PROJECT FILE Municipal Class Environmental Assessment. RECONSTRUCTION OF BIG APPLE DRIVE (County Road No. 25) Our File:

Transcription

1 Municipal Class Environmental Assessment RECONSTRUCTION OF BIG APPLE DRIVE (County Road No. 25) Our File: May 2011 Prepared by: McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION 920 Princess Street, Suite 101, Kingston, ON K7L 1H1 Tel: (613) Fax: (613)

2 Municipal Class Environmental Assessment RECONSTRUCTION OF BIG APPLE DRIVE (COUNTY ROAD No. 25) May 2011 Prepared by: McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION 920 Princess Street, Suite 101, Kingston, ON K7L 1H1 Tel: (613) Fax: (613) File: K:\WORK ORDER FILES\ Big Apple Drive (County Road 25)\ REPORTS\Project File\ (final).doc

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction Ontario Environmental Assessment Act Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process Appeal Process Purpose of the Environmental Project File Study Area Study Approach Study Organization Project Team Consultant Team Public Consultation Technical Agencies and Utilities PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED Introduction and Need Previous Studies EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS Existing Road Network Existing and Future Land Use Social Environment Natural Environment Fisheries and Aquatic Biology Natural Heritage and Terrestrial Biology Groundwater and Drainage Cultural Environment Archaeological Assessment Utilities Geotechnical Investigation Findings Pavement Recommendations ALTERNATIVES Alternative Solutions REVIEW WITH TECHNICAL AGENCIES AND PUBLIC Technical Agencies Public Consultation Centre Review in Light of Comments Received Consultation with the Ministry of Transportation Consultation with Lower Trent Conservation PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed Design Criteria Page McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page i

4 6.2 Typical Cross Section Alignment Horizontal and Vertical Grading Drainage / Stormwater Management Utilities Intersections Entrances / Driveways Sidewalks / Boulevards Bicycle Lane Property Requirements Landscape Proposed Implementation and Staging POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Land Use Social Environment Community Property Requirements / Access Noise Natural Environment Fisheries and Aquatic Biology Natural Heritage and Terrestrial Biology Groundwater Cultural Environment Construction Mitigation Measures Traffic Control / Detours Construction Noise Erosion and Sedimentation Water Quality and Quantity SUMMARY APPENDICES Appendix A - Agency & Utility Correspondence Appendix B - Public Consultation Centre Notice of Public Consultation Centres Public Consultation Centre Panels Comment Sheets Minutes of Meeting Appendix C - Traffic Impact Assessment Appendix D - Archaeological Assessment Appendix E - Geotechnical Investigation Appendix F - Existing and Proposed Flows Appendix G - Preferred Alternative File: K:\WORK ORDER FILES\ Big Apple Drive (County Road 25)\ REPORTS\Project File\ (final).doc McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page ii

5 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Big Apple Drive (County Road No. 25) is a main north-south link in, servicing the Village of Colborne to the south, communities to the north, and connects to the main east-west Provincial Highway 401. A traffic impact assessment was recently undertaken (October 2010) by the Township of Cramahe along Big Apple Drive between Highway 401 and Kelwood Lane. The traffic study used future background and development-generated traffic to determine road and intersection improvements in order to accommodate the anticipated growth within the study corridor. The traffic report recommended the following road improvements along Big Apple Drive: Left turn warrant at the following locations: Northbound left turn lane on Big Apple Drive at Highway 401 Eastbound Ramp Southbound left turn lane on Big Apple Drive at the intersection of Purdy Road /Orchard Road Northbound left turn lane on Big Apple Drive at the Tim Hortons entrance Traffic signal warrant at the following intersection: Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road Given the findings of the traffic impact assessment, and that the existing pavement is showing signs of distress, has initiated this Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for the planning and design of the Reconstruction of Big Apple Drive. The study corridor extends between Highway 401 and Kelwood Lane, approximately 1.3 kilometres in length. 1.2 Ontario Environmental Assessment Act Municipal projects are subject to the Ontario Environmental Assessment (EA) Act. The Class EA process is an approved process under the EA Act for a specific group or class of projects Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process The proponent for this study is. This study has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) which was prepared by the Municipal Engineers Association, October 2000, as amended in The Municipal Class EA is an approved environmental assessment planning process which proponents must follow in order to meet the requirements of the Ontario EA Act. Providing the Class EA planning process is followed, a proponent does not have to apply for formal approval under the EA Act. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 1

