FANSHAWE PARK ROAD/RICHMOND STREET INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Municipal Class Environmental Assessment PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE 2 June 16, 2016
ACCESSIBILITY Under the Accessibility Standards 2015 for Customer Service Regulation (2008), the City of London (City) is committed to ensuring that public participation opportunities are accessible to all participants. This Public Information Centre provides the following accessibility features: Accessible venue location for persons with disabilities, including wheelchair ramps, accessible washrooms, parking and elevators For persons requiring assistance, project team members will: o Explain presentation board content o Assist with the preparation and submission of comment forms Reading aids are available, including magnifying glasses. 2
WELCOME! The City s Smart Moves Transportation Master Plan (TMP) is a long-term transportation strategy to guide transportation and land use decisions to 2030 and beyond. Building on the TMP and Shift rapid transit initiative, this Class EA study assessed the need for traffic operations and safety improvements, access modifications and transit, pedestrian and cyclist friendly design features at the Fanshawe Park Road and Richmond Street Intersection. CONFIRM the need for improvements to the intersection PRESENT: Proposed access changes to local businesses Design options developed for the intersection improvements Evaluation of design options and the preferred design OBTAIN public/agency input and comments OUTLINE the next steps in the planning and design process. 3
FANSHAWE PARK ROAD/RICHMOND STREET STUDY AREA Consultation Area Project Study Area 4
CLASS EA PROCESS PHASE 1: Problem/ Opportunity Identify problems/ opportunities to be addressed in the planning and design process Confirm the need for intersection improvements as proposed in the Transportation Master Plan Prepare a Problem /Opportunity Statement PHASE 2: Alternative Solutions Develop alternative solutions to address problems/opportunities Overview of existing and future conditions Consultation with review agencies and the public PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE 1 October 22, 2015 The Study is following the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) (2011) for a Schedule C (major) project. The Class EA process ensures: All relevant social, environmental and engineering factors are considered in the planning and design process Public and agency input is integrated into the EA process. PHASE 3: Design Options Identify design options for the preferred solution Detailed overview of existing/future conditions Evaluate design options and select a preferred design option Consultation with review agencies and the public Complete an impact assessment of the preferred design option PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE 2 PHASE 4: Environmental Study Report (ESR) Document the decisionmaking process in an ESR for a Schedule C project WE ARE HERE PHASE 5: Implementation Design and construction phase Project must be designed and constructed as outlined in the ESR The Class EA Study is following Phases 1 to 4: Phases 1 and 2 review and update, as covered by the 2030 Smart Moves Transportation Master Plan (TMP), has been completed. The purpose of the review and update was to confirm the need for and refine the improvements identified in the TMP Phase 3 consisted of the development and evaluation of design options for the intersection improvements. A preferred design will be chosen at the end of Phase In Phase 4, the ESR will be placed on the public record for a 30-day public and agency review period. 5
PHASE 1, PROBLEM/OPPORTUNITY REVIEW & UPDATE Improvements at the Fanshawe Park Road/Richmond Street intersection are required to address the following: Existing Traffic Volumes (2016) o Intersection is currently operating at Level of Service (LOS) E during the AM Peak Hour, LOS F during the PM Peak Hour and LOS D during the Saturday Peak Hour with significant delays Future Traffic Volumes with no improvements (2026) o By 2026, the intersection will operate at LOS F during the AM/PM Peak Hours and Saturday Peak Hour with up to six minute delays Intersection Safety o 293 reported collisions at the intersection from 2007 to 2014 (London Police) Pedestrian and Cyclist Needs o As outlined in the City s new Cycling Master Plan and Draft London Plan. 6
PHASE 2, ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS REVIEW & UPDATE Although the City s Smart Moves 2030 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) emphasizes transit, active transportation and reduced car use, it also provides for road improvements, including improvements at the Fanshawe Park Road/Richmond Street intersection. The following work was completed as part of the Phase 2 Review and Update: Update existing/projected conditions. Based on the update, important considerations for the planning and design of the improvements are: o Intersection functions as a northern gateway into London o The surrounding area is designated as a Transit Village in the Draft London Plan o Improvements must be compatible with the Masonville Bus Terminal and future Shift rapid transit network o Minimize impacts on the surrounding regional commercial node, residential neighbourhoods and travelling public The Do Nothing alternative (maintain the intersection as is ) was evaluated to confirm the need for intersection improvements. Do Nothing was dismissed since it does not address existing/future capacity, queuing and collision issues or pedestrian/cyclist needs As presented at PIC 1, alternative design components (such as dual left turn lanes, straight-through lanes, etc.) were developed to refine the improvements identified in the TMP. The most effective components were carried forward and incorporated into the Design Options presented today. 7
