Public Information Centre No.1. Bram West Parkway. From Financial Drive to Heritage Road. and. Financial Drive

Transcription

1 WELCOME Pulic Informtion Centre No.1 Brm West Prkwy From Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod nd Finncil Drive From Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd Municipl Clss Environmentl Assessment (Schedule C) June 27, :30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Plese sign in so tht we cn keep you updted on the study Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

2 Purpose of Pulic Informtion Centre No. 1 This is the first of two Pulic Informtion Centres (PICs) to e held during the study to llow the pulic n opportunity to review nd comment on project detils. The PIC hs een rrnged to: Introduce the study to the pulic; Provide ckground context nd informtion; Present the need nd justifiction for the extension of Finncil Drive from Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd; Present lterntive plnning solutions nd identify the preferred lterntive plnning solution for Finncil Drive; Present the process for ssessing nd evluting lignment lterntives for Brm West Prkwy; Identify the preliminry preferred lterntive lignment for Brm West Prkwy; Otin pulic input nd comments; nd Identify the next steps in the process, including the preliminry design phse. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

3 Study Overview The purpose of this study is to conduct Clss Environment Assessment (EA) for the extension of Finncil Drive from Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd nd new north-south rteril rod, Brm West Prkwy, from Heritge Rod to the extended Finncil Drive. Phses 1 nd 2 of the Municipl Clss Environmentl Assessment process for Brm West Prkwy were crried out during the Hlton-Peel Boundry Are Trnsporttion Study (HPBATS) (2010): HPBATS ws joint study to develop regionl trnsporttion strtegy to ddress the needs of the Regions of Hlton nd Peel, the City of Brmpton nd the Towns of Cledon nd Hlton Hills. The strtegy included the north-south rteril rod Brm West Prkwy s prt of lrger north-south trnsporttion corridor. As Trnsporttion Mster Pln, HPBATS serves s direct input into susequent Clss EA requirements to implement the individul projects tht mke up the recommended trnsporttion strtegy nd network. Therefore, the min ojectives of this study re to: Complete Phses 3 nd 4 of the Municipl Clss EA process for Brm West Prkwy; Complete Phses 1 to 4 of the Municipl Clss EA process for Finncil Drive; Consider resonle rnge of lterntives; Consider the impcts to ll spects of the environment through systemtic ssessment nd evlution of lterntives; Develop preliminry preferred designs; nd Encourge prticiption from the pulic nd potentilly ffected prties erly in nd throughout the process. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

4 The Municipl Clss EA Process The Municipl Clss EA process enles the plnning nd implementtion of municipl infrstructure projects to e undertken in ccordnce with n pproved procedure, giving due regrd to the need to protect the environment nd minimize negtive effects. The Municipl Clss EA process is depicted elow: Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

5 Brm West Prkwy Finncil Drive The Clss EA Process For This Study This study is following the process of Schedule C requirements of the Municipl Clss EA which will complete Phses 3 nd 4 for Brm West Prkwy nd Phses 1 to 4 for Finncil Drive. Phse 1: Prolem/Opportunity Phse 2: Alterntive Solutions Phses 1 nd 2 of the Brm West Prkwy were completed through HPBATS, therefore our current Study will strt t Phse 3 for Brm West Prkwy. Phse 3: Alterntive Designs PIC No. 1 We re here PIC No. 2 (fll 2012) Phse 4: Environmentl Study Report 30 Dy Pulic Review (spring 2013) Phse 5: Implementtion Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

6 Pulic Consulttion Pulic input is n essentil component of the decision-mking process. Opportunities to provide your input re not limited to forml consulttion events such s this PIC, or other milestones. You cn provide input to the study tem t ny point throughout the study. The Study Tem recognizes tht there re mny different interests within our Study Are. To provide ll ffected stkeholders with n opportunity to ecome involved in our study, our Pulic Consulttion progrm includes outrech nd inviting feedck from the: Stkeholder Group (directly ffected lndowners within the Study Are); Technicl Agency Committee (including Ministry of Nturl Resources, Credit Vlley Conservtion, municiplities etc.); Utilities (e.g., TrnsCnd Pipeline, Enridge, Hydro One); nd the Generl pulic. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

7 Bckground Trnsporttion nd Trnsit Mster Pln Trnsporttion nd Trnsit Mster Pln (TTMP) (2009) The TTMP sets out policies nd progrms to support the long-term trnsporttion vision for the City of Brmpton. In terms of specific policies relted to our Study, the TTMP: Identifies north-south trnsporttion corridor (NSTC) from Heritge Rod to Myfield Rod with 407 ETR interchnge etween Hwy 401 nd Mississug Rod. Recognizes tht the section of the NSTC etween 407 ETR nd Emleton Rod, known s Brm West Prkwy, is required to support the full development in the Brm West Secondry Pln. Recommends Brm West Prkwy e constructed s n initil 6 lne cross section from south of Emleton Rod to the proposed 407 ETR interchnge nd 4-lne cross section from the proposed 407 ETR interchnge to Heritge Rod, in the south y Recommends 4 lne extension of Finncil Drive from Steeles Avenue to Winston Churchill Boulevrd y Other studies crried out in ccordnce with the TTMP: Finncil Drive Clss EA, from Mississug Rod to Heritge Rod (prt of the Clss EA for Brm West Block 40-3) (MMM Group 2009) Finncil Drive Clss EA, from Steeles Avenue to Mississug Rod (prt of the Clss EA for Brm West Block 40-3) (AECOM 2008) Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

8 Bckground Hlton-Peel Boundry Are Trnsporttion Study Hlton-Peel Boundry Are Trnsporttion Study (HPBATS) (2010) Joint study to develop regionl trnsporttion strtegy to ddress the needs of the Regions of Hlton nd Peel, the City of Brmpton nd the Towns of Cledon nd Hlton Hills. The strtegy included the north-south rteril rod Brm West Prkwy. As Trnsporttion Mster Pln, the study serves s direct input into susequent Clss EA requirements to implement the individul projects tht mke up the recommended trnsporttion strtegy nd network. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

9 Bckground GTA West Individul EA GTA West An Individul Environmentl Assessment Study currently eing undertken y the Ontrio Ministry of Trnsporttion to ssess interregionl trnsporttion needs. Considers the potentil future extension of Brm West Prkwy north from Finncil Drive to connect with future GTA West Highwy. The GTA West Corridor hs shifted south since the preprtion of HPBATS nd s such, potentil future connection from Brm West Prkwy to GTA West supersedes the previously defined Hlton-Peel Freewy Corridor identified in HPBATS. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

10 Bckground Officil Pln City of Brmpton Officil Pln (2006) The City of Brmpton's Officil Pln (2006) projected significnt growth in popultion nd employment in next 20 yers Brmpton is the 9th lrgest nd 3rd fstest growing city in Cnd, t n verge nnul growth rte of 8.4% ( ) Yer Popultion Employment Housing , , , , , ,000 Source: Brmpton SGU Level Forecsts (Hemson Consulting Ltd., 2009) , , ,600 A significnt portion of the City s overll growth will occur in the west Brmpton Secondry Pln Ares of: Brm West (Secondry Pln Are 40) Huttonville (29) Huttonville North (52) Mount Plesnt (51) Mount Plesnt West (53) Yer Popultion Employment ,490 5, ,970 38, ,770 67,670 Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

11 Bckground Officil Pln continued City of Brmpton Officil Pln (2006) Designtes the section of Brm West Prkwy from Steeles Avenue to Finncil Drive s the North-South Trnsporttion Corridor with n ultimte right-ofwy width of m. Designtes the section of Finncil Drive from Mississug Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd s collector rod with n ultimte rightof-wy of m. Brm West Prkwy Clss EA Study Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

12 Bckground Brm West Secondry Pln Brm West Secondry Pln The Brm West Pln Are covers out 6,050 cres (2,450 hectres) in south west Brmpton nd is ounded y the Credit River in the north, the City Limit to the south, Winston Churchill Boulevrd to the west nd Chingucousy Rod (Mvis Rod) to the est. The Brm West Secondry Pln (1998, OP93-70/71) identifies rod network tht includes north-south rteril rod locted etween Heritge Rod nd Winston Churchill Boulevrd (referred to s Brm West Prkwy). A Brm West Secondry Pln Review (2005) identifies corridor protection re ounded y Heritge Rod to the est, Winston Churchill Boulevrd to the west, the Credit River Vlley to the north. The Secondry Pln Review ws implemented in 2006 through OP93-270/271. These mendments were ppeled to the OMB nd since then, ll of the OP nd portions of OP hve come into force. Ongoing stkeholder concerns/ppels re primrily ssocited with Chpter 40(), etween Heritge Rod nd Winston Churchill Boulevrd, north of Steeles Avenue West. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

13 Existing Conditions Nturl Environment Mullet Creek, Levi Creek nd Heritge Creek ( triutry of Levi Creek) re the min wtercourses within the Study Are. Levi Creek nd Heritge Creek (north of Steeles Avenue) nd the upper reches of Mullet Creek re clssified s Smll Wrmwter in the Gtewy West Suwtershed Study Updte (2008). The most dominnt fish species in these creeks re Creek Chu nd Blcknose Dce long with Brook Stickleck, Bluntnose Minnow, Fthed Minnow nd White Sucker. All re common species typiclly oserved in these types of wrm wter hitts. Levi Creek nd its min triutries re identified y the Ministry of Nturl Resources s Recovery Hitt for qutic Species t Risk nd Regulted under the Endngered Species Act (2007). Designted fetures, which re protected under numer of provincil, regionl nd locl policies include: o o o o Levi Creek Provincilly Significnt Wetlnd Complex, scttered long the riprin res of Heritge Creek nd Levi Creek; Mullet Creek wetlnds tht re considered loclly significnt (note: one of these wetlnds is no longer present on the lndscpe); Credit Vlley Conservtion Authority Regultion Limits (Ontrio Regultion 160/60); Vlleylnds nd Wtercourse Corridors, Woodlnd nd Wetlnds under the City of Brmpton Officil Pln. Due to long history of griculturl lnd use, terrestril ecosystem fetures re limited to the smll vlley systems. Riprin vegettion communities include culturl medow, medow mrsh, culturl thicket nd scttered trees. These communities re culturlly influenced, nd tend to consist of common, disturnce tolernt plnt species. Nturl environmentl fetures re depicted on the next pnel. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