6 The four types of projects to which the Municipal Class EA applies are: Schedule A - Projects which are limited in scale, have minimal adverse environmental effects and include the majority of municipal road maintenance are pre-approved and therefore a municipality can proceed without following the procedures set out within the Municipal Class EA process. Schedule A+ - Projects which are also pre-approved but where the public is to be advised prior to project implementation. Schedule B - Projects which have the potential for some adverse environmental effects. These projects are approved subject to a screening process, which includes contacting directly affected public and relevant review agencies. Schedule C - Projects which have the potential for significant environmental effects and which must proceed under the planning and documentation procedures outlined in the Municipal Class EA document. The proposed reconstruction of Big Apple Drive is a Schedule B project, in accordance with Municipal Road Projects Description #20: Reconstruction or widening where the reconstructed road or other linear paved facilities (e.g. HOV lanes) will not be for the same purpose, use, capacity or at the same location as the facility being reconstructed (e.g. additional lanes, continuous centre turn lane). The construction cost limit for a Schedule B Project is <$2.2M. Key features of the Municipal Class EA process as well as a detailed outline of the process are shown in Exhibit 1 and 2, respectively. A Project File is required for Schedule B projects and documents the EA process carried out. A Notice of Completion shall be submitted to review agencies and the public for a period of at least thirty (30) calendar days to allow for comment and input. The Notice shall include notification of the provision to request a Part II Order. If concerns are raised that cannot be resolved through discussions with the proponent of the project, the Appeal Process may be initiated. This is discussed in Section If no appeals are brought forth by the completion of the review period, the project is considered to have met the requirements of the Class EA and the proponent may prepare contract drawings, proceed to tender and construct the project Appeal Process As part of the Municipal Class EA Process, it is recommended that all stakeholders work together to determine the preferred means of addressing a problem or opportunity. If concerns regarding a project cannot be resolved in discussions with the proponent, then members of the public, interest groups or technical review agencies may request the Ontario Minister of the Environment to require a proponent to comply with Part II of the EA Act before proceeding with a proposed undertaking. The Minister of the Environment then decides whether to deny the request, refer the matter to mediation, or, require the proponent to comply with Part II of the EA Act. The procedures for dealing with concerns are outlined as follows: McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 2

7 1. For Schedule B Projects, a person or party with a concern should bring it to the attention of the proponent (ie. ) in Phase 2 of the planning process. 2. If a concern is not resolved through discussions with a proponent, the person or party raising the objection may request the proponent to voluntarily: Elevate a Schedule B project to a Schedule C. 3. If the proponent declines, and the person or party with the concern wishes to pursue the matter, they may write to the Minister of the Environment or delegate and request a Part II Order. These requests shall be copied by the requestor to at the same time that they are submitted to the Minister or delegate. For Schedule B Projects, a written request must be submitted to the Minister or delegate within the 30 calendar day review period after the Notice of Completion has been issued. It is recognized that resolution of concerns directly between and the person or party raising the concern is always preferable to having the Minister or delegate make a decision to order the proponent to comply with the appeal process. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 3

8 EXHIBIT 1- Key Features of the Municipal Class EA EXHIBIT 2- Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 4

9 1.2.3 Purpose of the Environmental Project File This Project File documents the process followed to determine the recommended undertaking and associated mitigation measures related to the planning, design and construction and associated work. It describes the problem, alternative solutions that were considered, a description of the preferred alternative and its purpose, the existing social, natural and cultural environmental considerations, environmental effects and proposed mitigation measures, and commitments to future work and consultation, and monitoring associated with the implementation of the project. For further information on the Municipal Class EA process, readers are referred to the Municipal Class EA (October 2000, as amended in 2007) parent document. or McCormick Rankin Corporation are available to discuss this information and may be contacted as follows: Peter Nielsen, CET 555 Courthouse Road Cobourg, ON K9A 5J6 Tel: Ext.2344 Fax: nielsenp@northumberlandcounty.ca Peter Fraser, P.Eng. McCormick Rankin Corporation 920 Princess Street, Suite 101 Kingston, ON K7L 1H1 Tel: Ext Fax: pfraser@mrc.ca McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 5

10 1.3 Study Area The study area is immediately south of the Highway 401 corridor, in the Township of Cramahe,, shown on Exhibit 3. The Township is positioned between Toronto to the west and the cities of Trenton and Belleville to the east. The limits of Big Apple Drive (County Road No. 25) are from Highway 401 south to Kelwood Lane, a distance of approximately 1.3 km. The study area is comprised of the following ownership jurisdictions: 1. Ministry of Transportation Northern Project limit to north side of the intersection of Purdy Road / Orchard Road and Big Apple Drive. 2. North side of Purdy Road / Orchard Road intersection south to Kelwood Lane. 3. Township of Cramahe Purdy Road / Orchard Road, east and west of Big Apple Drive. EXHIBIT 3 - Study Area McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 6

