The City of Winnipeg · 2006-06-19 · Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Community Safety Proposal 16 May 2006 -1- Executive Summary For at least the past decade, the Westwood-Browning

Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Community Safety Proposal

for consideration by

The City of Winnipeg Assiniboia Community Committee (16 May 2006)

Standing Policy Committee on Infrastructure Renewal and Public Works (13 June 2006)

prepared by the

Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Team

306 Drummond Place, Winnipeg, MB R3K 0N2

Tel: 885-0415, Fax: 885-7312 Email: [email protected]

with support from

Many Community Stakeholders

16 May 2006, 13 June 2006


16 May 2006

-i-

Contents

Executive Summary.....................................................................................................................................................1 The Safety Need ...........................................................................................................................................................2

Figure 1: Westwood-Browning Intersection and Crosswalk Map ............................................................................3 Figure 2: Westwood-Browning Intersection and Crosswalk Aerial Photo ...............................................................4

A Decade of Community Concern..............................................................................................................................5

Petition of Support Forwarded to City of Winnipeg: 1998.......................................................................................5 Communications with St. James-Assiniboia School Division: 1999 ........................................................................6 Continued Parent Council Focus: 2000-2005 ...........................................................................................................7 MPI Speed Reader Board: 2001-2005 ......................................................................................................................7

A Measured Response from the City .........................................................................................................................8

Streets and Transportation Report: 1998 ..................................................................................................................8 Public Works Report: 2001.......................................................................................................................................9 Public Works Report: 2006.....................................................................................................................................10

The Four-Way Stop Solution....................................................................................................................................11

1) Effective Use of Four-Way Stop Controls..........................................................................................................12 Speed Control and Community Safety...............................................................................................................12 Reducing Traffic Volumes and Driving Patterns ...............................................................................................12 Stop Sign Compliance, Disrespect, and Safety ..................................................................................................12 Noise and Air Pollution Impacts ........................................................................................................................13 Change in Collision Type...................................................................................................................................13

2. Consistent Application of Stop Controls in Communities ..................................................................................14 Community Access Routes near Westwood ......................................................................................................14 Community Access Routes into Westwood .......................................................................................................15

3. Need to Comprehensively Consider All Issues...................................................................................................16 Consideration of Roadway Curvature, Sight-Visibility, and Sight-Stopping.....................................................16 Consideration of Successful North American Solutions ....................................................................................17 Consideration of Demonstrated Community Safety Wishes..............................................................................17

Conclusion and Community Request.......................................................................................................................18 Appendices .................................................................................................................................................................20

1. Petition of Support Forwarded to City of Winnipeg: 1998 ...........................................................................A1 2. Communications with St. James-Assiniboia School Division: 1999 ............................................................A2 3. Continued Parent Council Focus: 2000-2005 ...............................................................................................A3 4. MPI Speed Reader Board: 2001-2005 ..........................................................................................................A4 5. Streets and Transportation Report: 1998.......................................................................................................A5 6. Public Works Report: 2001...........................................................................................................................A6 7. Public Works Report: 2006...........................................................................................................................A7 8. Consideration of Successful North American Solutions (Sunnyvale, CA) ...................................................A8 9. Consideration of Demonstrated Community Safety Wishes (Winnipeg)......................................................A9 10. Letters of Support from Many Community Stakeholders .........................................................................A10


16 May 2006

-1-

Executive Summary For at least the past decade, the Westwood-Browning intersection has been deemed unsafe by a good many local residents and parents of children living in this community, people who use this crosswalk on a regular basis – at a variety of times during the day or week. We ask that the City of Winnipeg view the safety issues related to this intersection more comprehensively – toward an improved safety solution which community residents accept. We request installation of a four-way stop based on the following: 1) Effective use of four-way stop controls Stop signs are likely the most respected, clear, and obeyed traffic signs which exist in the City of Winnipeg. Concerns regarding potential negative impacts of installing one additional stop control are outweighed by the potential for reduced vehicle-pedestrian impacts and reduced risk of higher speed vehicle-vehicle collisions at this intersection. MPI SpeedWatch monitoring conducted at the Westwood-Browning intersection in September 2005 demonstrated that excessive speed is already a significant community safety problem along Westwood Drive. One additional stop control will not make this problem worse; it will contribute to community safety. 2) Consistent application of stop controls in communities Contrary to every other major north-south access route into the Westwood community, Westwood Drive has no stop controls from Portage Avenue to Assiniboine Avenue – a distance of nearly two kilometres. Also, when compared to similar access routes in the nearby communities of Crestview, St. Charles, and Charleswood – Westwood Drive again – is the only such route with no three-way or four-way stop controls over its entire distance. It would appear that major access routes located in communities on the west side of Winnipeg, which also serve as a Winnipeg Transit bus routes – where nearby schools, parks, and churches influence both pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows – should also contain a minimum of two three-way or four-way stop controls. 3) Need to comprehensively consider all issues Previous City of Winnipeg traffic studies – all rejecting installation of a four-way stop at the Westwood-Browning intersection – have focused solely on total traffic/pedestrian volumes and total reported collisions at the site. Additional criteria and other important factors have not been considered in the analysis. These include: roadway curvature, sight-visibility, and sight-stopping at various times of the day and week; consideration of successful North American solutions; and demonstrated community safety wishes. It is time that additional factors be considered as part of the decision-making process for revising existing traffic control protocols.