14 Existing Conditions Nturl Environment

15 Existing Conditions Socio-Economic/Culturl Socio-Economic The study re is locted within the Brm West Secondry Pln Are, n re of future community growth. Existing lnd use within the study re includes: Agriculturl opertions etween Emleton Rod, Steeles Avenue, Winston Churchill Boulevrd nd Heritge Rod; Agriculturl-Industril opertions (Mple Lodge Frms processing plnt); Rurl residentil nd commercil long Emleton Rod, Heritge Rod nd Winston Churchill Boulevrd; Employment lnds south of Steeles Avenue (Churchill Business Prk). Archeology A Stge 1 Archeologicl Assessment determined tht there re 29 registered rcheologicl sties within 1 km of the Study Are. None re locted within the re tht my e impcted y the project. The Stge 1 Archeologicl Assessment reveled tht the Study Are is within n re of high potentil for rcheologicl finds. Therefore, Stge 2 Archeologicl Assessment will e undertken once the preferred lignments for Brm West Prkwy nd Finncil Drive hve een confirmed. Culturl Heritge Five (5) properties Listed in the City of Brmpton Municipl Register of Culturl Heritge Resources One (1) property Designted under the Ontrio Heritge Act One (1) property with pending municipl heritge designtion -Mount Zion Cemetery The Town of Hlton Hills Heritge Register ws consulted. There re no listed or designted properties immeditely djcent to the study re. Socio-economic nd Heritge fetures re depicted on the next pnel. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

16 Existing Conditions Socio-Economic/Culturl

17 Finncil Drive Need nd Justifiction A Screenline* Anlysis ws undertken for the Study Are to ssess trvel demnd nd cpcity sed on p.m. pek hour trvel demnd model projections, using future popultion nd employment growth. The nlysis indictes tht without infrstructure improvements the existing rodwys nd intersections will result in high delys nd congestion. Additionl est-west lnes will e required in order to ccommodte the growth nd the ssocited projected trffic demnd. West Screenline Yer V/C Legend: Good operting condition (V/C <= 0.85) Est Screenline Yer Congested operting condition (V/C > 0.85) V/C *A Screenline is n imginry line, or liner feture such s rod, river, ril line or municipl oundry tht is used for the purpose of evluting the cumultive trvel demnd on the rodwys crossing this feture. A Screenline comprison of projected trffic volumes to rod cpcity is sic trnsporttion plnning tool which provide n indiction of how well specific corridor/screenline is operting. The Screenline Anlysis mesures trffic volume (V) to cpcity (C) s mens of identifying prolems (congestion, dely) t intersections long the corridor. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

18 Finncil Drive Prolem/Opportunity Sttement The City of Brmpton is experiencing high popultion nd employment growth tht will continue over the next 20 yers, nd eyond. Steeles Avenue is plnned for widening to six lnes. Even with these improvements, dditionl rodwy cpcity will still e required in the Brm West Secondry Pln to ccommodte the est-west trvel demnd growth. Emleton Rod is not identified for future widening in the TTMP due to the significnt community impcts ssocited with widening through Huttonville nd the lck of contiguous connection to the est (i.e., jog t Mississug Rod). Creting continuous connection would require new crossing of the Credit River. The trnsporttion nd trffic nlysis suggests tht the existing rodwys nd intersections will e incple of hndling the forecsted est-west trffic, leding to incresed delys nd congestion. Additionl est-west connection will e required in order to ccommodte the growth nd the ssocited projected trffic. The Finncil Drive extension to Winston Churchill Boulevrd implements the Recommended 2016 Rod Network Needs identified in the TTMP (2009). Even with other plnned rod network improvements, dditionl rod cpcity will still e required to ccommodte trvel demnd growth nticipted from development within the Brm West Secondry Pln re nd in northwest Brmpton over the next 20 yers. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

19 Finncil Drive Alterntive Plnning Solutions Under the provisions of the Clss Environmentl Assessment process, ll resonle lterntives to the undertking require considertion. The lterntive plnning solutions eing considered re: Alterntive Solution Do Nothing Implement Trnsporttion System nd Demnd Mngement Mesures/ Improve Trnsit Service Limit Development Implement Improvements to Existing Infrstructure Extend Finncil Drive Description Mintin existing conditions. No improvements or chnges would e mde to the est-west rod network including no extension of Finncil Drive or proposed intersection with Brm West Prkwy. Reduce the numer of single occupnt vehicles during pek hours through lterntive modes of trnsporttion (trnsit, cycling, wlking), crpooling, minimizing frequency of trvel (work from home), flexile work hours. Restrict future development in the re. Undertke cpitl improvements to existing nery est-west rods including rod widening nd intersection improvements such s enhnced signl timings nd turn lnes to improve trffic opertions. Extend Finncil Drive from Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd in order to provide est-west trnsporttion cpcity, llevite congestion on Steeles Avenue West nd ccommodte projected future trvel demnd. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

20 Finncil Drive Assessment of Alterntive Plnning Solutions Alterntive Solution How the Alterntive Solution Addresses the Prolem nd Opportunities Do Nothing - Does not crete the rod network system required to connect the future development of Brm West to the plnned rteril rod network. - Does not provide ny dditionl cpcity to ccommodte future trffic generted from within nd eyond Brm West. - Does not ddress dverse impcts from incresed trffic congestion. - Does not ddress Brm West Secondry Pln, the Trnsit nd Trnsporttion Mster Pln Updte (TTMP) Recommended Rod Network nd City of Brmpton Officil Pln policy. - No impcts to nturl or culturl fetures. - Does not ddress the prolem/opportunity. Implement Trnsporttion System nd Demnd Mngement Mesures/ Improve Trnsit Service Limit Development Implement Improvements to Existing Infrstructure Extend Finncil Drive - Does not crete the rod network system required to connect the future development of Brm West to the plnned rteril rod network. - Does not provide ny dditionl cpcity to ccommodte future trffic generted from within nd eyond Brm West. - Provides ccess to trnsporttion nd trnsit lterntives on existing rods to ccommodte trips generted y the development of Brm West. - Moderte nd potentilly mitigle impcts ssocited with djcent nturl fetures (for lne widening). - Positive socio-economic impcts s result of improved ccess to trnsporttion nd trnsit lterntives nd possile reduction in utomoile dependence. - On their own, these mesures do not fully ddress prolem/opportunity. - Not consistent with the Provincil Growth policy (Plces to Grow), City of Brmpton s Officil Pln policy, the Brm West Secondry Pln nd the TTMP. - Does not fully ddress the City s plnned economic growth. - Does not crete the rod network system required to connect the future development of Brm West to the plnned rteril rod network. - Provides some dditionl cpcity nd opertionl improvements to ccommodte trffic generted from the re, however, only defers the eventul need to provide dded network cpcity to support full development. - Low to moderte impcts ssocited with djcent nturl fetures (for minor rod widening). - Positive socio-economic impcts s result of minor cpcity nd opertionl improvements. - No culturl impcts. - On their own, these mesures do not fully ddress the prolem/opportunity. While improvements my offer some increses in cpcity, they simply defer the investment into creting trnsporttion network tht fully supports implementtion of the Brm West Secondry Pln. Not crried forwrd s prt of this Study ut ddressed in other inititives. - Fcilittes the cretion of trnsporttion network system required to connect the future development of Brm West to the plnned rteril rod network. - Improves est-west connections for trvel within the Brm West re. - Allevites trffic demnd on Steeles Avenue during pek hour trvel periods. - Low to moderte impcts ssocited with djcent nturl fetures. - Positive socio-economic impcts s result of improves est-west connections. - No culturl heritge impcts. - Moderte impct to griculturl lnds north of Mple Lodge Frms plnt however; no direct impcts to the plnt or its opertions. Reduces re ville for crops in the short term, however, lnd required for the new rod is designted for future industril uses. - Best ddress the prolem/opportunity nd supports the City of Brmpton s Officil Pln policy, the Brm West Secondry Pln nd the TTMP. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

21 Finncil Drive Preferred Alterntive Plnning Solution The preferred plnning solution for Finncil Drive includes comintion of the following lterntive solutions: Extend Finncil Drive from Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd; Implement Trvel System nd Demnd Mngement Mesures/Trnsit Service Improvements where fesile long the corridor. The preferred plnning solution considers pedestrin fetures nd ctive trnsporttion opportunities such s wlking nd cycling. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

22 Finncil Drive Corridor Finncil Drive, etween Heritge Rod nd Mississug Rod ws EApproved in The proposed extension of Finncil Drive will originte from the intersection of Heritge Rod nd will terminte t new intersection with Winston Churchill Boulevrd. A potentil corridor of the proposed extension of Finncil Drive is shown on the left. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

23 Brm West Prkwy Genertion nd Evlution of Alignment Alterntives In totl, 13 lignments for the Brm West Prkwy were developed nd ssessed. The evlution of the lignments involved two stge process: Stge 1 Preferred in ech Corridor The 13 lterntive lignments were seprted into three corridor groups: West, Centrl nd Est corridors sed on where they intersect Finncil Drive. The lignment lterntives within ech group were compred, to identify preferred lignment within ech corridor. Stge 2 Preferred Overll The West, Centrl nd Est preferred lterntives were compred to ech other, to identify n overll preliminry preferred lterntive. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