11 1.4 Study Approach In order to fulfill the Municipal Class EA requirements and to ensure a thorough understanding of the problem being addressed, the study followed the Municipal Class EA process for a Schedule B project as shown earlier in Exhibit 1 and 2. The alternatives considered, and the associated potential environmental impacts, the mitigation measures and consultation with the public and technical agencies are all part of the process. As part of a Schedule B project and after phases 1 to 2 are completed, a Project File is placed on public record. The Project File outlines the alternatives considered and the commitments to be followed in the implementation of the recommended undertaking. The construction of the recommended undertaking will be carried out in accordance with the Project File and will also be subject to the receipt of environmental approvals. 1.5 Study Organization The study organization reflects the general administrative and technical needs of the study as well as the study s consultation program. The latter has been developed to ensure that all of those with a potential interest in the study have the opportunity to participate and provide input during the process Project Team The study was carried out under the direction of the Project Team comprised of staff from the, the Township of Cramahe, and the Ministry of Transportation. Peter Nielsen, CET Mobushar Pannu, P.Eng. Christine Harvey, P.Eng. Rebecca Goddard-Sarria Township of Cramahe Christie Alexander Township of Cramahe Cheryl Tolles Ministry of Transportation Peter Fraser, P.Eng. McCormick Rankin Corporation Elizabeth Bonucchi, P.Eng. McCormick Rankin Corporation Consultant Team The Consultant Team retained by included: McCormick Rankin Corporation Project Management Municipal Class EA Requirements Roadway Design Electrical Design Stormwater Management Ecoplans Limited Natural Environment Landscaping Geo-Logic Inc. Geotechnical Investigation New Directions Archaeology Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 7

12 1.6 Public Consultation A key component of the EA process is public consultation during which time directly affected public, the local business community and relevant review agencies provide comment. For Schedule B projects, the screening process requires two mandatory points of contact. The following summarizes the consultation for this project: Notice of Study Commencement Notice mailed and hand-delivered to properties abutting the study area, the Business Park, and posted on County / Township websites Notice of Public Consultation Centre Notice mailed and hand-delivered to properties abutting the study area, the Business Park, and posted on County / Township websites Public Consultation Centre Held on December 14 th, 2011 between 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm. Notice of Completion - As a final point of contact, review agencies and the public will have a period of at least 30 calendar days to review this Project File for comment and input Technical Agencies and Utilities Technical Agencies, interest groups and utility companies were contacted during the study and requested to provide technical input; their correspondence is located in Appendix A. Ministry of Environment Ministry of Natural Resources Lower Trent Conservation Authority Ministry of Transportation Indian and Northern Affairs Ministry of Culture Bell Canada Cogeco Cable Enbridge Gas Union Gas Lakefront Utilities Responses were received from the following agencies and utilities: Ministry of Environment Ministry of Natural Resources Lower Trent Conservation Authority Ministry of Transportation Ministry of Culture Bell Canada Cogeco Cable Enbridge Gas Union Gas Lakefront Utilities McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 8

13 2. PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED 2.1 Introduction and Need Phase 1 of the Municipal Class EA process involves the identification of the problem and/or opportunity being addressed by the study. The local area surrounding the study corridor has experienced a growth in business and traffic. As a result, the Township of Cramahe initiated a traffic analysis in co-operation with the Ministry of Transportation and. The purpose of the analysis was to determine the existing and future needs of Big Apple Drive for the predicted traffic. The need for a solution is required to address the following issues / problems identified: Existing pavement surface is showing signs of distress that warrants rehabilitation, Development / recent growth is being experienced along the corridor, and To address the deficiencies identified in the traffic analysis including left turn lanes at three locations and a signalized intersection Previous Studies The Township of Cramahe retained Tranplan Associates who prepared the report Future Road Improvement Requirements on County Road 25 Between Highway 401 and Kelwood Lane Township of Cramahe County of Northumberland, October The planning study was undertaken to assess future access requirements for the development of vacant lands currently designated for industrial and commercial uses in the vicinity of the Highway 401 and Big Apple Drive. A copy of the study is located in Appendix C. 3. EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS 3.1 Existing Road Network Big Apple Drive is a two-lane rural north-south arterial road in the Township of Cramahe,. It connects to a major east-west highway system, Highway 401 at Interchange 497 and is the main arterial link between the Village of Colborne to the south and communities to the north. The existing cross-section is rural with a pavement width of approximately 11 metres with granular shoulders. The roadway is drained via roadside ditches. Three stop-controlled intersections, on side streets, are located within the study area. They include Kelwood Lane to the south, Keeler Road, and Purdy Road / Orchard Road. The posted speed limit within the study area is 60 km/hr. Provincial Highway 401 (MacDonald Cartier Freeway) is located at the northern study limit. It is a four lane rural highway operated by the Ministry of Transportation. The unsignalized ramp terminals for Highway access are located at Big Apple Drive. Purdy Road / Orchard Road is a two-lane rural east-west collector road. It connects Big Apple Drive to Highway 401 and County Road No. 30 interchange to the east. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 9

