City of Winnipeg William R. Clement Parkway Extension Functional & Preliminary Design Study

Transcription

1 11 Welcome City of Winnipeg William. Clement Parkway Extension Functional & Preliminary Design Study GAT AVEUE TO McGILLIVAY BOULEVAD - PUBLIC OPE HOUSE January 2016

2 PUBLIC OPE HOUSE FOMAT 2 Please review the boards and maps Project staff are happy to answer your questions Please complete and submit a comment form prior to leaving

3 MOAY ST. JAMES KIG EDWAD K IG H DE /G AT EW S O HW Y 3 62 A LE STUGEO EPOT CAADA KI CO CO LOG A 57 O T ED AM E AI ELLICE SILVE 57 te u ESS 85 AGE POT B M A IT O 115 A e ut 62 MAIO D BAL ACADEMY e ut COYDO 90 GAT te LO Y A T 105 A I TO B A FE 52 Y A 80 WILLIAM. CLEMET PAKWAY M 5 12 IV ILL G MC 90 e ut 5 15 D A V E L U O B I D A TA KO DA WCP Extension 427 S WILKE e ut 30 E S 145 G A ST. I TO B A ST. MAY The purpose of the TMP is to present a long-term strategy to guide the planning, development, renewal and maintenance of a multi-modal transportation system in a manner that is consistent with project needs, and aligned with the City s growth and the overall vision for a sustainable Winnipeg and region MA 42 PEMBI A u 105 WAVELEY T A KEASTO OBL I 96 E Y CO 95 O 95 DO 100 G OP H BIS e ut e ut 65 1 DE W 52 PE 80 E T ME I WA LLO E C A SO CH ATHE M 3 H HIG ST. MAY M A I T OB A 200 ad etwork Implementation CHIE F PE GU 90 IS T 59 H A IL 6 ut e S LIP H/ GA TE E IG D HE A LE u 62 W AY WY K te EDWAD SCHEYE PAKWAY ST. JAMES SO H A LI GTO KI 20 CO CO DIA LOG O T ED AM E IE E A 57 AI ELLICE 57 EGET 37 PADOA ESS 85 AGE POT B M A IT O 115 e ut 85 MAIO A ACADEMY 101 e ut WILKES LO TAY FEMO L GIL MC e ut 5 15 WAVELEY 90 P HO BIS 165 A EV UL BO A IT O B A 100 M 5 A ITOB A 0 15 DE WA LLO CE A SO CH ATHE M AY HW 52 PE 80 E T ME I M IT O B A e ut e ut I D A G I TO B A MA D TA KO DA 135 MA AY IV 80 WILLIAM. CLEMET PAKWAY A I TO B A E S I TO B A M ST. MAY MA G e ut A ST. 100 A GAT te 42 PEMBI u A 90 KEASTO I 241 T E 96 O OBL 95 B OS 95 O D Y CO COYDO LAGIMODIEE 75 MAP 7 POT AGE PLESSIS A I T O B A 37 DUGALD 115 ALD HIB AC M MOAY SILVE PEIMETE HIGHWAY James Armstrong ichardson Int l Airport SEL LAG IMO D WA MC G KIG EDWAD EPOT CAADA T T SASKATCHE I STUGEO PEIMETE HIGHWAY CE PO A SA LTE MA I WAY OA K te 17 LEIL MC PH IL 25 FUTUE P IK STE KEEWATI IKSTE 42 u 23 EGO IO S BOOKSIDE TE EX IA PEIMETE HIGHWAY MB PE 3 The WCP Extension Study is identified as part of the TMP s future Strategic ad etwork HIG ST. MAY M A I T OB A K IA MB PE On April 25, 2012 Winnipeg City Council approved an amendment to the TMP to change the WCP Extension between Grant Avenue and Wilkes Avenue from a medium-term project to a short-term project SEL 425 James Armstrong ichardson Int l Airport 85 PT 47 B OS POT AGE A I T O B A T 90 EWA SASKATCH M HI AC The City of Winnipeg Transportation Master Plan (TMP) ecommends William. Clement Parkway (WCP) Extension T PEIMETE HIGHWAY 425 CE 52 I LA HE WAY STUDY BACKGOUD 101 PO 17 LEI A LI GTO MC G EGO SA LTE MA I FUTUE P221 OA K IK STE KEEWATI 25 MC PH ILL IP IKSTE 3 75 City of Winnipeg LEGED Transportation Master Plan ad Implementation etwork ShortMap Term Kilometers LEGED Short Term Medium Term 80 City Strategic ad etwork Long Term Medium Term Long Term 80 City Strategic ad etwork