SHIFT UPDATE Building on the TMP s Smart Move to Take Transit to the Next Level, Shift focuses on the development of rapid transit. In May 2016, City Council approved the following rapid transit network: Two rapid transit corridors, North/South and East/West, consisting entirely of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Terminal Stations and Transit Villages at four locations, including the Fanshawe Park Road/Richmond Street intersection. The BRT Option will be developed further in a Rapid Transit Master Plan, currently underway. Following the completion of the Master Plan, the City will complete an EA of the proposed transit system. 8
PUBLIC & AGENCY CONSULTATION TO DATE In general, most stakeholders agree that intersection improvements are required to relieve traffic congestion and improve traffic, pedestrian and cyclist safety. To date, comments, questions and concerns include: Agencies Middlesex-London Health Unit encourages active modes of transportation and is concerned about collisions and pedestrian/cyclist safety. Residents Masonville Ratepayers Association is concerned about traffic infiltration into surrounding neighbourhoods and asked about traffic calming measures Other concerns were timing and length of construction, traffic signal timing and pedestrian/cyclist safety One resident requested speed bumps on North Centre Road and the extension of bus service further north on Richmond Street. Businesses Masonville Mall concerned about maintaining access during construction Other business owners asked for information on the property acquisition process. 9
ACCESS MANAGEMENT CHANGES 10
DESIGN OPTIONS, COMMON IMPROVEMENTS Design Options 1 to 5 were developed as part of Phase 3 of the Class EA process. All options include the following improvements: Westbound dual left turn lanes Northbound dual left turn lanes Southbound slotted left turn lane Eastbound slotted left turn lane Improved cycling and pedestrian facilities. Dual Left-turn Lanes Slotted Left-turn Lanes 11
DESIGN OPTIONS, ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS Along with the common improvements, Design Options 1 to 5 include the following additional improvements: Design Option 1 Northbound right turn lane Southbound right turn lane. Design Option 2 Northbound right turn lane Southbound right turn lane Eastbound through lane Westbound through lane. Design Option 3 Northbound right turn lane with channelization Southbound right turn lane with channelization. Design Option 4 Northbound right turn lane with channelization Southbound right turn lane with channelization Eastbound through lane Westbound through lane. Design Option 5 Northbound right turn lane Eastbound right turn lane Removal of existing southbound and westbound right turn lanes Removal of all lane channelizations. 12
DESIGN OPTION 1 13
DESIGN OPTION 2 14
DESIGN OPTION 3 15
DESIGN OPTION 4 16
DESIGN OPTION 5 17
COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DESIGN OPTIONS Evaluation factors and criteria used to evaluate Design Options 1 to 5 included: Transportation Planning and Traffic Operations - Future (2025) Traffic Operations Impacts on Transit Operations Impacts on Shift Rapid Transit System Potential to Reduce Neighbourhood Traffic Infiltration Pedestrian & Cyclist Safety Improvements Road Design - New Infrastructure Requirements Opportunity to Provide Urban Design Elements Compatibility with Future Infrastructure Drainage Modifications Impacts on City Services (water, sanitary, storm) Utility Relocations Construction - Construction Staging & Traffic Management Land Uses and Socio-Economic Environment - Impacts on Street Trees Property/Access Impacts on Commercial Uses Compatibility with future Main Street, Rapid Transit Corridor and Transit Village Relative Costs - Infrastructure Costs Property Costs. 18
SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DESIGN OPTIONS SIMILAR IMPACTS As shown on the following table, the impacts of Design Options 1 to 5 are similar or approximately equal for many of the evaluation factors and criteria: Evaluation Factors & Criteria Design Options 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Preferred Option Transportation Planning & Traffic Operations Impacts on Transit Operations All options maintain Masonville transit hub and can accommodate bus bays. Transit delays will occur during construction. Cyclist Safety Improvements All options improve cycling facilities. Equal Road Design Impacts on City Services (water, sanitary, storm) New lanes require relocation of catch basins and minor reconfiguration of storm sewer for all options. Construction Construction Staging & Traffic Management Lane closures required during widening for all options. Equal Land Uses & Socio-Economic Environment Access Impacts Access management changes for all options provide the same access to Equal businesses and side streets. Centre median island restricts turning movements for entrances within 15 m of intersection. Property Impacts on Residential Uses None Equal Property Impacts on Commercial Uses All options require the acquisition of the commercial building at SE quadrant. Equal Relative Costs Infrastructure & Property Costs Similar for all options. Equal Equal Equal 19
SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DESIGN OPTIONS SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES IN IMPACTS Evaluation Criteria Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 Preferred Design Option Transportation Planning & Traffic Operations Future (2026 PM Peak Hour) Traffic Operations Compatibility with Shift (Rapid Transit) Potential to Reduce Neighbourhood Traffic Infiltration Pedestrian & Cyclist Safety Improvements Road Design New Infrastructure Requirements Compatibility with Future Infrastructure Compatibility with future Main Street and Transit Village and Urban Design Opportunities Drainage Modifications Utility Relocations Moderate improvement. Causes significant increase in delay for WB left movement and moderate increase in delay for WB right and NB through movements. Provides less flexibility for signal settings causing exceptionally long signal cycles during low-volume periods. Requires more modifications than Options 2, 4 and 5 to accommodate Shift rapid transit. Mitigates potential for traffic infiltration. Provides slightly better accessibility crossing conditions because channelization is eliminated. Does not significantly improve intersection operations. Causes significant increase in delay for WB left