14 3.2 Existing and Future Land Use Surrounding land use includes commercial and business properties, vacant undeveloped property, the Industrial Park, Union Cemetery, and residential homes. Future planned development includes two commercially zoned vacant properties on the west side of Big Apple Drive, south of the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road. 3.3 Social Environment The Township of Cramahe has a land area of approximately 202 square kilometres. It is estimated to have a population of 5,950 (2006), largely supported by industries / manufactures in the area. South of the study area is the Village of Colborne, and the Keeler Centre, a multipurpose art, sports and entertainment complex. Within the study corridor are a number of single family rural homes which front on Big Apple Drive. There are 2 residential homes on the west side and 8 residential homes on the east side of the roadway. In addition to the Industrial Park east of the study corridor, the following facilities /commercial properties / businesses are located along Big Apple Drive within the study corridor: Union Cemetery Twindmills Markets Ultramar Durham Transport Tim Hortons Sunnyside Meat Deli House of Hoselton 3.4 Natural Environment The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and Lower Trent Conservation were contacted and provided information related to the natural environment within the study corridor. Related correspondence can be found in Appendix A Fisheries and Aquatic Biology The study corridor for the reconstruction of Big Apple Drive includes a potentially environmental sensitive watercourse, the Colborne Creek. The creek crosses Big Apple Drive at Sta via a cross culvert (Lot 33 Concession 2) and a second tributary drains through the Union Cemetery adjacent to Big Apple Drive (Lot 34 Concession 3). Colborne Creek is a cold water stream and as such, is sensitive to influences such as urban development and climate changes. There are resident Brook Trout in this stream, and it is suspected that within the study corridor, the tributary may provide spawning habitat. In addition, there are also lake run species of Trout, such as Rainbow which use the lower and upper portions of the creek for spawning. Colborne Creek is within MNR s Cold Water Management Zone A: Oak Ridges Moraine Iroquois Plain South, which flows south to Lake Ontario Natural Heritage and Terrestrial Biology Big Apple Drive falls within the physiographic region of the Iroquois Plain. MNR identified a number of Species at Risk, which include Blanding s Turtle (Threatened), Milksnake (Special Concern) and Snapping Turtle (Special Concern) in the immediate area of the subject property. In addition, Bobolink (Threatened) is known to occur in the general area. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 10

15 3.4.3 Groundwater and Drainage The residential rural homes along Big Apple Drive rely upon wells to supply water to their homes. There are a total of 10 residential homes which front on Big Apple Drive within the study corridor. Some well locations are located as close as 11 metres from the existing edge of pavement. The existing roadway runoff drains via roadside ditches and cross culverts. There are two main drainage areas, which outlet to either the north or south tributary of the Colborne Creek. Existing and proposed drainage is discussed in more detail in Section Cultural Environment Archaeological Assessment New Directions Archaeology Ltd. was retained by MRC to undertake a Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment in accordance with the Ontario Ministry of Culture s requirements. The Stage 1 study focused on the following tasks: Review of previous archaeological research, Background research to identify any archaeological sites, physiography, and Land use history for the study corridor. New Directions research determined there were no registered archaeological sites within or in the immediate vicinity of the study corridor. It was noted that the cemetery located at the northwest intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road requires an avoidance strategy during construction. Given that the rehabilitation project will not extend beyond the existing Big Apple Drive right-of-way which is entirely disturbed, it is recommended to the Ministry of Culture that the corridor is free of further archaeological concerns and that construction may proceed as planned. 3.6 Utilities The following utilities are located along Big Apple Drive within the study corridor: 200mm PVC Watermain (west side) 150mm HDPE Sanitary Sewer (west side) 100mm High Pressure Steel Union Gas (west side) 50mm Union Gas (west side) Buried Bell Conduit (west side, north of Purdy Road / Orchard Road) Buried Bell Conduit (east side, south of Purdy Road / Orchard Road) Bell Pedestals (north-west and north-east corners of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road intersection) Overhead Hydro line (east side) Utility companies with a potential interest in the study were contacted to determine the location of their existing facilities and any potential future plant expansions. Additional utility work completed with this study may include new watermain within the study corridor. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 11

16 3.7 Geotechnical Investigation Geo-Logic Inc. was retained by MRC to complete a geotechnical investigation to determine the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site and to provide recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of the design. Their report is included in Appendix E and is summarized below Findings A total of 20 exploratory boreholes to depths ranging from 0.8 to 4.6 metres below existing ground were advanced along Big Apple Drive. In general, the subsurface conditions encountered in the boreholes consisted of asphalt over fill, over native soils of sand or silty sand, underlain by a silty-clayey sand till. Groundwater was observed in four of the 20 boreholes, at depths ranging from 1.1 to 2.6 metres below existing grade Pavement Recommendations Two options were provided for the rehabilitation of the existing roadway: 1. Full-Depth Reconstruction Replace all existing asphalt and granulars with new asphalt and granulars. 2. Pulverize, Replace and Regrade Pulverize existing asphalt up to 150mm into underlying granular, regrade and repave. 4. ALTERNATIVES The Class Environmental Assessment requires that alternatives to the proposed undertaking be considered. This is to ensure that there is reasonable and adequate justification to proceed with the proposal and that the need for the project is clearly identified. 4.1 Alternative Solutions The number of alternative solutions required to address the traffic and pavement deficiencies are limited based on the configuration of the existing site (i.e. narrow right-of-way). Consequently, the following alternative solutions were considered in an effort to address the problem / issues identified in Section 2: Alternative 1: Do Nothing The Do Nothing Alternative does not address the problems or concerns identified by the public and previous studies as discussed in Section 2. This alternative will see the existing conditions unchanged, and when existing traffic volumes continue to increase, the problems will worsen. Therefore, it is not considered a viable option. Alternative 2: Develop Alternative Routes for Existing / Anticipated Traffic Existing roads which could be evaluated to meet the identified need are either located too far east or west, or have little or no expansion capability. Consequently these roadways are not suited for the proposed use and are not a reasonable solution. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 12