16 May 2006

-2-

The Safety Need On a bright Sunday afternoon in September 2005, a 12 year old girl was hit by a car and severely injured at the Westwood-Browning Crosswalk. Traffic accidents are an inherent risk associated with automobile travel in any urban setting, and pedestrian-vehicle contacts will always be an unfortunate element of this risk. Assigning blame is not productive. However, we feel the Westwood-Browning intersection (Figures 1 and 2) warrants consideration as a particularly dangerous crossing for pedestrians – for the following reasons:

• the intersection and pedestrian crosswalk are located within a partially blind curve on Westwood Drive and is the only access route into our community with no stop controls, resulting in uninterrupted traffic flow for a distance of nearly two kilometres;

• the crosswalk and curve are located at one end of long stretch of double lane roadway – in which speeds routinely exceed the standard 50 km/hr limit;

• the intersection is located within a transitional portion of Westwood Drive – in which automobiles are either merging from two lanes to one (southbound) or spreading from one lane to two (northbound);

• the intersection facilitates fluctuating periods of automobile traffic at different times during the week, with different traffic flow patterns: - during the weekday rush hours (both morning and evening) when most traffic flow is south-

north or north-south

- during the weekday school drop-off and pick-up period, in which most traffic flow is both turning west on to Browning Blvd. and turning north on to Westwood Drive

- during the late evening when south-north and north-south speeds have at times been extremely dangerous.

- on Sundays or during evening meetings, when the automobiles of church attendants are parked around the intersection

- on pleasant evenings when families (often on bicycles or with dogs and small children) use the crosswalk to visit Westwood – Browning Park

- on hot summer days when several vehicles are parked all around the intersection – and families are using the crosswalk to visit the Westwood – Browning wading pool

- when scheduled transit buses make passenger stops shortly before the intersection in the southbound and northbound lanes of Westwood Drive.

Since this portion of the Westwood area was developed in the early 1960s (when Browning Blvd. east was a no-exit street), this intersection has seen a significant number of vehicle-vehicle collisions (at least 17 reported between 1995-2004), including at least one vehicle-pedestrian impact, and a large number of near misses. WPS and/or MPI traffic accident reports do exist for the 17+ noted incidents, but many other incidents have gone unreported – having been witnessed or experienced by many members of this community.


16 May 2006

-3-

Figure 1: Westwood-Browning Intersection and Crosswalk Map


16 May 2006

-4-

Figure 2: Westwood-Browning Intersection and Crosswalk Aerial Photo


16 May 2006

-5-

A Decade of Community Concern Since the mid 1990s, many area residents have expressed concern over the inherent dangers of the pedestrian crosswalk located within the Westwood-Browning intersection. These people live near the intersection, use it while driving and/or walking, and/or share a common concern for community safety. Many of these people have also experienced actual events – in the form of vehicle-vehicle collisions, or vehicle-pedestrian near misses. These people have attempted to find long-term safety solutions – by working through whatever means they thought appropriate – via school parent councils, lobbying their city councillors, contacting the police, working on speed monitoring programs, and encouraging regular student crossing patrols, and ultimately – by being vigilant for the safety of the families. The efforts of many committed individuals and families have resulted in the following progress:

Petition of Support Forwarded to City of Winnipeg: 1998 After several years of growing community concern over safety issues at the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk, a committee of the École Robert Browning Parent Council was struck to begin formally addressing this situation. This Safety Committee was chaired by Ms. Rhonda Forcand. During the summer and early fall of 1998, several members of the Safety Committee canvassed the community to explain their concerns regarding the crosswalk – and their desire for a permanent safety solution. Recent community expansion, based on new home development on the old Columbus School site and recent changes in elementary school patterns (in which grade six students were no longer available to serve as crossing patrols) were identified as concerns affecting crosswalk safety at the Westwood-Browning intersection. A total of 222 signatures in support for either a lighted crossing or four-way stop were collected and forwarded to Pat Philips, city councillor for the St. Charles Ward in 1998 (Appendix 1).