4 STUDY PUPOSE 4 Charleswood d blin Blvd C Mainline Phase 1 Buckingham d Oakdale Dr WCP Elmhurst d. idgewood Ave Grant Ave Assiniboine Forest Wilkes Ave Shaftesbury Blvd. Sterling Lyon Parkway The WCP is an important component of the City s Strategic ad etwork to accommodate the north-south travel demand in west Winnipeg The City s TMP recommends Phase 1 of the WCP extension as a short-term project and Phase 2 as a long-term project as Study Area Loudoun d Phase 2 described in the figure on the left Funding for construction of the WCP extension is currently not in place Wyper d City of Winnipeg /.M. of Macdonald Boundary McGillivray Blvd Today s meeting is presenting material for Phase 1

5 STUDY SCOPE 5 Conduct functional and preliminary design studies for the WCP extension Develop alignment options for an east-west connection south of the C Mainline Develop grade separation options at the C Mainline Develop alternatives for the Harte Trail crossing Identify potential dog park location(s) Obtain Environmental Act Licensing for Phase 1 Conceptual Environmental Assessment Study for Phase 2

6 STUDY TIMELIE 6 WITE 2015 SPIG/ SUMME 2015 WITE 2015/2016 SPIG 2016 SUMME 2016 FALL 2016 Study Commencement Begin Environmental eviews Stakeholder Meetings Public Information Display Session (March 19, CMU) Develop Options Develop Evaluation Criteria Stakeholder Meetings Public Open House #1 Determine the ecommended Option(s) Conclude Functional Design Including Alignments (Grant Ave. to McGillivray Blvd.) Begin Preliminary Design Study (Phase 1*) Completion of Environmental eviews Stakeholder Meetings Public Open House #2 Finalize the Preliminary Design (Phase 1*) Prepare Final eport Study Completion We Are Here * Phase 1 - Grant Avenue to Wilkes Avenue (or an alternative east-west connection)

7 PUBLIC OTIFICATIO AD EGAGEMET 7 How we communicated and reached out to the public: Public Information Display Session held on March 19, 2015 Over 300 people signed in at the event Over 175 comment forms were received (hard copy and online) s to all stakeholders and meeting attendees Phase 1 WCP ewspaper ads in the Winnipeg Free Press, Winnipeg Sun, Grant Ave Canstar Sou Wester and Metro Information on the City of Winnipeg project website winnipeg.ca/wcp-extension Eldridge Ave City of Winnipeg social media (Facebook and Twitter) Oakdale Dr Haney St Elmhurst d Media release idgewood Ave otification flyers sent to 2,700 properties in study area Wilkes Ave Flyer distribution area

8 SUMMAY OF PUBLIC EGAGEMET FEEDBACK 8 Key Messages from the Community: Where will the new road go and what will it look like? Improve Wilkes Avenue Safety for all users Maintain Harte Trail Protect.M. industrial land use eed for dog park amenities Loss of natural habitat and green space Limit impact on wildlife Mitigate traffic noise / Provide vibration adequate lighting Eldridge Avenue connection Safety for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles

9 EVIOMETAL ASSESSMET 9 Key Concerns for the Study Area include: Habitat fragmentation/loss of natural wildlife corridors Preservation of Harte Trail How wildlife will safely cross the WCP extension Deer-vehicle collisions Assessments Conducted To Date Biological Surveys: Amphibian P Bird P Vegetation P Wildlife P Forestry Assessment P Options to prevent deer-vehicle P collisions

10 STUDY ALIGMET COSIDEATIOS 10 Accommodate emergency vehicle and truck access Accommodate access for local businesses Enhance safety for all users Address environmental considerations Identify potential dog park locations Grade separate the C Mainline Accommodate the Harte Trail Link to Wilkes Avenue (or an alternative east-west connection) Meet the design criteria requirements Accommodate Transit