17 Alternative 3: Widen / Improve Existing Road This alternative addresses the need established in Section 2, and concerns raised by local residents, businesses and previous studies. The alternative includes: Traffic Signals at the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road Three lane cross section with the centre lane functioning as an auxiliary turning lane to accommodate: - Left turn lane on Big Apple Drive at Highway 401 EB Ramp - Left turn lane on Big Apple Drive at Purdy Road / Orchard Road - Left turn lane on Big Apple Drive at the Tim Hortons property Urban cross section with concrete curb and gutter, concrete sidewalk, and storm sewer system Rural cross section Roadway illumination Roadside bicycle lane EXHIBIT 3 Alternative Solutions Matrix McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 13

18 Based on the Alternative Solutions Matrix Exhibit 3, Alternative 3 Widen / Improve Existing Road is the preferred option, and following the completion of the evaluation process, it was concluded that Alternative 3 would be the best solution. 5. REVIEW WITH TECHNICAL AGENCIES AND PUBLIC 5.1 Technical Agencies Appropriate technical agencies and utilities were initially informed of this project with the Notice of Commencement, see Section Public Consultation Centre A Public Consultation Centre was held on December 14 th, 2010 to review the project to date, to present the recommended alternative, and to elicit comments from interested and directly affected public. A Notice of Public Consultation Centre was placed in the following: Northumberland News Brighton December 1 st and 8 th Northumberland News December 3 rd and 10 th County of Northumberland Website Starting November 19 th Northumberland Today Newspaper - November 25 th and December 2 nd, 8 th and 9 th Township of Cramahe Website Starting November 19 th The Public Consultation Centre Notice was also sent by mail to property owners in the area, hand-delivered to local business along Big Apple Drive and the Industrial Park, and sent to a number of individuals who requested to be kept informed of the project MRC provided the Notice of Public Consultation Centre to the following agencies: Ministry of Natural Resources Ministry of the Environment Ministry of Transportation Lower Trent Conservation Authority Lakefront Utilities Ministry of Culture Bell Canada Cogeco Cable The informal information centre was from 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm where those who attended could review a series of display panels. Representatives from, Township of Cramahe, and McCormick Rankin Corporation were available to answer questions and discuss any aspects of the project. A total of thirteen people signed the attendance register. A total of five comment sheets were filled in and left during the Consultation Centre, an additional two were received by the comment deadline of Friday January 7 th, Notices, advertisements, minutes, responses and letters are provided in Appendix B. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 14

19 5.2.1 Review in Light of Comments Received The following is a summary of verbal comments which were received during the Public Consultation Centre: Comment 1: Comment 2: Comment 3: Comment 4: Comment 5: Comment 6: Comment 7: Comment 8: Comment 9: Comment 10: Comment 11: Comment 12: Comment 13: Comments related to the Tim Hortons property: Odour from the existing septic bed Trucks illegally parked along Big Apple Drive in front of residential properties, to frequent Tim Hortons Car lights from drive thru shine into resident s homes Storm sewer/ infiltration trench concerns Inquired about proposed sanitary and water work within the study corridor. Questions regarding the expected time line for the construction of the road works. Comments on the installation of the small bore sewer in 2004, and safety concerns for pedestrians walking along the roadway. Drainage comments at 237 Big Apple Drive, ditch drainage flows onto driveway. 114 Purdy Road, the existing culvert under Big Apple Drive north of Purdy Road has become blocked on several occasions. The existing area of the north east quadrant of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road is flat and drains poorly. Impacts the road design will have on school buses and mailboxes. Construction impacts, noise, dust and traffic delays. Concerns regarding the contamination of the existing wells. Existing flooding in the basement of 150 Keeler Road. Inquired about the budget for the project and the availability of funding from the Provincial and Federal governments. Inquired about the funding of the cost of the sidewalks. Inquired about the installation of street lights and the possible use of decorative light fixtures to improve streetscaping. Inquired about the connection of adjacent properties to the storm sewer. Comment 14: Inquired about the parking of vehicles in front of the Tim Horton's property and the placement and enforcement of "No Standing/Stopping/Parking" of vehicles along this roadway. The following is a summary of written comments which were received as a result of the Public Consultation Centre, and the corresponding responses: McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 15

