City of Hamilton
Development of Policy Papers for Phase Two of the Transportation Master Plan for the City of Hamilton ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Prepared by Stantec Consulting For IBI Group
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2005
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
DOCUMENT CONTROL
January 2005
Client:
City of Hamilton
Project Name:
Development of Policy Papers for Phase II of the Transportation Master Plan for the City of Hamilton
Report Title:
Development of Policy Papers for Phase Two of the Transportation Master Plan for the City of Hamilton ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
IBI Reference:
T0-1173
Version:
2
Originator:
Ted Gill
Reviewers:
Marty Hazel, Bill Janssen, Ed Swintenky, Mary Lou Tanner, Harold Groen, Hélène Ellermeyer
Page 1.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
January 2005
1.
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1
1.1
Study Background and Objectives............................................................................................................1
1.2
Road Classification Issues .........................................................................................................................1
2.
REVIEW OF EXISTING CITY OF HAMILTON POLICIES.................................................... 2
2.1
Existing Road Classification Systems......................................................................................................2
2.2
Official Plans .................................................................................................................................................2 2.2.1
Former Region of Hamilton - Wentworth Official Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2.2
Area Municipal Official Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.3
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3
Other Studies in Hamilton...........................................................................................................................8
2.4
Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways ................................................................10
2.5
Hamilton Winter Control Level of Service Standards...........................................................................11
3.
REVIEW OF PRACTICES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS.................................................... 13
3.1
Transportation Association of Canada...................................................................................................13
3.2
City of Toronto............................................................................................................................................13
3.3
City of Ottawa..............................................................................................................................................15
3.4
City of Guelph .............................................................................................................................................16
4.
POLICY OPTIONS ............................................................................................................ 18
4.1
Need for Road Classification System .....................................................................................................18
4.2
Approach to Defining a Functional Classification System..................................................................18
4.3
Core Road Classification System ............................................................................................................18
4.4
Variations on Core Classification Elements ..........................................................................................24 4.4.1
T r a f f i c Calming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4
4.4.2
V e h i c l e T y p e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4
4.4.3
Accommodation of Cyclists. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4
4 . 4 .4
Accommodation of Pedestrians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5
4.4.5
Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 Page i.
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D) 4.4.6
4.5
Boulevards Between Walk and Curb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5
Other Elements to be Considered with Road Classification...............................................................25 4.5.1
Higher Order Transit Features. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5
4.5.2
Special Character Roads, Heritage Roads, and Scenic Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6
4.5.3
Truck Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6
4.5.4
C u l s - de - sac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6
4.5.5
S u b - categories within a Core Road Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6
5.
RECOMMENDED POLICIES ............................................................................................ 28
6.
IMPACTS OF POLICY OPTIONS...................................................................................... 29
6.1
Assessment Factors ..................................................................................................................................29
6.2
Summary of Evaluation .............................................................................................................................29
Appendix A: Existing Winter Control Standards
LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 2.1: Former Regional Road Network (Region of Hamilton-Wentworth Official Plan) ........... 3 Exhibit 2.2: “Current” Draft Road Specification System – Urban Areas.......................................... 4 Exhibit 2.3: “Current” Draft Road Specification System – Rural Areas........................................... 5 Exhibit 2.4: Classification of Highways from Ontario Regulation 239/02...................................... 11 Exhibit 3.1: City of Toronto Road Classification Criteria................................................................ 14 Exhibit 3.2: City of Toronto Supplementation Decision Process Table .......................................... 15 Exhibit 4.1: Proposed Road Classification System (Rural Roads) ............................................... 21 Exhibit 4.2: Proposed Road Classification System (Urban Roads).............................................. 22 Exhibit 4.2: Proposed Road Classification System (Urban Roads).............................................. 22 Exhibit 6.1: Assessment Factors ................................................................................................ 29 Exhibit 6.2: Impacts of Policy Options......................................................................................... 30
January 2005
Page ii.
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Study Background and Objectives The City of Hamilton City-wide Transportation Master Plan will provide inputs to the Growth Related Integrated Development Strategy (GRIDS) and make recommendations to Council on the adoption of a City-wide Transportation Policy that is cognisant of Vision 2020 and other City of Hamilton longterm planning objectives. The project has been divided into three distinct phases. The first phase consisted of the technical calibration of the existing transportation model to reflect current transportation conditions in Hamilton. The second phase, which is the object of this and other policy papers, will focus on the development of 23 policy papers in the following areas: Travel Demand, Urban Development, System Performance, Infrastructure Planning and Infrastructure Financing. Following the completion of the Policy Papers, the City will proceed to develop transportation scenarios (Phase 3 of the project) based upon the results of the policy work performed in Phase 2 and the land use scenarios developed through the broader GRIDS study and will test the efficiency and viability of these scenarios by integrating them into the calibrated model. This policy paper addresses the issue of Road Classification. The remainder of this introduction provides a general overview of the issues of Road Classification. Section 2 provides an overview of existing policies in Hamilton. Section 3 provides a review of practices in other jurisdictions. Section 4 presents the policy options and Section 5 sets out the recommended policies. Section 6 summarizes the impacts of these policies.
1.2 Road Classification Issues There has been a road classification hierarchy in widespread use in many jurisdictions for years: expressway/freeway, arterial, collector, and local. However, many variations on the basic hierarchy have been developed or proposed from time to time to provide more options to account for local circumstances and preferences in Hamilton. The traditional hierarchy may work well in newer urban areas, but Hamilton contains older mature communities with a legacy roadway system, restricted road allowances, and direct frontage and access even on major roads. In addition, substantial development occurred before setbacks were required under a zoning by-law, and in some of the older areas, structures encroach on the road allowance. A road classification system must have regard to the absence or presence truck routes, transit routes, designated bicycle network links, parking and loading restrictions, and snow route restrictions. The public should be able to determine the essential characteristics of the road on which they live, or on which they intend to live, through a transparent and simple process. The classification of roadways by function is also important for assessing the applicability of design features during road re-construction or other planning processes. For example, vertical traffic calming features (e.g. speed humps) may be appropriate for local and collector roads but are not appropriate for arterial roads. The challenge is to provide a solution that reflects the Hamilton situation while not deviating materially from national guidelines and standards.
January 2005
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
2.
REVIEW OF EXISTING CITY OF HAMILTON POLICIES
2.1 Existing Road Classification Systems Since the amalgamation of the former municipalities in Hamilton-Wentworth, the New City of Hamilton has not formally updated their road classification system. Historically, roads where classified as Regional Roads (generally taken as arterial roads) and other roads (generally consisting of local roads and collector roads). Exhibit 2.1 shows the former classification of Regional (arterial) roads, as set out in the Regional Official Plan. In addition to the distinction between former Regional Roads and local municipal roads, there are also a number of neighbourhoods that have had secondary transportation or neighbourhood plans completed wherein road classification systems were established or reviewed. Where these neighbourhood plans have been approved, the road classification systems are generally taken as official policy. An example of a neighbourhood plan that included a road classification system is Durand. In the 1987 Durand Neighbourhood Plan, streets were classified into Major Arterials, Minor Arterials, Collectors, Locals, Pedestrian Oriented Streets, Major Alley Links and Minor Alley Links. Research conducted for the 2002 Durand Neighbourhood Traffic Study did not reveal any background on how this classification system was developed nor could any official definition of “pedestrian oriented links” be found. In 2001/2002, the City of Hamilton also produced a Draft Specifications for Road Classifications. These Draft Specifications are reproduced as Exhibit 2.2 and Exhibit 2.3. These have not been adopted as official policy, but have been used on some recent studies as guidelines.
