rich 1.0 Action Network https://actionnetwork.org <link href='https://actionnetwork.org/css/style-embed-v3.css' rel='stylesheet' type='text/css' /><script src='https://actionnetwork.org/widgets/v6/letter/sidney-traffic-calming-policy?format=js&source=widget'></script><div id='can-letter-area-sidney-traffic-calming-policy' style='width: 100%'><!-- this div is the target for our HTML insertion --></div> Capital Bike - Peninsula Action List https://actionnetwork.org/groups/peninsula-lc https://can2-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/letters/photos/000/449/013/normal/Letter_Campaign_Banner.png Sidney is proposing a new Traffic Calming Policy which is great! Having an official process for staff to respond to traffic calming requests, and a section on including traffic calming in new and reconfigured roads is excellent. This will come to Committee of the Whole soon at 6:00PM on Monday, June 1, cutoff for late correspondence is at noon. If it's approved then it will come back to Council on Monday, June 8th. There are some concerns in the details though: There's a requirement for 50% support from nearby property owners when the initial traffic calming request is made by a resident. Ignoring the problematic exclusion of renters right out of the gate, 50% approval is a high bar to meet before staff will even begin assessing whether there is data to back up the safety concerns. There's also another 67% approval from all residential units in the area required after design but before construction starts. While this may be fine in some situations, the concern is that there may be safety issues that warrant traffic calming but are denied because they aren't supported by people afraid of change, or of being inconvenienced. It's unclear what will happen when a request doesn't get the required 50% of signatures but staff believe the request has merit. In other CRD municipalities such as Victoria and Saanich there is no requirement for a threshold of support in their traffic calming policies, this idea comes from West Vancouver. Secondly, this policy prevents any requests for traffic calming on arterial roads such as Resthaven, Beacon (west of Fifth), Fifth (south of Beacon), and Lochside. While some traffic calming such as speed humps may not be appropriate on arterials, this would prevent curb extensions (bump-outs), lane narrowing, and raised median islands. All methods which have already been used on parts of Resthaven and Fifth, and that reduce driver speed in places with high volumes of people on foot or bike. Daylighting (removal of parking near intersections) is important but it isn't included in the list of traffic calming options Safety should not be compromised because of an arbitrary threshold of support from property owners, and it should not be prevented on arterial roads. It should be based on data and backed by evidence, whether that evidence comes from Sidney or from studies in other places. Please contact Mayor & Council using this form with your feedback, both positive and negative, especially if you live or ride in Sidney. https://actionnetwork.org/letters/sidney-traffic-calming-policy