movement and moderate increase in delay for EB right and SB through movements. Provides less flexibility for signal settings, same as Option 1. Can accommodate future Shift station with fewer modifications than Options 1 and 3. Requires the least new infrastructure. Requires more infrastructure than Option 1 but less than Option 4. Compatible with future widening of Compatible with future widening of Fanshawe Park Road and Richmond Fanshawe Park Road with little to no Street but requires some additional additional improvements required. improvements. Better accommodates pedestrian and Same as Option 1. Main Street criteria than Options 3 and 4. Allows for refinements to include urban design elements. New paved areas potentially increase run-off. Requires less relocation of overhead hydro than Options 2 and 4. Does not significantly improve intersection operations. Causes significant increase in delay for NB/SB through movements and moderate increase in delay for WB right movement. Provides more flexibility for signal settings allowing for shorter signal cycles during low volume periods. Significantly improves intersection operations. Causes moderate increase in delay for WB right and NB/SB through movements. Provides more flexibility for signal settings, same as Option 3. Provides the least delays, shorter queues and higher capacity for most movements. Moderate improvement to intersection operations. Negative impacts when compared to the base case are significant increase in delay for WB left movements and moderate increase in delay for WB right and NB through movements. Same as Option 1. Same as Option 2. Same as Options 2 and 4. Same as Option 1. Same as Options 1 and 2. Mitigate s traffic infiltration to a greater degree than other options. due to improved Level of Service. Same as Option 1. Reduces crossing distances and Same as Option 3. includes pedestrian friendly channelization. Has the most new paved areas potentially increasing run-off the most. Requires more extensive relocation of overhead hydro than Options 1 and 3. Same as Option 4. Preferred since it provides reduced crossing distances. Same as Option 2. Requires the most new Requires less new infrastructure than infrastructure. Option 4. Same as Option 1. Same as Option 2. Same as Options 2 and 4. Allows for refinement to include urban design elements. Channelization not compatible with Main Street criteria.. Same as Option 3. Preferred since it better accommodates pedestrian and Main Street criteria than Options 3 and 4. Allows for refinements to include urban design elements. Same as Option 1. Same as Option 2. Less paved areas than Options 2 and 4 but more than Options 1 and 3. Same as Option 1. Same as Option 2. Same as Options 1 and 3. Land Uses & Socio-Economic Environment Impacts on Street Trees Removes 13 trees. Removes 24 trees. Removes 16 trees. Removes 28 trees. Removes 28 trees. 20
PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION Option 5 is recommended as the preferred Design Option: Options 2 and 3 do not significantly improve intersection operations, while Option 1 only moderately improves operations Options 4 and 5 improve intersection operations and provide the least delays, shorter queues and higher capacity for most movements Design Options 2, 4 and 5 require fewer modifications to accommodate the future Shift rapid transit station Design Options 2, 4 and 5 are compatible with the future widening of Fanshawe Park Road and Richmond Street with little or no additional improvements required. Design Options 5 is preferred since it better accommodates pedestrians and is more compatible with the Main Street and Transit Village designations of the Draft London Plan. It also facilitates the incorporation of urban design elements to enhance the intersection s gateway function. Option 5 improves traffic operations, better accommodates pedestrians and is compatible with Shift, the Draft London Plan and future widening of Fanshawe Park Road and Richmond Street. 21
CROSS-SECTIONS FOR PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION FANSHAWE PARK ROAD 22
CROSS-SECTIONS FOR PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION RICHMOND STREET 23
REFINEMENT OF PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION During Phase 3, the preferred Design Option (Option 5) was further refined to integrate the Main Street and Transit Village vision, goals, function and character outlined in the Draft London Plan. The design refinements include: Accommodation of transit needs (short and long term) Landscaping and urban design elements (i.e., wide planted medians and boulevards, street furniture, pedestrian scaled lighting, etc.) Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. 24
25
REFINEMENT OF PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION RICHMOND STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOUTH LEG) 26
CONSTRUCTION TIMING, STAGING & TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT Project is currently scheduled for construction in 2018, subject to budget availability and property acquisition. Utility and property acquisitions will be completed prior to construction During construction: o Property access will be maintained o Temporary traffic signals will be in operation at the intersection. 27
NEXT STEPS REVIEW AND RESPOND TO COMMENTS RECEIVED AT PIC 2 REFINE PREFERRED DESIGN OPTION COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT (ESR) CIVIC WORKS COMMITTEE LONDON COUNCIL APPROVAL 30 DAY ESR PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD 2015 2016 JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING Your input is important to the outcome of this project. Please complete a comment form and return it by July 6, 2016 Personal information collected and recorded at the Public Information Centre or submitted in writing on this subject is collected under the authority of the Municipal Act, 2011 and will be used by members of Council and City of London staff in their review of this matter. With the exception of personal information, all comments will become part of the public record. Questions about this collection should be referred to the City Clerk s office at 519-661-2500. 28