2.2 Official Plans 2 . 2 . 1 FORMER REGION OF HAM ILTON-W E N T W O R T H O F F ICIAL PLAN
Section 4.3.1, "Road Network", of the Hamilton-Wentworth Official Plan – Toward a Sustainable Region (December 2000), sets out the following provisions, in part: "Even as alternative modes of transportation are increasingly utilized, the road network will remain an essential element of the integrated transportation system. In addition to the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, roads provide transit corridors and rights-of-way for municipal services, utilities and emergency vehicles. Accordingly, efforts must be made to ensure that roads are maintained and improved to sustain the integrated system envisioned for this Region. The Region will: 4.3.1.1 Adopt the road system shown on Map No. 6, as the framework necessary to support the land use strategy defined by this Plan. (Map No. 6 is attached as Exhibit 2.1)
January 2005
Page 2
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 2.1: Former Regional Road Network (Region of Hamilton-Wentworth Official Plan)
January 2005
Page 3
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 2.2: “Current” Draft Road Specification System – Urban Areas
Urban - Designated by urban boundary and rural settlement areas. Urban Local Residential
Urban Collectors
Industrial/Commercial
Residential
Arterials
Industrial/Commercial
traffic service function traffic movement secondary traffic movement secondary traffic movement and land traffic movement and land consideration access of equal importance access of equal importance consideration land access primary land service/ access land access primary function traffic movement and land traffic movement and land function access of equal importance access of equal importance traffic volume (veh/day <1000 <3000 typical) interrupted flow (driveways, interrupted flow (driveways, flow characteristics stop controlled stop controlled intersections) 50 design speed (km/h) 60 posted speeds vehicle type desirable connections
passenger and service all types vehicles other local and collectors
parking (typical) min.intersection spacing (m) right-of-way width (m) (typical) traffic calming
January 2005
Major
traffic movement major consideration some access control
traffic movement primary consideration rigid access control
5000 - 20000
>10000
<5000
1000 - 12000
interrupted flow
interrupted flow
60
60
70
80-100
50-60
60
50-60
60-80
uninterrupted flow except at signals
all types passenger and service vehicles locals,collectors and arterials
all types
all types with up to 20% trucks collectors, arterials and expressways
generally avoided
permitted
express and local buses permitted
no restrictions or special facilities
typically no restrictions or special facilities
wider lanes or separate facilities where required
transit service accommodation of cyclists accommodation of pedestrians
50
40-50
Minor
sidewalks on one or both sides
industrial sidewalks provided where required - commercial, both sides
sidewalks on both sides
industrial sidewalks provided where required Commercial, both sides
sidewalks on both sides
no restrictions or restrictions one side only 60
no restrictions or restrictions one side only 60
few restrictions other than peak hour 60
few restrictions other than peak hour 60
peak hour restrictions 200
prohibited or peak hour restrictions 400
20
26
26
26
30-36
36
where required
not provided
where required, horizontal features only
not provided
where required, gateway features
not applicable
Page 4
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 2.3: “Current” Draft Road Specification System – Rural Areas
Rural - Generally characterized by sparsely spaced road network, typically without subdivision-type configuration, often with ditches on one/both sides. Rural Local traffic service function land service/ access traffic volume (veh/day typical) flow characteristics
<1000
Arterial
traffic movement equal consideration traffic movement primary consideration with access traffic movement equal consideration land access secondary consideration with land access > 5000 <5000
interrupted flow
interrupted flow
free flow except at signals
design speed (km/h)
60-80
80-100
80-100
posted speeds
50-70
60-80
60-80
passenger and service vehicles
passenger and service vehicles
all types, truck route
other local and collectors
locals,collectors and arterials
generally not present
typically not present
collectors,arterials,freeways, provincial highways buses may be present
no restrictions or special facilities
no restrictions or special facilities
pedestrians permitted, no special facilities prohibited
pedestrians permitted, no special facilities prohibited
wider lanes or special facilities desireable, where required pedestrians permitted, no special facilities prohibited
n/a
n/a
n/a
20-26
20-26
26-36
not applicable
not applicable
not applicable
vehicle type desirable connections transit service accommodation of cyclists accommodation of pedestrians parking (typical) min.intersection spacing (m) right-of-way width (m) (typical) traffic calming
January 2005
traffic movement secondary consideration land access primary consideration
Collector
Page 5
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
4.3.1.2 Classify public roads in the Region by function to assist the planning and implementation of road operation, improvement and maintenance programs. Full or partial control of abutting land uses shall be required when development warrants such action and when alternative access can be provided. The road system classification is shown on Map No. 6, and identified as follows: a)
Inter-regional Highways – strategic links in the road network with a primary function to carry long distance traffic into, out of, and through the Region;
b)
Red Hill Creek Expressway is a Regional Road linking Hwy. #403 in the west to the QEW in the east.
c)
Arterial roads - strategic links in the road network needed to carry relatively high volumes of long distance traffic within, between or through Area Municipalities, and/or to provide access past major geographic barriers and to inter-regional highways; and,
d)
All other public roads not designated on Map No. 6, under the preceding classifications will be classified as arterial, collector or local roads in the Area Municipal Official Plans.
4.3.1.5 Establish basic right-of-way widths for arterial roads as follows: •
60 metres (approximately 200 ft.) - when there is complete control of access to abutting land use.
•
• 26 - 36 metres (approximately 86- 120 ft.) - when there is only partial or no control of access to abutting land use.
