a “permissive” system. This means that the routes which are truck routes are clearly defined. This system requires far less signing than the alternative which would be a “prohibitive” system in which all routes which are not truck routes have to be signed. However the Sub-Committee noted that there are instances in which additional signing in the form of prohibitive signing may be required in order to re-enforce areas with poor compliance or areas in which drivers maybe confused. A policy on the limited use of prohibitive signing in conjunction with the city‟s permissive signing system has been included in this study.
It is recognized that the changes recommended in the TRMP may generate issues that need further discussion. It is also recognized that new truck route related issues will arise regularly. This is particularly true of existing and proposed roadways in developing areas. In the past, truck route status was typically not considered or explicitly stated in planning reports. Going forward, it is important that this be formally considered and addressed, and that roadways be considered for inclusion in the City of Hamilton truck route network at such time as industrial or commercial demands would justify the change, with the appropriate roadway changes. The TRMP is not intended to provide a static truck route system that will not change in the future, but to update the system to current conditions. 1.7 Organization of Report
The report is organized as follows:
Section 2 is a summary of the Background Document Review. It provides the highlights of documents dealing with transportation planning issues in Ontario, and within the City of Hamilton.
Section 3 presents the Strategic Vision for the truck route network.
Section 4 describes the truck route network Evaluation Methodology.
Section 5 discusses the Consultation component of the study; it also includes a summary of the Data Collection effort.
April 2010 Page 5. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Section 6 provides a comprehensive explanation of the Development of the Truck Route Network.
Section 7 addresses Managing the Truck Route Network.
Sections 8 and 9 provide a summary of the Conclusions and Recommendations. 2. BACKGROUND DOCUMENT REVIEW
To gain a better understanding of the complexities involved with goods movement and truck routing through and within the City of Hamilton, a review and assessment of secondary source materials was undertaken. The following sections identify the background documents that were reviewed, and provide a summary of the relevant information contained within those documents. The documents are presented in chronological order of their release. As a result, some of the information presented for the older documents may be superseded by information contained within the more recent documents. This succession of information illustrates the dynamic nature of ideas and policies related to goods movement. 2.1 Airport Master Plan Update (2004)
The primary purpose of the Airport Master Plan is to establish an orderly development concept for John C. Munro Hamilton International Airport. At the end of 2004, a new airport expressway (Highway 6) opened. This nine kilometre two-lane highway connects Hamilton International Airport with Highway 403 to the northwest and Upper James Street to the southeast. Expansion plans call for New Highway 6 airport expressway to be upgraded to a limited access four-lane highway between Highway 403 and Hamilton International Airport within the next 5 to 10 years (medium term).
Implementation of the recommendations of the Airport Master Plan would improve commercial vehicle access to the airport and make the airport more attractive as a cargo hub within the Golden Horseshoe.
April 2010 Page 6. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 2-1: Hamilton Airport Landside Access
2.2 Hamilton Goods Movement Study Final Report (2005)
The primary objective of this study was to examine the technical potential of the City of Hamilton to become an efficient, integrated and sustainable regional intermodal transportation centre within the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Greater Toronto Area-Windsor-Sarnia Trade Corridor.
Good Movement Vision for Hamilton
Medium Term 5-10 years
Hamilton is able attract many industries that rely on just-in-time delivery because of the availability of 24-hour operations at air, marine and intermodal facilities. This gives Hamilton a competitive advantage in the region. Hamilton also has sufficiently large employment lands assembled, serviced and ready for these new industries (that are comprises of a variety of economic clusters).
Time Frames For Action
Short Term 1-5 Years
April 2010 Page 7. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
City of Hamilton: Should resolve freight bottlenecks and specify clearance requirements for truck routes.
Province of Ontario: Should plan network investments in conjunction with Hamilton Master Plan development, and provide funding for designated infrastructure improvements.
Medium Term 5-10 years
City of Hamilton: Should implement recommendations of the Transportation Master Plan regarding strategic infrastructure.
Province of Ontario: Should expand provincial highway system where needed (established through Environmental Assessment Master Plan process).
An improved truck route plan will be critical in transforming the City of Hamilton into an efficient, integrated and sustainable regional intermodal transportation centre in Southern Ontario. 2.3 Development of Policy Papers for Phase Two of the Transportation Master Plan for the City of Hamilton: Rural Road Standards Policy Paper (2005)
This report focuses on the current design standards for rural roadways, and whether higher standards (e.g., paved shoulders, pedestrian and cycling amenities, etc.) should be considered. There is no detailed discussion regarding Hamilton and local truck routes. The following policies were recommended for consideration in the City‟s Transportation Master Plan:
Recommended Policy 1
Use the proposed core roadway classification system and associated enhancements/variations as the basis for considering rural road standards.
Implementation
Adopt the proposed road classification system that delineates separate categories for Rural Arterials, Rural Collectors and Rural Local roads. Delineation of sub-categories of rural roads may be considered where warranted as part of area Transportation Planning studies, but will not form part of the official classification system.
The Rural Roadway Standards will be used not only for the design, construction and maintenance of rural roads, but also to determine the warrants for traffic operation and control changes on rural roads such as, but not limited to, right-of- way widths, use of stop controls and construction of exclusive turn lanes.
Recommended Policy 2
Follow “Desirable” or maximum design standards, and “Acceptable” or minimum design standards as warranted by specific needs and conditions.
April 2010 Page 8. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Implementation
Maintain Special Character Roads according to acceptable minimum engineering standards and practices, to levels that will not increase their design capacity.
The decision to use Desirable vs. Acceptable Rural Roadway Standards will be dictated by the category of roadway involved, its operating conditions (traffic volume and type), physical conditions (i.e. terrain), adjacent land use and access needs, and available financial resources.
Inclusion of special features such as paved shoulders, bike lanes, and adjacent multi-user paths will be assessed during preliminary design stages and other planning process and will take into account adjacent development, potential user needs, on-going maintenance requirements and potential drainage issues.
Recommended Policy 3
Consider the need for facilities to accommodate pedestrians, persons using mobility aids and cyclists on all rural roads, and attempt to provide paved shoulders on rural roads where cycling is prevalent and sidewalks where the roadway leads to a school or community facility.
Implementation
Develop and adopt design standards for rural roads with paved shoulders
Conduct on-going needs assessments to identify rural roads where cycling/pedestrian facilities may be warranted. 2.4 Short Sea Shipping Market Study (2005)
This study examines the potential to shift cargo currently moving by rail or road between the deep- sea port of Halifax and the inland market and Great Lakes port of Hamilton, Ontario. It focuses on both overseas transhipment cargo as well as domestic intermodal cargo.
There is no detailed discussion regarding Hamilton and local truck routes. 2.5 Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, Volume 2: Development of Policy Papers for Phase Two of the Transportation Master Plan for the City Of Hamilton – Summary of Proposed Recommended Policies (2005)
Goods Movement
Recommended Policy:
Maintain, protect and enhance the existing goods movement network in Hamilton to support the economic development strategy.
April 2010 Page 9. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Implementation:
The Strategic Goods Movement Network should be refined in Phase 3 of the Transportation Master Plan by identifying future infrastructure requirements and ensuring it is compatible with growth policies in the Official Plan
Investigate strategies to enhance the road network to improve opportunities for the integration of modes.
Continue utilizing a passive approach towards truck route designation, considering truck route restrictions on local streets only in special circumstances.
Review the truck route network to identify missing links and locations where roadway geometry can pose problems for trucks. To address these problems, develop routing and/or infrastructure options.
Ensure that goods movement issues are part of the planning process in the evaluation of transportation network decisions is EAs and TMPs. This includes routing options for new facilities, roadway geometric standards, and on-street parking and loading regulations.
Refine and expand the existing traffic count program to include more detailed truck classifications.
The recommended goods movement strategy policies contained in the Hamilton Transportation Master Plan seek to improve and enhance the existing good movement network through the identification of problems, making strategies compatible with existing plans and polices and the integration of modes.
2.6 Red Hill Valley Project (RHVP) Fact Sheet: Traffic (2005)
Traffic Congestion
A total of 3,300-3,500 truck trips per day could be diverted from local streets onto the Red Hill Creek Expressway.
On the Centennial Parkway, there are approximately 90 trucks travelling northbound and approximately 110 trucks travelling southbound during the morning peak period (7- 9 a.m.).
If the Red Hill Creek Expressway is operational, approximately 70-80% of truck traffic on the Centennial Parkway and potentially 85% of Claremont Access truck traffic could be diverted there.
Without the Red Hill Creek Expressway, there will be a capacity deficiency across the Escarpment crossings in both the short term (2006) and the long term (2021).
The Red Hill Valley Project will reduce and divert truck traffic from existing highways and local streets. Without this project, capacity deficiencies will be present at Escarpment crossings in the short and long terms.
April 2010 Page 10. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
2.7 Southern Ontario Gateway Council Strategic Plan: Building a Foundation for Prosperity (October 2006)
This strategic plan, commissioned by the Southern Ontario Gateway Council (SOGC) has four primary objectives:
Establish a vision for the SOGC;
Establish a set of priorities and policy initiatives to be addressed;
Provide a comprehensive reference/information guide for the SOGC; and
Act as a communication tool to increase public and government awareness of the importance of the Southern Ontario region‟s transportation system.
Key Strategic Issues: 9. Niagara to GTA Corridor
In 2000, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation initiated the Niagara Peninsula Transportation Needs Assessment Study. The results of this study were the development of a long-range "Transportation Development Strategy" to help guide provincial and municipal transportation planning in the Niagara Peninsula area. A key recommendation of the strategy is to develop a $1.5-billion Niagara-GTA corridor from the Canada/US border (at Fort Erie), through Hamilton, and connecting with the 400- Series Highway network in Southern Ontario.
Action Plan: Network Efficiency
Commercial vehicle only lanes – Adding lanes or designating existing lanes on new and proposed highways for commercial traffic only is a new and innovative idea that has never been tried in Ontario. Commercial vehicle only lanes would separate heavy vehicles (i.e. trucks) from existing traffic, and has the potential to decrease driver- vehicle conflicts, reduce congestion, and
Long combination vehicles (LCVs) – LCVs are truck tractors with two or three trailers. Allowing LCVs on Ontario highways will improve productivity, reduce transport costs, increase traffic flow and reduce emissions. Currently, LCV are allowed to operate by special permit in Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta.
The implementation of recommendations from the SOGC Strategic Plan, including ITS, commercial vehicle only lanes and LCVs will improve the efficiency of the existing roadway network and potentially reducing commercial vehicle volume on truck routes. 2.8 Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, Volume 1: Class Environmental Assessment Report (2007)
Freight/Goods Movement Systems: Trucks
The impacts of commercial vehicles on roads in Hamilton include:
Trucks loading and unloading on streets and avenues;
An excess of truck traffic on avenues and streets; and
April 2010 Page 11. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Trucks using residential streets to avoid delays on congested streets or at traffic lights.
To maximize the efficiency of the existing goods movement network, the recommendation is to clearly define future land uses adjacent to transportation corridors and regulate on- and off-street loading based on the specific land use.
Future Transportation Demand, Supply and Performance
Several previous sub-area studies have identified committed and planned road network improvements for Hamilton:
Red Hill Valley Parkway.
Arvin Avenue extension.
Dartnall Road extension to Dickenson Road.
Garth Street extension from Twenty Road to Dickenson Road.
New east-west road from Tradewind to Trinity Road.
Trinity Church Corridor (being examined as part of ROPA 9)
Upper Ottawa St. extension
Waterdown network improvements.
Highway 6 widening to five lanes (3 northbound and 2 southbound) south of Dundas Street, and the construction of an interchange at Highway 6 and Dundas Street (EA was recently completed).
Even with these road improvements, projections indicate that there will be road capacity shortfalls in the future. Assuming that current auto mode share trends remain the same in the future, most Escarpment crossings will be well over capacity in 2031. However, a 20% reduction in auto driver trips (through transit improvements and TDM), will allow most Escarpment crossings to operate within their capacity in the future. Cost estimates indicate that a new Escarpment crossing would cost in the order of $50 million, which indicate the importance of auto reducing strategies.
Road Network: Development of a Preferred strategy
Assuming that all committed roadway improvements are implemented and aggressive TDM in place, it is projected that some capacity deficiencies in Hamilton‟s roadway network will still exist:
Downtown and Central Escarpment Crossings: Future projects indicate that many of the Escarpment crossings are projected to continue to experience some congestion. In the short term, some of this congestion will be alleviated with the opening of the Red Hill Valley Parkway. Proposals to expand the Downtown road network are inconsistent with the goals of promoting a pedestrian and transit supportive environment. Other approaches are proposed: Accept some congestion as part of a successful Downtown Implement aggressive Transportation Demand Management (i.e. parking pricing)
April 2010 Page 12. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Additional transit improvements Postpone proposed conversion of east-west streets to two-way
Red Hill Valley Corridor: Over the long term, longer distance travel could cause capacity limitations on the Red Hill Valley Parkway. This could be alleviated by implementing additional TDM measures and/or auto disincentives such as road pricing. By 2031, additional lanes may be required on Red Hill Valley Parkway if development in Hamilton intensifies and TDM/transit initiatives are not effective.
Highway 403 Corridor: Due to the growth in surrounding municipalities, the Highway 403 corridor experiences regular congestion, this is projected to increase due to growth in surrounding municipalities. Environmental concerns to the Escarpment limits major road expansion leading to other capacity strategies such as the implementation of HOV lanes. The proposed GTA-Niagara corridor (currently under assessment) may also help to reduce travel demand on Highway 403 between the Lincoln Alexander Parkway and Highway 6 North.
New Link to Airport: A significant issue has been the lack of an appropriate north and east goods movement access to the Hamilton International Airport. The Hamilton Goods Movement Study (2005) identifies a need to provide a designated truck route between the Red Hill Valley Parkway and the Airport. In the short-term, existing roads could serve this function while specific routing alternatives are studied.
Proposed infrastructure improvements contained in Hamilton Transportation Master Plan will improve the efficiency of the City‟s good movement network. 2.9 Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, Volume 3: Public and Agency Consultation Report (2007)
This document contained no information of substantial relevance to the truck route master plan study. 2.10 City of Hamilton Economic Development Review (2007)
Hamilton 2008 – The Year Ahead
The Conference Board of Canada estimates that Hamilton‟s manufacturing economy will begin a slow recovery in 2008. Growth will remain relatively flat. There is new growth already in the development pipeline and over 700,000 square feet of industrial space currently under construction.
Employment Lands in Progress
Over the past two years, the City of Hamilton‟s Industrial Parks and Airport Development Division has been carrying out many required studies to open up industrially designated lands for development including:
Airport Employment Growth District Study
Ancaster Industrial Business Park
North Glanbrook Industrial Business Park
April 2010 Page 13. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Stoney Creek Industrial Business Park
The development of new industrial business parks in the City of Hamilton will add more commercial vehicles to existing truck routes, highways and local streets in the City of Hamilton. 2.11 Metrolinx Green Paper #5: Moving Goods and Delivering Services: Development of a Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (2008)
An efficient goods movement system is critical to sustaining economic prosperity in the GTHA. However, the movement of goods and delivery of services also requires the management of environmental concerns (e.g., emissions, noise, and excessive land consumption), transportation safety concerns (e.g., collisions, spills, and pavement damage) and increased road congestion. The goals set forth in this paper will attempt to balance these costs and benefits using sustainable approaches.
Appendix A: Potential Initiatives
Land Use LU2 – Develop and apply similar proximity guidelines for major truck routes
LU4 – Use land-use policies and public funds to develop the strategic assembly of lands near key goods movement hubs
LU7 – Establish freight villages adjacent to intermodal hubs so that transport-intensive industries can choose the most efficient mode by time and cost
Infrastructure I1 – Implement Private-Public partnerships to invest in additional rail and road capacity for trunk routes and regional arterial connectors
I3 – Expand road tolls to key facilities and provide reduced rates for trucks in off-peak hours
I4 – Develop an east-west toll truck route through the GTHA; through-trucks are required to use this route
Operations O5 – Develop a system to coordinate truck deliveries; one possibility is to have truck trips pre-registered and assigned a timeslot within which they can arrive, optimizing timeslots to minimize bottlenecks and congestion
Use of Technology
T2 – Implement programs to collect data on truck movements using GPS
T5 – Use real-time public systems to consolidate local movements and optimize total system logistics costs
T6 – Implement a suite of technologies to monitor traffic, enable tolling and allow dynamic route/mode selection for shippers and drivers
April 2010 Page 14. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Regulations and Policies RP1 – Develop and use common criteria and approaches for designating truck routes by municipalities and regional agencies to create an integrated GTHA-wide truck route network
The implementation of potential initiatives from Metrolinx Green Paper #5 will have a major impact on truck routes in the City of Hamilton. Land use polices will effectively guide development of industrial developments near good movement hubs and could lead to the development of freight villages. Road tolls, particularly congestion-based tolls, will impact time of day in which trucks use roads and highways. Policies to develop an integrated GTHA-wide truck route network will create stronger commercial linkages to and from Hamilton. 2.12 Road Classification and Right-of Way Width Project (2009)
The study provides an outline of the recommended road classifications and right-of-way widths for the City of Hamilton‟s roadway network. This study is of particular importance to the Truck Route Master Plan Study, as designation as an arterial roadway (Major/Minor Urban or Rural) or freeway implies that truck travel on the roadway is appropriate.
Recommended Truck Route Policy:
It would be appropriate that truck route designations continue to be provided through the applicable by-law. It is noted that trucks may affect the capacity of road or the need for additional lanes (e.g. truck climbing lanes). Also, the truck route system may have a higher impact on turning radii at intersections and the need for larger daylight triangles will be more critical.
Major Arterial Roads (Urban), subject to the following policies:
The primary function of a Major Arterial Road is to carry relatively high volumes of intra- municipal and inter-regional traffic through the City in association with other types of roads, although land accesses are permitted, they are under rigid controls;
The maximum basic right of way widths for Major Arterial Roads shall be 45 metres;
The right of way widths of Major Arterial Roads shall include sufficient width for left turn lanes and right turn lanes at major intersections;
Major Arterial roads should generally be organized in a grid pattern with collectors, arterials, parkways and provincial highways;
All vehicle types, including trucks (subject to truck route network), buses, and rapid transit vehicles are permitted; bike lanes may be in place to accommodate cyclists and sidewalks shall generally be present on both sides of the street for pedestrians; and
Parking shall be prohibited or at minimum be restricted in the peak hours.
Minor Arterial Roads (Urban), subject to the following policies:
The main function of a Minor Arterial Road is to carry moderate volumes of intra municipal and inter-regional traffic through the City in association with other types of roads, but land accesses are permitted under some controls;
April 2010 Page 15. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
The maximum basic right of way widths for Minor Arterial Roads shall 36 metres;
Minor Arterial roads shall generally be organized in a grid pattern with collectors, arterials parkways and provincial highways;
All vehicle types, including trucks (subject to truck route network), buses and rapid transit vehicles, are permitted; bike lanes may be in place to accommodate cyclists and sidewalks shall generally be present on both sides of the street for pedestrians; and
Gateway features may be permitted where required.
Arterial Road (Rural), subject to the following policies:
The primary function of a Rural Arterial Road is to carry relatively high volumes of intra municipal and inter-regional traffic through the rural area in association with other types of roads; land accesses are permitted but should be considered a secondary consideration;
The maximum basic right of way width for Rural Arterial Roads shall be 45 metres;
Rural Arterial roads shall generally be organized in a grid pattern;
All vehicle types, including trucks (subject to truck route network) and buses shall generally be permitted; paved shoulders may be present for cyclists, and
Parking shall be prohibited. 3. STRATEGIC VISION
The Strategic Vision attempts to explain the purpose of a truck route system in general, and discusses the advantages of defining a truck route system. The Vision reflects the directions of Hamilton‟s Economic Development Strategy, which places a high priority on fostering transportation-related industries such as the Port and Airport. The Vision also addresses the need to balance economic objectives with social and environmental considerations, including the creation of “liveable” communities. There are a number of key documents that have had a bearing on the overall vision including the Goods Movement Policy Paper (2005), the Hamilton Goods Movement Study (2005), as well as Vision 2020, GRIDS, and the most recent Economic Development Strategy. 3.1 Introduction
North American truck route plans are designed on the principle that heavy vehicles should stay on designated routes (primarily arterial roadways) and only use local roads (collector and residential) for local trips. This has lead many municipalities and regions to design a system of bypass routes for traffic that has neither an origin nor a destination in the community, and a local system that guides heavier traffic through the main local routes.
Ontario municipalities are permitted, by provincial legislation, to use vehicle weights when determining heavy vehicle routes. Given that gross vehicle weight (GVW)1 is based on physical characteristics, this translates in to size. The advantage is it puts everyone on a level playing field when it comes to measuring loads. Interestingly, it is not always the weight of the vehicle at the time
1 Gross vehicle weight is the combined weight of the vehicle and the cargo. Transport Canada sets the standard for determining GVW.
April 2010 Page 16. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
of the trip, but the maximum load potential that matters for enforcement purposes. A vehicle could be well under its maximum weight but could still be in violation based on its GVW.
It is important to note that due to Canada‟s climate, weight restrictions can change throughout the year. In the spring when roads are thawing out, restrictions are often in place indicating that trucks can only haul a certain percentage of their gross weight. Some jurisdictions also extend these restrictions into the winter when slippery conditions can make fully loaded trucks more dangerous.
The province of Ontario also regulates vehicles for their overall dimensions. This would apply to large construction project equipment or entire buildings that are sometimes moved on flatbeds. Municipalities in the province tend to defer to provincial regulations when determining the size regulations for over dimension loads. Most of loads can be transported under special permitting regulations.
Besides weight and dimension regulations, another broad regulatory restriction is for dangerous goods. These routes apply to the cargo and not the size of vehicle so a different set of criteria apply. These loads are not considered in this report.
There are two broad questions that municipal regulators must consider when designing truck routes. First, what are the routes? This can be answered after careful consideration of technical, economic, social and environmental implications.
The second question is how will the information be communicated? This does not refer to map and brochure design, but rather to the system of signage that will guide truckers on their trips through the community. The signage can be described as either “permissive” or “restrictive.” The following sections describe these signing approaches and present the strengths and challenges of each one.
3.1.1 PERMISSIVE APPROACH
The City of Hamilton currently uses a permissive approach to signing its heavy vehicle routes. Following the guiding principle that trucks should stay on designated routes unless they are making a local trip, the municipality indicates the approved truck routes with a green circle around the silhouette of a truck. Trucks meeting the weight restrictions are free to use these routes at any time of the day or night, unless otherwise indicated. When using roads not included in these routes, it must be for taking the shortest path between the nearest truck route and the trip origin/destination.
One of the distinct advantages of the permissive approach is its simplified signage routine. Rather than having to watch for exceptions at every corner, truckers follow the green circles until they are close to their destination, and then they can legally turn onto local streets that constitute the shortest path from the truck route.
This, in turn, can make enforcement easier because police officers only have to stop vehicles that they perceive not to be taking the shortest path (proof of the shortest path can be taken from shipping documents showing the origin and destination).
The permissive approach is also cost effective and prevents the proliferation of restrictive signage on roadways which are not truck routes.2The permissive approach often requires fewer signs than the restrictive approach, particularly in dense urban areas.
The challenge of this approach is that it lacks the finesse that is sometimes required to deal with local issues (e.g., persistent violations, public perception, and roads that are not suitable for trucks).
2 New York City Truck Route Management and Community Impact Reduction Study: Technical Memorandum 3, Truck Signage Program. March 2007.
April 2010 Page 17. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
3.1.2 RESTRICTIVE APPROACH
The restrictive approach to truck route signage still operates on the same broad principle as the permissive; that being, stay on the designated routes until it is necessary to use a local road, but there are more restrictions on the local roads and each is communicated to truckers with street signs. This approach reflects a stronger connection between land use and travel patterns as the restrictions can be used to keep heavy vehicles away from residential or commercial areas, where noise could be a significant factor.
The advantage of this approach is it does allow for fine tuning of restricting heavy vehicle access. These exceptions can be in response to citizens concerns about noise and safety, but can also be put in place to address traffic flow issues or geometric deficiencies in the road network.
An example of how other types of restrictions are used to manage traffic, which often applies to personal and heavy vehicles, is time-of-day turning restrictions at intersections. Restrictive signage is also used to direct traffic away from some commercial areas, which may provide a direct route, but where the municipality is trying to promote or protect a pedestrian environment.
One significant disadvantage of the restrictive signing approach is that it typically requires more time and funds to maintain, due to the inevitable proliferation of signage. Restrictive signage is often perceived, by the public, to be more proactive and more helpful, which can lead to near-constant requests for more signage.
However, given that restrictive signage is almost always posted on the receiving legs of intersections, it can result in situations where drivers have already made their turns before they realize they are not permitted on the receiving leg. This can, subsequently, lead to large trucks trying to back up though intersections, which is fundamentally unsafe. 3.2 Truck Route Master Plan Goals
The overarching goal of any truck route plan should be to support safe and timely movement of goods and services, while recognizing and trying to limit the impacts of truck traffic on the interests of the greater community (e.g., safety, congestion, noise, and air quality).
Well designed and efficient truck routes are an essential component of municipal transportation plans. They may very in their complexity and detail depending on the local traffic demands, but the routes should serve to ensure the smooth flow of traffic through and within the community by connecting industrial and commercial areas, and providing reasonable, controlled access to residential areas.
The City of Hamilton envisions itself as an intermodal transportation hub bringing together first class air, rail, marine, and road networks. The Truck Route Master Plan is an important step along the path to achieving that vision. 3.3 Truck Route Master Plan Benefits
A well designed truck route system presents multiple benefits for residents, industry and local government. This section presents, in general terms, the economic, infrastructure, fiscal, environmental and social benefits that the plan can offer. Later in development of the Truck Route Master Plan a more quantitative assessment will be presented for some specific locations.
April 2010 Page 18. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
3.3.1 ECONOMIC
In defining its economic vision for the future, the City has adopted a three-pronged approach focused on traditional industries, emerging opportunities and non-traditional clusters. The breakdown of specific industries in these clusters is shown below (Exhibit 3-1).
Exhibit 3-1: Industry Clusters
Traditional Clusters Emerging Clusters Non-traditional Clusters Advanced Manufacturing Aerotropolis Regional Tourism Agriculture/Food & Beverage Biotechnical & Biomedical Historic Downtowns Processing Film and Cultural Industries Port Related Industry/Businesses
All of the clusters can benefit, to varying degrees, from a well designed truck route network. The Traditional Clusters would likely be more reliant on heavy truck traffic, where Emerging and Non- traditional Clusters may have a higher degree of mixed commercial traffic including some heavy trucks. In either case, whether it is imports, exports or a mix of both, all the Clusters require well defined routes based on clear regulation and enforcement. Their needs must also not be treated as the exception on every road. Heavy truck and commercial traffic needs to have equality if not primacy on some routes.
The City of Hamilton‟s cluster approach to economic development can be well supported by a truck route master plan. A clear delineation between land uses can increase the understanding of the traffic patterns and thus support the timely transportation of goods. This in turn reduces businesses costs and opens economic opportunities from which the entire community can benefit.
3.3.2 INFRASTRUCTURE
Not all roads and networks are designed for all types of vehicles. Heavy vehicles can have an immense impact of the life and durability of roads and related infrastructure. A truck route system which is designed to keep heavier vehicles on purpose designed roads will support a longer life with lower maintenance costs for the system.
3.3.3 FISCAL
Infrastructure investments are a significant expense for municipal budgets. However, well designed systems can have significant paybacks in the form of increased commercial development and tax revenue. They can also have reduced maintenance costs.
3.3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL
Roadway congestion and the associated noise and emissions have become a major concern for many communities. While advances are being made in engine design to lower these impacts, travel patterns with repeated stopping and starting can have a significant impact.
3.3.5 SOCIAL
Municipal governments often face complaints from residents who want trucks removed from residential and certain commercial areas. While some trips are necessary – a large truck is
April 2010 Page 19. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
generally the only option when moving to a new house – there is rightfully less tolerance for trucks which are just passing through the neighbourhood.
A truck route network which keeps large vehicles on arterial roads, with exceptions for essential trips onto collector and local roads can reduce noise and emissions in residential neighbourhoods and increase community safety. 3.4 Truck Route Master Plan Key Elements
As previously stated, Hamilton‟s current truck route plan is based on a system of permissive signage. While this has worked, increasing heavy traffic volumes are one indication that a more comprehensive truck route master plan is necessary. This section does not aim to present the details of the plan, but rather outline four key components. They are:
Clear purpose;
Hierarchy of transportation routes;
Regulatory Coordination; and
Education and enforcement.
3.4.1 CLEAR PURPOSE
The City of Hamilton‟s Truck Route Master Plan must begin with a clear purpose. As indicated in the Request for Proposals for this study, roadway safety is to have a primary place in the vision. Additional elements that could be included are:
Maintain access for truck deliveries;
Reduce congestion on key transportation routes;
Reduce congestion in the Central Business District (CBD);
Reduce noise in residential neighbourhoods;
Reduce levels of air pollution attributed to heavy vehicle traffic; and
Support pedestrian and bicycle access to commercial areas.
3.4.2 HIERARCHY OF TRANSPO RTATION ROUTES
The second element of Hamilton‟s Truck Route Master Plan lies in developing a hierarchy of transportation routes. Hamilton has been clear about its desire to become an intermodal hub, and for this reason, routes must consider road-road connections, as well as intermodal links.
Commercial traffic has traditionally been a secondary consideration, when it is considered at all, in municipal transportation plans. The focus is usually on passenger traffic, and trucks are considered a nuisance on most roads. In the end, while some users would prefer to have dedicated roads for different types of traffic the best approach is a hierarchy which gives precedence but not exclusive use for any type of traffic on any road.
The recent trend in many Canadian cities has been to aggressively develop ring-road or bypass strategies for truck traffic. This approach aims to keep heavier traffic to larger arterial roads when
April 2010 Page 20. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
possible, and reserve narrower collector and local roads for passenger traffic. Of course, passenger traffic has to use the arterial roads and trucks must make local deliveries, but by creating a clear and enforceable hierarchy, larger vehicles are required to stay on arterials when possible, and are accepted on collectors and local roads when necessary.
Saskatoon has an interesting approach to vehicle hierarchy that is worth mentioning. Within their road system they have created primary and secondary routes. All trucks are permitted to use the primary roads, with secondary roads restricted to vehicles classed as level 2 (weighing less than 46,500kg) or level 1(weighing less than 33, 500 kg).3 Level 2 vehicles are not permitted in the downtown core (central business district) between 0700 h and 1800 h without a permit (level 1 are). This promotes smaller trucks in the core, but still allows for larger vehicles carrying loads that cannot be put in a smaller truck. These restrictions are in place because the larger vehicles block sight lines to traffic controls, have difficulty negotiating turning radii, require longer stopping distances and have slower accelerations. Safety of roadway users and pedestrians is paramount in the Saskatoon CBD.4
3.4.3 REGULATORY COORDINATION
Roads do not stop at municipal boundaries - they continue on and connect communities and industries. However, sometimes provincial and municipal regulations act as though there is a solid wall between the communities. This can lead to a confusing network where a vehicle is permitted to travel on one road through a community but when the jurisdiction changes, so do the vehicle requirements. This can lead to inefficient re-routing and applications for multiple permits to address load size restrictions.
Hamilton has chosen to pursue economic development with a cluster strategy. This will entail some specific land use and zoning controls. However, it is important that the zoning and bylaws take into account the transportation routes that will be necessary to support these clusters. For example, should the City choose to restrict the size of trucks in the CBD, this could require load shifting at terminals. Terminals which are located in an industrial zone today should not be faced with encroaching residential development in the near future. The City of Calgary is considering one option where businesses operating with a large number of heavy vehicles will only be able to locate within a specified distance of a major arterial roadway.
Another zoning challenge to consider is neighbourhoods or streets where the pedestrian environment is paramount. Just as freeways are not for walking, small shopping streets should not be main truck routes. But it is important to remember that stores still need to receive their stock. This does not mean that trucks have to be permitted on all roads all the time, but zoning and loading zone regulations need to consider reasonable access for commercial vehicles.
Next, within the hierarchy and regulatory environment there needs to be a clear system of exceptions. Some exceptions are based on time of day - trucks are not permitted on certain roads during specific hours - and some are based on load size. In some cases exemptions are granted for oversized (either in weight or dimension) loads to travel on local roads for specific reasons. Some municipalities require proof that a load cannot be broken down and transported on smaller vehicles before approving an exemption for a larger vehicle to entre specific zones. Whatever the framework for exemptions, it needs to include a clear and timely approvals process. Although many oversized or exceptional loads can be planned for, there will be true exceptions that require quick approval. Therefore, there needs to be a reasonable degree of flexibility in the exceptions process.
3 46,500 kg translates into a 6-axel, single box semi-trailer, or a vehicle with 5 axels or less. 4 Truck Bylaw Modification. Report to Saskatoon City Council. File 6000-1. September 2005.
April 2010 Page 21. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
3.4.4 EDUCATION AND ENFORC EMENT
One of the great frustrations for drivers making commercial deliveries is dealing with poorly signed routes and unclear transportation regulations. Attention must be given to working with key stakeholders – residents, local businesses and delivery companies - to communicate the new routes and regulations. When considering whether to maintain a permissive approach to signage, or adopt a more restrictive approach, Hamilton may want to consider their plans for stakeholder education.
Coupled with education is a plan for enforcement. Municipalities usually introduce new heavy vehicle regulations with an education period of about 3 months. This offers users time to adjust their transportation patterns over a reasonable period of time. It also gives the municipality an opportunity to see if signage has been placed in the appropriate locations. 4. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
The general evaluation methodology used to establish the recommended truck route network founded on two basic principles: 1) the designation of roads as truck routes should not contradict their road classification; and 2) roads designated as truck routes should facilitate goods movement, while balancing the impacts of truck traffic with the greater interests of the community.
In keeping consistent with both of the principles noted above, Local roads and Collector roads outside of recognized industrial/commercial employment areas should not, and will not under this evaluation methodology, be considered for inclusion in the truck route network. Arterial roads, however, generally satisfy a number of criteria, which makes them suitable for designation as truck routes.
The Road Classification Policy Paper (2005) adopted by Council as one of the founding elements of the Transportation Master Plan, and the Final Report of the Road Classification and Right-of-Way Width Project (2009), establish that arterial roads (both urban and rural) within the City of Hamilton should accommodate trucks. The Road Classification Policy Paper also sets out that collector and local industrial/commercial road sections shall provide for all vehicle types. In short, all Provincial freeways and highways, rural arterial roads, and urban major arterial roads are assumed to be truck routes available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, unless signed otherwise.
Goods movement to, from, and within the City of Hamilton must be supported to sustain the economic vitality of the city. As such, goods movement should not be considered as a sub-category of travel demand, such as motorists, transit riders, pedestrians and cyclists, as they all relate to person travel rather than the transport of manufactured goods and commodities. Rather, goods movement (rail, marine, air, road) and the systems to support it should be considered independent, but coincident with the road network for truck-related trips. Therefore, the need for suitable truck routes cannot be prioritized in competition with the needs of other road users, rather, it must be considered independently. 4.1 Other Key Considerations
In addition to the two basic principles noted above, the following key considerations also factored into the truck route network evaluation methodology.
4.1.1 DENSITY OF GRID
One of the first questions raised in developing a truck route network is the appropriate density of the grid. The system must be dense enough to be readily understandable to truck operators, to the
April 2010 Page 22. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
police, and to the public. As a starting point, a truck route system that is generally coincident with the arterial road system is preferred, and this philosophy is reflected in policies adopted by many municipalities.
A general reduction in density would lead to less clarity for users and for the Police Service responsible for enforcement. In the absence of a designated truck route, trucks are legally permitted to travel on all roads that constitute the most direct route between their origin/destination and the nearest truck route. This often results in the decision on the most direct route being subject to interpretation.
Conversely, an increase in truck route density beyond the arterial network would require that collector and local roads be designated as truck routes. Given the characteristics of these classifications of roads, this could create an imbalance in the impacts of truck traffic and the interests of the community, with respect to safety, congestion, noise, and air quality.
4.1.2 GEOGRAPHIC AND HI STORIC FEATURES
Hamilton has several unique historic and geographic features that influence the structure of a truck route system. They include natural physical barriers such as Lake Ontario, Hamilton Harbour, and the Niagara Escarpment, and constructed barriers such as freeways, expressways, and rail lines. Historic features include legacy road allowances, abutting mixed use development with minimal setbacks, and some indirect connections to adjoining municipalities.
4.1.3 RESTRICTIONS BASED ON ROAD OR VEHICLE CHARACTERISTICS
There are a number of rural arterial roads with load restrictions in the spring. The first step is to determine whether the roads should be included in the truck network. The second step is to determine whether there should be spring load restrictions, or the road should be upgraded.
The designation of a network of roads as a truck route does not implicitly imply that every link in the route is able to accommodate all types of trucks. In some instances links in the truck route network will have geometric characteristic (e.g., lower clearances, tighter turning radii, etc.) that will preclude them for use by some trucks. Additionally, some types of trucks (e.g., Long Combination Vehicles, oversized loads, etc.) will require additional clearances, beyond adhering to the truck route, to travel within the City of Hamilton. More information on the applicable restrictions and policies is provided in Section 7 of this report.
Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the truck operators to ensure that the routes that they choose to drive are compatible with their vehicles and their driving abilities.
4.1.4 RESTRICTIONS BY TIME OF DAY
At present, there are a number of truck routes in Hamilton that are restricted by time period (e.g., 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. only). This can be potentially used as a mitigating measure, by restricting truck traffic to daytime hours. However, such time restrictions may not be regularly enforceable because of the staffing levels and priorities of the Police Service between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Furthermore, the effective application of time-of-day restrictions requires clear, consistent guidelines for their use. Time-of-day restrictions are considered as part of this evaluation methodology. A recommended policy regarding the use of time-of-day restriction is discussed in Section 7.1.1 of this report.
April 2010 Page 23. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
4.2 Analysis Approach
The general evaluation methodology used to establish the recommended truck route network involves three levels of analysis, which address the basic principles and key considerations described above. The three levels of analysis are described in detail below.
4.2.1 LEVEL 1 ANALYSIS
From first principles, a truck route network was prepared, which includes all links in accordance with the following criteria:
Part A – the link is a freeway or highway, a rural arterial road, or a major urban arterial road as described in the Road Classification and Right-of-Way Width Project report (June 2009) shown in Exhibit 4-1 and Exhibit 4-2.
April 2010 Page 24. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 4-1: Roadway Classification
April 2010 Page 25. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 4-2: Roadway Classifications – Urban Area Enlargement
April 2010 Page 26. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Part B – the link is a minor urban arterial road as described in the Road Classification and Right-of-Way Width Project report (2009) shown in Exhibit 4-1 and Exhibit 4-2, and one of the following:
A direct link to the Provincial freeway system;
A link crossing a significant natural barrier (e.g. escarpment);
A direct link to a signed permissive truck route in an adjoining municipality;
A link to or within an industrial/commercial employment area as defined in the Draft Urban Structure Report (April 2008) shown in Exhibit 4-3, including several small defined employment areas (McMaster Innovation Park, west Hamilton, Dundas) plus the City Business Parks shown in Exhibit 4-4;
A link to or between the Downtown, Sub-Regional Centres, and Community Centres as defined in the Draft Urban Structure Report (April 2008) shown in Exhibit 4-3;
A direct link to a major institutional generator (hospital, college, university);
A direct link to Hamilton International Airport, a rail hub, or port facilities under the control of the Hamilton Port Authority; or
A direct link to mineral aggregate resource areas as defined in the Hamilton Official Plan rural land use designations shown in Exhibit 4-5, or to a landfill.
Exhibit 4-3: Draft Urban Structure
April 2010 Page 27. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 4-4: City of Hamilton Business Parks
Exhibit 4-5: Rural Land Use Designations
April 2010 Page 28. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Part C – the link is an urban collector road as described in the Road Classification and Right-of-Way Width Project (IBI Group, June 2009) shown in Exhibit 4-1 and Exhibit 4-2 that is an extension of an urban major or minor arterial road that meets the Part A or Part B criteria, and it is fully located within a recognized industrial/commercial employment area as defined in the Draft Urban Structure Report (April 2008) shown in Exhibit 4-3, including several small defined employment areas (McMaster Innovation Park, west Hamilton, Dundas) plus the City Business Parks shown in Exhibit 4-4.
The result was the L1 truck route network. The results of the Level 1 Analysis are presented in Section 6.4.1.
4.2.2 LEVEL 2 ANALYSIS
The existing truck route system was developed and intermittently maintained over time in accordance with documented and undocumented criteria. It is not current in some respects because of land and transportation infrastructure development that has occurred since the truck route network was last updated in a comprehensive way. However, the existing truck route network is a very good template for review, because of its historical development. The Level 2 Analysis was performed in several phases.
The present truck route network was compared against the L1 truck route network developed in the Level 1 Analysis, and all variances were identified. Variances include links in one network but not in the other (i.e., links in the existing truck route network but no in the L1 network and vice versa). The identified variances were re-evaluated with respect to the L1 criteria. Based on the review, variances were either included in or rejected from the base truck route network.
The result of the Level 2 Analysis was the L2 truck route network. The Level 2 Analysis is presented in Section 6.4.2.
4.2.3 LEVEL 3 ANALYSIS
Road sections or gaps that have been identified as issues by City staff, the public, and other stakeholders, as listed on the consolidated Issues List, and any road sections or gaps that have been identified as issues by the Project Team, were reviewed. Any issues that were addressed in the Level 1 and Level 2 analysis were noted and set aside. Remaining issues were carried forward for further analysis.
Planned changes to the road network were also reviewed. Proposed road links slated for construction or identified in the Transportation Master Plan or in Class EA Studies (e.g., Dartnall/Trinity Church Extension), to be completed within five (5) years were identified. This information was carried forward for further analysis.
The City of Hamilton covers a large geographic area. An initial scan by the consultant team resulted in the definition of eight distinct geographic regions, within which the issues, opportunities, and concerns are either similar or are inter-connected. Therefore, the Level 3 Analysis was undertaken on this regional basis (the geographic regions and the Level 3 Analysis are presented in Sections 6.1 and 6.4.3, respectively).
The remaining issues were evaluated with the intent of determining a proposed action: “Do nothing”, “Add to system”, “Delete from system”, or “Implement mitigating measures”. The evaluation was undertaken as a qualitative and quantitative assessment of road sections carried forward, in each of the eight regions, having regard to the following criteria:
April 2010 Page 29. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Maintain truck route system connectivity (i.e., avoid dead-ends in the truck route network);
Maximize the efficiency of the system serving commerce and the economy;
Minimize the impact of goods movement on residential communities, schools, hospitals - sensitivity of abutting land uses to noise and air quality (dust, particulates from diesel), predominant abutting land use, road allowance width and setbacks;
Minimize the impact of goods movement on safety, comfort and service offered by passenger transport modes - suitable geometry for turning characteristics, sufficient lane widths, degree of separation from pedestrians and cyclists, signal progression suitability for slow-moving trucks;
Consideration of restrictive measures where the economic, social, and/or environmental capacity of the road section would be adversely affected, and where alternate routes are reasonably available;
Consideration of the specific challenges in the Downtown Core (a detailed discussion of the truck route network for the Hamilton Downtown Core is provided in Section 4.3); and
Consideration of reasonable density within industrial/commercial areas to enhance routing efficiency while minimizing permissive signing requirements.
If it is determined that a road section should be added to the L2 truck route network, subject to mitigation, then conditions for inclusion (e.g. safety improvements, widening, alternatives, etc.) must be available within a specified time, or the addition of time restrictions or weight restrictions, could be generated for any road link proposed to be added to the L2 truck route network. Further discussion of capital roadway improvements is provided in Section 9.2.
The result of the Level 3 Analysis was the Alternative 3 - Recommended Truck Route Network (L3 truck route network). Exhibit 4-6 is a flow diagram illustrating the analysis approach.
April 2010 Page 30. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 4-6: Analysis Approach Flow Diagram
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Prepare Truck Route System from First Review Issues Raised by Project Principles Based on Road Classification Compare Existing Truck Route Team and Stakeholders (Arterial) and Level 1 Criteria System to L1 Network, and Identify All Variances Link: To Provincial Highway Across Significant Natural Barrier Identify Planned Changes to To Designated Truck Route in Road Network Adjacent Municipality (within 5 years) To Employment Area To Downtown, Sub-Regional Centre, Review All Variances Against Community Centre Level 1 Criteria To Hospital, University, College Evaluate Each Issue To Airport, Rail, Hubs, Port Level 3 Criteria – Safety, Quality To Mineral Aggregate Resource of Life, System Connectivity, Area, Landfill Efficiency Determine if “Do Nothing”, “Add”, Based on Review, Include or “Delete” or “Mitigating Measures” Reject Variances to Determine are Appropriate the Base Truck Route System
Level 3 Network (L3) Recommended Truck Route Level 1 Network (L1) Level 2 Network (L2) Network
4.3 Hamilton Downtown Evaluation
With any large city, the downtown core (central business district) presents some rather specific challenges when it comes to truck routing. Characterized by a dense road network, serving a diversity of land uses, the challenges in the Hamilton Downtown Core reflect those of the entire city in a concentrated geographic area.
