05 12 2004 COW Agenda
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
DATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 2004
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
ROBINSON ROOM
"
************************************************************************************************
1. NOTICE OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
"
2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF: . "IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
4. DEPUTATIONS:
None.
5. CORRESPONDENCE:
a) Carol Trainor, Clerk/Deputy Treasurer, Township of Essa, correspondence dated April
22, 2004 re: Appeal of the 2004 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority Budget.
b) Sheila Kirkland, Chairperson, Oro-Medonte History Association, correspondence dated
April 23, 2004 re: Oro African Church.
c) Leonard Kozachuk, Senior Project Manager, URS Canada Inc., correspondence dated
April 20, 2004 re: Highway 400 Planning Study [copy of Transportation Environmental
Study Report available in Clerk's office].
",
6. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
"
..
a) Report No. TR 2004-13, Paul Gravelle, Treasurer, re: Tax Ratios.
b) Report No. TR 2004-14, Bonnie McPhee, Accounting Clerk, re: Statements of
Accounts, April, 2004.
c) Report No. ADM 2004-21, Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO / Ron Kolbe, Director of
Building/Planning Development re: Septic Re-Inspection Program [from, April 28, 2004
meeting, to be distributed at meeting].
d) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, re: Human Resources Policies.
- POL-HR-01, Employee Policy/Procedure Awareness
- POL-HR-02, Employee Injury Reporting
- POL-HR-03, Incident/Accident Reporting
- POL-HR-04, Appropriate Internet & Email Usage
e) Chris Carter, Recreation Co-ordinator, re: Applications for Grant/Subsidy.
7. PUBLIC WORKS:
..
None.
...
8. ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES:
a) Report No. EES 2004-28, Keith Mathieson, Director of Engineering and Environmental
Services re: Mr. Sam Raseta - Request to Connect to the Warminster Municipal Water
System.
9. BUILDING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
a) Report No. PD 2004-18, Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning Consultants Inc., re: Water
Taking as a Land Use.
b) Report No. PO 2004-19, Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning Consultants Inc., re:
Georgian North Lands Limited Property.
c) Report No. PD 2004-20, Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning Consultants Inc., re:
Modifications to OPA #17.
d) Report No. BD 2004-04, Ron Kolbe, Director of Building/Planning Development,
Building Report, April, 2004.
10. IN-CAMERA:
,,'
a) Deputy Mayor Hughes, re: Legal Matter.
".
11. ADJOURNMENT:
2
ADDENDUM
~
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
Wednesday, May 12, 2004
6. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
f) Report No. TR 2004-15, Paul Gravelle, Treasurer, re: Insurance Coverage.
9. BUILDING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
e) Report No. BD 2004-05, Ron Kolbe, Director of Building/Planning Development re:
Howard Request to Temporarily Have Two Residences on Property, 97 Brambel
Road, Concession 4, Being More Particularly Described as Plan 819, Lot 11,
Township of Oro-Medonte.
04j23/2004 89:03
7854242367
ESSA
e~~A..0
PAGE 02/82
:orporcition of the Township of E~so
5786 Simcoe (fy. Rd. #21
Jtopia, E~so Township, Ontario
LOM 1 TO
- .......,.
Telephone: (705) 424-9770
Fax: (705) 424- 2367
Web Site: www.essatownship.on.ca
-- ~~ ~\
. .
. ,
Where Town and Country Meet
. ..
.4
22 April 2004
5~
To the Municipal Councils of the Member MunicipaUties,
NQttawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
Re: Appeal of the 2004 NVCA Budget
A Resolution of this Council was circulated to all member municipalities within the NVCA
watershed following the 7 April 2004 meeting regarding an appeal to the Mining and Lands
Commissioner of the 2004 NVCA budget, in accordance with the Conservation Authorities Act.
Following djscussions with the Commissioner and a review of the process involved, the Council
of The Township of Essa has requested that all member municipalities be surveyed to determine
if they wish to collaborate in this effort of appealing the 2004 NVCA budget, including prorating
or cost shaxing any legal expenses that may be involved.
A respoIJ.5e regarding your willingness or interest in joining Essa in this endeavour, or your
decision not to be involved, would be appreciated at your earliest possible convenience.
If you require further information, please feel free to contact the undersignoo, or Chief
Administrative Officer Greg Murphy, at 705-424-9770.
"
Thank you in advance for your prompt response.
Yours truly,
...
~
Carol O. Trainor, A.M.C.T.
Clerk/Deputy Treasurer
..
" '"""\
Gfycv
Sb
t~~,,~oo
IR~
,t 'RPI a 0., (
10Ih
'~>,-<rQ~
"''"'-~{;"
April 23, 2004
Attention: Mayor and Council of Oro-Medonte
""-
We the Oro-Medonte History Association recommend that you have the roads
department place fieldstones, no more than two feet high and five to six feet apart, as a
security perimeter on the road allowance around the Oro African Church. They will be
better able to judge how far in to place them so as not to restrict road maintenance.
We feel that fieldstones will not block the view of the Church as your eye is drawn to the
building not the perimeter markers.
It will be historically functional and will not deteriorate or need replaced with time.
It will provide a barrier to any vehicles that may loose control and will discourage easy ,
access to thieves with trucks.
Thank you in advance for your timely dealing with this concern.
Sincerely yours,
v; . 'J ;::0 ^ f) /
Y::::{/V!A_.l- ~ {X(~L,t::e- 0-81
Sheila Kirkland, Chairperson,
Oro-lv1edonte History Association
,
1 :\.
&t~.
t:;C-\
I
URS
, .
Ms. Vicki Robertson
Clerk
Office ofthe Clerk
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Oro, ON
LOL 2XO
April 20, 2004
Our Ref: CN29900147
-"
--
Dear Ms. Robertson:
RE: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town ofInnisfil, City of Barrie, Township of Spring water
County of Simcoe (G. W. P. 30-95-00)
URS Canada Inc. was retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to undertake a Planning and
Preliminary Design Study to examine the nature of improvements required to address traffic operations, capacity
and safety needs along 30 kIn of Highway 400 from l' kIn south of Highway 89 to the junction at Highway 11. In
addition, this study examined transportation problems, opportunities and issues relating to the existing interchanges
at Highway 89, 1nnisfil Beach Road / Simcoe Road 21, Molson Park Drive, Essa Road, Dunlop Street, Bayfield
Street / Highway 26, and Duckworth Street. Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements were
developed and evaluated to select the most appropriate solution.
This study followed the requirements of a Group 'B' Project as defmed by the Class Environmental Assessment for
Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000), including the opportunity for public input throughout.
Enclosed is one copy of the Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR) for the above noted project. Please
ensure that the TESR is made available for public review in your municipality from April 29, 2004 to May 28,
2004.
A "Notice of Submission of the Transportation Environmental Study Report" (see attached) will be placed in the
Toronto Star, Barrie Advance, Barrie Examiner, and Innisfil Scope on April 28th, 2004. The public review period
will start on April 29, 2004 and end on May 28, 2004.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. Should you have any questions in this regard, please feel free to
contact the undersigned.
"
Yours very truly,
URS CANADA INC.
"
~~
=
rtU~
Leonard Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
cc: Kevin Boudreau - MTO
Joel Foster - MTO
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
,
ONTARIO GOVERNMENT NOTICE
TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT SUBMISSION
Highway 400 Planning Study
From the 1 km South of Higbway 89 Nortberly 30 km to tbe Junction at Highway 11
County of Simcoe (G. W. P. 30-95-00)
.
URS Canada Inc. was retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to undertake a Planning and Preliminary Design
Study to examine the nature of improvements required to address traffic operations, capacity and safety needs along 30 km of
Highway 400 trom ] Ian south of Highway 89 to the junction at High~ay II. In addition, this study examined transportation
problems, opportunities and issues relating to the existing interchanges at Highway 89, Innisfil Beach Road I Simcoe Road 21,
Molson Park Drive, Essa Road, Dunlop Street, Bayfield Street I Highway 26, and Duckworth Street. Reasonable alternatives to
address the required improvements were developed and evaluated to select the most appropriate solution.
The recommended plan for the interim improvements to this section of the Highway 400 corridor incJudes:
· From Highway 89 to Essa Road - widen Highway 400 fTom6 to 8 lanes (including property protection for 10 lanes);
FromEssa Road to Bayfield Street - widen Highway 400 trom 6 to 10 lanes;
From Baytield Street to the Junction at Highway II - widen Highway 400 fTom 6 to 8 lanes;
· Improvements to the following interchanges to accommodate the ultimate 10 lane highway widening, and address
operational and geometric needs: Highway 89; Innistil Beach Road; Molson Park Drive; Essa Road; Dunlop Street;
Bayfield Street; and Duckworth Street.
Installation of a median concrete barrier;
Construction of new noise walls at warranted locations;
Installation of "high-mast" illumination north of Molson Park Drive to Duckworth Street and improve illumination at all
interchanges;
Replacement of the median sewer and improve the culverts and drainage as necessary;
New pavement on the existing section of Highway 400;
New commuter parking lot at the Highway 89 interchange (northeast quadrant); and
The installation of noise retrofit barriers at select locations.
This study followed the requirements of a Group B Project as defined by the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial
Transportation Facilities (2000), including the opportunity for public input throughout. A Transportation Environmental Study
Report (TESR) has been prepared as required under each Class EA process. This report is available for a 30Cday public review
period commencing on April 29, 2004 at the following locations:
Ontario Ministry of Transportatioo
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3'" Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario
OffICe of the Clerk
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
Ontario Ministry of the Environment
Barrie District Office
54 Cedar Pointe Drive, Unit 1203
Barrie, Ontario
OffICe of the Clerk
District of Muskoka
70 Pine Street
Bracebridge, Ontario
Office of the Clerk
Township of Essa
5786 County Road 21
Utopia, Ontario
Office of the Clerk
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Une 7 South
Oro, Ontario
OffICe of the Clerk
The Corporation of the City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
Office ofthe Clerk
Town of Innisfil
21471nnisfil Beach Road
Administration Building
Innisfil, Ontario
Springwater Public Library
50 Queen Street West
Elmvale, Ontario
Phone: (705)322-1482
Innisfil Public Library - Cookstown
Branch
19 Queen Street, Box 261
Cookstown, Ontario
Phone: (705) 458-1273
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
Public Library
Box 130, 100 Holland Court
Bradford, Ontario
Phone: (905) 775-3328
Barrie Public Ubrary
60 Worsley Street
Barrie, Ontario
Phone: (705) 728-1010
URS Canada Ine.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, Ontario
If you have any comments, concerns or questions please contact the undersigned prior to the end of the review period, Ma)' 28'.,
2004. If you have concerns that cannot be resolved in discussions with MTO, you may request the Minister of the Environment
(135 S1. Clair Avenue West, Toronto, Ontario M4V IP5), (in writing), to "bump-up" (i.e. make a Part II Order for) the project to
an Individual Environmenta! Assessment (EA). A copy of this request must be forwarded to MTO and URS (at the addresses
shown below). A Part II Order ma)' lead to the preparation of an Individual EA. If there are no outstanding concerns after May
28'h, 2004, the project will be considered to have met the requirements of the Class EA and the detail design can commence.
Infonnation collected will be used in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. With the
exception of personal information, all comments will become part of the public record. If you have any questions or require
further information, please feel fTee to contact:
Mr. Leonard Kozachuk, p, Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Canada Jne.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, Ontario, L3T 7N9
TeL: (905) 882-3540
Fax: (905)882-4399
Email: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
Mr, Kevin J, Boudreau, P. Eng.
Ministry of Transportation
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3'" Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario, N6E 1 L3
Tel: (519) 873-4603
Fax: (519)873-4600
E-mail: Kevin.Boudreau@mto.gov.on.ca
~ Ontario
t;c-~
,.
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT
CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GROUP "B"
G. W. P. 30-95-00
HIGHWAY 400
PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly
30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town of Innisfil,
City of Barrie, Township of Springwater,
County of Simcoe
Prepared for the Ministry of Transportation by:
URS Canada Inc.
Prepared and Reviewed by:
?z~
""'"
,g&,
Leonard Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
Tyler Drygas, B.A.A.
Environmental Planner
April 2004
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT
CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GROUP "B"
G.W.P. 30-95-00
HIGHWAY 400
PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly
30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town of Innisfil,
City of Barrie, Township of Springwater,
County of Simcoe
Ce document hautement specialise n'est disponsible qu'en anglais en vertue du nJglement 411/97, qui en exempte l'application de la Loi sur les services en fran~ais. Pour
de l'aide en fran~ais, veuillez communiquer avec Ie ministere des Transports, Bureau des services en fran~ais au: 905-704-2045 au 905-704-2046.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Public Record
Copies of this document have been sent to the following locations:
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3rd Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario, N6E 1L3
Office of the Clerk
District of Muskoka
70 Pine Street
Bracebridge, Ontario, PIL IN3
Ontario Ministry of the Environment
Barrie District Office
54 Cedar Pointe Drive, t)nit 1203
Barrie, Ontario, L 4N 5R7
Office of the Clerk
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario, LOL lXO
Office of the Clerk
Township of Essa
5786 County Road 21
Utopia, Ontario, LOM 1 TO
Office of the Clerk
Township of Oro-Medonte
148 Line 7 South
Oro, Ontario, LOL 2XO
Office of the Clerk
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario, L4M 4T5
Office of the Clerk
Town of Innisfil
2147 Innisfil Beach Road
Administration Building .
Innisfil, Ontario, L9S lA1
Innisfil Public Library - Cookstown Branch
19 Queen Street, Box 261
Cookstown, Ontario, LOL 1LO
Phone: (705) 458-1273
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
Public Library
Box 130, 100 Holland Court
Bradford, Ontario, L3Z 2A7
Phone: (905) 775-3328
Barrie Public Library
60 Worsley Street
Barrie, Ontario, L4M 1L6
Phone: (705) 728-1010
Springwater Public Library
50 Queen Street West
Elmvale, Ontario, LOL IPO
Phone: (705) 322-1482
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, Ontario, L3T 7N9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS
1.1 The Ontario Environmental Assessment Act
1.2 The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act
1.3 Purpose Of The Transportation Environmental Study Report
2 OVERVIEW OF PROJECT
2.1 Project Location
2.2 Purpose of the Undertaking and Scope of Study
2.2.1 Related Projects
2.3 General Description of the Recommended Plan
.3 EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
3.1 Natural Environment
3.1.1 Physiography and Soils
3.1.2 Groundwater Recharge and Discharge Areas
3.1.3 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat
3.1.4 Vegetation, Wetlands, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI)
3.1.5 Wildlife, Wildlife Linkages/Corridors, Vulnerable, Threatened or Endangered Species
3.2 Socio-Economic Environment
3.2.1 Existing Land Use
3.2.2 Future Developments
3.2.3 Noise
3.2.4 Aesthetics
3.2.5 Property Waste and Contamination
3.3 Cultural Environment
3.3.1 Archaeological Resources
3.3.2 Built Heritage Resources
3.4 Traffic Operations Analysis
3.4.1 Existing Mainline Operations
3.4.2 Existing Interchange Operations
3.4.3 Future Mainline Operations
3.4.4 Future Interchange Operations
3.4.5 Future Municipal Initiatives
3.4.6 Highway Features
3.4.7 Improvement Recommendations
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
4
5
6
6
6
12
13
13
16
17
17
19
20
20
21
21
21
21
21
21
22
23
24
24
25
25
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
.5
5.1
5.2
5.3
.6
DESIGN ALTERNATIVES AND EVALUATION 27
Problem Statement 27
Existing Problems 27
Future Problems 27
Alternatives to the Undertaking 28
Generation and Assessment of Design Alternatives 29
4.5.1 Highway 400 Mainline Alternatives 29
4.5.2 Highway 400 Interchange Alternatives 30
Assessment of Net Impacts 34
Evaluation of Alternatives 34
4.7.1 Highway 400 Mainline 44
4.7.2 Highway 400 Interchanges 53
4.7.3 Commuter Parking Lot Evaluation 90
Summary of the Technically Preferred Alternatives 98
CONSULTATION 99
Public Involvement 99
5.1.1 First Round of Public Information Centres 102
5.1.2 Second Round of Public Information Centres 102
External Ministry I Agency and Municipal Input 106
5.2.1 Municipal Team 106
5.2.2 External Team 106
Transportation Environmental Study Report Submission 111
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND COMMITMENTS 112
6.1
Natural Environment 112
6.1.1 Hydrogeology 112
6.1.2 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat 113
6.1.3 Vegetation, Wetlands, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) 115
6.1.4 Wildlife Linkage/Corridor, Vulnerable, Threatened or Endangered (VTE) Species 116
6.1.5 Storm water Management 116
Socio-Economic Environment 119
6.2.1 Community Impacts: Road Closures/Out-of-Way Travel 119
6.2.2 Residential Property Impacts 120
6.2.3 Commercial/Industrial Property Impacts 120
6.2.4 Access Agreements 121
6.2.5 Agricultural 121
6.2.6 Property Process 122
6.2.7 Future Land Use Developments 122
6.2.8 Noise 122
6.2.9 Property Waste and Contamination 125
6.2.10 Community Effects 125
6.2.11 Aesthetics 126
6.2
Transportation Environmental Study Report - G.W.P. 30-95-00
April 2004
- i -
@ Ontario
URS
6.3 Cultural Environment 126
6.3.1 Archaeological Resources 126
6.3.2 Built Heritage Features 127
6.4 Summary of Environmental Effects and Mitigation 127
6.5 Future Consultation 131
6.5.1 Agency Consultation 131
6.5.2 Municipal Consultation 131
6.5.3 Public Consultation 131
6.6 Commitments to Future Work 131
6.6.1 Socio-Economic Environment 131
6.6.2 Cultural Environment 131
6.6.3 Utility Relocations 132
6.6.4 Design and Construction Report 132
6.7 Project Monitoring 132
6.7.1 Project Specific Technical Monitoring 132
6.7.2 Project Specific Class EA Monitoring 132
6.7.3 Implementation of Environmental Monitoring Framework 132
Z APPLICATION OF CLASS EA PRINCIPLES AND PROCESS 133
7.1 Transportation Engineering Principles 133
7.2 Environmental Protection Principles 133
7.3 External Consultation Principles 133
7.4 Evaluation Principles 133
7.5 Documentation Principles 134
7.6 Bump-up Principles 134
7.7 Environmental Clearance Principles to Proceed 134
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Soil Capability Class........................ ...... ........................................................................................ 12
Table 3.2 Water Wells within the Study Area Corridor .................................................................................... 12
Table 3.3 Existing and Predicted Future "No Build" Sound Levels at Representative Mainline NSAs..................... 20
Table 3.4 Highway 400 Existing Directional Design Hour Volumes................................................................... 22
Table 3.5 Highway 400 Lane Requirements by Horizon Year* ......................................................................... 23
Table 4.1 Highway 400 Corridor Existing Level of Service............................................................................... 27
Table 4.2 Highway 400 Future Level of Service ............................................................................................. 27
Table 5.1 Summary of Issues Raised at the First Round of Public Information Centres....................................l03
Table 5.2 Summary of Issues Raised at the Second Round of Public Information Centres ...............................104
Table 5.3 Summary of Issues Raised by the Municipal Team .........................................................................107
Table 5.4 Summary of Issues Raised by the External Team...........................................................................110
Table 6.1 Potentially Impacted Fish Habitat Crossings and Proposed Mitigation Measures/ Conceptual
Compensation Strategy. ........... ....... .............. ........ ... .., ....... .... ..... ............. ...... ... ...................... .... .113
Table 6.2 Predicted "No-Build" and "Build" Sound Levels at Representative Mainline NSAs ..............................123
Table 6.3 Impacts to Built Heritage & Cultural Landscapes ............................................................................127
Table 6.4 Summary of Environmental Concerns and Commitments to Future Work......................................... 128
Exhibit 2.1
Exhibit 3.1
Exhibit 3.2
Exhibit 4.1
Exhibit 4.2
Exhibit 4.3
Exhibit 4.4
Exhibit 4.5
Exhibit 4.6
Exhibit 4.7
Exhibit 4.8
Exhibit 4.9
Exhibit 4.10
Exhibit 4.11
Exhibit 4.12
Exhibit 4.13
Exhibit 4.14
Exhibit 4.15
Exhibit 4.16
Exhibit 4.17
Exhibit 4.18
Exhibit 4.19
Exhibit 4.20
Exhibit 4.21
Exhibit 4.22
Exhibit 4.23
Exhibit 4.24
Exhibit 4.25
Exhibit 4.26
Exhibit 4.27
Exhibit 4.28
Exhibit 4.29
Exhibit 4.30
Exhibit 4.31
Exhibit 4.32
Exhibit 4.33
Exhibit 4.34
Exhibit 4.35
Exhibit 4.36
Exhibit 4.37
Exhibit 4.38
Exhibit 4.39
Exhibit 4.40
Exhibit 4.41
Exhibit 5.1
Exhibit 5.2
Exhibit 6.1
Exhibit 6.2
LIST OF EXHIBITS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Project Limits ....... ..... ......... ....... ...... ............ ... ..... ......... ... ..... ... ............ .................. ............. ... ......3
Existing Conditions..... ........ ....... ... ........... ... ......... ....... .... ...... ........................ ......... ........... ... ........7
Major Drainage Features............................. .... ..... ......... ...... ..... ............................. ..........:........ ..14
Widening Alternatives from South Project Limits to Essa Road .....................................................31
Widening Alternatives from Essa Road to North Project Limits...................................................... 32
Highway 89 Interchange Alternatives.............. ..... .................................................... ...................33
Innisfil Beach Road Interchange Alternatives............................................................................... 35
Molson Park Drive ~nterchange Alternatives.. ............................................ .................................. 37
Essa Road Interchange Alternatives............................................................................................ 38
Dunlop Street Interchange Alternatives......... ........................................ ...................... ................39
Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives... ... .... ..... ... ...... ... .... ... ... ...... ... ............ ...........................40
Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives................................................................................. 42
Analysis of Mainline Highway 400 Alternatives......................................... .......;............................45
Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400 Alternatives .........................................................................47
Highway 400 Mainline Technically Preferred Alternative ...............................................................49
Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400 Alternatives .........................................................................50
Highway 400 Mainline Technically Preferred Alternatives.............................................................. 52
Analysis of Highway 89 Interchange Alternatives... ...... ......... ........... ............................. ............... 54
Evaluation of Highway 89 Interchange Alternatives ..................................................................... 56
Highway 89 Technically Preferred Plan .... .... ........ ... ...... ...... ............. .... ... .... ..... ... .... ... ...... ...........58
Analysis of Innisfil Beach Road Interchange Alternatives .............................................................. 59
Evaluation of Innisfil Beach Road Interchange Alternatives ..........................................................61
Innisfil Beach Road Technically Preferred Plan............ ........................... ...... ................... ............. 63
Analysis of Molson Park Drive Interchange Alternatives................................................................ 64
Evaluation of Molson Park Drive Interchange Alternatives............................................................ 66
Molson Park Drive Technically Preferred Plan ..............................................................................68
Analysis of Essa Road Interchange Alternatives........................................................................... 69
Evaluation of Essa Road Interchange Alternatives........................................................................ 71
Essa Road Technically Preferred Plan ........... ................... ................................. .......... .... ............. 73
Analysis of Dunlop Street Interchange Alternatives...................................................................... 74
Evaluation of Dunlop Street Interchange Alternatives .................................................................. 76
Dunlop Street Technically Preferred Plan ..... ......... ........ ................. .......... ............... ....... ............. 79
Analysis of Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives..................................................................... 80
Evaluation of Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives ................................................................. 82
Bayfield Street Technically Preferred Plan............................... ..................... ............................... 84
Analysis of Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives ................................................................85
Evaluation of Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives............................................................. 87
Duckworth Street Technically Preferred Plan .... .......... ....... ............... .............. .......... ....... ............ 89
Highway 89 Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives ..........................................................................91
Evaluation of Highway 89 Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives ...................................................... 92
Molson Park Drive Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives ................................................................. 94
Evaluation of Molson Park Drive Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives ............................................. 95
Essa Road Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives......;.............................................. ........................ 96
Evaluation of Essa Road Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives ........................................................ 97
Study Schedule.... ................................................................................................................... 100
Study Process...................... ........ ........................................................................................... 101
Culvert and Stormwater Management Pond Locations................................................................ 118
Proposed Noise Barrier Locations . ............................................................................................ 124
Transportation Environmental Study Report - G.W.P. 30-95-00
April 2004
- ii -
~ Ontario
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
LIST OF APPENDICIES
Correspondence
Minutes of Meeting
Summary of Public Information Centres
Mapping of Noise Sensitive Areas
Natural Features Mapping
Plates - Recommended Plan
Transportation Environmental Study Report - G.W.P. 30-95-00
April 2004
- iii -
@ Ontario
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
@ Ontario
1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS
1.1 The Ontario Environmental Assessment Act
The purpose of Ontario's Environmental Assessment (EA) Act is to help protect and conserve
Ontario's environment by ensuring that projects subject to the Act follow a planning process
leading to environmentally sound decision-making.
For projects subject to the EA Act, an environmental assessment involves identifying and
planning for environmental issues and effects prior to implementing a project. The process
allows reasonable opportunities for public involvement in the decision-making process of the
project. An EA document is prepared by the proponent of the project and is subject to review
by the public and government agencies before project approval is given.
The Class EA is a planning document approved under the EA Act that provides a streamlined
process that projects or activities within a defined "class" must follow. When the Class EA
process is adhered to and its requirements met for a project, the requirements of the EA Act are
also fulfilled and fonnal approval under the EA Act is not required. The Class EA
requirements must be met before a project can be implemented. Projects and activities that are
defined within a class are generally ones that are recurring, carried out routinely and have
predictable and mitigable environmental effects. The word "environment" in this context is
defmed as any aspect of life that may be impacted by an undertaking. Therefore, "the
environment" can include aspects of the natural, social, economic and cultural environments
depending on the project in question. The class approach often expedites the environmental
assessment of smaller, recurring projects. The Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial
. Transportation Facilities (2000) outlines the EA process to be followed for specific groups of
provincial transportation projects. Project groupings within the Class EA were established for
the purposes of consultation, documentation and fonnal EA challenge (bump.up).