20 Comment 1&2: Request for the Traffic Study completed by Tranplan Associates for the Township of Cramahe. Response 1&2: We have enclosed a digital copy of the Future Road Improvement Requirements on County Road 25 Between Highway 401 and Kelwood Lane, October Comment 3: Concern that a private water well will be closer to road and therefore potential for roadway salt to contaminate the well. Also concerned that congestion from traffic is a safety issue. Noise and garbage was expected. Response 3: The existing edge of pavement is at a distance of 11.5 metres from your well and the existing edge of shoulder is 8.5 metres from your well. The proposed edge of pavement will be at a distance of 10 metres from your well. Today, the water runoff from the road drains via a roadside ditch, which is a distance of 8 metres from your well. With the proposed design, the roadway runoff will no longer run along the ditchline. Instead, the roadway runoff will be collected along the new curb line into catchbasins and will not discharge in front of your property. In an effort to ensure that the road works do not negatively impact wells, we will be requesting permission from property owners to test their well water. By installing a left turn lane from Tim Hortons to the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy / Orchard Road, vehicles travelling in the through lane will not be required to stop for the left turning traffic. This lane configuration is an improvement over the existing condition where through traffic is often blocked by the left turn movement. As part of the design process, utility companies are contacted to request whether they have any plans of expanding within the study corridor. At this time, Lakefront Utilities has expressed interest in potentially adding watermain and sanitary sewer work with the project, however the details and limits of the work are not confirmed. Mitigation measures will be in place during the construction period to ensure a minimal amount of impact to local residents from dust, noise and garbage. Comment 4&5: Concern for the road runoff that currently drains onto private driveway. Concern for the proposed sidewalk location along the west side of the roadway. Recommended meeting with MRC on site to discuss specific property concerns. Request for sewer layout as roadway runoff is a concern. Response 4&5: MRC is in agreement that a site meeting would be beneficial to address your property concerns. We can review the design to date as it specifically relates to your property, and incorporate necessary changes to ensure your concerns are addressed. Could you please contact our office at your earliest convenience and we will schedule a meeting.* *Note: Following the issuance of the above response, MRC met with the property owner and reviewed site specific drainage issues. The detailed design will incorporate measures (such as a ditch inlet or culvert) to collect roadway runoff which is currently draining onto the property owner s driveway. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 16

21 Comment 6: Response 6: On behalf of the Cramahe Horticultural Society we would appreciate our plantings to be protected during construction. We will ensure that the contract drawings and specifications for the road works indicate that the Walter Cody Park is to be protected during construction. We would like to meet with you to confirm the limits of plantings. At your earliest convenience, please contact our office to schedule a meeting.* *Note: Following the issuance of the above response, MRC held a telephone conversation with a member of the Cramahe Horticultural Society and it was concluded that the proposed works would not impact the existing plantings. It was decided that a meeting would not be required. 5.3 Consultation with the Ministry of Transportation Due to the proximity of the study limits to the Ministry of Transportation s corridor, they have been involved with the review of the preliminary design. The preferred alternative was submitted to the Ministry for preliminary review and comment. The intent was that the Ministry would review / comment on the preferred alternative and, if acceptable, provide approval in principle for the preferred alternative which would allow the detailed design to proceed. In order to proceed to construction, a MTO Encroachment Permit will be required. Preliminary comments from the Ministry were received regarding the left turn configuration at the EB Ramp, as well as the entrance for the Park and Ride on the east side of Big Apple Drive. The Ministry has provided approval in principal of the intersection improvements (see Appendix A). MRC and will continue to work with the MTO throughout the detailed design phase. 5.4 Consultation with Lower Trent Conservation Since the proposed road reconstruction will result in an increase in water runoff due to additional impervious surfaces, both water quality and quantity were reviewed with Lower Trent Conservation (LTC). Surface runoff flows were calculated for existing and proposed conditions based on the Rationale Method and IDF (Intensity-Duration-Frequency) parameters for the area, see calculations in Appendix F. The drainage areas for the study corridor were established and divided into three sections for comparison and review with LTC: 1. Section A From the northern project limit at Highway 401 to the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road. 2. Section B From the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road, south for a distance of approximately 375 metres. 3. Section C From the southern project limit at Kelwood Lane north approximately 530 metres. Section A has a proposed flow increase of 14% from the existing condition, and the drainage outlets (cross culverts) for this section will remain unchanged. Due to the increase in flow, LTC has requested quantity control for this section. As it is within the MTO corridor, any proposed quantity control will also involve review with MTO, as well as LTC. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 17