The downtown truck route has to balance the needs of business with those of the greater community, in an area that is densely developed, and where several modes compete for space on roads with little or no room for expansion. As a result of these particular constraints, the systemic approach to truck route network evaluation that was described in Sections 4.2.1 through 4.2.3 (above) cannot be applied as pragmatically to the Downtown Core.
The following sections provide a background discussion of truck routing challenges in the Hamilton Downtown Core, and describe alternatives that were considered for addressing those challenges.
4.3.1 DOWNTOWN BACKGROUND DISCUSSION
The sub-sections below provide background information on topics related to truck routing in and around the Hamilton Downtown Core (e.g., current truck patterns, the Hamilton perimeter road concept, and connections to Highway 403), and other ongoing concerns (e.g., transit expansion) that could impact those truck movements.
4.3.1.1 Current Truck Patterns As part of the needs assessment for the Hamilton Perimeter Road (2003), a truck trip table was prepared that was based in part on count information, and in part on a “truck following” study that
April 2010 Page 31. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
determined destination routes of a large sample of trucks entering the Downtown Core. The truck trip table indicated that of trucks entering the core (bounded by Victoria, the Escarpment, Dundurn, the Harbour), 50% were from the east. Of those trucks entering from the east, approximately 37% were destined to locations within the Downtown Core, 9% were destined to Hwy 403 eastbound, 12% were destined to Hwy 6 North, and 16% were destined to Hwy 403 westbound. Therefore, 28% of the trucks entering the Downtown Core from the east were destined to Hwy 403 WB and Hwy 6 NB; routes that would require the greatest amount of out of the way travel if Burlington Street plus either the QEW/Hwy 403 or RHVP/Hwy 403 were used instead. The Claremont Access/Upper James/LINC alternative is an available alternate route for trucks destined to Hwy 403 WB; however, much of Upper James Street is characterized by direct-frontage commercial development with numerous driveways and no centre turn lane between the escarpment and Fennell Avenue, and the LINC is nearing capacity in the peak hours.
Count information from June 2008 was used to assemble information on truck flows in the Lower City between Hwy 403 and east of Queen Street, in order to gain an understanding of link and turn volumes. The results are illustrated below (Exhibit 4-7).
Exhibit 4-7: Downtown Truck Patterns
2008 7-hr Truck Volumes York Blvd
260 250 N 20 PLUS 20 100 80 buses each direction 340 30 220 30
* Not to Scale 40 330 210 * Minor volumes not 440 Cannon necessarily shown 190 PLUS 20 ~20 buses * Counts: 7 - 10 a.m. 60 220 each direction on plus 2 - 6 p.m. 10 140 York north-south roads 170 / Wilson * 24 hr Count: Multiply by 1.635 130 20 120
560 30 340 310 190
King King
130 10 PLUS 100 90 260 buses on King and 180 20 260 buses on Main
Main Main
520 90 450 450 440 30 10
Dundurn Locke Queen
The count information is reasonably consistent with the 2003 trip tables prepared for the Hamilton Perimeter Road Needs Assessment (see Section 4.3.1.2). The pattern evident from the volume graphic is that trucks entering from the west generally stay on Main Street, and trucks exiting to the west generally go to King Street at Hwy 403 from Cannon Street using several alternate routes. Trucks entering the Downtown Core from the east are predominantly on Cannon Street.
Based on multi-day classification counts performed in summer 2008 on York Boulevard west of Dundurn Street, 24-hr counts would be approximately 1.6 times the 7-hr count totals. Expressed another way, the 7-hr volumes represent approximately 60% of the 24-hr volumes. Counts undertaken on King Street west of Dundurn and on Main Street west of Wellington Street indicate
April 2010 Page 32. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
that the 7-hour volumes in those locations represent 45-50% of the 24-hr volumes, with a greater proportion occurring in the midday period than on York Boulevard.
Clearly, there is a current demand for trucks to use the present truck route system in/through the Downtown Core – approximately 1000 per day to/from the east and 1300 to/from the west. However, some of those truck trips have reasonable alternate routes available.
4.3.1.2 Hamilton Perimeter Road Concept
The original Hamilton Perimeter Road (HPR) concept (Exhibit 4-8) was proposed because of the disconnect between Burlington Street and Hwy 403, which results in truck traffic using east-west streets Main, King, York/Wilson, Cannon, and Barton, and north-south streets Dundurn, Locke, Queen, and Bay. Although a great idea as a high level concept, there were very significant drawbacks, especially when investigated in some detail.
Exhibit 4-8: Perimeter Road Concept
Source: Hamilton Perimeter Roads Needs Assessment 2003 Assuming that the HRP could have been advanced westerly to the York Boulevard/Hwy 403 area, connecting to Hwy 403 would be problematic for several reasons: all moves are provided at Main and King, but York Boulevard is connected only to/from the east, so the HPR connection to York Boulevard would not provide any better functionality; and, interchange spacing is very tight so introducing another interchange for the HPR or additional ramps at York Boulevard to/from the west is operationally very challenging and may not receive MTO support. As capacity constraints on Hamilton streets are greatest in the area of the Dundurn Street screenline, adding HPR capacity
April 2010 Page 33. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
to/from the east without addressing improved capacity/connections to Hwy 403 serves no useful purpose.
Apart from the Hwy 403 connection issue, some of the challenges in developing the HPR included:
Difficulty providing suitable connections with north-south streets (e.g. Victoria, Wellington, John, James, Bay, Queen) and avoiding rail spurs;
Creation of a road barrier between the Downtown and the waterfront;
Unpalatable choices for roadway location west of Bay Street (e.g. on fill in the harbour, in the embankment above the rail corridor with very large retaining walls, or in cut-and- cover tunnel under some Dundurn Castle property and York Boulevard);
Likely to encounter contaminated property; and
Estimated costs of >$300M (1990).
In summary, in assessing the pros and cons, it was determined that the HPR concept should be abandoned. Notwithstanding the decision, challenges remain with respect to roadway capacity approaching Hwy 403 and to truck traffic to/from Hwy 403. Most of the main roadways have road allowances of only 20m (66ft), including Main and King Streets.
4.3.1.3 Connections to Highway 403 Although the concept of adding ramps to the York Boulevard/Hwy 403 interchange to/from the west was suggested on occasion over the past several decades, there has never been an investigation undertaken to determine the feasibility and cost. As the area between the King Street interchange and the Desjardins Canal is constrained by the Hamilton Cemetery, the CP rail line, the former municipal landfill (now Kay Drage Park), the Chedoke Creek, the Waterfront Trail, Cootes Paradise, and York Boulevard, there are very limited options. One location with fewer constraints than most others may be just southeast of the Bailey Bridge over the Chedoke Creek at Princess Point, but ramp connections between York Boulevard and Hwy 403 would still have to tunnel under the Hamilton Cemetery and the CP rail line. Another option may be just west of the Desjardins canal, where the need for tunnel/structures may be reduced but additional distance would be added to trips using the ramps because of a doubling-back effect.
4.3.1.4 Other Ongoing Studies The City of Hamilton is conducting parallel studies on the feasibility of implementing rapid transit, and summary reports for Phases 1 and 2 of the Hamilton Rapid Transit Feasibility Study (RTFS) are available on the City website. In the Capacity Evaluation component of the Phase 2 report, it is concluded that traffic diversion may be required from roadways on which rapid transit routes would be implemented in the Lower City. Furthermore, because of constraints in the Downtown Core, the diversion would likely be focused on alternate routes north and west of the Downtown Core.
4.3.2 DOWNTOWN TRUCK ROUTING ALTERNATIVES
Having regard to the Class EA Process, there are a number of alternatives for a truck route system in the area of the lower city bounded by Hamilton Harbour, the Red Hill Valley Parkway, the Niagara Escarpment, and Hwy 403:
4.3.2.1 The “Do Nothing” Alternative The “Do Nothing” alternative would maintain the present truck route designations in the Lower City, as illustrated in Exhibit 4-9.
April 2010 Page 34. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 4-9: Existing Downtown Truck Routes
The implication is that through truck traffic will continue to be an issue.
4.3.2.2 Designate Arterial Roads as Truck Routes This alternative would designate arterial roads as truck routes, subject to the Level 1 analysis as set out in the evaluation methodology.
The designated arterial roads (major in red and minor in brown) in the Lower City are illustrated below
Exhibit 4-10: Downtown Road Classifications
Based on road classifications, arterial roads that could be added to the truck route system in the Downtown area include:
Burlington Street between James Street North and Wellington Street;
James Street North and South between Burlington Street and Main Street;
April 2010 Page 35. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
James Street South between St. Josephs Drive and James Mountain Road;
James Mountain Road to West 5th Street/Fennell Avenue;
Wilson Street between Victoria Avenue and Sherman Avenue;
King Street between Wellington Street and Bay Street (classed as a Major Arterial);
Queen Street between Main Street and Beckett Drive;
Beckett Drive to Garth Street (classed as a Major Arterial);
Dundurn Street between Chatham Street and Aberdeen Avenue; and
Aberdeen Avenue between Longwood Road and Dundurn Street.
Many of the road sections listed above have significant limitations because of safety and operational considerations. For example, Beckett Drive and James Mountain Road are two-lane escarpment crossings with grades approaching 11%. Other locations, in particular intersections, are constrained by restricted road allowances, lack of corner clearances, and insufficient corner radii for large vehicles.
4.3.2.3 Restrict Through Truck Traffic in the Downtown Core This alternative would reduce available routes in the Downtown Core to reduce through truck traffic, while still allowing access to Hwy 403 WB and Hwy 6 North via York Boulevard. This alternative would include removing Main Street from the Truck Route system between Bay Street and Wellington Street, just as its one way pair King Street has already been removed. Through traffic through the core would be discouraged, but destinations via Hwy 6N and Hwy 403 WB would be available via York Boulevard and/or Bay/Queen/Locke/Dundurn connections to the King/Main pair, and the Claremont Access/LINC combination.
Although it would be preferable to remove Main Street and King Street from the Truck Route System further to the east to Dundurn Street, this is not considered operationally feasible because of the very short weaving distance between the Hwy 403 ramps from Toronto and from Brantford, and the intersection of Main Street and Dundurn Street.
4.3.2.4 Remove All Truck Routes in the Downtown Core This alternative would eliminate truck routes in the area bounded by Bay Street, Hamilton Harbour, Wellington Street, and the Escarpment to eliminate through truck traffic, while still permitting local deliveries. It is a much more restrictive alternative than Alternative 2.3 above, and further study with input from industry stakeholders would be required to determine the economic impact. However, it is very likely that the regulations would be very difficult to enforce. In addition, unless local deliveries were permitted from any truck route rather than the closest truck route, commerce in the core would be adversely affected.
4.3.2.5 Implement Time Restrictions This alternative would restrict routes in the Downtown Core between Bay Street and Wellington Street and on all escarpment crossings between Hwy 403 and the RHVP except for the Claremont Access, to the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. time period. The Claremont Access has a grade of 6% and was designed to accommodate truck movements.
The multi-day classification count information from summer 2008 on York Boulevard referenced earlier indicates that truck trips within the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. time period represent
April 2010 Page 36. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
approximately 82% of the 24-hr truck volume, and the percentage is greater - approximately 85% - for larger combination vehicles such as semi-trailers. Count information from Cannon Street west of Wellington Street exhibits similar characteristics to York Boulevard. Other counts on Main Street, King Street, Burlington Street, and the LINC fairly consistently show that about three-quarters of all truck traffic occurs between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
The Hamilton Police Service has noted that enforcement between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. will likely be very limited because of fewer staff and greater response activity during those hours.
4.3.2.6 Combine Time Restrictions with Restrictions in the Downtown Core This alternative would combine the elements of the alternatives discussed in Sections 4.3.2.3 and 4.3.2.5, i.e., removal of Main Street between Bay Street and Wellington Street from the truck route system, coupled with time restrictions on routes in the Downtown Core between Bay Street and Wellington Street and on all escarpment crossings between Hwy 403 and the RHVP except for the Claremont Access, to the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. time period.
4.3.2.7 Strategic Changes to the Downtown Core This alternative would involve changes to links within the Downtown truck route network (e.g., removal from the network and time restrictions) with the intent of maintaining a dense, cohesive network, while attempting to divert through trucks around some sensitive areas. The two major changes that would result from this alternative include the removal of King Street, between Queen and Bay Streets, and the removal of Barton Street, from Queen Street to Wentworth Street. Removing these sections of King Street and Barton Street would address issues related to modal competition, resident‟s complaints, business improvement areas, and traffic congestion. To accommodate the removal of these two key links from the Downtown truck route network, several minor removals, and changes to existing time restrictions, would be required. 5. DATA COLLECTION AND CONSULTATION
In addition to collecting a substantial amount of quantitative data, related to truck traffic, the data collection effort for this study also involved soliciting qualitative data from the public and other stakeholders. The consultation and data collection efforts that were carried out for this study are described below. 5.1 Consultation
The study was conducted as a Master Plan Environmental Assessment. The intent of the study was to balance the interests of the public, who would generally like to have truck routes removed from any areas with residential or pedestrian facilities, with those of industry, which requires goods movement, facilitated by an abundance of truck routes. The consultation process that was carried out for this study involved a much higher level of stakeholder engagement than the minimum required (and more than is typically done) for a Master Planning study.
Consultation took the form of a total of eight (8) public information sessions (two rounds of four) to garner public input, two (2) meetings with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which included representatives of the trucking industry and other interested stakeholders, four (4) meetings with various divisions of the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce, one-on-one meetings with all members of City Council, and a presentation to the City of Hamilton Association for Business Improvement Areas (HABIA). Three formal (3) meetings with the Truck Route Sub-Committee were also held over the course of the study. The relative timing of the various consultations is illustrated in Exhibit 5-1.
April 2010 Page 37. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 5-1: Consultation Flow Diagram
Consultation
Truck Route Sub-Committee Meeting #1 Spring 2008
Stakeholder Orientation and Consultation Spring 2008
Public Information Centres – Round 1 Preliminary Results Spring 2008
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 Spring 2008
Truck Route Sub-Committee Meeting #2 Fall 2008
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 Summer 2009
Meeting with HABIA Summer 2009
Truck Route Sub-Committee Meeting #3 Fall 2009
Public Information Centres – Round 2 Preliminary Recommended Truck Route System Fall 2009
More detailed discussions of the consultation process are provided in the following sections.
5.1.1 TRUCK ROUTE SUB-COMMITTEE
The City of Hamilton created the Truck Route Sub-Committee to consider issues related to the routing of heavy vehicles through the City of Hamilton. A prime responsibility of the Sub-Committee is to guide and implement the Truck Route Master Plan. The Truck Route Master Planning process has been overseen by the Truck Route Sub-Committee of the Public Works Committee. The Sub- Committee has been involved in each major step of the process to date. Separate meetings were held with the Sub-Committee prior to each PIC set, and meetings with all City Councillors were held in small groups at least once per Councillor, based on the direction of the Sub-Committee.
An initial input to the study was the list of “Outstanding Truck Route Issues.” Common types of issues include “too many trucks on legal route,” “illegal truck movements,” and “remove route now that alternate is in place.” The complete, original list of “Outstanding Truck Route Issues” was as follows:
1. Millgrove Side Road – One Way truck route to Hwy. # 6 signal (many illegal truck movements);
2. Westbrooke Road – Boundary Road (legal truck route in Niagara, not in Hamilton);
3. Haldibrook Road – Boundary Road (legal truck route in Haldimond, not in Hamilton);
4. Upper Mount Albion Road (Stone Church Road – Rymal Road) – Residents want it moved to Pritchard Road;
April 2010 Page 38. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
5. McMaster University Area (Sterling, Forsyth, Dalewood, Haddon, King St. W). – illegal truck movements;
6. Fruitland Road (Hwy. # 8 – northerly) – Residents complaining, to many trucks on this legal route;
7. Nash Road (King St. to Barton St.) – Part time Truck Route, residents were promised review to remove status upon opening of the R.H.V.P.;
8. Milburough Town Line Road – Boundary Road (large number of trucks on substandard pavement conditions);
9. Princess St. (between Sherman and Birch) – illegal truck volumes using as a short cut to by-pass Barton Street;
10. Scenic Drive – residents complaining of the high number of illegal truck movements;
11. Glow Avenue – residents complaining of the high number of illegal truck movements;
12. White Church / Binbrook Road (Hwy. # 56 – Hwy. # 6) – designated in by-law as “Specified Users” – Police will not enforce, residents complain of the high number of illegal trucks;
13. Regional Road # 20 (east of Upper Centennial to City Limit) – complaints regarding to many trucks on this route;
14. Stone Church Road (Upper James – Upper Wellington) – Too many trucks on this truck route;
15. Strathearne Avenue (Barton – Britannia) – Complaints regarding illegal truck traffic;
16. Lakeview Dr. (North Service Road) – Too many trucks on this legal truck route;
17. Sanatorium Road – residents complaining about illegal truck traffic;
18. Ridge Road – Too many trucks on this legal truck route;
19. Rennie Street – Too many trucks on this legal truck route;
20. Concession 4 W – high number of illegal trucks from Hwy. # 6;
21. R.H.V.P. – Request to direct eastbound truck traffic onto Mud Street instead of Dartnall or Trinity Church to Rymal;
22. The Eastern border with adjacent Niagara region has some gaps in truck routing; and
23. There are multi modal issues related to the Aberdeen hub.
5.1.2 PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The Truck Route Master Plan has followed the Public Consultation requirements of Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process, as per the Municipal Engineers Association document (Oct. 2000, as amended in 2007). More specifically the Class EA process followed “Approach#1” described in the above document, as “...at a broad level of assessment thereby requiring more
April 2010 Page 39. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
detailed investigations at the project-specific level in order to fulfil the Municipal Class EA documentation requirements for the specific Schedule B and C projects identified within the Master Plan”. Requests for an order to comply with Part II of the EA Act would only be possible for specific Schedule B or C projects identified in the Master Plan and not the Master Plan itself. No such projects have been proposed within this Master Plan to date.
The project team expanded the public consultation approach beyond the minimal requirements for public consultation of Class EA, to ensure that an understanding of issues and opportunity for input was maximized. The expanded consultation approach for this Master Planning study included four Public Information Centres (PICs), located throughout the City, at the initial stage of the process, to gather background input from the public, and to help formulate the problem and opportunity statement.
A second round of four PICs was held, to fulfil the Class EA mandatory point of contact with agencies and the public requirements. At the time of the second round of PICs, the problem and opportunity statement and alternative solutions, as well as the preliminary preferred alternative, were presented.
Notices for both rounds of PICs were sent out to affected agencies, internal City Departments, and interested members of the public. Each Notice was also advertised in the Hamilton Spectator, all six Community newspapers, and The View, two weeks in advance and one week in advance of each set of PICs. Summaries of the PICs (i.e., information presented and public input) are provided in Appendix A.
A brief summary of the information presented at each of the PICs is provided below:
Orientation Session: At the initial stage of the process, an Orientation Session was held on May 27, 2008. The purpose of the orientation session was to introduce the study, explain the process, and to invite the public to provide input on problems and opportunities.
Preliminary Results: Three PICs were held on June 17, 18 and 19, 2008. The purpose of the PICs was to explain the study process, to present the problems and opportunities that had been identified to date, and to present the preliminary evaluation methodology and alternative solutions to be evaluated. Based on the public input from the Orientation Session, the three PICs included general information about key issues, including truck route signing, and legal versus illegal truck movements. Feedback on the material was requested and documented.
Recommended Truck Route Network: Four PICs were held on November 5 and 12, and December 2 and 10, 2009 to fulfil the Class EA mandatory point of contact with agencies and public. At this time the problem and opportunity statement and alternative solutions, as well as the preliminary preferred alternative, were presented. Feedback on the material was requested and documented. At this round of PICs, the initial concepts for policies related to several important truck rout issues were discussed, including permissive and restrictive truck signing, and restrictive engine brake signing.
In addition to the PICs, a study link was created on the City of Hamilton website. This link provided electronic versions of the PIC material. It also invited the public to submit by email problems or opportunities. Each submission was recorded as an issue, and considered through the study process.
April 2010 Page 40. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Many comments were received from members of the public throughout the study. Petitions were received for three specific locations in the City: Fruitland Road (submitted prior to study commencement); Nebo Road (after first round of PICs); and Dickenson Road (presented at second round of PICs). There was also a delegation to Public Works Committee from Fruitland Road residents (after the first round of PICs). All public comments were given consideration as part of the Master Planning process, and in several instances, where appropriate specific responses were issued to members of the public, by the City.
When the truck route study was initiated there were approximately 25 locations in the City of Hamilton which were known areas where trucks had been a source of ongoing public concern and comment (the original list of “Outstanding Truck Route Issues”). Following the consultations and meetings, that list grew to over 100 locations. Each location was considered for addition or removal (through application of the network evaluation process, Section 4) from the truck route system, and in some instances the information presented by the public had a significant impact on road links that were removed from the truck route network.
5.1.3 TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was created. It consisted of key industry stakeholders, including representatives of the port, airport, Chambers of Commerce, trucking associations, Hamilton Police Service, the Ministry of Transportation Ontario and the Ministry of the Environment. The complete list of stakeholders invited to participate in the TAC is provided in Appendix B.
The TAC was consulted at two points in the study. A presentation was made in June 2008 to invite the TAC members to provide input on problems and opportunities. TAC members then provided input over the next several months. The draft Truck Route Network was presented to the TAC in January, 2009 to solicit feedback. The two TAC meetings were held in tandem with PICs so that members of the industry/other stakeholders could provide their input close to the time of each PIC set of meetings.
Additional meetings were held with the following agencies/ stakeholders:
HABIA – Hamilton Association of Business Improvement Areas (1 meeting);
Chamber of Commerce (4 meetings);
Neighbourhood Ward Meeting (Ward #6 – 1 meeting); and
Haldimand County (1 meeting).
All of the comments received from the industry, businesses and agencies contacted have been from/via the TAC membership. There was one petition received from the Ancaster Business Improvement Association (BIA). 5.2 Field Data
Initial field data was provided by the City of Hamilton in the form of a substantial collection of Turning Movement Counts (TMC) and Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) data. In total, well over 1000 traffic counts were accumulated throughout the course of the project. These traffic counts were used to provide insight into current truck traffic patterns across the city, as well in the immediate area of the links considered during the Level 3 Analysis.
Throughout the project, as gaps in the initial set of traffic data were identified, additional counts were carried out to ensure full data coverage in support Level 3 Analysis areas.
April 2010 Page 41. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Beyond TMC and ATR data, a number of supplementary site investigations were carried out in regards to truck traffic patterns in the City. These studies were conducted in support of individual issues (aka „hot spots‟) identified as the project progressed.
Supplementary site investigations were carried out for over 45 locations across Hamilton, and consisted of field observations, measurement of road geometrics, and truck traffic counts.
Further field data collection exercises included an evaluation of truck travel times along Main Street through the downtown core, truck following exercises, in the downtown core, to identify origin- destination patters, and an investigation into truck traffic patterns on the Kenilworth Access. 5.3 Collision Data
The City of Hamilton provided historic collision data for all collisions on City roads that involved trucks between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2007. Given that the data set contained only limited information on each collision (initial impact type, temporal and environmental conditions, and driver information were omitted) it was not possible to do a detailed analysis of collision trends or causation. However, some basic numerical analysis was possible:
The data set contained entries for a total of 860 collisions;
Of the 860 collisions, truck drivers were determined to be at-fault in 335 incidents (approximately 39%), which includes 156 single vehicle collisions (fault was determined based on the driver actions reported in the collision records);
The breakdown of truck collisions by severity was 1% (10) fatal collisions, 33% (282) personal injury collisions, and 66% (568) property damage only (PDO) collisions;
Of the ten fatal collisions truck drivers were at-fault in four, including 2 single vehicle collisions;
Nine locations (roads) experienced 25 or more collisions (5 or more per year) over the five-year analysis period, they include Main Street (Hamilton), Barton Street, Upper James Street, King Street (Hamilton), Burlington Street, Centennial Parkway, Rymal Road, Parkdale Avenue, and South Service Road; and
Truck collisions in the Hamilton Downtown Core represent 17% of the total truck collision for the analysis period; the collision severity breakdown was 1% fatal, 28% injury, and 71% PDO.
Based on the information presented above, the majority of the collisions involving trucks were not attributable to truck operator actions. However, the data also suggest that collisions involving trucks are likely to result in personal injuries. Although the data show that truck collisions are occurring across the entire City, they are most frequent on major urban arterials and in employment lands, where heavy truck traffic is generally concentrated.
Truck collisions rates, representing the number of truck collisions per million vehicle kilometres travelled, were calculated for some links (where data were available), and those rates are presented along with other segment data in Section 6.4.3.
April 2010 Page 42. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
6. DEVELOPMENT OF TRUCK ROUTE NETWORK
In the following sections, the development of the three truck route network alternatives are described in detail. 6.1 Geographic Regions
Although it is most relevant to the development of the Alternative 3 truck route network, the City of Hamilton was subdivided into eight geographic regions for evaluation. The eight geographic regions were defined based on a common or inter-connected set of issues and/or opportunities, and dependence on a limited number of key roads. The eight geographic regions are: Waterdown/East Flamborough; West Flamborough; Glanbrook/Airport; Parkways Corridor; Stoney Creek; Downtown Hamilton; East Hamilton/Port Area; and West Hamilton/Dundas. Maps and descriptions of the eight geographic regions, including approximate boundaries, key roads, communities, primary truck traffic generators, issues, and opportunities, are described in Sections 6.1.1 through 6.1.8.
6.1.1 WATERDOWN/EAST FLAM BOROUGH
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-1; a description of region attributes follows.
April 2010 Page 43. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-1: Waterdown/East Flamborough
Approximate Boundaries Hamilton municipal boundary Niagara Escarpment Middletown Road
Key Roads Highway 6 Highway 5
Communities Waterdown Millgrove Carlisle Freelton Flamboro Centre
April 2010 Page 44. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Agriculture Aggregate mineral extraction Equestrian sports
Issues/Opportunities Congestion at Highway 5/6 intersection Access to Highway 6 from concession roads Key link between Highways 401 and 403 Waterdown E-W Road 6.1.2 WEST FLAMBOROUGH
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-2; a description of region attributes follows.
April 2010 Page 45. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-2: West Flamborough
Approximate Boundaries Hamilton municipal boundary Middletown Road Jerseyville Road
Key Roads Highway 5 Highway 8
Communities Sheffield Rockton
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Agriculture Aggregate mineral extraction Equestrian sports
April 2010 Page 46. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Issues/Opportunities Peters Corners
6.1.3 GLANBROOK/AIRPORT
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-3; a description of region attributes follows.
Exhibit 6-3: Glanbrook/Airport
Approximate Boundaries Hamilton municipal boundary Niagara Escarpment Garner Road/Rymal Road
Key Roads Highway 6 Regional Road 56 White Church Road/Binbrook Road Highway 20
Communities Binbrook Mount Hope
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Agriculture Aggregate mineral extraction Landfill Hamilton International Airport/Airport Employment Growth District North Glanbrook Business Park Ancaster Business Park
April 2010 Page 47. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Issues/Opportunities Boundary connections to Niagara Region and Haldimand County Seasonal load restrictions Rural road cross-sections Few existing east-west/north-south truck routes
6.1.4 PARKWAYS CORRIDOR
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-4. A description of region attributes follows.
Exhibit 6-4: Parkways Corridor
Approximate Boundaries Lake Ontario Niagara Escarpment Garner Road/Rymal Road Jerseyville Road Parkdale Avenue Centennial Parkway
Key Roads Highway 403 QEW Lincoln M. Alexander Parkway (Linc) Red Hill Valley Parkway (RHVP)
Communities Hamilton South (Mountain) Ancaster Hamilton East (Downtown/Port)
April 2010 Page 48. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Interregional/international goods movement Retail commerce Hamilton International Airport/Airport Employment Growth District North Glanbrook Business Park Hospitals
Issues/Opportunities Interchange connections to the Linc and RHVP Congestion at Linc and Highway 403 interchange Incidents on Linc and RHVP Escarpment crossings
6.1.5 STONEY CREEK
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-5; a description of region attributes follows.
Exhibit 6-5: Stoney Creek
Approximate Boundaries Lake Ontario Niagara Escarpment Hamilton municipal boundary Red Hill Valley Parkway
Key Roads QEW Highway 8
April 2010 Page 49. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
RHVP Fruitland Road
Communities Stoney Creek
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Interregional/international goods movement Stoney Creek Business Park East Hamilton Industrial Area
Issues/Opportunities Interchange connections to the QEW Connections between Highway 8 and QEW
6.1.6 DOWNTOWN HAMILTON
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-6; a description of region attributes follows.
Exhibit 6-6: Downtown Core
Approximate Boundaries Lake Ontario Niagara Escarpment Highway 403 Wellington Street
Key Roads King Street York Boulevard Main Street Dundurn Street
April 2010 Page 50. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Barton Street Queen Street
Communities Hamilton Downtown Core
Primary Truck Traffic Retail commerce Generators Hamilton Harbour
Issues/Opportunities Through truck traffic Proposed one-way to two-way conversions Rapid transit planning BIAs efforts to improve streetscapes Escarpment crossings
6.1.7 EAST HAMILTON/PORT AREA
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-7; a description of region attributes follows.
Exhibit 6-7: East Hamilton/Portlands
Approximate Boundaries Lake Ontario Niagara Escarpment Parkdale Avenue Wellington Street
April 2010 Page 51. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Key Roads King Street Burlington Street Main Street Kenilworth Avenue Barton Street Queen Street
Communities Hamilton Downtown East
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Heavy/medium industry Retail commerce Port of Hamilton
Issues/Opportunities Through truck traffic Port access Access to Highway 403/QEW Escarpment crossings
6.1.8 WEST HAMILTON/DUNDAS
A map of this geographic region is presented in Exhibit 6-8; a description of region attributes follows.
Exhibit 6-8: West Hamilton/Dundas
Approximate Boundaries Niagara Escarpment
April 2010 Page 52. IBI G RO UP F INAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Highway 403
Key Roads King Street W Main Street W Highway 8 Wilson Street
Communities Dundas Ancaster
Primary Truck Traffic Generators Aberdeen Hub Agriculture McMaster University
Issues/Opportunities Access to Highway 403 Ancaster BIA Escarpment crossings
6.2 Alternative 1 Network
The Alternative 1 truck route network represents the “Do Nothing” alternative, and it was developed by making no changes to the existing truck route network. The existing City of Hamilton truck route network has evolved over the past thirty years as a result of infrastructure and land use development, and municipal amalgamation. Over that time links have been added to and removed from the network on an individual basis, and a formal network-wide evaluation has never before been undertaken. The Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing” (existing) truck route network is illustrated in Exhibit 6-9 and Exhibit 6-10.
April 2010 Page 53. IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-9: Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing” Truck Route Network
April 2010 Page 54 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-10: Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing” Truck Route Network (Zoom)
April 2010 Page 55 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
6.3 Alternative 2 Network
The Alternative 2 truck route network focuses primarily on reducing the number of links in the truck route network, using the existing truck route network as a starting point. This alternative was developed based on a series of individual meeting that were held with each of the Ward Councillors for the City of Hamilton, and it represents specific issues raised by their constituents. The Alternative 2 truck route network is illustrated in Exhibit 6-11 and Exhibit 6-12
.
April 2010 Page 56 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-11: Alternative 2 Truck Route Network
April 2010 Page 57 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-12: Alternative 2 Truck Route Network (Zoom)
April 2010 Page 58 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
6.4 Alternative 3 Network
The evaluation methodology for the Alternative 3 network was presented in Section 4, the inputs and results are presented below.
6.4.1 LEVEL 1 ANALYSIS
The Level 1 analysis focused on the application of first principals to determine a base truck route network. The full methodology is described in Section 4.2.1.
Exhibit 6-13 provides an overview of the arterial roads (outside of the Downtown Hamilton geographic region) that were not included in the L1 network.
The full L1 results are presented in Appendix C.
Exhibit 6-13: Arterial Links Not Included in the L1 System
Arterial Road Main Road Extents Classification Glanbrook/Airport Woodburn Rd Rymal Rd to Binbrook Rd Rural Arterial West Hamilton/Dundas Jerseyville Rd W Wilson St E to Meadowbrook Dr Minor Arterial McNiven Rd Mohawk Rd to Golf Links Rd Minor Arterial Waterdown/East Flambourough Mountain Brow Rd E Mill St S to King Rd Minor Arterial Parkways Corridor Jerseyville Rd W Regional Hwy 52 to Wilson St E Rural Arterial Southcote Rd Garner Rd to Golf Links Rd Rural Arterial
6.4.2 LEVEL 2 ANALYSIS
The Level 2 analysis compared the Level 1 truck route network against the existing truck route network, identifying variances. The full methodology is explained in Section 4.2.2.
Exhibit 6-14 provides an overview Level 2 process by geographic area. The full L2 results are presented in Appendix D.
April 2010 Page 59 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-14: Level 2 Analysis Variance Summary
Geographic Zone Noted Variances
Noted variances for the Glanbrook/Aiport area included White Church/Binbrook Road, Halidbrook Road and other collector roads (Hall Rd, Third Line Rd.)
White Church Road/Binbrook Road was included in the Level 2 Network on the basis of its role as a link to employment areas and Glanbrook/Airport regional centres.
Hall Road and Third Line Road were included based on their role as links to Truck Routes in Adjacent Municipalities.
No significant role was identified for Halidbrook Road; it was not included in the Level 2 Network.
A large number of industrial collector roads were identified as variances in the Level 2 Analysis. These roads were generally within industrial park areas north of Barton Street. Stoney Creek These roads were included in the Level 2 Network as they provide important links within the industrial employment areas.
A large number of industrial collector roads were identified as variances in the Level 2 Analysis. These roads were generally within industrial park and Portland areas north of Barton Street. East Hamiton/Port Area These roads were included in the Level 2 Network as they provide important links within the industrial employment areas.
A number of collector roadways were identified as variances within the Downtown Core.
Hamilton Downtown Core These roadways were included in the Level 2 Network because it was determined that a greater network density is required to control truck movements in the Downtown Core.
April 2010 Page 60 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Geographic Zone Noted Variances
A total of 7 variances were identified in the Level 2 Analysis for West/Hamilton Dundas.
Longwood Road S, York Rd and York Street were included in the Level 2 network based on West Hamiton/Dundas their role as links to provincial highways.
Mill St, Wellington St S, Hatt St and Market St were included based on their role as links to the employment lands at the base of Mill St.
Waterdown/East Flamborough No Level 2 Variances were noted.
West Flamborough No Level 2 Variances were noted.
No significant role was identified for Kilbride Parkways Corridor Road; it was not included in the Level 2 Network.
6.4.3 LEVEL 3 ANALYSIS
Following the Level 2 analysis, individual links requiring further investigation were considered during the Level 3 analysis. These links included roadways of special concern that were brought to the attention of the study team throughout the public/stakeholder consultation process, issues identified in consultation with city staff/Hamilton Police Service, and questions raised by the study team. The following subsections (6.4.3.1 through 6.4.3.14) present the Level 3 analysis of key links throughout the City, and provide recommendations/justifications for their status in the truck route network.
April 2010 Page 61 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
6.4.3.1 Barton Street Street Name: Barton Street
Extent From: Queen Street To: Wentworth Street
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Requests have been made by Councillors and the BIAs to remove Barton Street from the truck route network between Queen Street and Ottawa Street. • Recently, a significant effort has been made to make Barton Street more accommodating to pedestrians and to encourage business development, and a reduction in through truck traffic will support that effort • Burlington Street and Cannon/Wilson form good alternates for through truck traffic, although Wilson will be converted to two-way in 2010, reducing its capacity. • The geometry of Barton Street, Victoria Avenue to Wentworth Street, is challenging for trucks. Burlington Street and Cannon Street are better suited. • The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce requested Barton Street remain open and accessible from Wentworth Street to Ottawa Street due to the „industrial make-up” of the area. The Chamber recognizes change in streetscape at Wentworth Street, hence the recommendation to remove the truck route only west of Wentworth Street.
Data Regarding Segment: • 2004-2008 commercial ADT: Barton (Queen-Kenilworth): 492 • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: Barton (Queen-Kenilworth): 33 (Rate: 7.1) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Barton Street as a Minor Arterial Road. • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Employment Area, Link to Port
Impacts of Change: • Barton Street currently serves a significant volume of truck traffic, and removal of the link would likely result in truck traffic being shifted to Cannon Street, and perhaps to a lesser extent, Burlington Street • Cannon Street and Burlington Street represent more appropriate characteristics for truck traffic in terms of geometrics and land uses.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for removal between Queen Street and Wentworth Street based on geometrics, BIA considerations and availability of alternative routes. • Removal of this section of Barton Street would also necessitate the removals of Hess Street from Barton Street to Stuart Street, Sanford Avenue from Cannon Street to Barton Street, John Street from Cannon Street to Barton Street, and Caroline Street from Barton Street to Stuart Street to avoid dead end truck route segements.
April 2010 Page 62 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.2 Dundurn Street Street Name: Dundurn Street
Extent From: York Boulevard To: King Street
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated Public Stakeholder Input/Comments:
• Between York Boulevard and King Street the adjacent land uses are almost exclusively residential, with direct access • One reason for the current level of truck traffic on Dundurn Street is the difficulty of accessing Dundurn Street southbound from the Highway 403 exit from Toronto/Burlington origin. • Southbound Dundurn Street, north of King Street, is congested during both peak periods daily. • The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce requested Dundurn Street remain in the truck route network from York Street to King Street due to large volumes and lack of alternative routes. Data Regarding Segment:
• 2004-2008 commercial ADT: Dundurn (York-King): 477 • Approximately 20-30% of truck traffic on Dundurn is northbound, the rest is southbound • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: Dundurn (York-King): 9 (Rate: 19.3) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Dundurn Street as a Minor Arterial Road • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Downtown • Next adjacent northbound truck route is Bay Street, which would put more trucks into the downtown core. Bay Street currently carries approximately 210 trucks in a 24 hour period. • Rapid transit on King Street will alter traffic flows on Queen Street, King Street, etc. so altering truck flows at this time is premature. Queen Street now carries about 350 trucks in 24 hours.
Impacts of Change: • Dundurn Street currently serves a significant volume of truck traffic, and removal of the link would likely result in truck traffic being shifted to Queen Street/Bay Street and Highway 403 • While redistribution to Highway 403 is desirable, redistribution of volumes to Queen Street and Bay Street represents an undesirable alternative, as they already experience significant truck volumes and peak congestion as well. • Another factor is the extreme difficulty of exiting Highway 403 from the Burlington/Toronto side and trying to get to Dundurn South for a local delivery. This requires crossing 5 lanes of traffic in a very short distance, almost impossible for a truck at any time, especially rush hour. A much
April 2010 Page 63 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
easier alternative is for truck traffic to exit 403 at York and travel straight through King and Main. The other choice is to pass both exits and use the exit beside the Columbia School to turn back onto Main Street - not ideal given the student crossings.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for retention based on expected impact to adjacent truck routes and lack of viable alternatives. • Once the Rapid Transit Project is defined, it may be possible to revisit this recommendation.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.3 Fiddler’s Green Road Street Name: Fiddler‟s Green Road
Extent From: Garner Road To: White Church Road
Street Name: Airport Road/ Butter Road
Extent From: Fiddlers Green Road To: Upper James Street
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Currently, both Fiddler‟s Green Road and Airport Road/Butter Road are truck routes for specified users only. Most of the specified users are airport destined. • The Highway 6 by-pass is a preferable alternative for through traffic and airport traffic. • There have been some comments noted related to future access to the proposed airport development lands, and whether Fiddlers Green would be required. “Shortest path” rules and the Book Road access to the by-pass should be sufficient to accommodate development in the short- term.
Data Regarding Segment: • Speed and Classification Counts: Airport Road - West of Highway 6 – 24 Hours: • 4972 Total Vehicles • 259 Trucks (5.2%) • 83 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (1.7%) • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: Airport (Hwy #6 – Butter) : 3 (rate 1.0) • Speed and Classification Counts : Fiddler‟s Green – North of Butter Road – 24 Hours: • 3935 Total Vehicles
April 2010 Page 64 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
• 244 Trucks, (6.2%) • 50 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers -1.3% • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: Fiddler‟s Green (Garner – Carluke) : 4 (rate 0.4) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies both Airport Road and Butter Road as a Rural Arterial Roads • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Employment Area, Link to Airport.
Impacts of Change: • Some local truck traffic has remained on Fiddler‟s Green Road after the opening of Highway 6 New, but the provincial highway extension has a direct connection to Highways 403 and 6 and is a faster route, so only local traffic still uses Fiddlers Green. • Access to Highway 6 New from Rymal/Garner is not possible, so Fiddlers Green may be required for local delivery routing to the south. • By keeping Fiddlers Green in the system, a major local industry is properly served, that would otherwise be faced with a circuitous access route. • By making Fiddlers Green a standard truck route, the enforcement issue associated with specified users is eliminated. • By deleting Airport/Butter, airport-destined truck traffic is required to route via Highway 6 New, and avoids passing through the Mount Hope residential area.
Recommendation/Justification: • Fiddlers Green recommended for retention as full-time route based on local access to several major businesses. • Airport Road/Butter Road recommended for removal based on availability of higher classification route.
Proposed Truck Route Status: Fiddlers Green Road Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Proposed Truck Route Status: Butter Road, Airport Road Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.4 Fruitland Road Street Name: Fruitland Road
Extent From: Barton Street To: Queenston Road (Highway 8)
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
April 2010 Page 65 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Local residents have expressed concerns regarding truck traffic and associated pollution, noise and vibrations. Expressed concern with existing police enforcement levels. • Largely residential with direct access from Barton to Highway 8 • Industrial uses north of Barton Street, Fruitland Road has interchange with the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW), therefore is a truck route north of Barton Street, since MTO does not permit prohibition of trucks at an interchange. • Provides the only north-south connection between Barton Street and Highway 8 from Grays Road to Fifty Road (~3.5 km) • Grays Road (part-time truck route) and Fifty Road (full-time truck route) present comparable situations. • Grays Road is suitable for a part-time designation, since Centennial Parkway provides a near-by alternative for evening use. • There is an ongoing Fruitland Road Class Environmental Assessment to determine whether an alternate road to Fruitland Road is required. • Proposed restriction to 7 AM – 7 PM truck traffic (currently full-time) from Barton Road to Highway 8 was presented as Alternate 3 at PIC #2 • Hamilton Chamber of Commerce suggested Fruitland Road remain in the Truck Route Network as a full time route from the QEW to Barton Street, and the downgrade of the remaining portion from Barton Street to Highway 8 to part-time. • On-going Environmental Assessment may provide an entirely new option for routing truck traffic in the immediate vicinity of Fruitland Road.