The groups are as follows:
· Group "A" - Projects that are new facilities;
· Group "B" - Projects that are major improvements to existing facilities;
· Group "C" - Projects that are minor improvements to existing facilities; and
· Group "D" - Activities that involve operation, maintenance, administration and
miscellaneous work for provincial transportation facilities. These activities are approved
under the EA Act subject to compliance with applicable environmental legislation other than
the EA Act.
Other aspects of the environmental assessment process applicable to these project types are
contained in the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities
(2000). Readers interested in these matters are encouraged to refer to that document.
1.2
1.3
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) is "triggered" by the:
· Federal Agency as Proponent;
· Need for Federal funding;
· Need for Federal Lands (including First Nations lands); and/or
· Issuance of a Federal approval identified on the Law List.
This project will not require Federal funding, will not affect any lands owned by the Federal
Government or First Nations and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation is the proponent of this
project. Therefore, the first three triggers do not apply.
Regarding the fourth trigger:
In accordance with the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) and the Ministry of Natural Resources
(MNR) Fisheries Protocol, the MNR is responsible for reviewing MTO projects and
detennining whether the Federal Fisheries Act applies. Once the decision to issue a Fisheries
Act authorization is made, a Federal screening under CEAA is required. The Federal
Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) is responsible for undertaking this screening
exercise. .
The proposed improvements will result in impacts to 17 water crossings that support fish habitat
(See Section 6.1.2 for further details). These improvements have the potential to result in the
loss of channel edge resulting in a hannful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) and will
require authorization from the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans pursuant to Section
35 (2) of the Federal Fisheries Act. .
Purpose Of The Transportation Environmental
Study Report
This Highway 400 project (from 1 kIn south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the junction at
Highway II) is classified as a Group B undertaking under the Class EA due to the nature I
scope of the undertaking. A Transportation Environmental . Study Report (TESR) is the
environmental I process document required for a Group B project. The TESR documents the
process followed that led to the recommended project design.
In general the TESR includes the following infonnation:
· Purpose and history of the project;
· Existing and future natural, socio-economic, cultural and engineering conditions in the
project area;
· Description of alternatives considered, their associated potential impacts and evaluation of
the alternatives;
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 1 -
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Description of the recommended alternative and associated potential environmental effects
and mitigation measures; and
. Commitments to future work and monitoring aspects of a project, including expected
environmental effects and proposed mitigation measures.
As required under the Class EA, this TESR is being made available to the public, other
interested parties and external agencies for a 30-day review. This TESR is available for review
at the following locations:
Mr. Leonard Kozachuk, P .Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Tel: 905-882-3540
Fax: 905-882-4399
Email: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
. Ontario Ministry of Transportation . Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury Pubic
(Southwestern Region); Library;
. Ontario Ministry of the Environment . Barrie Public Library;
(Barrie District Office); . Innisfil Public Library (Stroud Branch);
. County of Simcoe; . Innisfil Public Library (Cookstown Branch);
. Township ofEssa; . Springwater Public Library; and
. Township of Oro-Medonte; . URS Canada Inc.
. District of Muskoka;
Mr. Tyler Drygas
Environmental Planner
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, Ontario, L3 T 7N9
Tel: 905-882-4401
Fax: 905-882-4399
Email: tyler_drygas@urscorp.com
You may also contact the following Ministry of Transportation Representatives:
Mr. Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3rd Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario, N6E lL3
Tel: 519-873-4603
Toll Free: 1-800-265-6072
Fax: 519-873-4600
Email: kevin.boudreau@mto.gov.on.ca
A "Notice of Study Completion" was placed in the local newspapers and a letter was mailed to
notify government agencies, municipalities, and members of the public on the Project Team's
mailing list of the TESR submission.
During the review period, parties are encouraged to bring their concerns regarding the project to
the attention of the Ministry of Transportation (MTO). If it is necessary to make significant
changes to the commitments outlined in the TESR or changes to the concept of the project
components, an Addendum may be required.
If, after consulting with MTO's consultants and staff, serious unresolved concerns are identified,
individuals have the right to request the Minister of the Environment (135 St. Clair Street West,
Toronto, Ontario, M4V IP5) to "bump-up" (i.e. make a Part II Order for this project).. A Part II
Order may lead to preparation of and individual environmental assessment. Copies of the
"bump-up" request are to be forwarded to MTO and URS Canada Inc., at the addresses noted on
the following page. If there are no outstanding concerns after completion of the 30-day review
period, the project will be considered to have met the requirements of the Class EA.
With respect to an Addendum to the TESR (if required), only changes documented in the
Addendum are eligible for "bump-up" (Part II Order). In the event that a "bump-up" request is
granted, the proponent has the option of withdrawing the Addendum and implementing the
project as documented in the original TESR. If, through unforeseen circumstances, an
immediate change is required to prevent environmental damage from occurring or continuing,
then the change will be considered as a Group D emergency response activity. In this case, an
Addendum is not required.
Detailed background infonnation, including supporting background study reports, is contained
in the environmental study file. The Project Manager and/or Environmental Planner are
available to discuss this infonnation and can be contacted as follows:
Mr. Joel Foster
Environmental Planner
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3rd Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario, N6E lL3
Tel: 519-873-4556
Toll Free: 1-800-265-6072
Fax: 519-873-4600
Email: joe1.foster@mto.gov.on.ca
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 2 -
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
GW.P. 30-95-00
OVERVI
Project Location
The project limits for this study are within the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town of
Innisfil, Township of Springwater, and the City of Barrie in the County of Simcoe (refer to
Exhibit 2.1). The limits extend from 1 km south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the Junction
at Highway 11 and Highway 400 and a reasonable distance east and west of Highway 400 so as
to include all possible impacts to the surrounding area.
Highway 400 is a Controlled Access Highway under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Ministry of
Transportation (MTO). This section of Highway 400 is a six-lane divided freeway with a
posted speed of 100 kmfh and a design speed of 110 kmlh (RFD 110).
Highway 400 is considered a Regionally and Provincially significant transportation link
connecting the Greater Toronto Area and the City of Barrie. It also connects Highway 401 in
Southern Ontario to Central and Northern Ontario / Western Canada via Highway 69 and
Highway 11.
2.2 Purpose of the Undertaking and Scope of Study
URS Canada Inc. was retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to undertake a
Planning and Preliminary Design Study to document required improvements and widening
requirements along 30 km of Highway 400 from 1 kIn south of Highway 89 to the Junction at
Highway 11, for the present, short-term (2001), mid-term (2006) and long-term (2011) planning
horizons. In addition, this study examined transportation problems, opportunities and issues
relating to the existing interchanges at the following locations:
iii Highway 89;
IiII Innisfil Beach Road I Simcoe Road 21;
II Molson Park Drive;
· Essa Road;
II
II
26;
III
Environmental
2004
Exhibit 2.1 Project limits
- 3 -
Not to Scale
~
.
-{~}-
I
I
I
I.
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
Essentially, the primary function of Highway 400 is to provide service to inter-city, inter-region,
commercial transport, commuter, as well as recreational travelers. Sections of Highway 400
currently operate at or near capacity during peak travel periods. Highway 400 traffic volumes
are expected to increase at a 4 to 6 percent ~ual growth rate, between 1999 and 2011, due to
high growth in population in the surroUDding Highway 400 areas. Major improvements to the
existing roadway network are needed in order to improve operations and levels of service in the
future.
In addition to widening Highway 400, improvements to the Highway 400 corridor will require
modifications to existing roads and interchanges. Given the nature of the improvements to be
investigated, this project is following the process for a Group B project UDder the Class EA for
Provincial Transportation Facilities. The alternatives were analyzed and impacts to natural,
social, economic and cultural environments, as well as technical considerations, were evaluated,
leading to the identification of a technically preferred plan. The alternatives considered and
evaluation of these alternatives is described in Chapter 4.
In particular, the scope of this study included the following tasks:
· Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR) and environmental clearance for the
technically preferred recommendations;
· Natural Environment Assessment;
· Cultural Heritage Assessment;
· Noise Impact Assessment;
· Structural Evaluation;
· Preliminary Structural Design;
· Preliminary Stormwater Management Study;
· Traffic Operations Study;
· Preliminary Electrical Design for Proposed Illumination;
· Property Waste and Contamination Assessment;
· Hydrogeological Assessment;
· Preliminary Geotechnical and FOUDdations Investigations and Recommendation;
· Preliminary Design for Mainline, Interchange, Sideroad and Crossing Road Improvements;
· Construction Staging; and
· Identifying Property Requirements.
This TESR documents the essence of the above noted study tasks. The results of the above
tasks are fully documented in technical reports, submitted UDder separate cover.
2.2.1 Related Projects
The following active projects are adjacent to the study area:
· GWP 172-91-00, Highway 89 Assessment Study, Alliston to Highway 400;
· GWP 377-90-00, Highway 400 - Highway 400 to Highway 404 Extension Link
"Bradford Bypass";
· GWP 222-97-00, Preliminary Design Services for Highway 400 Ultimate
'Widening (Within MTO Central Region)
· GWP 40-00-00, Highway 400 Planning and Preliminary Design Study - From
the South Canal Bridge northerly to 1 kIn south of Highway 89 (Within MTO
Southwestern Region);
· Simcoe Area Transportation Network Needs Assessment;
· GTA North Transportation Corridor EA Terms of Reference;
· W.P. 5-00-00, Highway 11 Corridor Study;
· Contract 98-65, G.W.P. 199-85-00, Highway 400/Molson Park Drive
Interchange Improvements (completed fall of 2002);
· Contract 2000-0061, G.W.P. 38-99-00, Highway 89 from 1.1 kIn west to 0.5 kIn
east of Highway 400 (completed the Fall of 2000);
· GWP 295-99-00, Highway 400/COUDty Road 21 Interim Interchange
Improvements; and
· GWP 199-89-00, Highway 400 Resurfacing, Molson Park Drive to Duckworth
Street Interchange.
GWP 40-00-00 Highway 400 Planning and Preliminary Design Study includes
improvements to Highway 400 immediately south of this project. The project is
intended to address necessary improvements to traffic operations on the section of
Highway 400 from the South Canal Bridge northerly to one kilometre south of
Highway 89 (the south limits of the GWP 30-95-00 study). The associated
improvements include widening Highway 400 to improve capacity and
improvements to illumination and drainage, closure of the Canal Road access and
modifications to the Simcoe Road 88 interchange. Ultimately, these improvements
aim to enhance the transportation network's ability to move people and goods safely,
quickly and efficiently along this section of Highway 400.
Specifically, the interim Highway 400 widening for the GWP 40-00-00 study will be
8 lanes with provision to widen to 10 lanes. The lO-lane cross section includes
provision for one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction. The
mainline will be widened on both sides of the existing Highway 400 lanes and will
maintain the existing centre line. The existing box beam guide rail will be replaced
with an 8.8 metre closed barrier median using concrete tall wall through the project
limits. Other specifics of the proposed improvements are noted below:
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 4-
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.3 General Description of the Recommended Plan
.
Closure of the existing Canal Road access and widening/rehabilitation of the
Canal Road structure;
Realignment of 5th Concession to the north (within existing road allowance) and
replacement of existing structure;
Reconfiguration of Simcoe Road 88 interc".ange including widening and
realignment of Simcoe Road 88, replacement of the existing Simcoe Road 88
structure and full high mast illumination;
Widening of existing 9th Concession structure to accommodate Highway 400
widening;
Realignment of 11th Concession to the south and replacement of existing 11 th
Concession structure;
Widening of existing 13th Concession structure to accommodate Highway 400
widening; and
An 8.8 metre closed barrier median on Highway 400 using concrete tall wall.
In addition to the mainline and interchange modifications, the following improvements to
Highway 400 are recommended:
· Provide concrete median barrier throughout;
. Construct new noise barriers at warranted locations;
. Install "'high-mast" illumination north of Molson Park Drive to Duckworth Street and.
improve illumination at all interchanges;
. Replace the median sewer and improve the culverts and drainage as necessary;
. New pavement on the existing section of Highway 400;
. New commuter parking lot at the Highway 89 interchange (northeast quadrant); and
. The installation of noise retrofit barriers at the following locations:
. Northeast quadrant of the Dunlop Street interchange
. Southeast quadrant of the Bayfield Street interchange
. Northeast quadrant of the Bayfield Street interchange
. Northwest quadrant of the Bayfield Street interchange
The total cost of the Highway 400 improvements is estimated between $340 million and $410
million (including property acquisition and construction staging costs).' The proposed Highway
400 widening is designed to adhere to current MTO standards for 400 series highways.
.
.
.
.
.
.
From the south project limits to Essa Road, Highway 400 will be widened to eight lanes with a
provision to widen to ten lanes. Within this section of Highway 400, the centreline will be
shifted to the west, preserving the existing east edge of pavement and property line. The
ultimate ten-lane cross section includes provision for one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in
each direction from the south project limits to Molson Park Drive.
From Essa Road to the north project limits, Highway 400 will be Widened to the east and west
of the existing centreline with the section from Essa Road to Bayfield Street being widened to
ten lanes and the section from Bayfield Street to the north limit being widened to eight lanes.
In addition to highway widening, improvements are also recommended for the interchanges
within the study limits. The improvements include local geometric improvements to existing
individual ramps and/or reconfiguration of an entire interchange.
The recommended interchange improvements include:
. Reconfigure to a standard Parclo A interchange at Highway '89;
. Reconfigure to a standard Parclo A interchange at Innisfil Beach Road;
. Operational improvements to existing Diamond interchange at Molson Park Drive;
. Geometric improvements to existing partial Parclo A interchange at Essa Road;
. Geometric improvements to existing partial Parclo B interchange at Dunlop Street;
. Geometric improvements to existing Parclo A (southbound) / Diamond (northbound)
interchange at Bayfield Street; and
. Geometric improvements to existing Partial Parclo A interchange at Duckworth Street.
All of the above interchanges will be constructed to allow for potential 10 lane widening.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 5 -
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
ff) Ontario
3 EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
3.1.1 Physiography and Soils
To generate a reasonable range of alternatives, all significant features within the study area limits
were identified to determine their sensitivity and potential for impacts associated with the design
alternatives.
Identifying significant features involved the collection of primary and secondary source data derived
from surveys, field studies, published and unpublished literature, government sources and
consultation with agencies and the public. The data collected was grouped in the following
categories:
· Natural Environment;
· Socio-Economic Environment;
· Cultural Environment; and
· Traffic Operations I Technical Considerations.
The study area is situated within the Lakes Simcoe-Rideau Site Region, which
extends from the Ottawa River in the east to Lake Huron in the west and includes 12 "
site districts. The forest climate type is mid-humid, Great Lakes hardwoods. The
regional landform is. gently undulating to rolling terrain of ice-laid materials deeply
covering the Paleozoic bedrock over eighty percent of the area. Local plains of
smoother lacustrine deposits occur and limestone plains occur very shallowly
covered with drift. "The regional soil type is of limy soil materials that support
tolerant hardwood-conifer forests in a grey-brown podsolic, except in areas of stony
limestone till where limestone gravel is near the surface. In these latter areas, brown
forest soils are common. Soils and landforms of this site region support beech, hard
maple and hemlock on normal fresh sites; oak and hickory on warmer fresh sites; oak
and ash on hot dry sites; hard maple, oak and ash on normal dry sites; white pine, elm
and ash on cold dry sites; and, hemlock, yellow birch or spruce and white cedar on
wet sites. Site district - Peterborough is an area of very high lime loam (drumlinized
till) with local areas of high to moderately low lime, water-laid silt and clay.
The study area is situated in three distinct physiographic divisions. The southerly
project limit begins in the Peterborough Drumlin Field then continues through the
Simcoe Uplands and the City of Barrie, situated in the Simcoe Lowlands.
The Peterborough Drumlin Field is a distinctive physiographic division within the
study area. The individual drumlin features provide important functions related to
groundwater recharge and discharge. Two drumlin features occur within the study
area corridor. Both of these features abut Highway 400 near Station 13+000, just
south of Fourth Line, in the Town of Innisfil.
The Simcoe Uplands are characterized by curved ridges and steep-sided, flat-floored
valleys. The southerly portion, Innisfil Uplands, is a flat-topped till plain
approximately 60 metres higher than the surrounding lake plains. This upland area
and the portion north of Kempenfelt Bay is bisected by another physiographic region;
the Simcoe Lowlands.
This lowland unit is composed of the Nottawasaga and Simcoe basins that are
connected at Barrie ~t the end of Kempenfelt Bay. The most striking feature within
the general study area is the extensive wetland at the headwaters of Innisfil and
Lover's Creek. The Simcoe basin is relatively poorly drained compared to the
Nottawasaga basin.
The bedrock of the study area is situated in the Grenville Province lying in the
Central Metasedimentary Belt. Limestone, dolostone, shale, arkose and sandstone
ITom the Middle Ordovician period are typical of the area. There are no geological
faults within or near the study area.
(Text continues on page 12)
3.1 Natural Environment
Aerial photographs, Forest Resource Inventory maps, Natural Resource Values Inventory maps,
Wildlife Values maps and Spawning Resource maps were reviewed to identify existing natural
features in the .study area. Distinct vegetation communities were identified prior to field visits
and confirmed through original investigations. Terrestrial and preliminary fisheries
investigations took place from September 11 to September 13, 2000 and detailed fisheries
investigations were completed on September 26 and September 27, 2000.
The following resources were consulted to obtain information on natural features within the
study area:
· Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority;
· Simcoe Region Conservation Authority;
· Natural Heritage Information Centre;
· Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (Midhurst);
· Ontario Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Rural Affairs;
· Ontario Ministry of Environment;
· City of Barrie; and
· Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
Natural environment features and functions were identified within 200 metres on either side of
the existing centreline. Significant environmental constraints exist primarily in three areas along
the Highway 400 corridor (refer to Exhibit 3.1).
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 6 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 Km South of 89
Junction 11
LEGEND
Ag Agricultural
~ Vegetation
3m 1
IGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 Km South Highway 89
11
EXHIBIT
LEGEND
m 1
Agricultural
~ Vegetation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 South 89
11
LEGEND
EXHIB
Ag
~ Vegetation
111
IGHWAY 400 PLANNING STU
1 of ighway
11
LEGEND
~
Scale
~~
Om 500m
3m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ag Use
~ Vegetation
Scale
o m 500 m
Iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
Soils were classified according to their agricultural capability classes. There is good
representation of nearly all of the soil capability classes. The majority of the soils
within the study area fall into either the Class 1 or Class 3 categories.
Class 1 soils have no significant limitations in use for crops. They are level or have
very gentle slopes, are deep, well. to imperfectly drained and have a good water-
holding capacity. They are easily maintained in good tilth and productivity, and
damage from erosion is slight (Department of Environment, 1967). Class 3 soils have
moderately severe limitations that restrict the range of crops or require special
conservation practices. The most commonly encountered limitations to soil capability
are excess water, low fertility and topography. Most of these limitations are directly
related to the physiographic character of the study area. The drumlin and upland
ridge features typically have moderate to high relief with stony or sandy infertile
soils. There are deposits of clay and silt on the plains between the drumlin and ridge
features. Organic soils are also linked to the physiographic characteristics of the
study area. They occur only in wetland areas near Little Lake. Organic soils are
defined as soils that contain 30 % or more of organic matter and have a depth of 12
inches or more of consolidated organic material.
According to the field investigations no areas of significant soil erosion was
identified. In general, the upland areas were composed of porous sandy tills and
loams with a thin veneer of coarse outwash material. The organic soils in the
depressional areas are predominantly humisols and fine textured silt loam to clay.
The following table documents the occurrence of the various soil classes:
Table 3.1 Soil Capability Class
number of tributaries within this system. The third drainage system is Willow Creek,
which drains into Little Lake and eventually empties into the Nottawasaga River.
The following table identifies wells that are within the study area corridor.
Table 3.2 Water Wells within the Study Area Corridor
WELL TYPE DEEP WELL SHALLOW UNREPORTED' TOTAL
(>50 FT.) WELL DEPTH
(<50 FT.)
Domestic 19 18 0 37
Commercial 5 2 0 7
Irrigation 2 0 0 2
Industrial 2 1 0 3
Public Supply 5 1 1 7
Municipal 1 1 0 2
Not Used 4 1 3 8 .
Unknown 0 1 15 16
TOTALS 38 25 19 82
The groundwater component was investigated under two categories:
· Recharge Areas; and
· Discharge Areas.
Groundwater Recharge Areas
The study area does not have well-defined drumlins compared to other areas in the
Peterborough Drumlin Fields. The Lover's Creek Infiltration area is an
environmentally significant area and earth science site just east of the study area.
The upland area that Highway 400 occupies in the northern portion of the Town of
Innisfil is a non-specific groundwater recharge area and helps maintain baseflows in
Lover's Creek. Vegetation Community 9 just north of Tenth Line, between Station
23+300 and Station 23+850, in the Town of Innisfil collects and holds considerable
surface water in an area of porous soils and provides groundwater recharge functions.
SOIL CAPABILITY CLASS OCCURRENCE IN THE STUDY AREA
CORRIDOR
Class 1 27%
Class 2 7%
Class 3 25%
Class 4 12%
Class 5 16%
Class 6 0%
Class 7 10%
Organic 3%
Groundwater Discharge Areas
Two significant groundwater discharge areas were identified within the study area.
These areas were identified as having either a sub-grade source and/or temperatures
consistent with groundwater sources for the area.
Perhaps the most significant groundwater discharge area is located south of Fourth
Line, between Station l2+925 and Station 13+080, in the Town of Innisfil on the
west side of the highway. There are numerous groundwater seepages at the base of
the stream valley and likely groundwater upwellings iD the stream channel itself. This
particular location is intennediate between the two drumlin features within the study
area. The other groundwater discharge area is in the Lowland Cedar Thicket
vegetation community. There is abundant evidence of groundwater seepage and a
rich diverse herb community consistent with groundwater influenced vegetation.
3.1.2 Groundwater Recharge and Discharge Areas
Surface drainage within the study area occurs primarily in two tertiary watershed
divisions. The study area straddles the Nottawasaga River watershed to the west and
the Severn River watershed to the east.
The highway crosses three main drainage systems within the study area. The first
system to the south is Innisfil Creek and its tributaries. The second major system is
Lover's Creek, which is a significant coldwater system. The highway crosses a
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 12 -
April 2004
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 13 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
3.1.3 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat
community comprising 18 percent of all the vegetation communities. Refer to
Exhibit 3.1 and Appendix E for locations of vegetation communities.
The existing information for the streams located within the study area is scarce. The
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Midhurst District indicated that the
Willow Creek was a typical warmwater stream containing yellow perch, northern
pike and migrating walleye but was not able to supply any documented fish capture
records for the area. Recent electro fishing efforts by the Department of Fisheries
and Oceans at Innisfil Creek in the vicinity of Highway 400 captured rainbow trout
and sculpins, indicative of a coldwater stream.
In total, there are 17 stream crossings that are considered fish habitat within the study
area (Refer to Exhibit 3.2). These findings were based on field investigations and
supported with secondary source information. Fish communities were sampled with a
variety of gear including backpack electrofisher, mini trapnets, minnow traps and
seines. The most significant fish habitat encountered are the two Type 1 permanent
coldwater crossings at Station 12+879, and Station 13+100, south of Fourth Line, in
the Town of InnisfiL Both of these crossings are part of the same tributary of Innisfil
Creek. A total of 21 brook trout and four rainbow trout were captured at the two
crossings. The catch represented a wide cross section of sizes ranging from 86 mm to
221 mm fork length. At least six of the captured brook trout were ripe males and one
was a ripe female. The habitat was ideal for brook trout spawning with an abundance
of groundwater seepages and upwellings along with suitable substrate. The presence
of ripe fish and excellent habitat indicates that this area was being used as a spawning
area. The composition of the cover and available small seepage streams would also
provide nursery and juvenile habitat for brook trout as well. The range of sizes of the
captured brook trout supports the existence of nursery and juvenile habitat.
There are three Type 2 permanent coldwater crossings at Station 11 +030 Gust south
of Dunlop Street), Station 12+200 Gust north of Dunlop Street) and Station 12+450
Gust south of Anne Street), in City of Barrie. No species were captured to confirm
the coldwater status but the temperature and origin of the streams was consistent with
coldwater streams. There was also an abundance of watercress, which is typical of
many coldwater streams. These streams contribute baseflow downstream and likely
supported limited fisheries in the past.
The remaining crossings are Type 2 seasonal or permanent habitats. They are typical
warmwater communities consisting mainly of bait fish species.
Vegetation
Vegetation Community 1 (V1)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of approximately 640
metres and an area of 23.3 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a normal
microclimate and a moist moisture regime. Black Ash, White Elm, Red Maple, and
Silver Maple comprise the overstory layer. The shrub layer consists of White Elm,
Eastern White Cedar, Black Ash, Sandbar Willow and Red-Osier Dogwood as the
dominant species. Canada Golden Rod, New England Aster and Canada Anemone
are common in the herbaceous layer. Fringed Brome Grass and Bushy Pasture Grass
are also representative of the community. This is a wetland community and is part of
the Little Lake Provincially Significant Wetland.
Vegetation Community 2 (V2)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of only 40 metres and an
area of 1.3 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a normal microclimate and a
moist moisture regime. Black Ash, White Elm, Red Maple, and Silver Maple,
Basswood and Eastern White Cedar comprise the overstory layer. The shrub layer
consists of Basswood and Riverbank Grape as the dominant species. Canada Golden
Rod, New England Aster and Narrow-Leaved Cattail are common in the herbaceous
layer. This is a wetland community and is part of the Little Lake Provincially
Significant Wetland.