24 Brm West Prkwy Genertion nd Evlution of Alignment Alterntives continued The nlysis presented on the following pnels presents: Stge 1 : The selection of the preferred lignment within ech of the West, Centrl nd Est Corridors. Stge 2 : The comprison of the preliminry preferred lterntive from ech corridor nd the selection of the overll preliminry preferred lterntive. The two stge process, with the lignment lterntives is outlined elow: Stge 1 Identify the preferred lterntive in ech corridor Stge 2 Compre preferred lterntives in ech corridor Identify preliminry preferred ltertive Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

25 Brm West Prkwy Assessment nd Evlution Process The selection processes for the preliminry preferred lterntives included two steps: Step 1 Assessment of Alterntives The potentil enefits nd impcts of ech lterntive were ssessed ginst comprehensive set of criteri for socio-economic, culturl, nturl nd trnsporttion nd technicl fctor groups; Step 2 Evlution of Alterntives A comprtive exmintion of the dvntges nd disdvntges of the lterntives ws undertken to identify preliminry preferred lterntive. The evlution of lterntives ws crried out using the Resoned Argument method, compring differences in impcts nd providing cler rtionle for the selection of the preliminry preferred lterntive. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

26 Brm West Prkwy Assessment nd Evlution Criteri nd Mesures An comprehensive set of criteri nd mesures were employed during the ssessment nd evlution process. The detiled list is provided on the right. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

27 Brm West Prkwy Alignment Alterntives The Brm West Prkwy lignment lterntives within the West, Centrl nd Est Corridors re depicted elow. A summry of our nlysis is shown on the following disply ord. Detiled ssessment tles re ville for review from our Study Tem. ACEG is the preliminry preferred lterntive within the West Corridor ACEH is the preliminry preferred lterntive within the Centrl Corridor ACEI is the preliminry preferred lterntive within the Est Corridor

28 Brm West Prkwy West Alterntives Stge 1 Evlution W1 W2 W3 W4 Fctor/Criteri (ABDG) (ABEG) (ACDG) (ACEG) Evlution 1 Trnsporttion c d e f g h i Rod Geometry Interchnge Opertions Intersection Spcing Impcts on Locl Rods Impcts of 407 ETR Network Comptiility Flexiility of Future Expnsion Emergency Services Support of Alterntive Modes of Trvel In terms of rod geometry, W3 is the est with the fewest curves. All other lterntives hve similr curviliner lignments. In terms of potentil impct to 407 ETR opertions, W1 nd W2, with potentil future full interchnge my result in potentil weving concerns on 407 ETR to the west, given the reltively close proximity to the Highwy 401/407 freewy to freewy interchnge. In terms of future interchnge opertions; ll lterntives re similr for potentil Full Interchnge t 407 ETR in terms of requiring 3 utment modifictions t djcent ridges to ccommodte the speed chnge lnes nd low flexiility of future widening 407 ETR eyond the pproved 8 lnes. W1 nd W2 hve minor impcts on the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility. For potentil Prtil Interchnge t 407 ETR, W1 nd W2 re preferred ecuse they require one less utment modifiction to djcent ridges, mintin high flexiility for future widening of 407 ETR nd void impcts to the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility. All lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. Therefore, W1 nd W2 re slightly preferred over W3 nd W4. 2 Technicl Considertions c d Impcts to Utilities Degree of Design Chllenge Constructility Issues Cost W1 nd W2 (minline) require 3 crossings of TCPL, 4 crossings of Enridge nd would need to ccommodte n ccess rod to the Enridge vlve sttion locted south of 407 ETR. In contrst, W3 nd W4 require 1 crossing of TCPL nd 2 crossings of Enridge nd will not impct the Enridge vlve sttion. W3 nd W4 preferred over W1 nd W2 ecuse they require fewer crossings of TCPL nd Enridge, void potentil conflict with Enridge vlve sttion. All lterntives will potentilly conflict with two EA-pproved 230kV hydro lines plnned for south of 407 ETR, within the Prkwy Belt. Creful considertion of potentil mitigtion mesures will need to e undertken regrdless of the preferred lterntive. W2 nd W4 hve more desirle loction reltive to the Enridge pipeline ROW tht will fcilitte ccess to the pipeline nd void triggering potentil future Clss chnges when surrounding lnd use trnsitions. Cost of constructility is considered similr for ll lterntives. Slightly higher costs my e ttriuted to W1 nd W2 given the dditionl utilities crossings however, these costs re firly minor when considered in the context of the overll costs of the new rod nd proposed interchnge. Therefore W3 nd W4 re preferred over W1 nd W2. 3 Nturl Environment 3.1 Aqutic Ecosystems Fish nd Fish Hitt All lterntives will require 3 wtercourse crossings: triutry of Mullet Creek, Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South. For the purposes of comprison, the crossings of the Mullet Creek triutry re considered similr for ll lterntives. The W1 nd W2 crossings of Mullet Creek re locted in n lredy distured re t Steeles Avenue. However, Mullet Creek crossing for W3 nd W4 is in n re lredy plnned for relignment. There my e some dvntges to utilizing the crossing loction t Steeles Avenue nd voiding newly restored rech downstrem however, in terms of impcts to fish nd fish hitt, ll lterntives re considered to hve similr low impcts to Mullet Creek. Heritge Creek South is considered more sensitive given tht it is Regulted s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk nd therefore this wtercourse crossing fctors more highly in the evlution. W1 nd W3 hve less desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek South since they hve slightly more olique crossing ngle nd will enclose more strem length (or require more extensive chnnel relignment). While W2 nd W4 my lso require some modifictions to loclized strem hitt, it is nticipted tht these impcts will e lower thn W1 nd W2 ecuse crossing re t perpendiculr ngle with less chnnel length impcted. Therefore, W2 nd W4 re preferred over W1 nd W Terrestril Ecosystems Designted Fetures Uplnd nd Wetlnd Vegettion c Wildlife nd Hitt 3.3 Surfce Wter nd Groundwter Fluvil Geomorphology Surfce Wter (including fluvil geomorphology, floodplin storge/flood conveynce nd stormwter mngement) c Groundwter 3.4 Property Wste & Contmintion Effect on operting nd closed wste disposl sites, known contminted sites nd potentilly contminted sites Nturl Environment Summry 4 Socio-Economic nd Lnd Use 4.1 Property nd Access Impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (numer of properties impcted, impcts to ccess, seprtion distnce from plnt) Impcts to other properties (numer of properties impcted, impcts to residences, impcts to commercil/industril res nd usinesses) c Impct to ccess 4.2 Community Effects There re no Ares of Nturl nd Scientific Interest (ANSI) or Environmentlly Sensitive/Significnt Ares (ESAs) impcted y ny of the lterntives. All lterntives cross vlleys designted s Greenlnds, in two loctions; Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South. W1 nd W2 crossings of Mullet Creek my e slightly desirle since it is comines with rod crossing nd therefore hs reduced impct on the roder vlley/greenlnds system (i.e., does not introduce new crossing in restored vlley portion). All lignments result in similr low to moderte impcts to uplnd nd wetlnd vegettion. Within the griculturl lnd use context, nturl fetures re lmost exclusively ssocited with the nrrow riprin corridors long the wtercourses. All lterntives result in similr minor removls of Levi Creek PSW nd similr reltively minor removls of culturl medow nd mrsh vegettion communities. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to nthropogeniclly influenced wildlife hitt for rnge of species common in n griculturl setting. If Species t Risk such s Boolink or Estern Medowlrk (i.e., species typiclly found in n griculturl setting) re found to e present, ll lterntives hve similr impcts to their hitt. Therefore, ll lterntives result in low to moderte impcts nd re eqully preferred. W1 nd W2 crossings of Mullet Creek re slightly preferred over W3 nd W4 ecuse they occur t more distured rech t n existing rod crossing. While the sensitivity of the creek crossing t W3/W4 is lso considered low, it my e desirle not to introduce new rod crossing in this newly restored rech. Bsed on the nlysis, it ppers s though two distinct chnnels re present t the Heritge Creek South crossings for ll lterntives. Therefore, ll crossings of Heritge Creek South will require some degree of geomorphic input to the design to ssess nd ddress the potentil issues. W2 nd W4 re preferle due to the improved crossing ngle (more perpendiculr) nd the reduced distnce etween the two chnnels which re expected to result in lower potentil impcts from surfce wter nd geomorphic perspective. All lignments re the sme from groundwter perspective s no wells re impcted. Therefore, W2 nd W4 re preferred over W1 nd W3. There re no known properties with contmintion. There is one property with Certificte of Approvl tht llows for the spreding of iosolids. All other properties impcted re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion (in ccordnce with MOE regultions, ny lnds under griculturl use re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion). All lignments result in similr impcts to potentilly contminted sites. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. From nturl environmentl perspective, the most importnt evlution fctor when compring lterntives within the west corridor is the crossing loction of Heritge Creek South, given its designtion s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk. W1 nd W3 hve less desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek South since they hve slightly more olique crossing ngle nd will enclose more strem length (or require more extensive chnnel relignment). While W2 nd W4 my lso require some modifictions to loclized strem hitt, it is nticipted tht these impcts will e lower thn W1 nd W2 ecuse crossing re t perpendiculr ngle with less chnnel length impcted. All lterntives result in similr low to moderte impcts to uplnd nd wetlnd vegettion nd ssocited wildlife hitt. Impcts re limited to nrrow riprin corridors. All lterntives results in similr impcts to Levi Creek Provincilly Significnt Wetlnds. Therefore, W2 nd W4 re preferred over W1 nd W3. In terms of impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (MLF), W1 nd W3 offer the lest seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. W2 nd W4 offer more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. W4 provides the est seprtion from the MLF plnt compred to the other lterntives. All lterntives will require frm ccess to djcent field e creted/mintined however, My Wy is considered the most significnt of the ccess rods. W3 nd W4 void impcts to My Wy, the min service rod into the Mple Lodge Frms plnt. W3 nd W4 impct one less prcel of MLF lnds. In terms of impcts to other properties, none of the lterntives will displce residences or usiness. All lignments impct 3 other properties (in dditionl to the MLF lnds); these lnds re owned y Infrstructure Ontrio, Orlndo Group Limited nd privte developer. W4 results in fewer impcts s it ffects one less prcel of lnd, offers the est seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd voids the min frm ccess rod. Impcts under other criteri re ll considered low. Therefore W4 is preferred over the other lterntives. Bsed on the nlysis, W4 (ACEG) is the preliminry preferred lterntive in the West Corridor. c d Impcts to cemeteries, schools, plces of worship, unique community fetures Nuisnce Impcts (e.g., noise nd esthetics) Impcts on Community Activity/Moility nd Community Chrcter Impcts to Recretionl Fetures All lterntives result in similr low impcts to ll criteri. No community fetures will e encroched upon or displced. There re no prks, recretion res or pulic tils in the Study Are. Although ll of the lignments will crete physicl footprint, there re no impcts to moility within communities s there re no communities locted on ny of the lignments. Overll, moility mong communities eyond the study re should e improved s ll lignments improve rteril rod connections in the re. All lterntives hve similr numer of residences tht my experience incresed noise levels. A noise nlysis of the preferred lignment will e undertken to identify if noise mitigtion is required for ny existing residentil property. Aesthetic impcts re nticipted to e miniml. Proposed rod eing constructed in n re of industril nd griculturl production with surrounding lnd use trnsitioning to urn/employment. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. 4.3 Lnd Use c Comptiility with Government Gols/Ojectives /Policies Comptiility with Plnned nd future Lnd Use Impct to Agriculturl Resources All lterntives re eqully comptile with government gols/ojectives nd policies. In terms of existing/pproved development plns, W3 nd W4 provide for more efficient development ly out on the west lock of the Churchill 3 Business Prk, south of Steeles Avenue. In terms of future development/ potentil lnd use chnges consistent with the Officil Pln industril lnds designtion, W1 nd W3 offer the most flexiility with respect to potentil future development lyout north of Steeles Avenue y retining lrge locks est of BWP nd keeping BWP closely ssocited with the utilities corridor. This would optimize the lyout of development prcels tht re le to ccommodte lrge uildings comprle to those plnned in the Churchill Business Prk. Becuse W3 optimizes the lyout for the pproved development south of Steeles Avenue, nd ecuse it provides the most flexiility for potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue, it is considered slightly preferred over the other lterntives when considering future potentil lnd use. All lterntives hve similr impcts to griculturl lnd (nd Clss 1 Soils). Therefore, W3 is considered slightly preferred over the other lterntives. Socio-Economic Environment Summry W4 results in slightly fewer impcts s it ffects one less prcel of lnd, offers the est seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd voids the min frm ccess rod. Impcts under other criteri re ll considered low. W3 offers the most flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. However, ecuse there re currently no pproved development plns to the north of Steeles Avenue, W4 is considered to e slightly more preferred thn W3 from socio-economic perspective s it is more comptile with the existing lnd use. Therefore W4 is preferred over the other lterntives. 5 Culturl Heritge Resources Impcts to Built Heritge Fetures nd Culturl Heritge Lndscpes All lterntives result in similr low impcts to heritge fetures. None of the lterntives will impct designted or listed uilt heritge resources. The entire study re is considered Culturl Heritge Lndscpe. As such, ll lterntives will hve similr impcts to the CHL. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Impcts to Archeologicl Resources All lterntives result in similr low impcts to rcheology ecuse the entire study re is within n re of high rcheologicl potentil. A Stge 2 Archeologicl Assessment will e undertken for the preferred lterntive. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Culturl Heritge Summry All lterntives result in similr low impcts to Culturl Heritge Resources. Therefore, ll lterntives re preferred. From trnsporttion perspective, ll lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. LEGEND: W1 nd W2 re not preferred from technicl perspective ecuse they hve the highest level of conflict with TCPL nd Enridge fcilities. Overll Summry W1 nd W3 provide the lest seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. W2 nd W4 offer more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. W4 provides the est seprtion from the MLF plnt compred to the other lterntives. All lterntives will require frm ccess to djcent field e creted/mintined however W3 nd W4 void impcts to My Wy, the min service rod into the Mple Lodge Frms plnt. W3 offers the most flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. However, ecuse there re currently no pproved development plns to the north of Steeles Avenue, W4 is considered to e slightly more preferred thn W3 from socio-economic perspective s it is more comptile with the existing lnd use north of Steeles Avenue. High Impct / Lest Benefit Low Impct / Most Benefit W2 nd W4 re preferred from nturl environmentl ecuse they re nticipted to hve lower impcts to Heritge Creek South given the etter crossing ngle nd reduced length of chnnel potentilly impcted. All lterntives result in very similr low impcts to the culturl environment. Therefore this fctor re is not decision relevnt when selecting preferred west corridor lterntive.