Data Regarding Segment: • Truck Observations 2009: 59 Legal Trucks between 7:00 AM and 10:00 AM, 12 Legal Trucks between 8:00–11:00 PM • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Fruitland Road as a Minor Arterial Road • Speed and Classification Counts: Grays Rd. south of Barton – 24 Hours: • 5515 Total Vehicles • 207 Trucks (3.8%) • 41 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (0.7%) • Speed and Classification Counts: Fruitland Road north of Barton – 24 Hours: • 13703 Total Vehicles • 2258 Trucks (16.5%) • 1233 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (9.0%) • Speed and Classification Counts: Fruitland Road north of Highway 8 – 24 Hours: • 8401 Total Vehicles • 505 Trucks (6.0%) • 191 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (2.3%) of total traffic • 121 Trucks from 7 PM-7 AM (24% of Truck Traffic) • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Employment Area, Link to Provincial Highway • Collision history indicates 0 truck collisions in 5 years (2004-2008)
April 2010 Page 66 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Impacts of Change: • Removal/downgrading of Fruitland Road would shift some volumes to Fifty Road, which is distant, but similar in character. • Removal/downgrading of Fruitland expected to worsen illegal truck traffic on routes like DeWitt, which already have noted issues. • Downgrading to part-time of Fruitland Road would lessen impact of truck traffic in terms of pollution, noise and vibration during evening hours and would remove approximately 24% of total truck volumes from Fruitland Road (7 PM-7 AM volumes), although actual volumes as measured is minimal. • Restriction of Fruitland Road (either part- or full-time) would leave no north-south connections between Centennial Parkway and Fifty Rd. (10.3 km) during evening hours or all day, requiring long distance rerouting of north-south truck traffic.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for retention based on expected impact to adjacent truck routes. • Once Fruitland Road Class Environmental Assessment is completed, it may be possible to revisit this recommendation, or a completely different alternative may be planned.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.5 Gage Avenue Street Name: Gage Avenue
Extent From: Lawrence Road To: Barton Street
Street Name: Lawrence Road
Extent From: Gage Avenue To: Red Hill Valley Parkway
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Requests have been made by Councillors and the BIA to remove all five parallel links, Sherman Avenue, Gage Avenue, Ottawa Street, Kenilworth Avenue and Parkdale Avenue, from the truck route network. • The Police Service has indicated that at least a minimum density of north-south connecting links is required in this area to support truck route enforcement, meaning that two adjacent major links
April 2010 Page 67 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
could not be deleted simultaneously. • Gage Avenue and the connection to Lawrence Road are a logical deletion given the relatively low volumes and significant residential boundary length. This means that Sherman Avenue and Ottawa Street should remain in the system for effective enforcement. • The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce requested that arterial roads remain open and accessible north of Barton Street, in support of industrial parks. • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Employment Area, Link to Port
Data Regarding Segment: • 2004-2008 commercial ADT: • Sherman Avenue (Main-Burlington): 172 • Gage Avenue (Lawrence -Barton): 192 • Ottawa Street (Lawrence-Burlington): 145 • Kenilworth Avenue (Main -Burlington): 916 • Parkdale Avenue(King-Brampton): 478 • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: • Sherman Avenue (Main-Burlington): 7 (Rate: 12.6) • Gage Avenue (Lawrence -Barton): 6 (Rate: 1.2) • Ottawa Street (Lawrence-Burlington): 16 (Rate: 23.6) • Kenilworth Avenue (Kenilworth TC-Burlington): 16 (Rate: 3.5) • Parkdale Avenue (King-Brampton): 14 (Rate: 6.9) • 24 Hour Expanded Counts: 160 Trucks Northbound, 130 Trucks Southbound on Gage Road north of King St. • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies both Gage Avenue and Lawrence Road as Minor Arterial Roads
Impacts of Change: • All north-south links currently serve significant volumes of truck traffic, and removal of any of them would result in truck traffic being shifted to the adjacent roadways. • Gage Avenue commercial ADT of 192 will likely be split roughly 50/50 between Sherman Avenue and Ottawa Street, representing an increase in truck volumes of approximately 56% on Sherman Avenue and 66% on Ottawa Street.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for removal based on connection to Lawrence Road, residential frontage and relatively low overall truck volumes, therefore the impact of transferred traffic should not be too great. • Lawrence Road is recommended for removal from Gage Avenue to the RHVP in conjunction with the removal of Gage Avenue, as King/Main are more suitable truck routes. • The removal of Lawrence Road would subsequently necessitate the removals of short portions of Ottawa Street and Cochrane Road from Lawrence Road to King Street, to eliminate dead end links.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
April 2010 Page 68 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
6.4.3.6 Garth Street Street Name: Garth Street
Extent From: Mohawk Road To: Rymal Road
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Garth Street provides access to the Lincoln Alexander Parkway, and it should be part of the truck route network between Mohawk Road and Rymal Road. (Level 1 Criteria) • Hamilton Chamber of Commerce requested the implementation of Garth Street south of the Lincoln Alexander Parkway be a part-time truck route, suggesting that there is no current demand for a full-time route. • As a minor arterial roadway, Garth Street meets initial Level 1 criteria for inclusion. • Access to and from Lincoln Alexander represents a key component of an effective Truck Route Network.
Data Regarding Segment: • 7 Hour Counts: Garth Street south of Rymal Road: • 83 Trucks Northbound (4.1%) • 79 Trucks Southbound (2.2%) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Garth Street as a Minor Arterial Road • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Highway (via Lincoln Alexander Parkway) • Access to developing industrial / commercial airport areas • Collision history indicates 2 truck collisions in 5 years (2004-2008)
Impacts of Change: • Provision of access to and from the Lincoln Alexander Parkway. • Likely minor increase in truck traffic on Garth Street.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for inclusion in Truck Route Network based upon access to Lincoln Alexander Parkway (Level 1) • Inclusion initially as only a part-time route is required to match to part-time status of Mohawk Road and removal of Garth Street, north of Mohawk Road, from the truck route network.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
April 2010 Page 69 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
6.4.3.7 Kenilworth Access Street Name: Kenilworth Access/ Kenilworth Avenue South/Mountain Brow Boulevard/Upper Ottawa St.
Extent From: Main Street To: Upper Gage Avenue/Fennell Avenue
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Removal of the Kenilworth access was requested by residents on Mountain Brow Blvd. to reduce truck flows in front of their residences. Concerns were also expressed regarding property values, geological implications of truck traffic and roadway setbacks • Hamilton Chamber of Commerce requested Kenilworth Ave., the Kenilworth Access and Upper Ottawa St. remain open and accessible as Kenilworth/Kenilworth access serves as the only full- time escarpment crossing between RHVP and Claremont Access.
Data Regarding Segment: • 2004-2008 commercial ADT: • Kenilworth Access (Kenilworth TC-Mountain Brow): 186 • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: • Kenilworth Access (Kenilworth TC-Mountain Brow): 3 (Rate: 4.95) • Truck Observations 2010: 201 Trucks From 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM – 126 Exempt (School buses, City waste and service vehicles, etc.), 75 Not Exempt; visual observation found only 3 full size semi-rigs in 7 hours • Roadway just recently completely reconstructed. Design was intended to accommodate trucks. Drainage and stability improves as a result. • Speed and Classification Counts – 24 Hours - Mountain Brow: • 7194 Total Vehicles Eastbound • 248 Trucks Eastbound (3.4%) • 38 Trucks Eastbound Class 8 or higher • 5925 Total Vehicles Westbound • 205 Trucks Westbound (3.5%) • 30 Trucks Westbound Class 8 or higher • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Mountain Brow Boulevard as a Minor Arterial Road • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Employment Area, Link Across Significant Natural Barrier, Like to Sub- Regional Centre, Link to Port • Only full-time escarpment crossing for trucks between Claremont and RHVP. • Travel time via RHVP if Kenilworth Access removed from track route system ranges for 30% more to 300% (three times) more, depending on start and end points. • Travel distance via RHVP if Kenilworth Access removed from truck route system is 6 to 7 times as far, depending on start and end points.
April 2010 Page 70 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Impacts of Change: • The Kenilworth Access is a major link across the escarpment for intra city commercial operations, serving such institutions as Henderson Hospital and the Concession Street BIA. Removal would force traffic from the east end of the BIA to drive the length of the BIA to access the truck route network.
Recommendation/Justification: • Kenilworth South and Kenilworth Access are designated as Major Urban Arterial Roadways, and as such are intended to carry truck volumes • Mountain Brow Road is designated as Minor Arterial Roadway, and as such is intended to carry truck volumes • Kenilworth Access just reconstructed with design fully intended to accommodate trucks • Large trucks avoid the Access due to the hairpin curve • Over 60% of heavy vehicles using the escarpment crossing are exempted under the Traffic By- law, and would legally remain, even if exempted • The collision history of the Access, despite the tight curve geometrics, is reasonable and not a cause to remove the section from the system • Travel time and distance for alternate route via Red Hill Valley Parkway are excessive • Kenilworth Access provides important Link Across Significant Natural Barrier (Level 1 Analysis)
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.8 Kenilworth Avenue Street Name: Kenilworth Avenue (North of Main Street)
Extent From: Main Street To: Beach Road
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Requests have been made by Councillors and the BIA to remove all five parallel links, Sherman Avenue, Gage Avenue, Ottawa Street, Kenilworth Avenue and Parkdale Avenue, from the truck route network • Hamilton Police Service have indicated that at least a minimum density of north-south connecting links is required in this area to support truck route enforcement, meaning that two adjacent major links could not be deleted simultaneously • There is a low bridge on Kenilworth North that causes clearance and collision concerns • Hamilton Chamber of Commerce further requested that arterial roads remain open and accessible north of Barton St. in support of industrial parks.
April 2010 Page 71 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Data Regarding Segment: • 2004-2008 commercial ADT: • Sherman Avenue (Main-Burlington): 172 • Gage Avenue (Lawrence -Barton): 192 • Ottawa Street (Lawrence-Burlington): 145 • Kenilworth Avenue (Kenilworth TC-Burlington): 916 • Parkdale Avenue (King-Brampton): 478 • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: • Sherman Avenue (Main-Burlington): 7 (Rate: 12.6) • Gage Avenue (Lawrence -Barton): 6 (Rate: 1.17) • Ottawa Street (Lawrence-Burlington): 16 (Rate: 23.62) • Kenilworth Avenue (Kenilworth TC-Burlington): 16 (Rate: 3.5) • Parkdale Avenue (King-Brampton): 14 (Rate: 6.93) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Kenilworth Ave./Kenilworth Access as Major Urban Arterial Roads.
Impacts of Change: • All north-south links currently serve significant volumes of truck traffic, and removal of any of them would result in truck traffic being shifted to the adjacent roadways. • Removing Kenilworth Avenue would move significant traffic to Ottawa Street, which is contrary to the specific comment from the Ottawa Street BIA about reducing the through truck traffic from their area.
Recommendation/Justification: • Evaluated on basis of need, escarpment crossing, volumes, road condition, and safety record. • Removal would redistribute significant additional volumes to adjacent links (e.g., Ottawa St.) • Removal would force traffic from the east end of the BIA to drive the length of the BIA to access the truck route system. • Kenilworth Avenue provides important Link to Hamilton Port (Level 1 Analysis) • Kenilworth Avenue be designated as Major Urban Arterial Roadways, and as such are intended to carry truck volumes.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.9 Millgrove Side Road Street Name: Millgrove Side Road
Extent From: Highway 6 To: Highway 5
Street Name: Concession 5 West
Extent From: Brock Road To: Highway 6
April 2010 Page 72 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Local residents have indicated concerns related to truck traffic within the community of Millgrove, particularly on the portion of Millgrove Side Road, north of Millgrove Road. • Both local and cut-through traffic have been identified as concerns, due to minimal setbacks and lack of pedestrian facilities. • The request has been to remove Millgrove Side Road (all or part north of Conc.5) and Concession 5 (Millgrove Road) from Highway 6 to Brock Road from the Truck Route Network. • The traffic signal at the intersection of Millgrove Side Road and Highway 6 is a major draw for truck traffic, since it provides safer, faster access to and across the highway. • Can be considered for removal on basis of proximity to higher order routes (Highway 5 and Highway 6). • Installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Highway 97 and Highway 6 may reduce need for access to Millgrove Side Road signal (MTO Highway 6 Safety Study). • Currently, Millgrove Side Road between Millgrove Road (Concession 5W) and Highway 6 is only a truck route in the northbound direction. It was suggested that the road could be upgraded and then converted to a two-way truck route to avoid confusion and concentrate movements at the Highway 6 signalized intersection.
Data Regarding Segment: • 2004-2008 commercial ADT: • Brock (Millgrove-Highway 5): 60 - 454 • Millgrove Side Rd (Highway 5-Highway6 ): 34 • Millgrove Rd (Brock-Highway 6): 47 • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: • Brock (Millgrove –Highway 5): 2 (Rate: 0.65) • Millgrove Side Rd (Highway 5-Highway 6): 1 (Rate: 3.99) • Millgrove Rd (Brock-Highway 6): 0 • Speed and Classification Counts: Millgrove Side Road north of Concession 5 West – 24 Hours: • 2431 Total Vehicles • 151 Trucks (6.2%) • 17 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (0.7%) • Speed and Classification Counts: Millgrove Side Road south of Concession 5 West – 24 Hours: • 2070 Total Vehicles • 107 Trucks (5.2%) • 77 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (3.7%) • Speed and Classification Counts: Concession 5W east of Millgrove Side Road – 24 Hours: • 2378 Total Vehicles • 218 Trucks (9.2%) • 47 Trucks Class 8 or higher – Tractor Trailers (2.0%) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies both Millgrove Side Road and Concession 5 West as Rural Arterial Roads • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Highway
April 2010 Page 73 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Impacts of Change: • Removal of the links would likely shift some traffic to Highways 5/6, which are higher order, preferred truck routes, as well as onto Brock Road and Safari Road, which have less viable access onto Highway 6. • Truck volumes on Millgrove Side Road are minimal, but are higher than Brock Road, north of Concession 5. Similarly with Concession 5 versus Safari Road. • Brock Road has a better safety rate, but Millgrove Side Road has only had one truck collision in five years.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for removal based on availability of alternative routes.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.10 Nebo Road Street Name: Nebo Road
Extent From: Rymal Road To: Twenty Road
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Main roadway through predominantly employment/industrial lands located north of Twenty Road • Residents expressed concerns regarding impacts to pedestrian and bicycle traffic south of Dickenson Road
Data Regarding Segment: • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Highway, Link to Employment Area • Nebo Road – 7 Hour Counts – South of Rymal • Northbound – 377 Trucks (22.4%) • Southbound – 392 (23.8%) • Dartnall Road Extension planned for 2010-11. Will curve around to meet Nebo, north of Dickenson.
Impacts of Change: • Considering large number of commercial developments adjacent to Nebo Road, it is likely that the majority of truck trips on Nebo Road currently are local deliveries. Consequently, it is probable that the inclusion of Nebo Road will not drastically increase truck traffic north of Twenty Road. • Some developments coming on line shortly.
April 2010 Page 74 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
• Connecting to Dartnall Road extension means that there would be a continuous loop, no dead- end.
Recommendation/Justification: • This section of Nebo Road is recommended for inclusion as soon as the Dartnall Road extension is completed.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Street Name: Nebo Road
Extent From: Twenty Road To: White Church Road
Street Name: Dickenson Road
Extent From: Nebo Road To: Highway 6
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Residents expressed concerns regarding suitability of existing roadway condition and impacts to pedestrian and bicycle traffic on Nebo, south of Dickenson Road and on Dickenson Road • Dickenson may eventually be required to provide a connection between developing employment lands and Highway 6/Airport employment area • Nebo provides the only North – South connection between Rymal and White Church Road from Hwy #56 to Upper James Street
Data Regarding Segment: • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Highway, Link to Employment Area • Nebo Road – 7 Hour Counts – South of Rymal • Northbound – 377 Trucks (22.4%) • Southbound – 392 (23.8%)
Impacts of Change: • Inclusion of Dickenson Road from Highway 6 to Nebo Road will divert some East – West trips from Rymal Road and expected increase in truck traffic
April 2010 Page 75 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Recommendation/Justification: • This section of Nebo Road, and Dickenson Road are not recommended for inclusion into the truck route system at this time • Further studies are recommended to establish truck routes in the area bounded by Rymal Road, White Church Road , Hwy. #56 and Upper James Street pending roadway improvements, and subject to development
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.11 Ottawa Street Street Name: Ottawa Street
Extent From: Lawrence Road To: Barton Street
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Requests have been made by Councillors and the BIA to remove all five parallel links, Sherman Avenue, Gage Avenue, Ottawa Street, Kenilworth Avenue and Parkdale Avenue, from the truck route network • Hamilton Police Service have indicated that at least a minimum density of north-south connecting links is required in this area to support truck route enforcement, meaning that two adjacent major links could not be deleted simultaneously • Gage Avenue and the connection to Lawrence Road are a logical deletion given the relatively low volumes and significant residential boundary length – this means that Sherman Avenue and Ottawa Street should remain in the system for effective enforcement • Hamilton Chamber of Commerce requested that arterial roads remain open and accessible north of Barton Street in support of industrial parks.
Data Regarding Segment: • 2004-2008 commercial ADT: • Sherman Avenue (Main-Burlington): 172 • Gage Avenue (Lawrence -Barton): 192 • Ottawa Street (Lawrence-Burlington): 145 • Kenilworth Avenue (Main -Burlington): 916 • Parkdale Avenue (King-Brampton): 478 • Total truck collisions 2004-2008: • Sherman Avenue (Main-Burlington): 7 (Rate: 12.6) • Gage Avenue (Lawrence -Barton): 6 (Rate: 1.17) • Ottawa Street (Lawrence-Burlington): 16 (Rate: 23.62) • Kenilworth Avenue (Kenilworth TC-Burlington): 16 (Rate: 3.5) • Parkdale Avenue (King-Brampton): 14 (Rate: 6.93) • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Ottawa Street as:
April 2010 Page 76 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
• Minor Arterial Road from Burlington Street to Barton Street. • Major Urban Arterial from Barton Street to Main Street. • Minor Arterial Road from Main Street. to King Street. • Collector Road from King Street to Lawrence Avenue. • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Employment Area, Link to Port
Impacts of Change: • All north-south links currently serve significant volumes of truck traffic, and removal of any of them would result in truck traffic being shifted to the adjacent roadways. • Removal of Ottawa Street, in conjunction with removal of Gage Avenue would create circuitous truck routing for north-south truck traffic, requiring long distance trips to the next available north- south connection. It would create an enforcement issue, as well. • Removal of Ottawa Street, as an alternative to the removal of Gage Avenue / Laurence Road, would not impact as many residential units, but would displace truck traffic to Kenilworth Avenue, a very similar shopping district.
Recommendation/Justification: • Most sections of Ottawa Street have been designated as either Minor Arterial or Major Urban Arterial roadways, and as such should be designated for truck traffic (Level 1 analysis) • Recommended for retention based on removal of adjacent truck route (Gage Avenue). It is not feasible to remove two adjacent north-south arterial routes in the interest of enforceability, distribution of truck traffic and a minimum density of Truck Route Network. • The section of Ottawa Street between Lawrence Road and King Street would have to be removed in conjunction with the removals of Gage Avenue and Lawrence Road to avoid creating a dead end.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.12 Parkside Drive Street Name: Parkside Drive
Extent From: Highway 6 To: Evans Road
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Parkside Drive provides east-west connection to Highway 6 for Waterdown. • Signalized at Highway 6. • Can be used with Evans Road to by-pass Highway 5 through village core. • Predominately residential with direct access. • Waterdown/Aldershot Transportation Master Plan - East-West Corridor is undergoing Phases 3
April 2010 Page 77 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
and 4 of a Class Environmental Assessment.
Data Regarding Segment: • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Parkside Drive as a Rural Arterial Road; proposes E-W Corridor as Rural Arterial Road • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Highway • Collision history indicates 1 truck collision in 5 years (2004-2008)
Impacts of Change: • Pending completion of E-W Corridor Environmental Assessment, redistribution of majority of truck volumes from Parkside Drive/Evans Road to E-W Corridor.
Recommendation/Justification: • The status of Parkside Drive and Evans Road may be reconsidered depending on route and once E-W Corridor is completed, but should remain until then.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.13 White Church Road/Binbrook Road Street Name: White Church Road/Binbrook Road
Extent From: Upper James Street To: Highway 56
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments about White Church/Binbrook Road: • Currently a designated truck route for specified users only; questionable whether this is a sustainable assumption • Provides a major connection to Niagara truck route (Regional Road 65) – provides important short – to mid- route connection • Facilitates goods movement from employment lands to/from airport • Limited alternative routes available east-west across the mountain from Highway 6 to Highway 56. • Required to maintain appropriate density of truck route network • Roundabout located in Binbrook. • Should be selected as either „Full-Time‟ or „Part-Time‟, rather than „Specified Users‟. • Consider designations subject to improvement. • Residents expressed concerns regarding suitability of existing roadway condition and geometrics in regards to addition of truck traffic.
April 2010 Page 78 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
• Increasing residential development bounding this road segment
Data Regarding Segment: • Segment from Highway 56 to Highway 6 was a truck route prior to 2000. • Truck volumes in 1999 were about 175 trucks per day, total • Typical volumes in 2005-9 are about 120-130 trucks at Highway 56 in 7 hours, or about 200-240 per day. • Recent truck observations found of 60 trucks identified from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM – 16 were exempt under specified users by-law, 44 were not exempt • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies White Church Road as a Rural Arterial Road • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Employment Area, Link to Provincial Highway, Link to Airport, Link to Adjacent Municipality (if Tyneside Road were added at a later date) • Collision history indicates 6 truck collisions in 5 years (2004-2008) for entire length from Westbrook Road to Highway 6 • Collision rate now among the lowest of truck routes considered in the study
Impacts of Change: • Provision of link from Highway 56 to Highway 6, required minimum density of network. • Prepares for development of airport lands with obvious route to markets in Regional Niagara. • Minimal expected increase in truck traffic on White Church Road, since majority of truck traffic is non-exempt already and volumes exceed those of 1999 when the probation was implemented. • By removing ambiguity about status of road as truck route, it can be put into capital budget process or coordinated with development for consideration of upgrades to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. • Features such as the roundabouts help to manage traffic in the more residential areas • Minimal safety impact, since the rate of truck collisions (based on truck travel and collision numbers) is very reasonable.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for inclusion in Truck Route system.
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
6.4.3.14 Wilson Street (Ancaster) Street Name: Wilson Street (Ancaster)
Extent From: Rousseaux Street To: Fiddler‟s Green Road
April 2010 Page 79 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Current Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Public Stakeholder Input/Comments: • Ancaster BIA has requested that the segment be removed from the truck route network between Rousseaux Street and Fiddler's Green Road. • Considerations are pedestrian facilities, pedestrian crossing opportunities and impacts on business. • Hamilton Chamber of Commerce recommends that Wilson Street remain a truck route and accessible from both the east and west ends of the village core. The Chamber also suggests that the Transportation Master Plan being developed for the former Town of Ancaster may provide other measures to deal with current truck volumes on Wilson Street. • The Ancaster Transportation Master Plan study is on hold, pending discussions with the MTO over adding a new ramp connection to Highway 403.
Data Regarding Segment: • 24 Hour Equivalent Counts: 230 Trucks Westbound, 210 Trucks Eastbound on Wilson Street east of Highway 403 • Hamilton Road Classification Report identifies Wilson Street as a Major Urban Arterial Road • Level 1 Criteria: Link to Provincial Highway, Sub-Regional Centre • Much of core has parking between the sidewalk and travel lanes • Collision history indicates 15 truck collisions in 5 years (2004-2008)
Impacts of Removal: • Trucks from Highway 403 cannot be prohibited from exiting at Wilson Street and at Fiddler‟s Green Road interchanges, but would be forced to turn at the Wilson/Fiddler‟s intersection. This would likely cause enforcement issues. • Access to the eastern part of the BIA for local deliveries to/from Highway 403 Brantford will have to be from the Aberdeen Street exit, since there is no movement provided at the Lincoln Alexander Parkway/Highway 403 interchange. • BIA deliveries would be split: west end only to/from Fiddler‟s; east end only to/from Rosseaux • Access for deliveries to Ancaster from West Hamilton/Dundas will be much more circuitous, increasing business cost. • A significant volume of truck traffic currently uses this segment of the truck route network.
Recommendation/Justification: • Recommended for retention in Truck Route Network due to lack of alternative routes through the Ancaster area. • Removal of route may only partially reduce truck traffic in the area due to proportion of trucks making local deliveries. • Inability to restrict truck traffic from Highway 403 and current ramp configurations make potential change ineffective, due to likely enforcement demands.
April 2010 Page 80 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Proposed Truck Route Status Full Time Part-Time Specified User Not Designated
Based upon the results of the individual link analysis, the Alternative 3 truck route network is illustrated in Exhibit 6-15 and Exhibit 6-16.
April 2010 Page 81 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-15: Alternative 3 Truck Route Network
April 2010 Page 82 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 6-16: Alternative 3 Truck Route Network (Zoom)
April 2010 Page 83 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
7. MANAGING THE TRUCK ROUTE NETWORK
The truck route network developed through this is not intended as a static entity; rather, it is expected to evolve and expand, as dictated by development and/or redevelopment within the City. This includes that construction of new road infrastructure. The consideration of truck traffic should be integral to the planning process for any new roads within the City of Hamilton.
The criteria that constitute the Level 1 Analysis should serve as a simple guide for determining if any new road should be included in the City‟s truck route network. Furthermore, the potential to remove existing links from the truck route network should also be considered during the planning of new roads. Given the relative ease with which mitigating measures to accommodate truck traffic can typically be incorporated into new construction, as compared to existing roadways, new roads should always be considered as potential truck routes, until sufficient justification for the contrary is provided.
With the understanding that the truck route network developed through this study could result in some unintended/unanticipated issues, the following sections identify several tools that can be used to manage a dynamic truck route network. In most instances, recommended policies for the application of these tools are also provided. 7.1 Time-of-Day/Time-of-Year Restrictions
Although time-of-day and time-of-year restriction on truck movements are similar, in that they both deviate from the typical full-time permissive truck route approach, they differ significantly in why they are used.
7.1.1 TIME-OF-DAY RESTRICTIONS
Time-of-day restrictions or part-time truck routes have occasionally been used to create a balance between recognized goods movement corridors and less compatible land uses (e.g., residential areas, hospitals, etc.). Currently, all part-time truck routes in the City of Hamilton are available between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, which reflects typical business hours. Through this study, the continued use of part-time truck routes has come into question, due to issues of equitableness and enforceability. The recommended policy regarding the use of part-time truck routes is as follows:
Existing part-time truck routes should be maintained. New part-time truck routes should only be added where adding a new full-time truck route would result in truck route discontinuities during the 7:00 PM – 7:00 AM period.
7.1.2 TIME-OF-YEAR RESTRICTIONS
Time-of-year restrictions (i.e., seasonal load restrictions or reduced load periods) are used to protect the structural integrity of road infrastructure during the spring months, by reducing the allowable load limits for heavy trucks. Given that these restrictions relate directly to the construction of the road infrastructure, reduced load periods are necessary to the sustained viability of the road network. The need for reduced load periods is dictated by the design and construction of the individual road sections to which they apply, and until such a time that the restrictions are not required, due to road infrastructure improvements, they should be retained. Existing reduced load periods are indicated in Section 58 of Part 5 – Load Related Restriction of the City of Hamilton By- law.
April 2010 Page 84 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
7.2 Engine Brake Signage
As part of this study, the issue of engine brakes, sometimes known as compression brakes or Jake Brakes®, was addressed. Overwhelmingly, issues raised with respect to the use of engine brakes relate to noise. In the past, several requests have been made by members of the public to have signs posted discouraging the use of engine brakes within areas of the City of Hamilton, and in a few isolated instances those requests were granted. There are arguments both for and against the continued use of engine brake signage, and some of the more relevant points of those arguments are discussed below.
All information provided by the manufacturers and truck operators suggests that, when properly maintained, engine brakes on large trucks do not produce any more noise than the same vehicle travelling uphill. However, it is known that poorly maintained or intentionally modified muffler systems can result in engine brakes that can be quite loud, which can have a negative impact on quality of life. Posting signs that discourage or prohibit the use of engine brakes is one way of mitigating the noise impacts associated with the use of engine brakes. Sample signs are shown in Exhibit 7-1.
Exhibit 7-1: Engine Brake Signs5
However, given that engine brakes are a supplemental safety device, prohibiting their use has the potential to create some serious liability issues, in the event of a collision involving a heavy truck in an area where the use of engine brakes is prohibited. Additionally, the enforcement of engine brake prohibitions is extremely challenging, because it involves both a moving violation and a noise by- law violation. Given the City‟s current policy on these types of violations, it would require both a Police Officer and a By-law Officer to enforce an engine brake prohibition. Due to the above issues the use of engine brake prohibitions is not recommended.
In the absence of engine brake prohibitions, signs could still be used to discourage their use in residential areas. The legal and enforcement concerns associated with this type of signage are less than those related to prohibitions. Nonetheless, there are still some issues related to the widespread use of any type of signage related to engine brakes. Namely, sign pollution (i.e., the counterproductive effects of over-signing) and the costs associated with the installation and maintenance of the signs.
Given the inevitability of more requests for engine brake signs being made to the City, it is clear that a formal policy on their use is required. The recommended policy is as follows:
Installation of signage that discourages the use of engine brakes is supported, subject to the following conditions:
5 Transportation Association of Canada Traffic Operations and Management Standing Committee, Draft Interim Report – Project No. 257 – Engine Brake Sign, April 2007.
April 2010 Page 85 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
High volume of truck traffic (based on traffic volume data collected within two years of date of request for signage);
Proven history of complaints at/within the same area;
Vertical alignment – downhill grade of less than 3%;
Frequent stopping location – traffic control device(e.g., stop sign or traffic signals), freeway exit, sharp curve, etc.; and
Close proximity to residences. 7.3 Long Combination Vehicles
In Canada, any combination of vehicles over 25 metres overall length is considered to be a Long Combination Vehicle (LCV). In Ontario, LCVs are made up of a tractor pulling two full-length semi- trailers up to 40 metres in overall length. In the summer of 2009, Ontario initiated a one-year pilot program to allow 100 LCVs to operation in the province. LCVs are restricted to predetermined highways and approved access points close to highway ramps. Additionally, all off-highway routes require an engineering and safety assessment, as well as municipal consent.
Given the unique geometric requirements associated with LCVs, the truck route network developed through this study is not intended to accommodate their unrestricted operations (i.e., the truck route designation does not negate the need for the provincially-mandated engineering and safety assessment).
Additionally, the City has indicated that until such a time as a business operating within the City of Hamilton requests consent to use LCVs, the City has no interest or intent to accommodate such vehicles on any City roadway (including the Linc and RHVP). Therefore, no further action related to LCVs is recommended at this time. 7.4 Restrictive Signage
The primary signing system currently used for the truck route network in the City of Hamilton is a permissive system. This means that the routes which are truck routes are clearly defined. This system requires far less signing than the alternative, which would be a restrictive system, in which all routes that are not truck routes have to be signed. In addition, the current system provides better guidance than do restrictive systems, in that signs may be erected upstream of intersections, letting heavy vehicle operators know which turning movements are permitted before they reach the decision point.
Generally, it is preferable to adhere to a single type of signage (i.e., permissive or restrictive), to minimize the potential for confusion and support consistent enforcement. However, through this study, it has been recognized that there are instances in which additional signage, in the form of restrictive signage, may be required to reinforce areas with poor compliance or areas in which drivers maybe confused. This approach is consistent with the direction outlined in the Ontario Traffic Manual – Book 5. The recommended policy regarding the use of restrictive signage is as follows:
Existing restrictive signage is to be grandfathered (i.e., maintained at all locations where it exists currently), until such time as the signs need to be replaced. At that time the need to retain the signs should be reviewed according to the criteria outlined below:
April 2010 Page 86 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
City of Hamilton staff or Hamilton Police Service to confirm history of complaints for the area;
Truck volume data (particularly illegal movement data) to be referenced or collected to verify issue;
If there is a demonstrated concern or issue, install additional permissive signage to reinforce the designated routes;
If there continues to be a demonstrated need, target area for police enforcement (City of Hamilton staff to liaise with Hamilton Police Service to monitor results of targeted enforcement); and
If additional, redundant permissive signage and/or police enforcement do not significantly improve the situation, implement restrictive signage.
Installation of restrictive signage should be limited, but new restrictive signage may be installed on roads that do not form part of the truck route network, subject to the criteria and procedure described above. 7.5 “Specified Users” Classification
The current By-law allows for truck route links with a “Specified Users” classification, whereby certain links can only legally be used for through travel by a specified set of operators, as named in the By-law. The intent of this classification is to restrict the number of operators that can use the link, other than for local deliveries, thereby reducing truck traffic volumes. However, it is very difficult to enforce the classification, and it is contrary to the goal of providing consistent application of the truck route designation. Therefore, it is recommended that the “Specified Users” classification be eliminated, and all references to it be removed from the By-law. Links that currently have this classification should either be upgraded to an “All Users” classification or removed from the network. Based on this recommended approach, all operators would have the same rights to use all truck routes in the City of Hamilton. 7.6 Enforcement
Currently, the sole responsibility for proactive enforcement of Traffic By-law 01-215 respecting trucks using non-truck routes lies with the Hamilton Police service. In fact, the Hamilton Police Service is responsible for enforcing all moving violations within the City limits. In 2009, the potential for reinstating a joint-enforcement strategy, involving the Hamilton Police Service and Hamilton By- law Enforcement Officers was explored. Ultimately, it was determined that, based on past experience, joint-enforcement of moving violations was not viable over the long-term, because policing priorities often did not allow Police Officers to attend pre-scheduled enforcement initiatives, resulting in an inefficient use of By-law Enforcement Officers and lost revenues to the City.
Given the justification cited above and the potential safety risks associated with stopping heavy trucks within the City of Hamilton, it is recommended that the task of enforcing the truck route network (i.e., Traffic By-law 01-215) be left to the Hamilton Police Service.
With the above in mind, minimizing the need for enforcement was a key consideration in developing the truck route network. While the Hamilton Police Service may provide a minimal level of enforcement, truck route violations are understandably not a high priority for service. That is why one of the guiding principles of the study was to attempt to develop a network that was logical to the trucking industry, such that the routings provided would not require high levels of police
April 2010 Page 87 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
enforcement to establish and maintain compliance. If the truck route network is not sufficiently dense, it becomes very difficult to determine where the shortest distance to and from a truck route is, and it becomes almost impossible for the police to enforce routings. 7.7 Education
The trucking industry is the primary audience for educational and informational materials related to the truck route network and its use. Informational signs explaining the City‟s permissive truck route system should be located at all truck route links to adjacent municipalities, oriented for traffic bound for the City of Hamilton. Additionally, a map of the truck route network and a copy of the applicable sections of the By-law should be posted on the City of Hamilton website, in an easily accessible and searchable location. Hard copies of the truck route network map and the applicable sections of the By-lay should be made available by request. 8. CONCLUSIONS
Based on all of the efforts that went into the Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study (e.g., public and other stakeholder consultation, site visits and data collection, network evaluation, individual link assessments, etc.), several conclusions were reached:
Changes are required to the truck route network to account for changes in land use that have occurred over time. Some new links should be added to fill gaps in the network and provide better connectivity across the City, and several links should be removed because they have become redundant or impractical. All of the recommended changes to the truck route network are presented in Section 9.1;
The stakeholder consultation conducted for this study confirmed that there is a very negative connotation associated with truck routes, and it is a widely held misconception that simply removing truck routes from the network will eliminate truck traffic from those roads. By far, the most common request that resulted from the public consultation was to remove links from the truck route network. The most challenging component of the study was trying to balance the needs of industry with those of the general public;
With respect to goods movement, the recommended truck route network was designed to address the current needs of the City of Hamilton. As the City develops and evolves, the truck route network will have to be updated to keep pace (e.g., creating a more direct connection between the Airport and North Glanbrook Business Park/RHVP due to the current lack of truck access opportunities from the northeast to the Airport, south of the Lincoln Alexander Parkway). The evaluation methodology presented in Section 4 should serve as a basis for future updates to the network; and
In addition to regularly updating the truck route network to ensure that it reflects the needs of the City of Hamilton, several tools have been recommended to help manage the network: Time-of-day restrictions and reduced load periods; Engine brake signage; Restrictive signage; Enforcement; and Education.
April 2010 Page 88 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
The management tools listed above should be used as outlined in Section 7 of this report, and they should be applied consistently throughout the City of Hamilton and over time. 9. RECOMMENDATIONS
Also based on the considerable efforts of the Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study, and following from the conclusions presented above, a series for recommendations for the truck route network, its immediate update and long-term evolution, are discussed below. 9.1 Recommended Truck Route Network
The recommended truck route network (the Alternative 3 Network) is that which resulted from application of the evaluation methodology outlined in Section 4 of this report. Maps illustrating the recommended truck route network are provided in Exhibit 6-15 and Exhibit 6-16.
A description of changes (e.g., additions and deletions) to the truck route network, relative to the existing truck route network, is provided in Exhibit 9-1 and Exhibit 9-2.
Exhibit 9-1: Recommended Additions and Upgrades
Road Extents Ward Justification Glanbrook/Airport White Highway 6 to Highway 56 11 Currently specified users only. Church Would fill a large gap in the network Road between Hamilton Airport and (Upgrade Highway 56/Binbrook Employment to All Lands. Users) Pritchard Stone Church Road to Rymal Road 9 Pritchard Road is a superior link to Road Upper Mount Albion, with far less adjacent residential development. Downtown Core Wentworth Cannon St to Barton St. 1 Upgraded in conjunction with Avenue restriction of Barton St. Forms (Upgrade adjacent north-south pair with to Full- Sanford Avenue, which is full-time. Time) Parkways Corridor Garth Mohawk Road to Rymal Road 8 Arterial Roadway with 'Linc' access, Street Part-time status due to part-time (Part-Time) status of Mohawk Rd. and residential land uses south of the 'Linc.' Glanbrook/Airport Fiddlers Garner Road to Carluke Road 12 Currently “Specified Users” Green Classification, which is being Road eliminated. Link is required to (Upgrade connect to major local industry. to All Users)
April 2010 Page 89 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Exhibit 9-2: Recommended Removals
Road Extents Ward Justification East Flamborough/Waterdown Campbellville Centre Road to 15 Halton Region connection removed. Truck routes Road Municipal should not dead end. Boundary Millgrove Highway 6 to 15 There are few truck generators on Millgrove Sideroad Highway 5 Sideroad. Highway 6 is a preferable alternative. There is a lack of pedestrian facilities. Millgrove Road Brock Road to 15 There are a number of residences with minimal (Concession 5 Highway 6 setbacks within the community of Millgrove. There W) is a lack of pedestrian facilities. West Hamilton/Dundas York Road Olympic Drive 13 Olympic Drive is a superior alternative with better to Cootes Drive geometry, cross-section, fewer residential frontages, and existing truck generators. West Flamborough Jerseyville Wilson Street to 12/14 Jerseyville Road has challenging geometry, many Road Highway 52 residential and community frontages, and it serves few truck generators, aside from agriculture near Highway 52. Also parallel to 403. Glanbrook/Airport Airport Fiddlers Green 11/12 Currently 'Specified Users' Classification, parallel Road/Butter Road to Upper to Highway 6 Bypass. Road James Street Upper Mount Rymal Road to 9 Pritchard Road is a superior alternative with fewer Albion Road Stone Church residential frontages, and existing truck generators. Road Stone Church Upper Mount 9 Creates discontinuous network with Upper Mount Road Albion Road to Albion Road removal RHVP Ramps Ridge Road Centennial 11 The geometry and cross-section of Ridge Road Parkway to west of Tapleytown Road are not accommodating 11th Road East to trucks, and the removal of Tapleytown Road from the truck route network determines the eastern extents of the Ridge Road removal. Tapleytown Mud Street to 11 Creates discontinuous network with Ridge Road Road Ridge Road removal Stoney Creek Nash Road King Street to 5 Nash Road is located between the RHVP and Barton Road Centennial Parkway. Between King Street and Barton Street there are mostly residential frontages and all truck generators could be served by shortest path from King, Queenston Road or Barton. Parkways Corridor Stone Church Upper James 7 Changing nature of adjacent land uses Road St. to Upper Gage Ave.
April 2010 Page 90 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Garth Street Mohawk St to 8 Residential Area with suitable alternative Fennell Ave Fennell Upper James 8 Residential Area with suitable alternative Avenue St to Garth Street East Hamilton/Portlands Parkdale King Street to 4/5 Extents of removal revised from Alternative 2. Avenue Main Street Almost exclusively residential land uses south of Main Street. Lawrence Gage Ave to 3/4/5 Residential Area, Proximity to King Street, Few Road King St/RHVP truck generators. Ramps Gage Avenue Lawrence Road 3 Restrict north/south links from Port Area to Barton Street Ottawa Street Lawrence Road 3/4 Removed in conjunction with removal of Lawrence to King Street Rd. Cochrane Lawrence Road 3/4 Removed in conjunction with removal of Lawrence Road to King Street Rd. Barton Street Queen Street to 1/2/3 Reduce impacts on Barton BIA, residences, while Wentworth maintaining the link in the area with more truck Street generators Garfield Limits 3 Short dead end link. Shortest path rules govern. Avenue Downtown Core King Street Queen Street to 1 Request of BIA. Eliminate through trips from King Bay Street Street in central business district. Hess Street Barton St to 1 Removed in conjunction with removal of Barton St. Stuart Street John Street Cannon St to 1 Removed in conjunction with removal of Barton St. Barton St. Caroline Street Barton St to 1 Removed in conjunction with removal of Barton St. Stuart Street
Revised versions of the relevant sections of the City of Hamilton By-law and applicable Schedules have been prepared that reflect the changes to the truck route network, as recommended herein, and they are available in Appendix E. 9.2 Capital Roadway Improvements
In general this study has not recommended specific capital roadway improvements related to any links that are currently part of the truck route network, nor have specific capital improvements been identified for links that would be added to the tuck route network through the recommended changes described in Section 9.1. Rather, it is intended that the status of a link, as part of the truck route network, serve as justification for prioritizing capital roadway improvements recommended by or being considered as part of other planning and engineering studies.
9.2.1 NEW ROADS
As previously noted in this report, it should be assumed that new (arterial) roads will become links in the truck route network, unless reasonable justification can be provided for their exclusion. The
April 2010 Page 91 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
primary reason for this recommendation is that it is typically much easier (and less costly) to include measures needed to accommodate trucks in new construction than it is to apply them as mitigating measures on existing roads. This approach also provides an opportunity to address issues with the existing truck route network through the planning and design of new roads (e.g., removing the truck route designation from links that are parallel to new roads and less suited to accommodate tuck traffic).
9.2.2 EXISTING ROADS
Some existing roads may require improvements to better accommodate trucks, as well as other road users (e.g., pedestrians and cyclists); however, truck route status alone is not, in most cases, sufficient justification for road improvements.
White Church Road/Binbrook Road is part of the existing truck route network with a “Specified Users” classification; it is being recommended through this study that the link be upgraded to an “All Users” truck route. The “Specified Users” classification is being eliminated through the recommended changes to the By-law. Given that this change of classification could result in additional truck traffic on the road, improvements to the infrastructure might be justified. The types of improvements that might be applied to make this rural arterial road more accommodating to road users are discussed in the Road Classification and Right-of Way Width Project report and the Rural Road Standards Policy Paper (2005), a brief synopsis of the document is provided in Section 2.3 of this report.
Additionally, when existing roads that are part of the truck route network are being reconstructed or improved (e.g., through utilities upgrades/repairs) opportunities should be looked at to better accommodate all road uses (e.g., sidewalks, bike lanes, traffic control signals, etc.). 9.3 Long-Term Management
Several recommended actions and policies for the long-term management of the truck route network are provided below:
Existing part-time truck routes should be maintained. New part-time truck routes should only be added where adding a new full-time truck route would result in truck route discontinuities during the 7:00 PM – 7:00 AM period;
Reduced load periods is dictated by the design and construction of the individual road sections to which they apply, and until such a time that the restrictions are not required, due to road infrastructure improvements, they should be retained;
Continue to install signage that discourages the use of engine brakes, subject to the following criteria:
High volume of truck traffic (based on traffic volume data collected within two years of date of request for signage);
Proven history of complaints at/within the same area;
Vertical alignment – downhill grade of less than 3%;
Frequent stopping location – traffic control device(e.g., stop sign or traffic signals);
Close proximity to residences; and
April 2010 Page 92 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
Results of field investigation by City of Hamilton staff to confirm that there is a problem;
Long Combination Vehicles should be treated as oversized loads, and as such, should be subject to the Oversized Load Permits process set out in Section 55 of Part 5 – Load Related Restriction of the City of Hamilton By-law.
Existing restrictive signage is to be grandfathered (i.e., maintained at all locations where it exists currently), and new restrictive signage can be installed on roads that do not form part of the truck route network, subject to the following process:
City of Hamilton staff to confirm history of complaints for the area;
City of Hamilton staff to perform field observations (e.g., collect traffic volume and classification data);
If there is a demonstrated need, install additional permissive signage to reinforce the designated routes;
If there is a demonstrated need, area to be targeted for police enforcement (City of Hamilton staff to liaise with police to monitor results of targeted enforcement); and
If all other treatments fail to improve the situation, implement restrictive signage;
The task of enforcing the truck route network (i.e., Traffic By-law 01-215) should be left to the City of Hamilton Police Service;
The “Specified Users” classification should be eliminated, and all references to it should be removed from the By-law;
Informational signs explaining the City‟s permissive truck route system should be located at all truck route links to adjacent municipalities, oriented for traffic bound for the City of Hamilton, and a map of the applicable truck route network and a copy of the applicable sections of the By-law should always be posted on the City of Hamilton website.