22 Section B has a proposed flow increase of 3.7% from the existing condition. LTC has indicated that the flow increase is not significant within this section to warrant quantity control, however the design will include quality control. The level of protection for quality control will be in accordance with MOE guidelines. Due to the significant grade of the ditches at the outlet, MRC s design will also include reviewing the need for rock stabilization for the bottom of the ditch. Section C has a proposed flow increase of 0.1% from the existing condition; the roadway will continue to drain via roadside ditches. This increase is not significant; the drainage areas will remain unchanged. Consultation / review with LTC regarding these will continue during the detailed design phase. 6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The main considerations and mitigation measures / commitment to works associated with this project has described in this section. While changes will occur during the detailed design phase of the project, the changes should not alter the intent of the recommended alterative. During the detailed design phase there will be further consultation with specific residential property owners, and appropriate agencies such as, the Ministry of Transportation, Lower Trent Conservation Authority, Bell Canada, Hydro One, Lakefront Utilities Commission,, and Township of Cramahe. The preferred alternative is Alternative 3 Widen / Improve Existing Road, which includes the following: Traffic Signals at the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road Three lane cross section with the centre lane functioning as an auxiliary turning lane to accommodate: 1. Left turn lane at Highway 401 EB Ramp 2. Left turn lane at Purdy Road / Orchard Road 3. Left turn lane at Tim Hortons 6.1 Proposed Design Criteria The proposed design criteria were established in accordance with the Ministry of Transportation Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways and incorporate design input from and the Township of Cramahe. Item Road Classification Design Speed Posted Speed Minimum Radius Superelevation Minimum Radius Normal Crown Minimum Stopping Distance Proposed Design Criteria Rural Arterial 80 km/h 60 km/h 250 m 3000 m 135 m McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 18

23 Item Proposed Design Criteria Minimum K Crest 35 Minimum K Sag 30 Minimum K Sag Comfort (Lighting) 15 Pavement Width Shoulder Width 3.5 m Through Lane 3.5 m Shared Through Right Turn Lane 3.25 m Left-Turn Lane 1.2 m Bicycle Lane 2.5 m Total (1.2 m Paved Bicycle Lane in Rural Cross Section) Minimum Acceptable Grade 0.5% Left Turn Deceleration Lane Length (SB at Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road) Left Turn Deceleration Lane Length (NB at Big Apple Drive and EB Ramp) Left Turn Deceleration Lane Length (NB at Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road) Right Turn Deceleration Lane Length (NB at Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road) Sidewalk Width 6.2 Typical Cross Section 60m Parallel 70m Taper 60m Parallel 70m Taper 130m Parallel 65m Taper 130m Parallel 65m Taper The selection of the typical cross section was based on the available right-of-way width along the corridor. In addition, it accommodates the features important to the County, based on standards as noted above, and on the completed traffic impact assessment. The study corridor will be comprised of two typical cross sections: 1. Rural Cross Section - comprised of two 3.5m through lane widths, two 1.2m roadside bicycle lanes, and a 0.8m wide granular shoulder. 2. Urban Cross Section - comprised of two 3.5m through lane widths, a continuous 3.25m centre turn lane, concrete curb and gutter, 1.5m curb faced sidewalk, two roadside bicycle lanes (1.2m width from the southern project limit to the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road, and a 1.5m width from the intersection to the northern project limit), and a variable width boulevard. Typical cross sections are shown in Exhibit m McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 19

24 EXHIBIT 4 Typical Cross Sections McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 20

25 6.3 Alignment Horizontal and Vertical The horizontal alignment is centered for the most part within the existing right-of-way and the horizontal alignment matches existing for horizontal curves and tangents. A 235 metre radius from Sta to Sta , is maintained which has a 6% super-elevation rate along the curve. For the remaining portion of the roadway, the proposed cross fall matches existing. The vertical alignment matches the existing elevations by means of a splined profile, instead of a calculated profile. 6.4 Grading Existing entrances will be constructed to match or improve the existing grades. Cut/fill slopes are to be constructed at slopes of 2:1 (maximum), or 3:1 (desirable) where property permits. The design maintains positive drainage along Big Apple Drive. 6.5 Drainage / Stormwater Management The existing roadway is drained via roadside ditches which outlet to the Colborne Creek. With an urban cross section, the ditch will be eliminated and replaced with curb and gutter, and a storm sewer system for approximately 600 metres, from Sta to , see Appendix G. The storm sewer system will outlet to the existing ditch, upstream of the Colborne Creek. Within the urbanized section, front yards which currently drain to the roadside ditch, will now be collected into catchbasins and conveyed into the storm sewer system. The increase in proposed flow for drainage Section A and B noted in Section 5.4 requires mitigation in terms of both water quality and quantity management. Quality control will include an oil grit separator to treat the water, prior to its release in the ditch, as an enhanced level of protection. Quantity control will be achieved either through underground storage within storm sewer pipes, or with a stormwater pond. Stormwater management measures will be consistent with recommendations in the MOE s Stormwater Management Practices Planning and Design Manual (March, 2003), in order to reduce quantity and improve quality. Any proposed stormwater management is subject to the approval of Lower Trent Conservation, with whom consultation / review will continue during detailed design. 6.6 Utilities The location of each utility identified in Section 3.6 has been confirmed within the study corridor. Test holes may also be required to confirm the depth of some underground utilities in the corridor such as gas, watermain, and the small bore sewer. The inclusion of a signalized intersection at Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road will have potential conflicts with exiting Bell Canada conduit. Consultation with Bell Canada is ongoing regarding this issue. 6.7 Intersections The proposed design will include the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road. McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 21