4.3.1.7 Undertake special studies in developed areas to determine practical rights-of-way that can serve the traffic requirements along the road, while minimizing negative impacts on existing development. 4.3.1.10 Maintain and regularly monitor an efficient system of designated truck routes throughout the Region, utilizing portions of the arterial road system. 4.3.1.11 Require the use of landscaping and other techniques that minimize the visual and noise impacts from roadways on adjacent residential development or in the immediate vicinity of existing or proposed arterial roads. 4.3.1.12 Consider the following in the establishment of the right-of way and the design of new roads and the reconstruction of existing roads:
January 2005
a)
requirements for pedestrian movements along and across the roadway including provisions in the right-of-way for adequate sidewalks, centre median pedestrian refuges, wheel-chair ramps, and cross walks;
b)
demands for bicycle use along the roadway. Where indicated in the Regional Bicycle Commuting Network Plan (as may be revised from time-to-time), sufficient bicycle facilities will be provided if possible;
c)
impact of the road and traffic on surrounding land uses;
d)
use of the rights-of-way as a location for trees and plants in order to reduce dust movement, improve air quality and enhance or restore natural habitat; and,
e)
impact of the roadway on historical, cultural and recognized archaeological resources. Page 6
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
4.3.1.14 Designate a system of scenic drives with the co-operation of Area Municipalities, and prepare a scenic road map for distribution through tourist information centres and other appropriate agencies. Similarly, information on scenic cycling routes and attractions will be prepared to promote bicycle tourism. 4.3.1.18 Require Area Municipalities to include in all development plans provisions for sufficient offstreet loading/unloading and parking for all new development adjacent to Regional roads. 2 . 2 . 2 AREA MUNICIPAL OFFIC IAL PLANS
In general terms, each of the former area municipal official plans is in conformity with the former Regional plan with respect to the arterial, freeway, and highway network. Each of the area municipal plans contain references to the road systems within their respective jurisdictions, with the main elements being: Ancaster – The relevant objectives in the Town of Ancaster Official Plan relate to promoting the elimination of "offset" road intersections on major roads, to define a hierarchy of roads which recognizes their functional differences, and to ensure that the local street system design enhances the amenity and environmental value of the Village Core. Dundas – The Town of Dundas Official Plan sets out that the road network will be comprised of Provincial Highways, Arterials, Collectors, and Local Roads. The functional road classifications and standards contained in the Plan are similar to the other Area Municipalities, with the exception that King Street West will not be widened where the right-of-way is less that 26 metres, right-of-way widths for Collector Roads may be 18 to 26 metres, and reduced rights-of-way and road widths may be necessary within the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area. All new Arterial, Collector, and Local Roads within the Urban Policy Area will be provided with curbs, gutters, and storm sewers, and where possible, sidewalks will be provided on at least one side of Local Roads and on both sides of Arterial and Collector Roads. Reverse-frontage lots will not be permitted unless it is an infill situation. Flamborough – The Town of Flamborough Official Plan makes reference to the role of Provincial Highways and Regional Roads in the same manner as the Regional Official Plan, and sets out that all other roads shall be Local Roads, with the function to provide direct access to abutting properties and have maximum right-of-way widths of up to 20 metres. The plan also sets out that direct access to Regional Roads and on-street parking or stopping may be restricted on Regional Roads. The plan also provided that trucks could be prohibited on Local Roads if detrimental to the amenity of abutting residential uses. Glanbrook – The Township of Glanbrook Official Plan contains a description of the functional classification of roadways within the municipality that is consistent with the classical definition of highways, arterials, collectors, and local roads. It sets out that Arterial Roads shall have right-ofway widths of 26 to 36 metres, and Collector Roads, 26 to 30 metres. The Plan contains a minor discrepancy with Regional Official Plan in that Fletcher, Kirk, and Harrison Roads are identified as Arterials in the Regional Plan and Collectors in the Glanbrook Plan. The Plan encourages the Region to take over all roadways identified as Arterial Roads as set out on Schedule 'E' of the Plan, which would include Westbrook Road between former Hwy 20 and Binbrook Road. The Plan recommends that safe bicycle paths separate from the roadway be provided within the right-of-way of Arterial and Collector Roads. Hamilton – The City of Hamilton Official Plan recognized the road classification system in the Regional Official Plan and identifies four road classifications: Inter-Regional Highways, Arterials (which are Regional Roads), collectors and local roads. The OP sets out right-of-way widths as follows: Arterial Roads – 26 to 36 metres in areas where there is only partial or no control of access January 2005
Page 7
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
and 60 metres where there is complete control of access; collector roads – 20 to 26 metres; and, local roads – 20 metres. Section 3.1.11 provides guidance on access management, noting the intent of the Regional Official Plan to limit direct access to arterial roads to enhance the free-flow of traffic and minimize the impacts on abutting properties and pedestrian movement. The OP also makes reference to co-operating with the Region in the designation and development of scenic drives. Stoney Creek – The City of Stoney Creek Official Plan contains a description of the functional classification of roadways within the municipality that is consistent with the classical definition of highways, arterials, collectors, and local roads. Schedule 'D' to the Official Plan identifies the Functional Road Classification, with virtually all of the non-Regional roads on the schedule being collector roads on the historic concession grid, plus the service roads for the QEW. Collector roads are identified as carrying lower volumes than Arterial Roads, may provide direct access to abutting properties, and have right-of-way widths ranging from 20 to 26 metres. Local Roads are identified as having right-of-way widths of 20 metres or less. The Plan contains a table identifying the planned right-of-way of all Collector Roads. 2.2.3 SUMMARY
All of the Official Plans support a traditional hierarchy of Highways, Arterials, Collectors, and Local Roads. The ranges set out for right-of-way widths for the various classifications are generally consistent between the plans, with Arterial Roads at 26m – 36m, Collector Roads at 20m – 26m, and Local Roads at 20m, or less in certain circumstances. There is a recognition that direct access may be limited or controlled on Arterial and Collector Roads.