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\TTR_Truck_Route_Master_Plan_Study_FINAL_2010-04-23.docx\2010-04-23\J
April 2010 Page 93 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
APPENDIX A
PIC SUMMARY REPORTS
April 2010
City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study Public Information Centre #1
Meeting Summary
Tuesday, May 27, 2008 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. Traffic Operations Centre 1375 Upper Ottawa Street Hamilton, Ontario
September, 2008
t: 905-527-0754 f: 905-528-4179 · www.lura.ca 36 Hunter Street East - Suite 601 Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3W8, Canada
This Public Information Centre (PIC) summary report was prepared by Lura Consulting. Lura is providing third-party facilitation services as part of the City of Hamilton’s Truck Route Master Plan Study. This summary captures the key discussion points raised during the PIC. It is not intended as a verbatim transcript of comments received. If you have any questions or comments regarding the summary, please contact either:
Gary Kirchknopf, C.E.T. Jean-Louis Gaudet Senior Project Manager Consultant Traffic Planning & Community Services Lura Consulting Public Works Department Phone: 905-527-0754 OR Operations & Maintenance Division Fax: 905-528-4179 77 James Street North, Suite 320 [email protected] Phone: 905 546-2424 ext. 7217 [email protected]
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Planning & Community Services
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
Table of Contents
1 About the Public Information Centre...... 1 2 Format of the PIC ...... 1 3 Summary of Feedback Received ...... 1 3.1 Ideas or Aspects to include in a Truck Route Strategy ...... 1 3.2 Issues and Challenges...... 3 3.3 Opportunities ...... 3 4 Next Steps...... 4
Appendix A: Display Boards Appendix B: Comment Form
i CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
ii CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
1 About the Public Information Centre
The first Public Information Centre (PIC) for the City of Hamilton’s Truck Route Master Plan Study took place on Tuesday, May 27, 2008. The City hosted the PIC as an orientation for the public to the project. Specifically, the purpose of the meeting was three-fold:
1. To introduce the public to the project; 2. To discuss the desired future for the efficient movement of goods through Hamilton (i.e., the community vision); and 3. To identify current issues and opportunities.
Seventeen members of the public attended the event, which was held at the City of Hamilton Traffic Operations Centre at 1375 Upper Ottawa Street, Hamilton. Representatives from the project team (including both City staff and the consulting team), the Ward 1 council office, and Councillor David Mitchell from Ward 2 also attended the PIC.
This report provides a summary of the meeting.
2 Format of the PIC
The PIC was held in an open house format and ran from 7:00 pm to 8:30 pm. Open House participants were invited to read a series a display panels that presented an overview of the study, including the study purpose and objectives, the workplan and schedule, and contact information for the study team. A copy of the display panels is provided in Appendix A.
Participants were provided with a comment sheet to record their feedback. They were asked what they would like to see incorporated into a future truck route strategy and what they felt are the most important issues, challenges and opportunities with developing truck routes in and through Hamilton. A copy of the comment form is provided in Appendix B.
City staff and members of the project team were available to discuss the project with the PIC participants. Maps were provided for participants to note issues or areas of concern and provide route suggestions.
A total of five comment forms were submitted. This report summarizes the feedback received through the comment forms and the discussions participants had with the project team members.
3 Summary of Feedback Received
3.1 Ideas or Aspects to include in a Truck Route Strategy Suggestions for what should be included in a Truck Route strategy included:
• Banning of large trucks in downtown core, and avoid residential neighbourhoods; • Encouragement of the use of appropriate routes; • Cooperation between stakeholders, including truck drivers, citizens, and the City; • Less use of engine brakes;
1 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
• Improved road conditions, including good pavement; • Efficient routing and operations (e.g., a minimum number of stop lights); • “Local Delivery Only” areas; • Consideration of: o Oil depletion; o Better uses of rail transport (e.g., which containers might be better transferred by rail); o How the make-up of existing roads will stand up to truck traffic; o The quality of life for residents; o Safety issues regarding trucking through agricultural areas (e.g., animals); and • Restriction of trucks to main 2-lane or 4-lane highways
In addition to the above comments, participants also provided suggestions on where trucks should be prohibited and truck routes should be located. Suggestions on where trucking should be restricted included:
• Stone Church Road east of Upper James (cuts through residential areas between Upper James and Upper Wellington, and separates the park from residents to the North); • The downtown core (Victoria to Dundurn, and Barton to Main); • Birch Avenue (since the steel mill is closed); • Ottawa Street, between Main and Barton; • Barton Street, between Victoria and Sherman; and • Nelson Road.
One participant presented the study team with a petition that would be circulated if Stone Church Road is considered for a trucking route. The participant noted that the petition was drawn up in September 2007, but its circulation was postponed when the petitioners learned of the truck route study. The petition is currently on hold until the City decides on its plans for Stone Church Road.
Routes that were said to more appropriate for trucks included:
• Rymal Road; • Lincoln Alexander Parkway; • Red Hill Expressway; • Only use one or two streets in the downtown core, such as York and Victoria; • King Street west and Main Street West (in Ward 1); and • York and Dundurn (in Ward 1).
With respect to garbage trucks, it was suggested that they should not be using the Centennial Parkway between Queenston Road and King Street when travelling from the transfer station to the landfill. It was suggested that smaller garbage trucks either bypass the transfer station and go directly to the landfill or, if that is not feasible, travel along the Red Hill Valley Parkway and Mud Street when going between the transfer station and the landfill.
2 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
3.2 Issues and Challenges Noted issues and challenges included:
• Fuel consumption, air quality and pollution - longer truck routes result in more fuel consumed, and frequent delays and stops result in greater pollution; • Educating truckers on the impacts of trucking on nearby residents; • Stakeholders working cooperatively; • Safety concerns of the general public and residents who live on truck routes: o It is difficult to cross Stone Church Road East; o There is a need to consider the safety of children at home and around schools (suggestion to review pedestrian traffic fatalities); • Truck traffic nuisances e.g. noise, vibrations ( vibrations are an issue for houses on Main Street; consider the impact of trucking nuisances on schools and students who are trying to learn); • Minimizing the interference of trucking with local traffic along truck routes (e.g., the ability to exit driveways); • Encouraging the use of alternative routes; • Management of truck route traffic, in particular trucks travelling to and from the airport employment lands and when the 403 is clogged; • Affect of truck routes on school bus routes; • Road operations, including sidewalks, lights, and the width of roads; and • The large number of garbage trucks that travel from the transfer station up Centennial Parkway to the landfill.
There were also a number of comments that were specific to signage, which included:
• There is no signage at Upper James Street and Stone Church Road; • More signage prohibiting trucks (e.g., the image of the truck struck out by a red bar) is required; • Permanent signage is needed on the QEW to replace the current portable signage; and • Use destination-based truck route signage, e.g., truck route signage that indicates routes to Toronto, London, or other areas.
3.3 Opportunities Identified opportunities to help create truck routes in and through Hamilton included:
• Garbage transfer station at Kenora Avenue (allow smaller trucks to go directly to the landfill instead of transfer station); • Use of Red Hill Valley Parkway, and promotion that it is open; • People who care about their neighbourhood and who will provide input; • Access to rail that can be used to ship containers; • Local health research capabilities, which can be used to assess the impact of truck traffic on human health); • Reducing the danger posed by truck traffic on certain routes;
3 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
• Concentration of noise, pollution etc on appropriate routes (e.g., those with bermed sides); • Prevent fragmentation of neighbourhoods; • Encouragement of “trucker responsibility” with respect to noise and speed (e.g., reminding them to avoid the use of engine brakes); • Information on how trucks are routed in other cities (e.g., Toronto); and • Clear signage on truck routes.
4 Next Steps
The project will continue with stakeholder consultations and additional technical and policy research. The next set of PICs for this project is scheduled for June 17, 18 an 19, where the project team will present and discuss the results of the studies and review possible alternatives. Input from those PICs will be used to develop a recommended Truck Route System, which will be presented to the public in a series of PICs in September 2008.
4 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX A
Display Boards
PUBLIC INFORMATION TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY CENTRE Public Information Centre No. #1 Truck Route Master Plan Study May 27, 2008
Study Area
Please sign in.
Staff from the City and consulting team will be glad to speak with you regarding your questions or comments.
We also invite you to fill out a comment sheet so that we can ensure that your ideas are recorded.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Purpose of Public Information PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 Centre May 27, 2008
The purpose of this Public Information Centre is to:
Describe the purpose of the Truck Route Master Plan study, and its objectives;
Describe the work plan, and study schedule;
Describe the consultation process;
Discuss the existing truck route philosophy;
Review some previously reported truck route issues; and
Receive your input on current and potential truck route issues in the City of Hamilton.
Your comments are essential to adequately identify problems and develop feasible and effective solutions.
Important: No decisions have been made at this time. We need your input before proceeding with developing some alternatives.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Study Background and PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 Objectives May 27, 2008
This study was initiated to develop a comprehensive Truck Route Master Plan for the City of Hamilton that will review the following issues:
Hamilton is a major transportation centre Major port Air cargo hub Road and rail routes serve busy transportation corridor
Economy needs efficient movement of goods that is safe and minimizes the impact on the environment and the community
The Truck Route Master Plan Study will investigate alternative solutions and select a plan that responds to stakeholder views, and that strives for equity among residents and industry.
The study is to be carried out according to the guidelines set out for Municipal Class Environmental Assessments (EA). The EA process ensures that a reasonable range of alternatives are considered and that the public and other stakeholders have sufficient input into the decision process.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Work Plan and Schedule PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 May 27, 2008
Work Plan Flow Chart
Technical Consultation
Stream 1 Stream 2 Research and Policy Data Collection and Field Work
Project Start-up Meeting Stakeholder Orientation and Consultation May 2008
Traffic Count Program Review Secondary Source Materials Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 June 2008 Design and Carry Out Origin-Destination Survey Strategic Vision Paper
Field Investigations of New or Modified Roads Truck Pattern Analysis
Safety Analysis Route Attributes and Assessment Process Review Application of By-Law Text
Public Information Centres – Round 1 Preliminary Results June 2008 Stream 3 Preparation of Master Plan
Develop a Recommended Truck Route System Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 August 2008
Public Information Centres – Round 2 Recommended Truck Route System Prepare Draft Report and By-Law September 2008 Changes
Prepare Final Report Including Revised By-Law Schedule
Presentation to Council
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Consultation Process PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 May 27, 2008
Three Approaches Technical Advisory Group
Key industry stakeholders
Public Information Centres
Orientation Session
Preliminary Results
Recommended Truck Route System
Web Consultation
To gather input on areas of concern, and to receive comments on draft truck route network throughout entire study
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Existing Truck Route PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 Philosophy May 27, 2008
“Permissive” approach to regulating movement of commercial vehicles, as opposed to “Restrictive” Identifies the roads on which truck movements are permitted Compliant with provincial regulations
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Truck Route Issues Reported PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 by Residents May 27, 2008
A range of truck route issues have been compiled through the Truck Route Sub- committee. Some of the main traffic issues are summarized below:
Too many trucks on legal route Trucks on illegal routes Remove truck route now that alternate is in place Impacts of trucks on residential neighbourhoods Impacts of truck congestion on economy How to deal with trucks at Hamilton boundaries How are truck routing decisions made? What criteria are used to identify truck routes?
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY Existing “Hot Spots” List Public Information Centre No. #1 May 27, 2008
OUTSTANDING TRUCK ROUTE ISSUES
No. ISSUE
1 Millgrove Side Road – One Way truck route to Hwy. # 6 signal (many illegal truck movements) 2 Westbrooke Road – Boundary Road (legal truck route in Niagara, not in Hamilton) 3 Haldibrook Road – Boundary Road (legal truck route in Haldimond, not in Hamilton) 4 Upper Mount Albion Road (Stone Church Road – Rymal Road) – Residents want it moved to Pritchard Road 5 McMaster University Area (Sterling, Forsyth, Dalewood, Haddon, King St. W. – illegal truck movements) 6 Fruitland Road (Hwy. # 8 – northerly) Residents complaining, to many trucks on this legal route? 7 Nash Road (King St. to Barton St.) Part time Truck Route, residents were promised review to remove status upon opening of the R.H.V.P. 8 Milburough Town Line Road – Boundary Road (large number of trucks on substandard pavement conditions) 9 Princess St. (between Sherman and Birch) – illegal truck volumes using as a short cut to by-pass Barton Street 10 Scenic Drive – residents complaining of the high number of illegal truck movements 11 Glow Avenue – residents complaining of the high number of illegal truck movements 12 White Church / Binbrook Road (Hwy. # 56 – Hwy. # 6) – designated in by-law as “Specified Users” – Police will not enforce, residents complain of the high number of illegal trucks 13 Regional Road # 20 east of Upper Centennial to City Limit) – complaints regarding to many trucks on this route 14 Stone Church Road (Upper James – Upper Wellington) Too many trucks on this truck route 15 Strathearne Avenue (Barton – Britannia) complaints regarding illegal truck traffic 16 Lakeview Dr. (North Service Road) – Too many trucks on this legal truck route 17 Sanatorium Road – residents complaining about illegal truck traffic 18 Ridge Road – Too many trucks on this legal truck route 19 Rennie Street – Too many trucks on this legal truck route 20 Concession 4 W – high number of illegal trucks from Hwy. # 6 21 R.H.V.P. – Request to direct eastbound truck traffic onto Mud Street instead of Dartnall or Trinity Church to Rymal 22 West 5th Street from Rymal Road to Fennell Avenue – high number of illegal trucks 23 Main Street (Hamilton downtown) – ban all trucks (non local delivery) 24 The Eastern border with adjacent Niagara region has some gaps in truck routing 25 There are multi modal issues related to the Aberdeen hub
Do you have additional issues? We will investigate each issue and recommend a course of action.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY Your Truck Route Concerns Public Information Centre No. #1 May 27, 2008
Please use pens to note on the plans on the tables what you think are key areas of truck route concerns.
PLEASE NOTE YOUR COMMENTS ON PLANS ON TABLES
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER Where are we going from PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 here? May 27, 2008
Analysis of truck route issues identified at this meeting Consultation with industry stakeholders Determine potential options based on input from stakeholders Complete Route Attributes and Assessment process Hold next round of Public Information Centres to present and discuss Preliminary Results in June 2008 Based on input from PICs and further investigation, develop a Recommended Truck Route System Hold final round of Public Information Centres in September 2008 to present and discuss Recommended Truck Route System Take recommended plan to Council for endorsement Implement preferred plan
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER We Want to Hear From You! PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre No. #1 May 27, 2008
These panels outline possible directions for the City of Hamilton. We would like to know what you think about the ideas presented here. There are four ways to participate:
☺ Speak to a representative at this public information centre Complete one of our feedback forms here today Visit our website at www.hamilton.ca - Traffic Click on “Truck Route Study”
Arrange a meeting with our staff
Gary Kirchknopf Senior Project Manager 905 546-2424 ext. 7217
**Thank you for contributing to the City of Hamilton’s future**
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX B
Comment Form
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
Public Information Centre #1
COMMENT FORM
Contact Information (Optional) Name:
Affiliation/Organization:
Address: E-mail address:
Would you like to be added to our mailing list? (Please circle) Yes No
Tuesday, May 27, 2008 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Traffic Operations Centre, 1375 Upper Ottawa Street Hamilton, ON
Purpose: To introduce the public the project To discuss the desired future for efficient movement of goods through Hamilton (i.e., the community vision) To identify current issues and opportunities
To provide additional comments or for more information:
City of Hamilton Public Works Attn: Gary Kirchknopf, Senior Project Manager
T: (905) 546-2424 ext. 7217 Email: [email protected] Web: www.hamilton.ca/traffic
To fulfill Environmental Assessment Act requirements, we will maintain your comments on file for use during this Study and may include them in Study documentation. With the exception of personal information, all comments received will become part of the public record. Information will be collected in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
Vision for Trucking Goods in and through Hamilton
1. Thinking about Hamilton's truck routes for the future, what 3 ideas or aspects would you like to see incorporated in a future strategy?
1.
2.
3.
Issues and Challenges
2. What do you think are the most important issues and challenges that need to be considered when developing truck routes in and through Hamilton?
1.
2.
3.
4.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
Opportunities
3. What do you think are the greatest opportunities for helping to create truck routes in and through Hamilton?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Additional Comments
Please provide any additional comments you have on any aspect of the City of Hamilton Truck Route Study below.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #1 MEETING SUMMARY
How did we do?
Please fill out the evaluation form below to let us know how we did. .
1. Overall, were you satisfied with the Open House? (Please circle)
Very Somewhat Very Satisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied
2. How did you find out about today’s PIC? (Please circle)
Newspaper Website Notice Other:
3. What did you like or find most useful about this PIC?
4. What suggestions would you make to improve this PIC?
5. Do you have any other comments on the PIC?
THANK-YOU FOR PARTICIPATING!
PLEASE RETURN COMPLETED WORKSHEETS ON YOUR WAY OUT. Thank you!
City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study Public Information Centre Series #1
Meeting Summary
Tuesday, June 17 - Thursday, June 19, 2008 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. Hamilton, Ontario
September, 2008
t: 905-527-0754 f: 905-528-4179 · www.lura.ca 36 Hunter Street East - Suite 601 Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3W8, Canada
This Public Information Centre (PIC) summary report was prepared by Lura Consulting. Lura is providing third-party facilitation services as part of the City of Hamilton’s Truck Route Master Plan Study. This summary captures the key discussion points raised during the PIC. It is not intended as a verbatim transcript of comments received. If you have any questions or comments regarding the summary, please contact either:
Gary Kirchknopf, C.E.T. Jean-Louis Gaudet Senior Project Manager Consultant Traffic Planning & Community Services Lura Consulting Public Works Department Phone: 905-527-0754 OR Operations & Maintenance Division Fax: 905-528-4179 77 James Street North, Suite 320 [email protected] Phone: 905 546-2424 ext. 7217 [email protected]
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Planning & Community Services
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Table of Contents
1 About the Public Information Centres ...... 1 2 Format of the PICs ...... 1 3 Summary of Feedback Received ...... 2 3.1 Overview...... 2 3.2 Flamborough Municipal Centre, June 17...... 2 3.3 Glanbrook Municipal Centre, June 18 ...... 9 3.4 Stoney Creek City Hall, June 19...... 13 4 Next Steps...... 17
Appendix A: Display Boards Appendix B: Comment Form Appendix C: PIC Display Boards Appendix D: Participant List
i CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
ii CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
1 About the Public Information Centres
The second series of Public Information Centres (PICs) for the City of Hamilton’s Truck Route Master Plan Study took place over three evenings, from Tuesday June 17 to Thursday June 19, 2008, and ran from 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. The PICs were convened by the City of Hamilton and their Consulting Team: IBI and McCormick Rankin. The meetings events were managed and facilitated by Lura Consulting,
The general purpose of the PICs was to provide the public with an update on the progress of the study and provide an opportunity for input and feedback on truck route issues and possible solutions. Specifically, the purpose was to:
1. Describe the purpose of the Truck Route Master Plan study, and its objectives; 2. Describe the work plan, and study schedule; 3. Describe the consultation process; 4. Discuss the City’s existing truck route philosophy/approach; 5. Review some previously reported truck route issues; 6. Describe preliminary results; and 7. Receive input on current and potential truck route issues in the City of Hamilton.
The PICs were held in three locations across the City of Hamilton:
• Flamborough Municipal Centre, 163 Dundas Street, Waterdown (June 17); • Glanbrook Municipal Centre, 4280 Binbrook Road, Binbrook (June 18); and • Stoney Creek City Hall, 777 Highway 8, Stoney Creek (June 19).
In total, 53 members of the public registered at the PICs.
Section 2 of this report provides an overview of the meeting format. Feedback received is summarized in Section 3. The project’s next steps are listed in Section 4. Appendices A, B, C and D contain the agenda, comment form, display boards, and the list of participants, respectively.
2 Format of the PICs
The PICs were facilitated by Barry Randall of Lura Consulting. Each meeting began in an open house format at 7:00 p.m. During the open house portion of the meeting, City staff and members of the project team were available to discuss the project with PIC participants. Maps were provided for participants to note issues or areas of concern and provide route suggestions.
At 7:15, Mr. Randall welcomed the participants to the PIC, described the meeting’s purpose, and introduced the City of Hamilton’s project representative. The City project staff were represented by Mr. Hart Solomon, Manager, Traffic Engineering and Operations, on the evenings of June 17 and 18, and by Mr. Gary Kirchknopf, Senior Project Manager, on June 19 (both from Traffic Engineering & Operations, Public Works Department). Mr. Solomon and Mr. Kirchknopf briefly described how this project fits within the City’s other transportation and planning projects and stressed the importance of the public’s feedback on this project.
1 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Mr. Ron Stewart of IBI Group presented information about the project, including the purpose, feedback received to date, background information on truck routes, and next steps for the project. Following Mr. Stewart’s presentation, Mr. Randall facilitated a question and answer session, which was then followed by the resumption of the open house.
Participants were each given a copy of the agenda and a comment form. The comment form asked for feedback on issues, hotspot areas and possible solutions.
3 Summary of Feedback Received
3.1 Overview The following summarizes the main themes raised.
• Suggestions for specific roads or routes to be used for truck routes or for specific truck routes to be removed; • The need for coordination between the Truck Route Study and other relevant traffic studies, for example the Waterdown/Aldershot Transportation Master Plan projects and the Niagara-GTA Traffic Corridor study. • Ensuring the safety of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic; • Nuisances due to truck traffic, such as noise or vibrations; • The impact of truck routes on quality of life and property values; • The need for efficient routes for trucks, including those carrying oversized or agricultural loads (e.g., allowing ease of access to the Hamilton Port Lands, providing routes for farm equipment or livestock cargo, and the timing of traffic lights); and • Enforcement of speeding trucks and of trucks travelling on routes that prohibit truck traffic.
Key routes of concern include:
• Millgrove Side Road; • The east/west routes through Waterdown (in particular, any roads that may be used for quarry truck traffic); • Brock Road; • Whitechurch Road; • Nebo Road and • Fruitland Road.
Specific issues and areas of concern for each PIC are described in more detail in Sections 3.2 to 3.4 below.
3.2 Flamborough Municipal Centre, June 17 The sections below summarize the feedback received at the PIC held on June 17 at the Flamborough Municipal Centre. Eighteen residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team and council representatives. The feedback was received through 10 comment forms submitted and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided below.
2 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
3.2.1 Hot Spots of Concern and Possible Solutions
The meeting participants identified their primary hotspots of concern and, in some cases, possible solutions. These hotspots of concern and solutions are summarized in the table below.
Hot Spots of Concern Possible Solutions 1. Concession 4 – Flamborough and proposed new Quarry trucks should use the expanded east/west route for the Waterdown-Aldershot Highway 6 and be prohibited from Transportation Master Plan using the new east/west route. 2. Concession 4, between Brock Road and Highway 6 (if Remain a non-truck route with it becomes a truck route, it would then become a enforcement. quarry truck route, which could possibly become a social disaster 3. Campbellville Road Should be a truck route from #6 to Burlington 4. Haldibrook Road Should be a truck route 5. Gore Road Should be a truck route 6. Westbrook Road Should be a truck route 7. Concession 5 W from #6 to #8 Should be a truck route 8. Whitechurch Road. from #6 to the County Line Should be a truck route 9. The roundabout west of Binbrook Remove the roundabout 10. Millgrove Side Road and Millgrove Road • (5th Concession to #6) Should • Truck traffic has increased since lights installed remain a truck route northbound and signs taken down. only • Trucks are coming down southbound illegally • For short-term improvements • Millgrove Side Road has become a shortcut to through the summer, more police bypass Clappisons Corner and go to Highway #6 and more ticketing of illegal traffic • Noise of trucks • Keep all through trucks on provincial highways • Change accessibility to Millgrove Side Road • Penalize bad driving habits through enforcement • Build bypass off Brock Road to Highway #6 (see Figure 1) 11. Brock Road between Highway 5 and Regional Road Reduce speed limit to 60 km/h and 97 enforce it • Safety concerns, as road is also used by school buses and residents • Used as a trucking route and a back-up in case Hwy 6 is closed • Is a residential 2-lane road, with deep ditches and no shoulders
3 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
12. Waterdown Speed up east/west route currently • 80% of traffic through Waterdown on a Friday being studied, implement without evening are not residents waiting for things to get worse • Traffic gets backed up from Evans Avenue up to Centre Road on Dundas Street • Highway 6 in Waterdown gets swamped if there is a problem on Highway 403 between Brant and Highway 6 13. Safety issues for trucks turning onto Highway 6 Need stoplights to give trucks time to turn onto highway
Participants also suggested new roads for truck routes or routes that should not be used for trucks. These include:
• Opposing views on whether or not the proposed new arterial road north of Parkside from #6 to #5 east of Waterdown should be used as a truck route;
• New roads linking 5th and 6 Concession roads to reduce truck traffic on Millgrove Side Road (see Figure 2).
4 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Figure 1: Participant’s suggested route to address truck traffic on Millgrove Side Road.
5 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Figure 2: Options suggested by participant for reducing truck route traffic on Millgrove Side Road
dead- ends
new road new road
traffic lights Map source: Google Maps 3.2.2 Other Issues and Comments
Other issues of concern include:
• How the east/west bypass in Waterdown will be used before the route is approved (urgent need to know whether the Waterdown bypass is to be a truck route or not). • Impacts on township roads if the system in Hamilton is changed. • Highway 6 bypass south of Puslinch to Highway 401 – approval is imminent. • Whether gravel trucks from quarries are limited to certain truck routes through agreements on haul routes. • The need to allow for the movement of agricultural and livestock trucks in rural areas, since people do not want them on the “Linc” or Rymal Road. • Increased truck traffic expected since quarry has approval to expand (quarry trucks may go the most direct route to the 407 despite the truck route system). • Whether the route from Boundary Road to Wellington is permitted (may lead to issues between the City of Hamilton and Wellington County jurisdictions). • The quarry expansion, Rossel Road north of the 407 and IBP (new proposed road by Highway 6 beside the 401). • Increased truck traffic in Carlisle.
Other comments and suggestions included:
• All traffic, including trucks, will always look for the fastest, easiest, safest route possible. • F-plated trucks should be exempted when on business. • You can’t prohibit the use of “Jake brakes”. • Safety is always a priority. • There is no such thing as too many trucks on a truck route road.
6 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
• Posted speed limits should reflect common sense rather than emotion. Unless they are enforced, then they are a farce. • The Environmental Assessment for the Highway 6 bypass near Morriston is completed (currently waiting for Minister to decide on implementation). • The new Waterdown-Aldershot East-West bypass should not connect at Concession 4 and Highway 6. • Truck routes are needed along 5th Concession to Highway 8, along Concession 8 and along Westbrook Road. • A truck route is needed for livestock from Haldibrook Road to Highway 6 and Glentyre Road. • Concession 4 is unfit and unsafe for trucks.
3.2.3 Question and Answers
Question (floor): In Flamborough, there are two or more large quarries. Can quarry trucks travel on any truck route? Or do they have to have a special route established? Answer (project team): Yes, assuming they are carrying a legal load. The floor is 4500 kg, ranging from a cube truck to a semi.
Question (floor): If the east/west route in Waterdown is designated a truck route, will it become a corridor that the quarry trucks will be able to use? I thought they had to have approval for the Dundas quarry. I was not aware that they could be on any route. Answer (project team): The St. Mary’s quarry is still in its approval process. A condition is that a traffic plan be submitted. A lot of ministries and municipalities are involved in the assessment, which includes addressing trucks from proposed quarries and looking at changes resulting from the quarry. Only once it has been submitted to the City’s satisfaction will the quarry be allowed. The assessment will use information from this project as well.
Question (floor): Do they have the permission in their conditions to use the route? Answer (project team): It’s not finalized yet. But it would not be a part of this truck route study. It’s part of a different assessment in the quarry approval process. How it will be enforced is to be decided, it may be through annual reviews. They would be a need to maintain certain levels of standards, and penalties could be invoked. But it’s not through the normal truck route enforcement process.
Comments • You can’t prohibit the use of “Jake brakes” on trucks, because safety is the priority. • Gore Road and West Brook should be open to traffic, as they are the only way to get to other municipalities. • Get rid of the roundabout in Binbrook, as it is not good for through traffic. • Millgrove Side Road, from 5th Concession to Highway 6, should be a truck route northbound, not south, so you can get across using a left-hand turn. • There should be an arterial road north of Parkside from Highway 6 to Highway 5 east of Waterdown. That would be a logical route for trucks and through traffic. • Truck routes have to allow trucks to move quickly and easily with safety as a high priority. • Speed limits should reflect common sense rather than emotion. They need to be enforced or they are a farce.
7 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Question (floor): Would a bypass past Brock Road going north to the Concession, work? Comment (floor): It was talked about and there was willingness for the City to buy the land, but the money was not there. Answer (project team): Not familiar with the option discussed (agreement to discuss offline, rough map presented).
Comment : Trucks on Millgrove Side Road are going through illegally. The road is used as a bypass. There should be a sign saying it’s not a truck route north on #5. Trucks should go up through #6 on provincial routes. The trucks going south on #6 should be ticketed.
Comment : Trucks are trying to keep on Brock Road but south of Concession. Trucks would have to go on Millgrove Road for a bit, and then go to the 6. I’m not sure of the geography or who owns it. But it would be a way of saving Millgrove Road.
Question (floor): Waterdown is looking at an alternate road east/west. It may not be built until 2011. How will that affect the decision on truck routes? Answer (project team): We need to look at the network that exists now and anticipate proposed changes to the road network. The problem is that the processes in place deal with current issues, not the future. We will have a proposed network, and will also look at changes in the shorter term.
Question (floor): When we asked the Waterdown project team if the east/west route will be designed as truck route, they did not provide a clear answer. But when you look at the design, the setbacks look like a truck route. It’s a Catch 22 situation – whether the route is a truck route or not influences the comments the public would give. The period for public comment in Waterdown closes in September, and the public won’t be able to comment if the decision about its status is not made until the fall. Answer (project team): If we have a good idea on what Waterdown Road will look like, then we can include it. If it’s just preliminary discussion, then it’s hard to include it. But if have a design, we can include it in the assessment. In general, all roads are designed for trucks to drive on them, because they are all legal networks. Putting in truck route is more an issue of volume, rather than design. Comment (from floor): We realize that, but people are saying they don’t want trucks on Dundas or in the downtown. It feels like the public is being blocked.
Question (floor): Can truck routes combine permissive and restrictive systems? Answer (project team): It’s a bad practice. We want to stick to one or another system. There are some distinct advantages with the permissive system. It’s simpler and gives truckers information in advance. You can use it at problem intersections, and use redundant signage. It says you are on route, and that you can’t move off of it. A restrictive sign on a road is too late, because a truck is already on the route. It’s better to have sign in advance 100 m of intersection. But there are some left over signage from pre-amalgamation.
Question (floor): There is currently a study by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) on the Niagara-GTA corridor. Are there representatives from MTO and the City of Hamilton on this study? Are the studies being coordinated? Answer (project team): There is a technical committee that includes an MTO representative, and we are aware of the Niagara-GTA study.
8 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Question (floor): Doesn’t a roadway have to be built differently to accommodate truck weight? Answer (project team): No. There are distinct limits in the Highway Traffic Act, where you have to have permits for over-weight trucks. The Act sets out how roads must be designed to accommodate trucks and buses. There may be some roads that are older, and may have some seasonal issues. Part of this study will be to help assess the loads that roads will need to take, and if corners need to be redesigned.
Question (floor): Also, the public needs to know how the roads will be used. They knew how Red Hill and other roads would be used. The City should have an idea of how the Waterdown east/west road will be used. Answer (project team): We need to check with the Waterdown team to see how firm they are and how they think the road will be used. Question (floor): The next public meeting for the Waterdown/Aldershot project is next week. It would be good to know if that road would be a possible truck route, so the public can make appropriate comment.
3.3 Glanbrook Municipal Centre, June 18
This section summarizes the feedback received at the PIC held on June 18 at the Glanbrook Municipal Centre. 27 residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team, the City of Hamilton, and council representatives. The feedback summarized below was received through 14 comment forms submitted and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided. 3.3.1 Hot Spots of Concern and Possible Solutions
The meeting participants identified their primary hotspots of concern and, in some cases, possible solutions. These hotspots of concern and solutions are summarized in the table below.
Hot Spot of Concern Possible Solutions 1. Rymal Road, the “Linc”, and Haldibrook Road Turn into truck routes, since they are east/west routes 2. Illegal truck traffic on Binbrook Road and • Keep trucks off, since it is a heavy Whitechurch Road (no enforcement) residential area with no sidewalks and a traffic circle. • Move truck traffic to Haldibrook Road. • Increase enforcement • Larger “no truck” signs 3. Binbrook Town Centre No heavy trucks 4. Whitechurch Road • Install a “no trucks” sign • “No trucks” sign removed and has not been replaced • Not made to handle truck traffic
9 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
5. Highway 6 to Glover Road by way of Twenty Use highway 53 or the “Linc” Road • Steel trucks are bypassing Highway 53 at midnight and later 6. Very few truck routes are left in Glanbrook Use the roads that were built for them, such as Haldibrook and Whitechurch. 7. Traffic circles on 56 Add another lane or sidewalks 8. Haldibrook Road as a truck route Add lights at Highway 6 9. Enforcement of violations by trucking companies • Educate companies on approved that regularly travel on non-designated routes truck routes • Test truckers on knowledge of routes • Implement policy of strict enforcement 10. Unsafe practices (e.g., not stopping at • Install video camera intersections) on high volume routes, such as • Fine people who don’t stop Westbrook and golf course roads • Suspend licence of people who speed through intersection 11. Heavy trucks on Nebo Road (in March-May 2008, • Make Nebo Road a dead-end street transport trucks were going by every 15 minutes) (cut off at Dickenson by the horse farm) • Convert the old railroad to a highway, if feasible 12. Twenty Road West (Mt. Hope) between Upper • “No trucks” sign to deter truckers James and Glancaster Road – Large trucks are • Use Garth St. to Twenty Road. to using Twenty Road instead of Rymal Road,. from Upper James the “Linc”, the 403, etc to gain access to Upper James (#6 Hwy) 13. Use of Twenty Road. from Caledonia and other • Enforcement streets to access “Linc” and Hwy 403, despite there being a “No Truck” sign at the intersection of Twenty Road West and Upper James 14. Garth Trails Adult Lifestyle Development on • Speak with Garth Trails developer Garth St. and Twenty Road. (see Figure 3) regarding trucks using Rymal Road • Construction vehicles are instructed to use and Garth St. for entering and exiting Twenty Road. to gain access to site site • Truckers leaving by Effort Trail don’t always • Use Abbotsford if possible use Garth, many choose Twenty Road to Upper James 15. Intersection at Whitechurch Road. and Nebo St. – Too many trucks at this intersection, where Bell Stone School is located 16. Keeping trucks off residential and agricultural Prevent short cuts (especially through roads county roads) and ensure they stay on highways or designated routes
10 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
17. Ticketing of trucks travelling off of truck routes to • Improve communication with police reach commercial heavy truck repair shop (police (tickets are issued based on local seem to be unfamiliar with “Shortest truck route” priorities). rule) • Purchase orders and manifests indicating shop as destination should be respected by police. 18. Nebo Road. from Dickenson to Whitechurch – • Improve enforcement not a truck route, too many illegal trucks
Figure 3: Participants’ Illustration regarding Garth Trails Adult Life Style Centre
3.3.2 Other Issues and Comments
Other issues and comments noted include:
• More truck routes and roads are needed. • More enforcement is needed, whatever routes are chosen. Routes in Binbrook are ignored. • Regular maintenance in primarily residential areas, which have designated truck routes. • Restricted truck access on main commuter roads, for example Westbrook Road. • Limit the type of cargo that can pass through residential areas (e.g., hazardous cargo). • Absent sidewalks in areas where school buses are picking up children. For example, many parts of Twenty Road do not have sidewalks. • Hidden driveways on Upper James. • Speeding trucks along Whitechurch Road, which has elderly people and handicapped children walking on it. • Unsafe shoulders on Whitechurch Road. • Impact on value of property, and if the City is prepared to make concessions for resale of properties on truck routes. • Provide bigger “no truck” signs on Nebo Road. • Nebo Road needs repairing, as it is being crushed by the big trucks.
11 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
• Coordinate truck routes with neighbouring townships. • If the Truck Route plan includes Whitechurch Road., Nebo Road and Highway 56, then the quality of life in those areas will decrease due to increased truck traffic. • Ministry has noted that Whitechurch Road is not a highway grade road. • Concern that the development to the north of Nebo Road will result in a change in its designation but in no changes to the road itself (road is too narrow and unsafe for truck traffic). 3.3.3 Question and Answers
Question (floor): One solution includes police enforcement. Will the city try that? In my area, police ignored trucks. Does the City contact police? Answer (project team): The City does it irregularly. It’s better for residents to contact the police directly. Police will attend tomorrow’s PIC. The City contacts the police when complaints are received, but traffic is a lower priority in community policing.
Question (floor): Sergeants ignores the issue. One sergeant said the shoulders are not wide enough for police to stop them. Once the master plan is in place, who will enforce? Answer (project team): The best approach is more carrot than stick. Try to make route attractive to truckers so you do not have to rely on enforcement.
Question (floor): Will you be taking down restrictive signs? Answer (project team): Currently the City of Hamilton mostly has permissive signs now. Comment (floor): If you don’t have enforcement, it won’t work. Truckers need a stick.
Question (floor): We don’t have sidewalks out here. How to correct that problem? How is Hamilton going to provide safety? Answer (project team): We can build safety into the truck route plan . Question (floor): Suppose people on my road don’t like the plan? Answer (project team): The next round of consultation will ask for your comments on the plan itself. After that, you can go to Councillor Mitchell and City council.
Question (floor): So we have one voice against the rest on council? Answer (project team): If the City does not have any truck routes, then trucks can go anywhere. The City needs a sensible plan. It’s not just about the downtown. It’s a strategic look at the whole package, rather than piecemeal.
Question (floor): If you choose a road, will you change the grading of the road? Answer (project team): Part of the assessment is the suitability of each road, considering its volume, if signage is required, the medium versus long solutions (e.g. by-pass). The plan needs short and long terms solutions.
Question (floor): What recourse do we have as citizens with trucks off route? Answer (project team): Help us make it right. We want trucks to stay on the routes.
Question (floor): Whitechurch Road has no side walk, the “Linc” is not being used, and further development is planned. Whitechurch Road should not be a truck route.
12 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Answer (project team): Council has approved that road for a local farm. Please record your comments on the comment sheets. We have the challenge to coordinate with our neighbouring municipalities.
Question (floor): Enforcement is not happening. Improper cargo is being hauled. For example, toxic waste was spilled on my property. Answer (project team): That’s a common challenge for any property on a route. Trucking is necessary. It’s best to go through industrial and commercial routes. There is no simple answer.
Question (floor): Build up has happened ahead of schedule, and without sidewalks. Truckers are used to certain roads that are now getting built-up. The “issues map” shows all of the roads highlighted. Are there any east-west routes in Glanbrook that don’t have concerns? Trucks need to go somewhere. Answer (project team): That concern could have been identified by one person, and reflect that person’s opinion.
Comment (floor): Trucks don’t use the “Linc”, which is designated as a truck route. Question (floor): The system is self-enforcing, and nothing is happening. We have no recourse. Answer (project team): The concern about enforcement can be passed on to police right away. We need to hear more about the motivation for using illegal routes. For example, identify certain traffic lights, challenges with traffic timing. We are trying to address strategic challenges. Last night was good in that specific local issues were zeroed in on.
Question (floor): What about the proposed by-pass to the Red Hill expressway? Property is being bought and houses are being torn down, for example, by Darnel Road. Answer (project team): The North/South Trinity extension to the airport is minor. The east/west route will be discussed by the Province.
Question (floor): Regarding enforcement, I don’t see the police except for issuing speeding tickets to automobile drivers. Eagle Road is not built for trucking. Answer (project team): Both permissive and restrictive systems are equally enforceable. Truck drivers know if they are on or off route.
Question (floor): Why did you bring a “ no engine brakes” sign? Answer (project team): This is not a major part of the study, but we do get requests about this.
Question (floor): I service heavy duty trucks. What if I lose access to my business? Answer (project team): A truck is entitled to deviate from the route to your business. Question (floor): Truckers are afraid to come in, in case they get fined. Answer (project team): Please write down your comment to ensure that the police are made aware that trucks are allowed to access your business.
3.4 Stoney Creek City Hall, June 19
This section summarizes the feedback received at the PIC held on June 19 at the Stoney Creek City Hall. Eight residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team, the City of Hamilton, council representatives, and Sergeant Laura Wiltshire with Hamilton Police Services. The
13 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
feedback was received through 2 comment forms submitted and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided. 3.4.1 Hot Spots of Concern and Possible Solutions
The table below lists the hotspots of concern identified by the meeting participants and possible solutions.
Hot Spots of Concern Possible Solutions 1. Fruitland Road • Build the Fruitland Road bypass as • Night-time traffic proposed almost 20 years ago • Speeding • In the interim, ban trucks during 7 pm • Unnecessary use by trucks to 7 am. • Constant policing during day and night • Provide tickets for speeds over 60 km/h 2. Police escort needed for oversized loads • Truck routes should take oversized loads into consideration 3. Difficult to access Hamilton Port Authority • Need access to Port (HPA) at (HPA) lands Eastport vicinity
3.4.2 Other Issues and Comments
Other issues, comments and suggestions made by the meeting participants are provided below:
• Fund new roads using development charges. • Allow a higher speed limit on Barton Street and Highway 20 to encourage more trucks to this area. • Provide a bypass route from Barton and Fruitland up to Highway 8 and then proceed up Mud Street. • Need to keep longer, heavier loads out of residential areas. • More traffic on Fruitland Road affects quality of life. • Traffic studies need to take place throughout the four seasons. • Heard that the police are hesitant to pull over trucks because of safety issues. • Houses on Fruitland Road are not selling because of truck traffic.
3.4.3 Question and Answers
Question (floor): Suggest that trucks go up the mountain on east side of Stoney Creek. That should be allowed in the long range plan, and from that develop the land use for the community. Answer (project team): The opening of the Red Hill Valley Expressway is a major generator of traffic. We are here to get input. We’ll record your feedback and get all the information we can, and come back with alternatives.
14 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Question (floor): The eastern part of the mountain is opening to residential development. Routes now lead west up the hill, but there is nothing going east. Answer (project team): There are other routes going east. The area is developing (for example, Centennial). It’s not currently identified as an area to establish truck routes, but if it could alleviate pressure in existing routes, we want to hear about it.
Comment (floor): I’m a resident of Fruitland Road. We see trucks coming 24/7. Oil trucks are going along the road at night, and wake residents. It’s difficult to go back to sleep if you have to be up at 5 a.m. Councillor Pearson: We heard that the trucks are going to Taylors, but they are not going there but are passing through. If they were going to Taylors, then they should have gotten off at Arvin. We’re not sure why they are taking Fruitland Road. Comment (floor): It is an exit off the QEW. It’s a natural route to still go south on Highway 8.
Question (floor): When setting up truck routes, what considerations are given to oversized loads that need to travel through the city to or from a business or the port? What considerations are given for overhead clearance? Do they have to go around for a high load? Answer (project team): We do have some oversized loads that travel through city. There are some physical limitations that require certain routes. Rymal Road could possibly be an east/west route on the mountain that is kept to allow the transport of certain types of goods. There is a real benefit to keep some routes specifically for those conditions. Otherwise, the loads need to travel on the provincial system.
Question (floor): There are routes on the provincial roads that can accommodate loads up to 16 feet high. If a truck is going from Cambridge to the port, then they have to be able to make sure they can make it. Answer (project team): Agreed, that is an excellent point. We have to look at the structures along the route. Comment (floor): If a high load can get past a structure in the City, then it can take that high load anywhere on provincial roads. But if you build a pedestrian crossing over a traditional City route, then trucks will have to go around it.
Comment (floor): A lot of my questions were answered during the presentation, which dealt with farming and roads that were not designated truck routes and the “shortest distance” rule. A lot of farmers have to transport crops on roads that are not truck routes. Farmers haul from fields to the harbour to grain elevators. There is also an elevator in Glanbrook that farmers use. I was concerned I would not be able to make deliveries. For Ridge Road, I would have to go to Mud Street to get on the QEW. Answer (project team): Are there any area s of concern when making your trips? Comment (floor): No, but there are areas in the harbour that are hard to access. I hoped the Red Hill Valley Parkway would be better but it’s not, and I have to go along Centennial. I would still have to get off at Hart Street and go through Woodford. It would be awkward for those trucks with large loads.
Question (floor): It is more common now that delivery trucks (such as from Home Depot, or the Beer Store) are tractor trailers. People are seeing tractor trailers in their neighbourhoods.