16 May 2006

-6-

Communications with St. James-Assiniboia School Division: 1999 Ms. Karen Exell (Chair) and Ms. Cheryl Wold (Vice Chair) of the École Robert Browning Parent Council then contacted the St. James-Assiniboia School Division regarding the Safety Committee’s concerns, petition results, and responses from the City of Winnipeg (Appendix 2). St. James-Assiniboia School Division has always attempted to be supportive of community and school concerns regarding the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk. Over the years, student crossing patrols have been encouraged and supported (with both teacher instruction and parent supervision at times). In addition, the management and staff of Browning School have been instrumental in maintaining awareness of safety concerns regarding this intersection – through several different versions of the Browning School Parent Council and later, the École Robert Browning Parent Council and with division staff at the school board office. Today, the École Robert Browning Student Patrol program provides a small measure of safety (primarily through increased visibility and driver attention drawn to the blaze orange colouring of student patrol vests and flags). While student patrols are generally effective at several other intersections near École Robert Browning, this program is largely ineffective at the Westwood-Browning Crosswalk – where patrols are present at no more than 50% of all student crossing times. The reasons for this are largely related to the strong concerns of many parents for the safety of their children patrolling at the Westwood-Browning intersection, and the inability of school staff to ensure all patrols are on duty at all required times. Due to low program participation among grade five students, grade four students are often asked to patrol at this intersection during school hours. The reality is that safety at the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk is ultimately a community concern – the many interrelated issues of which go well beyond the responsibilities of one individual, one school or one school division. Indeed, many of the safety issues identified in this proposal occur beyond school hours. In addition, small children in grade five (or even grade four) cannot be expected to be responsible for all safety concerns at a major intersection where vehicle speeds routinely exceed 50 km/hr – even if this may be their responsibility as a student patrol. Such responsibility is wholly unrealistic and inappropriate, while a school or school division staff can also not be expected to assume the obvious liabilities.


16 May 2006

-7-

Continued Parent Council Focus: 2000-2005 Based on initial contacts with Councillor Philips and subsequent contacts with area city councillors De Smedt and Eadie, City of Winnipeg traffic engineers did focus on the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk – exploring traffic flows and considering the potential for installing a lighted crosswalk or four-way stop at the intersection. Several vehicle-vehicle collisions (both reported and unreported), numerous vehicle-pedestrian near misses, and at least one late night high speed accident occurred during this time. Many of these were personally witnessed by community residents, including members of the École Robert Browning Parent Council’s Safety Committee chaired by Mr. George Dyker. Parent Council members were hopeful and trusting that the City of Winnipeg would assist in the realization of an improved safety solution. However, it eventually became clear that more attention to the matter would be required, and it was determined this issue could not be satisfactorily addressed as a school issue alone (Appendix 3).

MPI Speed Reader Board: 2001-2005 At the suggestion of Councillor Eadie in late 2001 (Appendix 4), the École Robert Browning Parent Council made several attempts to obtain and operate a “speed reader board” from Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI). However, these efforts were unsuccessful and frustrating. Renewed efforts by Ms. Rhea Yates finally resulted in the MPI SpeedWatch Program equipment being secured for Parent Council use in 2005. The reader board was employed for a period of one work week – during the morning rush hour/school drop-off and the evening rush hour/school pick-up times (Appendix 4). 12 parents and other community residents set-up and staffed board operations during the week of 12-16 September 2005. The results were striking. Even with the required blaze orange vests worn by all volunteers (combined with those worn by student crossing patrols at the Westwood-Browning intersection that week), a surprisingly large percentage of all automobile drivers exceeded the 50 km/hr speed limit on Westwood Drive. Based on MPI’s analysis of the results, of 648 cars monitored during peak travel/school crossing times over five weekdays, 330 (or 51%) were found to be speeding. Of these drivers, 182 (28%) were driving in excess of 55 km/hr, and 48 (or 7%) were driving in excess of 60 km/hr, with highest recorded speeds exceeding 80 km/hr. MPI notes that drivers’ reactions to seeing the bright orange SpeedWatch equipment and volunteer staff can result in a vehicle slowing down. The speed-reducing influence of controlled intersections is also noted. Many volunteers noted the frequency of vehicle-pedestrian near misses in the intersection and the surprising reactions of many drivers regarding their responsibility to be prepared to stop for crossing children. Councillor De Smedt stopped to thank volunteers and suggested that a sign could be erected to encourage drivers to slow down, with wording such as “Welcome to Westwood – Please Drive Carefully.”