29 Brm West Prkwy Centrl Alterntives Stge 1 Evlution C1 C2 C3 C4 Fctor/Criteri (ABDH) (ABEH) (ACDH) (ACEH) Evlution 1 Trnsporttion c d e f g h i Rod Geometry Interchnge Opertions Intersection Spcing Impcts on Locl Rods Impcts of 407 ETR Network Comptiility Flexiility of Future Expnsion Emergency Services Support of Alterntive Modes of Trvel In terms of rod geometry, C3 is the est with the fewest curves. All other lterntives hve similr curviliner lignments. In terms of potentil impct to 407 ETR opertions, C1 nd C2, potentil future full interchnge will result in potentil weving concerns on 407 ETR to the west, given the reltively close proximity to the Highwy 401/407 freewy to freewy interchnge. In terms of future interchnge opertions; ll lterntives re similr for potentil Full Interchnge t 407 ETR in terms of requiring 3 utment modifictions t djcent ridges to ccommodte the speed chnge lnes nd low flexiility of future widening 407 ETR eyond the pproved 8 lnes. C1 nd C2 hve minor impcts on the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility. For potentil Prtil Interchnge t 407 ETR, C1 nd C2 re preferred ecuse they require one less utment modifiction to djcent ridges, mintin high flexiility for future widening of 407 ETR nd void impcts to the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility. All lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. Therefore, C1 nd C2 re slightly preferred over C3 nd C4. 2 Technicl Considertions c d Impcts to Utilities Degree of Design Chllenge Constructility Issues Cost C1 nd C2 (minline) require 2 crossings of TCPL, 2 crossings of Enridge nd would need to ccommodte n ccess rod to the Enridge vlve sttion locted south of 407 ETR. In contrst, C3 nd C4 my void crossing TCPL, hve 1 crossing of Enridge nd will not impct the Enridge vlve sttion. C3 nd C4 preferred over C1 nd C2 ecuse they require fewer crossings of TCPL nd Enridge, void potentil conflict with Enridge vlve sttion nd provide more flexiility with regrd to future hydro corridor. All lterntives will potentilly conflict with two EA-pproved 230kV hydro lines plnned for south of 407 ETR, within the Prkwy Belt. Creful considertion of potentil mitigtion mesures will need to e undertken regrdless of the preferred lterntive. C3 hs more desirle future development lyout reltive to the Enridge pipeline ROW tht will fcilitte ccess to the pipeline nd void potentil future Clss chnges when surrounding lnd use chnges. Cost of constructility is considered similr for ll lterntives. Slightly higher costs my e ttriuted to C1 nd C2 given the dditionl utilities crossings however, these costs re firly minor when considered in the context of the overll costs of the new rod nd proposed interchnge. Therefore C3 nd C4 re preferred over C1 nd C2. 3 Nturl Environment 3.1 Aqutic Ecosystems Fish nd Fish Hitt 3.2 Terrestril Ecosystems Designted Fetures Uplnd nd Wetlnd Vegettion c Wildlife nd Hitt 3.3 Surfce Wter nd Groundwter Fluvil Geomorphology Surfce Wter (including fluvil geomorphology, floodplin storge/flood conveynce nd stormwter mngement) c Groundwter 3.4 Property Wste & Contmintion Effect on operting nd closed wste disposl sites, known contminted sites nd potentilly contminted sites Nturl Environment Summry 4 Socio-Economic nd Lnd Use 4.1 Property nd Access Impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (numer of properties impcted, impcts to ccess, seprtion distnce from plnt) Impcts to other properties (numer of properties impcted, impcts to residences, impcts to commercil/industril res nd usinesses) c Impct to ccess 4.2 Community Effects All lterntives will require 3 wtercourse crossings: triutry of Mullet Creek, Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South. For the purposes of comprison, the crossings of the Mullet Creek triutry re considered similr for ll lterntives. The C1 nd C2 crossings of Mullet Creek re locted in n lredy distured re t Steeles Avenue. However, Mullet Creek crossing for C3 nd C4 is in n re lredy plnned for relignment. There my e some dvntges to utilizing the crossing loction t Steeles Avenue nd voiding newly restored rech downstrem however, in terms of impcts to fish nd fish hitt, ll lterntives re considered similr nd reltively low for Mullet Creek, given the low sensitivity of the hitt. Heritge Creek South hs higher sensitivity given tht it is Regulted s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk nd therefore this wtercourse crossing fctors more highly in the evlution. C1 nd C3 hve slightly less desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek South since they hve slightly more olique crossing ngle nd will enclose more strem length (or require more extensive chnnel relignment). While C2 nd C4 my lso require some modifictions to loclized strem hitt, it is nticipted tht this impcts will e lower thn C1 nd C2 ecuse crossing re t perpendiculr ngle with less chnnel length impcted. Therefore, C2 nd C4 re preferred over C1 nd C3 There re no Ares of Nturl nd Scientific Interest (ANSI) or Environmentlly Sensitive/Significnt Ares (ESAs) impcted y ny of the lterntives. All lterntives cross vlleys designted s Greenlnds, in two loctions; Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South. C1 nd C2 crossings of Mullet Creek my e slightly desirle since it is comines with rod crossing nd therefore hs reduced impct on the roder vlley/greenlnds system (i.e., does not introduce new crossing in restored vlley portion). All lignments result in similr low impcts to uplnd nd wetlnd vegettion. Within the griculturl lnd use context, nturl fetures re lmost exclusively ssocited with the nrrow riprin corridors long the wtercourses. All lterntives result in similr minor removls of Levi Creek PSW nd similr minor removls of culturl medow nd mrsh vegettion communities. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to nthropogeniclly influenced wildlife hitt for rnge of species common in n griculturl setting. If Species t Risk such s Boolink or Estern medowlrk (i.e., species typiclly found in n griculturl setting) re found to e present, ll lterntives hve similr impcts to their hitt. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. C1 nd C2 crossings of Mullet Creek re slightly preferred over C3 nd C4 ecuse they occur t more distured rech t n existing rod crossing. While the sensitivity of the creek crossing t C3/C4 is lso considered low, it my e desirle not to introduce new rod crossing in this newly restored rech. Bsed on the nlysis, it ppers s though two distinct chnnels re present t the Heritge Creek South crossings for ll lterntives. Therefore, ll crossings of Heritge Creek South will require some degree of geomorphic input to the design to ssess nd ddress the potentil issues. C2 nd C4 re slightly preferle due to the improved crossing ngle (more perpendiculr) nd the reduced distnce etween the two chnnels which re expected to result in lower potentil impcts from surfce wter nd geomorphic perspective. All lignments re the sme from groundwter perspective s no wells re impcted. Therefore, C2 nd C4 re preferred over C1 nd C3. There re no known properties with contmintion. There is one property with Certificte of Approvl tht llows for the spreding of iosolids. All other properties impcted re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion (in ccordnce with MOE regultions, ny lnds under griculturl use re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion). All lignments result in similr impcts to potentilly contminted sites. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. From nturl environmentl perspective, the most importnt evlution fctor when compring lterntives within the centrl corridor is the crossing loction of Heritge Creek South, given its designtion s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk. C1 nd C3 hve less desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek South since they hve slightly more olique crossing ngle nd will enclose more strem length (or require more extensive chnnel relignment). While C2 nd C4 my lso require some modifictions to loclized strem hitt, it is nticipted tht these impcts will e lower thn C1 nd C2 ecuse crossing re t perpendiculr ngle with less chnnel length impcted. All lterntives result in similr low to moderte impcts to uplnd nd wetlnd vegettion nd ssocited wildlife hitt. Impcts re limited to nrrow riprin corridors. All lterntives results in similr impcts to Levi Creek Provincilly Significnt Wetlnds. Therefore, C2 nd C4 re preferred over C1 nd C3. In terms of impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (MLF), C1 nd C3 offer the lest seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. C2 nd C4 offer more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. C4 provides the est seprtion from the MLF plnt compred to the other lterntives. All lterntives will require frm ccess to djcent field e creted/mintined however, My Wy is considered the most significnt of the ccess rods. C3 nd C4 void impcts to My Wy, the min service rod into the Mple Lodge Frms plnt. C3 nd C4 impct one less prcel of MLF lnds. In terms of impcts to other properties, none of the lterntives will displce residences or usiness. All lignments impct 3 other properties (in dditionl to the MLF lnds); these lnds re owned y Infrstructure Ontrio, Orlndo Group Limited nd privte developer. C4 results in fewer impcts s it ffects one less prcel of lnd, offers the est seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd voids the min frm ccess rod. Impcts under other criteri re ll considered low. Therefore C4 is considered preferred over the other lterntives. Bsed on the nlysis, C4 (ACEH) is the preliminry preferred lterntive in the Centrl Corridor. c d Impcts to cemeteries, schools, plces of worship, unique community fetures Nuisnce Impcts (e.g., noise nd esthetics) Impcts on Community Activity/Moility nd Community Chrcter Impcts to Recretionl Fetures All lterntives result in similr low impcts to ll criteri. No community fetures will e encroched upon or displced. There re no prks, recretion res or pulic tils in the Study Are. Although ll of the lignments will crete physicl footprint, there re no impcts to moility within communities s there re no communities locted on ny of the lignments. Overll, moility mong communities eyond the study re should e improved s ll lignments improve rteril rod connections in the re. All lterntives hve similr numer of residences tht my experience incresed noise levels. A noise nlysis of the preferred lignment will e undertken to identify if noise mitigtion is required for ny existing residentil property. Aesthetic impcts re nticipted to e miniml. Proposed rod eing constructed in n re of industril nd griculturl production with surrounding lnd use trnsitioning to urn/employment. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. 4.3 Lnd Use c Comptiility with Government Gols/Ojectives /Policies Comptiility with Plnned nd future Lnd Use Impct to Agriculturl Resources All lterntives re eqully comptile with government gols/ojectives nd policies. In terms of existing/pproved development plns, C3 nd C44 provide for more efficient development ly out on the west lock of the Churchill 3 Business Prk, south of Steeles Avenue. In terms of future development/ potentil lnd use chnges consistent with the Officil Pln industril lnds designtion, C1 nd C3 offer the most flexiility with respect to potentil future development lyout north of Steeles Avenue y retining lrge locks est of BWP nd keeping BWP closely ssocited with the utilities corridor. This would optimize the lyout of development prcels tht re le to ccommodte lrge uildings comprle to those plnned in the Churchill Business Prk. Becuse C3 optimizes the lyout for the pproved development south of Steeles Avenue, nd ecuse it provides the most flexiility for potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue, it is considered slightly preferred over the other lterntives when considering future potentil lnd use. All lterntives hve similr impcts to griculturl lnd (nd Clss 1 Soils). Therefore, C3 is considered slightly preferred over the other lterntives. Socio-Economic Environment Summry C4 results in slightly fewer impcts s it ffects one less prcel of lnd, offers the est seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd voids the min frm ccess rod. Impcts under other criteri re ll considered low. C3 offers the most flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. However, ecuse there re currently no pproved development plns to the north of Steeles Avenue, C4 is considered to e slightly more preferred thn C3 from socio-economic perspective s it is more comptile with the existing lnd use. Therefore C4 is preferred over the other lterntives. 5 Culturl Heritge Resources Impcts to Built Heritge Fetures nd Culturl Heritge Lndscpes All lterntives result in similr low impcts to heritge fetures. None of the lterntives will impct designted or listed uilt heritge resources. The entire study re is considered Culturl Heritge Lndscpe. As such, ll lterntives will hve similr impcts to the CHL. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Impcts to Archeologicl Resources All lterntives result in similr low impcts to rcheology ecuse the entire study re is within n re of high rcheologicl potentil. A Stge 2 Archeologicl Assessment will e undertken for the preferred lterntive. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Culturl Heritge Summry All lterntives result in similr low impcts to Culturl Heritge Resources. Therefore, ll lterntives re preferred. From trnsporttion perspective, ll lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. LEGEND: C1 nd C2 re not preferred from technicl perspective ecuse they hve the highest level of conflict with TCPL nd Enridge fcilities. Overll Summry C1 nd C3 provide the lest seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. C2 nd C4 offer more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. C4 provides the est seprtion from the MLF plnt compred to the other lterntives. All lterntives will require frm ccess to djcent field e creted/mintined however C3 nd C4 void impcts to My Wy, the min service rod into the Mple Lodge Frms plnt. In terms of comptiility with existing nd future development,c3 offers the most flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. However, ecuse there re currently no pproved development plns to the north of Steeles Avenue, C4 is considered to e slightly more preferred thn C3 from socio-economic perspective s it is more comptile with the existing lnd use north of Steeles Avenue. High Impct / Lest Benefit Low Impct / Most Benefit C2 nd C4 re preferred from nturl environmentl ecuse they re nticipted to hve lower impcts to Heritge Creek South given the etter crossing ngle nd reduced length of chnnel potentilly impcted. All lterntives result in very similr low impcts to the culturl environment. Therefore this fctor re is not decision relevnt when selecting preferred centrl corridor lterntive.