Vegetation Community 3 (V3)
This community is in fair condition and covers a distance of 1440 metres and an area
of 15.5 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a normal microclimate and a fresh
to moderately fresh moisture regime. Hard Maple, White Elm and Buckthorn
dominate the overstory. The shrub layer consists Hard Maple, American Mountain
Ash and Buckthorn. Wild Sarsaparilla, Rose-Twisted Stalk and Slender White Aster
are representative of the herbaceous layer. A small patch of Black Walnut exists just
north of Duckworth Street, at Station 16+600, in the City of Barrie.
3.1.4 Vegetation, Wetlands, Areas of Natural and
Scientific Interest (ANSI)
A total of ten distinct terrestrial forested communities were identified within the
study area composing approximately 18 percent of the study area corridor. There
were also two forested wetland communities and one non-forested wetland
community. Vegetation community 5 (Mixed Wood) was the most common
Vegetation Community 4 (V4)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of 1480 metres and an
area of 16.7 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a normal microclimate and a
fresh moisture regime. Trees in this community include White Birch, Trembling
Aspen, Largetooth Aspen, White Ash and Eastern White Cedar. The shrub layer
consists of Buckthorn, American Mountain Ash, Riverbank Grape and Eastern White
Cedar. There are some isolated stems of Bur Oak in areas that hold more moisture.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PLANNING STUDY
of Highway 89
at 11
30-95-00
F
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 Ian to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Vegetation Community 5 (V5)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of 1820 metres and an
area of 53.3 hectares of the study area corridor. It ,has a nonnal microclimate and a
very ftesh to moist moisture regime. Trees in this community include White Birch,
Trembling Aspen, Largetooth Aspen, Black Ash, Bur Oak, Balsam Fir and Eastern
White Ce~. The shrub layer consists of Red-Osier Dogwood, Nannyberry, Choke
Cherry, HIghbush Cranberry, Hawthorn, Riverbank Grape and Eastern White Cedar.
Common Strawberry, Canada Goldenrod, Sweet Coltsfoot and Lesser Pyrola are
common herbs along with Bracken Fern and Ostrich Fern.
moisture regime. Dead trees are scattered throughout this community and include
Black Ash, Eastern White Cedar and White Spruce. This marsh is dominated by
Common Cattail and fonns a patchwork of wetland and upland in conjunction with
Community 5, Mixed Wood. The irregular boundaries of this community provide
habita! for wildlif~ species that require edge habitats. It is situated at a relatively high ,
elevatIon. It proVIde,s groundwater recharge functions and baseflow maintenance to
the Lover's Creek system.
Vegetation Com.munity 10 (V1 0)
This community is in fair condition and covers a distance of 300 metres and an area
of 7.2 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a cooler than nonnal microclimate
and a very moist moisture regime. The primary tree species are Eastern White Cedar
and White Spruce with scattered Eastern White Pine. Shrubs include Buckthorn,
Balsam Fir, Virginia Creeper, Round-Leaved Dogwood, Labrador Tea and Canada
Yew. There is a relatively rich herb layer consisting of Wild Sarsaparill~ Jewelweed,
Yellow Clintonia and Spinulose Wood Fern. There is also a wide variety of mosses
including Sickle Moss, Common Brown Peat Moss, Spiky Dicranum and Schreber's
Moss. The underlying soils are predominantly organic. This community has been
compromised somewhat by the construction of a golf course adjacent to it.
Vegetation Community 6 (V6)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of 780 metres and an area
of 8.6 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a cooler than nonnal microclimate
and a moist moisture regime. Trees in this community include Black Willow
M~toba Maple, White Elm, Basswood and Eastern White Cedar. The shrub laye;
consIsts of Black Ash, Choke Cherry, Highbush Cranberry, Mountain Holly. Ground
cover includes Bittersweet Nightshade, Sensitive Fern and Green-Tongue Liverwort.
Many locations of this community receive heavy use by white-tailed deer since the
waterways provide travel corridors and the cooler than nonnal microclimate may
provide summer thermal cover.
Vegetation Community 11 (V11)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of 480 metres and an area
of 7.3 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a nonnal microclimate and a dry to
moderately fresh moisture regime. It is a monoculture of young Trembling Aspen
reclaiming fonner open ,pasture. Shrubs include Staghorn Sumac and Riverbank
Grape.
Vegetation Community 7 (V7)
This community is in poor condition and covers a distance of 520 metres and an area
of 6.6 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a nonnal to warmer than nonnal
microclimate and a moderately fresh to dry moisture regime. Trees do not dominate
this community that is largely a shrub thicket. The scattered stems include White
~irch, White Ash, White Elm and White Spruce. A non-native species, Amur Maple
IS by far the most common shrub in this community followed by Staghorn Sumac.
Ground cover is very patchy since the shrub layer is extremely thick. Bracken Ferns
occupy any openings in the shrub layer. Many of the White Birch in this community
display signs of die-back.
Vegetation Community 12 (V12)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of 260 metres and an area
of 1.3 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a cooler than nonnal microclimate
and a moist moisture regime. It is a rich community composed of Eastern White
Cedar, Black Ash, Yellow Birch, White Elm and Balsam Fir. It has a simple shrub
layer consisting of Black Ash, Choke Cherry and a thick groundcover of Canada
Mayflower, Jewelweed, Sensitive Fern, Oak Fern, Royal Fern., Lady Fern and Dwarf
Scouring Rush. A wide variety of mosses are present including Sickle Moss,
Schreber's Moss, Spiky Dicranum and Common Brown Peat Moss. The vegetation in
this community is characteristic of one where the groundwater table is at or near the
surface and there was evidence of groundwater, seepage in several locations. There
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 16 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Significant Wetlands
The study area crosses or encroaches on two Provincially Significant Wetlands
(pSW): the Little Lake PSW just south of the Highway 11 junction and the
Cookstown Hollows Swamp PSW in the area of the Highway 89 interchange.
It is recognized that the features of the PSWs discussed below are location-specific
and may not necessarily exist within the areas potentially affected by the project.
Biophysical features specific within these PSW s and potential impacts to these
features will be investigated during detail design.
Cookstown Hollows Swamp PSW
Cookstown Hollows Swamp PSW has a high hydrological significance. It provides
for a high degree of flood attenuation and also provides significant groundwater
recharge functions based on the site and soil types. This wetland is approximately
656 ha and composed of two wetland types; marsh and swamp; and sixteen distinct
vegetation communities.
There are also significant special features recognized within the swamp, including
provincially significant species such as the Caerulean Warbler and Red-shouldered
Hawk present. The observation records for these species are south of the project
limits. In addition, significant features or habitat for a number of species occur within
the wetland include colonial waterbird nesting, winter cover for wildlife, waterfowl
and fish spawning and nursery habitat.
The Cookstown Hollows Swamp PSW provides significant wildlife habitat (deer
wintering), contiguous forest cover for a number of species, breeding habitat for
amphibians. Many of the impacts on the features and functions of these. wetlands
have been discussed in sections 3.1.3, 3.1.4, and 3.1.5, covering significant
vegetation, fish and aquatic habitat and significant wildlife habitat.
Vegetation Community 13 (V13)
This community is in good condition and covers a distance of 200 metres and an area
of 3.1 hectares of the study area corridor. It has a nonnal microclimate and a moist
moisture regime. It is also a rich community composed of Silver Maple, Black Ash,
Basswood, White Elm and Hard Maple. It has a simple shrub layer consisting of
Black Ash and White Elm. A thick groundcover of Poison Ivy, Jack-in-the-Pulpit,
Sweet Coltsfoot and Clearweed is present. Ostrich Fern,. Sensitive Fern, Spinulose
Wood Fern, Meadow Horsetail and Plume Moss complete the groundcover.
Little Lake PSW
Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI)
Little Lake PSW has a high biological significance, as the area of the wetland is
relatively large in physical area with numerous vegetation communities present. This
wetland is approximately 285 ha and composed of three wetland types; marsh,
swamp and fen; and seventeen distinct vegetation communities.
Little Lake PSW also has a high sOCial significance due to the numerous resource
products with cash value present, the variety and number of recreational activities
offered by the PSW and proximity to a relatively large urban centre. The resource
products present are timber, wild .rice~ commercial fish, snapping turtles and
furbearers; documented recreational activities include hunting, nature appreciation,
fishing and canoeing/boating; and the wetland is located within the urban or
suburban area of the City of Barrie.
In addition to the above features and functions, the wetland communities within the
study area provide breeding habitat for at least one provincially significant species
(Caspian Tern). Willow Creek also provides habitat for a number of warm and
coolwater fish species including walleye, northern pike, yellow perch and white
suckers.
From a hydrological perspective, it should be noted that there is a portion of this
wetland within the study area that is fill-regulated by Nottawasaga Valley
Conservation. The riparian vegetation within the fill regulated zone contributes to
erosion control, provides a nutrient trap and attenuates stonn flows to some extent.
The fill-regulated area also contributes to the wetland's overall detention areas.
There are no designated areas of natural and scientific interest within the study area
corridor.
3.1.5 Wildlife, Wildlife Linkages/Corridors, Vulnerable,
Threatened or Endangered Species
Significant Wildlife
Secondary source infonnation (natural heritage mapping) indicates that there are
three areas of significant deer wintering habitat in the study area. Contiguous
conifer cover near a suitable food source is not in great supply within the study area.
The identified areas are fairly specialized habitat and tend to have lowland conifer
cover with areas of thick shrub growth. The large wetland complex (Innisfil
Creek/Cookstown Hollows Swamp PSW) east of Highway 400 south of Highway 89
(Exhibit 3.1) is one of the few examples near the study area that has reasonably good
contiguous forest cover. The combination of lowland conifers and groundwater
sources provide excellent summer thennal cover for ungulates. In general, the
wetland habitats provide virtually the only locations suitable for a wide range of
amphibian breeding and are significant for this reason. This type of habitat is
available in Vegetation Community 12.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
The Canada Land Inventory Mapping for land capability for waterfowl production
indicates that Little Lake and its associated wetlands are represented as Class 4 soil,
moderate limitations to the production of waterfowl. The Innisfil Creek/Lovers Creek
wetland complex is identified as Class 3S soil, slight limitations to the production of
waterfowl and serve as important migration stops. The remainder of the study area is
ide;ntified as Class 7 soil, severe limitations to the production of waterfowl.
· Official Plan for the County of Simcoe
· Official Plan for the Township of Springwater
· Aerial photography
· Site visits conducted in September 2000 and April 2001
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
Field investigations undertaken for this study focused on lateral linkages that may be
affected by the expansion of the highway footprint. Cross-linkages are already
negatively impacted by the present footprint and would experience an incremental
cumulative impact by increasing the width of the highway corridor. There were three
important linkages that connect distinct habitat types located. The most evident use
was by white-tailed deer but a wide range of wildlife use wetlands and stream valleys
as travel corridors. One area in Vegetation Community 6, south of Fourth Line at
Station 12+920, in the Town of Innisfil provides a significant linkage between
riparian hardwoods and abandoned pasture areas important for feeding. This
vegetation community offers heavy cover and acts as a travel corridor between
feeding and resting areas for deer.
Another important linkage is located south of Innisfil Beach Road, at Station 18+402,
in the Town of Innisfil on the east side of the highway. White-tailed deer traveling
along the edge of the large Innisfil Creek/Lovers Creek wetland complex mainly uses
this corridor. This linkage area is nearly 200 metres to the east of the existing right-
of-way. The final key corridor is located north of Tenth Line, at Station 23+250, in
Town of Innisfil. It links a mixed wood community to open pasture and a lowland
conifer community. This is also primarily used by white-tailed deer but is used by
other species as well (i.e. raccoon, red fox).
3.2.1 Existing Land Us.e
The study area is located within the.Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town of
Innisfil, Township of Springwater, and the City of Barrie in the County of Simcoe.
The predominant land uses within the study area is characterized by commercial and
residential development and natural features scattered throughout the study area.
Active agricultural operations are located on both sides of the highway between
Highway 89 and Innisfil Beach Road.
The following sections describe, in detail, the existing land uses within the study
area. Key land use features within the study area are illustrated in Exhibit 3.1.
Residential
Residential development along the Highway 400 corridor is generally comprised of
detached single-family dwellings, townhouse complexes, and apartment complexes.
The majority of the residential subdivisions are situated on both sides of the highway
between Essa Road interchange northerly to the Duckworth Street interchange.
Vulnerable Threatened or Endangered (VTE) Species
The Natural Heritage Information Centre databases along with the Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources (OMNR) values mapping were consulted to determine if there
were any documented observations for any VTE species. No observations or
significant habitat for VTE species were documented within or near the study area.
A list of known VTE species for Simcoe County was consulted prior to conducting
field investigations to scope the range of potential VTE species.
Community /Recreation/Institutional/Park Features
The commUnity/recreational/park features within the study area are as follows:
· Molson Park1 located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 400 and Molson
Park Drive;
· A picnic area located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 400 generally
between Molson Park Drive and Essa Road;
· Barrie Raceway (currently closed) located on the northeast quadrant of Highway
400 and Essa Road; and
· Georgian Downs Raceway located on the west side of Highway 400 between
Innisfil Beach Road and 10th Line.
There are two trailer/campground parks within the study area limits:
· KOA Campgrounds located at the northeast quadrant of Highway 400 and
Highway 89; and
· Trailer Park located in the northwest quadrant of Highway 400 and Duckworth
Street bordering Little Lake.
3.2 Socio-Economic Environment
The following sources were used to inventory existing and future land use within the study area:
· Official Plan for the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
· Official Plan for the Town of Innisfil
· Official Plan for the City of Barrie
I These lands have recently been sold and are proposed to be developed.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 17 -
April 2004
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 18 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kmSouth of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
The following institutional features are located in close proximity to the Highway
right-of-way:
· Innisfil Cemetery and Crematorium located on the northwest quadrant of
. Highway 400 and Innisfil Beach Road;
· A church located on the southeast quadrant of Highway 400 and Anne Street;
. A school located on the southeast quadrant of Highway 400 and Bayfield Street;
· OPP Station located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 400 and Bayfield
Street;
· Barrie Police Station located on the northwest quadrant of Highway 400 and St.
Vincent Street;
· Georgian College located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 400 and
Duckworth Street;
· Royal Victoria Hospital located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 400 and
Duckworth;
. A church located on the northwest quadrant of Highway 400 and Highway 11;
and
· A church located on the southeast quadrant of Highway 400 and Highway 11.
Innisfil Beach Road, Southwest Quadrant
A total of 155 vehicles were observed during the September 2000 field investigation.
The parking lot was filled to capacity, in addition to a number of vehicles parked in
non-designated spaces. This parking lot was relocated in 2003 under contract 2003-
3006.
Essa Road Interchange, Northwest Quadrant
A commuter parking lot located on the west side of Highway 400 off of Ardagh
Road. The parking lot was filled to capacity during the September 2000 field
investigation, in addition to a number of vehicles parked in non-designated spaces.
Service Centres
Commercial/Industrial Uses
Within the study area, commercial and industrial developments primarily exist along
at the interchanges of Highway 89 and Innisfil Beach Road as well as through the
City of Barrie from south of Molson Park Drive to Duckworth Street.
The major types of commercial/industrial by interchange are summarized in Table
3.5.
There are two service centres located within the study limits. A service centre is
located at the northwest quadrant of the Highway 89 interchange. Access to the
service centre is provided directly from the N-E/W ramp for southbound motorists.
Northbound motorists can access the service centre via the S-E/W ramp and
Highway 89, where a second entrance is located. The service centre includes a Petro
Canada service centre, and a McDonalds restaurant. A large parking area is located
immediately south of McDonalds. The parking lot was observed to be approximately
60% full. It appears that part of the parking lot is used as a commuter parking lot.
From the parking lot, access is provided back to the N-EIW ramp where vehicles can
access Highway 89 and Highway 400
Another service centre is located along the Highway 400 northbound lanes mid-way
between Molson Park Drive and Essa Road. Primary service centre tenants include
Petro Canada and McDonalds restaurant. The picnic area located on the north side of
the service centre is closed. The service centre has direct access to/from northbound
Highway 400.
Agricultural
There are active agricultural operations located on both sides of the highway between
Highway 89 and 10th Line in Innisfil. The primary agricultural operations include
field and plantation crops comprising of grain, vegetable and fruit production.
Tourist Information Centre
Commuter Parking Lots
There are three commuter parking lots within the study area at the following
locations:
An abandoned tourist infonnation centre is located on the northbound side of
Highway 400, north of Essa Road at Station 10+350, in the City of Barrie north of
Essa Road. The entrance ramp to the Centre has been removed. The exit ramp to
Highway 400 is still in place, however, the speed change lane for the exit ramp has
been removed.
An existing Tourist Infonnation Centre is in operation at the SE quadrant of the
.Molson Park Drive interchange.
Highway 89, Southeast Quadrant
This commuter parking lot was closed to commuters during site investigation. The
commuter lot was in the process of being expanded as part of Contract 2000-006.
Proposed improvements include increased capacity to 208 vehicles, and improved
access to the S/E- W and E/W -N Ramps.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 Ian South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 Ian to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Railway Crossings
There are two grade separated rail crossings within the project study limits. A single
track of the Barrie-Collingwood Railway crosses under Highway 400 at Station
20+194, Town of Innisfil approximately 600 metres north of Innisfil Beach Road.
Numerous tire tracks were observed under the Highway 400 structure, parallel along
the north side of the rail. It would appear that construction vehicles used the
structure for alternative access to the Georgian Downs Race Track on the west side of
Highway 400 when it was under construction. Industrial Park Road parallels
Highway 400 approximately 65 m to the east. This single Barrie-Collingwood track
crosses Industrial Park Road at-grade.
Another single track of the Barrie-Collingwood Railway crosses under Highway 400
at Station 29+355, in the City of Barrie, midway between Essa Road and Dunlop
Street.
vehicle traffic at the Essa Road interchange will increase as a result and could
potentially cause additional capacity deficiencies at this interchange.
Future development is proposed for the Molson Park lands, however, this
development is currently in the preliminary stages and specific details are not known
at this time.
According to the City of Barrie Official Plan, residential development and extended
open space is planned in the vacant lands in the area of Bayfield Street and
Duckworth Street. Secondary plans have been developed for East Bayfield Street
and Georgian Drive planning areas. .
A Special Policy Area is located north of Highway 400 and west of Duckworth Street
and is designated for a commercial development (Huronia Corporate Centre)
consisting of retail commercial uses, automotive retail, ancillary offices or hotel uses.
There is one known development application, a site plan for a future commercial use
involving approximately 18 acres in the southwestern quadrant of the Duckworth
Street interchange. There is also a proposed site plan for a hotel located in the
southwest quadrant of the Duckworth Street/Cundles Road intersection.
The Georgian Drive Secondary Plan Area contains a business park, designated in
recognition of its strategic location adjacent to the Georgian College and the Royal
Victoria Hospital. These ~e the two largest institutional land uses in the City of
Barrie, together occupying 5.5 ha. The business park is intended to attract uses
associated with and complementary to a regional hospital and major educational
institution.
Both the college and Hospital have plans for expansion. The college is preparing a
master plan, recognizing a potential increase in the student body ITom 5,000 to
15,000. The college expects an intensification of the campus that could involve the
construction of 9 to 18 new buildings. The Hospital plans a major expansion
including the construction of a regional cancer centre, emergency services expansion,
new ambulance bays, medical building, outpatient expansion and improved parking
facilities. New subdivision plans are proposed for the Georgian Drive surrounding
residential neighbourhood.
The lands adjacent to the Innisfil Beach Road / Highway 400 interchange are
developable lands within the study area and future. land use plans are expected.
Current land uses include a horse racing / gaming facility and a boat and recreational
vehicle retail business.
Because of the significant growth in Barrie, traffic volumes have increased
substantially on some of the major streets. A traffic simulation model was developed
to forecast the future travel patterns based on projected land use infonnation (Read,
Voorhees & Associates Ltd., City of Barrie Transportation Study, 1999). Refer to
Section 3.4.5 for further details on the Barrie Transportation Plan. In light of this
significant growth the City of Barrie, in 1999, updated the land use conditions and
traffic forecasts that were documented in the 1992 Barrie Transportation Study,
which provided recommendations for street plans to meet future needs.
Utilities
Ontario Hydro and Bell Canada poles are located throughout the entire study area.
The poles are generally located adjacent to the right-of-way, and are located outside
the clear zone for Highway 400.
A Bell Canada plant is proposed along the west side of Highway 400 in the vicinity
of Molson Park Drive (Station 23+900 to Station 25+300, City of Barrie).
Cable Television, Barrie Hydro, Innisfil Hydro, Simcoe County Access Network
(SCAN), and Town of Innisfil and City of Barrie utilities are located throughout the
study area.
Emergency Services
Fire and ambulance services ITom the Town of Innisfil cover the section of Highway
400 between the south project limits and Molson Park Drive. Emergency services
ITom the City of Barrie cover the section of Highway 400from Molson Park Drive to
the north of the project limits.
3.2.2 Future Developments
There are no special provincial or federal land use strategies for lands abutting
Highway 400 within the project limits.
A site plan application has been developed and filed with the Town of Innisfil to
facilitate the development of lands located at the comer of Highway 89 and Reive
Road. The proposed development includes a recreational vehicle, boat sales and
service centre.
The Ardagh Road and Essa Road area, just west of Highway 400 has recently
undergone residential and mixed commercial use development. It is expected that
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 19 -
April 2004
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.2.3 Noise
The noise impact assessment undertaken for this study examined noise levels and
potential noise impacts to noise sensitive areas (NSAs) within the study area. NSAs
are defined by the MTO Directive and include homes such as single-family
residences, townhouses, apartments, hospitals, and nursing homes. NSAs must have
outdoor living areas associated with the residential unit. The NSAs were identified
based on field visits undertaken in April 2001, available mapping of the study area
and aerial photography.
The noise analysis was performed using STAMSON v5.03, the computerized noise
model advocated by the Ministry of Environment (MOE). The following factors
were taken into account for the analysis:
· Horizontal and vertical road-receiver geometry;
· Ground absorption;
. Barrier attenuation provided by rows of houses, commercial/industrial buildings,
existing road structures and topography;
· Attenuation provided by tree areas;
· Road grade;
. Traffic volume and percentage of heavy and medium trucks; and
· Vehicle speed.
Existing (2001) and projected (2011) traffic volumes for the mainline Highway 400
was supplied in the form of Summer Average Traffic Data (SADT) and the traffic
volumes for the interchange ramps were supplied in the form of Annwil Average
Daily Traffic (AADT), as this was the best available data. Mainline Highway 400 is
the dominant source of noise in comparison to the interchange ramps.
The existing noise levels at the NSAs along the corridor ranged from 58 to 73
decibels and the future noise levels range from 60 to 75 decibels. Further details of
the noise analysis are available in the Environmental Noise Impact Assessment
Report, submitted under separate cover.
Table 3.3 identifies the existing and predicted future "no build" sound levels at
representative mainline NSAs. The locations of these receptors are shown in
drawings 3 a - p in Appendix D.
Table 3.3 Existing and Predicted Future "No Build" Sound Levels at Representative
Mainline NSAs
RECEPTOR NEAREST INTERCHANGE ExISTING PREDICTED RECEPTOR NEAREST INTERCHANGE ExIsTING PREDICTED
LoCATIONS SOUND FUTURE LOCATIONS SOUND FUTURE
LEvELS "No BUILD" LEvELS "NO BUILD"
(dBA) SOUND (dBA) SOUND
LEvELS LEvELS
(dBA) (dBA)
89H3 North of Hwv 89 66 68 BAH4 Bay eld Street 69 70
INHI0 North of Innisfil Beach Road 61 62 BAlli Bav eld Street 67 68
ESH2 Essa Road 71 73 BAH6 Bav eld Street 58 59
ESH3 EssaRoad 61 62 BAH7 Bay eld Street 71 72
ESH4 Essa Road 59 61 BAH8 Bay eld Street 70 71
ESH5 Essa Road 63 64 BAH9 Bav eld Street 69 70
ESH6 Essa Road 59 61 BAHI0 Bav eld Street 68 69
ESH7 North ofEssa Road 71 72 BAH11 Bav eld Street 66 67
ESH8 DunIOD Street 67 68 BAH12 Bav eld Street 59 60
DNA2 DunlOD Street 69 71 BAH13 Bav eld Street 59 60
DNHl Dunlon Street 67 69 BAH14 Bav eld Street 60 61
DNH2 DunloD Street 64 66 DKAl Duckworth Street 70 71
DNID DunloD Street 62 64 DKHl Duckworth Street 58 59
DNH4 DunlOD Street 68 70 DKH2 North of Duckworth Street 71 73
DNHS North of DunlOD Street 67 68 DKH3 North of Duckworth Street 63 65
BAHl Bavi eld Street 72 74 DKH4 North of Duckworth Street 73 75
BAH2 Bav! eld Street 66 67 DKH5 North of Duckworth Street 71 73
BAID Bavi eld Street 69 70
3.2.4 Aesthetics
Landscape Features
Within the Highway 400 corridor there are several landscape components that
provide aesthetic views.
The following summarizes the landscape features within the Highway 400 corridor:
. Cookstown Hollows Swamp PSW (13th Concession to Highway 89) a
significant landscape feature that contains mature forest communities and linear
hedgerows;
. From Highway 89 to Innisfil Beach Road the primary feature is agricultural
landscape with scattered clusters of trees and forest communities;
. Lover's Creek Valley (eastside ofInnisfil Beach Road) contains mature trees;
. From Innisfil Beach Road to Molson Park Drive the landscape is agricultural and
commercial land use with small fragments of the Lover's Creek Valley along the
eastside of the highway and the Allendale Bluffs Bear Creek Valley encroaching
the westside of the highway;
. From Molson Park Drive to Essa Road there are no notable landscape features
along this section of the highway that provide aesthetic views given the
industrial and commercial character of this section of the Highway 400 corridor;
and
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 20-
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 Ian to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
· From Essa Road to Duckworth Street there are no notable landscape features
along this section of the highway that provide aesthetic views given the
commercial and residential land use adjacent to the right-of-way.