16 May 2006

-8-

A Measured Response from the City In response to formal requests made by members of the École Robert Browning Parent Council Safety Committee, the Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Team, and city councillors – staff responsible for the City of Winnipeg’s transportation system have provided clear rationale for no additional controls to be installed at the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk. There is no argument that these responses are statistically valid and appropriate – based on the measured automobile traffic volumes at the location of this intersection. The two formal responses from the City are based on identical traffic data and may be summarized as follows:

Streets and Transportation Report: 1998 In response to the initial request to Councillor Pat Philips, Mr. Drew Gunson responded on behalf of the City’s Streets and Transportation Department (Appendix 5). A weekday traffic study was conducted between 7:00am and 6:00pm during the week of 16-19 October 1998 – in which the highest vehicle volumes within an eight hour period were measured at 3139. Based on 1998 traffic volumes, the appropriateness of installing a lighted pedestrian crossing was deemed to be 4% (eight of 75 pedestrians waiting more than 10 seconds to cross Westwood Drive). Based on the number of school children attempting to cross (15 children) during the peak 30 minutes of traffic volume (3:45pm-4:15pm), the benefit unit for maintaining a lighted school crossing corridor was rated at 1.8 in terms of expected benefit. A four-way stop is only deemed warranted when vehicle volumes exceed 4000 within the highest eight hour period and at least 1600 of these are supplied by the lower volume street (i.e. traffic flow must be approximately equal in all directions). Alternatively, a four-way stop may be installed where there are at least nine right angle or left/opposing collisions reported at an intersection within the most recent three year period. A lighted pedestrian corridor requires a minimum of 200 pedestrians waiting more than 10 seconds to cross. A lighted school crossing corridor requires a benefit rating above 5.0. A page of explanations as to where and why four-way stop controls are used (and why they are not used in certain locations) was also provided. Four-way stops can be warranted:

1. To reduce conflicts between vehicles entering an intersection from a stop controlled street and an uncontrolled street;

2. Where traffic volumes (vehicles and/or pedestrians) approaching the intersection from all directions are close to being equal;

3. Where there is a high incidence of reported right angle and/or left/opposing collisions; or

4. Where the horizontal or vertical curvature of the roadway approaching the intersection results in a deficiency in sight-visibility lines and reduced safe sight-stopping distance.


16 May 2006

-9-

Public Works Report: 2001 The same 1998 traffic data was used in response to a request made to Councillors Eadie and De Smedt in 2001. R.J. Hartmann responded from the Public Works Department (Appendix 6). Again, based on the rationale provided in 1998, the requests for a four-way stop or pedestrian corridor were rejected, as neither was deemed to meeting the warrant criteria used by the City. As in 1998, the rationale against installing a four-way stop at the Westwood-Browning intersection is based on “many North American studies” which have shown that installing unwarranted stop signs results in:

1. High levels of non-compliance if deemed unnecessary by motorists;

2. Disrespect for traffic signs in general with excess signage;

3. Potential hazard to pedestrians and other motorists expecting drivers to stop;

4. Increased vehicle speeds at mid-block locations as drivers attempt to make up for time lost at the stop sign;

5. An increase in rear-end collisions at the intersection; and

6. Increased air and noise pollution and fuel consumption.

The installation ($30k) and annual maintenance costs associated with a lighted pedestrian or school crossing corridor were deemed to be unjustified, based on anticipated under-utilization. Suggestions were provided to contact Manitoba Public Insurance to make use of the MPI speed reader board. The letter was copied to the Winnipeg Police Service.

Figure 3: Traffic Accident,

Westwood-Browning (Jan. 2001 or 2002)


16 May 2006

-10-

Public Works Report: 2006 In response to the 18 September 2006 vehicle-pedestrian collision (dated 18 August in the report), new traffic research was conducted for the Westwood-Browning intersection, again demonstrating that traffic volumes do not meet the City’s warrant criteria (Appendix 7). R.J. Hartmann’s letter again outlines the logic of not installing either a four-way stop or pedestrian corridor at the intersection. The last page of the letter also provides the following advice and insights to those parents and others who may be concerned regarding traffic safety:

1. The onus is on both pedestrian and motorists to conduct themselves appropriately when approaching each other;

2. Motorists are expected to drive at speeds consistent with the adjoining conditions and to anticipate any potential hazard such as vehicles backing out of driveways and children entering the roadway;

3. In addition, parents or guardians must ensure that children of elementary school age and younger are not on the roadway unsupervised and that children are properly educated with respect to pedestrian and road safety; and

4. Children attending Browning School, located on the north side of Browning Boulevard west of Westwood Drive, should cross Westwood within the signed and marked “School Crosswalk” on the north side of Browning under the supervision of school patrols.