30 Brm West Prkwy Est Alterntives Stge 1 Evlution E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 Fctor/Criteri (ABDI) (ABEI) (ACDI) (ACEI) (ACFI) Evlution 1 Trnsporttion c d e f g h i Rod Geometry Interchnge Opertions Intersection Spcing Impcts on Locl Rods Impcts of 407 ETR Network Comptiility Flexiility of Future Expnsion Emergency Services Support of Alterntive Modes of Trvel In terms of rod geometry, E2, E3 nd E4 re considered slightly etter since they re less curviliner. In terms of potentil impct to 407 ETR opertions, E1 nd E2, potentil future full interchnge will result in potentil weving concerns on 407 ETR to the west, given the reltively close proximity to the Highwy 401/407 freewy to freewy interchnge. In terms of future interchnge opertions; ll lterntives re similr for potentil Full Interchnge t 407 ETR in terms of requiring 3 utment modifictions t djcent ridges to ccommodte the speed chnge lnes nd low flexiility of future widening 407 ETR eyond the pproved 8 lnes. E3, E4 nd E5 hve minor impcts on the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility. For potentil Prtil Interchnge t 407 ETR, E1 nd E2 re preferred ecuse they require one less utment modifiction to djcent ridges, mintin high flexiility for future widening of 407 ETR nd void impcts to the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility. All lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. Therefore, E1 nd E2 re slightly preferred over the other lterntives. 2 Technicl Considertions c d Impcts to Utilities Degree of Design Chllenge Constructility Issues Cost E1 nd E2 (minline) require 2 crossings of TCPL, 3 crossings of Enridge nd would need to ccommodte n ccess rod to the Enridge vlve sttion locted south of 407 ETR. In contrst, E3/E4/E5 hve no crossings of TCPL, 1 crossing of Enridge, void potentil conflict with Enridge vlve sttion nd provide more flexiility with regrd to future hydro corridor. All lterntives will potentilly conflict with two EA-pproved 230kV hydro lines plnned for south of 407 ETR, within the Prkwy Belt. Creful considertion of potentil mitigtion mesures will need to e undertken regrdless of the preferred lterntive. E3 hs more desirle loction reltive to the Enridge pipeline future development lyout reltive to the pipeline tht will fcilitte ccess to the pipeline nd void potentil future Clss chnges when surrounding lnd use chnges. Cost of constructility is considered similr for ll lterntives. Higher costs my e ttriuted to E1 nd E2 given the dditionl utilities crossings however, these costs re firly minor when considered in the context of the overll costs of the new rod nd proposed interchnge. Therefore E3, E4 nd E5 re preferred over E1 nd E2. 3 Nturl Environment 3.1 Aqutic Ecosystems Fish nd Fish Hitt All lterntives, with the exception of E5 will require 4 wtercourse crossings: triutry of Mullet Creek, Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South nd Heritge Creek North. For the purposes of comprison, the crossings of the Mullet Creek triutry re considered similr for ll lterntives. E5 crosses Heritge Creek t the confluence of the North nd South rnches. The E1 nd E2 crossings of Mullet Creek re locted in n lredy distured re t Steeles Avenue. However, the Mullet Creek crossing for E3, E4 nd E5 is in n re lredy plnned for relignment. There my e some dvntges to utilizing the crossing loction t Steeles Avenue nd voiding newly restored rech downstrem however, in terms of impcts to fish nd fish hitt, ll lterntives re considered similr nd reltively low for Mullet Creek. Heritge Creek is considered more sensitive given tht it is Regulted s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk nd therefore this wtercourse fctors more highly in the evlution. E1 nd E3 hve less desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek South since they hve slightly more olique crossing ngle nd will enclose more strem length (or require more extensive chnnel relignment). E1 nd E3 hve more desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek North ecuse it is locted t frm crossing (previously distured re) nd hs more perpendiculr crossing ngle. The slight dvntges nd disdvntges of the creek crossing loctions ssocited with E1, E2, E3 nd E4 mkes them ll somewht similr in terms of trde-offs. E2 nd E4 re considered more preferred ecuse they hve etter crossing loctions on more complex creek system (Heritge Creek South). E5 is lest preferred ecuse it is locted very close to the confluence of Heritge Creeks North nd South. Therefore, E2 nd E4 re preferred over E1 nd E3, nd much more preferred over E Terrestril Ecosystems c Designted Fetures Uplnd nd Wetlnd Vegettion Wildlife nd Hitt There re no Ares of Nturl nd Scientific Interest (ANSI) or Environmentlly Sensitive/Significnt Ares (ESAs) impcted y ny of the lterntives. All lterntives cross vlleys designted s Greenlnds, in three loctions; Mullet Creek, Heritge Creek South nd Heritge Creek North. E1 nd E2 crossings of Mullet Creek my e slightly desirle since it is comines with rod crossing nd therefore hs reduced impct on the roder vlley/greenlnds system (i.e., does not introduce new crossing in restored vlley portion). All lignments result in similr low to moderte impcts to uplnd nd wetlnd vegettion. All result in similr minor removls of culturl medow nd mrsh vegettion communities. E5 hs the enefit of voiding wetlnds designted s Levi Creek PSW, ut this lterntive still ffects similr re of vegettion overll. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to nthropogeniclly influenced wildlife hitt for rnge of species common in n griculturl setting. If Species t Risk such s Boolink or Estern Medowlrk (i.e., species typiclly found in n griculturl setting) re found to e present, ll lterntives hve similr impcts to their hitt. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. 3.3 Surfce Wter nd Groundwter c Fluvil Geomorphology Surfce Wter (including fluvil geomorphology, floodplin storge/flood conveynce nd stormwter mngement) Groundwter E1 nd E2 crossings of Mullet Creek re slightly preferred ecuse they occur t more distured rech t n existing rod crossing. While the sensitivity of the creek crossing t E3/E4/E5 is lso considered low, it my e desirle not to introduce new rod crossing in this newly restored rech. Bsed on the nlysis, it ppers s though two distinct chnnels re present t the Heritge Creek South crossings for ll lterntives. Therefore, ll crossings of Heritge Creek South will require some degree of geomorphic input to the design to ssess nd ddress the potentil issues. E2 nd E4 re preferle due to the improved crossing ngle (more perpendiculr) nd the reduced distnce etween the two chnnels. E1 nd E3 hve more desirle crossing loctions on Heritge Creek North ecuse it is locted t frm crossing (previously distured re) nd hs more perpendiculr crossing ngle. E5 is locted t the confluence of Heritge Creeks North nd South nd therefore this lterntive is lest preferred from oth geomorphic nd floodplin impct perspectives. Therefore, E2 nd E4 re preferred over E1 nd E3, nd much more preferred over E Property Wste & Contmintion Effect on operting nd closed wste disposl sites, known contminted sites nd potentilly contminted sites Nturl Environment Summry 4 Socio-Economic nd Lnd Use 4.1 Property nd Access Impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (numer of properties impcted, impcts to ccess, seprtion distnce from plnt) Impcts to other properties (numer of properties impcted, impcts to residences, impcts to commercil/industril res nd usinesses) c Impct to ccess 4.2 Community Effects Impcts to cemeteries, schools, plces of worship, unique community fetures Nuisnce Impcts (e.g., noise nd esthetics) Impcts on Community Activity/Moility nd Community c Chrcter d Impcts to Recretionl Fetures 4.3 Lnd Use There re no known properties with contmintion. There is one property with Certificte of Approvl tht llows for the spreding of iosolids. All other properties impcted re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion (in ccordnce with MOE regultions, ny lnds under griculturl use re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion). All lignments result in similr impcts to potentilly contminted sites. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. From nturl environmentl perspective, the most importnt evlution fctor when compring lterntives within the est corridor is the numer nd loction/siting of crossings of Heritge Creek nd Levi Creek, given their designtion s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk. E1 nd E2 crossings of Mullet Creek re slightly preferred over E3/E4/E5 from geomorphologicl perspective. However, for the Heritge Creek South crossing, E2 nd E4 re preferred over E1 nd E3 from fisheries nd geomorphologicl perspectives. E5 is lest preferred due to the complexity of hving wtercourse crossing sited on confluence of two creeks. This crossing would require sustntil reconfigurtion of the chnnels nd the loction of the confluence. Therefore, E2 nd E4 re preferred over E1 nd E3 nd much more preferred over E5. In terms of impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (MLF), E1 nd E3 offer the lest seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. E2, E4 nd E5 offer more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. E5 provides the est seprtion from the MLF plnt compred to the other lterntives. All lterntives will require frm ccess to djcent field e creted/mintined however, My Wy is considered the most significnt of the ccess rods. E3, E4 nd E5 void impcts to My Wy, the min service rod into the Mple Lodge Frms plnt nd impct one less prcel of MLF lnds. In terms of impcts to other properties, E1, E2, E3 nd E4 impct 3 other properties (in dditionl to the MLF lnds); these lnds re owned y Infrstructure Ontrio, Orlndo Group Limited nd privte developer. E5 impcts one dditionl property nd hs significnt encrochment into n djcent horse frm; resulting in the removl of pddock nd trining circuit. E4 results in fewer impcts s it ffects one less prcel of lnd, offers the est seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd voids the min frm ccess rod. Impcts under other criteri re ll considered low. Therefore E4 is considered preferred over the other lterntives. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to ll criteri. No community fetures will e encroched upon or displced. There re no prks, recretion res or pulic tils in the Study Are. Although ll of the lignments will crete physicl footprint, there re no impcts to moility within communities s there re no communities locted on ny of the lignments. Overll, moility mong communities eyond the study re should e improved s ll lignments improve rteril rod connections in the re. All lterntives hve similr numer of residences tht my experience increses in noise levels. A noise nlysis of the preferred lignment will e undertken to identify if noise mitigtion is required for ny existing residentil property. Aesthetic impcts re nticipted to e miniml. Proposed rod eing constructed in n re of industril griculturl production with surrounding lnd use trnsitioning to urn/employment. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. All lterntives re eqully comptile with government gols/ojectives nd policies. Bsed on the nlysis, E4 (ACEI) is the preliminry preferred lterntive in the Est Corridor. c Comptiility with Government Gols/Ojectives /Policies Comptiility with Plnned nd future Lnd Use Impct to Agriculturl Resources In terms of existing/pproved development plns, E3/E4/E5 provide for more efficient development ly out on the west lock of the Churchill 3 Business Prk, south of Steeles Avenue. In terms of future development/ potentil lnd use chnges consistent with the Officil Pln industril lnds designtion, E1 nd E3 offer the most flexiility with respect to potentil future development lyout north of Steeles Avenue y retining lrge locks est of BWP nd keeping BWP closely ssocited with the utilities corridor. This would optimize the lyout of development prcels tht re le to ccommodte lrge uildings comprle to those plnned in the Churchill Business Prk. E2 nd E4 offer slightly less flexiility with respect to potentil future development lyout north of Steeles Avenue ut, they ct s mid-lock rod, potentilly creting good ccess/frontge opportunities, lthough the mximum prcel size is more limited thn with E1 nd E3. However, E2 nd E4 result in n undesirle smll remnnt prcel locted etween BWP nd Heritge Creek North. E5 is considered etter thn E2 nd E4 in this regrd ecuse this lterntive keeps BWP close to Heritge Creek North, mintining develople lnds to the est nd west. Becuse E3 optimizes the lyout for the pproved development south of Steeles Avenue, nd ecuse it provides the most flexiility for potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue, it is considered slightly preferred over the other lterntives when considering future potentil lnd use. All lterntives hve similr impcts to griculturl lnd (nd Clss 1 Soils). Therefore, E3 nd E5 re considered slightly preferred over the other lterntives. Socio-Economic Environment Summry E4 offers good seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd voids the min frm ccess rod. While E5 offers greter seprtion distnce from MLF, it impcts one dditionl property nd hs significnt encrochment into n djcent horse frm; resulting in the removl of pddock nd trining circuit. E3 offers the most flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. However, ecuse there re currently no pproved development plns to the north of Steeles Avenue, E4 is considered to e slightly more preferred thn E3 from socio-economic perspective s it is more comptile with the existing lnd use. Therefore E4 is preferred over the other lterntives. 5 Culturl Heritge Resources Impcts to Built Heritge Fetures nd Culturl Heritge Lndscpes All lterntives result in similr low impcts to heritge fetures. None of the lterntives will impct designted or listed uilt heritge resources. The entire study re is considered Culturl Heritge Lndscpe. As such, ll lterntives will hve similr impcts to the CHL. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Impcts to Archeologicl Resources All lterntives result in similr impcts to rcheology ecuse the entire study re is within n re of high rcheologicl potentil. A Stge 2 Archeologicl Assessment will e undertken for the preferred lterntive. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Culturl Heritge Summry All lterntives result in similr low impcts to Culturl Heritge Resources. Therefore, ll lterntives re preferred. From trnsporttion perspective, ll lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. LEGEND: E1 nd E2 re not preferred from technicl perspective ecuse they hve the highest level of conflict with TCPL nd Enridge fcilities. Overll Summry E1 nd E3 provide the lest seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. E2, E4 nd E5 offer more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. E5 provides the est seprtion from the MLF plnt compred to the other lterntives however, the dditionl property impcts it cretes mke this lterntive much less preferred. All lterntives will require frm ccess to djcent field e creted/mintined however E3, E4 nd E5 void impcts to My Wy, the min service rod into the Mple Lodge Frms plnt. E3 offers the most flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. However, ecuse there re currently no pproved development plns to the north of Steeles Avenue E4 is considered to e slightly more preferred thn E3 from socio-economic perspective s it is more comptile with the existing lnd use. High Impct / Lest Benefit Low Impct / Most Benefit E2 nd E4 re preferred from nturl environmentl perspective ecuse they hve lower impcts to Heritge Creek South. E5 is lest preferred due to the poor crossing loction of Heritge Creek, locted t the confluence of Heritge Creeks North nd South. All lterntives result in very similr low impcts to the culturl environment. Therefore this fctor re is not decision relevnt when selecting preferred west corridor lterntive.