11 WCP POPOSED IGHT-OF-WAY \ SK-006 _Proposed OW.dwg -tab:layout1 11 GAT AVEUE OW Typical 80 m ight-of-way Looking orth COY AVEUE HAEY STEET EDGE OF PAVEMET 19.5 m POPETY LIE EDGE OF PAVEMET 19.5 m POPETY LIE OW Typical 60 m ight-of-way Looking orth ELDIDGE AVEUE OW 13.1 m 13.1 m EDGE OF PAVEMET POPETY LIE EDGE OF PAVEMET POPETY LIE Typical 70 m ight-of-way Looking orth 17.9 m 17.9 m EDGE OF PAVEMET POPETY LIE EDGE OF PAVEMET POPETY LIE * Traffic noise reduction method and height to be determined during preliminary design IDGEWOOD AVEUE

12 COCEPTUAL OPTIOS FO THE WCP EXTESIO 12 Charleswood d blin Blvd ELDIDGE AVEUE AT WCP 4 Options See boards GADE SEPAATIO AT C MAILIE 3 Options See boards C Mainline Harstone d Oakdale Dr WCP Haney St Elmhurst d idgewood Ave Loudoun d Grant Ave Assiniboine Forest HATE TAIL 2 Options See board 24 Shaftesbury Blvd Wilkes Ave EAST-WEST ALIGMET 3 Options See boards Sterling Lyon Parkway Legend WCP Extension - Phase 1 Conceptual Option Area Kenaston Blvd

13 COCEPTUAL EAST-WEST ALIGMET OPTIOS 13 There are three proposed options for the east-west alignment to the WCP extension. The alignment of the WCP extension from Grant Avenue to the C Mainline is the same in each of the three proposed options. COCEPTUAL OPTIO 1: COCEPTUAL OPTIO 2: COCEPTUAL OPTIO 3: Wilkes Avenue Alignment Sterling Lyon Parkway orth Alignment Sterling Lyon Parkway South Alignment

14 OPTIO 1: COCEPTUAL WILKES AVEUE ALIGMET 14 Maintains Wilkes Avenue as the eastwest connection to WCP Pros Less property required south of Wilkes Avenue/Sterling Lyon Parkway than other options Potential for development of property on relocated section of Wilkes Avenue from Elmhurst ad west Due to proximity of C Mainline, will require frontage property on south side of Wilkes Avenue from Shaftesbury Boulevard to Elmhurst ad for widening to 4 lane divided Direct all-way access will not be possible Cons to all properties fronting on Wilkes Avenue Widening to 4 lane divided will require total reconstruction of Wilkes Avenue and major disruption to east west traffic Existing Wilkes Ave ealigned Spacing between realigned Wilkes Avenue and the existing C Mainline is undesirable given the forecast in traffic volumes on WCP Connection to Wilkes Avenue to be determined during Preliminary Design (SEE BOADS 17-22) (SEE BOADS 22-23) (Phase 2)

15 OPTIO 2: COCEPTUAL STELIG LYO PAKWAY OTH ALIGMET 15 Maintains access to existing businesses fronting on Wilkes Avenue Construction of Sterling Lyon Parkway extension can occur with minimal traffic disruption Potential for development of property Pros between Sterling Lyon Parkway extension and Wilkes Avenue Wilkes Avenue will remain in its current location from Shaftesbury Boulevard west Kenaston Blvd as a collector street Will become the major east-west ro in the area; offers improved spacing between Sterling Lyon Parkway and the C Mainline compared to Wilkes Avenue alternative Property for Sterling Lyon Parkway Connection to Wilkes Avenue to be determined during Preliminary Design ealigned Sterling Lyon Existing extension required south of Wilkes Cons Avenue Short term traffic disruption may occur at the east end of the Sterling Lyon Parkway extension The section of existing Sterling Lyon Parkway immediately east of Shaftesbury (Phase 2) (SEE BOADS 17-22) (SEE BOADS 22-23) Boulevard will require realignment