Sensitive Viewer Groups
Sensitive viewer groups within . the Highway 400 corridor include primarily
residential communities ,directly abutting or adjacent to the highway. In total,
approximately 150 single family residences, 15 townhouse complexes, 35 apartment
buildings were identified as being sensitive viewer groups.
City of Barrie Landscaping Agreements
There are legal agreements between the City of Barrie and owners of private
properties within the study area that include provisions for landscaped areas or
plantings on the private lands.
3.2.5 Property Waste and Contamination
Field investigations regarding property waste and contamination and waste material
were conducted on December 15, 2000 and March 12, 2001. Based on field
investigations, several properties were identified along the right-of-way (ROW) as
having potential for contaminated soils. Land use types of the properties identified
include industrial, commercial and agricultural. Additional details are outlined in a
Property Waste and Contamination report, submitted under separate cover.
There were no environmental concerns observed within the right-of-way, with the
exception of the known Trichloroethylene (TCE) impacted groundwater plume under
the Highway 400 'right-of-way, south of the Tiffin Street overpass in the City of
Barrie. Presence of TCE in the Highway 400 right-of-way (ROW) was identified in a
report published in January 1999. The report was prepared for an owner of a
property ,to the west of Highway 400. MTO is not responsible for causing the
contamination. At the time this report is being published, MTO is responding to an
Order from the Ministry of Environment (MOE) for the investigation and
management of the TCE contamination. Any future design and construction work in
this area must take account of this issue. The extent and nature of the TCE impacted
groundwater plume should be specifically investigated during detail design, to
address health and safety and the potential generation of soil and groundwater waste.
Numerous active farming operations are present along the right-of-way, but no
specific issues of potential environmental concern were noted at the farm properties.
However, farming operations typically include vehicle maintenance and refueling,
historical waste disposal and fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide storage. During detail
design, mitigation measures should be detennined on a case-by-case basis where
farm properties are to be acquired and include the farm buildings (as opposed to
fields).
3.3
3.4
Cultural Environment
3.3.1 Archaeological Resources
Based on an inventory and review of archaeological resources complied for the study
area, it was detennined that no archaeological sites have been registered within the
study area. Eighteen sites, however, have been registere9 within a radius of two
kilometers of the study area limits. Details of these registered sites are available in
the Archaeological Assessment Study (submitted under separate covet).
3.3.2 Built Heritage Resources
A built heritage and cultural landscape field review was undertaken in September
2000. The review identified that no structures located in the study area designated
under the Ontario Heritage Act. Based on the field investigations, however, eleven
built heritage features and twenty-nine cultural landscape units were identified.
The Archaeological Assessment Study (submitted under separate cover) provides a
list of the built heritage features and cultural landscape units located within the study
area.
Traffic Operations Analysis
Operational improvements required to address traffic conditions for the existing, short-term
(2001), mid-term (2006) and long-term (2011) planning horizons are identified in the Highway
400 Traffic Operations Study Report and Preliminary' Design Report, submitted under separate
cover. The traffic operations analysis undertaken for this study is provided in detail the
Highway 400 Traffic Operations Study Report.
The analysis reviewed reports, references and data from a variety of sources including the
Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO), Simcoe County, and the City of Barrie.
3.4.1 Existing Mainline Operations
Existing Design Hour Volumes (DHVs) for the Highway 400 segments were derived
from 1999 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT), obtained from the MTO. A
summary of existing directional DHV for the Highway 400 study area is provided in
Table 3.4.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
~ 21 -
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 22-
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@
Table 3.4 Highway 400 Existing Directional Design Hour Volumes
HIGHWAY CORRIDOR SeCTION 1999 EXISTING
Simcoe Road 88 to Hi wa 89 4000
Hi wa 89 to Innisfil Beach Road 4300
Innisfil Beach Road to Molson Park Drive 4200
Molson Park Drive to Essa Road 4200
Essa Road to Dunlo Street 5100
Dunlo Street to Ba eld Street 5100
Ba eld Street to Duckworth Street 3800
Duckworth Street to Hi wa 11 Junction 3500
Mainline level of Service (LOS) and capacity analysis was undertaken using the
methodologies described in the Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways.
For the study purposes, acceptable LOS is defined as LOS "c" or better and
undesirable LOS is defined as LOS "D" or worse.
Each different level of service (LOS "A" to LOS "F") as they pertain to this study are
described as follows:
3.4.2 Existing Interchange Operations
Interchange operations were analyzed in terms of weaving section, ramp junction,
and ramp terminal operations.
In addition to the traffic issues discussed in this section, there are geometric
conSiderations at each interchange. Overall, the current ramp geometries and
interchange configurations do not satisfy current Ministry standards. More detailed
discussion of the interchange geometrics is provided in the Existing Conditions
Report and in Chapter 5 of the Preliminary Design Report, submitted under separate
cover.
LOS DEFINITION
A Excellent - Represents free flow conditions
B Good - Stable flow with negligible impact on operating speeds
C Acceptable - Stable flow and driver comfort and convenience
deteriorates rapidly beyond this level.
LOS A B and C = l. rovements not warranted
Highway 89 Interchange
Under existing conditions, the Highway 89 interchange ramp junctions operate
within acceptable LOS. Both unsignalized Highway 400/Highway 89 ramp terminals
operating at an undesirable level of service for the minor approaches. This is due to
lack of available gaps on Highway 89 during the design hour. As a result, queues
may occur on ramp approaches, which may affect mainline operations.
A commuter parking lot is currently located in the southeast quadrant of the
interchange. Existing utilization of the commuter parking lot is moderate.
Approximately 90 of 150 parking spaces were occupied during the site visit. Based
on the assumption of two vehicle trips per parking space occupied per hour, it was
estimated that approximately 180 vehicle trips are parking lot usage related. The
traffic impacts of the parking lot compared to the overall E/W-N and S-E/W ramp
volumes are significant.
Indicates undesirable level of service.
Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
Under existing conditions, Innisfil Beach Road interchange ramp junctions operate
within acceptable LOS. Unsignalized intersections at Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe
Road 21 ramp terminals operate at an undesirable level of service. As a result,
queues occur on ramp approaches, which could affect mainline operations. The
Ministry installed traffic signals at these intersections in 2003.
A commuter parking lot was located in the southwest quadrant of the interchange at
the time the traffic operations analysis was carried out for this study. Utilization of
the commuter parking lot was high. All 155 parking spaces were occupied during the
site visit. Based on the assumption of two vehicle trips per parking space occupied
per hour, it is estimated that approximately 300 vehicle trips were related to the
commuter parking lot usage. Trirffic impacts of the parking lot relative to the overall
E/W-S and N-E ramp volumes were high.
The commuter parking lot was recently relocated during the interchange
reconstruction in 2003. The new commuter parking lot consists of271 spaces, and is
located in the northeast quadrant of the interchange. The new access to the
commuter parking lot will be via Industrial Park Road.
Based on the corridor analysis, Highway 400 mainline segments mostly operate
within acceptable levels of service (LOS "c" or better) under existing conditions
except for the sections from Essa to Dunlop and from Dunlop to Bayfield. These
segments operate at LOS "D" under existing traffic conditions.
In addition, several geometric and roadside features along Highway 400, including
median barriers, median shoulders, illumination and vertical curves, do not meet
current Ministry standards.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-OO
Molson Park Drive Interchange
Under existing conditions, Molson Park Drive interchange ramp junctions and ramp
terminals operate within acceptable LOS.
3.4.3
Future Mainline Operations
Future Highway 400 traffic operations issues are the result of increased traffic on
Highway 400 and the local road network. This increase is due primarily to increasing
commuter traffic within the project limits.
Generally, Highway 400 segments are expected to experience four to six percent'
annual growth in traffic between 1999 and 2011. Level of service wilt become
undesirable (LOS "D" or worse) from Highway 89 to Bayfield Street by 2001. By
2006, the LOS of the entire length Highway 400 within the project limits is expected'
to operate at LOS "D" or worse. With the exception of the segment from Duckworth
Street to the north project limit, Highway 400 will be operating over capacity (LOS
"F") by 2011.
To address 2001 traffic demands, widening from six to eight lanes will be required
from the Innisfil Beach Road to Essa Road. By 2006, widening from six to eight
lanes will be required from the south project limit to Innisfil Beach Road and from
Bayfield Street to Duckworth Street. Also, Highway 400 will require widening to ten
lanes from Essa Road to Bayfield Street. The table below summarizes the number of
lanes required on Highway 400 to address traffic demands for the present and the
2001, 2006 and 2011 horizon years.
By 2011, eight lanes will be required between the south project limit and Essa Road.
Although there will be eight paved lanes, the cross section will be wide enough to
accommodate one additional lane per direction to provide additional capacity beyond
2011. From Essa Road to Bayfield Street, ten lanes will be required on Highway 400.
From Bayfield to Duckworth Street, eight lanes will be required.
Table 3.5 Highway 400 Lane Requirements by Horizon Year*
Essa Road Interchange
Under existing conditions, Essa Road interchange ramp junctions operate within
acceptable LOS. Signalized intersections at Essa Road ramp terminals operate
within acceptable levels of service except for the intersection of Essa Road and
Fairview Drive, which currently operates at capacity during the design hour.
Dunlop Street Interchange
Under existing conditions, most Dunlop Street interchange ramp junctions operate
undesirably (LOS "D"), except for the E/W -N and E/W -S ramp junctions, which
operate within acceptable levels of service. Undesirable levels of service at these
locations are due to high volumes on the freeway. The unsignalized W-N ramp
tenninal is operating within acceptable levels' of service. The signalized intersection
at Dunlop Street and Hart Drive operates within acceptable levels of service. The
signalized intersection of Dunlop Street and Cedar Pointe Drive operates at capacity
during the design hour. As a result, queues occur on ramp approaches, which can
affect mainline operations.
Bayfield Street Interchange
Under existing conditions, all Highway 26/Bayfie14 Street interchange ramp
junctions operate within' acceptable levels of service (LOS "c" or better)~ Both
signalized Highway 400/Bayfield Street ramp terminals operate at poor LOS. As a
result, queues can occur at the ramp approaches, which can affect mainline access
and operations. .
MAINLINE SECTIONS
Simcoe Road 88 to Hi wa 89
Hi wa 89 to Innisfil Beach Road
Innisfil Beach Road to Molson Park Drive
Molson Park Drive to Essa Road
Essa Road to Dunlo Street
Dunlo Street to Ba eld Street
Ba eld Street to Duckworth Street
Duckworth Street to Hi hwa 11
2006
8
8
8
8
10
10
8
2011
8
8
8
8
10
10
8
Duckworth Street Interchange
Under existing conditions, Duckworth Street interchange ramp junctions operate
within acceptable levels of service. The unsignalized intersection of Duckworth
Street and Cundles Road operates at LOS "F" for the minor approaches. Minor
approaches are experiencing delays due to few available gaps on Duckworth Street.
As the result, queues occur at the ramp approach, which can affect mainline
operations. Signalized intersections at Duckworth/Georgian and DuckworthlBell
Farm operate within acceptable levels of service (LOS "A").
Indicates existing number of lanes
* Requirements are based on traffic demand only and do not reflect or indicate
commitments for construction.
Highway 400/Highway 11 Junction
Highway 400 Extension/Highway 11 interchange was analyzed as a major merge and
major diverge junction. Traffic analysis revealed that this section of Highway 400
operates below capacity under existing design hour volumes.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 23-
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kin South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kin to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 24 _
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.4.4 Future Interchange Operations
Highway 89 Interchange
By the 2006 horizon, the W-S ramp junction is expected to operate at LOS "D",
while all other ramp junctions at the interchange are expected to operate at this LOS
by 2011. In general, significant increases in through volumes on the freeway will
result in the undesirable ramp junction operations. The signalized intersection at
Highway 89/Southbound ramp terminals is expected to operate at LOS "D" by 2011.
unstable flow and significant reductions in speed on the freeway. Queuing on the
freeway is expected where ramp junctions operate at LOS "E" or worse. All ramps
will reach this LOS prior to 2011. A traffic signal control for the intersection at
Dunlop StreetJE/W-N ramp is warranted by 2006. This intersection will operate at a
poor LOS by 2011. The signalized intersection of Dunlop Street and Cedar Pointe .
Drive is expected t9 fail by 2001. As a result of poor ramp tenninal operations,
queues may form on the ramps, affecting freeway access and operations.
Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
The E-N, W-S, and E-S ramp junctions are expected to operate at LOS D by 2006.
All ramp junctions are expected to operate at undesirable LOS by 2011. Poor ramp
operations at these ramp junctions may result in unstable flow and significant
reduction in speed on the mainline. Queuing on the freeway is expected where ramp
junctions operate at LOS "E" or worse. Signalized intersections at Innisfil Beach
Road/Simcoe Road 21 ramp terminals are expected to operate at LOS D prior to
2006 and fail (LOS "F") by 2006. As a result, queues are expected to form on
Highway 400 ramps, affecting freeway access and operations.
Bayfield Street Interchange
By 2001, the S-E/W ramp junction will operate at LOS "D". The EIW-N and W-S
ramp junctions will operate at an undesirable LOS by 2006. All ramp junctions, with
the exception of the N-EIW ramp, will operate at an undesirable LOS by 2011. Ramp
junctions with poor operations may result in unstable flow and significant reduction
in speed on the freeway. Queuing on the freeway is expected where ramp junctions
operate at LOS "E" or worse. The S-E/W and EIW-N ramps will operate at this level
prior to 2011. Both signalized east and west ramp terminals at the Highway
26/Bayfield Street interchange are expected to continue operating at an undesirable
LOS through 2011. As a result, queues are expected to form, which may affect
mainline access and operations.
Molson Park Drive Interchange
By 2006, the S-EIW and EIW -N ramp junctions will operate at an undesirable LOS
"D". By 2011, all ramp junctions will fail (LOS "F"), with the exception of the EIW-
S junction, which will operate at LOS "D". All signalized ramp terminals are
expected to operate at LOS "F" by 2006. As a result, queues may form on the
Highway 400 ramps, affecting freeway access and operations.
Duckworth Street Interchange
The E-S ramp is expected to operate at an undesirable LOS by 2011. The other
interchange ramps will operate within acceptable LOS through to 2001. Signal
control for the Duckworth StreetlCundles Road intersection is warranted under the
2006 horizon traffic volumes. Under signal control, the intersection is expected to
operate at LOS "F" by 2011. By 2006, the intersection at Duckworth Street / Bell
Farm is expected at an undesirable LOS. All signalized intersections will operate at
undesirable LOS by 2011.
Essa Road Interchange
The E-N ramp junction will operate at an undesirable LOS "D" by 2001. By 2006,
the N-EIW ramp junction will fail. All ramp junctions will fail by 2011. Ramp
junctions with poor operations may result in unstable flow and significant reduction
in speed on the freeway. Queuing on the freeway is expected where a ramp junction
operates at LOS "E" or worse. The Essa Road/Fairview Road signalized intersection
is expected to fail by 2001. The signalized intersection of Essa Road/N-EIW ramp
will fail by 2006. All intersections within the interchange will operate unacceptably
by 2011. As a result, queues are expected to form on the Highway 400 ramps,
affecting freeway access and operations.
Dunlop Street Interchange
The S-E, S-W, and N-EIW ramp junctions are expected to operate at undesirable
levels by 2001. By 2006, all ramp junctions will operate unacceptably, with the
exception of the EIW-N ramp, which is expected to operate at LOS "C" by 2006 and
fail between 2006 and 20 ll. Ramp junctions with poor operations will likely result in
3.4~S Future Municipal Initiatives
Barrie Transportation Plan
The City of Barrie Transportation Study, April 1999 used a traffic simulation model
to forecast the future travel patterns based on projected land use information (Read,
Voorhees & Associates Ltd., City of Barrie Transportation Study, 1999).
The study identified the road improvement program noting the proposed staging of
road improvements, although the actual staging would vary depending on the pace of
growth, structural condition of the roads and available funds. The improvement plan
aimed to address the known structural deficiencies in the road system and the
improvements required to carry the projected increases in traffic based on the 10 to
15 and 20 year projected population and employment growth. Some of the key
elements of the improvement plan for major roads (new subdivisions excluded)
divided into time period are as follows:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kin South of Highway 89 Northerty 30 kin to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
1-5 Year Projects
· Widen Anne Street from Dunlop Street southerly to Essa Road
· Widen Dunlop Street west of Highway 400 to five lanes
· Left turn lane improvements at Bayfield Street intersections south of Highway
400
· Widen Dunlop Street to seven lanes from Anne Street to Highway 400 including
the structure over Highway 400
· Widen Bayfield Street to seven lanes north of Cundles Road
· Widen Essa Road (Femdale to Ardagh Road)
3.4.6 Highway Features
Due to changes in MTO standards, several roadside safety features do not comply
with current desigp criteria. Similarly, a number of ramp and interchange
configurations do not comply with current geometric standards. Details of the
roadside safety features are provided in the Traffic Operations Study Report and the
Existing Conditions Report, submitted under separate cover.
A box beam guiderail system, which does not satisfy current MTO standards, is
provided in the median of Highway 400 through most of the project limits. The
majority of the guiderail along the outside lanes is three-cable guiderail, with steel
beam guiderail used on approach to structures.
There is. no illumination along Highway 400 through the project limits. Partial
illumination is provided at most of the interchanges. With the exception of Molson
Park Drive and the Duckworth Street interchanges, all of the light standards do not
meet current Ministry standards.
The median width is generally 3.0 metres. The paved median includes a box beam
guiderail and provides for a 1.0 metre left shoulder in both directions. The left
shoulder width does not satisfy current MTO standards.
There are 42 mainline vertical curves within the study limits~ Eight of these curves do
not satisfy the MTO standards for design speed of 120 km/h. One of the eight curves
does not satisfy the MTO standards for the posted speed of 100 km/h. Further
discussion of these vertical curves and geometric and roadside features mentioned
above is provided in the Existing Conditions Report and the Preliminary Design
Report, submitted under separate cover.
6 -10 Year Projects
· Widen Anne Street north from Dunlop Street west to Cundles Road West
· Widen sections ofEssa Road including the Highway 400 structure
· Widen Cundles Road east to Duckworth Street
· Widen Harvie Road, build structure under Highway 400 to Big Bay Point Road
· Widen Dunlop Street west from Femdale Drive to Miller Drive
11 -15 Year Projects
· Widen Duckworth Street (Cundles Road east to Georgian Drive) including the
structure under Highway 400
· Widen Bayfield StreetlHighway'400 structure
3.4.7 Improvement Recommendations
16 - 20 Year Projects
· Widen Tiffm Street from Anne Street to Femdale Drive including the Highway
400 structure
· Additional widening of Dunlop Street from Highway 400 to F emdale Drive to
seven lanes
· Widen Sunnidale Road (Cundles Road to Wellington Street) including structure
at Highway 400
· Widen Bayfield Street (Cundles Road to Highway 400)
· Widen Anne Street north at Highway 400 including structure
· These road improvements will aim to address the increased traffic in the
municipality as well as to improve the road deficiencies
This section addresses the overall corridor requirements, in terms of number of lanes
required to maintain an acceptable Level of Service (LOS). Improvement
requirements are categorized into three planning horizons: short-term (2001); mid-
term (2006); and long-term (2011).
Short-term (2001) Improvement Requirements
Highway 400 required corridor improvements by 2001 horizon year include:
· Widen Highway 400 to 8 lanes between Essa Road to Dunlop Street; and
· Widen Highway 400 to 8 lanes between Dunlop Street to Bayfield Street.
Based on traffic volumes, there are no ramp junction improvements required in 2001.
Intersection improvements by 2001 are required for the following locations:
· Highway 89 at Highway 400 east and west ramp terminals (improvement
completed in 2000);
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 25 -
Apri/2004
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 26 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
· Innisfil Beach Road at Highway 400 east and west ramp terminals (improvement
planned in 2001);
. Innisfil Beach Road at Industrial Park Road (improvement planned in 2001);
· Essa Road at Highway 400 east ramplFairview Road;
· . Dunlop Street at Highway 400 west ramps/Cedar Pointe Drive;
· Highway 26/Bayfield Street at Highway 400 east ramps; and
· Duckworth Street at Highway 400 west ramp/Cundles Road.
Long-term (2011) Improvement Requirements
Highway 400 required corridor improvements by 2011 include:
. Widen Highway 400 to 10 lanes between Essa Road to Dunlop Street; and
. Widen Highway 400 to 8 lanes between Bayfield Street to Duckworth Street.
Required ramp junction improvements by 2011 include:
· Highway 89 N-E/W ramp;
· Highway 89 E/W -S ramp;
· Innisfil Beach Road S-E/W ramp;
· Innisfil Beach Road N-E/W ramp;
· Innisfil Beach Road E-S ramp;
· Innisfil Beach W-S ramp;
· Molson Park Drive S-E/W ramp;
· Molson Park Drive E/W -N ramp;
· Molson Park Drive N-E/W ramp;
· Essa Road S-E/W ramp;
· Essa Road W-N ramp;
· Essa Road E-N ramp;
· Essa Road E/W -S ramp;
· Dunlop Street S- W ramp;
· Dunlop Street E/W-N ramp; and
· Bayfield Street E/W-N ramp.
Intersection improvements by 2011 are required for the following locations:
· Molson Park Drive at Highway 400 east ramps;
. Dunlop Street at Highway 400 W:-N ramps (in addition to signalization);
. Duckworth Street at Highway 400 east ramps/Georgian Drive; and
. Duckworth Street at Highway 400 west ramps/Cundles Road (in addition to
signalization).
It should be noted that since operations of ramp junctions, weave sections, and
mainline segments are closely related, improvements to the mainline will generally
benefit ramp junction and weaving section operations as well. As the result, ramp
junction requirements in the later years maybe superceded by mainline improvement
requirements.
Mid-term (2006) Improvement Requirements
Highway 400 required corridor. improvements by 2006 horizon year include:
, .
. Widen Highway 400 t08 lanes between south project limits to Innisfil Beach
Road;
. Widen Highway 400 to 8 lanes between Innisfil Beach Road to Molson Park
Drive;
. Widen Highway 400 to 8 lanes between Molson Park Drive to Essa Road; and
· Widen Highway 400 to lO lanes between Dunlop Street to Bayfield Street.
Required ramp junction improvements by 2006 include:
· Essa Road N-E/W ramp;
· Dunlop Street S-E ramp;
· Dunlop Street N-E/W ramp;
· Dunlop Street E/W -S ramp; and
· Bayfield Street S-E/W ramp.
Intersection improvements by 2006 are required for the foliowing locations:
. Innisfil Beach Road at Industrial Park Road/Commerce Park Drive (in addition
to 2003 improvement);
. ,Innisfil Beach Road at Highway 400 west ramps (in addition to 2003
improvement);
. Innisfil Beach Road at Highway 400 east ramps (in addition to 2003
improvement);
· Molson Park Drive at Hig4way 400 west ramps;
· Molson Park Drive at Barrie View Drive;
· Essa Road at Highway 400 west ramps; and
· Highway 26/Bayfield Street at Highway 400 west ramps.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
4 DESIGN ALTERNATIVES AND EVALUATION
4.1 Problem Statement
The problems addressed in this study relate to deficiencies in the transportation network, which
include roadside safety, structmal and futerchange geometrics and operations for Hi~way 400
from 1.0 kilometre south of Highway 89 northerly to the junction at Highway 11.
Improvements to this section of the Highway 400 corridor are required to accommodate existing
and future recreational, commuter and commercial travel needs.
4.2 Existing Problems
Highway 400 Mainline
Currently, Highway 400 mainline operates within acceptable levels of service (LOS "c" or
better), except for the section in the city of Barrie from Essa Road to Bayfield Street. This
section experiences congestion during peak travel periods. The LOS for the Highway 400
mainline is provided in Table 4.1. Design Hour Volumes are provided in Table 3.4 in Section
3.4.1. Existing mainline operations are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 3. In addition,
several geometric and roadside features along Highway 400 require upgrading to meet current
Ministry standards, including roadside safety, illumination, drainage features, median barriers,
median shoulders and vertical curves.
Table 4.1 Highway 400 Corridor Existing Level of Service
HIGHWAY CORRIDOR SECTION 1999 EXISTING
Simcoe Road 88 to Highwav 89 C
Hil!hwav 89 to Innisfil Beach Road C
Innisfil Beach Road to Molson Park Drive C
Molson Park Drive to Essa Road C
Essa Road to Dunlop Street D
Dunlop Street to Bayfield Street D
Bavfield Street to Duckworth Street C
Duckworth Street to HiQhwav 11 Junction C
Highway 400 Interchanges
Overall, the current ramp geometries and interchange configurations require upgrading to
improve safety and meet current Ministry design standards. Geometries, including ramp radii,
sight distance, horizontal and vertical alignments and speed change lane lengths, require
improvement.
Existing operational problems at interchanges include queuing on ramps at Highway 89, Innisfil
Beach Road, Bayfield Street and Duckworth as a result of undesirable LOS at the ramp tenninal
@ Ontario
intersections at the crossing roads, which may impact traffic flow and operations on the
Highway 400 mainline. At Dunlop Street, undesirable levels of service at the ramp junctions
due to high volumes on Highway 400 result in queuing on the ramps and may impact traffic
flow and operations on Highway 400. Existing traffic operations are discussed in greater detail
in Section 3.4 of this report and in the Traffic Operations Study Report, submitted under
separate cover.
4.3 Future Problems
Highway 400 Mainline
Due to the anticipated future development within the City of Barrie and surrounding areas,
traffic volumes will continue to increase, traffic operations will deteriorate and congestion on
Highway 400 will worsen. By 2006, the LOS of the entire length Highway 400 within the
project limits is expected to operate at LOS "D" or worse with the existing six lane cross
section. With the exception of the segment from Duckworth Street to the north project limit,
Highway 400 will be operating over capacity (LOS "F") by 2011. Future lane requirements on
Highway 400 for each of the horizon years are provided in Table 3.5 and levels of service for
each of the horizon years is provided below. Future mainline traffic operations are discussed in
greater detail in Section 3.4 of this report and in the Traffic Operations Study Report, submitted
under separate cover.