2.3 Other Studies in Hamilton Regional Road Allowance Width Study (Draft) (M. M. Dillon Limited, June 1986) – The objective of the study was to establish policies for road allowance widths that would meet accepted design standards, that would take local conditions and development into account, and would be practical to obtain. The study also proposed road allowance widths and methods to achieve those widths for the Regional Road System and specified City of Hamilton Streets. The right-of-way widths recommended for Regional Roads were as follows: Roadway Character 7-lane urban arterial 5-lane urban arterial 4-lane one-way urban arterial 3-lane urban arterial 2-lane urban collector with parking 2-lane rural collector
Right-of-Way Width 39m 32m 27m 20m 20m 26m
The assumptions used in these calculations assumed a 5m centre left-turn lane or turn lane plus median, and sidewalk widths of 1.5m on each side of the roadway. Since the preparation of the report, philosophies regarding sidewalk widths, boulevard widths, and provisions for cyclists have changed. While the report is useful in reviewing whether or not right-of-way widenings may be obtainable or unobtainable, it is dated with respect to the elements that should be considered in determining right-of-way and cross-section elements. Regional Transportation Review – Roads Component Working Paper (M. M. Dillon Limited, Feb 1995) – This report dealt, in part, with draft proposals for road transfers between jurisdictions (Province, Region, Area Municipalities). In July of 1992, the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) January 2005
Page 8
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
adopted revised upper tier road classification criteria that were endorsed by the Municipal Engineers Association (MEA), and were to be used by the MTO for all future requests for including roads in an upper tier road system. At that time, the MTO contributed significant subsidy dollars to municipalities, and had the last word on matters such as these. The criteria adopted by MTO were essentially all related to Arterial Roads, and considered minimum requirements for connecting urban centres, servicing commerce and industry, linking Highways, and servicing minimum population cells. The report concluded that, for the most part, the Regional Road system sufficient to meet present and future demand, i.e. that with some additions and deletions, the Regional Road system was consistent with application of the MTO criteria for upper tier roadways. Regional Transportation Review (Delcan, Dillon and IBI, April 1996)—The goal of the report was to determine how the transportation system should be changed and developed to support the Region’s Vision of sustainable development. While it focused on demand and supply of transportation infrastructure, it also provided a bicycle plan and a pedestrian plan that broke new ground in terms of supporting the concepts set out in Vision 2020. The implication for this policy paper is the overt recognition of separate facilities on Arterial Roads in support of a bicycle network. South Mountain Area Transportation Master Plan Study (Region/City of Hamilton Roads Department, 2000) – This study prepared an implementation and staging plan for road widenings on Hamilton's south mountain. It determined that the basic guiding principles identified for the study were, in part: • • •
consider the widening of major arterial roads (36m right-of-way) over minor arterials (30m right-of-way) consider the widening of north-south arterial roads with access to the Linc, and access to the escarpment crossings, over roads without access to these facilities consider the widening of arterial roads with limited access and reverse frontage residential development over arterials with unlimited access and residential driveways
The implication for this policy paper is that there are factors within a roadway classification (in this case, an Arterial Road classification) that may affect relative priorities for reconstruction/widening. Ancaster Comprehensive Transportation Study (Stantec Consulting, November 2001) – The study objectives were to protect the quality and integrity of existing neighbourhoods, achieve a more balanced transportation system with increased use of transit, cycling, and walking as travel modes, ensure urban developments do not negatively impact on the rural lifestyle, and recommend improved traffic calming techniques. The study recommended both structural improvements and transportation demand management (TDM) improvements, but more importantly, recommended that Special Character Roads be recognized specifically. The study noted, " The Ancaster community includes a number of roadways that, because of their structural, visual, and historic characteristics, are intended to remain open for public use, but be maintained at levels consistent with surrounding conditions. In designating the following Special Character Roads the primary assessment consideration should be the structural, visual, and historic characteristics of the road right-of-way. • •
Urban Roadways – Sulphur Springs Road, Lovers Lane, Jerseyville Road Rural Roadways – Old Dundas Road, Lions Club Road, Lower Lions Club Road, Artaban Road, Mineral Springs Road"
A "special character-oriented management process" is intended to manage the character of these roads by using a four-step process of identifying if a roadway meets the scoring factors associated with special character roads, evaluating the structural, visual, and historic characteristics of the January 2005
Page 9
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
roadway section, mitigating construction and maintenance activities to protect or enhance special character elements, and monitor the measures taken. The implication for this policy paper is that overt recognition should be given to "special character roads" in some manner that is consistent across the municipality. A Plea for Informed and Effective Road and Transportation Policies (Association for the Preservation of the Old Dundas-Ancaster Road, August 2000) - This report authored by stakeholders provides an extensive description of the current transportation problems on the Old Dundas Road, mainly relating to excessive traffic, and contends that actual design and operations practices have not conformed with existing policies. The report provides 11 recommendations dealing with: 1) recognition of scenic and historical character roads, 2) reduced road salt, 3) an inappropriate street map, 4) adoption of a special character road policy for the Town of Ancaster, 5) recognition of reviewing policy documents when proposing road work and maintenance, 6) standardization of paved surface widths, 7) resident consultation, 8) review of effectiveness of speed humps, 9) installation of traffic calming measures to improve safety, 10) requirements for input from soils experts and other associations, and 11) provisions for pedestrians. Putting People First: The New Land Use Plan for Downtown Hamilton (Regional Planning and Development Department, July 2001) and Putting People First: Downtown Transportation Master Plan (IBI Group, July 2001) – These two studies were undertaken together in an integrated process. In the former, a street hierarchy of Mobility Street, Traditional Street, and Local Street was set out as a guide to the planning and construction of public improvements to streets and sidewalks, and for the most part, Mobility Streets consist of arterial and collector roads in downtown Hamilton. The latter study avoided categorizing streets by traditional means, and instead identified roads in the downtown as primary or secondary streets. The implication for this policy paper is that road classifications in older areas of the City, and especially in the Downtown areas, are difficult unless the classification structure is sufficiently flexible enough to capture the specific characteristics of specific roadway sections. Shifting Gears: A New Cycling Plan for Hamilton-Wentworth (Region of Hamilton-Wentworth, Transportation, Operations & Environment Division, December 1999) - This report is an action plan that updates the 1992 Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Bicycle Network Study (Victor Ford and Associates Inc. and R.G.P. Transtech Inc.). The report notes that new directions for transportation described in Vision 2020 were incorporated into the 1995 Hamilton-Wentworth Official Plan and the 1996 Regional Transportation Review. The Regional Official Plan acknowledged that cycling is an essential form of transportation for many residents and states that the Region will ensure that road designs incorporate provisions for cyclists where warranted and appropriate.
2.4 Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways Ontario Regulation 239/02, Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways, was enacted in 2002, but a number of draft regulations had been under review for several years. The Standards utilized a classification table that correlated Highway Class (from 1 to 6) with ranges of Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT). Under this classification system, Class 1 roadways are given the highest priority while class 6 are given the lowest priority.
January 2005
Page 10
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 2.4: Classification of Highways from Ontario Regulation 239/02 Average Annual Daily Traffic (number of motor vehicles)
Posted or Statutory Speed Limit (kilometres per hour)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
15,000 or more
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
12,000 - 14,999
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
10,000 - 11,999
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
8,000 - 9,999
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
6,000 - 7,999
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
5,000 - 5,999
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
4,000 - 4,999
1
2
3
3
3
3
4
3,000 - 3,999
1
2
3
3
3
4
4
2,000 - 2,999
1
2
3
3
4
4
4
1,000 - 1,999
1
3
3
3
4
4
5
500 - 999
1
3
4
4
4
4
5
200 - 499
1
3
4
4
5
5
5
50 - 199
1
3
4
5
5
5
5
0 - 49
1
3
6
6
6
6
6
Most municipalities, including Hamilton, did not simply adopt the classifications as set out in the Regulation. Instead, they adopted service standards that met their needs while meeting the minimum standards as set out in the Regulation.
2.5 Hamilton Winter Control Level of Service Standards In report TOE01113, Harmonized Winter Control Level of Service Standards and Response Guideline, City staff noted that, "In a large urban setting, when the provincial standards are applied to a roadway network, an operating plan would be very fragmented and could fail to meet broader socio-economic needs of the community for transit and emergency response groups such as police, fire and ambulance. Although this may be a simplification, the provincial minimum suggests that there are six basic categories of roads, all of which are defined only by traffic volume (AADT). When these volumes are plotted on the City streets to determine road classifications, the streets that are important for emergency service provision are not necessarily captured. The volume-designationonly approach also makes route design very difficult." January 2005
Page 11
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
The report went on to set out the Hamilton Road Classification and Criteria as follows: "The Levels of Service Standards incorporate three priorities for our roadway network. Although the provincial standards utilize six classifications, this is impractical operationally and would likely create confusion during a storm event. The City of Hamilton criteria is as follows: Priority 1 Priority 1 roads include the Linc, escarpment crossings, arterial roads and areas of local concerns or hazards such as steep grades, sharp curves or hospital frontages. Priority 2
Primary and secondary collectors (e.g.. White Church Road, Limeridge Road)
Priority 3
Residential, rural hardtop and gravel roads (e.g. Shaver Road, East 31st Street)"
The Winter Control Level of Service Standards and the Operational Response Guideline, in addition to the 2003/2004 Snow Emergency and Clearing Priorities Map, are attached to this policy paper in Appendix A. The implication for this policy paper is that operational response guidelines essentially define classes of roadway.