16 OPTIO 3: COCEPTUAL STELIG LYO PAKWAY SOUTH ALIGMET 16 Maintains access to existing businesses fronting on Wilkes Avenue Construction of Sterling Lyon Parkway extension can occur with minimal traffic disruption Pros Potential for development of property between Sterling Lyon Parkway extension and Wilkes Avenue Wilkes Ave will remain in its current location from Shaftesbury Boulevard west as a collector street Kenaston Blvd Best supports the Capital egion ad etwork plan Existing Cons Property for Sterling Lyon Parkway extension required south of Wilkes Avenue Short term traffic disruption may occur at the east end of the Sterling Lyon Parkway extension The section of existing Sterling Lyon Parkway immediately east of Shaftesbury Boulevard will require realignment Construction costs will be highest due to the increased length Additional traffic short-cutting on idgewood and Elmhurst would be anticipated due to the more southerly location of the Sterling Lyon Parkway extension East-west connection to be determined during Preliminary Design (Phase 2) ealigned Sterling Lyon Parkway (SEE BOADS 17-22) (SEE BOADS 22-23)

17 WCP GADE SEPAATIOAT C MAILIE OPTIOS 17 There are three proposed options for the grade separation of the WCP Extension at the C Mainline: OPTIO A: WCP AIL LIE OVEPASS OPTIO B: WCP AIL LIE UDEPASS OPTIO C: WCP AIL LIE OVEPASS WITH AIL LIE ELOCATIO

18 OPTIO A: WCP AIL LIE OVEPASS 18 C Mainline does not require relocation or short term detouring Drainage would be much less costly than for an underpass Minimal utility relocations would be required Pros Construction cost would be lower than Options B or C Existing Wilkes Avenue alignment can be accommodated under structure Allows for two grade separation options for the Harte Trail at WCP, an overpass, or a throughpass Cons idgewood Avenue from east of Oakdale ad to east of Laxdal ad would need to be realigned to the north and raised to allow it to intersect WCP Harte Trail options shown on board 24 May require traffic noise reduction due to height of structure

19 OPTIO B: WCP AIL LIE UDEPASS 19 Pros Less intrusive no traffic noise reduction required Does not require relocation of idgewood Avenue The highest cost for a grade separation of the C Mainline due to the below items C Mainline will require detouring during construction Cons Lift station and retention pond would be required for drainage A number of underground utility relocations would be required Wilkes Avenue will require detouring or closure during construction Harte Trail options shown on board 24

20 OPTIO C: WCP AIL LIE OVEPASS WITH AIL LIE ELOCATIO 20 Pros Does not require relocation of idgewood Avenue Existing Wilkes Avenue alignment can be accommodated under structure C Mainline will require relocation to the south C Mainline will require detouring during construction Cons May require traffic noise reduction due to height of structure Wilkes Avenue may require detouring during construction Increased project cost due to relocation of the C Mainline EW AT-GADE COSSIG EMOVAL OF EXISTIG AT-GADE COSSIG EMOVAL OF EXISTIG AT-GADE COSSIG EW AT-GADE COSSIG Property required for relocation of C Mainline Harte Trail options shown on board 24

21 EVALUATIO CITEIA FO SELECTIO OF PEFEED OPTIO 21 The alignment and grade separation options will be evaluated based on the following criteria: Social Environment Safety (10%) Property (10%) Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities (10%) How well does the option safely accommodate all users of the facility, including vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists? What are the property acquisition impacts of the option? How well does the option serve pedestrians and cyclists? Does the option have significant impacts on existing commercial or residential atural Environment Area Impacts (15%) Drainage (15%) developments and neighbourhoods? What impact does the option have on the surrounding environment (i.e., surface water, air, noise, etc.) and what level of approvals would be required? How does the option affect the drainage of the surrounding area? Transportation / Engineering ail Impacts (10%) Utilities (10%) Ease of Construction and Staging (10%) What are the impact of the option on the C Mainline? What are the impacts of the option on major utilities in the area? What extent of staging and detour works are required for the option? How easy or difficult is the option to construct and stage? Cost Costs (10%) What is the construction cost (order of magnitude) of each option?