Table 4.2 Highway 400 Future Level of Service
HIGHWAY CORRIDOR SECTION 2001
Simcoe Road 88 to Hi wa 89 C
Hi wa 89 to Innisfil Beach Road
Innisfil Beach Road to Molson Park Drive
Molson Park Drive to Essa Road
Essa Road to Dunlo Street
Dunlo Street to Ba eld Street
Ba eld Street to Duckworth Street
Duckworth Street to Hi wa II Junction
Indicates undesirable LOS
This will lead to the potential for collisions, trip delays and the associated waste of energy
resources, increased cost of moving goods, significant diversion of traffic to other adjacent
roadways and increased driver frustration.
Highway 400 Interchanges
Traffic volumes at all of the interchange ramps will exceed capacity by 2011. This could result
in queuing onto Highway 400 mainline and negatively affect traffic operations and safety.
Future interchange traffic operations are discussed in greater detail in Section 3.4 of this report
and in the Traffic Operations Study Report, submitted under separate cover.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
-27- URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
4.4 Alternatives to the Undertaking
The purpose of the undertaking is to resolve the identified operational concerns and to address
existing and future capacity needs. Specific objectives are to:
. Provide a reasonable level of service for long distance movement of people and goods;
. Provide a reasonable level of service for the movement of people and goods in the direct
study area;
· Improve traffic operations; and
· Improve highway geometric characteristics.
Consistent with the Environmental Assessment Act, Alternatives to the Undertaking were
examined to detennine which alternatives were considered reasonable. For this study, the
judgment of reasonableness was based on the degree to which an alternative resolves the
transportation problems identified, or to take advantage of a transportation opportunity.
Alternatives to the undertaking were assessed based on the advantages and disadvantages of
each alternative. The assessments of the Alternatives to the Undertaking are provided below:
Do Nothing
The' "Do Nothing" alternative maintains the status quo of transportation infrastructure and
services, with no significant changes or actions being taken to either manage demand, expand
infrastructure, or improve operations. Traffic volumes in the Highway 400 corridor are expected
to continue to increase. To do nothing would result in further deterioration of the level of
service, resulting in an increase in travel time, congestion, potential for collisions, and increased
fuel consumption. The consequences of the "Do Nothing" approach suggest that action must be
. tak~n to address the existing and projected deficiencies of Highway 400.
Traffic Operations Improvements
The implementation of a traffic management system would infonn the driver of problems ahead;
and with ramp metering, the use of available highway capacity could be improved by an
increase in the range of 5% to 10% (as observed on the QEW in Mississauga). This would delay
but not eliminate the need for improvements.
Transportation Demand Management
Managing transportation demand includes the implementation of measures to sufficiently
reduce, shift, or eliminate transportation demand, such that improved transportation
infrastructure within the study limits is not required. Such measures would be difficult to
implement effectively over such a large road network. In addition, managing transportation
demand would likely not reduce demand sufficiently or eliminate the need to improve any of the
identified deficiencies on Highway 400. The Ministry of Transportation recognizes the benefits
of managing transportation demand and is proposing various measures to reduce demand,
including the provision of commuter parking lots and High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes.
Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Adjacent Road System Improvements
Improvements to other existing parallel roads would not adequately solve the problems in the
Highway 400 corridor. The parallel roads within the study limits are generally arterial roads
designed to provide local access, and are not suitable for carrying high-speed, long distance
traffic. As such, these roads would provide limited diversion for Highway 400 through-traffic.
Improving the arterial road network to serve long distance traffic is not a desirable solution and
will not be considered further.
Localized Geometric Improvements
Localized geometric improvements would improve traffic operations along the corridor, but
would not adequately address the capacity deficiencies.
Vehicle Occupancy Increase
This alternative would involve reducing the number of vehicles along major highways by
encouraging ridesharing. Commuter parking facilities already exist along the corridor and more
improvements to encourage increased vehicle occupancy are proposed along the corridor.
Measures to increase vehicle occupancy are not likely to reduce demand enough such that no
other improvements are required. This alternative may defer the timing for the improvements,
but would not eliminate the need.
Rail and Transit Expansion
Rail and transit expansion would provide a more competitive choice of travel modes for some
users of Highway 400 and, thus, reduce the traffic volumes somewhat on Highway 400.
Specifically, transit expansion within the City of Barrie would reduce some inter-city travel.
However, inter-city travel volumes comprise a relatively small percentage of Highway 400
traffic through Barrie and would not address corridor travel demand.
The Province of Ontario recently announced initiatives to expand transit systems in the Golden
Horseshoe and resumed responsibility for GO Transit. While both of these events may lead to
increased capacity of transit networks, the capacity of overall transportation network in the
Highway 400 corridor will not be increased sufficiently to eliminate the need for roadway-based
improvements. This alternative alone would not adequately ad4ress travel demand throughout
the project limits.
Combination of Non-Freeway Capacity Alternatives
The combination of all of the previously stated alternatives would not sufficiently address
projected future travel demand. Based on the current transportation plans of the governnient
ministries and agencies that would be involved in providing the combination of alternatives,
achieving a timely implementation to sufficiently meet the travel demands of the corridor is
unlikely. Further, while each of the previously stated alternatives may contribute to delaying
the need for additional improvements, together they would not adequately offset the need for
highway improvements within the planning horizon of this study.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 28-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Ontari.o
Freeway Capacity Improvements
This alternative would provide the needed capacity to improve Highway 400 to an acceptable
level of service. It also would provide the opportunity to improve the facility to current
Ministry standards. As such, this alternative will be carried forward for further consideration.
To accommodate future (2011) traffic volumes, the following Highway 400 improvements are
required:
· Eight lanes between the south project limit and Essa Road;
· Ten lanes between Essa Road and Bayfield Street;
· Eight lanes from Bayfield Street to the north project limit; and
· Upgrading the Highway 400 interchanges within the project limits to Ministry standards.
· Highway 400 Mainline Alternatives
· Highway 400 Interchange Alternatives
The alternatives developed considered the information gathered on the existing natural, socio-
economic and cultural environments. The objectives in developing the various mainline and
interchange alternatives included the avoidance and/or reduction of impacts to significant
. natural, social, economic, and cultural features, as well as improving transportation service. In
the generation of interchange alternatives, opportunities to improve traffic operations, access to
local network, and incorporate land uses more compatible with transportation improvements
(Le, vacant, undeveloped lands or areas in transition to less sensitive uses) were considered. The
impacts associated with each of the mainline and interchange alternatives described in this
section were assessed as described in Section 4.6. The assessment of impacts were used to
evaluate the alternatives to determine which ones are technically preferred. The objective of this
process was to select an alternative for each component (interchanges and mainline) that
resulted in the lowest overall impacts and provided acceptable traffic operations. The evaluation
of the alternatives are provided in Section 4.7.
Provincial Highway Network Expansion
The Ministry is planning a new parallel transportation corridor west of Highway 400.
Considering the length of the corridor and the anticipated timeframe for approvals and
construction, a new parallel. highway in this corridor would not address the immediate and
medium term capacity deficiencies of the Highway 400 corridor. Projected traffic volumes on
Highway 400 will exceed the existing capacity in some sections within five years.
In June 2002, the Ministry completed the Simcoe Area Transportation Network Needs
Assessment Study, which will guide longer range (30 year) planning for provincial
transportation facilities in the Simcoe County area. This study made recommendations for rail,
transitways and highway improvements. The Simcoe Study determined that there is a need to
widen the Highway 400, as well as to plan for a new transportation corridor to the west of
Highway 400, extending from Highway 427 northerly around Barrie. The MiniStry is initiating
the Terms of Reference for the planning of this new transportation corridor around Barrie.
4.5.1 Highway 400 Mainline Alternatives
The project was divided into the following two sections for the purposes of
developing and evaluating mainline widening alternatives.
· From Highway 89 to Essa Road (through the Town oflnnisfil); and
· From Essa Road to the Highway 11 Junction (through the City of Barrie).
The division was necessary to address the different needs of the two sections. The
land use from Highway 89 to Essa Road is predominately rural and the section from
just north of Essa Road to the Highway 11 Junction is urban. Operational and
maintenance issues would, therefore, differ for the two sections. As well, a widening
of Highway 400 through the former section to eight lanes would be required based on
future (2011) traffic operations, while a widening to ten lanes through the City of
Barrie from Essa Road up to Bayfleld Street would be required. Based on future
traffic operations, a core-distributor system was also considered for Highway 400
through the City of Barrie. Given the differences in land use and future requirements
of Highway 400 from Highway 89 to Essa Road and from Essa Road to Highway 11,
the project was divided into sections in which alternatives appropriate to each section
were developed.
Recommended Alternative to the Undertaking
Improvements to traffic capacity and operations are warranted on Highway 400 through the
project limits. The assessment of Alternatives to the Undertaking concluded that the preferred
alternative is "freeway capacity improvements". The capacity and operational improvements
are proposed to be achieved through widening Highway 400. As per the preceding discussion,
while the other alternatives either improve capacity or reduce/manage demand, none of the
alternatives would be adequate in satisfying corridor travel demand. Widening Highway 400
will provide adequate additional capacity to satisfy travel demand within the study area.
Widening Alternatives from Highway 89 to Essa Road
As noted in Section 3.4, widening of Highway 400 from six to eight lanes is required
to meet future traffic demand to 2011. In addition to this study, MTO recently
completed preliminary design reviews and Transportation Environmental Study
Reports for the sections of Highway 400 from Major Mackenzie Drive in York
Region to the south Canal Bridge (W.P. 222-97-00), and from the south Canal Bridge
to one kilometer south of Highway 89, (G.W.P. 40-00-00) the south project limit of
this current study. The two projects reviewed the requirements to meet future traffic
4.5 Generation and Assessment of Design Alternatives
The development of design alternatives for improvements to Highway 400 was completed in
two phases:
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 29 -
April 2004
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 30 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@) Ontario
demand to 2021, and both projects are proposing to widen Highway 400 to ten lanes.
Recognizing that this project examines transportation improvements for the short to
midterm timeframe, as well as providing future flexibility in accommodating traffic
growth beyond 2011, the alternatives considered for carrying out the undertaking are
based on the design requirements for an ultimate ten-lane widening of Highway 400.
Widening the existing highway from six lanes to either eight or ten lanes will require
additional property along the existing right-of-way. Three widening alternatives
were developed for consideration, and include shifting the centerline of Highway 400
to the west, upgrading the median. barrier and changing the median width. Typical
sections for the three alternatives considered are illustrated in Exhibit 4.1.
As indicated on Exhibit 4.1, widening alternatives include widening to the west
(shifting the centreline to the west) and about the existing centreline. The Highway
400 right-of-way along several sections is significantly wider on the west side than
on the east side. This provided an opportunity to significantly reduce impacts to
adjacent land uses by considering alternatives which included widening to the west
or about the existing centreline. Based on the existing Highway 400 right-of-way,
widening to east would result in significantly greater property impacts to the adjacent
land uses. As well, municipal service roads (namely Reive Road, 9th Line and
Fairview.Road) are immediately adjacent and parallel to Highway 400 right-of-way
on the e~t side. Widening to the east would impact and require realignment of these
roads. The associated impacts of widening to the east would be significantly greater
than those associated with widening to the west or about the existing centreline.
Alternatives that included widening to the east, therefore, were not considered.
centerline would be shifted to the west and the additional lanes would be constructed
to the outside on the west side of Highway 400, to reduce overall property impacts.
Widening Alternatives from Essa Road to the Highway 11
Junction
Based on the traffic analysis carried out for this study, at least ten lanes on Highway
400 are required to meet 2011 traffic volumes between .Essa Road and Bayfield
Street. The alternatives of widening the existing Highway 400 section to ten lanes
and a 12 lane core/distributor system alternative were, therefore, considered for this
section of the project. Typical sections for the alternatives are illustrated in Exhibit
4.2.
Alternative 1: 10 - Lane Widening
Alternative 1 includes widening Highway 400 from six lanes to ten lanes (five lanes
per direction) from Essa Road to Bayfield Street. North of Bayfield Street, Highway
400 would be widened from six lanes to eight lanes. The median barrier would be
upgraded to current MTO standards. .
Alternative 2: 8.8 m Median - Widen to the West
In reviewing the existing right-of-way along Highway 400, it was noted that in
several areas along this section of Highway 400 MTO owns sufficient property to
accommodate a widening to the west without requiring additional property. With
Alternative 2, the centerline would be shifted to the west and therefore, the additional
lanes would be constructed to the outside on the west side of Highway 400. As with
Alternative I, the median barrier would be upgraded to current MTO standards.
Alternative 2: Core-Distributor SY5!em
A second alternative was considered which would separate through and local freeway
traffic. As noted in Chapter 3, during peak travel period, traffic operations at several
interchanges in the Barrie area have deteriorated to the point where queuing on the
ramps can affect mainline operations. Alternative 2 provides a separation of through
traffic and. local traffic by providing separate core and distributor lanes.. The core
distributor (C/D) system would extend from south of Essa Road to north of Bayfield
Street. Three core lanes (per direction) would have no access to and from the Essa
Road, Dunlop Street and Bayfield Street interchanges. Access to and from these
interchanges would only be provided. from three distributor lanes (per direction),
which would provide access to and from Highway 400. Separating the through
traffic from the congestion that can occur at interchanges would improve operations
for through traffic.
Alternative 1: 8.8 m Median - Widen about the Existing Centreline
. .
Alternative I maintains the current centerline on Highway 400 and provides an 8.8
metre closed barrier median cross section. With this alternative, additional lanes
woul4 be constructed to the outside on both sides of the highway and the median
barrier would be upgraded to current MTO standards.
4.5.2 Highway 400 Interchange Alternatives
Alternatives for the Highway 400 interchanges were developed. to address
operational deficiencies, accommodate the widening of Highway 400 and to reduce
impacts to adjacent land uses.
Alternative 3: 22 m Median - Widen to the West
Highway 89 Interchange Alternatives
Recognizing the rural nature of the area along the Highway 400 corridor along most
of the section from Highway 89 to Essa Road, an open median concept was
developed for consideration. Alternative 3 includes a 22 metre wide median, the
Two alternatives were carried forward for evaluation. Alternative I is a Pardo A
configuration, while Alternative 2 is a Parclo B configuration. Schematic layouts of
the alternatives are provided in Exhibit 4.3. (Text continues on page 34)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
UBS
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
SOUTHBOUND
3.75 3.75 3.50
LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2
5.00
LANE 1
8.80
MEDIAN
NORTHBOUND
5.00 3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75,
LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 UTURE!
LANE 5 \
I-A.15
FUTU
I lANE 5
1
n
II
~..,
, ,
v
-6%
PROPOSED &
EXISTING
't.
HIGHWAY 400
I
t t t t
-2 2%-
A
"
,,~
II
U
SOUTHBOUND
NORTHBOUND
ALTERNATIVE 1 - 8.8m MEDIAN, WIDEN ABOUT EXISTING CENTRELlNE
SOUTHBOUND
,3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 5.00
:Rjiu" LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1
I LANE 5
,
//~~_._--___ ~n~ ~ ~ t ~
~. <"'~ -6~'~' _2%.. 2%-
4:'\ ..:------
.:-- --~~.::.-----'".~
8.80
MEDIAN
NORTHBOUND
5.00 3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75,
LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 'iJtlfRE;
LANE 5\
,
PROPOSED
't.
HIGHWAY
400
I
_ ._6%
(,. t2%J.V~=RATE
'itf~:lr_.?gIVMi:ijMXli...i~~~
--------.
--------~-."
~-"'-.,,-----'"'--~
/.
ALTERNATIVE 2 ..; 8.8m MEDIAN, WIDEN TO THE WEST
SOUTHBOUND
,3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 5.00
FUru" LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1
\ LANE 5
I
22.0
MEDIAN
PROPOSED
<t
HIGHWAY
400
n t~t ~
"./''''---
//~.., '.
.- \, -'
~6% y _2% ~.~----
4:'\ _-.,.,.-----
I~-"
_/9~>~
-."
6%-
..-----
NORTHBOUND
5.00 3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75,
LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 UtuRE!
LANE 5\
ALTERNATIVE 3 - 22.0m MEDIAN, WIDEN TO THE WEST
N.T.S.
EXHIBIT
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
HIGHWAY 400 WIDENING ALTERNATIVES
South Project Limits to Essa Road
4.1
SOUTHBOUND
3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50
LANE 5 LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1
. 3.50 3.75
LANE 1 LANE 2
7.50
MEDIAN
PROPOSED
& EXISTING
<t
HIGHWAY
400
ttttt
-2'% 2%-
4:1
f !%f f2%J
~-~.
6%_
-6%
13.75 I 3.751 3.50 I~I 3.50 I 3.75\ 3.751
LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1MEDIAN LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3
ALTERNATIVE 1 -10 LANE WIDENING
3.75 3.75 3.50
LANE 6 LANE 5 LANE 4
SOUTHBOUND
7.50
MEDIAN
3.50 3.75 3.75
LANE 4 LANE 5 LANE 6
NORTHBOUND
7.50
MEDIAN
3.75 3.75 3.50 7.50 3.50 3.75 3.75
LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1 MEDIAN LANE 1 LANE 2 E3
PROPOSED
f f f & EXISTING f f f
<t
HIGHWAY
400
/
~__ fff
,~ ---
~----
- 6CY;--~"--- 2'%
4'.'\
d"'\',~""_~_~_~' _." '
f f f
-2%
2%- 6%_ -6% -2%
2%-
6%-
ALTERNATIVE 2 - CORE/DISTRIBUTOR
SYSTEM WIDENING (12 LANE WIDENING)
N.T.S.
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 HIGHWAY 400 WIDENING ALTERNATIVES 4.2
(Y) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 Essa Road to North Project Limits
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCALE 1 :2500
1"\00.....- ,
50m 0 ,100m
i'~.. ~ ,;~/''''
ALTERNATIVE 1 - PJt~CI.::.O A
::f ""~,"
/'
Q':f '0:) ~//""
ALTERNATIVE 2 - PA~Cl-er'B
"""~
"""~
REALIGNED RE"'E
'v, ROAD
REALIGNED RENE ROAD
.....
\
SIMCOE ROAD 89
SIMCOE ROAD 89
HIG
o
~
~
~
(!)
:f
f
f
~ 1:2500
ro..~ '
50m 0 100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 HIGHWAY 89 INTERCHANGE
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 AL TERNA TIVES 4.3
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry ofTransportation
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
W Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Innisfil Beach Road Interchange Alternatives
Three alternatives were carried forward for evaluation. Alternative 1 is a Pardo A
configuration, Alternative 2 is a Pardo B configuration and Alternative 3 is a
Diamond (Northbound) / Parclo A (Southbound) configuration. Schematic layouts of
the alternatives are provided in Exhibit 4.4.
Molson Park Drive Interchange Alternatives
Two alternatives were carried forward for evaluation. Alternative 1 considers
operational improvements to the existing interchange by providing additional turning
lanes on the N-E/W and S-E- W ramps as well as right-turn tapers on Molson Park
Drive at the ramp tenninals. Alternative 2 would separate the traffic exiting
northbound Highway 400 with a S-E direct ramp and a S- W Parclo B loop ramp.
Schematic layouts of the alternatives are provided in Exhibit 4.5.
Essa Road Interchange Alternatives
Two alternatives were carried forward for evaluation. Alternative 2 retains the basic
configuration of the existing interchange with geometric improvements to the ramps.
The current Configuration requires eastbound vehicles on Essa Road to access
southbound Highway 400 by turning left from Essa Road onto the E/W -S loop ramp.
Alternative 1 eliminates the eastbound left turn to the southbound Highway 400
entrance ramp by providing a direct W -S ramp on Essa Road. Both alternatives
incorporate a direct connection from the southbound ramp terminal on Essa Road to
the commercial plaza in the southwest quadrant of the interchange, w~ch is being
implemented through a private agreement. Schematic layouts of the alternatives are
provided in Exhibit 4.6.
Dunlop Street Interchange Alternatives
Two alternatives were carried forward for evaluation. Alternative 1 retains the
existing configuration and Alternative 2 is a Pardo A configuration. Schematic
layouts of the alternatives are provided in Exhibit 4.7.
Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives
Three alternatives were carried forward for evaluation: Alternative 1 retains the
existing configuration with geometric improvements to the ramp, Alternative 2 is a
Diamond configuration, and Alternative 3 is a Parclo A configuration. Schematic
layouts of the alternatives are provided in Exhibit 4.8.
Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives
Four alternatives were carried forward for evaluation. Alternative 1 retains the
existing configuration and Alternative 2 is a Parclo A (Southbound) / Diamond
(Northbound) configuration. Alternative 3 is a Pardo A configuration that also
includes the realignment of Duckworth Street and Cundles Road. Alternative 4 is a
Parclo B configuration that includes the realignment of Duckworth Street and
Cundles Road as well as other local road connections. Schematic layouts of the
alternatives are provided in Exhibit 4.9.
4.6 Assessment of Net Impacts
The mainline and interchange alternatives were analyzed to determine the net impacts and
traffic operations benefits. Net impacts are defined as those impacts that are likely to remain
after mitigation measures are applied. This analysis was used to evaluate the alternatives and
recommend a preferred alternative. The objective of this process was to select an alternative for
each component (interchanges and mainline) that results in the lowest overall impacts and
provides acceptable traffic operations.
The Environmental Assessment Act requires a proponent to describe the effects that will be
caused or that might reasonably be expected to be caused on the environment. The broad
definition of environment forms the basis for the criteria considered in this study. Evaluation
criteria were organized into six factors: Natural, Social, Economic, Cultural, Transportation and
Engineering. The criteria represent the components of the environment that are directly,
indirectly or potentially affected by the undertaking. The analysis of impacts for each of the
mainline and interchange alternatives are provided in the following section.
4.7 Evaluation of Alternatives
The evaluation of mainline and interchange alternatives considered both the impacts generated
by the alternative, and the relative importance of the impacts. Each factor in the evaluation (i.e.
Natural, Social, Economic, Cultural, Transportation and Engineering) contributes a relative
level of significance to the decision-making.
Based on the range of issues involved and the nature of the problems, a level of significance was
assigned for each factor. Levels of significance are determined based on consultation input
received from government ministries, agencies, local municipalities and the general public as
well as site specific study area conditions.
The evaluation of alternatives was conducted based on the comparative evaluation method.
Significant net impacts (after consideration of mitigation opportunities) are focused on in the
selection of the preferred mainline and interchange alternatives. Differences in impacts between
alternatives are compared considering both the magnitude and the relative significance of the
impact.
(Text continues on page 44)
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
-34- ORS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALTERNATIVE 1 -
PARCLO A
Plan reflects proposed interim improvements,
including realignment of Industrial Park Road
and relocation of commuter parking lot, to be
under separate contract.
,
100m
'~-------
",..,.-n 5IJIII>MS"'"
;;::::::::;:,';;;."::
ALTERNATIVE 2 -
PARCLO A DIAMOND
~
Plan reflects proposed interim improvements,
including realignment of Industrial Park Road
and relocation of commuter parking lot, to be
under separate contract.
------
",..,.-n 5IJIII>MS"'"
~
~
~;;;::-:~-~--------
~---~-_._-
----- ---
~
~
SU,^COE RO;..D 2'\
S\\\ACOE ROAD 2'\
:::::;:.-::::::;::.~.
t
t
SCALE 1 :2500
~-- ,
50m 0 100m
SCALE 1 :2500
~--
--
50m 0
UBS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY INNISFIL BEACH ROAD EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
INTERCHANGE
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 4.4a
AL TERNA TIVES
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 3 - PARCLO B
Plan reflects proposed interim improvements
including realignment of Industrial Park Road'
:)_) and relocation of commuter parKing lot, to be
under separate contract.
_._---..-.~ ,
c"">
f'ROI'OSS' su&OM""'"
~ ,,*"'C
.~~:./
"" -Co
Q" IS'
~~
t
SCALE 1 :2500
ro.,......-
SOm 0
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
~
~T
S\t.ACOE PI
I
100m
INNISFIL BEACH ROAD
INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVES
EXHIBIT
4.4b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALTERNATIVE 1 -
MAINTAIN EXISTING
!I
!~
t
........ -oi
~l1'l"Al'---
pREIJ
SCALE
1""\..-...-
SOm 0
t
,
100m
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 2 - PARCLO B~)
~
"
~
n
~iI!
~~
I
.~"'......." <I
-,' 1-., /,'/
p REIJ~l1'l,~; ./>
J
(
SCALE
,...___ I
50m 0 100m
MOLSON PARK DRIVE
INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVES
EXHIBIT
4.5
CONFORT
....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
,,,- /'
ALTERNATIVE l~.. PARCLO;A
~'<~\ \\ ;i
;~,>;'\\
"'~ '
AL TERNA TIVE::t~fARCLO IJ
r"~~~~\ \:-\ /
;"".,,<' \~~..-"'-.
'''---_J J ! -----~':::::~~~";:
'~~,,~ J~
"""~~,"i
"~f
;~1
"'-
".
/
:~"---_.J i ::
..
......._ f"
''''-~ j}"
-".1 "
r-"~_"'::::~::-!' ;
----_.J Ii
ESt
fi
f
......---..1 ii!
:::::Jih-
; ............"'"
!.....,~~
, > 't::::/
:i
!.............,........
(,~-~~
"~':
~',.../
if
COIIFORt
...
1:.
.. ,
~"'''''' {:
."-~~"-~,...,
..... ",<?4t'"
q liii""
Ii.'t. "'-.J
.. ..
; ....~
;'
/r'
//
.. /
//
//
//
,/ /'
//
//
/
/
J it
i ..
SCAlE
P"\,,-.-
50m 0
,
100m
r:
;'
ro..-_-
50m 0
SCAlE
,
100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 ESSA ROAD INTERCHANGE
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 AL TERNA TIVES 4.6
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALTERNATIVE 1
///'
/''",''..