January 2005
Page 12
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
3.
REVIEW OF PRACTICES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS
3.1 Transportation Association of Canada The Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) produced a Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads in September 1999. Section 1.3 deals with Design Classification, and the information and tables contained therein are the most commonly referred to sources for road classification. Table 1.3.4.1 Characteristics of Rural Roads, and Table 1.3.4.2 Characteristics of Urban Roads are the underpinnings of road classification systems across the country. However, many jurisdictions have found that some of the elements of the national guideline are not flexible enough or detailed enough to account for their own roadway characteristics, especially in older and larger urban areas, and that augmentation or modification is required. The City of Toronto is a case in point.
3.2 City of Toronto Toronto City Council, at its meeting of June 7, 8 and 9, 2000, adopted a new road classification system to consolidate and replace the various road classification systems inherited from Toronto's seven former municipalities. The road classification system is described in a report entitled "Road Classification System - A Consolidated Report" from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services1. The new road classification for Toronto is generally based on the classification systems of the former municipalities and road classification guidelines developed by the Transportation Association of Canada, but including some new features which recognize the multi-modal nature of transportation in Toronto. It divides streets into local, collector, minor arterial and major arterial roads and expressways. The new system has been used to classify all streets under the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto into these five classes. Transportation policies were also developed in conjunction with the road classification system, and recommendations were made regarding the respective roles of Community Councils and standing committees in dealing with transportation, traffic operations and road operations policies in the context of road classification. No changes to individual traffic by-laws (such as speed limit changes on particular streets) were recommended as part of the road classification review. Toronto City staff used the guidelines published by TAC, and adapted the table to reflect Toronto conditions. There were a number of refinements in the new road classification table that reflected Toronto's experience, because the TAC table was not sufficiently explicit to permit easy classification of Toronto’s streets. For example, staff noted that a road carrying between 10,000 and 12,000 vehicles per day could be classified as an “industrial/commercial collector”, a “minor arterial”, a “major arterial” or even an “expressway”. Toronto staff noted that, "The most significant characteristics in the new table are the relative importance of traffic movement versus property access, the daily motor vehicle traffic volume, traffic flow characteristics and the inclusion of pedestrian and cycling characteristics. The characteristics identified in Table 1 (See below) are intended to be mostly descriptive, but they may also serve a prescriptive role. In other words, they should describe existing characteristics of streets in each class, and assist in the classification of individual streets, but they may also help in determining appropriate changes to land use, property access, traffic operations or road operations on particular streets, so that in future these streets will be able to operate more as intended in the network. 1
Report can be found on City of Toronto Website http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/transportation/pdf/appendix3.pdf
January 2005
Page 13
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 3.1: City of Toronto Road Classification Criteria
January 2005
Page 14
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 3.2: City of Toronto Supplementation Decision Process Table
3.3 City of Ottawa The City of Ottawa Official Plan contains policies respecting road classifications. The City of Ottawa identifies five classes of roadways: • • January 2005
City Freeway Arterial Roads Page 15
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
• • •
Major Collector Collector Roads Local Roads
The City of Ottawa specifically identified the need to accommodate a range of possible transportation facilities within road right-of-ways such as: roadway lanes for cars, truck, bicycles and/or transit vehicles; sidewalks and pathways; central or side boulevards for landscaping; lighting; and spaces for street side amenities (bus stops, mail and newspaper boxes, etc.). Some of the pertinent policies adopted by the City of Ottawa regarding road classification inclucde Rural Road ROW - The City of Ottawa proposed to undertake a review of rural road ROWs and to harmonize policies of the various former local municipalities. Developing Areas - The City of Ottawa will establish the ROW of these future roadways, primarily on lands subject to a subdivision application, by way of City approved standards for the development of roadways using the subdivision approval process. Exception to ROW Requirements - Under certain situations the City of Ottawa may decide to reduce or waive the requirements shown in this Plan for the acquisition of lands for a road widening from adjacent properties. This may be done to reflect site constraints, existing physical development or encroachment, placement of buildings, heritage structures, scale of proposed development and pedestrian safety. Decisions to possibly vary right-of-way requirements will be based on consideration of such matters as: − − − − − −
Comprehensive studies Impact on valued resources Recent road designs Potential effect on site development Pedestrian widening/easement in Central Area Building setback incongruities
Corner Triangles - The City of Ottawa will require the land for a road widening to provide corner triangles at intersections. Rail Crossings - The City of Ottawa may also require additional rights-of-way where there is an existing at grade crossing of a city road and a railway line.
3.4 City of Guelph The City of Guelph produced an Interim Report on Alternative Development Standards (October 22, 1996). In it, alternative criteria for a number of street types were proposed. The street types included Mews, Minor Street, Traditional Street, Collector, Arterial, and Grand Boulevard. The rights-of-way proposed for the first three street types (all local in character) were 13m, 16m, and 20m respectively, in keeping with the stated intent of the study to increase housing affordability and choice. The standards were not adopted by the City of Guelph, but they did influence later studies; specifically, the Downtown Guelph Public Realm Plan, approved by Guelph Council in June 2001. Excerpts from the Plan are reproduced below. Street Classification Each of the streets in the downtown has its own character. To develop a streetscape manual that is comprehensive, yet manageable, the project required a classification of downtown streets that categorizes streets into groupings with similar characteristics. Numerous character elements were January 2005
Page 16
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
considered in order to classify downtown streets, with land use and scale being the key determinants. From the analysis, the following categories were formulated. A more thorough analysis of streetscape characteristics and a list of downtown streets by category can be found in Appendix B. Streetscape Characteristics as determined by Adjacent Land Use Characteristics: Main Streets have clearly defined street walls, are usually two stories or greater, and are defined by both heritage and contemporary style buildings. The public realm is defined by uniform setbacks with little if any separation between sidewalks and road surfaces. On-street parking defines road boundaries during business hours in most cases. The predominant activity/land use is retail and retail services, often with residential uses in upper stories. Heritage Residential / Commercial streets are predominately bounded by heritage facades with varying setbacks. There is a noticeable separation of building facade from the right-of-way. Space between the right-of-way and facades is often soft landscape. On-street parking usually defines the road boundary during business hours. The predominant activity/land use is retail and office services. Suburban streets usually exhibit a poorly defined street wall composed of contemporary styled facades. Varying setbacks exist with little separation between sidewalks, road surfaces, and parking lots. Public space is dominated by parking and road surfaces. The majority of parking occurs in lots. The predominant activity/land use is retail and office services. Residential streets are bounded by residences or former residences with varying setbacks. Public space is defined by varying setbacks composed of heritage and/or contemporary styled facades and no significant street wall. A noticeable separation exists between pedestrian sidewalks and road surfaces. Predominant activities/land uses include residential, professional office and service commercial uses. Urban Link streets exhibit both well-defined and poorly defined street walls. Adjacent structures range from heritage facades to rears of buildings to bridge abutments to open space and parking lots. Setbacks vary with little separation between pedestrian sidewalks and road surfaces. The predominant function is one of connectivity. Streetscape Characteristics as determined by Street Scale Characteristics: Arterial streets are designated as “arterial street” in the Official Plan. Road surfaces dominate the public realm. Pedestrians are generally traveling to a destination with few opportunities to stop enroute. Local streets are designated as “local” or “arterial street” in the Official Plan. Road surfaces appear less prominent than those in the arterial designation. The priority for public space is predominantly vehicular. Freedom of movement exists for pedestrians to stop, rest, or enter buildings. Pedestrian streets have no Official Plan designation. Road surfaces do not visually dominate the public realm. A significant tree canopy or street wall helps to define the space. Pedestrian movement is less restricted.