15 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Answer (project team): We are trying to raise awareness that some trucks have the right to be there. We are trying to discern between trucks that have a right to be there compared to ones passing through.
Comment (floor): About 20 years ago, they were having an EA study on a proposed Fruitland Road bypass, but the bypass was not built. Over the past 20 years, the traffic has increased. If the City was to look at the bypass again, it would solve one of the problems, in that it would get trucks off Highway 8. There is also more development planned for this area. It is something that has to be looked at as a part of this study and the secondary process.
Comment (floor): There are truck routes that are circuitous. It’s hard to get from Bay Road to the highway. There are many stoplights, which gobble fuel. Give consideration to balanced traffic lights so if trucks go at a reasonable speed, then they go straight through without having to stop, instead of impeding everyone. Some facilities are moving to outside the city so they have easier access to the highway, and the jobs go with them.
Answer (project team): Fewer signals would be nice, but they are needed for safety. Some areas have good timing, but some timing going north and south is broken. Since the Red Hill Valley Parkway has come online, traffic dynamics have changed. The City will be doing another study to look at traffic light timing.
Question (floor): The timing will change greatly at different times of the year. If the seaway is closed, then the roads have a different volume. There is less traffic in winter, and more in summer. Answer (project team): The counts take place throughout the year. We understand that there are different volumes.
Comment (floor): When we purchased our home on Fruitland Road, we bought it because it was supposed to be a cul de sac. A study was done that recommended that alignment. Fruitland Road was to be removed from truck routes. But this did not happen because the allocated monies were used elsewhere. The Fruitland route was not built for trucks, and residents have been fighting this battle for 20 years. Because of the vibrations from trucks, I have replaced my windows twice, my doors are uneven, glasses shatter. I have an issue with the shaking, because I have significant property damage due to the vibrations. The time of day limit does not come into play. Also, over 70% of vehicles are going 120 kph, but it is 50 kph zone.
Question (floor): With respect to trucks speeding, does the police or the Department of Transportation deal with that? Answer (project team): The police enforce speed limits. The ministry looks at the safety of the vehicles themselves, such as their tires, brakes, etc.
Comment (floor): I was told that the police don’t pull trucks over because is not safe to do so. Sergeant Wiltshire: I am not aware that police don’t pull trucks over because there is not the space. We do try to foresee where we can pull them over safely. We do have a project in place for Fruitland Road. We are aware the road is a problem and that it is a speeding zone area. We have an officer for that area. With respect to trucks, it is a Truck route and so we can’t keep them off, but we can do speed enforcement. We have a speed watch program that has a huge sign that clocks speed and displays it for the driver to see. We will put it on Fruitland Road throughout the year. The Ministry has a program in the works where trucks will have a device installed that sets the trucks’ maximum
16 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
speed at 105 kph. This will not affect Fruitland Road where the limit is 50 kph, but it will help in other areas.
Question (floor): What is speed limit on Fruitland Road? Sergeant Wiltshire: It is 50 kph. If it is not marked, it is 50 kph in the City of Hamilton. On 50 kph roads, there are some spans where the speed limit goes up to 60 kph.
4 Next Steps
The project team’s next steps will include completion of the Complete Route Attributes and Assessment process. Using the results of the assessment process and feedback from the PICs and the technical advisory committee, the project team will develop a Recommended Truck Route System. A final round of Public Information Centres will be held in Fall 2008 to present and discuss the recommended Truck Route System. After feedback from that round of PICs has been incorporated, the recommended plan will be taken to Council for endorsement. Once Council endorses the plan, the City will implement the preferred plan.
17 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX A
Agenda
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Public Information Centre 2
AGENDA
Tuesday, June 17, 2008 Wednesday, June 18, 2008 Thursday, June 19, 2008 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Flamborough Municipal Glanbrook Municipal Centre Stoney Creek City Hall Centre, 163 Dundas Street, 4280 Binbrook Road 777 Highway 8 Waterdown, ON Binbrook, ON Stoney Creek, ON
Purpose: • To provide an update on the project to the public, including area “hot spots” • To present preliminary concepts for the Truck Route Master Plan • To discuss preliminary concepts
7:00 p.m. Open House 7:15 p.m. Meeting Purpose - Facilitator, Lura Consulting Welcome and Opening Remarks – City of Hamilton 7:20 p.m. Presentation– Ron Stewart, IBI 7:30 p.m. Question and Answer Period 8:30 P.M. ADJOURN
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX B
Comment Form
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Public Information Centre
COMMENT FORM
Contact Information (Optional) Name:
Affiliation/Organization:
Address: E-mail address:
Would you like to be added to our mailing list? (Please circle) Yes No
Tuesday, June 17, 2008 Wednesday, June 18, 2008 Thursday, June 19, 2008 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. Flamborough Municipal Glanbrook Municipal Centre Stoney Creek City Hall Centre, 163 Dundas Street, 4280 Binbrook Road 777 Highway 8 Waterdown, ON Binbrook, ON Stoney Creek, ON
Purpose: • To provide an update on the project and the process to the public • To review truck route issues and possible solutions identified to date and to describe preliminary results • To receive public input on current and potential truck route issues in the City of Hamilton
To provide additional comments or for more information:
City of Hamilton Public Works Attn: Gary Kirchknopf, Senior Project Manager
Tel: (905) 546-2424 ext. 7217 Fax: (905) 540-5926 Email: [email protected] Web: www.hamilton.ca/traffic
To fulfill Environmental Assessment Act requirements, we will maintain your comments on file for use during this Study and may include them in Study documentation. With the exception of personal information, all comments received will become part of the public record. Information will be collected in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Identified Issues and Alternative Solutions
1. Thinking about the types of issues and possible solutions that have been identified, are there other types of issues or solutions that should be considered?
2. What are your primary Hot Spots of concern (e.g., truck route issue areas), and what possible solutions would best address them?
Hot Spots Possible Solutions
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
3. Are there any Hot Spots missing from the list? If so, please describe them, and indicate what possible solutions would best address them.
Hot Spots Possible Solutions
Additional Comments
Please provide any additional comments you have on any aspect of the City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan study.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Thank you for attending -- How did we do?
Please fill out the evaluation form below to let us know how we did. .
1. Overall, were you satisfied with the Open House? (Please circle)
Very Somewhat Very Satisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied
2. How did you find out about today’s PIC? (Please circle)
Newspaper Website Notice Other:
3. What did you like or find most useful about this PIC?
4. What suggestions would you make to improve this PIC?
5. Do you have any other comments on the PIC?
THANK-YOU FOR PARTICIPATING!
PLEASE RETURN COMPLETED WORKSHEETS ON YOUR WAY OUT. Thank you!
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX C
Display Boards
TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Truck Route Master Plan Study
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Purpose of Public Information STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 Centre June, 2008
The purpose of this Public Information Centre is to:
Describe the purpose of the Truck Route Master Plan study, and its objectives;
Describe the work plan, and study schedule;
Describe the consultation process;
Discuss the existing truck route philosophy;
Review some previously reported truck route issues;
Describe preliminary results; and
Receive your input on current and potential truck route issues in the City of Hamilton.
Your comments are essential to adequately identify problems and develop feasible and effective solutions.
Important: No decisions have been made at this time. We need your input before proceeding with developing some alternatives.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Study Background and STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 Objectives June, 2008
Goods movement is a major part of the economy of the City of Hamilton This study was initiated to develop a comprehensive Truck Route Master Plan for the City of Hamilton that will review the following issues:
Hamilton is a major transportation centre Major port Air cargo hub Road and rail routes serve busy transportation corridor
Economy needs efficient movement of goods that is safe and minimizes the impact on the environment and the community
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Study Background and STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 Objectives June, 2008
The Truck Route Master Plan Study will investigate alternative solutions and select a plan that responds to stakeholder views, and that strives for equity among residents and industry.
The study is to be carried out according to the guidelines set out for Municipal Class Environmental Assessments (EA). The EA process ensures that a reasonable range of alternatives are considered and that the public and other stakeholders have sufficient input into the decision process.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Work Plan and Schedule STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Work Plan Flow Chart
Technical Consultation
Stream 1 Stream 2 Stakeholder Orientation and Consultation Research and Policy Data Collection and Field Work May 2008
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 June 2008
Public Information Centres – Round 2 Preliminary Results June 2008
Stream 3 Preparation of Master Plan
Develop a Recommended Truck Route System Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 Fall 2008
Prepare Draft Report and By-Law Changes Public Information Centres – Round 3 Recommended Truck Route System Fall 2008
Prepare Final Report Including Revised By-Law Schedule
Presentation to Council
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Consultation Process STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Three Approaches Technical Advisory Group
• Key industry stakeholders
Public Information Centres
• Orientation Session
• Preliminary Results
• Recommended Truck Route System
Web Consultation
• To gather input on areas of concern, and to receive comments on draft truck route network throughout entire study
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Existing Truck Route STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 Network June, 2008
Based on a vehicle weighing greater than 4500 kilograms (5 tons) “Permissive” approach to regulating movement of commercial vehicles, as opposed to “Restrictive” Identifies the roads on which truck movements are permitted Some “time of day” restrictions Some “time of year” restrictions Some routes limited to specific users Compliant with provincial regulations
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Local Deliveries STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Trucks are permitted on any road which is on shortest route from origin or destination to closest truck route There will always be some truck traffic on all roads
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Issues Identified By Public STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 (Part 1 of 2) June, 2008
Close to 60 issues identified Distributed throughout urban, suburban and rural areas Categorized by type
TRUCK ROUTE ISSUES RAISED BY THE PUBLIC JUNE 16 2008 CLASSIFICATION DETAILS Lack of Truck Route The Eastern border with adjacent Niagara region has some gaps in truck routing Road Not Suitable for Trucks Campbell Ville Road (north of Hwy. #6) – Extensive pavement cracking Mount Albion Road fly-over bridge – Bridge is not suitable to accommodate heavy trucks Milburough Town Line Road – Boundary Road (large number of trucks on substandard pavement conditions) Environmental Concerns Network-wide – Clean Air Hamilton has identified the local impacts of trucks as an area of air pollution concern under their 2008 Strategic Plan, and would like to provide information and comments on air quality and health concerns Centennial Parkway (King Street to QEW) – Prohibit use of engine brakes Queen Street North – Trucks (travelling south from Barton Street) cause houses to shake, lots of noise R.H.V.P. – Prohibit trucks on the Parkway during the overnight period (e.g., midnight to 6 AM) Downtown Core – Re-evaluate downtown truck routes (intersection of Cannon Street W at Bay Street N), trucks cause buildings to shake Too Many Trucks on Legal Barton Street, Queenston Road, and King Street (R.H.V.P. – Parkdale Avenue) – Heavily congested with truck Route traffic Campbellville Road/Highway 6 – Many trucks use these roads as a by-pass of Highway 401 Centennial Parkway (King Street to Queenston Road) – Too many trucks Centennial Parkway (Ridge Road to QEW) – Garbage transfer trucks Fruitland Road (Hwy. # 8 – northerly) Residents complaining, to many trucks on this legal route? Garner Road/Rymal Road – Used as by-pass of Highway 403 and “Linc” Lakeview Dr. (North Service Road) – Too many trucks on this legal truck route Regional Road # 20 (east of Upper Centennial to City Limit) – complaints regarding too many trucks on this route
Rennie Street – Too many trucks on this legal truck route Stone Church Road (Upper James Street – Upper Gage Avenue) – Too much truck traffic through residential area Ridge Road – Too many trucks on this legal truck route Burlington Street – Keep trucks of the street Stone Church Road (Upper James – Upper Wellington) Too many trucks on this truck route Review Alternate Route Barton Street (Victoria Avenue to Sherman Avenue) – Business Improvement Area, remove truck route Innovation Park (between Paradise Road and Frid Street) – Remove truck routes Main Street (Dundurn Street to Victoria Avenue) – Remove truck routes Nash Road (King St. to Barton St.) Part time Truck Route, residents were promised review to remove status upon opening of the R.H.V.P. Ottawa Street – Business Improvement Area, remove truck route R.H.V.P. – Request to direct eastbound truck traffic onto Mud Street instead of Dartnall or Trinity Church to Rymal
Upper Mount Albion Road (Stone Church Road – Rymal Road) – Residents want it moved to Pritchard Road
Main Street (Hamilton downtown) – ban all trucks (non local delivery)
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Issues Identified By Public STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 (Part 2 of 2) June, 2008
TRUCK ROUTE ISSUES RAISED BY THE PUBLIC JUNE 16 2008 CLASSIFICATION DETAILS Too Many Trucks on Illegal Concession 4W – high number of illegal trucks from Hwy. # 6 Route Dickenson Road (Upper James Street – Nebo Road) – No truck routes Glow Avenue – residents complaining of the high number of illegal truck movements Haldibrook Road – Boundary Road (legal truck route in Haldimond, not in Hamilton) McMaster University Area (Sterling, Forsyth, Dalewood, Haddon, King St. W. – illegal truck movements) Millgrove Side Road – One-way truck route to Hwy. # 6 signal (many illegal truck movements) Montgomery Drive and Old Dundas Road – Illegal trucks using these streets as alternative to Wilson/Main West (during construction) Nebo Road (Dickenson Road – White Church Road) – Illegal trucks using road
Princess St. (between Sherman and Birch) – illegal truck volumes using as a short cut to by-pass Barton Street
Sanatorium Road – residents complaining about illegal truck traffic
Scenic Drive – residents complaining of the high number of illegal truck movements Strathearne Avenue (Barton – Britannia) complaints regarding illegal truck traffic West 5th Street from Rymal Road to Fennell Avenue – high number of illegal trucks Westbrooke Road – Boundary Road (legal truck route in Niagara, not in Hamilton) White Church / Binbrook Road (Hwy. # 56 – Hwy. # 6) – designated in by-law as “Specified Users” – Police will not enforce, residents complain of the high number of illegal trucks Safety Concerns Queen Street North – Find an alternate truck route since many children play on the street Greenhill Avenue – Request to have trucks banned from using R.H.V.P. ramps at Greenhill Ave. (residential area), reroute to King Street interchange and Quigley Road Lawrence Road – Ban trucks from travelling through this residential area Dundurn Street (from Chatham Street south to its end) – Keep trucks off Dundurn due to congestion and elementary school Regional Road # 56 (Cemetery Road – Guyatt Road) – School zone Ridge Road (Airport Road, White Church Road, Binbrook Road, Haldibrook Road) – keep rural truck routes separate from rural bike routes White Church Road and Nebo Road – School at intersection Traffic Operations There are multi modal issues related to the Aberdeen hub Centennial parkway and King Street – Need advance southbound left turn phase Upper James Street and Stone Church Road – Truck parking at Tim Horton’s impedes traffic York Boulevard – underused truck route
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Issues Identified By Public – STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 City Wide June, 2008
Issues identified by the public are distributed throughout the City of Hamilton
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Issues Identified By Public - STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 Downtown June, 2008
Need to serve the port, industrial areas and downtown businesses, while maintaining a good environment Issue raised about “through” trucks travelling through downtown
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN External Issues STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Truck route decisions in adjacent municipalities affect the Hamilton Truck Route network
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Truck Collisions STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Collision reports will be reviewed to identify any specific safety issues
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Assessment Process STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
Assessment process will be performed for all issues identified by stakeholders – the public, and employers/industry
Type of Issue Possible Solutions
Too many trucks on illegal route Time of Day Restriction
Too many trucks on legal route Increase enforcement
Safety concerns Remove link from truck route
Road/intersection design Add new truck route concerns
Circuitous truck route Improve road/intersection design
Lack of truck route Build new road
Change land uses
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN Where are we going from STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 here? June, 2008
Complete Truck Route Assessment process Based on input from PICs and further investigation, develop a Recommended Truck Route System Hold final round of Public Information Centres in Fall 2008 to present and discuss Recommended Truck Route System Take recommended plan to Council for endorsement Implement preferred plan
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN We Want to Hear From You! STUDY Public Information Centre Round 2 June, 2008
These panels outline possible directions for the City of Hamilton. We would like to know what you think about the ideas presented here. There are four ways to participate:
☺ Speak to a representative at this public information centre Complete one of our feedback forms here today Visit our website at www.hamilton.ca/traffic Click on “Truck Route Study”
Arrange a meeting with our staff
Gary Kirchknopf Senior Project Manager Phone: 905 546-2424 ext. 7217 Email: [email protected]
**Thank you for contributing to the City of Hamilton’s future**
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Engineering & Operations CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX D
Participant List
Name Organization/Affiliation June 17 - Flamborough Municipal Centre, 163 Dundas Street, Waterdown Bob Wheildon Gamsby and Mannerow Limited (Township of Puslinch) Tom Sutton St. Thomas RC Church Waterdown Shirley Vaughan Retired Steve Oliver Parkside Drive Citizens Group Ken Audziss City of Hamilton Mayor’s Office Jim Shaw Mayor’s Office Tara Arabian Gary Tansley Force Rosalyn Vanderboon Vanessa Grupe City Planning Dianne Cornish Flamborough Review Alex Mastrokalos Harry Nicholson Roy Lyons Resident Tony Onufer Lori and Ken Brims Resident Sylvia Renshaw City of Hamilton Andrew Palumbo Dufferin Aggregates Ralph Kessler Resident Gerald Weninger Resident Dorothy Markle Rick Breznik June 18 - Glanbrook Municipal Centre, 4280 Binbrook Road, Binbrook Thom Potter Jaquie Tyler Dennis Mitchell Carole Stickney Sylvia Renshaw City of Hamilton Pat Davidson Resident G Smith De Amalgamation Bob Butrym Leanne Cunliffe Ashley Young Ross Davidson Charles and Olga LeClair Peggy Young
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Name Organization/Affiliation Debbie Hoeflaak Sandra Lejer Roy Zimmerman C. P. Beattie Steve Beattie Brian S. Smith Terry Fletcher A. Pyett L. Pyett B. Ryan Phil Drinkwater Syd Francis Shawn Tyler Jim Shaw Gerard P. Murphy Pyett Spring and Alignment June 19th - Stoney Creek City Hall, 777 Highway 8, Stoney Creek Wayne and Kathleen Dale Teresa Difalco Scube Nick Romano Grant Cook Scube John Vesprin Nick Demy Roy Shuker Hamilton-Wentworth Federation of Agriculture Sylvia Renshaw Maria Pearson City of Hamilton Leon Salliers Trans Consultant
City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study Public Information Centre Series #2
Meeting Summary
Thursday November 5, Thursday November 12, Wednesday December 2 and Thursday December 10, 2009 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. Hamilton, Ontario
December 18, 2009
t: 905-527-0754 f: 905-528-4179 · www.lura.ca 36 Hunter Street East - Suite 601 Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3W8, Canada CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
This Public Information Centre (PIC) summary report was prepared by Lura Consulting. Lura is providing third-party facilitation services as part of the City of Hamilton’s Truck Route Master Plan Study. This summary captures the key discussion points raised during the PICs. It is not intended as a verbatim transcript of comments received. If you have any questions or comments regarding the summary, please contact either:
Gary Kirchknopf, C.E.T. Patricia Halajski Senior Project Manager Consultant Traffic Planning & Community Services Lura Consulting Public Works Department Phone: 905-527-0754 OR Operations & Maintenance Division Fax: 905-528-4179 77 James Street North, Suite 320 [email protected] Phone: 905 546-2424 ext. 7217 [email protected]
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations & Maintenance Division Traffic Planning & Community Services
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Table of Contents
1 About the Public Information Centres (PICs) ...... 1 2 Format of the PICs ...... 1 3 Summary of Feedback Received ...... 2 3.1 Overview ...... 2 3.2 Hamilton Convention Centre, November 5 ...... 3 3.3 Stoney Creek Municipal Services Centre, November 12 ...... 7 3.4 Hamilton Church of God, December 2 ...... 12 3.5 Mountsberg Hall, December 10 ...... 18 4 Next Steps ...... 25
Appendix A: Blank Comment Form Appendix B: Submitted Comment Forms Appendix C: Display Boards Appendix D: Participant List Appendix E: Submitted Petitions
i CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
ii CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
1 About the Public Information Centres (PICs)
The second round of Public Information Centres (PICs) for the City of Hamilton’s Truck Route Master Plan Study took place over four evenings, on the following days: • Thursday November 5, 2009, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. • Thursday November 12, 2009, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. • Wednesday December 2, 2009, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. • Thursday December 10, 2009, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
The PICs were convened by the City of Hamilton and their Consulting Team: IBI Group and McCormick Rankin. The meetings events were managed and facilitated by Lura Consulting.
Prior to the second round of PICs, the City had conducted its detailed technical analysis, with input from the public (first round of PICs in May and June 2008), members of the industry and other stakeholders, under the auspices of the Public Works Committee’s Truck Route Sub-Committee. The general purpose of the second round of PICs was to provide the public with an update on the progress of the study and provide the public and local stakeholders with an opportunity to review the preliminary preferred alternative and the alternative’s evaluation.
The PICs were held in four locations across the City of Hamilton:
• Hamilton Convention Centre, 1 Summer’s Lane (November 5); • Stoney Creek Municipal Services Centre, 777 Highway 8 (November 12); • Hamilton Church of God, 1338 Stone Church Road East (December 2); and • Mountsberg Hall, 2133 Centre Road (December 10).
In total, 168 members of the public registered at the four PICs. It should be noted that some members of the public attended more than one PIC.
Section 2 of this report provides an overview of the meeting format. Feedback received is summarized in Section 3. The project’s next steps are listed in Section 4. Appendices A, B, C and D contain the blank comment form, submitted comment forms, display boards, and the list of participants, respectively.
2 Format of the PICs
The PICs were facilitated by Jim Faught of Lura Consulting. Each meeting began in an open house format at 6:00 p.m. During the open house portion of the meeting, City staff and members of the project team were available to discuss the project with PIC participants. Display panels were exhibited around the room detailing the preliminary preferred alternative, evaluation criteria and study background information.
At 6:15 p.m., Mr. Faught welcomed the participants to the PIC, described the meeting’s purpose, and introduced the City of Hamilton’s project representatives. The City project staff were represented Mr. Gary Kirchknopf, Senior Project Manager, Traffic Planning and Community Services; Margaret Fazio, Project Manager, Strategic Planning & Rapid Transit, Environment &
1 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Sustainable Infrastructure Division; Hart Solomon, Manager of Traffic Engineering, Engineering Services Group, Environment and Sustainable Infrastructure Division, and Sylvia Renshaw, Business Development Consultant, Economic Development Division. Hamilton Police Services were also involved throughout the process and attended a number of the PICs. Mr. Kirchknopf briefly introduced the project and stressed the importance of the public’s feedback, noting that the preliminary preferred alternative was not set in stone.
Following the introductions, Mr. Ron Stewart of IBI Group presented information about the project, including the problem and opportunity statement, study background and objectives, truck route facts, results of public and stakeholder consultation, truck route alternatives, alternatives evaluation and next steps for the project. Following Mr. Stewart’s presentation, Mr. Faught facilitated a question and answer session, which was then followed by the resumption of the open house.
Participants were given a copy of a comment form. The comment form asked for feedback on the information being presented at the PICs. The comment form noted that public comments for this project were due December 31, 2009.
3 Summary of Feedback Received
3.1 Overview The following summarizes the main themes raised.
• The need for coordination between the Truck Route Master Plan Study and other relevant traffic studies, for example the Hamilton Transportation Master Plan, the Waterdown Road Class EA, and the New East-West Road Class EA; • Ensuring the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and children; • Opposition to goods movement corridors being added on rural residential roads; • Nuisances due to truck traffic, such as noise, air pollution and vibrations; • The impact of truck routes on quality of life and property values; and • The need for enforcement along non-truck routes.
Routes of concern identified at the PIC’s included:
• Mountain Brow Road • Fruitland Road • Fifty Road • McNeilly Road • Kenilworth Access • Nebo Road • Dickenson Road • Governor Road • Concession Street • White Church Road • Millgrove Side Road and Millgrove Road
2 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
• 5th Concession • Tyneside Road • Centennial Parkway
Specific issues and areas of concern for each PIC are described in more detail in Sections 3.2 to 3.5 below.
3.2 Hamilton Convention Centre, November 5 The sections below summarize the feedback received at the PIC held on November 5 at the Hamilton Convention Centre. Seventeen residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team. The feedback was received through 3 submitted comment forms and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided below. 3.2.1 Issues and Comments
Participants identified the following issues of concern:
• How will this study affect the Waterdown Road Class EA and the New East-West Road Class EA? • What will be the impact of the new East-West road in Waterdown on truck flow and truck routes, and vice versa? • Noise due to truck traffic; • Possible conflict between farm equipment and trucks; • Trucks sharing roads with cyclists, children and pedestrians cause safety concerns; • Street racing and speeding; and • Arterial traffic cutting through residential areas.
Other comments and suggestions included:
• Increase enforcement to penalize trucks using non-truck routes; • Lengthen the left-turn signal at James Street and Burlington Street to prevent through traffic; • Perform geological studies to discover how the erosion and truck traffic affect road conditions and safety; • Consider adding real estate value as an evaluation criterion; and • Consider using something other than distance as a main criterion for choosing a truck route, there may be other less dense routes that may be more efficient – no stop signs, less density. 3.2.2 Question and Answers
Question (floor): Since data collection is part of your plan, will you be counting trucks passing though areas, to observe traffic volumes? Is that the analysis that was done? Answer (project team): The consulting team obtained truck route data from the City of Hamilton, in addition we did spot truck route data collection – checking the movement of trucks through an area. We also do traffic counts annually.
3 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): If a truck is going through intersection A, it may only be going that way because the driver thinks it’s the best way to go. So it may be better to stop trucks to ask drivers where they are going and where they are coming from, it would provide good data for the Transportation Master Plan in line with this study. You don’t want to have the chicken before the egg. This study needs to be in line with the Transportation Master Plan and others. Answer (project team): There is never a point where everything is settled, this process is always ongoing. No one was looking at this traffic date for the past 20 years, but we are looking at it now and seeing how we can use it to plan for the future. There are so many concurrent studies going on that may change this plan 3 months or even 6 months from now. We are creating a reasonable process that can be adjusted when these changes occur and the other studies come to their conclusions.
Comment (floor): I am from the Ancaster Heritage Business Improvement Area (BIA), and we want to eliminate the truck route to discourage arterial traffic. I see that similar recommendations were made by most BIAs. Most BIAs seem to prefer Alternative 2 over Alternative 3. Of course, there is a trade off between economics and quality of life. The thirteen local BIAs are the engines for economic growth in this area, and they are about balanced “live, work and play” communities. Your preliminary preferred alternative may open the door to changes in infrastructure that may break the dike for quality of life for a heritage community such as ours. We are a new BIA and we want to make sure our concerns are heard.
Question (floor): In the alternatives evaluation table, what do the values mean and how where they assigned? Can you explain the circles/pies in the table? Answer (project team): Please note that every link of roadway was not evaluated in Hamilton; instead we looked at specific criteria. For example, a less dense truck network requires trucks to take a longer route to get to their destination, in that case the noise and pollution generated by the truck is magnified. That is how we looked at the impacts.
Question (floor): So what does a three-quarter pie mean? Answer (project team): A full circle is a higher score which is better, so if you compare to the full circle then if it has a lower score it will have a smaller pie – i.e. for noise. An empty pie is a zero, which is the lowest score. Currently all BIAs are truck routes so they have empty pies.
Question (floor): What I’ve seen tonight is terrific. I’ve had a battle with Council and local police about trucks using non-truck routes, the issue is enforcement – truck drivers don’t care about using a non-truck route since there is not enough enforcement, so they are not caught or penalized. Due to a lack of enforcement, residential roads are being damaged by heavy trucks. Residential streets are not designed to support the weight of the trucks. What have the police said about this? What about the by-law enforcement people? It seems the police are too busy to be involved. Answer (project team): The police are on the Technical Advisory Committee and they are providing input to this project. I agree that enforcement is a key issue, and it is unfortunate that no-one is here from the police department to answer your question. Overall, the police department is in support of Alternative 3. They believe that Alternative 2 is not easy to enforce, because there are so few truck routes and so many possible alternative routes for trucks to take to get to their destination. If you deliver goods to a house, you take the shortest route and don’t drive down five different residential streets.
4 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): If we could talk to police and by-law enforcement people together, we can work something out. Answer (project team): A combined effort between police and by-law enforcement staff was attempted in the City but it did not work well, since a by-law enforcement officer cannot stop a moving truck. It turned out to be double the manpower. We observed that it is best to have police to do that type of enforcement work.
Comment (floor): I live in Ward 2 and we have many trucks along Burlington Street and Cannon Street. We have police enforcement in the area in the form of a speed trap, so why can’t they have a truck trap at John Street and Burlington Street? We’ve told trucks that they are off a truck route, and they are not very nice to us. The signal at the light is advantageous to through-traffic, maybe they can make the left-hand signal much longer to discourage through traffic? Answer (project team): That is a good suggestion that we can look into.
Question (floor): Is the timeframe for truck routes (i.e. 6:00 am – 9:00 am) assigned by the Ministry of Transportation (MTO)? Answer (project team): It is a municipal by-law.
Comment (floor): I live on Mountain Brow Road, and I don’t understand your methodology. What is the flow of traffic, and its destination? I’m not sure how you came up with your evidence. I would like to look at that if you can make it available to us. I find the symbols in your criteria evaluation table to be easily misunderstood. I would like to know your assumptions. I also found your second last slide a little misrepresented; I would think that Alternative 3 would be closer to the right hand side of the sliding scale. Answer (project team): Is there a specific location you are interested in? We can show you detailed data more easily for a specific location. Most people don’t like to listen to engineers talk, so we try to present this material in a way you can wrap your head around and give us your specific questions. Maybe the table is an over-simplification, and I apologize. It is a fair comment. This is a higher level presentation intended to give the public the context for this study. We can provide specific details about a spot or geographic location you are interested in, and you can give us specific suggestions. Comment (floor): That makes sense, and I understand that.
Comment (floor): I don’t agree with using distance as a main criterion for choosing a truck route, there may be other less dense routes that may be more efficient even though they are longer – no stop signs, less density. I think I’d like to see more details about that.
Comment (floor): I live on Mountain Brow Road. There was a geological study done in our area. There were two rocks that fell in the area, and we are concerned about the floods we had earlier this year. Can someone do a thorough assessment of that area? There are so many heavy trucks using the area going to Upper Ottawa Street and Upper Gage Avenue. The escarpment is unstable; there was a large slide recently. Answer (project team): The City has hired a consultant to do an analysis of the geological issues especially the spring thaw in order to change dates on truck restrictions. Those restrictions are posted in signage.
Comment (floor): I live on Mountain Brow Road. How will you look at Kenilworth access? There is a hairpin curve at the bottom of Kenilworth. I know that going up the hill is not safe nor is it a truck route. The Red Hill is a better choice.
5 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Question (floor): Did you assess the value of the real estate as a function of the truck routes? I think pricier real estate is on Mountain Brow. This area is special and it has characteristics and attributes that make it different than other areas. I think that it is a conflict to treat it the same as other areas. There are certain set backs from the road that need to be considered as well. Answer (project team): No, the value of real estate was not considered.
Question (floor): Do you think you can add something to the criteria about real estate? Answer (project team): That would be up to the City.
Comment (floor): The set back on Mountain Brow Road used to be 150 feet from the road, it was a dirt road, over the years development has come in, and people created severances and extensions. Since the 1950s the City has created bylaws regarding setbacks. There is an amendment to that by- law to make sure the setback is protected. The City took our front yards when they put in new roads. Everybody comes off the Red Hill to get to Kenilworth Avenue. There has been a lot of traffic. The police did a traffic count recently, but they do it at the wrong time of day.
Comment (floor): Mountain Brow Road and Concession Street should be a real concern for the City, the speed of traffic on Mountain Brow is like a highway. We’ve already had one death. We had an accident with a school bus, we also have streetcar racing. That is out of control for a residential street.
Comment (floor): There is a high school in the Mountain Brow area, so there are 17 buses coming in every day. There is a lot of space being taken up for parking for all these buses. Ambulances need access to the hospital – so the Kenilworth Avenue access needs to be clear. By using Kenilworth Avenue at the top it would be a great access route.
Question (floor): What about Henderson Hospital? There is a very high volume of traffic here, especially outbound traffic. The trucks don’t need to go through this area; it should be a “people place”. Answer (project team): We will look at that area with respect to traffic.
Comment (floor): There are many ambulances along the street – it is a regional hospital.
Question (floor): What information has the project team gathered that led you to these valuations? What bearing do they have on the final outcome? Answer (project team): This table is a summary of the criteria applied. We are trying to boil it down to something we can all understand. Alternative 3 starts with a clean slate. We identified geographic areas that have interdependences. Then we identified roads within the geographic area to see what purpose those roads serve – does it move trucks etc. We then applied the criteria to the specific areas as we worked down the scale. That was the process - region to higher lever roads to smaller roads.
Question (floor): If I want to construct a counter argument how do I use these criteria? Answer (project team): We can argue on a specific scale. So if you have an issue about a specific area we can consider it. We would encourage you to specify your area of concern, since people in different areas have different concerns. The maps and lists are detailed and you can find them all on
6 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
the project website. If you ask us “why did you propose this?” about a specific area or road, then we can easily give you our reasons.
Question (floor): How long is the timeframe for responses? Answer (project team): It is an ongoing process, you have until December 31 to provide us with your comments, and there will be a total of four open houses, so an answer we may give you now may change after we have the other three open houses. Through this dialogue we hope to boil down the concerns and issues. We want to hear specific comments. We will look at your feedback and sit down with the City to address the issues. The more specific your comments and questions the better.
Comment (floor): Thank you; it was a very good presentation.
3.3 Stoney Creek Municipal Services Centre, November 12
This section summarizes the feedback received at the PIC held on November 12 at the Stoney Creek Municipal Services Centre. Fourteen residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team, the City of Hamilton, and Councillor Dave Mitchell. The feedback summarized below was received through 3 submitted comment form and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided.
3.3.1 Issues and Comments
Participants identified the following issues of concern:
• Many of the roads currently being used for truck routes need to be upgraded/renovated; • Fruitland Road is a residential street and should not be a truck route; • Trucks cause noise, vibrations and air pollution; and • There is a lack of enforcement in the Fruitland Road area.
Other comments and suggestions included:
• Fruitland Road should be turned into a cul-de-sac and an alternate by-pass to the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) should be added in the area; and • The City should repair damaged roads in a timely manner. 3.3.2 Question and Answers
Question (floor): During the presentation you touched on road construction – are you using industrial roads or substandard roads? What year were the engineering standards set for the intersections? How old are those standards? You said that truck routes were on proper roads, but what is a “proper road”? A “proper road” would not be a gravel road. Answer (project team): I would need to check into the engineering standards for roads and intersection and get back to you. It should be kept in mind that this is the first time the City of Hamilton has attempted to evaluate the existing truck route system and create a proper system.
7 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): You have given the public 60 days to provide comments, but you have been accommodating the truck industry for the past two years. You are giving them what they want. What about us and our needs? We are consumers; we buy the products that trucks transport. The City offices will be closed on New Year and Christmas, asking for our comments by Dec 31 is a joke. It seems you have waited until the last minute to ask us what we think. Answer (project team): This is the second time we have held a public open house in the Stoney Creek area about truck routes. We are here today to give you information about how the Truck Route Study has progressed, and ask for your feedback on the preliminary preferred alternative.
Question (floor): Why would you put a truck route on a road that is not fit to be a truck route? Answer (project team): We are trying to achieve a “proper” truck route with this study. We want to change the designations of some routes. The existing truck route system will identify deficiencies in road conditions and road uses, and we will ensure that roads are reconstructed to meet the needs.
Comment (floor): I am a resident from McNeilly Road. The truck route issue went to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in 1995. They said there will be no truck road until the road has been renovated to accommodate trucks; that was the official ruling.
Question (floor): I am a resident from Fruitland Road. Fruitland Road was not intended to be a permanent truck route; we were told when we moved here that there would be a by-pass. So why isn’t there an option that represents that old commitment? Answer (project team): We are familiar with the Fruitland Road issues; there is a separate Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for that road.
Question (floor): Why isn’t there an option in the Truck Route Master Plan study for this particular road to be designated a non-truck route? There is no consistency between the two projects, you are sending out the wrong message to the public. You can’t look at it in isolation. We bought our houses on the premise that we would have no trucks on our road. Answer (project team): We are looking at options that can be implemented today.
Comment (floor): These decisions will affect our lives, we live here. Answer (project team): We will introduce a truck route system that can be evaluated and improved over time; it is an open process that can evolve with time.
Question (floor): Why doesn’t it say that the designation for Fruitland Road will be determined as part of the outcome of the Class EA? It should be made clear. It is 100% residential on Fruitland Road and it should not be a truck route. It pollutes our air, affects our health and is very loud at night. Answer (project team): I understand why you are upset; there is a history on Fruitland Road. The Truck Route Master Plan will determine whether a road is a truck route or not, the Fruitland Road Class EA is working under the premise that the route will remain or be a part time truck route. We didn’t want to wait until the Truck Route Class EA was complete before we started the Fruitland Road Class EA. We are looking at all the history. The Fruitland Road issue needs to be resolved. We are working the Secondary Plan process to aid with this issue.
Comment (floor): I did not hear the answer to my question. What you are talking about is just process. You will have a legal challenge here that will put a burden on the tax payers.
8 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Answer (project team): There are many studies going on in the City, some may be done in 3 months, others in 2 years. They all affect each other, so it is difficult to say what the final outcome will be. We propose to set up a truck route network that is not fixed, and this network will adapt to environmental and land use changes.
Comment (floor): You assume that Fruitland Road is a truck route to be had, but I disagree. Answer (project team): If we close Fruitland Road to truck traffic, the closest alternative route is kilometres away in a rural area, which is a long way away. We have to plan accordingly.
Comment (floor): I live on Millen Road, and they just finished upgrading our road. Bicycle lanes were added, but there is no sign that defines it as a non-truck route, and it is dangerous for children riding bikes.
Question (floor): Certain roads that are used by trucks are also designated bike routes yet don’t meet the minimum standards for road quality and safety. These roads also service pedestrian traffic and rural traffic, such as slow moving farm vehicles. These roads are degraded with pot holes. What are your plans to update these roads to the latest safety standards? Answer (project team): Once the Truck Route study is done and truck routes have been identified, the information will go to the planning department and implementation and construction will begin.
Question (floor): When will there be open communication between the people who live here and the developers and the City?
Comment (floor): A truck route is not a road that has roundabouts, that is not rational. Answer (project team): The project team has looked at the geometrics and there would be a need to upgrade some roads. People keep saying none of the roads are suitable for truck routes so we should remove all truck routes, but then where will the truck go? We need to settle on a proper network and upgrade the infrastructure. Some routes are only seasonal due to the degradation of some roads, but this is all part of the process, you need to start with a proposed truck route before you renovate roads.
Comment (floor): The Hamilton area has very poor road planning when compared to the adjourning municipalities. These municipalities put the roads in first and then built the homes, schools, community centres, and businesses around the existing roads. Hamilton put in houses and businesses first, and now we are struggling to widen and improve roads so that people can get around. Pembroke is a good example of this.
Question (floor): I have lived on Fruitland Road for 20 years. In Alternative 3, you state that Fruitland Road will be a part-time truck route from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, which is not acceptable, since that is the time when traffic is the most problematic. That option will not work. I suggest you put in the by-pass that was suggested 20 years ago. If you create a part-time truck route, who will police it outside those hours?
Question (floor): Who will be responsible for the enforcement? Answer (project team): The police service is responsible for enforcement. That is the current by-law.
Comment (floor): Enforcement will be a problem for us, the police are having a hard time enforcing speeding and dealing with more urgent situations, we can’t rely on them for this type of
9 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
enforcement; they have other more important things to worry about. That means we won’t have enforcement, since there is only one squad car in Stoney Creek. The perpetrator will be gone by the time the police get here.
Comment (floor): You can’t build this truck route if it will not be enforced. It is pointless unless it is enforced.
Question (floor): If the police can’t enforce it, what do we do? Answer (project team): You can make a presentation to City Council.
Question (floor): I would like to know what will be done about the enforcement of engine brake use by trucks in residential areas. Answer (project team): That it is a liability issue. We can ask truck drivers to avoid the use of engine brakes, but enforcement it tricky. Telling them they can’t use a braking device creates a liability issue for the City. It is a supplementary braking system, and it is used by truck drivers in emergency situations or steep terrain. How will we enforce that? How can we know whether a driver had to use his engine brakes since his other brakes were not enough? If the trucker gets into an accident and says “I couldn’t use my brakes because of the by-law”, the trucking company can sue the municipality. If the issue is noise from the engine brakes, then we need a police officer and a by-law officer to stop the truck and measure that the noise has exceeded the legislated noise level. It is very hard to enforce.
Comment (floor): I driven a truck for a living. Engine brakes are used for mountainous terrain, such as Centennial Parkway. You do not need to use them on flat roads. Drivers opt to use engine brakes because they want to prevent their floor brakes from being worn out quickly. Answer (project team): Some jurisdictions have attempted these by-laws and there have been pit falls, we need to be aware of this. It is not the brake that is the problem it is the noise caused by the brake.
Comment (floor): It doesn’t seem anything has been done since I’ve been living here. There is signage but it doesn’t do much, since it is not enforceable. Trucks wake me up at night all the time.
Question (floor): As part of your evaluation, you used various criteria; can you show us the relative weight of these criteria? For example, what is the weight of protecting the quality of life versus the economy and the trucking industry? The human factor and social impacts need to be considered and I want to know what the weight of this is. Answer (project team): We are dealing with the City of Hamilton as a whole, and as I discussed we broke it down into areas with similar needs. Different areas weight criteria differently.
Question (floor): Why doesn’t the Ministry of Transport pull over trucks on the Red Hill Valley Parkway if they have modifications that make their brakes louder? I see trucks being pulled over on the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) all the time. Answer (project team): We would have to ask the Ministry of Transportation that question.
Comment (floor): There are by-laws for engine brakes in other parts of Ontario, why can’t we have a by-law here that excludes emergencies? The noise is so loud it shakes our houses. Some of us are shift workers and we sleep in the day time, so a part-time truck route doesn’t solve the problem. We
10 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
need to educate the truckers, we need their services and their goods, but they should be considerate of us as well.
Question (floor): I have a question for Councillor Mitchell – what have you done to uphold your promises to the constituents on Fruitland Road? In your own words, you have said that “trucks do not belong on Fruitland Road”, but the truck route was not removed. Answer (Councillor Mitchell, Chair of the Truck Route Sub-Committee): I started this job in 2001, I am Chair of the Truck Route Sub-Committee, and I am working to create a new and appropriate truck route. We also have an Class EA for Fruitland Road, and a recommendation for a part-time truck route from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm. We will have better enforcement when we have a better by- law in place. I have implemented the Truck Route Master Plan study. I am doing my best. We are hoping for a new Fruitland Road, to act as a by-pass, that is a possibility, but Fruitland Road will not be cul-de-sac at Barton Street.
Comment (floor): For the past 20 years we’ve been fighting for Fruitland Road.
Comment (floor): I have seen official City of Hamilton drawing that show Fruitland Road as a cul- de-sac.
Comment (floor): I’d be happy to have a part-time truck route. You’re giving the residents on Fruitland Road preferential treatment, and continuing to allow trucks on my road. I want equal treatment. Fifty Road is old and the City has stolen the budget to upgrade Barton Street. Why should I suffer, I am a resident too? We are the last ones to the table. This could have been solved in the past 6 months or maybe a year ago. Fifty Road is falling apart. I would be happy to have the same option as Fruitland Road. As part of the presentation you said you took road conditions into account when doing the Alternative 3 review. Answer (project team): You are correct in that some roads are not designed for trucks. Comment (floor): We have been waiting for 25 years for our road to be fixed.
Comment (floor): Before we bought our property on Fruitland Road I went down to the regional government to ask if it would be a cul-de-sac and I was shown plans that it would be a cul-de-sac below Sandy Drive. We were assured this would happen. A year later, after we bought the property and build the house, the region had a public information centre and we were shown a plan of Fruitland Road as a dead end. We are still living here; I don’t know where the money went, and what happened to these plans. Answer (Councillor Mitchell): Developers had more control back then, and real estate regulations have been changed since that time. We’ve forced the industry to be more accountable.
Comment (floor): It was the City that put on the presentation, it was their planning department, it was not a developer. This was 17 years ago. The City budgeted for this in their 5 year Capital Plan. Stoney Creek and Hamilton created the plan for the cul-de-sac at Fruitland Road.
Comment (floor): We want a good night sleep, and we want to live our lives. Answer (Councillor Mitchell): I’ve seen a plan for a new by-pass road to replace Fruitland Road. It is the developers that pay for this type of road construction, not the tax payers. Question (floor): How will the developers be held accountable?