/. :i~>"'"
,...,,- 9 /
'.
"-',-/
~
\
I
100m
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
ALTERNATIVE 2 -/FrAR~L::
//~//'> "'~~{8~
./ // ~
// / ~"':..; "'-'
/ if - -
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ '
/ '
/ "
I' "'-".....
"-
, ,
\ \
'.
ti-
p
U1
'Z
'0\
a..
It.'
'"
@
,0:
~
<fY
c;.
8-
)/'" I
,,/' /
/..../
.ty
,61
,~
$
If
/ /
,/ /'
//
/ /
/';
/ ./
/ /
// ,,/
/ /
/ /f
P /"', l/
I' "'. ,Ii
/ / /-,,-"',,;/- /~//
" // ''''-'-> "-,
" " . / ff,j
) "'<'
-""-......, /..f
~.'-.. .///
/
/'-
/ -,
/ >',
/: e~ /<
"'-. II'V
, /
V
\
/
<~<~~,('
'-. ", "
'.', "-
'" ". "-
'" " SCALE
'~< ,.."" ~---
,,'~Om 0
DUNLOP STREET
INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVES
EXHIBIT
4.7
I
100
ALTERNATIVE 1 - PARCLO AJS8i
DIAMONIY'(NB)<"
{~;\
0",-
"'~-~1~~,
ALTERNATIVE 2 - DIAMOND
!
,~,
II
/ /
/1 /lr~~~
; :! ~'"
I ,"'/ "'~_
,~/~1/ / '"
'-,
r"<:::,,~
/ ',- '"
...........,::','--.
/) / -;::~:~
., "~~,;:
/ / ~"
// / ~''''''''''~
// "''''<
;/;/
/ /
II
~.
"
. ~-:~',~~~::>- '
//
/1
" -'
: f
/ :'
! !
, .
/J.....I
!t'/;!
~/
~I
/(j!
;/ '"
/
/
'.... /
,~" !
S,*" 7~'lj"", /
, ~js,,~<.()'~d
"'~1".
~
~
'::
;Ii
1-'
(JJ
f5
f.;.
:5
pREIJ}Al~
\
f...:
(JJ
f5
f.;.
pREIJ~l~
,-,--
--
50m 0
SCALE
I
100m
//
/~:~~""'''''''' /
:/ ,,<:,~,:~j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/ :
/ /......-
! ./
/ /
1/
/f
/J...../
!t'/;/
/jft/
/0/
pit!
,Vf
\
1""\--
--
50m 0
SCALE
I
100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 BAYFIELD STREET
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 INTERCHANGE 4.8a
AL TERNA TIVES
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry ofTransportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALTERNATIVE 3 - PARCLO
~
~
~
1-'
CIJ
15
f.;::.
P Rf.l.J~l~
\
SCALE
1""\--
--
50m 0
,
100m
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
EXHIBIT
BAYFIELD STREET
INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVES
4.8b
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 1 - PARCLO/A~(/
;';/ ;.,,;,
," ; f\'i/--c
". 2J\
/ /' .; JUt'~
/j ~~~~;;"
-.:~,' ''',
,,'j-'
'-
,....-:
l'...
_/"
t:i
g
ff
4;
NI
,/i
:~
If
'j
" J
j
""~~~~~5~') i ,/
, '-"~~~r
\; ~1~ fi-pJ
".lL...! ....:
. ~ . .., .
~ .." ,- ."
" ." '--~":::c..'.
~;'-' ,.
GEORGIAN
COllEGE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALTERNATIVE 2 - P ARCLp AlSfiJ) I
DIAMO:ND OCNB)
; / :"
/ /
~:i
I
/1
.~
1l
.""
,y
I /
:' /~
, ~.
GEORGIAN
(;()liEGE
~
l~l~fi-Ri
.t
'J:,
.~
i'
t
~
~
SCALE
SCALE
1""1--
--
50m 0
,
100m
1""1--
--
50m 0
I
100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY DUCKWORTH STREET EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
INTERCHANGE 4.9a
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 AL TERNA TIVES
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALTERNATIVE 3 - PARCLO A-4 ,
& REALIGNED DUCKW9RT~-9-'f.
AL TERNA TIVE 4 - PARCL9 ~7f
& REALIGNED DUCKWORT~$i.
/)1 ~,~
j.j ~~
;;:..t ''''-y
/! -::t
~
/1
,4;
if
,'""
""
::t6'
, ,
....~ /};;.,
"," ('4~
s:~~~::~:
:~"'~~
"",j"
"'~--r
/
'-V 0'
,
100m
; j
Q
,.~
:J'
1I;j
if
,"'i'
1/
-'~~
~.......
.--1"",,";
......,~, .
f>-,..,,;/'i
"
/:1
,Q)l$i
/
/
~~~~\~2',~~~l~:R_'~;i ..I../?
.,,~~~ :-"':-~j (l
..
is-
, :;
~ '.
_\,~;, '-,-?::;V w' _ _ ,~.
'-. '-. ~\" 5,?
''-."., ..
,,>'~
"'~-"" ":;{:-,':':<
......." ':-.....
,'-.'<";S:."
,,~ '"
~\~<~~~\
; \ -,\.\
""""""'"
COLLEGE
t)
.,
--"" I
"'-~_.--_:.-~--- "
"',
-,,;: t
.. ,
,'Ci':
<': -~
1J"y
n~ j\t '-
~
.
(J)
i
-0
t
t
&
'f
I
p
I
t
'1
1
r
SCALE
I
100m
P"'\".""..-
50m 0
SCALE
P"'\--
--
50m 0
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 DUCKWORTH STREET
(i) Ontario. to Junction at Highway 11 INTERCHANGE 4.9b
ALTERNATIVES
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry ofTransportation
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 44 _
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
4.7.1 Highway 400 Mainline
From Highway 89 to Essa Road
Ptior to conducting a detailed analysis of impacts and benefits of the mainline
alternatives, a coarse level evaluation was carried out. The coarse level evaluation
was used to detennine whether any of the alternatives that resulted in significantly
greater impacts to the environment and/or produced limited transportation benefits in
comparison to the other alternatives.
Although Alternative 3 (widen to the west with 22m median) offered some
operational advantages, this alternative carried higher costs, and significantly greater
impacts. These higher impacts were due primarily to the greater property
requirements associated with.this option to accommodate the 22m median. Based on
the greater environmental impacts associated with this alternative, and because the
advantages provided by this alternative were not considered significant, Alternative 3
was not carried forward for detailed analysis.
The fundamental difference between Alternative 1 (widen about centerline) and
Alternative 2 (widen to the west) is that Alternative 1 impacts both sides of the
existing right-of-way, and Alternative 2 impacts are limited to the west side only.
Impacts to the west side of the Highway 400 corridor associated with Alternative 2
were not significant while Alternative 1 resulted in greater impacts.
In terms of the impacts to watercourses, for example, Alternative 1 would require
extending both ends of a culvert, whereas Alternative 2 would require extending the
existing culvert on one side of the highway. Although the lengths of the culvert
extensions are greater with Alternative 2, limiting culvert extensions to one side was
preferred as fish and wildlife habitat would only be impacted on one side of the
highway. The impacts to fish and wildlife habitat on the west side, due to culvert
extensions, was considered to be less than the impacts associated with extending the
culverts on both sides of the highway.
The evaluation of impacts to the Economic Environment had similar results. While
Alternative 1 impacts a greater area of agricultural land, the overall area affected is
not- significant. Limiting highway widening to the west side results in a lower number
of agricultural operations affected, no impacts to commercial property, no
displacements/disruptions of businesses and no impacts to access to businesses.
Alternative 2 results in more significant impacts: namely, a greater number of
impacts to agricultural operations (15 versus 10); impacts to commercial property; 13
displacements/disruptions of businesses; and will require realignment of adjacent
service roads to maintain access to businesses.
From the perspective of Transportation and Engineering, the alternatives were
comparable in most categories. The only differences were in Duration of
Construction, Property Requirements and Cost. The advantages of Alternative 1,
however, were not significant in these categories; Alternative 2 would require more
time to construct and less than two hectares more property (23.1 ha versus 21.4 ha).
The difference in cost, however, is significant because Alternative 1 is approximately
15% more expensive to construct relative to Alternative 2.
Based on these impacts, Alternative 2 (widen to the west) is the preferred mainline
section of Highway 400 from Highway 89 to Essa Road.
The analysis of Alternatives 1 and 2 is provided in Exhibit 4.10 and the evaluation
discussions are provided in Exhibit "4.11. The typical cross-section of the preferred
plan is provided in Exhibit. 4. 12.
From Essa Road to the Junction at Highway 11
The two mainline alternatives considered on this section of Highway 400 were a ten-
lane widening and a twelve-lane core-distributor system. Please refer to Exhibit 4.13
of this report for the evaluation of mainline Highway 400 alternatives from Essa
Road to Highway 11. Due to the generally built-up nature of the Highway 400
corridor through Barrie, widening the existing corridor to accommodate three core
and three distributor lanes per direction (twelve lanes total) would have a significant
impact to features, land uses and properties adjacent to the existing corridor.
Widening the highway to ten lanes can generally be accommodated within the
existing corridor. Alternative 1 (ten-lane widening) results in substantially lower
impacts than Alternative 2 (widen to accommodate core-distributor system). Refer to
Exhibit 4.13 for the evaluation of mainline Highway 400 alternatives from Essa Road
to Highway 11.
The advantages of a core-distributor system are limited. They include improved
traffic operations for through traffic during weekday peak travel periods because,
with a core-distributor system, through traffic would be separated from the congested
areas "at the interchanges. The core-distributor alternative, however, did not offer any
operational advantages for through traffic during weekend peak travel periods, as
through traffic demand during such weekend periods is expected to exceed the
capacity of three core lanes. During such weekend periods, the distributor lanes are
also expected to operate at or near capacity. Other operational disadvantages of a
core-distributor system were noted during the analysis, including less staging
flexibility, as well as snow removal and emergency access issues. Alternative 1
offers several technical advantages, provides for better overall traffic operations and
has a lower estimated construction cost than Alternative 2.
Therefore, Alternative 1 was selected as the preferred mainline section of Highway
400 from Essa Road to Highway 11. The preferred cross-section is shown in Exhibit
4.14.
(Text continues on page 53)
I
INDICATOR MEASURE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
EVALUATION FACTOR 8.8 M WIDEN ABOUT THE CENTRELINE 8.8 M WIDEN ALL TO THE WEST
Natural Environment
Fisberies and Aquatic Habitat Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat Subjective Low impact Low impact
Extensions at both ends of the culverts are reauired. Extension at one culvert end is reQuired.
Number offish habitat 2 Type 1 Coldwater Permanent 1190 2 Type 1 Coldwater Permanent 1150
crossings/encroachments and channel #/m 1 Type 2 Coldwater 1 70 1 Type 2 Coldwater 1 60
length affected by expanded ROW 3 Type 2 Warmwater 1210 3 Type 2 Warmwater /125
Terrestrial Environment Number of wildlife travel # 3 (Between 4th Line & Innisfil Beach Rd, 6th Line, 1 If' Line) 2 (Between 4th Line & Innism Beach Rd, 6th Line)
corridors/linkmres affected
Area of significant wildlife habitats ha 1.9 ha 2.2ha
impacted
Number of significant vegetation units and #lha 10/2.4ha 813.0 ha
area impacted
Number and area of provincially #lha 3 /1.4 ha lI1.5ha
significant wetlands impacted
Area through upland forests impacted ha 0 0
Potential impact to Areas of Natural and Subjective No impact No impact
Scientific Interest (ANSIs)
Groundwater Potential interference with water wells and # of wells impacted 2ha 2ha
area of flowing wells and high water table
Potential impact to groundwater recharge ha 0 0.2ha
and discharge areas
Surface Water Potential impact to private/municipal Subjective
water intakes
The 8.8m barrier median requires property outside the highway cross section for stonn water treatment. Treatment facilities The 8.8m barrier median requires property outside the highway cross section for stonn water treatment. Treatment
facilities would be sized to avoid/reduce property impacts where possible. Exiting facility on the east side will be
Effectiveness ofStonn Water Subjective would be sized to avoid/reduce property impacts where possible. Additional lanes will necessitate replacement of existing salvaged and incorporated into the design. Additional lanes will necessitate replacement of existing median stonn
Management median stonn sewer. Performance of existing storm sewer is limited by the capacity of the catchbasin 1 sewer system. sewer. perfonnance of existing storm sewer is limited by the capacity of the catchbasin / sewer system. Significant
Significant (> 1 in 10 year event) events may resuh in excess water in the median, which could impact traffic operatioos. (> 1 in 10 year event) events may result in excess water in the median, which could impact traffic operations.
Social Environment
Aesthetics Impact to aesthetic quality of existing Subjective Moderate Low to Moderate
landscape in the vicinity of ROW Widening ofHie:hwav 400 will ootentiallv imnact landscaning on both sides of the corridor. Imnacts to the east side of Hie:hway 400 will be minimized.
Impact to sensitive viewer groups Subjective Low impact due to widening of existing highway. Low impact due to widening of existing highway.
Impact to noise sensitive receivers:
. Low (less than 5 dBA incr'ease) Analysis No significant impact No significant impact
Noise . Moderate (5 to 10 dBA increase)
. Hi!!b (!!teater than 10 dBA increase)
Residential Number of residences disrupted/displaced # 0 0
Residential property affected ha 0 0
Impact to community mobility Low to Moderate
Community Effects Subjective Impact of Highway 400 widening to the east requires realignment of adjacent service roads No impact
(out-of-way travel) (Reive Road and 9th Line). This will affect access duriI\!!. construction.
Impact to community/recreational! #lha 1 (Innism Cemetery) 1 0.1 ha - No marked graves affected. 1 (Innisfil Cemetery) / 0.3 ha- No marked graves affected.
institutional!park features
Impact to municipal utilities/residential Low impact Low impact
Subjective Bell cable/conduits within Bell easement located adjacent to the highway and potential conflict with Bell Plant. Bell cable/conduits within Bell easement located adjacent to the highway and potential contlict with Bell Plant.
services Gas main running under the highway at Tiffin Road and Little Avenue. Gas main running under the highway at Tiffm Road and Little Avenue.
Low to Moderate Low impact
Impact to emergency services access Subjective Impact of Highway 400 widening to the east requires realignment of adjacent service roads
(Reive Road and 9th Line). This will affect access during construction. Emergency service access will be unaffected.
Compatibility with Future Impact to future land use plans Subjective Low impact Low impact
Land Use One property displaced but no direct impact to the proposed site. One property displaced but no direct impact to the proposed site.
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
URS
mGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT mGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives
lkm South of Highway 89 to Essa Road
Exhibit
4. 10 a
I
I
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
8.8 M WIDEN ABOUT THE CENTRELINE 8.8 M WIDEN All TO THE WEST
Economic Envimnment
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 9.4 ha 16.3 ha
Number of operations displaced # 0 0
Number of operations affected ## IS 10
Impact to access (out-of-way travel) . Subjective Low Low
Access unaffected Access unaffected
CommerciallIndustrial Uses Commercial property affected ha 0.8ha 0
Number of businesses disrupted/displaced # 13 businesses disrupted 0
Low to Moderate
Impact to business access Subjective Impact of Highway 400 widening to the east requires realignment of adjacent service roads No impact
(Reive Road and 9th Line). This will affect access during construction.
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on Provincia1lFederal Subjective N/A N/A
initiatives
Property Waste and Number of properties affected that have
known or high potential for Analysis Low risk Low risk
Contamination waste/contamination
Cultural Envimnment
Archaeological Resources Arca of properties affected with ha 0.1 ha (Innisfil Cemetery) 0.3 ha (Ionisfil Cemetery)
archaeolOlrical notentia1
Number and description of heritage/ 1 1
Heritage Resources historical features or cultural landscapes ## Potential impact to Coat of Anus panel on bridge structure at 4th Line and Highway 400. Potential impact to Coat of Anus panel on bridge structure at 4th Line and Highway 400.
impacted
TransDOl1:ation & Enaineerirll1
Traffic Operations Subjective Widening of Highway 400 will provide acceptable operations to beyond year 20 II. Widening of Highway 400 will provide acceptable operations to beyond year 2011.
Drainage Perfonnance (capacity / event) Subjective Perfonnance limited by the capacity of the catchbasin / sewer system. Significant (> I in 10 year event) events may result Perfonnance limited by the capacity of the catchbasin / sewer system. Significant (> I in 10 year event) events
in excess water in the median. which could imtJact traffic ODeraUons. may result in excess water in the median. which could impact traffic onerations.
Snow can not be stored in the median. The potential for snow drift occurs at five locations for a tota1length of approximately Snow can not be stored in the median. The potential for snow drift occurs at five locations for a total length of
Operations & Maintenance Snow Removal Quantitative 5.3 kIn from Highway 89 to Molson Park Drive. Additional property required for snow storage within these areas. approximately 5.3 kIn from Highway 89 to Molson Park Drive. Additional property required for snow storage
within these areas.
Road Rehabilitation Subjective Closed median requires milling before resurfacing. Closed median requires milling before resurfacing.
Consistency Consistency with other sections Subjective Section of Highway 400 ftom Toronto to Highway 89 has a barrier median design. This alternative will be consistent with Section of Highway 400 ftom Toronto to Highway 89 has a barrier median design. This alternative will be
these sections. consistent with these sections.
Staging Construction staging Subjective Staged construction is required in order to provide additional lanes, remove and replace existing median. Three construction Staged construction is requited in order to provide additional lanes, remove and replace existing median. Four
stages will be reauired. construction stages will be required.
Impact ori traffic during construction Subjective Proximity of construction zone to traffic will impact travel speed. The existing number of lanes will be maintained during Proximity of construction zone to traffic will impact travel speed. The existing number of lanes will be maintained
construction, but lane widths will be reduced. during construction, but lane widths will be reduced.
Estimated Duration Quantitative 3- Seasons 3+ Seasons
Cost
Cost Construction Cost % of Lowest 115% 100%
Property ha 21.4 ha 23.1 ha
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
URS
IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-OO
Analysis of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives
lkm South of Highway 89 to Essa Road
I
Exhibit
4. 10 b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FACTOR
CATEGORY - NATURAL EN
1 FISHERIES "
AQUATIC
HABITAT
2 TER1lESTRIAL
ENVIRONMENT
3 GROUNDWATER
4 SURFACE WATER
5 AREAS OF
NATURAL "
SCIENTIFIC
INTEREST
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
ALTERNATIVE 1
8.8M WIDRNMOOT
THE CENTIUILINE
ALTERNATIVE 2
8.8 M WIDEN TO THE
WEST
CATEGORY - EcONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
COMMENTS
FACTOR
ALTERNATIVE 1
8.8 M WIDRN ABOIlf
THE CENnu;;UNE
ALTERNATIVE 2
8.8 M WIDEN TO THE
WEsT
~ 0
0 0
0 ~
~ 0
0 0
~ 0
ALTERNATIVE 1
8.8 M WIDEN ABOUT
THE CENTRELINB
~
o
COMMENTS
o
o
80tb al!A::matives will impact tile samellUDlber of fish babitat crossings. Alrernative 2. however, bas a
lesser impact on each crossing because only one cul~ end is affected.
AGRICULTURAL
o
Alrernative I will affect more agricultural land aDd operations than Alternative 2.
~
o
~
~
o
AI!A::mative I impacts a sligbtly greater IIUDIber of wildlife habitat aIeaS, significant vegetation units, and
wetland aIeaS. Alternative 2. however, impacts slightly greater area.
2 COMMERCIAL I
INDUSTRIAL USES
While Alternative 2 will not require property from businesses, Alternative I wilJ require
property from 18 businesses. 1be impacts (area required) on eacb of these properties, however,
is low and can be reduced through design refinetnents.
5 COMPA TlBR.ITY 0
WITH FUTURE
LAND USE
CATEGORY ~
SUMMARY
o
SU1IU1UIrv of Effects 011 the &Jcial Environment
o
Both al!A::mativcs inlpact the same number of wells. However, while Alternative I will have no impact on
groundwater recharge and discharge areas, AI!A::mative 2 will have a slight impact on the groundwater
discharge area locau:d on the west side of Highway 400, north of Highway 89.
1be 8.8m harrier median of both alternatives will require property outside the highway cross section for
Storm water treatment. Alternative 2, however, will maintain tile storm water management facilities 011
the east side of Highway 400 and limit property impacts due to storm water management requirements to
the west side of tile Highway.
~
o
While Alternative 2 will not impact Reive Road and 9'" Line, Alternative I necessitau:s
realignment of these roads and result in out of way travel and access to businesses during
construction.
Neitber alternative will have an affect on ProvinciallFederal initiatives for future land use.
o
3 SPECIAL POLICY
AREAS
4 PROPERTY
WASTE "
CONTAMINATION
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
o
@ Ontario
o
o
Both alternatives result in low impacts to land with wasre and contamination because of the
potential environmental concerns for farming opemtions in association with vehicle
maintenance, wasU: disposal, herbicide and pesticide storage.
Neither alternative will have an impact on aIeaS of natural and scientific interest.
~
o
SUfIU1UU1I of Effects Mike Economic Environment
Both aJtematives result in low impacts to the economic environment. Altemative I, however, results in slightly greater impacts to agricultunlland and operations.
SwnlrUZTV of Effects on the Natural Enviromnellt
AI!A::mative 2 bas a lower degree of impact on the fish habitat crossings and also offers a storm water management system that resullJl in less impacts to surrotIIIding properties and
natural features. Alternative 2 impacts a groundwater discharge area just north of Highway 89. 1be impact however is not significant and can be reduced through design
refinements. Alternative 2 also impacts a smaller amount of signilkant Type I pennaneut coltlwater fish habitat.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 21S SLJGHTL Y PREFEIUUID.
1 AESTHETICS
2 NOISE
3 RESIDENTIAL
4 COMMUNITY
EFFECTS
THEREFORE, ALTERANTIVE 21S PREFERRED.
ALTERNATIVE 1
U M WIDEN ABOOT
THE CENTlUlLtNE
1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 0 0
RESOURCES
2 HERITAGE 0 0
RESOURCES
CATEGORY 0 0
SUMMARY
Both al!A::matives will impact tile bridge structure at 4th line which features a provincial Coat of
Arms panel on the abutments.
COMMENTS
Both al!A::matives will impact a known archaeological resource (lnnisfil Cemeu:ry).
Alternative I will impact sensitive viewer groups on holb tile CIISI aDd west sides of the highway. Impacts
from Alternative 2 win be limiu:d to the west side of the highway.
Both alternatives result in similar low noise impacts due to tile same changes in lane distances from
receptors, identical increase in traffic volume for each future alternative, and the location of tile majority
of receptors in tile study area. Noise impacts associated with Alternative 2 are only slightly greater than
those with Alternative I and affect a small minority of the receptOIS in the stUdy area. however the
impacts are not considered significant.
S_arv Effects on the Cll1tural Emironment
Alternative 2 will not displace residences or require residential property. Alternative 1 win not displace
residents, however. will require 0.1 ha of resUlential property.
Both aJtematives result in similar low impacts to the cultural environment.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives will require property from the Innistil Cemetery located on the west side of Highway
400, north of lnnistil Beach Road. Alrernative 2, however, will require more land. Both alternatives may
potential impact the Ben Plant located on the west side of Highway 400.
Alternative I necessitates the realignment of the service roads (Reive Road and 9'" line) that run adjaceut
to Highway 400 on the east side. This will result ill out-of-way travel during construction. Alternative 2
will not impact property on the east side. It is noted that these impacts can be reduced with tile
application of retaining walls, which wouItI increase the construction cost of Alternative 1.
Neither alternative will have an impact to future land use plans.
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social environment. AI!A::mative 2. however, bas fewer aesthetic impacts and will not impact adjacent service roads.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 21S PREFERRED,
mGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT mGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives
lkm South of Highway 89 to Essa Road
Exhibit
4. 11 a
CATEGORY - TRANSPORTATION a ENGINEERING AND COST
FACTOR
ALTERNATIVE I ALTERNATfVEZ
8.8 M WIDEN AIIotlf 8.8 M WIDEN TO THE
THE CENTImLJNE WEST
1 DRAINAGE ~ 0
Z OPERATIONS & 0 0
MAINTENANCE
3 TRAFFIC 0 0
OPERATIONS
4 CONSISTENCY 0 0
5 STAGING 0 0
4) COST ~ 0
CATEGORY ~ 0
SUMMARY
SlIIn11Ul1'Y of Effects 0" TraRsDOl'tlltlo" tuUl Entdneerintl
I
COMMENTS
C.A'l'EGORy....StIMMARY OF EVALUATION
FACTOR "RBlATIVH LBVHL ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 COMMENTS
01' SIGNIFICANCE 8.8 M WIDEN Allour 8.8 M WIDEN TO THE
THE Ci!NTREUNE WEST
I NATURAL Alternative 2 bas a lower degree of impact on the fish habitat crossings and also offers a
storm water management system that results in less impacts to surrounding properties
ENVIRONMENT and natUral fuatures. Alternative 2 impacts a groundwater discharge area jost north of
Moderate ~ 0 Highway 89. The impact however is not significant and can be reduced through design
refinements. Alternative 2 also impacts a smaller amount of significant Type I
permanent coldwater fish habitat
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 21S SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social environment Allemative 2.
ENVIRONMENT ~ 0 however, bas fewer aesthetic impacts and will not impact adjacent service roads.
Moderate
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 21S PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Both alternatives result in low impacts to the economic environment Alternative I,
however, results in slightly greater impacts to agricultural land and operations.
ENVIRONMENT Moderate ~ 0
THEREFORE, AL TERANTIVE Z IS PREFERRED.