Figure 4: Traffic Accident, Westwood-Browning (January 2001 or 2002)


16 May 2006

-11-

The Four-Way Stop Solution The Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Team appreciates the detailed research undertaken by City of Winnipeg staff responsible the Winnipeg’s transportation system. We respect the statistical validity of the research and the guiding limitations which must be respected to prevent automotive anarchy within the City of Winnipeg. It is all very logical and appropriate when only total vehicle numbers are considered. We can also respect and appreciate the City’s decision to avoid installation of a second lighted pedestrian corridor on Westwood Drive. Such an installation would be unwarranted. We are all taxpayers, and we can understand that the installation and maintenance costs are not justified with such little pedestrian traffic. The fact that just such a corridor currently exists at the intersection between Westwood Drive and McBey Avenue is not relevant to our case, as it must also be considered unwarranted. Its existence today cannot easily be explained based on the City’s current warrant criteria. However, our case remains. For at least the past decade, the Westwood-Browning intersection has been deemed unsafe by a good many local residents and parents of children who live in this neighbourhood and must use this crosswalk on a regular basis – at a variety of times during the day or week. The Westwood-Browning Crosswalk team (and future residents of this community) will continue working for an improved safety solution for this intersection and crosswalk. We care about our families, our neighbours, and our community; we want to be safe, and we want to feel safe – regardless of the statistical rationale for not implementing specific traffic controls. We ask that the City of Winnipeg view the safety issues related to this intersection more comprehensively – toward an improved safety solution which community residents accept. We have reviewed the history of community concern for this intersection, efforts by the École Robert Browning Parent Council Safety Committee, and all formal responses by the City of Winnipeg on this matter. We request installation of a four-way stop based on the following:


16 May 2006

-12-

1) Effective Use of Four-Way Stop Controls We ask that the City of Winnipeg consider that stops signs can be (and are already) used in Winnipeg for many purposes, and at times apparently contrary to rationales provided in the 1998, 2001, and 2006 City transportation reports rejecting action the Westwood-Browning intersection.

Speed Control and Community Safety The Maples neighbourhood in northwest Winnipeg, specifically Mandalay Drive and Jefferson Avenue, each contain a vast number of four-way stops which clearly contribute to speed control and community safety – whether originally designed as such or not. There are many other examples of this use throughout the city – where stop signs greatly influence vehicle speed and safety along lengthy access routes into communities. Areas which are comparable to the Westwood community are discussed in detail in Section 2 (p. 14).

Reducing Traffic Volumes and Driving Patterns Network routing analysis conducted at the University of Manitoba (Department of Geography) has clearly demonstrated that motorists will indeed chose alternate routes based on travel conditions including number of turns, stops, and overall travel time. We point this fact out – not in an effort to argue for reduced traffic volume, but to suggest that to suggest that stop signs (contrary to the City’s stated rationale) can and do in fact dramatically influence traffic patterns and driver choices. The important role of stop signs as a strong influence on the decisions and driving patterns of individual drivers needs to be fully considered.

Stop Sign Compliance, Disrespect, and Safety We find it difficult to accept that one additional stop sign may actually lead to increased stop sign non-compliance in Winnipeg. There are many existing stop signs throughout the city that many drivers may feel are unwarranted. Most people make the decision to stop (or slow to a near stop) at most stop signs – because the law requires drivers to obey traffic signals and devices, and most drivers obey the law. To suggest that excessive traffic sign usage breeds disrespect for all signs is to suggest that most drivers have a tendency to disrespect the law, which is not the case. Traffic signage and traffic signals within Winnipeg are well known to be complicated already – so much so that a traffic signage expert was recently engaged to advise the City on how to improve the situation. Stop signs are likely the most respected, clear, and obeyed traffic signs which exist in the City of Winnipeg.


16 May 2006

-13-

Suggestions regarding the “false sense of security” which stop signs may provide are certainly reasonable, and all pedestrians – whether young or old – must accept that some cars may not stop on some occasions. This risk is a reality of everyday life in a major urban centre. Some drivers do not: slow down at yellow lights, stop for school buses, or move to the right and stop when an emergency vehicle attempts to pass. These are all traffic safety problems, but the fact that that they continue does not mean we should stop trying to solve them. The Precautionary Principle suggests that every effort should be made to improve a known hazard, particularly if the cost of implementing a potential solution is low and its potential negative impacts are minor. The potential safety benefits of installing a four-way stop sign at Westwood Drive and Browning Blvd. are likely to outweigh its potential negative impacts, including concerns regarding a false sense of security. This intersection is widely viewed as hazardous by the community; this perception is not likely to change with the installation of one stop sign – unless this intervention results in noticeable decreases in vehicle speed, collisions, and vehicle-pedestrian near misses, observed by community residents over time.