11 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): Due to the truck route on Fruitland Road I have to replace my windows every five years, I have high blood pressure, and I get woken up at night by engine brakes.
Question (floor): Why isn’t the problem with Fruitland Road being solved right now? Just get rid of the truck route, put up signs and end it. It is a sore spot that has been going on for too many years. Answer (project team): The Fruitland Road issue remains alive and we are trying our best to address it. We are also recording all your comments.
Comment (floor): The City needs to find solutions for citizens.
Comment (floor): When these roads were designed, the intersections were too narrow. Truck lengths have increased in the last 10 years, and the engineering by-laws for the roads are too old and I am sick of slamming on my brakes every time a truck pulls out and he has to cross lanes to fit into the turn. We need enforcement. We have one squad car for this whole area. I have made repeated suggestions to widen the intersections, with left hand turn lanes. You collected money from developers years ago, but that road is still a 2 lane road. I know the City has the money. We are fed up with getting the short end of the stick; the City needs to treat the suburbs fairly.
Comment (floor): We have so many problems and no enforcement. Fruitland Road and Fifty Road suffer from the same problem; we are both connected to the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW).
3.4 Hamilton Church of God, December 2
This section summarizes the feedback received at the PIC held on December 2 at the Hamilton Church of God. Forty four residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team, the City of Hamilton, Police Sergeant Mike Martin, Councillor Dave Mitchell and Councillor Tom Jackson. The feedback was received through 11 submitted comment forms and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided. 3.4.1 Issues and Comments
Participants identified the following issues of concern:
• The close proximity of Mountain Brow Road to the escarpment is a safety concern (i.e. falling rocks). • Opposed to goods movement corridors being added on rural residential roads such as Governor Road, Nebo Road, Concession Road, Dickenson Road and White Church Road. • Request for detailed costs for the presented alternatives. • Request for detailed evaluation criteria. • Trucks sharing roads with cyclists, children and pedestrians cause real safety concerns. • The Red Hill Valley Parkway is not being used optimally for truck traffic. • Enforcement is required to keep trucks off of rural residential roads. • Has the project team considered environmental impacts, specifically air pollution?
Other comments and suggestions included:
12 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
• A geotechnical study of the escarpment should be performed as part of the Truck Route Study. • Kenilworth Avenue should be closed to truck traffic.
3.4.2 Question and Answers
Question (floor): What are the parameters for the environmental impacts, particularly for the Mountain Brow Road area? Have studies been done on the environmental and geological stability of Mountain Brow? Answer (project team): No specific studies have been performed on the status of the escarpment as part of this study.
Comment (floor): We use the Governor Road route for large trucks and vehicles, we are concerned that there is an intension to put in a roundabout, which will prevent us from bringing in the equipment we need to our facility in Dundas. If the truck can’t access our facility we will have to move. We ask that the City maintain the same truck routes near Governor Road and Dickenson Road.
Question (floor): On the chart in the presentation, Alternative 3 scores low on cost, can you explain that? Answer (project team): We don’t know the exact costs for the alternatives. In order to make our assessment, we look at the number of roads that would require upgrades and renovations, which is would make alternative 3 costly because it requires many changes. If you’re looking at the alternative totals, the highest score is a full circle. We are trying to show high versus low. Alternative 3 ranks low because it has a higher cost associated with it when compared to the other alternatives.
Question (floor): I am concerned with how the Alternative 3 was proposed. We have not seen the criteria for the alternative routes in detail. What values did you use to score the alternative routes? Did you consider residential impacts of the new routes? You are affecting people’s lives, and I don’t know if an Class Environmental Assessment (EA) will capture those social impacts. There are routes that already exist, that are highly controlled and highly used for access to the airport, the landfill etc. The Red Hill Valley Expressway is one such example. I don’t see any good coming out of Alternative 3. You should strengthen the routes you already have. Answer (project team): Approximately 45% of current truck routes are residential. We are not proposing an alternative to the highway, but additional designated routes to prevent the zig-zagging of trucks through residential areas. More truck routes are easier to regulate and enforce because there are fewer non-designated truck routes for trucks to taken when planning the shortest route from the end of a truck route to their destination. Comment (floor): We are not asking for goods movement corridors to be added on rural residential roads. Local deliveries are permissible, but trucks going on our road every 15 minutes are too much. My fear is that you will create corridors across people’s front doors.
Comment (floor): There are rural residential roads with one lane in each direction. There is very limited pedestrian and cycling space on these roads. Where will kids ride their bikes? It is not safe to have trucks on these roads. There are safer alternatives. There is no reason to turn our country side into a truck infested route. I am particularly concerned about Nebo Road, White Church Road and Dickenson Road.
13 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): We had tree experts do some research in our area and they noted that trees are being killed by the vibrations of trucks. There are no shoulders or sidewalks on many of these rural residential roads. You are changing the lives of the people who live here. Where can kids play? There was a different commitment on Nebo Road in the 1990s, the politicians wanted to commit to close Nebo Road to truck traffic and they put up signs, now that commitment is being revoked. There should be no truck routes past Dickenson Road, these are our homes and you are going to ruin our neighbourhood.
Question (floor): What will it take to look at the escarpment and do a geological study on Mountain Brow Road? Answer (project team): The City builds roads on a sound engineering basis, and they are designed to uphold occasional truck traffic. When a road is being constructed engineers examine soils, drainage and erosion. As part of the Hamilton Truck Route Study process we will not be performing any additional studies.
Comment (floor): We are very concerned about the escarpment, there are many rocks falling in the spring. There are unstable rocks and we would like to ask for a thorough assessment of the area. A study done by the City earlier this year, states that there were 540 trucks on Mountain Brow Road in one day, and 60 of those were tractor trailers, the rest were cement trucks, city trucks etc. This is a residential street. We don’t believe this road is made for these types of trucks. It takes a tractor trailer four lanes to turn at the light. There are a lot of school buses in our area and we are concerned about accidents. My husband and I did a study ourselves, we found if a truck goes up Upper Ottawa to Mountain Brow Road, it took 21 minutes due to the eight stop lights, but if the truck took the Red Hill Valley Parkway it took 12 minutes with only one stop light. I want to ask you if you have taken into consideration the cancer rates in the area. We spoke to the hospital and they expect a 30% increase. I believe the population is going to increase significantly as well. Did you take all of this into consideration in the planning process? Answer (project team): As part of our process we ensure the truck route grid we propose allows for unrestricted access to service institutions such as hospitals.
Question (floor): Why did we spend millions of dollars on the Red Hill Valley Expressway and now we are going to use Kenilworth Avenues for access? We just heard that the Red Hill is faster. We have an alternative, why can’t we use it? We won’t accept that. Answer (project team): The approach does not prevent the use of the Red Hill. There are many opinions being provided by the public. Some people say we should not allow trucks on the Red Hill since it makes noise. Conversely, if you only allow trucks on highways and interchange roads than any residential street can become the “shortest route” to the destination.
Comment (floor): People call the City everyday telling them that rocks fall on their cars. The circle is a hazard and there have been many deaths in the area due to accidents. Mountain Brow Road is very dangerous. This information was presented to Council many years ago.
Comment (floor): I lives on Miles Road, and there is a sign that says no trucks allowed but they use our road rather than Upper James Street and Nebo Road. The police stop you if you speed, maybe they can stop trucks that travel of these routes? Answer (project team): As people report such incidents, the police will look into it.
14 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): I ride a bike everyday and it is very dangerous. You are putting your life in your hands between Rymal Road (Highway 53) and Dickinson Road, which is the truck route. There are alternative routes that do not have houses and road ditches on both sides; those are better suited for trucks. Everybody who lives on a rural residential road should fill out comments which your street address, and actual events or incidents you have observed. Nebo Road and White Church Road are a concern. I encourage you all to tell your neighbours, family and friends about the meeting on December 10th and come out and have your voice heard.
Question (floor): How can an alternative be called “preferred” without an exact cost assessment? That doesn’t make sense. The cost to upgrade routes is phenomenal.
Comment (floor): I live on Mountain Brow Road. Why should we not have precedence over commercial interests? More residents are paying taxes since the population in Hamilton has increased.
Question (floor): In your evaluation process, what is the mechanisms by which you evaluated the Master Plan for Cyclists? Was it even considered? What about the Clean Air Initiative? They will have opinions on Alternative 3. Answer (project team): Alternative 3 has not been generated based on the trucking community providing a wish list; it was developed based on first principles that were discussed in detail in the presentation. We have central hubs that need to be accessible. Essentially all roads leading off the highway become default truck routes because that is the way on and off the highway. On most roads in Hamilton people see trucks, hear trucks and feel vibrations, and we have heard this in your comments.
Question (floor): Alternative 3 has more truck routes than Alternative 2 and the status quo. Are any of the evaluation criteria calculated quantitatively or assigned quantitative values? Who gave the authority to those selected few to make the decisions on the preliminary preferred alternative? Answer (project team): The project team was retained by the Truck Route Sub-Committee. After being retained we put together a work plan and went back to the Sub-Committee with our results, and they gave us further direction on how we should move forward. We consulted the public, police, City, industry, local businesses and many others. We provided the evaluation criteria but we do not have numeric criteria for each specific road. We have to be aware that if we eliminate one truck route it is possible that the next route over will have double the trucks, so we need a balanced solution.
Question (floor): I heard that Hamilton police asked that Kenilworth Avenue be put back as a truck route to prevent truck traffic backup on Upper James. Is that statement correct? Answer (Sergeant Martin): My personal request was to take Kenilworth Avenue off the truck route because it has a poor safety record.
Comment (floor): The evaluation criteria should have been made available so that we can have a transparent process. We should see the evaluation criteria. It seems a geological study of the escarpment was not done. Answer (project team): We did not do additional geotechnical studies as part of this study, but it was done as part of initial road construction.
15 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): I looked at the Terms of Reference (ToR) for this study and I found the document very helpful. I recommend you all get a copy of this document, it is a public document. In the Terms of Reference document is states, “The Red Hill Valley Parkway has changed traffic partners with respect to trucks – it reduced congestion between the upper and lower sections of the study area, and gets trucks off roads that are not designed for heavy trucks”. If that is the case why are residential roads still used as truck routes? In your presentation Kenilworth Avenue is mentioned but it contradicts what I just read. I live on Concession Street and there are two new parks which increased bike traffic and pedestrian traffic. What about the cultural heritage of the area? Concession Street from Mountain Brow Road to Upper Gage is a beautiful park. It is dangerous for trucks to be in close proximity to so many people. I ask for that section of Concession Street be taken off the truck route. There is a heritage home in the area as well. There is lots of erosion and it needs to be taken into account. Trucks make this erosion much worse. Please submit your comments if you have similar concerns.
Comment (floor): I want mention that a study was done on the effects of the idling of trucks at red lights, and if trucks take the Red Hill Valley Parkway there is less idling and less air pollution. Clean Air Hamilton was supposed to reduce emissions from fleet vehicles. They did not meet their emissions targets. The Hamilton Spectator noted that trucks should be limited and one-way streets should become two-way in order to make Hamilton a more liveable city. Truck traffic cannot be the sacred goose. Paul Young said trucks are killing our City. The trucks need us but we don’t need them. Trucks need to get to hospitals to deliver necessary good, but these are smaller trucks not tractor trailers. So the truck system can work around us.
Question (floor): How does this fit in with the Transportation Corridor Study for the City? Answer (project team): This study deals with the road network as it is right now. This study will define a truck route network but as other projects are completed it may change our truck route which will adapt. The Truck Routes Plan needs to be an adaptive and evolving plan. We shouldn’t wait another 20 years to evaluate it again.
Question (floor): You have put forward Alternative 3 as the preliminary preferred alternative; will there be changes to that alternative if there are comments from the public? Answer (project team): The project team will collect public input and the City will decide what changes will be made. We are here for public consultation. There may be revisions, but it is the City of Hamilton who makes the final decision. We will meet with City Council, City Public Works, and the Truck Routes Sub-Committee after the public consultation to discuss the comments and feedback received from the public.
Comment (floor): After the Notice of Completion is issued for this study we can submit a Part II Order Request to the Minister of the Environment if we are not happy with the final outcome. Answer (project team): We are following the public consultation process as part of the Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process, we will have four public information centres (PICs), and we will compile the comments and try to accommodate as many as is possible. This study does not propose new construction, so it is not a schedule B or schedule C project, this means there is no ability to apply a Part II Order. There are pamphlets available here tonight that explain the EA process. As part of the Truck Route Study we are not suggesting new construction, we are simply changing road designations.
16 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Question (floor): What is the point of the 30 day review period? What recourse do we have as residents? Answer (project team): The 30 day review process is meant for fine tuning and new issues that may come up. We try to reach a compromise with the public. As part of the Class EA process we have a Truck Route Sub-Committee. You can also approach the Sub-Committee with your issues. The 30 days is a minimum, it can be 45 days or more.
Question (floor): When council votes on something does that close the door? Is the 30 days review period just an ability to tie up loose ends? Answer (project team): We can talk about this in detail off line. There is always an ability for fine tuning.
Question (floor): The comments we put in are just going through the motions. How do we know if our input is being considered? You take our feedback and consider it before making your decision, but once Council votes that is it. Answer (project team): We can still have a dialogue outside of the public review process. If there is no schedule B or C project there is no option for a Part II order. We are here to listen and we are hearing what you are saying, so this meeting does have a purpose.
Question (floor): Would the truck route system work better if the signs were red instead of green? Answer (project team): This study does not have the ability to change the signing approach. The signage slide was included in the presentation as background about the current signage system.
Question (floor): Wouldn’t red signs be better for keeping trucks off of routes? Answer (project team): No matter what sign you use, you create a truck route network. The green signs are needed in smaller number; many more red signs would be required to sign all routes that are not truck routes. It is easier to stick to one type of signage, and not mix the two. One system is best for enforcement and reporting incidents. It is also easier to prosecute.
Question (floor): I live on Mountain Brow Road. I would suggest you take Kenilworth Avenue off the truck route system. How many people does it take before we get heard? Concession Road and Mountain Brow Road are both issues.
Comment (floor): Not all roads are equal. We have a unique geological feature that needs to be considered. All those people leave the City because they can’t find a good place to live, there are too many trucks ruining residential streets. Answer (project team): There are many crossings of the escarpment; do you want all of these to be removed from the truck route? Comment (floor): Those closest to the Red Hill Valley should definitely be removed. Answer (project team): Please keep in mind that this plan deals with the whole City of Hamilton. There was no specific study done of each escarpment crossing, but there is a need for trucks to cross the escarpment, maybe Council will decide to restrict the crossings, but if a truck driver can make the argument that he is taking the shortest route than any road is a truck route.
Comment (floor): I am concerned about safety on Nebo Road. City Council recognized this fact many years ago, so what makes it a safe route now when there are many more houses. How much will it cost to make it a safe road?
17 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
3.5 Mountsberg Hall, December 10 This section summarizes the feedback received at the PIC held on December 10 at Mountsberg Hall. Seventy residents attended the PIC, along with members of the project team, the City of Hamilton, Councillor Robert Pasuta (City of Hamilton) and Councillor Susan Fielding (Township of Puslinch). The feedback was received through 14 submitted comment forms and through discussions between participants and the project team. A summary of the Question and Answer session is also provided. 3.5.1 Issues and Comments
Participants identified the following issues of concern:
• Trucks sharing roads with cyclists, children and pedestrians cause real safety concerns. • Concern with the state of rural residential roads (i.e. no shoulders, no sidewalks, deep ditches, no bike trails etc.) • Concerns about noise, air pollution, and ground vibrations caused by trucks. • Concerns about the lack of police presence and enforcement on rural residential roads.
Other comments and suggestions included: • Trucks should use Highway 6 and Brock Road to travel through the area. • Local rural residential roads need to be renovated and widened to include sidewalks and proper shoulders. • A parking lot should be build next to the baseball park on Millgrove Side Road. • Future public meetings should be held in larger venues with adequate parking and resources.
3.5.2 Question and Answers
Question (floor): What is the capacity for this building in accordance with the Fire Code? Answer (project team): It is 79 persons.
Comment (floor): The original meetings were advertised in October so you had plenty of time to find another venue or simply postpone the meeting until the New Year if a suitable venue was not available. You should have changed the meeting date knowing that this venue was insufficient. This venue is much too small and there is not enough parking. There is not even enough room to look at all the display panels set up around the room.
Question (floor): Can we vote whether we should continue with this meeting or adjourn? (Show of hands: the majority wanted to continue).
Comment (floor): If there is no drop off point along a route, a truck should not be on that road, but should stay on the highway. Answer (project team): If a truck needs to get from one end of Hamilton to the other, taking the highway is not always the fastest or shortest route, so there should also be adequate through routes for truck traffic that are not highways.
18 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): If the flow rate into a truck route is 5 cars per unit and you create a new one that is 100 cars per unit, such as the Lincoln Allen expressway, it should reduce the amount of trucks on residential routes.
Question (floor): If you compare Alternative 2 to Alternative 3, wouldn’t the comparison be academic. In your explanations, in Alternative 1, we do nothing, Alternative 2 is only “no votes” that list all the roads to be closed to truck traffic, and Alternative 3 is the only mix. So if I asked for three designs, I only see one design. It is not really three designs, since Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 don’t really propose solutions to the problem. Answer (project team): These three alternative systems follow the criteria. All three have different impacts on goods movement and residents. Comment (floor): You should have an Alternative 4 and Alterative 5. Right now I have no other real comparison to Alternative 3. You were supposed to give us three different designs. At most you can argue you have two designs.
Comment (floor): My name is Graham Flint, and I am the chair of FORCE. On your maps, the blue dots represent institutional locations and the red dots represent major aggregate or landfill sites. Currently, there is no aggregate site at the top of Flamborough. It is only a proposed aggregate site and it should be removed from your maps. Answer (project team): It is there in error and will be removed from the map.
Comment (floor): I live on Millgrove Side Road. Heavy trucks are constantly coming from Dufferin Aggregates and Steely Quarry. They take our road and the roads are in terrible shape, you cannot even walk down to get the mail. The trucks go northbound and they speed and use their engine breaks. I contacted Councillor McCarthy about this problem, and the police were sent out but they just come and sit by the cemetery, so when truckers go by they get on their CB radio and tell other truckers to avoid the area, but the next day when the police are gone the trucks are back.
Question (floor): My name is R. Ebert and I also live on Millgrove Side Road. This road is not a bypass; it was never meant to be a truck route. Trucks go 70 or 80 km/h on this road. Is it considered part of the truck route system now, and will it be a truck route in the future? Answer (project team): It is currently a truck route in one direction, and as part of Alternative 3 it remains a truck route. Comment (floor): You should know it is also a designated bicycle route, and there are no shoulders so there is no space for bikes or pedestrians.
Comment (floor): Why do they have to make Highway 6 “safe for trucks”? Highway 6 was built for trucks from the beginning that is what that highway is for.
Comment (floor): I also live on Millgrove Side Road just south of 5th Concessions. There is a park, community center and a library located there. There are often cars parked along the road for baseball games, and the road is packed. Kids will bike on the road but the trucks do not slow down. I have waited to cross the road with four kids and the trucks go by at 80km/h. If you spend a day or two on the road you would know it is not safe. There are buses, pedestrians, bikes, and children in the area.
Comment (floor): I don’t agree with the terminology “the preliminary preferred alternative”. You should have alternative 1, 2 and 3, and not prefer one over the others. It seems biased.
19 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Answer (project team): At the end of the day we have to make a recommendation to Council. We try to give them our best advice. This is not a finished product, but rather a reference to the alternative we would like to get your comments on. The preliminary preferred alternative is simply a starting point, and it is open for discussion.
Comment (floor): I live on 5th Concession, and we see heavy trucks getting off Highway 6 and carrying heavy equipment and squashed cars. I don’t understand why they use our road and where they are going.
Comment (floor): I moved to Millgrove Side Road in 1986, and there were signs on Millgrove Side Road saying no truck traffic. We got a light put in at the Esso station, the signs disappeared and now we have increased truck traffic.
Comment (floor): Trucks are only allowed to go north on Millgrove Side Road, but they go both ways. Answer (project team): Unfortunately, that is an enforcement issue.
Comment (floor): I am Susan Fielding, a Councillor for the Township of Puslinch. It seems the northern part of Hamilton is being forgotten. Most trucks use Highway 6 between the 401 and 403. We have been lobbying to get more lanes in each direction, and we have asked Hamilton to lobby the provincial government to get the realignment funded. Has the City of Hamilton done anything to get the realignment moved forward? We are your partners to the north and we should work together. Answer (project team): We can take this off line and discuss it in detail following the meeting.
Comment (floor): Millgrove Road is a safety problem from 5th Concession West to Highway 6. Many kids on skateboards use the road. Trucks try to accelerate up the hill but due to their heavy weight slow down significantly. Vehicles pull up to a truck and pass the truck, but due to the hill there is no visibility. School buses use this area. I fear there will be a head on collision one of these days.
Comment (floor): If you make this a truck road you will have a problem. You have a school and two nursery schools in the area. There are houses right up against the road, built in the early 1900s. People walk to get their mail in the center of the village. My son was hit by a car on Millgrove Road. A girl was also hit on Sheltons Lane. Just south of this area are two blind spots. This area is hard clay and trucks cause houses to bounce, you feel the vibrations.
Question (floor): I also live on Millgrove Side Road, and if we get a truck route will the City mitigate the problems we have been discussing? Will the City add a parking lot at the baseball diamond, renovate the roads, add paved shoulders and so on? Answer (project team): One of the City’s commitments is to renovate truck routes to ensure they can handle the heavy traffic. Truck routes will also be widened. However there is a shortage of funding and it will take time to get this all done. The City will make a commitment to add shoulders.
Comment (floor): Councillor McCarthy promised a walkway for children on Millgrove Side Road but I haven’t seen anything yet. So how can we rely on our City and Council? The Council doesn’t live up to their promises.
20 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Comment (floor): I live on White Church Road near Binbrook Road. I see trucks everyday driving at speeds from 60 km/h to 80 km/h. I have children and grandchildren. There have been many rollovers. There is an arena and a cemetery in the area but the trucks keep coming through at high speeds. We have to walk in the ditch to get our mail. We pay taxes but we get minimal policing, no sewers, etc. There is no enforcement. I asked a cop why they don’t stop trucks, they tell me if they pull over a truck and someone goes around the parked truck and there is a head on collision all hell will be paid.
Question (floor): I lived on Millgrove Side Road as a kid. This road was never meant for truck traffic. What criteria and testing do you do to ensure it can handle heavy trucks? There are swamps up and down that road. Answer (project team): There are criteria that road developers and engineers go through when assigning a truck route. Question (floor): So why is Millgrove Side Road a truck route? Answer (project team): It was formally in the City by-law as a truck route in the northern direction, but we are starting from scratch and re-examining the current truck route system. I am very concerned about vibrations and the fact that there are no sidewalks in your area. Comment (floor): There are a lot of houses on that road, if you widen the road they will have no front yards.
Comment (floor): The City of Hamilton is using our tax money but they are not doing a good job planning development and road placement. If downtown Councillors knew what happens out here, it would make for better planning. The City needs to build better roads and shoulders. I have seen people jump into the ditch when walking their dog when a truck goes by. I remember when the City sent a plow to Millgrove Side Road last winter and it got stuck, we had to help pull it out, this was due to poor road construction.
Comment (floor): I am a new resident and I am disappointed to see six trucks an hour on Millgrove Side Road. I have stood on the corner and watched trucks and counted. Where is the police force to monitor this? We had a tractor trailer pull the hydro line overhead, and a local resident was kind enough to put up a sign and direct traffic to slow down. When the police arrived the officer just sat in his car. The police officer should have been directing traffic. The City of Hamilton made this a truck route even though 95% of the residents voted against it. We need more enforcement.
Comment (floor): I live on 5th Concession. We don’t want trucks there, why can’t they use Brock Road to get to Highway 5? Answer (project team): Unfortunately, there are no residents here tonight from Brock Road, and we cannot simply move the truck route from your road to their road, it won’t solve anything, it will only move your problem to someone else’s road. We have to think about it seriously.
Comment (floor): Dufferin Aggregates is on Brock Road and it is already a truck route.
Comment (floor): Send the trucks to Highway 5.
Comment (floor): I live on Tyneside Road, have you even measured the width of the road? At the conservation area it is actually within the conservation area. You will need to reconfigure the road. It will cost you millions. You have many other by-passes already. There is nothing close to my road,
21 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
such as a gravel quarry. Yesterday a City truck almost pushed me off the road with his plow. I had two kids in the back of my car at the time. Nebo Road is also an issue in the area.
Comment (floor): I live on Millgrove Road and I have a 3 year old son. He should be able to walk to school in the future but there is no sidewalk. If anything happens to him I will sue the City and any Councillor who voted to have a truck route here.
Question (floor): Was a study done on Nebo Road to see how many trucks use that road or will potentially use that road? Answer (project team): This study is looking at the current situation, we have truck volume information and we can provide you with it.
Comment (floor): Was a study done on the bridges on Nebo Road? Can they handle the weight of constant truck traffic? They are very old and small. Answer (project team): All bridges in the City are inspected regularly, and all roads are built to be able to carry any vehicle that can take the highway. Comment (floor): If a study was done about truck numbers you should study the bridges. If you have many trucks using the bridges they will get destroyed due to fatigue.
Comment (floor): With respect to the roads that have been removed from the truck route system, is there rationale for those roads being removed? I see Airport Road was removed. I have also noted that business improvement areas (BIAs) are located on the truck routes to improve their economies, but then residents get the trucks on their roads as a result. I would like to see Nebo Road removed from the truck route system. For a truck to turn from White Church Road onto Nebo Road it must move onto oncoming traffic and cross the line drawn on the road, that is not safe.
Comment (floor): There is a lack of vision at the provincial, federal, and municipal levels. There are trucks going through rural and residential roads that are not properly built. These roads are very narrow with big ditches on both sides. Truck traffic should not be on these roads, you are pushing truck traffic into areas where it shouldn’t be.
Comment (floor): I live in a century home at Nebo Road and Airport Road. There is a stop sign and every day I see cars flying through the stop sign without even yielding. If it becomes a truck route, trucks will break to come to a stop and the vibrations will ruin my home. There is a rail trail in the area that could be converted into a truck route. I put a lot of money into my home. Who will buy my house if I want to sell? No one wants to live on a truck route.
Comment (floor): I live on 7th Concession which is also called Safari Road. It doesn’t fit any of the level 1 criteria you mentioned. Farm equipment is often driven on this road. Farm vehicles are very wide and take up more than one lane, it doesn’t help that there is no shoulder on this road. Why is Safari Road designated a truck route? I see about 20 dump trucks every hour. The trucks can take alternate routes. We are farmers and we need to get our farm equipment around on this road. There is nothing located in the area that needs access by truck. Answer (project team): Safari Road connects to Highway 6 and Highway 8. Comment (floor): Why don’t the trucks take King’s Highway? It is only a little bit further off the road. There was no truck traffic here two years ago. There are shorter alternate routes. Due to the heavy truck traffic I have many issues moving my farm equipment around. When I am driving my
22 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
farm equipment down the road I have to wait to get to a driveway to pull over to let trucks through, this is dangerous and very time consuming.
Comment (floor): With respect to the board of road criteria – you use those criteria to decide whether to make a road a truck route, yes? You should also show criteria for eliminating roads from the truck route system. Currently you are only showing criteria for adding a road to the truck route system. Answer (project team): There are 1000s of kilometres of roads in Hamilton. The majority of them are not identified as truck routes. These criteria start with a blank map and identify the needs and the requirements of each area, which allows for roads to be added or removed. A road will not be a truck route if it doesn’t meet the criteria.
Question (floor): You show a “do nothing” alternative, but hasn’t something already been done? How can you have a do nothing alternative? It seems ridiculous. Will you turn around and leave everything as it is now? Answer (project team): We will consider all comments from tonight. We will not be able to make a decision until we evaluate all options and hear your feedback.
Comment (floor): I bought my house outside the City in preparation for my retirement. I live on Millgrove Side Road and I moved here to have peace and quiet when I retired. It isn’t difficult to solve the problem, just put up a sign that say “no trucks allowed” at both ends of the road.
Comment (floor): I am concerned that when we got that intersection light added trucks just powered on through without stopping. How will you fix the road? Will you remove more of our property to widen the road? Trucks are using Millgrove Side Road as a short cut. Yes you are hearing us but we have gone through this process before. Millgrove Side Road is not meant to be a truck route, it is a side road.
Comment (floor): I live on White Church Road and I don’t get my garbage picked up sometimes because City workers are afraid to cross the road. I lost a dog and a cat. My wife was clipped twice.
Comment (floor): I live on Millgrove Side Road – what about the bridge renovations I heard about?
Comment (floor): My neighbour on Millgrove Side Road doesn’t set his alarm clock because trucks wake him up at 5:30 am every day.
Comment (floor): Your first criteria should be safety. If that was your criteria you should remove trucks from all side roads.
Question (floor): Many roads are adjacent to creeks protected by local conservation authorities. How do you plan to get around widening these roads or renovating them? What about protected greenbelt lands? We are under the jurisdiction of Halton Conservation. What about flood zone protected areas?
Comment (floor): I live on Concession Road by Mountain Brow Road. There is a proposed transfer station for Nebo Road, and it is to operate 24 hours a day, 6 days a week. The Hamilton Transportation Master Plan also has proposed expansions on Nebo Road; all this information is
23 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
available online. There is more at play here than just truck routes. Kenilworth Avenue is also slated to be part of the light rail transit route, so how can it be a truck route? Answer (project team): We will have to look into the transfer station on Nebo Road. Comment (floor): If you, the public, have concerns about your road be sure to look at other policies that affect your road. You need to ask your questions to the City.
Comment (floor): I am from Nebo Road. How do you think people found out about this meeting? We went door to door and let people know about it; this should be the City’s job. You have a moral obligation to do that. You need to advertise these events properly.
Comment (floor): We are advocating for the removal of the Kenilworth access. People took the time to come to these meetings to advocate. You will have to apply some sort of finessing when you look at all the comments. How will you compromise with all our comments? Your process is qualitative. Answer (project team): We will make decisions based on all the information and comments available to us. Question (floor): Will you reward the people who came to these meetings by giving them rationale for the final decisions that include details as to why their road is to be a truck route?
Comment (floor): I see nothing about public health issues at this meeting. Trucks will affect our health; you should talk to the public health department. Answer (project team): At the Stone Church meeting held last week, public health staff was in attendance. Comment (floor): You need to talk about noise, and carcinogens. It is happening in our
communities. You should check carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Answer (project team): The City met with Clean Air Hamilton as part of this study.
Comment (floor): It looks like trucks are trying to take short cuts; they should just stay on the highway that is what they are meant for. We don’t want trucks. We don’t care about the issue of no sidewalks as much as we care about trucks driving on our roads.
Comment (floor): In the most recent issue of the Hamilton Spectator, they write that we will become a transportation gateway. The City wants to bring in more manufactures and retailers.
Comment (floor): Millgrove Side Road is very narrow. My culvert was torn off by a plow last year and no one has shown up to address the issue. Answer (project team): Please give us your address and we will look at it.
Comment (floor): On the website it states that the following roads will be expanded – Nebo Road, Upper Ottawa Road and others. These will be expanded up to Dickenson Road. Is this part of the long range plan? Is that true? What about transit on Upper Ottawa Street? Answer (project team): The project team cannot answer these questions at this time.
Comment (floor): Can we get the names of the people on Truck Route Sub-Committee? Answer (project team): Yes.
Comment (floor): With respect to the Kenilworth access – back in 2008 it was noted that the Red Hill Expressway was built to address the truck traffic on local residential streets, so why is
24 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Kenilworth Avenue still a truck route? There were some Council members who were against Kenilworth as a truck route. Answer (project team): If a road is noted on the display map as a truck route it is there because it met the criteria.
Comment (floor): All of these people have concerns about different roads. Why don’t you look at open areas and build quick highway routes there and keep trucks off our roads? That solution will cost you less than renovating all our roads.
Answer (project team): Council will see all your comments as part of a report.
Comment (floor): We should all write down our comments.
4 Next Steps
The project team’s next steps will include gathering and assessing feedback from the PICs to develop a draft Project File Report containing the Recommended Truck Route System and all public comments received to date. After feedback from the final round of PICs has been incorporated, the recommended plan will be taken to Council for endorsement. Since no schedule B or C Class EA projects were identified to date during this master plan process a Part II order would not be applicable. The public will still have a 30 day review period to provide additional comments on the recommendations. The public can further influence the outcome of this process by taking delegations to Public Works Committee. Once Council endorses the final plan, the City will update the applicable by-law and thus implement the preferred plan.
25 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX A
Blank Comment Form
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
COMMENT SHEET City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study
November – December 2009
Please provide specific comments or concerns about the City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study on this form or via the contact information listed below. –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Please return your comments this evening, or by December 31, 2009 via email, fax or post to:
Email: [email protected] Senior Project Manager, Traffic Planning and Phone: 905.546.2424 ext 7217 Community Services Website: www.hamilton.ca/publicworks Public Works (click on ‘Truck Route Study’ City of Hamilton 77 James Street North, Ste 320 Hamilton, Ontario L8R 2K3
Name (optional) Postal Code
Address City
Email Telephone
To fulfill Environmental Assessment Act requirements, we will maintain your comments on file for use during this Study and may include them in Study documentation. With the exception of personal information, all comment received will become part of the public record. Information will be collected in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX B
Submitted Comment Forms
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study SUBMITTED COMMENT FORMS
November 5, 2009
Comment Comments Book # 1 I visited this evening to gain insight as to the Truck Route Plan for the future East- West Waterdown TP. I am disappointed that the Truck Route MPS has not taken into consideration the impacts of the new WATMP East-West route on truck flow and routes. The WATMP East-West project team has still not acknowledged that the route will be a truck route and have not acknowledged the additional truck traffic it would attract and how it would affect its Noise Assessment Study that it published in Spring 2009. The East-West route study, due to be approved by Council February 2010, has underestimated the amount of trucks it will attract out to 2023. Please counsel the project team of the impact on traffic that will occur once the route is built, and also if Parkside Drive ends up closed at Highway 6. 2 The Waterdown Aldershot Master Transportation Plan project team is resigning the new proposed East-West Road capable of handling trucks. When we ask them if this road will be a truck route they say that is not their decision, it is up to the Truck Route Master Plan project team. Since this new East-West road does not yet exist the Truck Route Master Plan project team cannot designate it as a truck route. Catch 22. Meantime the noise levels in the East-West Study are based on minimal truck traffic which currently shows that noise mitigation is not required for any existing residents. But if this becomes a truck route, it will become noisier but there is nothing to require a new noise study be done to see if mitigation is required BUT even if it is required in either project team’s report, any future study will be based on the ambient noise levels on the new East-West road at the time the study is being done Æ not at the original ambient noise levels when there was no East-West road. How can this problem be addressed by either or both project teams? 3 I do not think it appropriate to make Dickenson Road East a “revised operational hours truck route”. This road’s construction will not handle a flow of heavy trucks even under a restricted timeframe. The speed limit is posted at 60 km and is not enforced and has not been properly enforced. The stop signs that are at Miles Road and French Road are not always effective as traffic will do a rolling stop and continue through the intersection. There are several operational farms and slow moving wide agricultural equipment along the Nebo Road and Upper James section of Dickenson Road. This section is also a main school bus route with a large number of small children. Residents exercise (i.e. bike, walk) along this road at all times throughout the year. Also, you noted that this section of road is a link between Binbrook and the airport, which is not entirely correct – White Church Road is more appropriate, please reconsider.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
November 12, 2009
Comment Comments Book # 1 NIMBY – well, trucks have to go some place, even if it is in my side yard – but let’s put them on roads that are suited for that type of traffic. 2 Concern: QEW to Hwy 20 entrance ramp to #20. As a citizen of Stoney Creek I have no protests to trans trucks and service vehicles using Hwy 20. As long as they are delivering goods on Hwy 20 (Lower or Upper), or in Elfrida, they should be allowed to do so. Any deliveries from QEW to Paramount Drive should be forced to take the Red Hill Expressway from QEW to Stone Church Road entrance. Speed limit should be imposed on trucks to 20 M.P.H. from QEW to Hwy 20 entrance to King and 20 Hwy. Then to 40 M.P.H on Upper Centennial Parkway to Elfrida. Impose stiffer fines for truckers using Engine Brakes in non-emergency. Braking and police spot checks on truck goods and fines for carrying wrong goods on wrong route. 3 Regarding the Truck Route Master Plan Study, I would like to make the following comments: First and foremost, we need trucks to supply the population with goods and supplies and keep the economy moving forward. It appears however, there are problems associated with trucks, some of which can be rectified by working with the truckers, the City and of course the province. As you can see from the articles attached (dated 1991) regarding the need for repairs on our roads and in this case Centennial Parkway, it is very important to have the repairs done in a timely manner to avoid complaints from the residents. The residents would like to have our quality of life improved, so that we can enjoy our homes. We, as residents have experienced and are still experiencing noise, vibrations and extremely loud trucks using our roadway. Thus, the following are suggestions that hopefully someone can put into action: An inspection Station should be put at the top of Centennial Parkway to check trucks using our road. The same for heavy used roads by truckers. Per above, the City should and must repair damaged roads in a timely manner. As I write this letter, I hear and feel trucks hitting uneven pavement and causing unnecessary noises and vibrations. Should we have to contact the appropriate Supervisor? (I have in the past and I will today once again). The Truckers Association should educate their drivers to be more considerate and understand the fact that people live on truck routes and we know firsthand when the truckers are very annoying by using Jake Brakes (as I hear one right now at 12:25 p.m. and the truck is traveling slowly). How would (they) the truckers like it if they lived on a truck route? As discussed, it is very difficult to enforce but we believe the only way to stop this unnecessary Jake Braking is to hit them in the wallet. Thank you for the opportunity of submitting our comments.