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the cultural enviromrent
4 CULTURAL 0 0
ENVIRONMENT Moderate THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED
5 TRANSPORTATION Both alternatives are equal in terms of maintenance, traffic operations, consistency and
staging. Alternative 2, however, offers more favourable drainage characteristics at a
& ENGINEERING & High ~ 0 lower cost
COST
THERFORE, ALTERNATIVE 21S SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
Summarv of Evahullion:
Although Alternative 2 bas greater impacts to environmental features west of the highway, overall the impacts are lower than Alternative I, which impacts enviro'lmental features on both
sides of the highway. Alternative 2 results in lower overall impacts and is less costly to construct as well as offers similar technical advantages as Alternative J.
OVERALL, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS SELECTED AS THE PREFERRED.
I
I
Both alternatives win require replacement of the median sewer. Alternative 2, however, wiJl
maintain drainage facilities on the east side.
I
Both alternatives require additional propeny for snow sturage in snow drift areas.
I
Both alternatives will provide acceptable operations to heyond 2011.
Both alternatives provide cross sections that are consistent with design ftom Toronto to
Highway 89.
I
Both Alternatives will require complex staging that will span over 3 seasons.
I
Alternative 2 bas a lower conslrUCtion cost
I
Both alternatives are equal in terms of maintenance, traffic operations, consistency and staging. Alternative 2, however, offers more favourable drainage characteristics
at a lower cost
I
THERFORE, ALTERNATIVE % IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IDGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHWAY 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives
lkm South of Highway 89 to Essa Road
Exhibit
4. 11 b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHBOUND
3.50 to
:._A~1.~L 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75
fUTU LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1
: LANE 5
:
:
/________ : Jn~ ~ II I
~~,,;,--~ -2% T ~%_ T
8.80 to 10.80
MEDIAN
PROPOSED
~
HIGHWAY
400
3.50 to NORTHBOUND
3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 I
LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4 FUTURE:
LANE 5 i
:
I
I
^ :
1\
'1r-
II
U
INCORPORATE EXISTING ROADBED
(REMOVE ASPHALT AND PROVIDE NEW
GRANULARS ON EXISTING SHOULDER)
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED SECTION
1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 TO ESSA ROAD (WITH PROVISION FOR HOV LANES)
t t
-2% i
"--'''''''F"'' ,,~,,"M.W'...._
EXj:rnr"'IG
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
HIGHWAY 400 MAINLINE
TECHN ICALL Y PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
1 km South of Highway 89 to Essa Road
N.T.S.
EXHIBIT
4.12
FACTORlINDICATOR Relative Level of Alternative 1 Alternative 2 COMMENTS
Significanee 10 Lane Widening 12 Lane CID System
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Effect on Aquatic Habitat ./ Both alternatives require the widening of 7 crossings that have fish habitat. Alternative 2 is wider and therefore results in additional impacts at these crossings.
Effect on Temstrial Habitat Moderate ./ ./ Given the urban nature of the area, both alternatives result in similar low impacts to terrestrial features.
Effect on Wetlands ./ ./ Both alternatives have the same footprint in the vicinity of the Little Lake Wetland (PSW) and result in similar low impacts to this feature.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
Effect on Noise ./ Alternative 2 results a maximum increase of approximately 4 dBA in noise for receivers within 100 m of the highway whereas Alternative I results in an increase of 2 dBA A
sound level change of 3 dBA is considered to be technically imperceptible.
Effect on Residences ./ Alternative 1 results in the displacement of 4 residences whereas Alternative 2 results in the displacement of 14 residences. It is noted that these impacts could be reduced through
the use of retaining walls. Retaining walls would add to the cost of the alternatives. Alternative 2 would carry higher retaining wall costs.
Effect on Community Features ./ ./ Neither alternative effect community features (i.e., school, parks recreation centres etc.).
Effect on Businesses Moderate ./ Alternative 1 does not displace businesses whereas Alternative 2 results in the displacement of 4 businesses. It is noted that these impacts could be reduced through the use of
retaining walls. Retaining walls would add to the cost of alternative 2.
Alternative 2 provides limited oDDortunity for through traffic to exit in Barrie potentially impacting businesses.
Effect on Agricultural Operations ./ ./ Neither alternative affects agricultural operations.
Property Impacts ./ Additional property is required along approximately 20010 of the length of Alternative 1, whereas Alternative 2 requires additional property along 90010 of the length. It is noted that
these percentages generally represent partial property takingS and exclude the property impacts associated with the interchanges.
CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT
Effect on Heritage Features ./ ./ Neither alternative affects heritage features
Effect on areas with Archaeological Moderate ./ Alternative 1 requires slightly less land with a high potential for archaeological resources and is therefore preferred.
Potential
TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Through Traffic Operations With the 10-lane scenario, acceptable level of service achieved during weekday peak: travel periods. Queuing on ramps could reduce opemting speeds; this impact can be reduced
through interchange improvements (e.g. sub-collector) but there may be increased property impacts.
./ Under the CID system, through traffic achieves good level of service. Queuing on ramps could reduce opemting speeds in distributor, but core lanes would be unaffected.
Durin!! weekend oeak travel Deriods throu!!h traffic oDerations are acceptable with both alternatives.
Local Traffic Operations With the 10-lane scenario, an acceptable level of service is achieved during weekday peak: travel periods. Queuing on ramps could reduce operating speeds; this impact can be
reduced through interchange improvements (e.g. sub-collector) but there may be increased property impacts.
./ ./ Under the CID system, local traffic achieves acceptable level of service. Queuing on ramps could reduce operating speeds in distributor; interchange improvements could help
High reduce the impacts to the distributor lanes but there may be increased property impacts.
Durin!! weekend oeak travel periods the alternatives have similar levels of traffic ooerations.
Incident Management Under the 100lane scen8rio, with 3+ lanes closed, major impact to access to/through Barrie; With 1-2 lanes closed, minor impact to access to/through Barrie.
The CID system can contain major incidents to either core or distributor lanes; with distributor lanes closed, access to Barrie is reduced; with core lanes closed, distributor lanes
./ ./ available to maintain access to/through Barrie; also potential for incidents in both core and distributor which could potentially have major impact to access to/through Barrie. With
1-2 core lanes closed, distributor lanes available to maintain access to/through Barrie; with 1-2 distributor lanes closed, access to Barrie is affected.
No noticeable difference since CID system is only better if incident occurs in core lanes; an incident in the distributor lanes would mean worse operations than 10-laning and
POssiblv reduced access to some interchan!!es.
Note: This evaluation does not include the impacts associated with interchanges. Interchange impacts will increase the direct natural social and economic impacts of the alternatives. Alternative 2 will result in higher direct interchange impacts because more property is required to accommodate
the larger cross-section.
./ - Compares favourably on the issue.
@ Ontario
URS
Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives
Essa Road to the Junction at Highway
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Exhibit
4.13 a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Relative Level of Alternative 1 Alternative 2
FACTORlINDICA TOR Significance 10 Lane Widening 12 Lane CID System COMMENTS
TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONTINUED)
Snow Removal With Alternative I, all snow is cleared to the right shoulder by snowplows moving in echelon.
./' With Alternative 2, snow in core lanes requires removal, which is an additional operation requiring additional equipment to be used and results in further disruptions to traffic.
Alternative I is stron!!.lv nrefen-ed.
Highway Rehabilitation Under the 10 lane scenario, lane closures/restrictions impact all traffic in the bound being worked on; Work on Lane 3 has greatest impact, this may require a reduction to two lanes.
Scheduling such operations during non-busy periods can reduce the impacts.
./' With the CID System, lane closures/restrictions impact either core or distributor, leaving other set of lanes to bypass the operation. Work on Lane 2 of distributor has greatest impact
as this may require reduction of distributor to one lane. Scheduling such operations during non-busy periods can reduce the impacts. Alternative 2 has less impact to traffic during
rehab onerations. .
Emergency/Routine. Maintenance High ./' With the 10-laning scenario, access available to all lanes. With the CID system, access to core I~es is restricted somewhat.
Onerations
Emergency Access ./' With the IO-Ianing scenario, access available to all lanes. With the CID system, access to core lanes is restricted somewhat.
Construction Staging ./' Both alternatives have similar staging requirements and impacts. However, Alternative 1 provides greater flexibility in staging the improvements in that it provides for staged
implementation (i.e. Ability to widen from 6 to 8 lanes, then 8 to to lanes) as traffic demand warrants.
No such flexibilitv with Alternative 2. which. as a result would !!.enerallv be underutilized in the short to medium terms.
Compatibility with Future Transportation ./' Alternative 1 is considered more consistent with the long tenn vision for the provincial road network in that it provides more flexibility for access to interchanges in Barrie and is
Network consistent with the recommended improvements for sections of Highway 400 south of Barrie to Major Mackenzie Drive.
Cost ./' The construction of the CID systern is estimated to cost approximately 25% more than 10-laning.
SUMMARY OF EV ALUA TION
Alternative I results in fewer impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural environments than Alternative 2 primarily because ofthe smaller footprint associated with the construction of Alternative 1.
From a technical considerations perspective, Alternative 2 provides for slightly better operations for through traffic during weekday PM peak travel periods. During weekday PM peak travel periods Alternative 2 provides for a good level of service for through traffic, while
Alternative I traffic operations are acceptable. Both alternatives provide for comparable traffic operatiollS during other times.
Alternative 2 would have less of an impact to traffic during rehabilitation operations, but would require more complex snow removal operations which would have greater traffic impacts than Alternative I. Given that snow removal operations would occur more frequently than
rehabilitation (generally required every 15 years), the impacts of snow removal operations are considered to be of greater significance than those resulting from rehabilitation operations.
For other technical aspects, Alternative 1 is considered to operate equal to or better than Alternative 2, since Alternative I provides greater flexibility for future expa~sion ~f the transportation network and has a lower construction cost estimate.
Alternative I will result in lower impacts to tbe natural, social, economic and cultural environments. As well, the more favourable technical considerations associated with Alternative I are considered .to be more important than the slight advantages associated with Alternative 2.
Advantages in through traffic operations and pavement rehabilitation for Alternative 2 are slight. Overall, Alternative I better addresses technical considerations.
Alternative I is therefore nreferred.
Note:
This evaluation does not include the impacts associated with interchanges. Interchange impacts will increase the direct natural social and economic impacts ofthe alternatives. Alternative 2 will result in higher direct interchange impacts because more property is required to accommodate
the larger cross-section.
./'-
Compares favourabJy on the issue.
@ Ontario
URS
Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives
Essa Road to the Junction at Highway
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Exhibit
4.13b
SOUTHBOUND
3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50
LANE 5 LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1
NORTHBOUND
3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75
LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 E 4 LANE 5
7.50
MEDIAN
PROPOSED
& EXISTING
HIG~AY
41)0
,
t t t t t
. -2% 2%- 6%_
4:1
_60A
~ l~ ~%J
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED SECTION
ESSA ROAD TO SA YFIELD STREET (NO PROVISION FOR HOV LANES)
SOUTHBOUND
3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50
LANE 4 LANE 3 LANE 2 LANE 1
NORTHBOUND
3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75
LANE 1 LANE 2 E 3 LANE 4
7.50
MEDIAN
PROPOSED &
EXISTING
<t.
~ ~. ~ ~ HIGHWtY400
-2% 2%- 6%_
t t t t
-2% 2%- 6%-
URS
4:1
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED
BA YFIELD STREET TO HIGHWAY 11 (NO PROVISION FOR HOV LANES)
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 MAINLINE
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Essa Road to the Junction at Highway 11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N.T.S.
EXHIBIT I
4.14 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-OO
@ Ontario
4.7.2 Highway 400 Interchanges
Molson Park Drive Interchange
The complete analysis and evaluation for the Molson Park Drive interchange
alternatives are provided in Exhibits 4.21 and 4.22, respectively. Alternative 1
( operational improvements) includes minor modifications to the interchange area,
and therefore would have no significant impacts to adjacent features and properties.
Alternative 2 includes a new loop ramp to be constructed in the northeast quadrant of
the interchange. The effect on traffic operations at the interchange associated with a
new loop ramp is expected to be limited. The additional property impacts and
construction costs are, therefore, not justified for Alternative 2. Alternative 1
provides a slight improvement to traffic operations and can be implemented with less
construction costs than Alternative 2. Therefore, Alternative 1 is the preferred
alternative. The preferred Molson Park Drive interchange is shown in Exhibit 4.23.
The alternatives were developed based on the information gathered on the existing
natural, socio-economic and cultural environments, as well as tra:f:Iic operations and
current Ministry standards. The objectives in developing the various interchange
alternatives included the avoidance and/or reduction of impacts to significant natural,
social, economic, and cultural features, as well as improving transportation service
and existing interchange geometries. Opportunities to improve traffic operations,
access . to local network, and incorporating land uses more compatible with
transportation improvements (Le. vacant, undeveloped lands or areas in transition to
less sensitive uses) were also considered.
Highway 89 Interchange
The complete analysis and evaluation for the Highway 89 interchange alternatives
are provided in Exhibits 4.15 and 4.16, respectively. The configuration of
Alternative I (parclo A interchange) is more suited to the existing MTO property
envelope at the Highway 89 interchange than Alternative 2 (Parclo B configuration).
As a result, Alternative 1 would require less additional property, thereby having less
of an impact to the agricultural operations and displacing fewer businesses
immediately adjacent to the interchange. It is noted that both alternatives displace
the parking lot and service centre/restaurant within the northwest quadrant of the
existing interchange.
In addition, Alternative 1 would provide for more favourable traffic operations than
Alternative 2 because the Parclo A configuration offers free flow traffic movement
from the ramps onto the freeway, resulting in the highest interchange capacity.
The preferred Highway 89 interchange (Alternative 1) is shown in Exhibit 4.17.
Essa Road Interchange
The complete analysis and evaluation for the Essa Road interchange alternatives are
provided in Exhibits 4.24 and 4.25, respectively. Alternative 1 provides greater
transportation benefits since the new configuration eliminates the eastbound left-turn
to access southbound Highway 400 with a free-flow ramp. Eliminating a left turn on
Essa Road, a busy arterial road, is considered a significant benefit to the local
transportation network. Alternative 1, shown in Exhibit 4.26 is the preferred Essa
Road interchange.
Dunlop Street Interchange
The ~omp~ete analysis and evaluation for. the Dunlop Street interchange alternatives
is provided in Exhibits 427 and 4.28, respectively. Due to the extent of development
in the interchange area, any substantial improvements to the interchange will result in
impac~s to adjacent land uses. The majority of the impacts associated with
Alternative 1 (parclo B interchange configuration) are generally located in the
northeast quadrant of the interchange, which includes Dunlop Village Plaza and a
residential area, and the southwest quadrant, which includes a car dealership and
restaurant. The majority of the impacts associated with Alternative 2 (Parclo A
configuration) are generally located. in the northwest quadrant of the interchange,
which includes Cedar Pointe Plaza, and the southeast quadrant, which includes two
car dealerships and two large hotels. It is recognized that both alternatives carry high
impacts to the adjacent land uses at this interchange.
In terms of which alternative offers the greatest transportation benefits, Alternative 1
would result in more improved traffic flow on Dunlop Street. Alternative 2 would
require two additional traffic signals on Dunlop Street at the ramp tenninals. Traffic
operations on the section of Dunlop Street between Anne Street and Cedar Pointe
Drive would be greatly affected and would likely experience extensive congestion
during peak travel periods.
(Text continues on page 78)
Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
The complete analysis and evaluation for the Innisfil Beach Road interchange
alternatives are provided in Exhibits 4.18 and 4.19, respectively. Alternative 1
(P3!clo A interchange configuration) provides better overall traffic operations with
the free-flow ramp configuration eliminating the need for left turn lanes, as well as
simplified ramp movements that are more consistent with driver expectations.
Alternative 1 impacts slightly more forested area (consisting of upland Maple trees
and mixed wood) relative to the other alternatives considered and would require
some property (but no building displacement) from the commercial properties
fronting the east side of the highway. However, given the superior traffic operation
benefits of Alternative 1, this alternative offers the best balance of transportation
benefits and environmental impacts. Alternative 1 is, therefore, the preferred
alternative. A plan of the preferred Innisfil Beach Road interchange is shown in
Exhibit 420.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 53 -
April 2004
ORS
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE AL TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARCLO B INTERCHANGE
Natural El1viro1llltellt
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat Subjective Moderate impact Moderate impact
--
Number of fish habitat 14 crossings /367 m of Type 2 Warmwater Habitat 14 crossings /390 m of Type 2 Warmwater Habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel length #/m 4 crossings of Type 2 Coldwater Habitat (lnnisfil Creek) 2 crossings of Type 2 Coldwater Habitat (lnnisfil Creek)
affected by expanded ROW
Terrestrial Environment Number of wildlife travel corridorsllinkages # 0 0
affected
-----_.
Area of significant wildlife habitats ha 0.1 ha Deer Wintering 0.1 ha Deer Wintering
impacted ---. -
Number and area of significant vegetation #/ha 0 0
communities impacted ---
Number and area of provincially significant #/ha 1/ 0.1 ha (Cookstown Hollows Swamp) 1/ 0.1 ha (Cookstown Hollows Swamp)
wetlands impacted --.- r-------- - -- -..-
Area through upland forests impacted ha 0 0
---
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) / Environmental #lha 0 0
Simificant Areas ffiSAs)
Groundwater Potential interference with water wells and
area of flowing wells and high water table # of wells impacted 3 3
--
Potential impact to groundwater recharge ha 0 0
and discharge areas
Surface Water Ability to provide Storm Water Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net increase in pavement area, partially off-set Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net increase in pavement area, partially off-set
Management (SWM) Subjective by the removal of McDonalds and Petro Canada and associated parking lots. New and/or extended culverts are required. by the removal of McDonalds and Petro Canada and associated parking lots. New anlor extended culverts are required.
Social Environment
Aesthetics Impact to aesthetic quality of existing Low impact Low impact
Subjective Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field, tree plantations and hedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the Existing vegetation cover (Le. old field, tree plantations and hedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the
landscape in the vicinity of ROW interchange ramps and road realil!llments. interc~e ram~~d road realignments.
- ---
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the Subjective No significant impact No significant impact
road and from the road
Noise
Impact to noise sensitive receivers Analysis Low impact to one residence and moderate impact to KOA Campground. Low impact to one residence and moderate impact to KOA Campground.
Residential Number of residences displaced # 0 0
--- - --. ----------
Residential property affected #lha 0 0
(partial takings)
Community Effects Impact to community mobility Subjective Low impact Low impact
(maximum out-of-way travel) 756 m out-of-way travel along r~ligned Reive Road. - 756 m out-of-way travel along realigned Reive R~d. --
Impact to community/recreational/ #/ha 0 0
institutional/park features
-- -- "'---'--- -
Impact to municipal utilities/residential Subjective Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange. Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
services
--- --..- -
Impact to emergency services access Subjective No impact No impact
Compatibility with Future Impact to approved future land use plans Subjective No impact No impact
Land Use
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT mGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Highway 89
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 15 a
I
I
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE AL TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARCLO B INTERCHANGE
Economic Environment
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 1.4 ha 2.5 ha
---------
Number of operations displaced # 0 0
._- -. --------.--.---..-...-.. - - ----
Number of operations affected # 4 4
-- .- ---.--------.--
Impact to aecess (out-of-way travel) Subjective No impact No impact
CommerciallIndustrial Uses
Number of businesses displaced # 2 businesses (petro Canada Gas Station, McDonalds) 3 businesses (Petro Canada Gas Station, McDonalds, Road Show Antiques)
-. -. - --.---.- .--
Commercial property affected #Iha 4 properties (Motel 400, Cookstown Outlet Mall, Road Show Antiques, KOA Campground) / 7.8 ha 2 properties (Cookstown Outlet Mall, KOA Campground) / 4.7 ha
(partial takings)
e-:--- -- --
Impact to business access Subjective Low impact Low impact
2 business accesses (RV Warehouse, Road Show Antiques) being displaced and would require realignment. 2 business accesses (RV Warehouse, Road Show Antiques) being displaced and would require realignment.
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on ProvinciaVFederal Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected.
iuitiatives
Property Waste and Number of properties affected that have
Contamination known or high potential for # of properties / ha I property with moderate to high potential for waste and contamination /0.7 ha I property with moderate to high potential for waste and contamination. / 0.7 ha
waste/contamination
Cultural Environment
Archaeological Resources Area of properties affected with ha 1.35 ha 3.4 ha
archaeological notential
Heritage Resources Number and description of heritage!
historical features or cultural landscapes # 0 0
impacted
Transoortation & Engineerina
Traffic Operations Favourable Less Favourable
Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in advance of the structure. Free-flow moves onto Movements from the freeway do not pass through traffic signals, which reduces the possibility of traffic backing up on
Interchange operations Subjective freeway result in highest interchange capacity. Stops and traffic signals for left turns are confined to ramps only, which the freeway_ High-speed freeway traffic, however, must exit to a low-speed inner loop ramp, which is operationally less
eliminates the need for a left turn lane on Highway 89. Ramp movements are consistent with driver expectation and lend desirable. Traffic making WoN and E-S movements must make left tums from Highway 89 onto ramps to Highway 400.
well to signage. This will require traffic signals and an additional lane for left turns on Highway 89. Ramp movements are not consistent
-. .------.-~iIDpact --- -- .--- with driver expectation:._________...____.__
Local road network access & operations Subjective No impact
- Minor reali~ent of Reive Road to opposite outlet mall entrance. .. ---- Minor realignment of Reiv~ Road to op~osite outlet mall ep.trance. ___ ..._-
Degree to which existing geometric Moderate to High Moderate to High
All ramps upgraded to exceed minimum requirements for urban interchanges: E-N, N-FJW and S-FJW ramps upgraded to All ramps upgraded to exceed miuimum requirements for urban interchanges: FJW-S and FJW-N ramps exceed urban
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are Subjective meet urban interchange standards; E-N ramp upgraded and exceeds minimum requirements; inner loop ramps exceed interchange standards; S-E and N-W ramps meet urban interchange standards; inner loops exceed minimum
addressed minimum requirements, which is an improvement on existing conditions. requirements, which is an improvement on existing conditions.
Construction Impacts Moderate Moderate
Construction complexity Subjective Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Structural work may require profile Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Structural work may require profile
- - adjustment on Highway 89. ~~!II1ent ~~waL89.
Impact on traffic during coustruction Subjective Low to Moderate Low to Moderate
--- .._--~-_. All movements maintained during construction, however, reduced operating speeds are ex~ted. _.__ All movements maintained during constructiop., however, reduced operating ~~ are. expected.
Duration of Construction Quantitative 2 seasons 2 seasons
Commuter Parking Impact to commuter parking lot Subjective Moderate Moderate
Sufficient vacant (privately held) land in vicinitv of interchange for siting commuter lot. Sufficient vacant (privately held) land in vicinity of interchange for siting commuter lot.
Cost
Cost Construction cost estimates Percentage of lowest 100% 100%
Property required (permanent) ha 12.3 ha 14.7 ha
@ Ontario
mGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT mGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Highway 89
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 15 b
CATEGORY -NATURAL ENvIRONMF..NT
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1
PARCLO A
INTERCHANGE
1 FISHERIES & ~
AQUATIC HABITAT
2 TERRESTRIAL 0
ENVIRONMENT
3 GROUNDWATER 0
4 SURFACE WATER 0
CATEGORY ~
SUMMARY
ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE
o
o
o
o
o
Summarv of Effects on the Natural EnvironmenJ
CATEGORY - Et:ONOMIC ENVIRONME."IT
COMMENTS
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PAReLoA PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
1 AGRICULTURAL 0 ~
2 COMMERCIAL I 0 ~
INDUSTRIAL USES
3 SPECIAL POLICY 0 0
AREAS
4 PROPERTY 0 0
WASTE &
CONTAMINATION
CATEGORY 0 ~
SUMMARY
Both alternatives result in impacts to fisheries and aquatic habitat, however Alternative I will have
slightly higher impacts as a result of additional number of coldwater habitat crossings.
Difference between the two alternatives is insignificant.
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to water wells.
Both alternatives result in similar increases on paved areas and have opportunities for storm water
facilities in the interchange.
Although the number of stream crossings impacted by both alternatives is high, the impact is of low signifICance because the nature of the impacts entails minor culvert extensions for
water courses which have already been impacted by adjacent land uses and the highway. Alternative I results in slightly higher impacts due to additional coldwater crossings.
Potential opportunities exist with both alternatives to provide for stonn water managetrent within the interchange.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 21S SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
CA TEGORV - SOCIAL ENvIRONMENT
FACTOR
ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TlVE 2
PARCLOA PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 AESTHETICS
2 NOISE
3 RESIDENTIAL
4 COMMUNITY
EFFECTS
5 COMPATIBILITY
WITH FUTURE
LAND USE
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
Summarv of Effects on the Social EnvironmenJ
Both alternatives result in the same low impacts to the social environment.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
@ Ontario
Summary of Effects on the Economic Environment
Both alternatives result in relatively low impacts to the economic environment. Alternative 2 results in slightly more impacts to agricultural land and more impacts to hosiness
operations.
I
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS PREFERRED.
COMMENTS
CATEGORY - Cl1LTtJRAL ENVIRONM~"
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the existing vegetation cover and have no significant
impact on sensitive viewer groups.
FACTOR AL TERNA TIVE 1
PARCLO A
INTERCHANGE
1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 0
RESOURCES
2 HERITAGE 0
RESOURCES
CATEGORY 0
SUMMARY
o
o
AL TERNA TIVE 2
PARCLO B
INTERCHANGE
o
Realignment of Reive Road (identical for both alternatives) will have an expected low to possible
moderate noise impact on the nearby campground. Alternative 2 is expected to cause noise impacts
marginally higher than Alternative I but is not perceivable (less than 5 dBA). Therefore from a noise
perspective, the alternatives are essentially equivalent
Neither alternative impacts residential property.
Both alternatives impact community mobility (756 m maximum out-of-way travel) for local
commuters with the realignment of Reive Road.
Summarv Effects on the Cultural EnvironmenJ
Both alternatives have similar low impacts to the cultural environment.
Neither alternative impacts land dedicated to future land use.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
COMMENTS
I
Both alternatives impact agricultural land and disrupt fiuming operations, although Alternative 2
results in slightly greater impacts to agricultural land.