January 2005
Page 17
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
4.
POLICY OPTIONS
The national guideline produced by TAC is an excellent source to use as a foundation for policies on road classification in Hamilton. However, experience in three mature municipalities in Ontario as outlined above suggests that there must be recognition of the special character of roadways in certain areas. In other words, celebrate diversity, but do so in a way that is generally consistent with guidelines. This theme is explored further in the discussion of potential policies.
4.1 Need for Road Classification System As the City of Hamilton continues to face growth-related development in urban fringe areas and redevelopment in existing areas, a sound road classification system is an essential requirement. A road classification system is required to guide the design and construction of new roadways as well as provide guidance on appropriate changes for existing road facilities. While there are a number of existing documents that provide information on current road classifications, including the former Regional Road classifications, official plans, and neighbourhood plans, there currently does not exist a “one-stop-shopping” source on existing road classifications. The remainder of this chapter outlines policy options for a road classification system, but additional work will be required to apply this classification system to existing roadways in order to officially classify each roadway. This work could be done in conjunction with the adoption of a new Official Plan for Hamilton.
4.2 Approach to Defining a Functional Classification System As outlined in the Transportation Association of Canada’s (TAC) Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads (1999), “the objective of an urban street classification system is to group streets according to the character of service they are intended to provide. Thus, the classification of streets assists in establishing, amongst other factors, the geometric design features for each group, consistent with the long term operational needs of that particular group.” There is a need to adopt a functional road classification system for Hamilton. In doing so, a number of potential approaches exist. One option would be to simply adopt the TAC Guidelines, which generally describe the characteristics of roadways in urban and rural settings, using categories ranging from freeways to laneways. However, given the complexities of Hamilton's large and old built form, and the need to recognize the special characteristics of roadways that do not neatly fall into one category, this standardized approach will not suffice. Many jurisdictions have used the TAC Guidelines as the basis for their own road classification systems, but have augmented or modified them to meet their own needs. This approach is recommended for Hamilton, subject to a number of special considerations as described in the following sections.
4.3 Core Road Classification System A road classification system consists of two basic elements - a list of define roadway types and a list of corresponding characteristics of each roadway type. Building on the work already completed by the City of Hamilton, three different roadway types are proposed for rural roads and six types are proposed for urban road as follows: January 2005
Page 18
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Rural Roads •
Rural Local
•
Rural Collector
•
Rural Arterial
Urban Roads •
Residential Local
•
Industrial/Commercial Local
•
Residential Collector
•
Industrial/Commercial Collector
•
Minor Arterial
•
Major Arterial
Basic descriptions of these roadway types are found in the first two rows of Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2. The TAC Design Classification includes a number of characteristics used to classify rural and urban roadways as listed below: • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
service function land service traffic volume flow characteristics design speed average running speed vehicle type normal connections/desirable connections transit service* accommodation of cyclists* accommodation of pedestrians* parking* minimum intersection spacing* right-of-way width* (* In the TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, these characteristics are identified for urban roads only.)
Many of these road classification characteristics can apply without qualification to the road system in Hamilton in order to define the core classification of a road section. However, there are some characteristics that should be possible to vary, depending on the road section in question. These include:
January 2005
•
traffic calming*
• •
vehicle type accommodation of cyclists
Page 19
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
• •
accommodation of pedestrians parking
•
boulevards between walk and curb*
* not included in TAC definitions A Core Classification Table should include traffic service function, land service/access, traffic volume, flow characteristics, design speed, average running speed, desirable connections, transit service, right-of-way width, and minimum intersection spacing. Every road section in Hamilton would be categorized as arterial, collector, or local using these core characteristics. Road sections not meeting all of the characteristics in a category would necessarily fall into a lower category, as these characteristics should be considered non-variable. Building on the TAC Guidelines and the Draft Road Classification System for Hamilton contained in Exhibits 2.2 and 2.3, Exhibit 4.1 and Exhibit 4.2 propose a core road classification system for rural and urban roads respectively.
January 2005
Page 20
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 4.1: Proposed Road Classification System (Rural Roads) Core Road Classification - Rural Characteristic
Rural Local
traffic service function traffic movement secondary consideration
Rural Collector
Rural Arterial
traffic movement equal consideration with access
land service/ access
land access primary consideration
traffic movement equal consideration with land access
traffic volume (veh/day typical) flow characteristics design speed (km/h) average running speeds (km/hr) desirable connections
< 1000
< 5000
traffic movement primary consideration land access secondary consideration > 5000
interrupted flow 60-80 50-70
interrupted flow 80-100 60-80
free flow except at signals 80-100 60-80
other local and collectors
locals, collectors and arterials
generally not present 20-26
typically not present 20-26
collectors, arterials, freeways, provincial highways buses may be present 20-36
not applicable
not applicable
not applicable
transit service right-of-way width (m) (typical) traffic calming (default) vehicle type (default) accommodation of cyclists (default) accommodation of pedestrians (default) parking (default)
passenger and service vehicles no restrictions or special facilities pedestrians permitted, no special facilities prohibited
passenger and service vehicles all types, truck route paved shoulders if traffic volume > 1000 veh/day; otherwise no paved shoulders restrictions or special facilities walkway/sidewalk on one side if it connects rural settlement area to pedestrians permitted, no special school or community facility less than 2.5 km away; otherwise facilities pedestrians permitted, no special facility prohibited prohibited
Note: These default categories may be varied depending on area characteristics and requirements and where supported by planning study.