26 6.8 Entrances / Driveways Driveway access will be maintained and reinstated where shown on the preferred alternative drawing provided in Appendix G. As part of the Ministry of Transportation s review, the entrances to the Park and Ride on the east side of Big Apple Drive will be reconfigured. The existing entrance to the north will be closed, and entrance to the south will be relocated further south. Positive drainage will be maintained for commercial and residential entrances. 6.9 Sidewalks / Boulevards The proposed design includes the installation of a 1.5m sidewalk along the west side of Big Apple Drive from Sta to Sta and along the east side from Sta to the Park and Ride at Sta Although the recommended width for curb faced sidewalk is 1.8m, in order to accommodate other design features within the limited right-of-way width, a reduced sidewalk width was included. Similarly, the boulevard width varies within the study corridor, based on the limited right-of-way and in order to accommodate all of the design features. At the request of the Township of Cramahe, potential sidewalk locations have been evaluated for the full project limits. In the future, in order to accommodate sidewalk between the station limits of Sta and Sta , an urban cross section would be required as the existing right-of-way is not sufficient in width to accommodate a sidewalk with a rural cross section (i.e. shoulder and ditch) Bicycle Lane The County of Northumberland has initiated a Cycling Master Plan, and in keeping with their plan, requested a bicycle lane be evaluated as part of the Schedule B Municipal Class EA for the Reconstruction of Big Apple Drive. The preferred alternative includes a bicycle lane which is adjacent to motor vehicle traffic, separated by pavement markings, extending from the northern project limit (Highway 401) south to Kelwood Lane. From the northern project limit to the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road the bicycle lane is 1.5m wide, and from the intersection to the southern project limit, the bicycle lane is 1.2m wide. The Ministry of Transportation was asked to comment on the inclusion of this bicycle lane within their corridor at the northern study limit. A number of signs would be included along the roadway in order to educate and address all cyclist skill levels. Signage includes the following: Reserved Bicycle Lane Begins Sign (Rb-84A + Rb-84t) posted at the beginning of the bicycle lane Reserved Bicycle Lane Sign (Rb-84A) posted along the length of the bicycle lane at intervals of 300 metres or less Reserved Bicycle Lane Ends Sign (Rb-84A + Rb-85t) posted at the end of the bicycle lane Cycling Prohibited Sign (RB-67) posted at the approach ramp for Highway 401 Share the Road Sign (WC-47) posted at the end of the bicycle lane, start of structure It is noted that the current overpass structure has a minimum side clearance, concrete Jersey barrier, and no sidewalk or bicycle lane. It is suggested that the Ministry consider, when the structure is reconstructed / rehabilitated, installing a barrier to accommodate a bicycle, with a bicycle rail height of 1.375m. This would permit to continue its bicycle routes to the north of the Highway 401 corridor. Correspondence with MTO is included in McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 22

27 Appendix A. Correspondence with MTO regarding this issue will continue during detailed design Property Requirements The existing right-of-way along the study corridor is limited to generally a 20 metre (66 ) width. In order to accommodate the proposed design at the intersection of Big Apple Drive and Purdy Road / Orchard Road, daylighting at the south-east quadrants is required. The following proposed property acquisition / easements is recommended. Civic Address / Property Number Approximate Area Property Description Part of Lt 33 Con 2 & Part of Road Allowance Btwn Lt 32 and Lt m 2 Durham Transport (South-West Quadrant) 6.12 Landscape The existing landscape composition is a mix of urban and rural influences. Generally, travelling south towards downtown Colborne, there is a transition from a commercial landscape to a rural residential one. The general composition of the landscape in the commercial area consists of minimal roadside vegetation, and a domination of the built features (ie. Tim Hortons, gas station and commercial yard). The existing boulevard vegetation, where present, is primarily turf grass dotted with the occasional mature tree (ie. Silver/red maple, ash). The rural area is a mix of rural residential and vegetated areas adjacent to the right-of-way. As a result, the vegetation is a mix of native and ornamental species. Common species include: Silver maple, spruce, ash, white pine, cedar, cattails, old fruit trees and mixed ornamental shrubs. Rural landscape features such as picket fences, mailboxes and laneways are present. Within the rural areas, there is an opportunity to enhance the rural character. The focus will be on restoring and enhancing the environment with native plantings. For both commercial and rural areas, the objective will be to use hardy, low maintenance, drought and salt tolerant plants. Proposed plantings will use native plants where possible, and will use only native plants for any environmental restoration or for areas adjacent to natural areas. The primary goals of the landscape plan will include the following: Intent is to preserve existing trees where possible Enhance the urban streetscape as well as the rural landscape Propose way-finding enhancements to the streetscape and create the sense of an entrance to the Apple Route and to the Village of Colborne Enhance the apple route appeal/theme McCORMICK RANKIN CORPORATION May 2011 Page 23