Noise and Air Pollution Impacts The suggestion that noise and air pollution are increased with the presence of stop signs is an important consideration in some locations, but not in an uncongested suburban neighbourhood. Again, the potential community safety benefits associated with a four-way stop at the Westwood-Browning intersection would far outweigh any potential noise and air pollution impacts. If the City of Winnipeg is serious about reducing noise and air pollution, stricter engine sound and emission regulations should be enacted and enforced within city boundaries. Additionally, more non-stop cross-town thoroughfares and rapid transit schemes (such as originally recommended in the 1968 Winnipeg Area Transportation Study (WATS report) should be designed and implemented, while increased funding for public transit should also be provided.

Change in Collision Type This is the one argument against four-way stop control installation that is worthy of consideration. It is certainly reasonable to assume that total vehicle collisions may not be reduced by installing a four-way stop at the Westwood-Browning intersection. If streets are not adequately sanded, salted, or plowed during the winter, it is logical to expect an increase in the number of low speed rear-end collisions. However, these would typically be less serious than higher speed collisions along a major community access route with no stop controls (Westwood Drive), and would also have to be deemed preferable to the right angle and left/opposing collisions which are currently occurring at this location. The potential for vehicle-pedestrian impact would be significantly reduced.


16 May 2006

-14-

2. Consistent Application of Stop Controls in Communities Examples of major north-south access routes close to the Westwood community – where three-way and four-way stops influence speed and safety include: Barker Blvd. and Dale Avenue in Charleswood; Buchanan Blvd. and St. Charles Street in St. Charles; and Cavalier Drive and School Road in Crestview.

Community Access Routes near Westwood Each of these locations begin with traffic lights on a major east-west thoroughfare (Roblin Blvd. or Portage Avenue). In some cases these major community access routes are divided for all or part of their length. Most are also Winnipeg Transit bus routes, and virtually all cases (except School Road) – nearby schools, parks, and churches significantly influence traffic flow near important intersections containing either a three-way or four-way stop control, many of which also include crosswalks (Table 1).

Table 1: Major North-South Community Access Routes near Westwood

Major N-S Community

Access Route

Distance from Roblin Blvd. or Portage Ave. Thoroughfare

Also Serves as Bus Route

Nearby Presence of Schools,

Parks, and/or Churches

Three-Way or Four-Way Stop Locations at

Important Intersections before Terminus

Barker Blvd. (Loop)

2.1 km No Yes 3-Way at Barker Blvd. 3 Way at Stack Street

3-Way at Sinnott Street 4-Way at Stack Street

Dale Avenue 1.8 km Yes Yes 4-Way at Brownell Bay 4-Way at Cullen Drive

4-Way at Betsworth Ave. 4-Way at Rannock Ave.

Buchanan Blvd. 1.8 km Yes Yes 4-Way at Fairlane Ave. 4-Way at Ness Extension

4-Way at Hamilton Ave. 4-Way at Lumsden Ave.

St. Charles St. 0.8 km Yes Yes 4-Way at Lepine Ave. 4-Way at Augier Ave.

Cavalier Drive 1.8 km Yes Yes Traffic Lights at Safeway 3-Way at Ness Terminus 4-Way at Hamilton Ave.

School Road 0.7 km No No None


16 May 2006

-15-

Community Access Routes into Westwood Within the Westwood community itself, Bedson Street, Country Club Blvd., Rouge Road, and Westwood Drive must all be considered major north-south access routes.1 Each route begins with traffic lights on a major east-west thoroughfare (Portage Avenue), and two routes are divided for all or part of their length (Country Club Blvd. and Westwood Drive). Three of these routes are also Winnipeg Transit bus routes. In all cases – nearby schools, parks, and churches influence traffic flow near important intersections containing either a three-way or four-way stop control, many of which also include crosswalks (Table 2).

Table 2: Major North-South Community Access Routes into Westwood

Major N-S Community

Access Route

Distance from Portage Ave. Thoroughfare

Also Serves as Bus Route

Nearby Presence of Schools,

Parks, and/or Churches

Three-Way or Four-Way Stop Locations at

Important Intersections before Terminus

Bedson Street 1.6 km Yes Yes 4-Way at Allard Ave. 4-Way at Sansome Ave.

Country Club Boulevard

1.2 km No Yes 4-Way at McBey Ave. 3-Way at Pinehurst Cres.

Rouge Road 1.8 km Yes Yes 4-Way at Allard Ave. 4-Way at Sansome Ave. 4-Way at Browning Blvd.

Westwood Drive 1.8 km Yes Yes None

Contrary to every other major north-south access route into the Westwood community, Westwood Drive has no stop controls from Portage Avenue to Assiniboine Avenue – a distance of nearly two kilometres. Also, when compared to similar access routes in the nearby communities of Crestview, St. Charles, and Charleswood – Westwood Drive again – is the only such route with no three-way or 4-way stop controls over its entire distance. It would appear that major access routes located in communities on the west side of Winnipeg, which also serve as a Winnipeg Transit bus routes – where nearby schools, parks, and churches influence both pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows – should also contain a minimum of two three-way or four-way stop controls.