31 Brm West Prkwy Stge 1 Preferred Alterntives Bsed on the Stge 1 evlution: W4 (ACEG) C4 (ACEH) E4 (ACEI) re the preliminry preferred lterntives for Brm West Prkwy from the West, Centrl nd Est corridors. These lterntives re crried forwrd to the Stge 2 evlution.

32 Brm West Prkwy Stge 2 Evlution Fctor/Criteri W4 (ACEG) C4 (ACEH) E4 (ACEI) Evlution 1 Trnsporttion c d e f g h i Rod Geometry Interchnge Opertions Intersection Spcing Impcts on Locl Rods Impcts of 407 ETR Network Comptiility Flexiility of Future Expnsion Emergency Services Support of Alterntive Modes of Trvel The most significnt difference etween the three lterntives from trnsporttion perspective is relted to flexiility for future expnsion to the north. Becuse of their more westerly loction, W4 nd C4 hve very high the flexiility in terms of generting future extension lignments to the north tht cn void significnt nturl, socio-economic nd culturl fetures; oth of these lterntives terminte on the west of the significnt woodlnd where there re fewer constrints locted to the north. C4 is somewht more constrined thn W4 for short distnce north ecuse future extension would e locted etween the TCPL ROW nd the woodlnd nd would cross Heritge Creek North, potentilly resulting in low to moderte impcts to these fetures in the future. E4 is the lest flexile in terms of future extension. An extension north from its current terminus t the proposed Finncil Drive extension would result in significnt impcts to the community (residences nd usinesses) long Emleton Rod nd would hve lower trnsporttion network comptiility in tht the future BWP would e in very close proximity to Heritge Rod nd the intersection of Heritge Rod/Emleton Rod. In order to void these impcts, future extension from E4 would hve to swing to the west nd, while this is fesile from rod geometry perspective, it is not desirle from technicl/cost perspective. Furthermore, extending the rod to the north nd then west would require tht n lignment e locted etween the wetlnd nd woodlnd resulting in the removl of wide hedgerow nd cretion of rrier cross hitt linkge/wildlife movement corridor. In terms of future interchnge opertions; ll lterntives re similr for potentil Full Interchnge t 407 ETR in terms of requiring 3 utment modifictions t djcent ridges to ccommodte the speed chnge lnes nd low flexiility of future widening 407 ETR eyond the pproved 8 lnes. Some of these impcts my e mitigted if prtil interchnge is implemented. All lterntives hve minor impcts on the existing 407 ETR SWM fcility, in tht this fcility would hve to e reconfigured to mintin storge volume. For potentil Prtil Interchnge t 407 ETR, ll lterntives mintin moderte flexiility for future widening of 407 ETR. All lterntives hve similr rod geometry, level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. Therefore, W4 is slightly preferred over C4 nd oth re much preferred over E4. 2 Technicl Considertions Impcts to Utilities W4 requires 1 crossing of TCPL nd 2 crossings of Enridge fcilities. C4 nd E4 potentilly void TCPL crossings on the BWP minline (i.e., excluding the potentil Degree of Design Chllenge future interchnge nd require only 1 crossing of Enridge fcilities. C4 nd E4 re considered slightly less constrined thn W4 in terms of the flexiility to ccommodte potentil future hydro corridor. c Constructility Issues Cost of constructility is considered similr for ll lterntives. Slightly higher costs ttriuted to W1 given the dditionl utilities crossing however, these costs re firly minor when considered in the context of the overll costs of the new rod nd proposed interchnge. d Cost Therefore C4 nd E4 re slightly preferred over W4. 3 Nturl Environment 3.1 Aqutic Ecosystems Fish nd Fish Hitt W4 nd C4 require crossings of the triutry of Mullet Creek, Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South. E4 will require n dditionl crossing of Heritge Creek North. All lterntives cross the Mullet Creek triutry in the sme loction. All lterntives cross Mullet Creek t the sme loction in n re tht is plnned for future relignment s prt of the pproved development of the Churchill Business Prk, Phse 3. All lterntives cross Heritge Creek South in similr loction nd therefore re considered similr in terms of potentil impcts to this wtercourse. Becuse E4 requires n dditionl wtercourse crossing t Heritge Creek North, it is considered slightly less preferred thn the other lterntives due to the potentil for dditionl impcts. Therefore, W4 nd C4 re slightly preferred over E Terrestril Ecosystems Designted Fetures Uplnd nd Wetlnd Vegettion c Wildlife nd Hitt 3.3 Surfce Wter nd Groundwter Fluvil Geomorphology Surfce Wter (including fluvil geomorphology, floodplin storge/flood conveynce nd stormwter mngement) c Groundwter 3.4 Property Wste & Contmintion Effect on operting nd closed wste disposl sites, known contminted sites nd potentilly contminted sites Nturl Environment Summry 4 Socio-Economic nd Lnd Use 4.1 Property nd Access Impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (numer of properties impcted, impcts to ccess, seprtion distnce from plnt) Impcts to other properties (numer of properties impcted, impcts to residences, impcts to commercil/industril res nd usinesses) c Impct to ccess 4.2 Community Effects Impcts to cemeteries, schools, plces of worship, unique community fetures Nuisnce Impcts (e.g., noise nd esthetics) Impcts on Community Activity/Moility nd Community c Chrcter d Impcts to Recretionl Fetures 4.3 Lnd Use There re no Ares of Nturl nd Scientific Interest (ANSI) or Environmentlly Sensitive/Significnt Ares (ESAs) impcted y ny of the lterntives. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to designted fetures. All lterntives cross vlleys designted s Greenlnds. W4 nd C4 cross in two loctions: Mullet Creek nd Heritge Creek South. E4 hs n dditionl crossing t Heritge Creek North. All lignments result in similr low to moderte impcts to uplnd nd wetlnd vegettion. Within the griculturl lnd use context, nturl fetures re lmost exclusively ssocited with the nrrow riprin corridors long the wtercourses. All result in similr minor removls of culturl medow nd mrsh vegettion communities. Due to the dditionl vlley crossing, E4 results in slightly more impct to (removl of) PSW nd vlley vegettion communities, lthough the differences is still considered quite minor (i.e., E4 removes 0.34 h of PSW while C4 removes 0.16 h). For this reson, E4 is considered less desirle. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to nthropogeniclly influenced wildlife hitt for rnge of species common in n griculturl setting. If Species t Risk such s Boolink or Estern Medowlrk (i.e., species typiclly found in n griculturl setting) re found to e present, ll lterntives hve similr impcts to their hitt. Therefore, W4 nd C4 re preferred over E4. As noted ove, ll lterntives cross the Mullet Creek triutry in the sme loction. All lterntives cross Mullet Creek t the sme loction in n re tht is plnned for future relignment s prt of the pproved development of the Churchill Business Prk, Phse 3. All lterntives cross Heritge Creek South in similr loction nd therefore re considered similr in terms of potentil impcts. Bsed on the nlysis, it ppers s though two distinct chnnels re present t the Heritge Creek South crossings for ll lterntives. Therefore, ll crossings of Heritge Creek South will require some degree of geomorphic input to the design to ssess nd ddress the potentil issues. E4 requires crossing of Heritge Creek North nd therefore is slightly less preferred s it results in dditionl incrementl impcts to flood storge/conveynce tht must e mitigted. Therefore, W4 nd C4 re slightly preferred over E4. There re no known properties with contmintion. There is one property with Certificte of Approvl tht llows for the spreding of iosolids. All other properties impcted re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion (in ccordnce with MOE regultions, ny lnds under griculturl use re considered to hve moderte potentil for contmintion). All lignments result in similr impcts to potentilly contminted sites. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. From nturl environmentl perspective, the most importnt evlution fctor when compring lterntives within the west corridor is the numer of crossing of Levi Creek triutries (Heritge Creek), given their designtion s Recovery Hitt for qutic species t risk. E4 is slightly less preferred thn W4 nd C4 ecuse it requires n dditionl crossing of Heritge Creek (Heritge Creek North) nd hs incresed impcts to vlley vegettion nd hitt, the Levi Creek PSW nd the floodplin. Therefore, W4 nd C4 re slightly preferred over E4. In terms of impcts to Mple Lodge Frms (MLF), W4 nd C4 hve very similr seprtion distnce from MLF opertions. E4 offers the est seprtion distnce nd provides more contiguous field re djcent to the plnt nd lgoons tht llows MLF equipment to move more freely etween the plnt nd surrounding lnds therey minimizing the impcts to their existing prctices. E4 impcts fewer MLF properties. E4 impcts 2 MLF properties in comprison to the 4 properties impcted y W4 nd C4 (leit, the 4 th property is minor edge impct ssocited with the intersection of Finncil Drive nd BWP). In terms of impcts to other properties, none of the lterntives will displce residences or usiness. All lterntives impct 3 other properties (in dditionl to the MLF lnds); these lnds re owned y Infrstructure Ontrio, Orlndo Group Limited nd privte developer. E4 isects the privte developer-owned lnds nd therefore my e considered less desirle y tht owner. Therefore ll lterntives re eqully preferred. All lterntives result in similr low impcts to most criteri. No community fetures will e encroched upon or displced. There re no prks, recretion res or pulic tils in the Study Are. Although ll of the lignments will crete physicl footprint, there re no impcts to moility within communities s there re no communities locted on ny of the lignments. Overll, moility mong communities eyond the study re should e improved s ll lignments improve rteril rod connections in the re. E4 hs pproximtely doule the numer of sensitive receivers (i.e., residences) locted ner the lignment. Up to 18 residences my experience incresed noise levels s result of E4, in contrst to the 8 nd 9 residences for W4 nd C4. A noise nlysis of the preferred lignment will e undertken to identify if noise mitigtion is required for ny existing residentil property. E4 hs higher potentil of creting noise impcts tht require mitigtion. Therefore, W4 nd C4 re slightly preferred over E4. Bsed on the Stge 2 evlution, C4 (ACEH) is the preliminry preferred lterntive for Brm West Prkwy c Comptiility with Government Gols/Ojectives /Policies Comptiility with Plnned nd future Lnd Use Impct to Agriculturl Resources All lterntives re eqully comptile with government gols/ojectives nd policies. All lterntives provide for efficient development ly out on the west lock of the Churchill 3 Business Prk, south of Steeles Avenue. All lterntives provide less thn optiml flexiility with respect to potentil future development lyout north of Steeles Avenue. While W4 nd C4 provide more flexiility to the est, they result in remnnt prcel locted etween BWP nd the MLF lgoons however, this is not n issue with the existing lnd uses. E4 provides mid-lock rod, potentilly creting good ccess/frontge opportunities on oth sides of the lignment lthough the mximum prcel size will e limited, however, it lso results in smll remnnt prcel etween BWP nd heritge Creek South. There re trde-offs ssocited with ech lterntives nd therefore, for the purposes of this evlution, ll re considered similr with respect to flexiility for potentil future development. All lterntives re similr in impcts to griculturl lnd (nd Clss 1 Soils). Therefore ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Socio-Economic Environment Summry E4 offers good seprtion distnce from MLF opertions nd offers the flexiility with respect to pproved development south of Steeles Avenue nd potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. All provide similr overll flexiility for potentil future development north of Steeles Avenue. E4 hs greter numer of residences tht my experience increses in noise levels therefore my hve greter potentil to result in noise impcts requiring mitigtion. All lterntives re very similr from socio-economic perspective, nd where there re differences, the significnce of the differences in impcts is considered minor. Therefore E4 is only slightly preferred over the other lterntives. 5 Culturl Heritge Resources Impcts to Built Heritge Fetures nd Culturl Heritge Lndscpes All lterntives result in similr low impcts to heritge fetures. None of the lterntives will impct designted or listed uilt heritge resources. The entire study re is considered Culturl Heritge Lndscpe. As such, ll lterntives will hve similr impcts to the CHL. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Impcts to Archeologicl Resources All lterntives result in similr impcts to rcheology ecuse the entire study re is within n re of high rcheologicl potentil. A Stge 2 Archeologicl Assessment will e undertken for the preferred lterntive. Therefore, ll lterntives re eqully preferred. Culturl Heritge Summry All lterntives result in similr low impcts to Culturl Heritge Resources. Therefore, ll lterntives re preferred. From trnsporttion perspective, ll lterntives hve similr level of service nd cceptle distnces etween intersections with other rods, re comptile with the existing rodwy network, mintin or enhnce emergency services/ccess nd cn ccommodte cycling/pedestrins. The most significnt differences etween the lterntives in considering the flexiility of future extension to the north. W4 is considered to hve slightly more flexiility thn C4 ecuse n extension of C4 would e locted etween the TCPL ROW nd the woodlnd nd would cross Heritge Creek North. E4 is much less preferred ecuse it hs the lowest flexiility in terms of future expnsion. W4 is lest preferred from technicl perspective ecuse it results in higher impcts to (or conflicts with) utilities. C4 nd E4 void crossing the TCPL ROW nd minimize crossings of Enridge (nd impcts to Enridge fcilities). LEGEND: Overll Summry From socio-economic perspective, E4 provides the est seprtion distnce from Mple Lodge Frms plnt, nd voids impcts to My Wy. However, E4 hs undesirle impcts to properties (i.e., isects the prcel just south of Finncil Drive) nd hs the potentil to result in noise impcts tht must e mitigted, given the numer of nery residences tht my experience increses in noise levels. C4 is only slightly less preferred thn E4 from socio-economic perspective due to the closer proximity to the MLF plnt. From nturl environmentl perspective, E4 is less preferred ecuse it requires n dditionl wtercourse crossing. High Impct / Lest Benefit Low Impct / Most Benefit Overll, C4 is similr to W4 nd E4 however, it is considered preferred ecuse it hs much etter flexiility for future expnsion thn E4 nd does not hve the utilities conflicts ssocited with W4.