22 HILTO ST MILA ST ELDIDGE AVEUE AT WCP ITESECTIO OPTIOS 22 ELDIDGE CLOSUE OPTIO ELDIDGE FLY-OVE OPTIO OAKDALE D McDOWELL D XXX CLOSE XXX CLOSE HAEY ST MILA ST HEWITT C HEWITT C ELDIDGE AV OVEWATE CV OAKDALE D LIK McDOWELL D HILTO ST BIDGE HAEY ST MILA ST HEWITT C LIK HEWITT C ELDIDGE AV OVEWATE CV BLOSSOM BY HOOKWAY C Impacted Properties BLOSSOM BY HOOKWAY C ELDIDGE IGHT-I/IGHT-OUT OPTIO ELDIDGE SIGALIZED OPTIO OAKDALE D McDOWELL D HILTO ST HAEY ST HEWITT C HEWITT C ELDIDGE AV OVEWATE CV OAKDALE D McDOWELL D HILTO ST HAEY ST MILA ST HEWITT C HEWITT C ELDIDGE AV OVEWATE CV BLOSSOM BY HOOKWAY C BLOSSOM BY HOOKWAY C

23 ELDIDGE AVEUE AT WCP ITESECTIO OPTIOS POS AD COS 23 Closure Fly-over ight-in/ight-out Signalized Pros educes risk of collisions Limited property impact Minimal physical environmental impact Minimal costs Easiest to construct educes risk of collisions o traffic impact on WCP o impact on neighbourhood connectivity and transit service Pedestrians/cyclists do not need to cross a busy intersection this is a safer option for all Eldridge Avenue users educes risk of collisions Limited property impact Minimal traffic impact on WCP due to limited access Minimal physical environmental impact Full access for emergency vehicles Limited property impact Signal will accommodate projected traffic volumes Maintains neighborhood connectivity and transit service Minimal physical environmental impact Accommodates all pedestrians/cycle movements Short-cutting on adjacent north/south streets minimized Cons o access for emergency vehicles from WCP o intersection May increase short-cutting on adjacent streets Impact on neighborhood connectivity and transit service o pedestrian/cyclist crossing o access for emergency vehicles from WCP Property impacts o intersection Traffic noise impact East/west pedestrian/cyclist movements only Significant costs Most complicated to construct Limited access for emergency vehicles from WCP Impact on neighborhood connectivity and transit service Limited pedestrian/cyclist crossing Greater risk of collisions Additional signalized intersection on WCP

24 60m HATE TAIL OPTIOS 24 Pedestrian & Cycling Overpass Example (Chief Peguis at ortheast Pioneer s Greenway) idgewood Ave XXX X Y XXX X 260m Y Pedestrian & Cycling Through Pass adway WCP C Mainline Wilkes Ave 5.8m min m Option 1: Overpass A - Harte Trail Overpass (X Y: 0.9 km) B - Harte Trail At Grade Bridge Structure Option 2: Through Pass A - Harte Trail Through Pass (X Y: 1.5 km) B - Harte Trail At Grade Crossing Through Pass Structure WCP Pedestrian and Cycling Facility

25 POTETIAL DOG PAK LOCATIOS 25 The existing temporary dog park land is reserved for a future street as outlined in the Winnipeg Area Transportation Study (1968), Plan Winnipeg (1981), Winnipeg TransPlan A: 5 acres (2 hectares) B: 7 acres (2.8 hectares) 2010 (1998) and the City C: 3 acres (1.2 hectares) of Winnipeg Transportation Master Plan (2011). A potential permanent dog park may be located in the remaining land of the existing temporary dog park, and/or additional D: 8 acres (3.2 hectares) lands within the project Corridor. Four possible permanent dog park locations and sizes are shown on this map. (SEE BOADS 22-23)

26 PUBLIC FEEDBACK 26 WE WAT TO HEA FOM YOU! Please complete a comment form and provide feedback on: 1. WCP Phase 1 Design 2. East-west Alignment Options 3. Grade Separation of C Mainline Crossing Options 4. Eldridge Avenue at WCP Intersection Options 5. Harte Trail Options 6. Potential Dog Park Locations 7. Overall Project Comments Your feedback will assist in the design of the recommended option for the WCP extension

27 THAK YOU 27 On behalf of the Project Team, thank you for your attendance and participation. For more information, contact: Chris Baker, MMM Group Public Engagement Lead: David Jopling, MMM Group Project website: winnipeg.ca/wcp-extension