Traffic calming, Markham residents suggest, is a new oxymoron.
The re-engineering of Carlton Road, Village Parkway and Royal Orchard Boulevard, designed to tranquilize vehicle speed and flow, has had the opposite effect on neighbouring residents, drivers and cyclists.
The slalom of lane markers and benign mid-road brick bumps has Unionville Ratepayers Association president Richard Talbot as baffled as the majority of his membership.
“It’s perplexing, extraordinary,” he said. “There are two big issues. There are areas where the installations are causing danger and the cycle paths have been removed. If you wanted to change two roads to piss off the cycling community, they’d be Carlton and Royal Orchard.”
The traffic dampening design, more decorative than a deterrent, forces vehicles to weave along, Mr. Talbot said. That endangers cyclists who are forced to the curb or on to the sidewalk which is illegal.
Also confusing is how the town quietly stick handled past the apparent groundswell of taxpayer opposition, he said. A survey of 8,000 questionnaires returned approximately 55 replies, of which 43 were in favour.
“That suggests about 80 per cent were in favour, but I know that only one in ten of the e-mails I get approve of the project,” Mr. Talbot said. “I’m not surprised. There may have been public consultation addressing the issue in junk mail, 40 per cent of it usually undelivered.”
Markham mayor Frank Scarpitti said public meetings and surveys were conducted early last year, but admitted the consultation may not have been totally inclusive.
“There’s a lesson to be learned here,” he said. “We followed the normal process, but perhaps not enough of the public was involved.”
In retrospect, town staff may have focused expressly on residents on the identified streets, he said.
“People who don’t live on the street generally oppose (traffic calming) while those close want something done about speed and traffic infiltration.
“We do try and focus on all people. The lesson for all of us is to make an effort to cast a net that’s a bit wider.”
The mayor said he’s driven along the painted lines and brick roll overs on Village Parkway.
“I’ve got to be honest, like anything new, it takes time to get used to it,” he said.
Ward 1 councillor Valerie Burke, whose riding includes Royal Orchard Boulevard from Bayview Avenue to Yonge Street, said the calming project had the public’s input at a meeting in April last year.
“A community need was identified,” she said. “There was a concern about speeding which was verified.”
Under Markham’s Safe Streets program, the three roadways were cited as being problematic, she said.
“The program works with the three Es,” Ms Burke said. “Enforcement, education and engineering. Engineering is the last resort because that changes the street.
“There was an allocation of about a year for enforcement on the three streets. It was sporadic and not effective. So, there were no hasty decisions. It was a thoughtful process.”
Town staff consulted with York Region Transit, emergency, fire and snow plowing services, she said
Still, the design completed last month as an alternative to speed bumps disliked by emergency vehicle drivers, remains controversial, she said. “People who live near it, support it,” she said. “I did get quite a few comments. People either like it or hate it.”
Thornhill resident Renata Richardson, who uses the thoroughfare and lives a block north, isn’t a fan.
“There was no notification,” she said. “If there was, it was so subtle that I missed it. The road is now unsightly and the cycling lanes, which we were all excited about, now look like parking lanes.
“Drivers seem confused, particularly at turns. The brick bumps make you weave and bob. That’s dangerous and I won’t ride my bike there anymore.”
Unionville resident, motorist and cyclist Jean Gagnon lives on a street siding Carlton.
“I’d like to understand the reason for this initiative,”’ she said. “There’s huge confusion in terms of the white lines and the bumps. No one knows how to drive Carlton anymore.
“It’s tragic for cyclists who are now on sidewalks. There’s no education. The community wasn’t properly consulted. It was just foisted on us.”
The cost of the three road traffic calming, said Ms Burke, was approximately $400,000.
“My tax dollars went to that?” asked Ms Richardson. “It was unnecessary. In my opinion, Royal Orchard didn’t need traffic calming.”
The stated budget is contested by Mr. Talbot. “I understood the installation cost $440,000 and the study was $120,000,” he said. “There were hidden costs and, excluding staff time, the cost is closer to $600,000.”
The project, effectively limiting or eliminating several kilometres of cycling paths, surprisingly comes in the wake of a $4.5 million government grant for more bike lanes, Mr. Talbot said.
“Why on earth didn’t some common sense set in?” he asked. “Markham’s traffic and planning just put the kibosh on cycle paths.”
The association will meet Monday at Unionville Station at 7 p.m., he said. Discussion will focus on identifying areas requiring correction and how to get bike paths back on track. The public is welcome.
Do you like the new traffic calming measures? E-mail your letter to the editor to boneill@yrmg.com
Anything but calm
What others said about the traffic calming project.