January 2005
Page 21
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 4.2: Proposed Road Classification System (Urban Roads)
Core Road Classification - Urban Industrial/Commercial Local
Characteristic
Residential Local
traffic service function
traffic movement secondary consideration
land service/ access
land access primary function
land access primary function
traffic volume (veh/day typical)
< 1000
< 3000
flow characteristics
Residential Collector
Industrial/Commercial Collector
Minor Arterial
Major Arterial
traffic movement traffic movement and land traffic movement and land traffic movement major secondary consideration access of equal importance access of equal importance consideration
traffic movement primary consideration
traffic movement and land traffic movement and land access of equal importance access of equal importance
permitted, with some access control
permitted, but with rigid access control
interrupted flow (driveways, interrupted flow (driveways, stop controlled stop controlled intersections) intersections)
< 8000
< 12000
5000 - 20000
> 10000
interrupted flow
interrupted flow
predominantly uninterrupted flow
uninterrupted flow except at signals
design speed (km/h)
50
60
60
60
70
70-100
average running speeds (km/hr)
40-50
50
50-60
60
50-60
60-80
desirable connections
other local and collectors
locals, collectors and arterials
collectors, arterials and expressways
transit service
generally avoided
permitted
express and local buses permitted
right-of-way width (m) (typical)
18 - 20
20 - 26
20 - 26
20 - 26
20-36
26 - 36
min.intersection spacing (m)
60
60
60
60
200
400
traffic calming (default)
where required
not provided
where required, horizontal features only
not provided
where required, gateway features
not applicable
vehicle type (default)
passenger and service vehicles
all types
passenger and service vehicles
all types
all types, may be truck route
all types, truck route
accommodation of cyclists (default)
no restrictions or special facilities
Wide lane
January 2005
wider lanes or separate facilities where required
wider lanes or separate facilities where required
Page 22
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Core Road Classification - Urban Characteristic accommodation of pedestrians (default) parking (default) boulevards between walk & curb (default)
Industrial/Commercial Industrial/Commercial Residential Collector Local Collector industrial sidewalks industrial sidewalks sidewalks on one or both sidewalks on both sides provided where required provided where required sides commercial, both sides Commercial, both sides no restrictions or no restrictions or few restrictions other than few restrictions other than restrictions one side only restrictions one side only peak hour peak hour Residential Local
1.5 - 2.5 metres
1.5 - 2.5 metres
1.5 - 3.0 metres
1.5 - 3.0 metres
Minor Arterial
Major Arterial
sidewalks on both sides peak hour restrictions
prohibited or peak hour restrictions
1.5 - 3.0 metres
1.5 - 3.0 metres
Note: These default categories may be varied depending on area characteristics and requirements and where supported by planning study.
January 2005
Page 23
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
4.4 Variations on Core Classification Elements Other road classification characteristics should also appear on the table for traffic calming, vehicle type, accommodation of cyclists, accommodation of pedestrians, parking, and boulevards between walk and curb (six characteristics in all). However, these characteristics should be considered variable, so that if the default thresholds for the characteristics are not met, the road section would not automatically fall into a lower category. It is anticipated that most roadways in Hamilton would meet the default thresholds for these characteristics, but there are some that would not. Two road classification characteristics that are not included in the TAC classifications are Traffic Calming and Boulevards. Traffic calming was proposed as a criteria in the Draft City of Hamilton Road Classification System (see Exhibit 2.2 shown previously) and is an important consideration for several reasons, not the least of which is ensuring that traffic calming devices are used appropriately on different road types. Boulevards should be included in this part of the table because of the fundamental importance of boulevard widths on the ultimate cross-section, placement of utilities, and separation of pedestrians from vehicular traffic. Variations on the defaults presented in the core classification system may be appropriate for the identified elements depending on local characteristics, historical practices and strategic planning objectives (e.g. establishment of a bicycle route). These considerations would be made through appropriate planning studies, namely Environmental Assessments. A brief discussion of the rationale for variations on the default road classification characteristics is provided below. 4 . 4 . 1 TRAFFIC CALMING
As discussed in the Traffic Calming Policy Paper, The Canadian Guide categorizes traffic calming devices into four broad categories: horizontal deflection, vertical deflection, obstruction and signage. Given the increasing move towards traffic calming, it is appropriate to identify where traffic calming may or may not be appropriate in the road classification system. Notwithstanding that traffic calming would not normally be utilized for certain road classifications, there may be special circumstances where some form of traffic calming may be recommended, e.g. traffic calming on a heritage commercial collector or arterial roadway. 4 . 4 . 2 VEHICLE TYPE
Variations in the types of vehicles permitted on a road section may be recommended if that is needed to support an integrated truck route system or for routings for vehicles carrying dangerous or hazardous materials. Variations may also be recommended where mobility and access considerations compete against quality of life for abutting residents. 4 . 4 . 3 ACCOMMODATION OF CYC LISTS
There may be a need to vary the default values set out in the Core Classification Table to account for legacy situations, particularly where the available rights-of-way are limited and setbacks of buildings are limited or absent. For example, it may be decided that cyclists would be accommodated in regular shared lanes on a downtown arterial road because of insufficient space for separate bicycle facilities.
January 2005
Page 24
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
4 . 4 . 4 A C C O M M ODATION OF PEDESTRIAN S
On some very low volume roads, culs-de-sac, and the like, there should be some flexibility to allow for alternative accommodations for pedestrians. 4 . 4 . 5 PARKING
Because of the limited rights-of-way in older areas of the City, there may be a need to permit onstreet parking because of the general lack of off-street parking for residents and businesses. 4 . 4 . 6 BOULEVARDS BETWEEN WALK AND CURB
Notwithstanding that boulevards are recommended in most applications, there may be variances required when the needs for on-street parking, cycling, and the ability to provide front yards and offstreet parking spaces are balanced.