1 Banting Drive is another north-south access route into the Westwood community, beginning with traffic lights at Portage Avenue. After only 0.3 km, Banting terminates at McBey Avenue (Lincoln School) and therefore cannot be considered a major community access route into Westwood. While it does not begin with traffic lights at Portage, Rouge Road must be considered a major community access route into Westwood given its traffic patterns and uses.


16 May 2006

-16-

Furthermore, it seems highly improbable that each and every one of the comparable intersections listed above (Table 1 and Table 2) would also meet the City’s warrant criteria for the installation of a three-way or four-way stop control. Consistent application of stop controls is not occurring. Whether these locations were originally designed for the purposes of speed control and community safety (or not), they are providing these benefits today. It is illogical that one major community access route (Westwood Drive) – which is in all material respects comparable to eight similar routes within Westwood and in nearby communities – not be afforded a similar level of traffic control as the others. There should be a consistent application of the use of three-way and four-way stop controls on all comparable community access routes in Winnipeg. MPI SpeedWatch monitoring conducted at the Westwood-Browning intersection in September 2005 demonstrated that excessive speed is already a significant community safety problem along Westwood Drive. One additional stop control will not make this problem worse; it will contribute to community safety.

3. Need to Comprehensively Consider All Issues The traffic study conducted by the City in 1998, and featured in analytical reports prepared in 1998 and 2001 (with subsequent follow-up in 2006) – rejecting installation of a four-way stop at the Westwood-Browning intersection – have focused solely on total traffic/pedestrian volumes, and total reported collisions at the site. Additional criteria and other important factors have not been considered in the analysis. These include:

Consideration of Roadway Curvature, Sight-Visibility, and Sight-Stopping Roadway curvature, combined with documented high average speeds occurring along Westwood Drive – is a major factor influencing community safety at the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk. This intersection lies along a tight southbound curve in Westwood Drive and near the beginning of a northbound roadway separation – making it a complex intersection. Given that an estimated 51% of automobile drivers are traveling at speeds between 50 km/hr and 80 km/hr, roadway curvature is indeed a factor in a driver’s ability to stop for a pedestrian or students travel through an intersection. Clearly, roadway curvature combined with excessive speed in the summer of 2002 or 2003, when a high-speed accident removed 100 m of City of Winnipeg fencing along the east side of Westwood – Browning park. The City’s transportation studies (while statistically reasonable) did not occur at night, on pleasant summer days, or on Saturdays or Sundays – when additional factors such as church parking, family visits to the park, and wading pool use represent additional safety variables.


16 May 2006

-17-

Consideration of Successful North American Solutions Innovations in civic policy will never occur if the same data and same decision-making patterns are always used in an attempt to address recurring problems. Policy-makers and community residents need to search for new approaches to solve old problems. One example of creative four-way stop control usage was identified in Sunnyvale, California. In 1996, the City of Sunnyvale received a request for a four-way stop solution to address longstanding intersection concerns near Sunnyvale Middle School. A petition of support, with 300 neighbourhood signatures accompanied the request. In response to numerous previous community requests, City transportation staff had conducted at least eight detailed quantitative analyses during the previous 23 years. On each occasion, the four-way stop request was deemed unwarranted and rejected based on total traffic volumes, pedestrian flows, and a relatively low reported accident rate. This situation is materially identical to the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk case. However, due to continued pressure from the Sunnyvale Middle School Parent Council and additional concerned neighbourhood residents, the City eventually revisited the situation and ultimately, a City decision was made to install the four-way stop control desired my most neighbourhood residents (Appendix 8).

Consideration of Demonstrated Community Safety Wishes In recent months, intersection and crossing safety concerns have emerged in several Winnipeg neighbourhoods (Appendix 9). In some instances, community residents feel strongly that a four-way stop solution is required. In those cases, as with the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk, the desires of area residents who:

• care enough to sign petitions and attend meetings;

• become active on their children’s school parent councils; and/or

• spent countless hours working with their neighbours to find real solution to their real concerns about neighbourhood safety…

…will continually emerge (likely on a cyclical basis) as children grow up, and legions of new parents and other concerned residents take up the challenge of community safety. It is time that additional factors be considered as part of the decision-making process for revising existing traffic control protocols – whether this may involve installations, removal of existing devices, or street alterations, especially if strong community concern has been demonstrated.


