A Port Lambton resident is hoping St. Clair Township will consider moving a proposed upgraded crosswalk away from his home, as he believes the new crossing will, among other things, cause safety issues along the St. Clair Parkway.
Art Parrish moved to Port Lambton in 2015 and said he was shocked when the township informed him a few years ago that the crosswalk in front of his home was set to be upgraded to something more complex.
After council found out that the current pedestrian crossing – which has single white painted lines and one pedestrian crossing sign on each side of the road and leads the north of Brander Park – did not meet the requirements to justify a controlled crossing based on changes to the Highway Traffic Act, township staff determined that it would pose a ‘liability risk’ to remove it.
Council later received a letter from another Port Lambton resident requesting a protective crossing, and in 2019 voted to install a Level 2, Type B pedestrian crosswalk at the same spot. It would feature regulatory signs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, as well as pavement markings.
Parrish said the new crossing, set to be installed later this year, is overkill and will create more problems than it solves.
“This has been going on for two years,” he said. “It’s wearing me down, it’s affecting my health and it’s frustrating to me because until I feel my concern in they didn’t even know that this crossing was out of compliance.”
Aside from being a visual annoyance for property owners along the parkway, Parrish said the location of the upgraded crossing is a low visibility area for pedestrians and drivers (“This is the most dangerous spot to cross,” he said), and will cause significant stop-start traffic problems during busy summer days.
Parrish also said the current site isn’t ideal for access to Brander Park.
“The flow of pedestrian traffic isn’t what they say it is. (The township) keeps talking about the crossing as serving the pond parking lot on the east trail … it doesn’t.”
“I’ve asked if it could just be moved down the (parkway), closer to the park entrance. Because it serves the pond parking lot, which is 500 meters south, there’s a new subdivision is going up, so both of the things that serve this crossing are there,” Parrish said. “So if you move this closer to the entrance, it’s better for pedestrians coming from the new subdivision and for pedestrians who are using the pond parking lot.”
Though he has repeatedly asked council to reconsider the upgraded crosswalk, Parrish said he has been frustrated by his refusal to take a second look.
“I only found out about it last October. We followed the protocols and (council) voted down a motion to reconsider. I did a support proposal document, which was voted down. I hired Jeff Wesley, a former mayor and councilor … they gave him an audience but they voted down the motion to reconsider,” said Parrish. “So you can understand my frustration that I have a legitimate concern and it doesn’t get addressed. I understand that they’re probably looking at it like ‘we’ve talked this thing to death’.”
He added: “There’s a new concern here, because all this equipment is going to be put here. So you go from being completely out of compliance to the second highest level of road crossing possible, for a trail that’s only open six months a year, used by a handful of people and it’s going to destroy the natural beauty of this whole area.”
Mayor Steve Arnold said while he understands Parrish’s concerns, he and council believe they made the correct decision.
“A number of years ago council upgraded the east side of the road so we could have a walkway there with curb and gutter. And in that location we put an unprotected crossing into the north end of Brander Park, which ties into the walkway we have there, which connects to the west side of the park,” said Arnold.
“About a year and a half ago, we had a letter from a resident concerned about people crossing at that location and felt we needed a protective crossing there. That went to council, council and agreed that’s why it got on the work log to do a capital project.”
Arnold said: “It’s gone to council a couple of times and council decided to leave it there.”
Some concerns that Parrish raised can be addressed, the mayor said.
“It’s my understanding that the crossing will have little white flashing lights on top of the sign – it’s not going to be stop-start, but you’re still going to have vehicles stopping there and that was one of Mr. Parrish’s issues. As far as the lights flashing, you can put blinders up so you don’t see them in houses, those are things that protect residential areas so that you don’t cause irritation for the people who live along there.
“This is a low-end crossing, it’s not the high-end one,” Arnold continued. “It just has small, flashing white lights and that’s what was deemed to be necessary. Staff is looking at other locations that need to be upgraded along the parkway – we have seven crossings in that 42-klometre section of roadway.”
count. Rose Atkins said she was satisfied with leaving the crosswalk at its current location rather than moving it south.
“We’ve been working on this for a couple of years, and council decided to leave the crosswalk where it was originally placed,” she said. “There were studies done about the light– an illumination summary, it’s called – and I’m comfortable in leaving it where it is as it services both directions of the community.”
Arnold suggests that if the crosswalk ended up becoming an eyesore or if traffic problems did begin to occur at the crossing, changes could be made in the future.
“If something happens and it doesn’t work out, council does allocations and reallocations if need be. And we can upgrade or downgrade the crossing as required,” he said.