4.5 Other Elements to be Considered with Road Classification In addition to the core classification elements, there are several other roadway features that could apply to particular road sections including: •
higher order transit system features
•
special character roads, heritage roads, and scenic routes
• •
truck routes culs-de-sacs
•
sub-categories of roadways types within a Core Road Classification
It is proposed that these features be considered on an “as justified” basis, and not be included in the core road classification system. Similar to the core classification elements that are permitted to vary, these elements would be addressed through special studies. Each of these special features is discussed below. 4 . 5 . 1 HIGHER ORDER TRANSIT FEATURES
The long range transit plan for Hamilton has, since 1971, included recommendations to establish a system of higher order transit, most likely Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). BRT could be implemented to varying degrees and could include the following elements:
January 2005
•
transit signal priority
•
dedicated transit lanes
• •
restricted parking and/or loading enhanced transit stops and/or stations
•
pedestrian connections
• •
pre-board fare payment special land use designations along the corridor
•
other urban design features
Page 25
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
When higher order transit corridors are identified, it would be appropriate to describe the roadways to be utilized with a special designation. This special designation would preserve and re-enforce the right to implement some or all of the features of BRT. 4 . 5 . 2 SPECIAL CHARACTER ROADS, HERITAGE ROADS, AND SCENIC ROUTES
There is a legacy of recognizing the special features of Hamilton roadways. The Niagara Escarpment and areas with significant heritage and natural features have influenced policy. It is certain that many of the legacy policies relating to those roadways should be recognized in a road classification system, but there are a number of ways that this can be done. One method would be to assign such roads to the lowest road classification matching a number of its features. An example is the Old Dundas Road, which has been identified as a Special Character Road in Ancaster. It could be considered a Local Road, because many of the road's characteristics are reflective of the Local Road classification rather than a Collector Road classification, notwithstanding that it fulfills a Collector Road function in linking the communities of Ancaster and Dundas. Another method would be to formally describe such roads using a core classification system, but also to identify additional design elements and operating characteristics that are reflective of its special status. The elements that could be considered for inclusion in this section include: •
recognition of scenic and historical character
•
views of and from the Niagara Escarpment
•
potential for alternative winter control practices to reduce road salt
These special designations could be adopted in area transportation master plans or through special Council by-laws. 4.5.3 TRUCK ROUTES
There is currently a Truck Route system that has been established by by-law, and it is recommended that the model be continued. However, trucks routes should only be permitted on Arterial Roads and higher, unless there is a special circumstance requiring a variance. Additional details on the truck route system are provided in the Goods Movement Policy Paper. 4 . 5 . 4 C U L S -D E -SAC
Culs-de-sacs could be considered separately or within the local road category of the core classification system. Culs-de-sac would not have to be considered as a separate category if a model of core classification system plus detailed matrix were adopted. There is considerable evidence to support limiting the lengths of new culs-de-sac to 150m, and there may be options for reduced rights-of-way and sidewalks on culs-de-sac. 4 . 5 . 5 S U B -CATEGORIES WITHIN A CORE ROAD CLASSIFICATION
A number of studies have recommended special classifications – mobility streets, traditional streets, primary roadways, secondary roadways, and so on. The numbers and variations have become difficult to track and understand. It is therefore recommended that every roadway be categorized January 2005
Page 26
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
according to the core classification system. However, for planning purposes, other roadway descriptions could be used. These descriptions would have no legal standing.
January 2005
Page 27
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
5.
RECOMMENDED POLICIES
The establishment of a clear and understandable road classification system is a basic requirement for any urban area. In the preparation of this policy paper, several different approaches were considered for developing the road classification system for Hamilton. One approach considered was to adopt a standard road classification system based on the Transportation Association of Canada’s system. A second approach considered would be to develop a more elaborate system to include the many possible features and characteristics applicable to roads in the City of Hamilton. The latter approach has certain legal implications in that it may undermine the City’s ability to enforce a basic road classification system (which is necessary for the efficient operation of the City’s roadways) and it may also open up the City to liability issues. In the end, a hybrid approach was adopted whereby a basic roadway classification system is proposed, with provisions for other roadway features and characteristics to be considered when required, in conjunction with planning studies falling under the class environmental assessment process. Based on this general direction, the following recommended policies and implementation actions are proposed for inclusion in the Transportation Master Plan. Recommended Policy Adopt a core road classification system that is sufficiently broad so as to permit the assignment of every road in Hamilton to the core system, but also allows for refinements that recognize nonstandard or special situations through the application of features involving traffic calming, vehicle type, accommodation of cyclists, accommodation of pedestrians and persons using mobility aids, parking, and boulevards, without requiring the revision of roadway classifications. Implementation •
On approval of the classification system, the City should assemble a special team to classify all roadways under the jurisdiction of the City of Hamilton. In most cases, this will be a matter of re-affirming existing classifications as identified in neighbourhood plans.
•
Prepare and maintain a geographic information system of roadway section by classification.
Recommended Policy In conjunction with planning studies, consider variations to the core classification system and additional descriptors where appropriate to account for unique or special roadway characteristics. Implementation
January 2005
•
Consult existing guidelines and design manuals (e.g. Traffic Calming Guidelines, Hamilton Bicycle Design Guidelines, etc.) in determining the rationale for and implications of varying from default roadway characteristics in the Core Roadway Classification System.
•
Consider other roadway elements in conjunction with road classification on an “as needed” basis including: ·higher order transit system features, special character roads, heritage roads, and scenic routes, truck routes, culs-desacs and sub-categories of roadways types.
•
Respect special roadway designations when applying design standards and in developing and applying maintenance practices while ensuring safety to all road users.
Page 28
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
6.
IMPACTS OF POLICY OPTIONS
6.1 Assessment Factors Assessment of policy options is based on factors for achieving sustainable growth and development across all of the policy papers developed in this project. They fall under the three major categories of social, economic and environmental impacts, and they are described briefly below. Exhibit 6.1: Assessment Factors Impact Social
Economic
Environmental
Acts on
Description (or examples)
Residential communities
Improves quality of life in neighbourhoods
Safety and security
Reduces collisions; improves personal safety and security
Ease of implementation & governance
Provides clarity, measurability, accountability
Development
Attracts employment, capital, optimal use of transportation infrastructure capacity, and future land use
Land value
Increases land value, or does not decrease land values
Operating and capital costs
Reduces or defers public and private costs of transportation capital (construction or acquisition of fixed infrastructure and rolling stock) and operations (maintenance, enforcement, delay, fuel, etc.)
Congestion
Maintains traffic flow at acceptable level
Air quality
Reduction of Criteria Air Contaminants
Noise and vibration
Minimizes noise impacts
Natural environment
Improves water quality, green spaces, flora and fauna etc.
The rating system that will be used to apply these criteria is a visual five-point scale, to reflect a range from strong positive impact to strong negative impact. (+, +, o, --, --)
+ Represents the strong positive impact, o represents absence of significant impact either way, and -- represents strong negative impact.
6.2 Summary of Evaluation The assessment factors have been applied to the policy options associated with road classifications in Hamilton as discussed in Section 5. The results of a preliminary qualitative assessment using the rating scheme described previously are provided in Exhibit 6.2.
January 2005
Page 29
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Exhibit 6.2: Impacts of Policy Options
Natural Environment
Noise and Vibration
Air Quality
Congestion
Land Value
Development
Environmental
Operating and Capital Costs
Economic Ease of Implementation and Governance
Safety and Security
Policy Option
Residential Communities
Social
Adopt a core road classification system that is sufficiently broad so as to permit the assignment of every road in Hamilton to the core system, but also allows for refinements that recognize nonstandard or special situations through the application of features involving traffic calming, vehicle type, accommodation of cyclists, accommodation of pedestrians and persons using mobility aids, parking, and boulevards, without requiring the revision of roadway classifications.
+
+
0
+
+
0
0
0
+
+
In conjunction with planning studies, consider variations to the core classification system where appropriate for features involving traffic calming, vehicle type, accommodation of cyclists, accommodation of pedestrians, parking, and boulevards, without requiring the revision of roadway classifications.
+
+
-
+
+
0
0
0
+
+
J:\1173\10.0 Reports\Road Classification\TTRroad-classification2004-08-04.doc\2005-01-11\CL
January 2005
Page 30
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
Appendix A
EXISTING WINTER CONTROL STANDARDS
January 2005
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
January 2005
Page A-1
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
APRIL 2004
Page A-2
City of Hamilton DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PAPERS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HAMILTON ROAD CLASSIFICATION POLICY PAPER
January 2005
Page A-3