16 May 2006

-18-

Conclusion and Community Request On behalf of the majority of residents living in our community, many community stakeholders, and especially our children – the Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Team respectfully requests that the City of Winnipeg again review the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk situation – toward the approval and installation of a four-way stop control. We ask that the City consider the strong community support which has built in our neighbourhood over the past decade, evidenced by 222 signatures on a petition of support conducted in 1998. In addition, we have now collected several letters of support from various organizations and other community stakeholders (Appendix 10). We realize and accept that a new four-way stop does not meet the City’s warrant criteria based on existing traffic volumes, pedestrian usage, or reported accident rates. We ask that a four-way stop control be installed at the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk based on:

• significant roadway curvature, sight-visibility, and sight-stopping issues which exist at the Westwood-Browning intersection. These factors represent existing City of Winnipeg decision-making regarding four-way stop warrant criteria. However, they have yet to be seriously considered in this situation. They need to be considered, particularly given that most drivers on Westwood Drive routinely exceed the speed limit of 50 km/hr, creating increased safety concerns as the intersection is located on a partially blind curve;

• the fact that Westwood Drive is the only major community access route into our community with no stop controls, resulting in uninterrupted traffic flow for a distance of nearly two kilometres, in which speeds routinely exceed the standard 50 km/hr limit;

• a complex driving situation which reduces driver attention on the crosswalk, given that the Westwood-Browning intersection is located within a transitional portion of Westwood Drive – in which automobiles are either merging from two lanes to one (southbound) or spreading from one lane to two (northbound);

• the desire of many community residents working to improve the safety of children and other pedestrians who cross at this location seven days per week – at different times;

• in recognition of the fact that small children in grade five (or even grade four) cannot be expected to be responsible for all safety concerns at a major intersection where vehicle speeds exceed 50 km/hr – even if this may be their responsibility as a student patrol;


16 May 2006

-19-

• the fluctuating nature of automobile traffic at different times during the week, with different traffic flow patterns – reducing the opportunity for routine driver and pedestrian safety patterns to develop. The Westwood-Browning intersection/crosswalk is used: - during the weekday rush hours (both morning and evening) when most traffic flow is south-

north or north-south

- during the weekday school drop-off and pick-up period, in which most traffic flow is both turning west on to Browning Blvd. and turning north on to Westwood Drive

- during the late evening when south-north and north-south speeds have at times can become extremely dangerous

- on Sundays or during evening meetings when the automobiles of church attendants are parked around the intersection

- on pleasant evenings when families (often on bicycles or with dogs and small children) use the crosswalk to visit Westwood – Browning Park

- on hot summer days when several vehicles are parked all around the intersection – and families are using the crosswalk to visit the Westwood – Browning wading pool

- when scheduled transit buses make passenger stops shortly before the intersection in the southbound and northbound lanes of Westwood Drive.

• consideration of a successful case study and very similar situation from the City of Sunnyvale, California – where longstanding community safety concerns were ultimately given equal weight to statistical factors based on traffic flow, pedestrian usage, and reported accident rates; and

• consideration that many residents in this neighbourhood have and will continue to devote massive amount of energy and resources toward an improved safety solution for the Westwood-Browning intersection and crosswalk. This concern will not dissipate, because we believe a four-way stop control is in fact warranted for reasons beyond statistically valid traffic flow calculations.


16 May 2006

-20-

Appendices The following background documents are included in support of our request:

1. Petition of Support Forwarded to City of Winnipeg: 1998

2. Communications with St. James-Assiniboia School Division: 1999

3. Continued Parent Council Focus: 2000-2005

4. MPI Speed Reader Board: 2001-2005

5. Streets and Transportation Report: 1998

6. Public Works Report: 2001


8. Consideration of Successful North American Solutions (Sunnyvale, CA)

9. Consideration of Demonstrated Community Safety Wishes (Winnipeg)

10. Letters of Support from Many Community Stakeholders


16 May 2006

-A1-

1. Petition of Support Forwarded to City of Winnipeg: 1998


16 May 2006

-A2-

2. Communications with St. James-Assiniboia School Division: 1999


16 May 2006

-A3-

3. Continued Parent Council Focus: 2000-2005


16 May 2006

-A4-

4. MPI Speed Reader Board: 2001-2005


16 May 2006

-A5-

5. Streets and Transportation Report: 1998


16 May 2006

-A6-



16 May 2006

-A7-



16 May 2006

-A8-

8. Consideration of Successful North American Solutions (Sunnyvale, CA)


16 May 2006

-A9-

9. Consideration of Demonstrated Community Safety Wishes (Winnipeg)


16 May 2006

-A10-

10. Letters of Support from Many Community Stakeholders


16 May 2006

-A11-


16 May 2006

-A12-


16 May 2006

-A13-


16 May 2006

-A14-

Documents

The City of Winnipeg · 2006-06-19 · Westwood-Browning Crosswalk Community Safety Proposal 16 May 2006 -1- Executive Summary For at least the past decade, the Westwood-Browning