December 2, 2009
Comment Comments Book # 1 All routes pass through heavy residential areas that are zoned 60 and 50 km/h for speed. Also, these roads are not in 100% conditions for car and light truck traffic! Upper James Street, Highway 56 and Highway 53 are preferred routes for trucks. There
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
is no industry on Nebo Road, White Church etc. No truck traffic on your proposed route!!! 2 My adamant opposition to Tyneside Road being designated a truck route is not based on whimsy but on personal experience of truck traffic. Several summers ago, I called the traffic department to inquire and complain about heavy frequent truck traffic on the road. It lasted three to four weeks. Heavy, large trucks, full and empty, every twenty minutes, the thundering noise, the unacceptable speeds, prompt my adamancy. Our heavy traffic consists of milk trucks and school buses, very limited and scheduled, and heavy farm machinery. These are local necessity traffic. They are not on the road as a result of expedience. There are two major North- South highways built for heavy, frequent traffic, use them! Safety issues are significant. This is a narrow road with very narrow shoulders and steep ditches. People, animals, passenger traffic and mail delivery are seriously exposed to risk. 3 I have driven a fuel truck on and off for 15-20 years as well as owned and dispatched company trucks of all sizes. I would never drive any large truck or 18 wheelers up or down the Kenilworth mountain Access or dispatch a drive to do so. The turn halfway up is impossible to negotiate without crossing into the other lane. This also happens at the circle at the hill as the truck traffic turns onto the Mountain Brow Blvd going west. I have followed city buses up the Access and they are also unable to stay in their lane. With the new Red Hill Expressway Parkway completed there is no requirement to travel up or down the Kenilworth south of Main St. South of Main is all residential on both sides of the street. With the number of children playing on this section of Kenilworth, trucks should never be allowed on this access to the Mountain over to Upper Gage. Trips have been taken both ways to the retail and commercial areas on the Mountain. There are less traffic lights on the Red Hill and it is shorter than taking the Kenilworth and Mountain Brow Blvd. This is a great saving in fuel consumption, break repairs, tire replacements, driver fatigue and better for the environment. (Everyone wins). No trucks on Kenilworth! 4 We have lived on the Mountain Brow for many years and experienced many changes to the Kenilworth Access. We have waited many years for the new Red Hill Expressway. We have seen an amazing improvement in the regular traffic which travels in front of our home. Many travellers in cars realize that using the Red Hill Expressway helps cut down both pollution and wear and tear on their cars as it is a much faster route. For trucks, it would also be much more sensible to use the Red Hill Expressway route as they would only have to stop for 3 stop lights to go from the Burlington Street separation centre to the Mountain dump as opposed to the 12 stop lights they encounter using the Kenilworth Access route. Red Hill Expressway is a much safer route for heavy trucks because of the crumbling areas along the edge of the escarpment, where rocks could be shaken loose by trucks’ vibrations: Additionally an 18. Mountain Brow is not the most convenient access as Mountain Brow simply leads to a center of small services which do not require large trucks. The time is now to realize that this is a park land area. 5 As a physician and long standing resident of Conservation Hamilton for the past 23 years, I am very concerned about the significant pollution that the Truck Route Master Plan Study would expose our residents to and the potential effects on their health and well being. No Kenilworth truck route! 6 If the proposed portions of Nebo Road and Tyneside Road are being chosen as truck routes because there is no north/south truck route between provincial Hwy’s 6 and 56,
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
and because this will allow a legal alternative to trucks which at present are taking other north/south routes illegally, then I believe this is a poor reason. The problem above will not be solved by designating unsuitable roads as truck rotes. Although both Nebo Rd and Tyneside Rd look suitable on a map, there are many reasons why they are not. Firstly, both roads are unimproved – without concrete road bases and with springtime axle load limits. Secondly, both roads have narrow lanes (10’ wide on average) and in most places no shoulders. In many places there are deep ditches which start immediately at the edge of the road surface. Thirdly, in sections the roads have poor straight line visibility because of the rolling nature of the terrain (there has been no cut and fill work done). Fourthly, unlike most provincial highways which have reasonable house setbacks, many houses on Nebo Road and Tyneside were built too close to the road, making them vulnerable to noise, vibration and exhaust emissions. For the above reasons, I believe that Tyneside Road and Nebo Road are very poor choices for a truck route. Heavy truck traffic should stay on roads that were designed for them (i.e. provincial highways and 400 series highways). 7 I accept the argument that there needs to be a grid of truck routes and not just confined to the major freeway alternatives. However, Kenilworth Access is unsuitable due to the hairpin turns and car traffic through the Kenilworth Access. Mountain Brow traffic, and alternatives exist to connect trucks to the Ottawa Street Recycling Station. 8 Many years ago, Glanbrook Council decided Nebo Road was unsafe and not built for truck traffic. Since this decision, nothing has changed with the road other than an increase in car traffic with the completion of the Red Hill Creek Parkway. Is Hamilton willing and able to spend a great deal of money to make Nebo safe for truck traffic? As for a direct route to the airport, it will be no more direct than the current routes. Trucks should be using roads already built to accommodate them such as Upper James, Rymal Road and Hwy 56 not country roads such as Nebo Road. 9 The most compelling reroute, among many, to eliminate Kenilworth Access from the truck route is the simple fact that for trucks travelling to and from the south Mountain to or from the north end. The quickest, shortest route is to use the Red Hill Expressway. There are virtually no stops on this route, therefore reduced wear and tear, time travelled and pollution as well as ‘fuel used’. There are points along their route which could easily be determined, where it is shorter or quicker to use Kenilworth. Truck route regulations allow trucks to take this shorter or quicker route. All others should use Red Hill. It is that simple. 10 Having lived on Mountain Brow Blvd for 46 years we are used to traffic and fear that the big trucks should not use this access and Mountain Brow Blvd. It’s obvious that City Council is trying very hard to bring Hamilton back to its former beauty; it is to us, doing a great job! We are aware that trucks are necessary to our commercial viability however, residential areas should not be subjected to the bigger trucks; enforcement is necessary here. Good luck on your efforts. We love Hamilton. 11 1. With regard to the Kenilworth Access as a truck route, there was no consideration given to the fragility of the edge of the escarpment. 2. The police department did not recommend it be used as a truck route and the report mitigated them by saying that the police department approved. 3. There are adequate access routes for trucks through the city without relying on the Kenilworth Access. 4. The Kenilworth Access with its hairpin turns is unsuitable and unsafe for truck traffic.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
December 10, 2009
Comment Comments Book # 1 No truck route on Millgrove Side Road. No houses are protected for noise traffic as other surveys. To make the road safe for truck traffic most front yards will be gone to widen road or be torn down. Was a gravel road, that was tarred and chipped, the road does not support truck traffic as the road is suffering from “one way” truck traffic already. No sidewalks, no shoulder, deep ditches and reduced speed limit are al factors against keeping this road a truck route. River creeks, swamp land, conservation protected lands affected by noise and dust pollution. Unsafe conditions for all residents in this area. Unable to safely walk, bike or drive on this road. Summertime sees the road by Millgrove Ball Park reduced to one lane of traffic due to cars parked on the road, which causes a safety hazard. This road should not be a truck route at all! 2 Our specific concern is the amount of speeding trucks going by our home on Millgrove Side Road. Shaking our windows, the tremendous traffic load, noise, speed, no sidewalks, so we have to dodge trucks when walking, putting out garbage, waiting for school bus, shovelling driveway is very dangerous. I was nearly run down by a dump truck when putting out my garbage. They knocked down cable wires at the front of our house. They gear up the hill to get speed and then use loud breaks for stopping at Highway 6 lights. They awaken us at 5:30 am. They cause major dust, rattle our windows and we can’t sit on our front porch for peace and quiet in the summer. Our dream of a Bed & Breakfast in our home is on hold because of noise levels. We need to close windows in summer. Pollution of air – caused allergies to stir up. “Shocking and crazy”. 3 No truck route on Millgrove Side Road. Millgrove Side Road should not be considered a truck route. These are some reasons why: - No sidewalks - Children centre - Park for children - Community centre - Library (children use all these places) - Ball park and pavilion - General store - cemetery Children use Millgrove Side Road to go to the park and general store. This is a poor planning choice. Highway 6 has been widened to accommodate more traffic. Keep trucks on Highway 6 NOT on Millgrove Side Road. 4 P.A. system not available, projection screen not available, no information handouts, and safety and fire regulations are ignored at the public information centre (PIC) at Mountsberg Hall. This PIC is a fiasco, a farce – not enough parking, room seating, open space or time to review the information being displayed - 15 minutes in over crowded room. Was it published that there would be a presentation at 6:15 pm? City of Hamilton is not noted for good planning; this is another example. Where are the local Councillors (Ward 14 and 15)? Councillor Pasuta did show up. Meeting should be held over at a later date at a suitable location. Don’t use the “it’s on our website” excuse. Screen presentation not readable. The general public is denied the opportunity to review and digest the proposal and therefore cannot offer useful, intelligent input.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
5 This letter is in regards to proposed truck routes in the Millgrove area. We would like to express our opinions RE the use of Millgrove Side Road and Millgrove Road being used as a truck route as we are unable to attend the public meeting. The Millgrove Village and our roads were not made for heavy industrial traffic. We have two excellent highways in the area to accommodate heavy traffic and see no reason why Millgrove Road and Millgrove Side Road should even be considered as a truck route. I understand that the truckers in many cases are paid per load and mileage and therefore are looking for the fastest way to get to their destination, but our community and our families’ safety should not be jeopardized. We have no sidewalks, a very small shoulder, no street lighting and single lane traffic only. We have many young families in the area and on many occasions have witnessed them out for walks in carriages, strollers etc. Where can we walk??? No sidewalks, so we must use the roads. When you have a tractor trailer, dump truck etc. coming down these single lane roads and speeds in excessive of the 60 kph, it is very dangerous and unsafe practice. Our alternative is to move off the road and onto the shoulder or ditch. This is just an accident waiting to happen! When we moved to this area with our young children it was a quiet comfortable place to live, with trucks on this road we would never have considered living here, as well I am sure this has devalued our home! Please look at this issue carefully and have the trucks use the appropriate highways that are built for this type of traffic! 6 RE: NEBO Road South of Dickenson to Whitechurch Road First I would like to address this section of road using your Evaluation Methodology on page 24 of the Truck Route Master Plan. LINK: To Provincial Highway - this road does not directly lead to a provincial HWY. There is an existing route which can be taken via Hwy#53 then Hwy #6 or Hwy #56. Across Significant Natural Barrier- There is no barrier avoided by using this road. To Designated Truck Route in Adjacent Municipality - the trucks would need to connect to Tyneside Road and then Haldibrook Road in Haldimand. Haldibrook Road is a truck route in one direction (east) only. To Employment Area – I was not able to find the definition for employment area on the city web page but at this time I cannot see the need for trucks to travel anywhere along this route. There is no industry and in Binbrook there is a very small amount of commercial business. To Downtown, Sub-Regional Centre, Community Centre – Yes this could be taken to get to the Glanbrook Community Centre but for what purpose I am not sure. To Hospital, University, College – No To Airport, Rail, Hubs or Port – There is no need to take this road to access the airport since you have Hwy #6 as a direct route from Hwy #53 and eventually Dickenson Road. To Mineral Aggregate Resource Area, Landfill – None of these are at the end of Nebo. The trucks from the transfer station should be using the existing highways: Hwy #53 and Hwy #56 Next I would like to address this section of road from a logistical viewpoint. a) Any trucks coming up the Red Hill Expressway which are heading for a destination south of Mount Hope should be taking the Link to Hwy #6, the new proposed
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Dickenson Road or Hwy#53 to Binbrook. These roads are all wide enough and have a large shoulder which makes pedestrian traffic much safer. b) For the sake of the City funds it does not seem feasible that the money can be spent on upgrading this road to a standard for truck traffic. c) This road is presently just Tar and Chip; it is built on a base of solid clay. The amount of noise and vibration the residents will be exposed to is unacceptable. I am not exaggerating when I say that the pictures on our wall shake when trucks go by. The final topic I would like to address is safety. a) There are no sidewalks along this road and the shoulders are extremely narrow with ditches on either side. There are many children, seniors and especially cyclists using this road. When a truck passes there is little room for error. Let’s not create a situation where someone may get hurt. Please. b) There is a school at the intersection of Nebo Road and Whitechurch Road. This would need to be used by every truck. Again, we would be creating a situation which allows for no errors on everyone’s behalf, school bus drivers, vehicle drivers, truckers, pedestrians and cyclists. Please consider our suggestions and recommendations. This community is made up of long time residents as well as new comers who have chosen to move to this area for the country atmosphere and tranquility. We are part of the greenbelt which was another reason many of us chose this area. Please don’t ruin this. 7 Our concern is with trucks using Millgrove Side Road. 1.) Not all just a country road. It is roughly 4.7 km long. The last 1.7 km and certainly the 0.7 km section north of the 5th Concession is not a country road, it is a populated village initially “designed” for horse and buggy traffic. 2.) No sidewalks. There are maybe 41 metres of poor sidewalk on either side of the 5th Concession but only on the east side of the road it is so close to the road that any truck veering, careening, or sliding off the road. Would definitely hit any pedestrians. 3.) No shoulders. I walk from my home to the general store regularly. Many of the properties have lawns right up to the pavement, you either walk on the pavement or in the ditches. When I see the 2 opposing cars will pass by each other. 4.) Schools. There is 1 near HWY 5 and another just around the corner on 5th Concession while not on the side road, the children in the village walk along the side road to get to it. 5.) Library. People walk to it because it’s close by. The other perspective and maybe even more dangerous than walking at least to the trucks is the volume of cars that have to turn onto the road? 6.) Baseball Park. On the road with limited parking. Whenever there is a game at the park most of the attendees have to park on the road making the already narrow road, even narrower. Pedestrians (with no shoulder or sidewalks) have to weave around on the traffic side of the parked vehicles, onto the road. There is insufficient space between the cars on each side for a truck to safely travel. 7.) Road not Designed for Heavy Loads. This is really the town’s problem because the damage to the road is another mitigation cost. It will be a nuisance for the residents but poor repair may have the happy effect of discouraging truck use of the road or at least slow them down. 8.) Logical Alternative. HWY 6 is a large highway, roughly parallel to Millgrove Side Road. If trucks which are already on HWY 6 stay on it and have to end up somewhere west of the side road on HWY 5, their trip will be at the most 1 minute longer because
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
the side road is posted at 60 kph while HWY 6 allows 80 kph. Interested in the safety of pedestrian traffic on my road because my disability does not allow me to drive and therefore walking is my primary mode of local travel. I am copying Mrs. McCarthy, my councillor. Just so she’ll know of my concerns first hand. I’m sure she will be getting a copy or a brief of the final report. Perhaps I could be a conduit back into the neighbourhood if she wants to put some flesh and blood into the words. 8 1. I only heard about this meeting by word of mouth and confirmed this with Councillor McCarthy’s office. 2. McCarthy’s secretary indicated that she supported a particular alternative, yet she had not yet heard the concerns from this meeting. 3. The meeting was in an obscure location that was inadequate to hold all attendees or room for parking. 4. I am strongly opposed to either Millgrove Road or Millgrove Side Road being a designated truck route for the followings reasons: - both roads go through school zones - there are 2 day care centres with no sidewalks connecting to the library or park areas - a lot of residents like to walk including children on bikes, but the road shoulders are too narrow. This is a safety concern with any vehicles and worse with trucks. - both roads go through swamp areas. They are old gravel roads with a tar and stone topping. They are not capable of supporting heavy trucks. - these roads are an unnecessary short cut for trucks. 9 These are all the points that we oppose this road for a truck route: 1. First, and the most important of all, is the noise caused by the trucks. 2. Millgrove Side Road is a narrow road not a highway road, a residential road that has 2 schools and a park, where children are. Their safety is at risk. 3. The speed is not obeyed by the trucks. 4. The safety of pedestrians on the road is taken away since most of the road has no sidewalk or shoulder. 5. Save tax payers a lot of money by making the trucks go through Hwy #5 to Hwy #6, the way it was before this mess. 6. Our quality of life has been disrupted. Our country serenity and peacefulness is being destroyed. 10 I attended your meeting on December 10, 2009 and listened to all comments. I live on Millgrove Side Road for over 60 years. Truck speed is far too fast for this country road. Trucks go north okay and return south bound which should not be. The brush and creek that runs through my property is protected by Halton Conservation – wetlands. If a truck has an accident or broke down with fuel running into the creek that would be a disaster. There are no shoulders on the road to walk on. You almost have to get into the ditch so you’re not hit by a huge truck (Bell trucks, hoppers, dump trucks etc.). Roads structure is deplorable. We hope that you will take all these points, plus others who have written and emailed into consideration when you are structuring a new truck route. No need for these trucks to use Millgrove Side Road, unless for deliveries. 11 Of great concern to us and our community is the potential of converting Millgrove Side Road to a truck route. For the trucks, at best, the shortcut of Millgrove Side Road cuts off less than 5 minutes from the effective routes of Hwy #6 and Hwy #5. The minor benefit (of converting Millgrove Side Road to a truck route) to truckers comes at a great expense to the Millgrove community. The single lane community road – Millgrove Side Road is entirely suitable “as is” for local traffic. As trucks currently
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
come northbound on Millgrove Side Road (on what has evolved to a one-way truck route) the noise, congestion, and unsafe environment for pedestrians and cars is on great concern. We can no longer sit outside at the front of our house or have open windows on the street side because of this misery. The out of community truck traffic starts as early as 6:00 am. Added to this the vibration caused by heavy vehicles can be felt through the entire house – time will show the structural damage this is causing to our century home and to our neighbours’ home. In conclusion, we plead with you to consider the unnecessary disruption a truck route would cause to Millgrove and revert the decision of allowing non residential truck traffic on Millgrove Side Road. Thanks for your attention to this far reaching decision. 12 RE: Millgrove Side Road – Hwy 6 to Hwy 5 Millgrove Side Road runs through wetlands and over a bridge which crosses a creek. It is a built up residential area with and children and seniors. It has no sidewalks and no shoulders to walk on. Speed limit is 50 km and 60 km, but trucks travel 80 km and 90 km. Road was realigned in 1967 to remove stop at 4th Concession and was never designated as a truck route for the past 43 years. Women Institute of Millgrove were instrumental in getting a stop light erected at Hwy 6 and Millgrove Side Road for farmers to get farm machinery and slow moving vehicles and the school buses across 4 lanes of traffic on Hwy 6. Since 2005, large gravel trucks, tandem gravel trucks, and gravel trucks with pup trailers are now using Millgrove Side Road as a short cut to beat the lights at Hwy 5 and Hwy 6. They are traveling at a high rate of speed and hit every hole or dip in the road which shakes the ground and the houses along the road. The public library, community hall and community park are on the side road. The public school on the side road is in the process of expanding. This road is a designated bicycle route from Toronto to Dundas and beyond. Chunks of broken pavement from the edges of the road are laying at the edge and are hard to walk over. Truck traffic starts at 5:30 am with approximately 10 trucks in 40 minutes. 13 Concerns RE: 5th Concession Road West, Millgrove as a “Preferred Routing Designation”. 1. Major taxpayer expense for construction of Hwy #6 to Hwy #5 interchange, trucks should use it! 2. No sidewalks through village of Millgrove – trucks are dangerous on this narrow road for people walking at the side of it. 3. School zone – no place for trucks here! 4. Noise factor – new stop sign at Millgrove Road and Millgrove Side Road already has substantially increased braking and screeching noises of trucks and cars. 5. Houses situated close to the road – my house vibrates considerably with each passing heavy truck. The road isn’t constructed to carry a heavy truck bearing a heavy load. 6. We have suffered enough heavy truck traffic over the last 25 years – quarry traffic especially. We have lobbied over the years to no avail. Plus speedway and raceway traffic – take it somewhere else! 14 1. Millgrove Side Road is a substandard road, not built to withstand heavy truck traffic. 2. There are no sidewalks or shoulders. 3. Many seniors and children walk along this road. 4. A walking path was promised when northbound trucks were allowed to use Millgrove Side Road (we are still waiting). 5. Many southbound trucks are using Millgrove Side Road as a shortcut to Hwy #5 when they should be using Hwy #6 to get to Hwy #5.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
6. Hwy #6 and Hwy #5 are built to withstand truck traffic and there is little or no pedestrian usage. 7. Some of the heavy hopper trucks using Millgrove Side Road are so wide they extend over the centre line and encroach on the other lane of traffic. 8. This quiet residential area is being destroyed by noise including engine breaking. 9. When stop light located at Hwy #6 and Millgrove Side Road, the OPP, Ministry of Transportation and Regional Police all stated that this was the wrong location, but their advice was not heeded. The meeting held at Montsberg on December 10th was in a completely inappropriate location. It was too small, parking lot was not cleared of snow, standing room only, although we were advised Millgrove Community Centre was not available, it stood empty on that evening???
Additional Comments sent to the City of Hamilton
Dated: December 16, 2009
Comment Comments # I live on Millgrove Side Road between the 5th Concession and HWY 6.The last 2 years 1 the side road has become a very busy route. The side road has no shoulders or sidewalks to protect people and kids going to school or the office. Truckers do not obey speed limits and are using engine brakes for no reason other than speed to slow down at the 5th Con. The roads are in very bad condition from the heavy loads they carry. But trucks go both ways. The Millgrove Side Road is surrounded by wet lands and fear what would happen if a truck ended up there. They’re using Millgrove Side Road as a short cut, instead of 5th or 6th. I pay heavy taxes to live on the Side Road and I don’t need these trucks speeding up and down.
Dated: December 24, 2009
Comment Comments # 1 I have spoken with David Mitchell, councillor for ward 11 about the proposed changes to Dickenson Road and the surrounding area. These changes include transforming Dickenson Road into a Truck Route. We stumbled across the information on December 11th, 2009 through an article that was written in the Glanbrook Gazette. We were shocked to learn that all public meetings had already been held and that the residents, that will be directly affected, were not informed. Although there were articles posted about the truck route changes there was no mention of Dickenson Rd being directly affected in the articles. Now that the residents have become aware of the City’s proposal we are adamantly opposed to these changes for many reason, some of which will be outlined below: 1.)Dickenson Rd. is a commonly used cycling route – Trucks travelling at high speeds will put cyclist in direct danger. Trucks will not be able to safely pass these cyclists and collisions will occur. 2.) Agricultural Area – this area is used for farming and farmers use Dickenson Rd to move their farming equipment. These vehicles travel at very slow speeds and would be put in jeopardy by fast moving trucks.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
3.) Rail Trail/Walking Route – This is a high traffic walking area with residence from Hamilton and surrounding cities utilizing the rail trail. Dickenson Rd. intersects the rail trail and Dickenson is frequently crossed by pedestrians utilizing this natural trail which runs along the Niagara Green Belt. This is a natural area that the city should be trying to protect. 4.) Safety – Despite efforts the city may make to make the road safer, safety cannot be guaranteed when large transport trucks are brought into a quiet rural residential area. Families relocated into this country setting to give their children an opportunity to play freely outdoors. Children not only ride their bikes up the street, but have also become accustomed to playing on their property and can often be seen running onto Dickenson Rd to retrieve toys giving them a false sense of security when these trucks enter our residential neighbourhood. People regularly walk the length of Dickenson Rd often with their pets, off leash. With a city with such high obesity rates, I would imagine that City officials would be concerned with preserving these areas that are so widely used for outdoor activities. 5.) Agricultural Landscape – This road is populated by trees that would be destroyed if the city decides to move forward with the road changes. This area will be drastically altered and this is not acceptable to the residents. The city should be concerned with maintaining Agricultural areas and landscapes as opposed to destroying them. 6.) Property Value in the area – In recent years, the residents of Dickenson Rd have invested great amounts of money into both new home construction and interior renovation. These efforts were made in an attempt to increase their property value. The changes that the City has proposed will greatly devalue the investments these residents have made. These changes will greatly increase the noise factor, pollution levels, home vibration and rumbling, visual landscape and personal safety of the residents. The general public relocates to rural areas, pay more for housing, with the intension of escaping city pollution and noise and now the City is putting this in our front yards, giving us no alternatives. The residents of Dickenson Rd and surrounding area feel that they have not been given the opportunity to properly voice our concerns and complete opposition to these changes. Considering that the city will be directly affecting our lives in countless ways, we demand that we be given the opportunity to meet with the city officials in charge of this plan. We strongly feel that our questions and concerns have not been addressed and are requesting a town hall meeting prior to any further decisions being made. Please be advised that a petition signed by the residents of Dickenson Road and surrounding area has been filed with the City Clerk on December 24, 2009. (The petition can be found in Appendix E)
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Dated: December 29, 2009
Comment Comments # 1 1. Truck Route Master Plan Study could be more comprehensive by including input from: Public Health on environmental health and quality of life issues, the efficiency of using the Red Hill Valley Parkway and the link as an alternative to the Kenilworth Access, Hamilton Conservation Authority, and Niagara Escarpment Commission. 2. More consideration could be given to the different needs and concerns of citizens from various areas; for example, the escarpment should receive separate attention due to its unique structure and as part of the Bruce Trail. 3. The City of Hamilton’s plans and objectives for safety of pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists and the Public Health Dept’s plans to develop complete and healthy communities could be better reflected in the Master Plan by considering these issues. A portion of Mountain Brow Blvd. is part of the Bruce Trail. 4. The Truck Route Master Plan study appears to be industry oriented to favour economic factors over health and safety considerations. The association between air pollution and health is well documented in the scientific literature. 5. The Kenilworth Access is known a Hot Spot, an area of interest from a safety perspective with a high level of collision potential. 6. Lane width on Kenilworth Access does not safely allow large and medium trucks to navigate this route safely. Intersections in this area are not adequate for very large trucks. 7. Some consideration could be given to the uniqueness of the properties along Mountain Brow Blvd. If the city wishes to attract people to this area as a desirable place to live, increased truck traffic will lessen property values and reduce the appeal of this area. 8. The Concession BIA is concerned about increasing truck traffic and vehicular congestion reducing the appeal of this business area. 9. There is widespread support from the citizens of Kenilworth Ave., Mountain Brow Blvd, Concession St, Upper Ottawa for eliminating the Kenilworth Access as a route for large and medium trucks. This support is reflected in the number of citizens who have signed a petition to this effort. (The petition can be found in Appendix E) 10. The citizens of this area are also concerned about future city plans to develop an industrial park and a waste transfer station on the south east mountain without considering an alternative to Kenilworth Access for large and medium trucks. 11. The increased traffic on the Kenilworth Access due to growth on the south mountain, the development of an industrial park and waste transfer station and the redevelopment of the Henderson Hospital should be considered. Any truck traffic which can be diverted to the Red Hill Expressway will help to lessen traffic congestion in residential areas. A Truck Study done by the City of Hamilton on July 27 2009 on the Kenilworth Access identified that during a 24 hour period, 453 trucks used the Kenilworth Access, 68 of which were tractor trailers. 12. From an environmental and public health standpoint, reducing truck traffic would lessen pollution. The emissions from 1 truck equal that of 20 cars, so the impact is substantial. 13. The City should consider developing an educational plan to inform truckers and trucking companies of the considerable economic efficiencies of using the Red Hill Expressway rather than the Kenilworth Access when traveling from the downtown
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
north end to the south mountain. 14. Alternative 2 in the Master Truck Route Plan is the option that the residents of Kenilworth Ave, Mountain Brow, Concession St, and Upper Ottawa believe is the only alternative. 15. Quality of Life issues – The constant noise, the volume and speed of traffic, the vibrations generated, and the emissions from trucks all affect the quality of life of citizens in our community.
Red Hill Expressway vs. Kenilworth Access An economic case can be made for using Red Hill instead of Kenilworth when travelling from the south mountain area to Burlington St area. The following is an example of distance traveled, number of stops made and travel time between these two locations. Starting at Waste Management Centre at Upper Ottawa and Rymal Road and traveling north on Upper Ottawa, down Kenilworth and north on Kenilworth St to the Compost Centre on Burlington St: Distance: 21 km, Travel time: 21 minutes, Number of stops: 8
Compare this route to travel from the Compose Centre Burlington St, east on Burlington St to Red Hill Expressway, south on Red Hill Expressway to Dartnall Rd, Upper Ottawa St, to Waste Management Centre: Distance: 14.7 km, Travel time: 12 minutes, Number of stops: 1
The cost savings in time and distance traveled, fuel used, wear and tear on the vehicles, and reduction in pollution in the Upper Ottawa, Kenilworth Access and Kenilworth St is obvious and dramatic. It would be simple to calculate at what points along the Kenilworth Access route efficiencies would be gained by using Red Hill instead. Beyond these points, where it would be shorter and quicker to take the Kenilworth Access rather than the Red Hill Expressway, the current truck route regulations would apply, i.e. trucks are permitted to take the shortest route to their destination. The city should determine at what points on the Kenilworth Access route using Red Hill would represent a more efficient route. During presentations of the proposed truck route, it was not known or at least no identified that the Red Hill Expressway is a much more efficient route for trucks to take when t ravelling from the Burlington St area to the south mountain. In fact, during one presentation, the Kenilworth Access route was indicated to be the shorter route from downtown to the south Mountain. An education program to educate truck companies of this efficiency would be worthwhile.
Dated: December 30, 2009
Comment Comments # 1 We are 45 year residents of Nebo Road, at the corner of White Church Road and are very upset and disheartened that the City of Hamilton is proposing Nebo Road as a new truck route that will deteriorate our quality of life. Has the City of Hamilton not considered the safety of the residents and their children? Nebo Road is a narrow country road with very narrow shoulders and no sidewalks which makes it very unsafe for walking, there are load restrictions and it is currently “not a truck route” for those very reasons. The section between Airport Road and White Church Road is badly in need of repairs which haven’t been done in years. There
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
is definite safety concern for the children who attend Bell Stone School which is located at the corner of Nebo Road and White Church Road. Prior to “Nebo Road is NOT a Truck Route” enforcement, we had a constant stream of dump trucks – up to 200 or more per day, pass our house, emitting exhaust fumes, using their air brakes and gearing down to stop at the corner, that we felt the vibrations in our house. There has been 3-4 dump trucks, some with trailers, lined up in front of our house at the stop sign waiting to turn onto White Church Road. These trucks were hauling cement, gravel, asphalt and goods from businesses located at the north end of Nebo Road between Dickenson and Rymal and elsewhere. We are also aware that the property value of our homes will decrease considerably. We will not receive fair market value due to such a catastrophic decision. There is nothing good that can come from a rural road becoming a truck route. Not only is safety a major issue but also the pollution factor, noise and negative environmental effects, will become a huge problem for all residents and especially those who reside at intersections. Trucks cause road deterioration due to their loads and weight, they cause traffic accidents due to their speed and they cause noise pollution with the use of air brakes and more importantly, cause environmental hazards to our environment which the City of Hamilton is supposed to protect from harm. Nebo Road has become a very busy road with vehicular traffic. It is a rural road and is not designated to carry “truck traffic” on a daily and constant basis. We, the residents of Nebo Road are greatly opposed to this proposal and insist on the City of Hamilton to reconsider their plan.
Dated: January 6, 2010
A detailed comment document entitled "Comment Sheet - Public Submission" was submitted by Danusia Szpak and Robert Whitelaw. According to the document the position of the authors is as follows: “We want the Kenilworth Access, Concession Street to Mountain Brow Boulevard, and Upper Ottawa, removed from the Truck Route System”. The 160 page document covers the following topics: the Red Hill Valley Parkway; analysis of geological issues; the effects of traffic on public safety; noise and vibrations caused by truck traffic; heritage and history; the potential rapid transit line for the Kenilworth Access and Upper Ottawa; comments/criticisms of the process and Public Information Centres (PICs); and remarks about the Environmental Assessment (EA) Process. This document is on file with the City of Hamilton.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX C
Display Boards
Welcome
Truck Route Master Plan
Public Information Centre - Number 2
Fall 2009 Study Background and Objectives
Problem and Opportunity:
The City of Hamilton’s citizens are impacted by the current truck route network’s visual,,, vibration, enforcement and air quality issues. The City is undertaking this study in an effort to minimize these impacts while at the same time making goods movement more efficient and enforceable by addressing port, airport, through and local truck traffic.
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 2 Study Background and Objectives
• Hamilton is an important transportation centre with a major port, air cargo hub, road and rail routes which serve a busy transportation corridor
• Goods movement is a major part of the economy of the City of Hamilton
• Goods movements should occur in a way that o Maximizes road safety o Minimizes impact on the environment (air quality) o Affect s th e communit y ( noi se, vib rati on and vi sua l intrusion) as little as possible
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 3 Municipal Class EA Process • This project follows the guidelines of the Municipal Class EA Process o Public Consultation Throughout o Identify Problems and Opport unities o Generate Alternatives o Evaluate Alternatives o Make Recommendations
• No EA Class projects have been identified during the project to date.
• New EA projects may be triggered in the future, as additional information becomes available .
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 4 Process and Project History
Technical Consultation Stream 1 Stream 2 Truck Route Sub-Committee Meeting #1 Research and Policy Data Collection and Field Work Spring 2008
Stakeholder Orientation and Consultation Spring 2008 Stream 3 Preparation of Master Plan Public Information Centres – Round 1 Preliminary Results Spring 2008 Develop a Preliminary Recommended Truck Route System Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1 Spring 2008
Prepare Draft Report Truck Route Sub-Committee Meeting #2 Present to Truck Route Fall 2008 Sub-Committee
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 Prepare Final Report Including Revised Summer 2009 By-Law Schedule Present to Public Works Committee Meeting with HABIA Summer 2009
Present to City Council Truck Route Sub-Committee Meeting #3 Fall 2009
Public Information Centres – Round 2 Public 30 Day Review Period Preliminary Recommended Truck Route System Fall 2009
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 5 Truck Route Facts - 1
Legal Definition – City of Hamilton By-Law What is a truck ? • Heavy vehicles over 4500 kg registered weight • Large Combination Vehicles are not permitted Where can trucks go? • Signed, designated truck routes • Any road which is part of the shortest route from origin or destination to closest truck route Therefore, even roads that are not part of the truck route network will experience some legal truck traffic
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 6 Truck Route Facts - 2
• Truck routes have been,,, and should be, chosen based on a consideration and understanding of economic, environmental and social factors. This recognizes the needs/quality of life of local citizens and the needs of business and industry.
• Virtually all goods used in Hamilton are delivered by truck. Goods movement is thus key to the city’ s economy.
•With o r wi thout a tr uck r oute system, ttucsrucks will continue to travel Hamilton streets in roughly the same travel distances.
• Even if a street is not a designated, legal truck route, if there are businesses or industries, significant LEGAL truck travel will occur, as local deliveries are always permitted.
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 7 Truck Route Facts - 3
• Truck Route enforcement is conducted in accordance with the City's Strategic Road Safety Plan and vision.
• The truck rout e syst em must b e conti nuous. Th ere should be no dead ends.
• The truck route system should have a reasonable spacing. Too many designated routes would result in inconvenience to too many citizens and require upggyrades to too many roads. Too few routes, and trucks can essentially travel anywhere, since it becomes impossible to determine and enforce the shortest distance from formal truck routes to points of delivery and pickup.
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 8 Specific Concepts of Truck Route System Design/Changes
• Designing/revising a truck route system needs to consider through trucks versus trucks bound for more local destinations • All trucks will not be eliminated as designation changes to non-truck route • Deleting a truck route will often just transfer the traffic to adjacent truck routes • A minimum density of truck routes is required for a network to be enforceable • The denser the truck route network, the less overall travel – fewer emissions, less collision potential • There will be “unexpec te d ou tcomes ” o f removing links from the network
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 9 Signage
• The City of Hamilton uses a ‘Permissive’ signing system, as opposed to a ‘Restrictive’ system. This system requires far fewer signs and is more effective at guiding trucks through the City
• Special signage has been placed in areas of concern (e.g. Noise from Engine Brakes), or where frequent violations are likely
Permissive Restrictive Engine Brake
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 10 Results of Public and Stakeholder Consultation General Themes • Public Information Centres o Specific personal issues o Trucks have a negative impact on quality of life o Remove links from the network • Technical Advisory Committee o Trucks are essential to commerce o Eliminate through trips from within BIAs • Truck Route Sub-Committee o Requested consultation with Ward Councillors o Represented concerns of constituents • Clean Air Hamilton, Police, Road Safety o Efficient network o Logical grid o Distribute traffic • Ongoing Evaluations o Current PICs o Truck Route Sub-Committee to continue o Ongoing consultation with adjoining jurisdictions
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 11 Development of Truck Route Network Alternatives
In following the Municipal EA Process, three Truck Route Alternatives have been generated:
• Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing”
• Alternative 2 – Reduced Truck Route Network
• Alternative 3 – Preferred Truck Route Network
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 12 Alternatives Evaluation
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 13 Development of Truck Route Network Alternatives
Alternative 1 – “Do Nothing”
Existing No Changes Truck Route Truck Route Alternative 1 Network “Do Nothing”
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 14 Alternative 1
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 15 Alternative 1
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 16 Development of Truck Route Network Alternatives
Alterna tive 2 – RdReduce dTd Truc kRk Rou te NtNetwor k
Existing Publi c an d W ar d Truck Truck Councillor Input Route Route “Hot Spot List” Alternative Network PIC Input 2
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 17 Alternative 2
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 18 Alternative 2
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 19 Alternative 2 – Summary of Changes
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 20 Alternative 2 – Summary of Changes
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 21 Alternative 2 – Summary of Changes
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 22 Development of Truck Route Network Alternatives
Alternative 3 – Preferred Truck Route Network
Law Base Road Public/TAC Level 3 Network Input and Enforcement Follow Up and City Staff Analysis Investigations Input
Technical Evaluation of Level 1 Level 2 Truck Route Network Alternative 3 Analysis Demand and Analysis Connectivity
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 23 Three-Level Evaluation Methodology
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 24 Alternative 3
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 25 Alternative 3
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 26 Alternative 3 – Summary of Changes
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 27 Alternative 3 – Summary of Changes
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 28 Alternative 3 – Summary of Changes
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 29 Impacts of Alternatives on the Truck Route System
No Changes Manyyg Changes
EiExisti ng S ystem PfPreferred dAl Alternati ve Large Number of Sections Proposed for Removal from the Truck Route System
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 30 Next Steps • Public Provides Input: ☺ Speak to a representative at this public information centre Complete one of our feedback forms here today or by December 31st, 2009 Visit our website at www.hamilton.ca/traffic Click on “Truck Route Study” Or contact our staff: Gary Kirchknopf Senior Project Manager, Traffic Planning and Community Services Phone: 905-546-2424 x7217 Email: [email protected]
• Report with recommendations prepared • Repor t su bm itted t o Cit y Counc il • Public 30 Day Review Period
**Thank you for contributing to the City o f Hamilton’s future **
IBI Group with MRC Public Information Centre City of Hamilton – Truck Route Master Plan Fall 2009 31 CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX D
Participant List
Name Organization/Affiliation
November 5 – Hamilton Convention Centre, 1 Summer’s Lane, Hamilton
Andrew Palumbo Holcim (Canada) Inc. Bill Dobbe Bob Wilkins Ancaster BIA Cathy Johnson Dale Brown Ward 1 Council Office Dave Johnson Dawn Graham Strathcona Community Council Jay Lannin Jen Dawson Strathcona Community Council Karen Wilkins Ancaster BIA Kate Fraser Kathleen Moore North End Neighbours (NEN) Marg Ricci Peg Kelly Rick Breznik Steve Oliver Sylvia Renshaw City of Hamilton, Economic Development
November 12 – Stoney Creek Municipal Services Centre, 777 Highway 8, Stoney Creek
Adam Huycke Township of West Lincoln Cal DiFalco Fruitland Road Community Association Fred Pizzoferrato G. Beattie Grant Cook John Gec Mark Leban Mike Duffy Blair Blanchard Stapleton Real Estate Phil Drinkwater Roy Lyons Sam Clarke T. Young Tony Onufer Wayne Olayton
December 2 – Hamilton Church of God, 1338 Stone Church Road East
Brian S. Smith
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Name Organization/Affiliation D. Hoeflook Dan Rodrigues Hamilton Chamber Danusia Szpak Don Willard Eldon Tuuly Eric and Ronniw Dauber Anderson Water Systems F. D. Fraser Gord Earl Harry Andry Harvi and Chuck Wallace Jay Lannin Jerry and Lynne Smith Joanne and Erwin Mataitis Kate Fraser Liliana Mont Linda Godin City of Hamilton Public Health Lynne Earl Maria and Debra Maxwell Maria Castaldi Mary Bixby Maureen Andry N. Pegg Nick Pellegrino Paul Wharton Concession Street BIA R. and R. Mariolle Sandra Leja Shawn De Jacer Shawn MacKinnon Public Health Services Syd Francis Sylvia Renshaw City of Hamilton, Economic Development Tina Brajic Tom Jackson City Hall
December 10 – Mountsberg Hall, 2133 Centre Road
A. Regnerus Andy and Becky Galer Barbara McKenna Ben and Colleen Van Berkel Ben Hoeflaok Bill and Chris Verbeek Bill Hoffner Brian Montgomery Bruce Bainbridge Cathy and Paul Tuin
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Name Organization/Affiliation Cathy Weninger Chantal Berendl Charles LeClair Chris Weir Cindy and Randy Balzer Cliff and Mary Bramhill D. Allemang Danusia Szpak Davis Rollinsor Deborah Hoeflaok Dianne Cornish Flamborough Review Dino Rubli Don Watson Erwin and Jo-anne Mataitis Gary Tansley Gary Weldon Graham Flint FORCE Guy Jemlin Ian Dunlop Jason Bainbridge Jay Lannin Jim Giffen Judy and Phil Balzer Kate Fraser Ken and Joy Boyd Ken McKenna Kevin Wall Lori Brims Mark Smith Michel Ella Magee Nick Restarno Olga LeClair Palmer Neal Peter and Marion Paulik R. Ebert Ralph and Mariam Berry Robert Pasuta City of Hamilton, Councillor Ward 4 Rose Restarno Roy Lyons Russ Springate S. Renshaw City of Hamilton, Economic Decelopment Shirley Vaughan Susan Black Susan Fielding Councillor, Town of Puslinch T. Brajic Thelma and Peter Hayden
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Name Organization/Affiliation Tom Robinson Tony Onufer Tracey Robinson
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
APPENDIX E
Submitted Petitions
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Kenilworth Access Truck Route Petition
Background:
The Kenilworth Access is designated as a Full-Time Truck Route. Mountain Brow Blvd/Concession Street is also a Full-Time Truck Route between Upper Wentworth and the Kenilworth Access. This is covered under the City of Hamilton By-law No. 01-215.
Issue:
Heavy and medium truck traffic consisting of tanker trucks, double tanker trucks, dump trucks, etc. Utilize this stretch of road 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Specific Concerns that the Community has indentified include:
1. Recent and observed rock slides along the Kenilworth Access which may indicate erosion and other geological instability. 2. Safety for the greater community (pedestrians, cyclists, families, school buses, emergency vehicles, motorcycles tec.) is at risk with this traffic from Sam Lawrence Park to the Kenilworth Stairs. 3. Environmental issues such as noise, emissions, and visual impact from the sheer volume of traffic.
Maintaining the Kenilworth Access as a Truck Route could put this neighbourhood enjoyed by all Hamiltonians at risk.
Petition Statement (Fall 2009)
Under the current City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study, we the undersigned are in support of Alternative 2, removing Kenilworth Access from the Truck Route. Furthermore, we ask that Concession Street starting from Upper Wentworth to Mountain Brow Boulevard ending at the traffic circle, plus Upper Ottawa, be removed from the Truck Route.
Note: A total of 533 individuals signed the petition. Due to the confidential personal information contained in the petition, the names, signatures and addresses those the undersigned have been removed, and a copy of the petition is on file with the City of Hamilton.
CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2 MEETING SUMMARY
Dickenson Road Petition
We, the residents of Dickenson Road and surrounding area, want to register our opposition to the proposed truck route changes on Dickenson Road, as per Alternative 3 of the City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study.
Note: A total of 160 individuals signed the petition. Due to the confidential personal information contained in the petition, the names, signatures and addresses those the undersigned have been removed, and a copy of the petition is on file with the City of Hamilton.
IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
APPENDIX B
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
April 2010 1. Technical Advisory Committee: Cargo Holdings Inc. – Trans Care and McMaster Institute for Transportation & Logistics Clean Air Hamilton Cole Integrated Systems Dofasco Downtown Hamilton BIA E.D. Smith Earl Paddock Transportation Flamborough Chamber of Commerce FORCE - Friends of Rural Communities and the Environment Goodwill the Amity Group HABIA Hamilton Chamber of Commerce Hamilton International Airport Hamilton Police Services Hamilton Port Authority Hamilton Terminals Inc., a division of Fluke Transport HCC Henderson Hospital McMaster University McMaster University Medical Centre Ottawa Street BIA SNT St. Joseph's Hospital Stoney Creek Chamber of Commerce Transcare Logistics Corp. TRANSCARE LOGISTICS CORP. Transportation Club of Hamilton Transportation Committee of The Hamilton Chamber and Genesis Transportation US Steel Canada
2. List of Other contacted Agencies: Ancaster BIA Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians Bell Canada Brant County Burlington Detachment Canada Post Commercial Service Centre Canadian Center for Inland Waters, Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Canadian Geographical Names Database Canadian National Railway Canadian Pacific Railway Chronic Disease Prevention City of Burlington City of Cambridge City of Guelph CN Rail - Engineering & Environmental Services Cogeco Cable Inc - 950 Syscon Road Conservation Halton COSEWIC - Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Services County of Wellington De dwa da dehs nye’s Aboriginal Health Centre Department of Indian and Northern Affairs Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Environment Canada FORCE - Friends of Rural Communities and the Environment Grand River Conservation Authority Greater Toronto Transit Authority Haldimand County Hamilton Central Ambulance Communication Centre Hamilton Conservation Authority Hamilton District Catholic School Board Hamilton Executive Directors' Aboriginal Coalition Hamilton Health Sciences Hamilton Police Services Hamilton Port Authority Hamilton Utilities Corporation Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board Haudenosaunee Resource Centre Heritage & Libraries Branch Horizon Utilities Corporation Human Resources Development Canada Hydro One Networks, Inc. Imperial Oil Products & Chemical Division Industry Canada (Ontario Region) Integrated Policy & Planning Division, Ministry of Health & Long Term Care Lands and Trusts Services Env. Unit INAC McMaster University McMaster University Medical Centre Métis Women's Circle Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs Ministry of Agriculture and Food Ministry of Citizenship & Immigration Ministry of Community and Social Services Ministry of Culture Ministry of Natural Resources Ministry of Public Infrastructure Ministry of the Attorney General Ministry of the Environment Ministry of Training, Colleges & Universities Ministry of Transportation Mississaugas of New Credit First Nation Mohawk College Mountain Cablevision Municipal Affairs & Housing National Heritage Information Centre Niagara Escarpment Commission Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority Niagara Regional Police Service Ontario Federation of Indian Friendship Ontario Power Generation Ontario Secretariat of Aboriginal Affairs Ontario Trucking Association Region of Halton Region of Waterloo, Public Health Regional Municipality of Niagara Regional Municipality of Waterloo Safe Water Unit - Infectious Diseases Branch, Ministry of Health & Long Term Care Six Nations Lands and Resources South Mount Cable Ltd Southern Ontario Railway St. Joseph's Hospital Sun Canadian Pipeline The Chiefs of Ontario The Corporation of Haldimand County The Flatiron Building The Métis Nation of Ontario Town of Grimsby Town of Milton Township of North Dumfries Township of Puslinch Township of West Lincoln Traffic Office, Ministry of Transportation Trans Canada Pipelines Transport Canada - Environmental Programs Transport Canada - Ontario Region (PHE) Tremblay Building Union Gas Ltd. W.J. Deans Transportation
IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
APPENDIX C
LEVEL 1 ANALYSIS RESULTS
April 2010 Glanbrook/Airport - L1 Evaluation
Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality Carluke Rd Sawmill Rd to Glancaster Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Y White Church Rd Glancaster Rd to Trinity Church Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Binbrook Rd Trinity Church Rd to Westbrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Upper Centennial Py Ridge Rd to Rymal Rd Major Arterial Y Y Y Regional Road 56 Rymal Rd to Haldibrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Upper James St Rymal Rd to Highway 6 Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Trinity Rd Garner Rd to Sawmill Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Regional Road 20 Trinity Church Rd to Westbrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Sawmill Rd Trinity Rd to Carluke Rd Rural Arterial Y Fiddler's Green Rd Garner Rd to Carluke Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Y Butter Rd Fiddler's Green Rd to Highway 6 Rural Arterial Y Y Y Airport Rd Highway 6 to Upper James St Rural Arterial Y Y Y Glancaster Rd Airport Rd to White Church Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Glancaster Rd Garner Rd to Dickenson Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Dickenson Rd Glancaster Rd to Trinity Church Rd Rural Arterial Y Miles Rd Rymal Rd to Dickenson Rd Collector Nebo Rd Dickenson Rd to White Church Rd Rural Arterial Y Tyneside Rd White Church Rd to Haldibrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Trinity Church Rd Rymal Rd to White Church Rd Collector Y Woodburn Rd Rymal Rd to Binbrook Rd Rural Arterial Mud St RHVP to East Town Ln Rural Arterial Y Y Y Y Tapleytown Rd Ridge Rd to Rymal Rd Rural Arterial Y Ridge Rd Upper Centennial Py to Brand Rd Rural Arterial Y Blackheath Rd Hall Rd to Haldibrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Fifty Rd Ridge Rd to Reservoir Rd Major Arterial Y Eleventh Rd Ridge Rd to Mud St Rural Arterial Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Stoney Creek - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality Centennial Pkwy Barton St E to Ridge Rd Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Y Queenston Rd Nash Rd N to Kelson Ave Major Arterial Y Y Y King St E Gailmont Dr to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Y Grays Rd QEW to King St E Minor Arterial Y Barton St E Kenora Ave to Fifty Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y South Service Rd Grays Rd to Kelson Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Y Millen Rd S Service Rd to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Y Fruitland Rd N Service Rd to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Glover Rd (W Access Rds) S Service Rd to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Y Fifty Rd S Service Rd to Reservoir Rd Major Arterial Y Y New/Old Mountain Rd King St E to Ridge Rd Minor Arterial Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 East Hamilton/Port Area - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality Woodward Ave Eastport Dr to Rennie St Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Eastport Drive Woodward Ave to Extents Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Parkdale Ave N Burlington St to Lawrence Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Burlington St E Welllington St N to QEW Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Y Industrial Dr Burlington St E to Kenilworth Ave Major Arterial Y Y Kenilworth Ave Burlington St E to Sherman Access Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Gage Ave Burlington St E to Lawrence Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Ottawa St Main St E to Barton St E Major Arterial Y Y Ottawa St Barton St E to Burlington St E Minor Arterial Y Y Lawrence Rd Parkdale Ave S to Gage St S Minor Arterial Y Y King St E Main St. to Wellington Ave Major Arterial Y Y King St E Parkdale Ave S to Main St Minor Arterial Y Y Wellington St N Burlington St E to Hunter St E Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Y Victoria Ave N Hamilton Harbour to Hunter St E Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Y Wentworth St N Burlington St E to Charlton Ave E Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Sanford Ave Cumberland Ave to Barton St E Minor Arterial Y Y Birch Ave Burlington St E to Wilson St Minor Arterial Y Y Y Sherman Ave Main St E to Burlington St E Minor Arterial Y Y Y Cannon St E Sherman Ave to Wellington St N Minor Arterial Y Wilson St Wellington St N to Sherman Ave Minor Arterial Y Main St E Wellington St N to Queenston Rd Major Arterial Y Y Queenston Rd Maint St E to Parkdale Ave N Major Arterial Y Y Barton St E Wellington St N to Parkdale Ave N Minor Arterial Y Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Downtown Hamilton - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality Burlington St E Wellington St N to James St N Major Arterial Y Y Y James St Burlington St E to Aberdeen Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y John St Barton St to Arkledun Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Barton St E Wellington St to Queen St Minor Arterial Y Y King St Wellington St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Main St Wellington St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y Y Y Y York Blvd Hwy 403 to James St N Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Y Wilson St James St to Wellington St Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Cannon St York Blvd to Wellington St Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Dundurn St York Blvd to Main St Minor Arterial Y Y Y Queen St Barton St to Becket St Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Aberdeen Ave Locke St to Queen St Minor Arterial Y Y Y Charlton Ave Queen St to Wentworth St Major Arterial Y Herkimer St Queen St to James St Minor Arterial Y St Joseph's Dr James St to John St Minor Arterial Y Arkledun Ave John St to Jolley Cut Minor Arterial Y Y Y Clarence Access Hunter St to Upper James St Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 West Hamilton/Dundas - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality York Rd Hwy 6 to Olympic Dr Minor Arterial Y Y Olympic Dr York Rd to Cootes Dr Minor Arterial Y Y Y King St E Olympic Dr to Cootes Dr Major Arterial King St E/W Cootes Dr to Springhill Major Arterial Y Y Y Cootes Dr Main St W (Kings Hwy 2) to King St Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Dundas St Main St (Dundas) to Cootes Dr Major Arterial Y Governors Rd Binkley Rd to Main St (Dundas) Major Arterial Y Y Main St (Dundas) Governors Rd to King St Major Arterial Y Y Sydenham St King St W to Livingstone Dr Rural Arterial Y Y Y Osler Dr Governors Rd to Kings Hwy 2 Major Arterial Y Y Y Main St W (Kings Hwy 2) Wilson St E to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y Y King St W (Hamilton) Hwy 403 to Paradise Rd S Major Arterial Y Y Paradise Rd S King St W (Hamilton) to Main St W Major Arterial Y Y Wilson St E (Kings Hwy 2) Main St W (Kings Hwy 2) to Jerseyville Rd W Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Jerseyville Rd W Wilson St E to Meadowbrook Dr Minor Arterial Rousseaux St Wilson St E to Mohawk Rd Major Arterial Y Y Mohawk Rd Rousseaux St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y Y McNiven Rd Mohawk Rd to Golf Links Rd Minor Arterial Dundurn St Main St to Aberdeen Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Aberdeen Ave Locke St to Linwood Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Waterdown/East Flamborough - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality Dundas St Hwy 6 to Kerns Rd Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Campbellville Rd Hwy 6 to Millburough Line Rural Arterial Y Centre Rd Campbellville Rd to Parkside Dr Rural Arterial Y Hamilton St N Parkside Dr to Hamilton Rd 5 Minor Arterial Y Y Parkside Dr Hwy 6 to Evans Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Y Mill St S Hamilton Rd 5 to Mountain Brow Rd E Minor Arterial Y Y Y Y Mountain Brow Rd E Mill St S to King Rd Minor Arterial Sixth Concession Rd E Hwy 6 to Centre Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Carlisle Rd Hwy 6 to Millburough Line Rural Arterial Y Y Y Freelton Rd Hwy 6 to Eleventh Concession Rd E Rural Arterial Y Y Eleventh Concession Rd E Freelton Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Y Brock Rd Freelton Rd to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Y Hwy 8 Springhill to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Fifth Concession Rd W Middletown Rd to Brock Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Millgrove Rd Brock Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Y Millgrove Side Rd Hwy 6 to 5 Hwy W Rural Arterial Y Y Sydenham Rd 5 Hwy W to Livingstone Dr Rural Arterial Y Y Y Safari Rd Middletown Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Y Hwy 97 Middletown Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 West Flamorough - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality Cooper Rd Hwy 97 to Gore Rd Rural Arterial Y Hwy 97 Hamilton Boundary to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Kirkwall Rd Hwy 97 to Hwy 8 Rural Arterial Y Woodhill Rd Hwy 8 to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Safari Rd Hwy 8 to Middleton Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Old Hwy 8 Safari Rd to Seaton Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Sheffield Rd Safari Rd to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Y Hwy 8 Hwy 52 to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Rockton Bypass Rd Hwy 8 to Hwy 8 Rural Arterial Y Y Westover Rd Safari Rd to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 52 Hwy 5 to Jerseyville Rd Rural Arterial Y Hwy 5 Hamilton Boundary to Hwy 52 Rural Arterial Y Y Y Y 5th Concession Rd Westover Rd to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Lynden Rd Hwy 5 to Jerseyville Rd Rural Arterial Y Governors Rd Hamilton Boundary to Binkley Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Parkways Corridor - L1 Evaluation Link to Link to Link Across Link to Link to Downtown, Link to Mineral Arterial Road Provincial Designated Truck Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Employment Sub-Regional Centre, Aggregate Classification Highway or Route in Adjacent Rail Hubs, Port Natural Barrier Area Community Centre Resource Area Parkway Municipality King's Hwy 2 Colborne St E to Wilson St Rural Arterial Y Y Garner Rd W Wilson St W to Glancaster Rd Major Arterial Y Y Y Rymal Rd W Glancaster Rd to Pritchard Rd Major Arterial Y Y Jerseyville Rd W Misener Rd to Sunny Ridge Rd Collector Jerseyville Rd W Regional Hwy 52 to Wilson St E Rural Arterial Sunny Ridge Rd Jerseyville Rd to King's Hwy 2 Rural Arterial Y Regional Hwy 52 King's Hwy 2 to Jerseyville Rd W Rural Arterial Y Y Wilson St W King's Hwy 2 to Fiddler's Green Rd Major Arterial Y Y Y Fiddler's Green Rd Garner Rd to Jerseyville Rd Rural Arterial Y Y Y Southcote Rd Garner Rd to Golf Links Rd Rural Arterial Rousseaux Rd Wilson St to Lowden Ave Major Arterial Y Mohawk Rd Lowden Ave to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y Golf Links Rd Southcote Rd to Stone Church Rd Major Arterial Y Stone Church Rd Golf Links Rd to Pritchard Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Mohawk Rd Golf Links Rd to Mountain Brow Blvd Major Arterial Y Garth St Rymal Rd to Fennell Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Beckett Dr Garth St to Glenfern Ave Major Arterial Y Y Y W 5th St Rymal Rd to W Claremont Dr Minor Arterial Y Y James Mountain Rd W Claremont Dr to Inglewood Dr Major Arterial Y Y Upper James St Rymal Rd to Rosedene Ave Major Arterial Y Y Y Y Clarence Access Upper James St to Jackson St E Major Arterial Y Y Upper Wellington St Rymal Rd to Jolley Cut Minor Arterial Y Y Y Upper Wentworth St Rymal Rd to Concession St Minor Arterial Y Upper Sherman Ave Rymal Rd to Sherman Access Minor Arterial Y Y Upper Gage Ave Rymal Rd to Concession St Minor Arterial Y Upper Ottawa St Kilbride Rd to Concession St Minor Arterial Y Y Dartnell Rd Rymal Rd to Lincoln Alexander Pkwy Major Arterial Y Y Fennell Ave W Garth St to Mountain Brow Blvd Minor Arterial Y Y Mountain Brow Blvd Mud St to Upper Gage Ave Minor Arterial Y Y Concession St Upper Gage Ave to Upper Wellington St Minor Arterial Y Y Jolley Cut Concession St to Arkledun Ave Major Arterial Y Y Kenilworth Access Mountain Brow Blvd to Kenilworth Ave S Major Arterial Y Y King St E Parkdale Ave to Centennial Pkwy Minor Arterial Y Y Queenston Rd Parkdale Ave to Centennial Pkwy Major Arterial Y Y Barton St E Parkdale Ave to Centennial Pkwy Minor Arterial Y Y Y Centennial Pkwy N Barton St to QEW Major Arterial Y Y Y
- Include in L1 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
APPENDIX D
LEVEL 2 ANALYSIS RESULTS
April 2010 Glanbrook/Airport - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Carluke Rd Sawmill Rd to Glancaster Rd Rural Arterial Y White Church Rd Glancaster Rd to Highway 6 Rural Arterial Y White Church Rd Highway 6 to Trinity Church Rd Rural Arterial Binbrook Rd Trinity Church Rd to Regional Road 56 Rural Arterial Binbrook Rd Regional Road 56 to Westbrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Upper Centennial Py Ridge Rd to Rymal Rd Major Arterial Y Regional Road 56 Rymal Rd to Haldibrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Upper James St Rymal Rd to Highway 6 Major Arterial Y Trinity Rd Garner Rd to Sawmill Rd Rural Arterial Y Regional Road 20 Trinity Church Rd to Westbrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Sawmill Rd Trinity Rd to Carluke Rd Rural Arterial Y Fiddler's Green Rd Garner Rd to Carluke Rd Rural Arterial PT Butter Rd Fiddler's Green Rd to Highway 6 Rural Arterial PT Airport Rd Highway 6 to Upper James St Rural Arterial PT Glancaster Rd Airport Rd to White Church Rd Rural Arterial Glancaster Rd Garner Rd to Dickenson Rd Rural Arterial Dickenson Rd Glancaster Rd to Trinity Church Rd Rural Arterial Nebo Rd Dickenson Rd to White Church Rd Rural Arterial Tyneside Rd White Church Rd to Haldibrook Rd Rural Arterial Trinity Church Rd Rymal Rd to White Church Rd Collector Mud St RHVP to East Town Ln Rural Arterial Y Tapleytown Rd Ridge Rd to Rymal Rd Rural Arterial Y Ridge Rd Upper Centennial Py to Brand Rd Rural Arterial Y Blackheath Rd Hall Rd to Haldibrook Rd Rural Arterial Y Fifty Rd Ridge Rd to Reservoir Rd Major Arterial Eleventh Rd Ridge Rd to Mud St Rural Arterial Y Haldibrook Rd Regional Road 56 to 4th Concession Rd Collector Y Hall Rd Regional Road 56 to Blackheath Rd Collector Y Third Line Rd Haldibrook Rd to Westbrook Rd Collector Y
- Evaluated Explicitly Under L1 Analysis - Variance from Existing Truck Route Network PT - Part Time
Glanbrook/Airport - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area White Church Rd Highway 6 to Trinity Church Rd Minor Arterial Y Y Y Binbrook Rd Trinity Church Rd to Regional Road 56 Minor Arterial Y Y Y Haldibrook Rd Regional Road 56 to 4th Concession Rd Collector Hall Rd Regional Road 56 to Blackheath Rd Collector Y Third Line Rd Haldibrook Rd to Westbrook Rd Collector Y Y
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Stoney Creek - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Upper Centennial PkwyBarton St E to Ridge Rd Major Arterial Y Queenston Rd Nash Rd N to Kelson Ave Major Arterial Y Barton St E Kenora Ave to Fifty Rd Minor Arterial Y QEW Grays Rd to Kelson Ave Provincial Highway Y King St E Gailmont Dr to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial King St E Gailmont Dr to Upper Centennial Pkwy Minor Arterial PR Grays Rd QEW to Community Ave Minor Arterial PT Grays Rd Community Ave to Barton St Minor Arterial Y Grays Rd Barton St to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial PT South Service Rd Grays Rd to Kelson Ave Minor Arterial Y Millen Rd S Service Rd to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Millen Rd Frances Ave to Barton St E Minor Arterial PR Fruitland Rd N Service Rd to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Y Glover Rd (W Access Rds)S Service Rd to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Glover Rd (W Access Rds)Watershore Dr to Barton St E Minor Arterial PR Fifty Rd S Service Rd to Ridge Rd Major Arterial Fifty Rd N Service Rd to Queenston Rd Major Arterial PR New/Old Mountain Rd King St E to Ridge Rd Minor Arterial Arvin Ave Grays Rd to Jones Rd Industrial Collector Y Green Rd QEW to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Hilton Dr Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y North Service Rd Grays Rd to Kelson Ave Industrial Collector Y Seaman Ave/St Frances Ave to S Service Rd Industrial Collector Y Frances Ave Seaman Ave to Millen Rd Industrial Collector Y Belgraden Ave S Service Rd to Seaman St Industrial Collector Y Leaside Ave Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Dewitt Rd S Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Jones Rd S Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Sunnyhurst Ave Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Kenmore Ave Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Lewis Rd S Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Winona Rd (W Access SRd) Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Teal Ave S Service Rd to Garden Ave Industrial Collector Y Community Ave Grays Rd to Teal Ave Industrial Collector Y Garden Ave Pinelands Ave to Teal Ave Industrial Collector Y Pinelands Ave S Service Rd to Garden Ave Industrial Collector Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time PR -The part of the road with The truck route
Stoney Creek - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area Arvin Ave Grays Rd to Jones Rd Industrial Collector Y Green Rd QEW to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Hilton Dr Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y North Service Rd Grays Rd to Kelson Ave Industrial Collector Y Seaman Ave/St Frances Ave to S Service Rd Industrial Collector Y Frances Ave Seaman Ave to Millen Rd Industrial Collector Y Belgraden Ave S Service Rd to Seaman St Industrial Collector Y Leaside Ave Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Dewitt Rd S Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Jones Rd S Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Sunnyhurst Ave Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Kenmore Ave Arvin Ave to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Lewis Rd S Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Winona Rd (W Access SRd) Service Rd to Barton St E Industrial Collector Y Teal Ave S Service Rd to Garden Ave Industrial Collector Y Community Ave Grays Rd to Teal Ave Industrial Collector Y Garden Ave Pinelands Ave to Teal Ave Industrial Collector Y Pinelands Ave S Service Rd to Garden Ave Industrial Collector Y
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 East Hamilton/Port Area - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Woodward Ave Eastport Dr to Rennie St Minor Arterial Y Eastport Drive Woodward Ave to Extents Minor Arterial Y QEW Burlington St to Extents Provincial Highway Y Parkdale Ave N Burlington St to Lawrence Rd Minor Arterial Y Burlington St E Welllington St N to QEW Major Arterial Y Industrial Dr Burlington St E to Kenilworth Ave Major Arterial Y Kenilworth Ave Burlington St E to Sherman Access Major Arterial Y Gage Ave Burlington St E to Barton St Minor Arterial Y Gage Ave Barton St to Lawrence Rd Minor Arterial PT Ottawa St Burlington St E to King St Major Arterial Y Ottawa St King St to Lawrence Rd Minor Arterial PT Lawrence Rd Parkdale Ave S to Gage St S Minor Arterial PT King St E Parkdale Ave S to Main St Major Arterial Y King St E Main St to Wellington St N Minor Arterial Y Wellington St N Burlington St E to Hunter St E Major Arterial Y Victoria Ave N Hamilton Harbour to Hunter St E Collector Victoria Ave N Burlington St E to Hunter St E Minor Arterial PR Wentworth St N Burlington St E to Barton St Minor Arterial Y Wentworth St N Barton St to Cannon St Minor Arterial PT Wentworth St N Burlington St E to Main St E Minor Arterial Y Sanford Ave Cumberland Ave to Barton St E Minor Arterial Sanford Ave Main St E to Barton St E Minor Arterial PR Birch Ave Burlington St E to Barton St Minor Arterial Y Birch Ave Barton St to Cannon St Minor Arterial PT Sherman Ave Main St E to Burlington St E Minor Arterial Y Cannon St E Sherman Ave to Wellington St N Minor Arterial Y Wilson St Wellington St N to Sherman Ave Major Arterial Wilson St Wellington St N to Victoria Ave N Minor Arterial PR Main St E Wellington St N to Queenston Rd Minor Arterial Y Queenston Rd Main St E to Parkdale Ave N Major Arterial Y Barton St E Wellington St N to Parkdale Ave N Minor Arterial Y Ferrie St E Wellington St to Victoria Ave Industrial Collector Y Birge St Wellington St to Victoria Ave Industrial Collector Y Shaw St Victoria Ave to Wentworth St Industrial Collector Y Brant St Wentworth St to Sherman Ave Industrial Collector Y Biggar Ave Sherman Ave to Lottridge St Industrial Collector Y Lansdowne St Sherman Ave to Lottridge St Industrial Collector Y Lottridge St Barton St to Beach Rd Industrial Collector Y Birmingham St Burlington St E to Beach Rd Industrial Collector Y Beach Rd Lottridge St to Burlington St Industrial Collector Y Depew St Industrial Dr to Beach Rd Industrial Collector Y Dofasco Rdq Beach Rd to Kenilworth Ave Industrial Collector Y Strathearne Ave Brampton St to Hamilton Harbour Industrial Collector Y Brampton St Strathearne Ave to Woodward Ave Industrial Collector Y Windmere Rd Parkdale Ave to Woodward Ave Industrial Collector Y Beach Blvd Woodward Ave to Eastport Drive Industrial Collector Y Cochrane Ave Lawrence Rd to King St Industrial Collector PT Rennie St Parkdale Ave to Woodward Ave Industrial Collector Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time PR -The part of the road with The truck route
East Hamilton/Port Area - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area Ferrie St E Wellington St to Victoria Ave Industrial Collector Y Birge St Wellington St to Victoria Ave Industrial Collector Y Shaw St Victoria Ave to Wentworth St Industrial Collector Y Brant St Wentworth St to Sherman Ave Industrial Collector Y Biggar Ave Sherman Ave to Lottridge St Industrial Collector Y Lansdowne St Sherman Ave to Lottridge St Industrial Collector Y Lottridge St Barton St to Beach Rd Industrial Collector Y Birmingham St Burlington St E to Beach Rd Industrial Collector Y Beach Rd Lottridge St to Burlington St Industrial Collector Y Depew St Industrial Dr to Beach Rd Industrial Collector Y Dofasco Rdq Beach Rd to Kenilworth Ave Industrial Collector Y Strathearne Ave Brampton St to Hamilton Harbour Industrial Collector Y Brampton St Strathearne Ave to Woodward Ave Industrial Collector Y Windmere Rd Parkdale Ave to Woodward Ave Industrial Collector Y Beach Blvd Woodward Ave to Eastport Drive Industrial Collector Y Cochrane Ave Lawrence Rd to King St Industrial Collector Y Rennie St Parkdale Ave to Woodward Ave Industrial Collector Y
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Hamilton Downtown - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Burlington St E Wellington St N to James St N Minor Arterial Burlington St E Wellington St to Ferguson Ave Major Arterial PR James St Burlington St E to Aberdeen Ave Minor Arterial James St Main St to Aberdeen Ave Minor Arterial PT John St Barton St to Hunter St Minor Arterial Y John St Hunter St to Arkledun Ave Minor Arterial PT Barton St E Wellington St to Queen St Minor Arterial Y King St Wellington St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial King St Bay St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial PR Main St Wellington St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y York Blvd Hwy 403 to James St N Major Arterial Y Wilson St James St to Wellington St Minor Arterial Y Cannon St York Blvd to Wellington St Minor Arterial Y Dundurn St York Blvd to Aberdeen Ave Minor Arterial Dundurn St York Blvd to Chatham St Minor Arterial PR Queen St Barton St to Becket St Minor Arterial Queen St Barton St to Main St Minor Arterial PR Aberdeen Ave Longwood Rd S to James St N Minor Arterial Charlton Ave Queen St to Wentworth St Minor Arterial Herkimer St Queen St to James St Minor Arterial St Joseph's Dr James St to John St Minor Arterial PT Arkledun Ave John St to Jolley Cut Minor Arterial PT Hwy 403 Scenic Dr to Old Guelph Road Provincial Highway Y Clarence Access Hunter St to Upper James St Major Arterial Y Hunter St John St to Wellington St Collector Y Hunter St Bay St to John St Collector PT Yonge St James St to Clarence Access Collector PT Stinson St Wellington St to Victoria Ave Collector PT Wellington St S Hunter St to Stinson St Collector PT Ferguson Ave Burlington St to Dock Service Rd Collector Y Dock Service Rd Ferguson Ave to Catharine St Collector Y Bay St Stuart St W to Main St Collector Y Bay St Main St to Hunter St Minor Arterial PT MacNab St Cannon St to York Blvd Minor Arterial Y Caroline St Stuart St W to Barton St Collector Y Caroline St York Blvd to Main St Minor Arterial Y Hess St Stuart St W to Barton St Collector Y Stuart St W Bay St to Queen St Collector Y Chatham St Dundurn St to Fird St Collector Y Fird St Chatham St to Main St Collector Y Longwood Rd S Hwy 403 to Hwy 403 Collector Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time PR -The part of the road with The truck route
Hamilton Downtown - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area Hunter St Bay St to Wellington St Collector Y Yonge St James St to Clarence Access Collector Y Stinson St Wellington St to Victoria Ave Collector Y Wellington St S Hunter St to Stinson St Collector Y Ferguson Ave Burlington St to Dock Service Rd Collector Y Y Dock Service Rd Ferguson Ave to Catharine St Collector Y Y Bay St Stuart St W to Hunter St Collector Y Y MacNab St Cannon St to York Blvd Collector Y Caroline St Stuart St W to Barton St Collector Y Caroline St York Blvd to Main St Minor Arterial Y Hess St Stuart St W to Barton St Collector Y Stuart St W Bay St to Queen St Collector Y Chatham St Dundurn St to Fird St Collector Y Fird St Chatham St to Main St Collector Y Longwood Rd S Hwy 403 to Hwy 403 Collector Y
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 West Hamilton/Dundas - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Hwy 403 Lincoln M. Alexander Pkwy to Hwy 6 Provincial Highway Y Hwy 6 York Rd to Hwy 403 Provincial Highway Y York Rd Hwy 6 to Olympic Dr Minor Arterial Y Olympic Dr York Rd to Cootes Dr Minor Arterial Y King St E Olympic Dr to Cootes Dr Major Arterial King St E/W Cootes Dr to Springhill Major Arterial Y Cootes Dr Main St W (Kings Hwy 2) to King St Major Arterial Y Dundas St Main St (Dundas) to Cootes Dr Major Arterial Y Governors Rd Binkley Rd to Main St (Dundas) Major Arterial Y Main St (Dundas) Governors Rd to King St Major Arterial Y Sydenham St King St W to Livingstone Dr Rural Arterial PT Osler Dr Governors Rd to Kings Hwy 2 Major Arterial Y Main St W (Kings Hwy 2)Wilson St E to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y King St W (Hamilton) Hwy 403 to Paradise Rd S Major Arterial Y Paradise Rd S King St W (Hamilton) to Main St W Major Arterial Y Wilson St E (Kings HwyMain 2) St W (Kings Hwy 2) to Jerseyville Rd W Major Arterial Y Jerseyville Rd W Wilson St E to Meadowbrook Dr Minor Arterial Y Rousseaux St Wilson St E to Mohawk Rd Major Arterial Y Mohawk Rd Rousseaux St to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y McNiven Rd Mohawk Rd to Golf Links Rd Minor Arterial York Rd Olympic Dr to King St E (Dundas) Collector Y York St King St E (Dundas) to Main St (Dundas) Collector Y Mill St Head St to Market St S Collector Y Market St Mill St to King St (Dundas) Collector Y Wellington St S Mill St to King St (Dundas) Collector PT Hatt St Bond St to Main St (Dundas) Collector PT Longwood Rd S Main St W (Hamilton) to Hwy 403 Collector Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time PR -The part of the road with The truck route
West Hamilton/Dundas - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area York Rd Olympic Dr to King St E (Dundas) Collector Y York St King St E (Dundas) to Main St (Dundas) Collector Y Mill St Head St to Market St S Collector Y Market St Mill St to King St (Dundas) Collector Y Wellington St S Mill St to King St (Dundas) Collector Y Hatt St Bond St to Main St (Dundas) Collector Y Longwood Rd S Main St W (Hamilton) to Hwy 403 Collector Y
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Waterdown/East Flamborough - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Hwy 6 Campbellville Rd to York Rd Provincial Highway Y 5 Hwy W Middletown Rd to Hwy 6 Provincial Highway Y Hamilton Rd 5 Hwy 6 to Kerns Rd Major Arterial Y Mountsberg Rd Hwy 6 to Millburough Line Collector Y Centre Rd Mountsberg Rd to Parkside Dr Rural Arterial Y Hamilton St N Parkside Dr to Hamilton Rd 5 Minor Arterial Y Parkside Dr Hwy 6 to Evans Rd Minor Arterial Y Mill St S Hamilton Rd 5 to Mountain Brow Rd E Minor Arterial Mountain Brow Rd E Mill St S to King Rd Minor Arterial Sixth Concession Rd E Hwy 6 to Centre Rd Rural Arterial Y Carlisle Rd Hwy 6 to Millburough Line Rural Arterial Y Freelton Rd Hwy 6 to Eleventh Concession Rd E Rural Arterial Y Eleventh Concession RdFreelton E Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Brock Rd Freelton Rd to Hwy 8 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 8 Springhill to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Fifth Concession Rd W Middletown Rd to Brock Rd Rural Arterial Y Millgrove Rd Brock Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Millgrove Side Rd Hwy 6 to 5 Hwy W Rural Arterial Millgrove Side Rd Millgrove Rd to 5 Hwy W Rural Arterial PR Sydenham Rd 5 Hwy W to Livingstone Dr Rural Arterial PT Safari Rd Middletown Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 97 Middletown Rd to Hwy 6 Rural Arterial Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time PR -The part of the road with The truck route
Waterdown/East Flamborough - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 West Flamborough - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network Cooper Rd Hwy 97 to Gore Rd Rural Arterial Y Hwy 97 Hamilton Division Line to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Kirkwall Rd Hwy 97 to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Safari Rd Hwy 8 to Middleton Rd Rural Arterial Y Old Hwy 8 Safari Rd to Seaton Rd Rural Arterial Y Sheffield Rd Safari Rd to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 8 Hamilton Division Line to Hwy 52 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 8 Hwy 52 to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Rockton Bypass Rd Hwy 8 to Hwy 8 Rural Arterial Westover Rd Safari Rd to Hwy 5 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 52 Hwy 5 to Jerseyville Rd Rural Arterial Y Hwy 5 Hamilton Division Line to Hwy 52 Rural Arterial Y Hwy 5 Hwy 52 to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y 5th Conc Rd Westover Rd to Middletown Rd Rural Arterial Y Lynden Rd Hwy 5 to Jerseyville Rd Rural Arterial Y Governors Rd Hamilton Division Line to Binkley Rd Rural Arterial Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time
East Flamborough - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 Parkways Corridor - L2 Evaluation: Identification of Variances Road Part of Existing Truck Main Road Extents Classification Route Network King's Hwy 2 Colborne St E to Regional Hwy 52 Rural Arterial Y King's Hwy 2 Regional Hwy 52 to Wilson St W Rural Arterial Y Garner Rd W Wilson St W to Fiddler's Green Rd Major Arterial Y Garner Rd E Fiddler's Green Rd to Glancaster Rd Major Arterial Y Rymal Rd W Glancaster Rd to Upper James St Major Arterial Y Rymal Rd E Upper James St to Pritchard Rd Major Arterial Y Hwy 403 Hamilton Division Line to Lincoln Alexander Pkwy Provincial Highway Y Jerseyville Rd W Misener Rd to Sunny Ridge Rd Collector Y Jerseyville Rd W Regional Hwy 52 to Wilson St E Rural Arterial Y Regional Hwy 52 King's Hwy 2 to Jerseyville Rd W Rural Arterial Y Wilson St W King's Hwy 2 to Fiddler's Green Rd Major Arterial Y Sunny Ridge Rd Jerseyville Rd to King's Hwy 2 Rural Arterial Y Fiddler's Green Rd Garner Rd to Jerseyville Rd Rural Arterial Y Hwy 6 Bypass Hwy 6 to Hwy 403 Provincial Highway Y Southcote Rd Garner Rd to Mohawk Rd Rural Arterial Rousseaux Rd Wilson St to Lowden Ave Major Arterial Y Mohawk Rd Lowden Ave to Hwy 403 Major Arterial Y Golf Links Rd Southcote Rd to Stone Church Rd Major Arterial Stone Church Rd Golf Links Rd to Pritchard Rd Minor Arterial Mohawk Rd Gold Links Rd to Upper James St Major Arterial PT Mohawk Rd Upper James St to Mountain Brow Blvd Major Arterial Y Garth St Rymal Rd to Mohawk Rd Minor Arterial Garth St Mohawk Rd to Fennell Ave Minor Arterial PT Beckett Dr Garth St to Glenfern Ave Major Arterial W 5th St Rymal Rd to W Claremont Dr Minor Arterial James Mountain Rd W Claremont Dr to Inglewood Dr Major Arterial Upper James St Rymal Rd to Rosedene Ave Major Arterial Y Clarence Access Upper James St to Jackson St E Major Arterial Y Upper Wellington St Rymal Rd to Mohawk Rd Minor Arterial Upper Wellington St Mohawk Rd to Fennell Ave Minor Arterial Y Upper Wellington St Fennel Ave to Jolley Cut Minor Arterial PT Upper Wentworth St Rymal Rd to Concession St Minor Arterial Y Upper Sherman Ave Rymal Rd to Mohawk Rd Minor Arterial Upper Sherman Ave Mohawk Rd to Concession St Minor Arterial Y Upper Gage Ave Rymal Rd to Concession St Minor Arterial Upper Ottawa St Kilbride Rd to Stone Church Rd Minor Arterial Y Upper Ottawa St Stone Church Rd to Mohawk Rd Minor Arterial PT Upper Ottawa St Mohawk Rd to Concession St Major Arterial Y Dartnell Rd Rymal Rd to Lincoln Alexander Pkwy Major Arterial Y Lincoln Alexander PkwyHwy 403 to Red Hill Valley Pkwy Parkway Y Red Hill Valey Pkwy Lincoln Alexander Pkwy to QEW Parkway Fennell Ave W Garth St to Upper James St Minor Arterial PT Fennell Ave W Upper James St to Mountain Brow Blvd Minor Arterial Y Mountain Brow Blvd Mud St to Upper Gage Ave Minor Arterial Concession St Upper Gage Ave to Upper Wellington St Minor Arterial Y Jolley Cut Concession St to Arkledun Ave Major Arterial PT Kenilworth Access Mountain Brow Blvd to Kenilworth Ave S Major Arterial Y King St E Parkdale Ave to Centennial Pkwy Minor Arterial Y Queenston Rd Parkdale Ave to Centennial Pkwy Major Arterial Y Barton St E Parkdale Ave to Centennial Pkwy Minor Arterial Y Centennial Pkwy N Barton St to QEW Major Arterial Y Grays Rd Hwy 8 to Barton St E Minor Arterial PT Grays Rd Barton St to Community Ave Minor Arterial Y Grays Rd Community Ave to QEW Minor Arterial PT QEW Woodward Ave to Centennial Pkwy Parkway Y
- L1 System - Variance from L1 System PT - Part Time
Parkways Corridor - L2 Evaluation: Application of L1 Criteria to Variances Link Across Link to Designated Truck Link to Link to Downtown, Sub- Link to Mineral Road Link to Provincial Link to Airport, Main Road Extents Significant Natural Route in Adjacent Employment Regional Centre, Aggregate Resource Classification Highway or Parkway Rail Hubs, Port Barrier Municipality Area Community Centre Area Kilbride Rd Upper Ottawa St to Limits Industrial Collector
- Include in L2 System
J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\Reference Documents\6 - Truck Route Maps and L1-L2 Analysis Tables\TTW_level_1_analysis_2008-12-09 4/15/2010 IBI G RO UP FINAL REPORT City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY
APPENDIX E
CITY OF HAMILTON BY-LAW AND SCHEDULES
April 2010 Schedule 27 (Truck Routes) Road Section From To Times Community 1 Community 2
Airport Access Road Airport Road Highway 6 Anytime A Carluke Road Sawmill Road White Church Road Anytime A G Fiddler's Green Road Carluke Road Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime A Garner Road Rymal Road Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime A H Governor's Road Main Street (Dundas) west Hamilton boundary Anytime A D Highway 52 Highway 5 Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime A F Jerseyville Road Sunny Ridge Road west Hamilton boundary Anytime A Lynden Road Jerseyville Road Highway 5 West Anytime A F Mohawk Road Lincoln Alexander Parkway Rousseaux Street Anytime A Rousseaux Street Mohawk Road Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime A Sawmill Road Carluke Road Trinity Road Anytime A Sunny Ridge Road Jerseyville Road Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime A Trinity Road Sawmill Road Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime A Wilson Street (Ancaster) Main Street west Hamilton boundary Anytime A
Cootes Drive King Street (Dundas) Main Street Anytime D H Dundas Street Cootes Drive Main Street (Dundas) Anytime D Hatt Street York Road west limit of Hatt Street 7am - 7pm D King Street (Dundas) Cootes Drive Highway 8 Anytime D F Main Street (Dundas) King Street (Dundas) Osler Drive Anytime D Market Street (Dundas) King Street (Dundas) Mill Street (Dundas) Anytime D Mill Street (Dundas) Market Street (Dundas) west limit of Mill Street Anytime D Ogilvie Street Governor's Road King Street (Dundas) Anytime D Olympic Drive Cootes Drive York Road Anytime D Osler Drive Main Street (Dundas) Main Street West Anytime D H Sydenham Road Highway 5 King Street (Dundas) 7am - 7pm D F Wellington Street (Dundas) King Street (Dundas) Mill Street (Dundas) 7am - 7pm D York Road Highway 6 Olympic Drive Anytime D York Road Hatt Street King Street (Dundas) Anytime D
Brock Road Freelton Road Highway 8 Anytime F Campbellville Road Centre Road Highway 6 Anytime F Carlisle Road north Hamilton boundary Highway 6 Anytime F Centre Road Campbellville Road Parkside Drive Anytime F Concession 4 West Sheffield Road east int. Sheffield Road west int. Anytime F Concession 6 East Centre Road Highway 6 Anytime F Cooper Road north Hamilton boundary Regional Road 97 Anytime F Evans Road Highway 5 Parkside Drive Anytime F Freelton Road Highway 6 north intersection Highway 6 south intersection Anytime F Gore Road Cooper Road County Road 35 (Wellington) Anytime F Hamilton Street Centre Road Parkside Drive Anytime F Highway 5 Highway 6 north intersection north Hamilton boundary Anytime F Highway 5 Highway 8 west Hamilton boundary Anytime F Highway 8 King Street (Dundas) Highway 5 Anytime F D Kirkwall Road Highway 8 Regional Road 97 Anytime F Millgrove Road (Concession 5) Brock Road Westover Road Anytime F Old Highway 8 (Rockton) Highway 8 east intersection Highway 8 west intersection Anytime F Old Highway 8 (Sheffield) Highway 8 Safari Road Anytime F Parkside Drive Evans Road Highway 6 Anytime F Regional Road 97 Highway 6 west Hamilton boundary Anytime F Safari Road Highway 6 Highway 8 Anytime F Sheffield Road Concession 4 West Highway 5 Anytime F Sheffield Road Concession 4 West Old Highway 8 Anytime F Sheffield Road Old Highway 8 Safari Road Anytime F Westover Road Highway 5 Safari Road Anytime F Woodhill Road Highway 5 Highway 8 Anytime F
Binbrook Road east Hamilton boundary White Church Road Anytime G Blackheath Road Hall Road south Hamilton boundary Anytime G Haldibrook Road Highway 56 south Hamilton boundary Anytime G Hall Road Blackheath Road Regional Road 56 Anytime G Regional 9A Road east Hamilton boundary south Hamilton boundary Anytime G Regional Road 20 east Hamilton boundary Upper Centennial Parkway Anytime G Regional Road 56 south Hamilton boundary Upper Centennial Parkway Anytime G White Church Road Binbrook Road Carluke Road Anytime G A
Arkledun Avenue John Street Jolley Cut 7am - 7pm H Arrowsmith Road Centennial Parkway Bancroft Street Anytime H Bancroft Street Arrowsmith Road Nash Road Anytime H Barton Street Fifty Road Wentworth Street Anytime H SC Bay Street Hunter Street Main Street 7am - 7pm H Schedule 27 (Truck Routes) Road Section From To Times Community 1 Community 2 Bay Street Main Street Stuart Street Anytime H Beach Boulevard Eastport Drive north Hamilton boundary Anytime H Beach Boulevard QEW Ramp Woodward Avenue Anytime H Beach Road Burlington Street Lottridge Street Anytime H Biggar Avenue Lottridge Street Sherman Avenue Anytime H Birch Avenue Burlington Street Cannon Street Anytime H Birge Street Victoria Avenue Wellington Street Anytime H Birmingham Street Beach Road Industrial Drive Anytime H Brampton Street Kenora Avenue Nash Road Anytime H Brampton Street Strathearne Avenue Woodward Avenue Anytime H Brant Street Sherman Avenue Wentworth Street Anytime H Brockley Drive Barton Street Milburn Road Anytime H Burland Crescent Parkdale Avenue north int. Parkdale Avenue south int. Anytime H Burlington Street QEW Wellington Street Anytime H Cannon Street Queen Street Sherman Avenue Anytime H Cascade Street Covington Street Lake Avenue Anytime H Centennial Parkway QEW Upper Centennial Parkway Anytime H Chatham Street Dundurn Street Frid Street Anytime H Claremont Access Main Street Upper James Street Anytime H Community Avenue Grays Road Teal Avenue Anytime H SC Concession Street Upper Ottawa Street Upper Wentworth Street Anytime H Concession Street Upper Wellington Street Upper Wentworth Street 7am - 7pm H Covington Street Barton Street Cascade Street Anytime H Dartnall Road Lincoln Alexander Parkway Rymal Road Anytime H Depew Street Beach Road Industrial Drive Anytime H Dundurn Street Chatham Street York Boulevard Anytime H Eastport Drive Beach Boulevard Woodward Avenue Anytime H Fennell Avenue Upper James Street Upper Ottawa Street Anytime H Ferrie Street Victoria Avenue Wellington Street Anytime H Frid Street Chatham Street Main Street Anytime H Gage Avenue Beach Road Industrial Drive Anytime H Garth Street Mohawk Road Rymal Road 7am - 7pm H Grays Road Barton Street Community Avenue Anytime H SC Grays Road Community Avenue Frances Avenue 7am - 7pm H SC Hunter Street Bay Street John Street 7am - 7pm H Hunter Street John Street Wellington Street Anytime H Industrial Drive east limit west limit Anytime H James Street Main Street St. Joseph's Drive 7am - 7pm H John Street Cannon Street Hunter Street Anytime H John Street Hunter Street Jolley Cut 7am - 7pm H Jolley Cut north limit south limit 7am - 7pm H Kenilworth Access north limit south limit Anytime H Kenilworth Avenue Burlington Street Kenilworth Access Anytime H Kenora Avenue Barton Street Brampton Street Anytime H Kilbride Road Rymal Road south limit Anytime H King Street Centennial Parkway Wellington Street Anytime H King Street Paradise Road Queen Street Anytime H Lake Avenue Barton Street South Service Road Anytime H Lanark Street South Service Road Warrington Street Anytime H Lansdowne Street Lottridge Street Sherman Avenue Anytime H Lincoln Alexander Parkway Highway 403 Red Hill Valley Parkway Anytime H Longwood Road Aberdeen Avenue Main Street Anytime H Lottridge Street Barton Street Beach Road Anytime H MacNab Street Cannon Street York Boulevard Anytime H Main Street Queenston Road Wilson Street (Ancaster) Anytime H A Milburn Road Brockley Drive Grays Road Anytime h Mohawk Road Upper James Street Upper Ottawa Street Anytime H Mohawk Road Lincoln Alexander Parkway Upper James Street 7am - 7pm H A Mountain Brow Boulevard Kenilworth Access Upper Ottawa Street Anytime H Nash Road Barton Street Brampton Street Anytime H North Service Road east Hamilton boundary Centennial Parkway Anytime H SC Ottawa Street Industrial Drive King Street Anytime H Paradise Road King Street Main Street Anytime H Parkdale Avenue Burlington Street Queenston Road Anytime H Pritchard Road Rymal Road Stone Church Road Anytime H Queen Street Main Street Stuart Street Anytime H Queenston Road Highway 8 Main Street Anytime H Red Hill Valley Parkway Lincoln Alexander Parkway QEW Anytime H Rennie Street Parkdale Avenue Woodward Avenue Anytime H Rymal Road Garner Road Upper Centennial Parkway Anytime H SC Sanford Avenue Barton Street Main Street Anytime H Shaw Street Victoria Avenue Wentworth Street Anytime H Sherman Avenue Burlington Street Main Street Anytime H South Service Road east Hamilton boundary Centennial Parkway Anytime H SC St. Joseph's Drive James Street John Street 7am - 7pm H Stinson Street Victoria Avenue Wellington Street 7am - 7pm H Stone Church Road ramps to Red Hill Valley Pkwy Upper Gage Avenue Anytime H SC Strathearne Avenue Brampton Street north limit Anytime H Schedule 27 (Truck Routes) Road Section From To Times Community 1 Community 2 Stuart Street Bay Street Queen Street Anytime H Upper Gage Avenue Concession Street Rymal Road Anytime H Upper James Street Claremont Access Highway 6 Anytime H G Upper Ottawa Street Mohawk Road Stone Church Road 7am - 7pm H Upper Ottawa Street Mohawk Road Mountain Brow Boulevard Anytime H Upper Ottawa Street Rymal Road Stone Church Road Anytime H Upper Sherman Avenue Concession Street Mohawk Road Anytime H Upper Wellington Street Fennell Avenue Mohawk Road Anytime H Upper Wellington Street Concession Street Fennell Avenue 7am - 7pm H Upper Wentworth Street Concession Street Rymal Road Anytime H Victoria Avenue Claremont Access Young Street 7am - 7pm H Victoria Avenue Burlington Street Main Street Anytime H Warrington Street Lake Avenue South Service Road Anytime H Wellington Street Burlington Street Main Street Anytime H Wellington Street Claremont Access Young Street 7am - 7pm H Wentworth Street Burlington Street Main Street Anytime H Wilson Street Victoria Avenue York Boulevard Anytime H Windermere Road north limit Parkdale Avenue Anytime H Woodward Avenue Barton Street Eastport Drive Anytime H York Boulevard north Hamilton boundary Wilson Street Anytime H Young Street James Street Victoria Street 7am - 7pm H
Arvin Avenue Grays Road Jones Road Anytime SC H Belgraden Avenue Seaman Avenue South Service Road Anytime SC Commerce Court Seaman Avenue end Anytime SC Constellation Drive Lewis Road end Anytime SC DeWitt Road Barton Street South Service Road Anytime SC Dosco Drive Arvin Avenue south limit Anytime SC Drakes Avenue Frances Avenue North Service Road 7am - 7pm SC Eleventh Road East Mud Street Ridge Road Anytime SC Fifty Road Highway 8 North Service Road Anytime SC Frances Avenue Drakes Drive Grays Road 7am - 7pm SC Frances Avenue Millen Road North Service Road Anytime SC Fruitland Road Highway 8 North Service Road Anytime SC Garden Avenue Pinelands Avenue Teal Avenue Anytime SC Glover Road Barton Street Glover Access Road Anytime SC Glover Access Road Glover Road North Service Road Anytime SC Grays Road Barton Street Highway 8 7am - 7pm SC H Green Road Barton Street South Service Road Anytime SC Highway 8 east Hamilton boundary Queenston Road Anytime SC Hilton Drive Arvin Avenue Barton Street Anytime SC Ivandi Court Jones Road end Anytime SC Jones Road Barton Street South Service Road Anytime SC Kenmore Avenue Arvin Avenue Barton Street Anytime SC Kerivan Court South Service Road end Anytime SC Lakeview Drive Fruitland Road North Service Road Anytime SC Leaside Avenue Arvin Avenue Barton Street Anytime SC Lewis Road Barton Street South Service Road Anytime SC Millen Road Frances Avenue North Service Road Anytime SC Millen Road Barton Street Frances Avenue Anytime SC Millen Road Millen Road South Service Road Anytime SC Mud Street east Hamilton boundary Red Hill Valley Parkway Anytime SC H Pinelands Avenue Garden Avenue South Service Road Anytime SC Ramp to Red Hill Valley Pkwy Red Hill Valley Parkway Stone Church Road Anytime SC Ridge Road east Hamilton boundary Eleventh Road East Anytime SC Seaman Street Millen Road South Service Road Anytime SC Sunnyhurst Avenue Arvin Avenue Barton Street Anytime SC Tapleytown Road Mud Street Regional Road 20 Anytime SC Teal Avenue Garden Avenue South Service Road Anytime SC Winona Road Barton Street Winona Service Road Anytime SC Winona Service Road South Service Road Winona Road Anytime SC