33 Preliminry Preferred Alterntive Alignment of Brm West Prkwy Bsed on the ssessment nd evlution C4 (ACEH) hs een selected s the preliminry preferred lterntive for Brm West Prkwy. C4 ws selected s the preliminry preferred lterntive ecuse: From trnsporttion perspective, C4 offers significntly more flexiility thn the Est Corridor lterntives, with respect to future extension to the north. A future north extension from C4 cn etter void significnt community, socio-economic nd nturl environmentl impcts when extended in the future. From technicl perspective, C4 voids crossing the TCPL ROW nd minimizes crossings of Enridge (nd impcts to Enridge fcilities). The West corridor options resulted in significntly higher impcts to (or conflicts with) utilities. Although E4 provides slightly more contiguous field re djcent to Mple Lodge Frms, this enefit is offset y the significnt constrints with respect to future extension to the north. From nturl environmentl perspective, C4 minimizes potentil impcts y crossing Heritge Creek South in preferred loction nd voiding crossing t Heritge Creek North. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

34 Potentil Are for Future Hydro Corridor Hydro One hs future plns for new power trnsmission corridor within West Brmpton nd Southest Hlton to service future development in North West Brmpton nd north into Cledon. The need for new trnsmission corridor is sed on study completed y the Ontrio Power Authority (OPA)which recommends north-south trnsmission line corridor of pproximtely 37 m in width to service growth in the west prt of Peel Region. The City hs mde commitment to Hydro One to consider the fesiility of future hydro corridor in the vicinity of the proposed Brm West Prkwy. Opportunities nd constrints for potentil future hydro corridor hve een considered in the evlution of the Brm West Prkwy lignment lterntives. The potentil re within which future hydro corridor my e locted is depicted on the figure to the left. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

35 Preliminry Design Phse Following this PIC, the preliminry preferred lterntive for Brm West Prkwy nd the preferred plnning solution for Finncil Drive will e confirmed sed on comments received from the pulic nd stkeholders, nd through further technicl ssessment y the Project Tem. Alignment lterntives will e evluted to select the preliminry preferred lignment for Finncil Drive. Design lterntives will e developed for oth Finncil Drive nd Brm West Prkwy. Preliminry design lterntives my include: lignment refinements/shifts; 407 ETR Interchnge configurtions; different cross-section configurtions; stormwter mngement, etc.. The preliminry preferred designs will e selected from these lterntives nd will e presented t PIC #2. In preprtion for preliminry design phse, typicl cross sections hve een developed for the Brm West Prkwy nd re presented on the following disply pnel. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

36 Typicl Cross Sections Brm West Prkwy Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)

37 Next Steps The next steps for the Clss Environmentl Assessment Study re: Review comments nd suggestions received from the pulic nd gencies nd incorporte into the study, s pproprite nd respond to written questions nd comments, s requested; Confirm the preferred lignment for Brm West Prkwy nd the preferred plnning solution for Finncil Drive; Evlute lterntives lignments nd select the preliminry preferred lignment for Finncil Drive; Crry out the preliminry design of Brm West Prkwy nd Finncil Drive; nd Conduct second round of Pulic Consulttion in Fll 2012 to present nd request input on the preliminry designs. Brm West Prkwy (Finncil Drive to Heritge Rod) nd Finncil Drive (Heritge Rod to Winston Churchill Boulevrd)