Parking reinstated

Lake on the Mountain to a get a pedestrian crosswalk

Back on the table at Committee of the Whole last Thursday, a lengthy—and at times confusing debate—was conducted by members of council surrounding a staff report on Lake on the Mountain and County Road 7 road improvements. What came out of the long discussion were several amendments to the motion on the table. The ensuing discussion talked about whether a traffic study was needed, whether a pedestrian crossing was needed, how much parking there is and how much was needed along who should provide it, with a number of councillors balking at the idea of spending over $600,000 to fix a problem that didn’t really exist in the views of some. The meeting also heard four audience comments, all in favour of parking being restored to the location.

Council voted in favour of approving a pedestrian crosswalk for County Road 7 at Lake on the Mountain, and directed staff to solicit a financial commitment from Ontario Parks to offset project costs, with a report to come back to council. The news almost everyone was hoping to hear came as Council approved the reinstatement of parking on County Road 7 on both sides of the road adjacent to Lake on the Mountain Provincial Park for a distance of 111 metres for the 2022 season, together with agreeing to undertake a parking needs analysis. “In terms of what we dealt with last year, as a result of what we experienced the year before, in many ways in trying to solve one problem we created another one,” expressed Mayor Steve Ferguson. “This matter has gone on for a considerable amount of time, there has been all kinds of commentary, negative and positive; we have neighbour against neighbour, neighbour against business, business against neighbour, we have conflicting opinions and views amongst members of council, we cannot let this go forward and languish for the summer of 2022.”

Based on results from an earlier consultant’s pedestrian and traffic review, along with responses from the public, staff’s recommendation was for a pedestrian crossover, pedestrian walkways and roadside parking. “The proposed design phase would include a parking analysis that would be conducted as part of the detailed design and not as a separate full study,” said Aynsley Osborne, Development Coordinator. “The intention of the parking analysis is to confirm the location of the parking spaces and the number of parking spaces that can be safely accommodated based on the existing road allowance, sightlines, setbacks, etc.“ She confirmed the construction costs of the project with asphalt walkways is anticipated to be about $385,000, which can roughly be broken down into five categories. “The first category being mobilization, demobilization, supervision, site office, etc. would be $50,000,” said Osborne. Asphalt for the parking spaces is anticipated to be about $100,000, the asphalt for the walkway and the curb about $150,000. “The PXO [pedestrian crossover] would be about $66,000 and then signage and line painting would be about $19,000.” She noted that if walkways were constructed with concrete sidewalks instead of asphalt walkways, costs would increase from $385,000 to $454,000.

Councillor Stewart Bailey said he would like to see a parking analysis done first. “The parking analysis will not only confirm if roadside parking is appropriate for the area, but also determine where and how many roadside parking spaces could be accommodated and that’s what I’d really like to see,” said Bailey. “Let’s start with a phased-in approach, let’s analyze the needs of the parking first; if there are needs for parking, how much parking there is supposed to be in the park, in the resort.” Councillor Janice Maynard said she would not support any commitment of monies for any construction work without first having the parking analysis to frame the decisions. “I would suggest that instead of using the parking reserve fund that it comes from our share of the Municipal Accommodation Tax (MAT) as it’s clearly many issues here are related to tourism,” she said. Finance Director Amanda Carter said it may not be possible to use the MAT funds which must be directed to tourism-related infrastructure, and may not work for a study. “It seems we are trying to battle our way out of our motion by spending $650,000, it makes no sense whatsoever,” added Councillor Phil Prinzen. “I have spoken to Staff Sergeant John Hatch [PEC OPP] and it’s his opinion that removing the parking on both sides increases the odds of a pedestrian being struck as they are walking further distances.”

Councillor Mike Harper said he too struggled with spending the money since a need has not been established. “We believe we have a safety problem and there are two contributing factors: one is the businesses and their success—and they have been very successful—is contributing to the congestion challenge. What is their role in all of this?” He said the other contributing factor is the provincial park and their contribution to the problem. CAO Wallace said conversations had taken place with the Province. “They see themselves as a partner in the solutions for this location, they are concerned about the practices and conflicts that existed last year, and frankly the congestion in that area.” She said they are interested in being a financial partner and are interested in a crosswalk in this project, but have not committed to an actual dollar value. “I do not see them paying for all of it, but they are interested in paying for a portion.”

Councillor Andreas Bolik said it is not the municipality’s responsibility to provide parking for the provincial park. “I would suggest it is not the municipality’s job to provide parking for private businesses,” added Bolik. Osborne noted the original site plan agreement for just the resort had asked for 18 parking spaces in the parking lot, and then following the site plan agreement for Miller House had asked for an additional eight spaces within the resort parking lot. “They were required to provide 26 spaces in total,” she said, noting there are 44 spaces there (but some of those spaces are within the municipal right of way). Councillor Brad Nieman noted they are 20 parking spots over what they are required to have.

“There’s no way I can support spending $604,000 going toward something that is not the municipality’s problem,” added St-Jean. “The pedestrian issues are predominantly being caused by the provincial park and crossing the road back and forth from Miller House,” he said. “I strongly believe that every commercial entity needs to provide adequate parking to serve their customers. I do not believe that is the responsibility of the municipality particularly in areas such as this.” The February 24 Committee of the Whole meeting is available for viewing on the County’s YouTube channel (youtu.be/UO3H0UO8Kew) with associated documentation available as part of the agenda package found on the County’s website (pecounty.on.ca).