Shelving Parkway plan for a decade

City rejecting a new Environmental Assessment for The Parkway extension

At last week’s meeting of the City of Peterborough’s General Committee, city councillors ran out of time to deal with several reports before them and they were pushed forward to sometime this month.

One of those was a lengthy staff report on the thorny question of what to do about the Parkway — the northsouth expressway first proposed 71 years ago that remains the most enduringly controversial infrastructure proposal in city history.

Four years ago, city council approved an environmental assessment (EA) for the Parkway, including a bridge through Jackson Park.

That 20-year, $79 million plan that would see a roadway built from Clonsilla Avenue to Cumberland Avenue and Water Street in the north end attracted 88 citizen appeals to the province.

After much delay, the Ontario Minister of the Environment and Climate Change issued two orders requiring the city to conduct further environmental studies of the proposal.

Last fall, Mayor Daryl Bennett received council approval to take the pro-Parkway case directly to Ontario Premier Wynne, who declined his request in favour of a meeting with other provincial officials which came to no consequential result.

In January 2016, I wrote in this space about a number of factors that foretold a significant weakening of support for the Parkway — and especially the bridge through Jackson Park — including the changing political landscape.

Last week’s report from city staff — who have until now been the biggest boosters of the Parkway — adds to that prognosis, effectively pushing out development of the roadway for many years to come.

Instead of proposing a new EA for the Parkway or a new, city-wide EA for a Transportation Master Plan that would include a review of the Parkway — both of which would prepare the ground for a Parkway decision as quickly as possible — the city staff have chosen a different direction.

That direction is to step back and undertake a series of five major studies — some scheduled and some new — that will assess comprehensive transportation needs, including issues such as transit and cycling, to accommodate the city’s anticipated growth.

The studies and their resolution could take 5 to 7 years; new and lengthy EAs and Ministry reviews and revisions will follow in a process likely to consume a decade.

That is the equivalent of waving a 10-year white flag of surrender.

The abandonment of the Parkway is close to a fait accompli and there are some definite signs pointing in that direction.

First, it is noteworthy that previously approved funds assigned to the Parkway project are now to be reassigned to a variety of transportation studies, none of which focus precisely on Parkway development.

Second, the city now proposes to move forward with studies of short term transportation fixes to improve traffic flow; to upgrade the city’s traffic signal network; to optimize signal settings; and to create a more adaptive signal control system — matters specifically recommended by Parkway opponents.

Third, of the five city-owned houses in the path of the Parkway that the city planned to demolish — two of which are rented — two more will now be renovated and rented.

This is a clear indication of a change in city direction.

City council will deal with the report this month. Its adoption will signal a significant turning point in the history of urban planning in Peterborough and a defeat for expressway advocates.

The Parkway extension’s opponents will want to add a nail in the coffin by moving a motion to delete the proposed Jackson Park study of “where and how any future transportation facilities could cross or encroach on the Park or adjacent natural areas.”

‘The city staff have chosen a different direction. That direction is to step back and undertake a series of five major studies’