Both alternatives displace the conunercial operations in the interchange; Alternative 2 displaces
an additional business. This displacetrent is considered more significant than the greater
disruption impacts associated with Alternative 1.
Neither alternative will have an effect on Provincial or Federal initiatives for future land use.
I
Both alternatives ",ill have impacts to land with high waste and contamination potential (petro
Canada Gas Station).
I
I
I
COMMENTS
I
Both alternatives impact land with archaeological potential.
Neither alternative impacts beritage resources.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Exhibit
4.16 a
Evaluation of Highway 89
Interchange Alternatives
I
I
CATEGORY -
FACfOR
CA TEGORY - TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERI1~G" COST
FACfOR
.. RELATIVE LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
ALTERNATIVE 1
PARCW A
INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVE 1
PARCLO A
INTERCHANGE
o
1 TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS
2 CONSTRUCTION
IMPACfS
3 COMMUTER
PARKING
4 COST
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
o
o
o
o
Summon of Effects on TrtULfDlll'tiltitm and Enllineerinlt
ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCW B
INTERCHANGE
<l)
o
o
o
<l)
COMMENTS
ALTERNATIVE 2
PARcwB
INTERCHANGE
Alternative I provides higher capacity with free-flow moves onto Highway 400. The free-
flow moves also eliminate the need for left turn lanes on Highway 89. Alternative I
provides for more simplified and predictable movements between Highway 400 and
Highway 89 and is more consistent with driver expectation.
1 NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT
<l)
o
Both alternatives win require complex staging to maintain all traffic movements dining
construction and reduced operating speeds during construction should be expected from
both alternatives.
Low
Both alternatives have moderate potential to site a commuter parking lot in vicinity of the
interchange.
2 SOCIAL 0 0
ENVIRONMENT Low
3 ECONOMIC 0 <l)
ENVIRONMENT
Low
4 CULTURAL 0 0
ENVIRONMENT Low
5 TRANSPORTATION 0 <l)
& ENGINEERING &
COST High
SumrtUlTY of Evaluation:
No signifICant difference in cost.
Alternative I provides for more favourable traffic operations than Alternative 2. Further, Alternative I is equal to Alternative 2 in the other transportation and engineering
factors, and carries similar construction costs.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS PREFERRED.
@ Ontario
COMMENTS
Although the number of stream crossings impacted by both alternatives is high. the
impact is of low significance because the nature of the impacts entails minor culvert
extensions for water courses which have already been impacted by adjacent land uses
and the highway. Alternative I resuhs in slightly higher impacts due to additioual
coldwater crossings. Potential opportunities exist with both a1tematives to provide for
storm water management within the interchange.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives resuh in the same low impacts to the social environment.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives result in relatively low impacts to the economic environment.
Alternative 2 resuhs in slightly more impacts to agricultural land and more impacts to
business operations.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE liS PREFERRED.
Both alternatives have similar low impacts to the cu1tma1 environment.
THEREFORE, BOrn ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Alternative I provides for more favourable traffic operations than Alternative 2. Further,
Alternative I is equal to Alternative 2 in the other transportation and engineering factors,
and carries similar construction costs.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
AlternaIives I and 2 have simi1ar impacts to the social and cultural environments. The measurable differences between Alternatives I and 2 relate to the number of coldwater stream crossing
impacts, the number of businesses displaced. and the traffic operations provided. Although Alternative I impacts more coldwater streams, the overall impacts are of low significance. The
more favourable traffic operations provided by Alternative I and the lower business displacement impacts are considered to be more important than the differences in impacts to coldwater
streams.
THEREFORE, AL TERNA TIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Evaluation of Highway 89
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4.16 b
--
-
~_."
,i"""",> ,_:
;"''''''.::.;''
.:;,P
d:;......(
-~.
D ,-
..J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
D
~.._-~~~-----""-.
----.._~--,,-
"
<;
&'
t
i!.
--
--------...:::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::;..- -
e
LEGEND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
~
SCALE
1""\--
--
SOm 0
I
100m
---
EXHIBIT
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
URS
HIGHWAY 89
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED PLAN
4.17
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Natural Ehvimnment
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat
Terrestrial Environment
Groundwater
Surface Water
Social Environment
Aesthetics
Noise
Residential
Community Effects
I
Compatibility with Future
Land Use
I
I
I
Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat
Number of fish habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel
length affected by expanded ROW
Number of wildlife travel
corridors/linkages <I.!!~~_"_
Area of significant wildlife habitats
impacted
Number and area of significant vegetation
.~mmunities im~~5:~
Number and area of provincially
significant wetlands impacted
Area through upland forests impacted
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) I
Environmental Si ificant Areas (ESAs)
Potential interference with water wells and
area of flowing wells and high water table
Potential impact to groundwater recharge
and discharge areas
Ability to provide Storm Water
Management (SWM)
Impact to aesthetic quality of existing
landscape in the vicinity of ROW
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the
road and from the road
Impact to noise sensitive receivers
Number of residences displaced
Residential property affected
(partial takings)
Impact to community mobility
(maximum out-of-way travel)
Impact to community/recreationaV
institutionaVpark features
Impact to municipal utilities/residential
services
Impact to emergency services access
Impact to approved future land use plans
I
@ Ontario
I
Subjective
#/m
#
ha
#/ha
#/ha
ha
-----
#/ha
# of wells impacted
ha
Subjective
Subjective
Subjecti ve
Analysis
#
#/ha
Subjective
#/ha
Subjective
Subjective
Subjecti ve
No impact
No impact
No impact
-----.--
o
o
o
o
o
o
-----
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
p-------
0.3 ha (of upland maple and mixed wood forest impacted)
0.2 ha (of upland maple and mixed wood forest impacted)
0.2 ha (of upland maple and mixed wood forest impacted)
o
o
o
3
3
3
o
o
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net
increase in pavement area. New drainage infrastructure required.
Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net
increase in pavement area. New drainage infrastructure required.
Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net
increase in pavement area, but less than for Altematives I and 2. New drainage
infrastructure re uiced.
Low impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field and hedgerows) required to be removed
to accommodate the interchange ramps and road realignments.
No significant impact
Low impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field and hedgerows) required to be removed
to accommodate the interchange ramps and road realignments.
No significant impact
Low impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field and hedgerows) required to be removed
__!o accol!!!I!~te. the interchange I!!!lPs and !<:!'Id reali~ments.__
No significant impact
Low noise impact to adjacent residences.
Low noise impact to adjacent residences.
Low noise impact to adjacent residences.
o
o
o
._----"-------
o
o
o
No impact
No impact
No impact
-------..
o
o
o
. .. . .. ..
..--..-.---.-.--------. ----_._~-_._-.__.
Potential impact to Hydro Tower in the vicinity of the interchange.
Potential impact to Hydro Tower in the vicinity of the interchange.
Potential impact to Hydro Tower in the vicinity of the interchange.
------~-_....
No impact
No impact
No impact
Potential impact to approved plans for development on the northwest and
southwest quadrants of the interchange.
Potential impact to approved plans for development on the northwest and
southwest quadrants of the interchange.
Potential impact to approved plans for development on the northwest and
southwest quadrants of the interchange.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 Kl'\f SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Innisfil Beach Road
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 18 a
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3
PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARCLO B INTERCHANGE DIAMOND (NB) / PARCLO A (SB) INTERCHANGE
Economic Environment
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 4.5 ha 4.1 ha 4.5 ha
-- -- --
Number of operations displaced # 0 0 0
- --
Number of operations affected # 2 2 2
--
Impact to access (out-of-way travel) Subjective No impact No impact No impact
ComnrerciaInndusUialUs~ Number of businesses displaced # 0 0 0
--- --.- ---.--..-. -
Commercial property affected 9 properties (Santa's Chalet & Gift Store, Viceroy Display Homes, Boat & RV
#Iha Auctions, Original Flag Store, Sandy Cove Marine, Mini Storage, MacKenzie 3 properties (Boat & RV Auctions, Original Flag Store, 400 Market) /3.64 ha 2 properties (Sandy Cove Marine, 400 Market) / 0.62 ha
(partial takings) Furniture House, Munroe's Furnishings, 400 Market) /1.77 ha
- -
Impact to business access Subjective No significant impact No significant impact No significant impact
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on ProvinciallFederal Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected.
initiatives
Property Waste and Number of properties affected that have
Contamination known or high potential for # of properties / ha 1 property with low potential for waste and contamination / 0.1 ha 1 property with low potential for waste and contamination / 0.1 ha 1 property with low potential for waste and contamination / 0.1 ha
waste/contamination
Cultural Environment
Archaeological Resourc~ Area of properties affected with ha 5.5 ha 7.7ha 5.2ha
archaeololrical Dotential
Heritage R~ourc~ Number and description of heritage! 1 1 1
historical features or cultural landscapes # Potential impact to a known heritage feature property (former fannhonse -3576) Potential impact to a known heritage feature property (former fannhouse -3576) Potential impact to a known heritage feature property (former fannhouse -3576)
impacted located north of Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21 west of Highway 400. located north of Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21 west of Highway 400. located north of Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21 west of Highway 400.
Transoortation & EnaineedntJ'
Traffic Operatious Least Favourable
Favourable Less Favourable Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in advance of
Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in advance of High-speed traffic must exit from the freeway to a low-speed inner loop ramp, the structure. A disadvantage is that traffic making the W-N movement must
the structure. Free-flow moves onto freeway result in highest interchange which is operationally less desirable. Traffic making W-N and E-S movements make a left turn from Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21 onto the ramp to
Interchange operations Subjective capacity. Stops and traffic signals for left turns are confined to ramps only, must make left turns from Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21 onto ramps to Highway 400. Also, the diamond ramps increase the potential for wrong-way
which eliminate the need for a left turn lane on Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Highway 400. This will require traffic signals and an additional lane for left moves and introduce more points of conflict than other ramp types. Traffic
Road 21. This interchange type lends well to signage, which reduces the turns on Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. Ramps are not consistent with signals will be required on Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21 to control
possibility of wrong way moves. Ramps are consistent with driver expectation. driver expectation. traffic at the ramp terminals leading to Highway 400. Spacing between ramp
terminals is sufficient for left turn storage. Ramps are not consistent with driver
-- --
Local road network access & operations Subjecti ve Minor realignment of Industrial Park Road. No impact to operations. Minor realignment of Industrial Park Road. No impact to operations. Minor realignment of Industrial Park Road. No impact to operations.
-. -
Moderate to High High Moderate to High
Degree to which existing geometric All ramps upgraded to meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban All ramps upgraded to meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban All ramps upgraded to meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are Subjective interchanges: S-FJW and N-FJW ramps upgraded to urban interchange interchanges: FJW-S and FJW-N ramps upgraded and exceed urban interchange interchanges: S-FJW and N-FJW ramps upgraded to urban interchange
addressed standards; W-S and E-N ramps upgraded to exceed urban interchange standards; standards; S-E and N-W ramps upgraded and meet urban interchange standards; standards; W-S and FJW-N ramps upgraded to exceed urban interchange
E-S and W-N inner loop ramps exceed minimum requirements and improve on N-E and S- W ramps exceed minimum requirements. standards; E-S inner loop ramp exceeds minimum requirements and improve on
the existing conditions. the existin!! condition.
Construction Impacts High High Moderate to High
Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction.
Construction complexity Subjective Structural work will complicate staging and may require profile adjustment on Structural work will complicate staging and may require profile adjustment on Structural work will complicate staging and may require profile adjustment on
Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. However, ramp configuration will make
- -' construction simpler than the other alternatives. --
Moderate to High
High High Construction will require detours and temporary ramp and lane closures on
Impact on traffic during construction Subjective Construction will require detours and temporary ramp and lane closures on Construction will require detours and temporary ramp; and lane closures on Highway 400 and on Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. Disruption to ramp
Highway 400 and on Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. Highway 400 and on Innisfil Beach Road/Simcoe Road 21. traffic is minimized as construction of 4 of the 5 proposed ramps will not affect
the construction of the new structure.
Duration of Construction Quantitative 2 Seasons 2 Seasons 2 Seasons
Commuter Parking Not applicable, commuter parking lot proposed to be relocated east of Not applicable, commuter parking lot proposed to be relocated east of Not applicable, commuter parking lot proposed to be relocated east of
Impact to commuter parking lot Subjective interchange. interchange. interchange.
Cost
Cost Construction cost estimates Percentage of 125 % 120% 100%
lowest
Property required (permanent) ha 6.6 ha 7.7ha 5.1ha
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
HIGEnNAY400PLA~NGSTUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Innisfil Beach Road
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 18 b
I
I
.
I
I CATEGORY - NATURAL ENvIRONMENT CATEGORY - F...cONOMIC r~VIRONME]"'T
FACTOR AI. TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMMENTS FACTOR AI. TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 C01\fM:ENTS
PARCLO A PARCLO B DIAMOND (NB)/ PARCLO A PARCLO B DIAMOND (NB)/
I INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE PARCLOA (SB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE PARCLOA (SB)
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
I FISHERIES & 0 0 0 Neither alternative impacts fisheries and aquatic habitat. 1 AGRICULTURAL 0 0 0 All alternatives result in similar low impacts to agricultural land and operations.
I AQUATIC
HABITAT
~ 0 0 All alternatives have a low impact to the telTestrial environment. Alternative I results in slightly 2 C01\fM:ERCIAL I (i) Q) 0 None of the alternatives displace businesses, but Alternative 2 results in the greatest
2 TERRESTRIAL disruption impacts to corrnnercial property.
ENVIRONMENT more impacts to forested land because slightly more upland and mixed forest area will be lost INDUSTRIAL USES
compared to the other alternatives. 0 0 0 None of the alternatives will have an affect on Provincial or Federal initiatives for future
I 0 0 0 Nether alternative impacts recharge or discharge areas. 3 SPECIAL POLICY land use.
3 GROUNDWATER AREAS
4 PROPERTY 0 0 0 All alternatives impact a parcel of land with a low potential for waste and contamination
4 SURFACE WATER (i) (i) 0 All alternatives provide opportunities for stonn water treatment facilities in the interchange WASTE & (cbemical plant).
however, Alternative 3 is prefelTed since it results in a slightly lower increase in paved areas.
I CONTAMINATION
CATEGORY Q) (i) 0 CATEGORY (i) Q) 0
SUMMARY SUMMARY
I Summorv of Effects on the Natural Environment: SUm11UUY of Effects on the Economic Environment
There are no significant impacts to the natural enviromrent for any alternatives. A small loss of forested land is expected for all alternatives, however Alternatives 2 and 3 will affect
less forested area than Alternative J. Alternative 3 has less potential for surface water impacts since it has a lower increase in pavement area. Overall, Alternative 3 has the least impact to existing businesses where as Alternative 2 has the greatest disruption impacts to connnercial property.
I TIIEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED. THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3IS PREFERRED.
CA TEGORY _ Q",,,... CATEGORY - CIJLTIIRALEN"'IR.ONMENT
I FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMMENTS FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 AI. TERNA TIVE 3 COMMENTS
PARCLO A PARCLOB DIAMOND (NB)/ PARCLOA PARCLOB DIAMOND (NB)/
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE PARCLOA(SB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE PARCLOA (SB)
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
I 1 AESTIIETICS 0 0 0 An alternatives result in similar low impacts to the existing vegetation cover and to sensitive 0 0 0 An alternatives impact land with archaeological potential.
viewer groups. 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
0 0 0 Alternative I is most similar to existing conditions and is expected to cause a low impact. All alternatives result in similar low impacts to one built heritage feature (fannhouse).
2 NOISE Alternative 2 involves ramp structures that are not similar to existing conditions. Low impacts 2 HERITAGE 0 0 0
I are expected due to the significant distance of noise-sensitive receptors from the interchange. RESOURCES
Alternative 3 involves minimal changes and similarly low impacts are expected. Therefore, ITom 0 0 0
a noise impact perspective. all three alternatives are essentially equivalent. CATEGORY
SUMMARY
3 RESID&VfIAL 0 0 0 Neither alternative impacts residential property.
I SummarY Effects on the Cultural Environment
4 C01\fM:UN1TY 0 0 0 All alternatives will have low community effects. All alternatives result in similar low impacts to the cultural environment.
EFFECTS
THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
I 5 COMPATIBILITY 0 0 0 All alternatives result in low impacts to land with approved plans for commerciallinduslrial
WITII FUTURE development located in the northwest and southwest quadrant of Innisfil RoadlSimcoe Road 21
LAND USE and Highway 400.
CATEGORY 0 0 0
I SUMMARY
SUI1I1narv of Effects on the Social Environment ."". ;-~ ..""...
All alternatives impact the aesthetic quality of the existing landscape and result in minor impacts to sensitive viewer groups. An alternatives result in low noise impacts to residences ..4 ....
I adjacent to the highway. The potentially low impacts to the approved commercialfmdustrial development for all alternatives are cnnsidered minor. ..Y'. ....
1\iI"d ...... ... , I
TIIEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
I
I @
Ontario IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY Evaluation of Innisfil Beach Road Exhibit
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11 Interchange Alternatives 4. 19 a
G.W.P.30-95-oo
CATEGORY - TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING & COSTS
FACTOR AL TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMMENTS
PARCLOA PARCLOB DIAMOND (NB)I
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE PARCLOA (SB)
INTERCHANGE
TRAFFIC 0 ~ Q) Alternative 1 provides the highest capacity since all moves to Highway 400 are
free-flow. Unlike Alternatives 2 and 3, which require left turn movements from
OPERATIONS Innisfil Beach Road to Highway 400, the free-flow ramps in Alternative I
eliminate the need for left turn lanes. Alternatives 2 and 3 will adequately serve
future traffic volwnes. Alternative 3, however, has a higher potential for wrong-
way moves and is therefore least prefeued from a traffic operations perspective.
Alternative I provides the most simplified and predictable movements from
Highway 400 to 1nnisfil Beach Road and is most consistent with driver
expectation.
2 CONSTRUCTION ~ ~ 0 Alternatives 1 and 2 will require complex construction staging, which will cause
significant disruption to traffic. Alternative 3 will aho require complex
IMPACTS construction staging, however. to a lesser degree. Due to it's simpler interchange
design, construction staging will be simplified and result in less disruption to
traffic.
3 COMMUTER 0 0 0 Not applicable, commuter parking lot proposed to be relocated east of interchange.
PARKING
4 COST ~ ~ 0 Alternative 3 has the lowest cost.
CATEGORY 0 ~ ~
SUMMARY
CATEGORY - SUMMARY OF EVALUATION
FACTOR · RELATIVE LEVEL AL TERNA TlVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3 COMMENTS
OF SIGNIFICANCE PARCLOA PARCLOB DIAMOND (NB)/
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE PARCLOA (SB)
INTERCHANGE
1 NATURAL G) ~ 0 1bere are no significant impacts to the natura1 environment for any alternatives.
A small loss of forested land is expected for all alternatives, however Alternatives
ENVIRONMENT 2 and 3 will affect less forested area than Alternative 1. Alternative 3 has less
Low potential for surface water impacts since it bas a lower increase in pavement area.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3 IS SLIGIITLY PREFERRED.
0 0 0 All alternatives impact the aesthetic quality of the existing landscape and result in
2 SOCIAL minor impacts to sensitive viewer groups. All alternatives result in low noise
ENVIRONMENT impacts to residences adjacent to the highway. 1be potentially low impacts to
the approved connnercialfmdustrial development for all alternatives are onsidered
Low minor.
THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC ~ G) 0 Overall, Alternative 3 has the least impact to existing businesses wbere as
Alternative 2 has the greatest disruption impacts to connnercial property.
ENVIRONMENT Low
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3 IS PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL 0 0 0 All alternatives result in similar low impacts to the cultura1 environment.
ENVIRONMENT Low THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION 0 ~ ~ 1be benefits of the superior traffic operations offered by Alternative 1 outweigh
& ENGINEERING & the lower costs and construction impacts of the other alternatives. While all
COST alternatives are adequate to serve future traffic demands, Alternative 1 is most
favourable from an overall traffic operations perspective as it provides the highest
High capacity, eliminates left turns from Innisfil Beach Road and reduces the possibility
of wrong-way moves.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Sum11UlTV of Evaluation:
Alternative I ranks highest under transportation and engineering, as it provides better overall traffic operations. 1be impacts of Alternative I to the natura1, social and economic environments
are low and can be reduced through refining the design; the differences in transportation and engineering cannot. 1be benefit of superior traffic operations outweighs the slightly higher
environmental impacts.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Summar; of Effects on Transoorliltion and EnrineerinR
1be benefits of the superior traffic operations offered by Alternative 1 outweigh the lower costs and construction impacts of the other alternatives. While all alternatives are
adequate to serve future traffic demands, Alternative I is most favourable from an overall traffic operations perspective as it provides the highest capacity, eliminates left
turns from 1nnisfil Beach Road and reduces the possibility of wrong-way moves.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
@ Ontario
Evaluation of Innisfil Beach Road
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 19 b
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROPOSED SUBOMSlON
.~..,....- -'..-.,,-...-.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :>>O<t; ~.~t; -;.:.=- ;;:~ -=-; -= -=--:
----.......,
~ -,
; 400 MARKET
i
L---.-?
"-.,; \
(')
o
1=
z
G)
~
o
o
o
~
~
~
~'~
....~. ......-.
-, ..,' .
. -- (J)
.! ; .
I (")
:..' 0
;fl~ m
~. ;0
~' 0
... )>
~.: 0
1\ !'oJ
~ ...
Plan reflects proposed interim improvements,
i~cluding realignment of Industrial Park Road
and relocation of commuter parking lot, as
completed by MTO.
LEGEND
e SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
- - - EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
-----$-
SCALE 1 :5000
,,-,--
--
50m 0
I
100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 INNISFIL BEACH ROAD 4.20
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 TECHNICALL Y PREFERRED PLAN
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
I
INDICATOR MEASURE ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE 2
EVALUATION FACTOR OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS DIAMOND (5B) I PARCLO B (NB) INTERCHANGE
NatIJral.Environinent
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat Subjective No impact No impact
Number of fish habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel #/m 0 0
length affected by expanded ROW
Terrestrial Environment Number of wildlife travel # 0 0
corridors/linkages affected
Area of significant wildlife habitats ha 0 0
impacted - -. -
Number and area of significant vegetation #lha 0 0
communities impacted ------.
Number and area of provincially #/ha 0 0
significant wetlands impacted ----
Area through upland forests impacted ha 0 0
..- --,-
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) 1 #/ha 0 0
Environmental Si!!1lificant Areas (ESAs)
Groundwater Potential interference with water wells and I
area of flowing wells and high water table # of wells impacted I
~tial impact to groundwa~ recharge ---- -- --~-~------- --.
ha 0 0
and discharge areas
Surface Water Ability to provide Storm Water N/A Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Increase in highway pavement area, which is
Management (SWM) Subjective partially offset by the removal of Molson Brewery and associated parking lot.
Social Environment
Aesthetics Impact to aesthetic quality of existing Subjective No significant impact to the existing vegetation cover. Low impact to the existing vegetation cover due to the new ramp.
landscape in the vicinity of ROW -- -
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the Subjective No significant impact No significant impact
road and from the road
Noise
Impact to noise sensitive receivers Analysis No noise impacts to nearby residences due to interchange improvements. No noise impacts to nearby residences due to interchange improvements.
Residential Number of residences displaced # 0 0
- - .--. .------ -------..---
Residential property affected #lha 0 0
(partial takings)
Community Effects Impact to community mobility Subjective No impact Slight improvement for eastbound and westbound movement along Molson Park Drive from northbound Highway 400
~um out-of-way travel) ~_ ...L
---- .-.---.---------
Impact to community/recreationaV #/ha Molson Park 1 0.6 ha Molson Park 11.6 ha
institutionaVpark features
__m_ .-
Impact to municipal utilities/residential Subjective Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange. Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
services
..--.-----.--.-- f..- -_.'-'--- -------
Impact to emergency services access Subjective No impact No impact
Compatibility with Future Impact to approved future land use plans Subjective No impact No impact
Land Use
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Molson Park Drive
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 21 a
I
I
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE AL TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS DIAMOND (5B) f PARCLO B (NB) INTERCHANGE
EconomiC.El7virol7me11t
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 0 0
-
Number of operations displaced # 0 0
- -. -
Number of operations affected # 0 0
_.- --
Impact to access (out-of-way travel) Subjective No impact No impact
CommerciaVIndustrial Uses 0
Number of businesses displaced # 0
Commercial property affected #Iha 7 properties (Crafter Market, St. Onge Recreation, Kempenfelt Graphics, Georgian Business Complex, Northern Self 9 properties (Crafter Market, St. Onge Recreation, Kempenfelt Graphics, Georgian Business Complex, Northern Self
(partial takings) Storage, Cedar Hill Plaza, Car dealership) / 0.4 ha Storage, Cedar Hill Plaza, Car dealership, Ontario Tourist Information, Molson Brewery) I 3.3 ha
Impact to business access Subjective No impact No impact
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on ProvinciaVFederal Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected.
initiatives
Property Waste and Number of properties affected that have
Contamination known or high potential for # of properties I ha 0 1 property with low to moderate potential for waste and contamination. /3.1 ha
waste/contamination
Cultural.Environment
Archaeological Resources Area of properties affected with ha 0 0
archaeololrical notential
Heritage Resources Number and description of heritage!
historical features or cultural landscapes # 0 0
impacted
Transportation & Engineeriltg
Traffic Operations Favourable
Favourable Northbound Traffic from the freeway do not pass through traffic signals when exiting to Molson Park Drive, which
Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in advance of the structure. A disadvantage is that reduces the possibility of traffic backing up on the freeway. However, the proximity of traffic signals dilutes the
Interchange operations Subjective traffic making the W-N and E-S movements must make left turns from Molson Park Drive onto the ramps to Highway benefits of the free flow ramps. Another disadvantage of this configuration is that high-speed freeway traffic must exit
400. Due to closely spaced signalized ramp tenninals, multiple left turn storage lanes are required for the W-N movement. to a low-speed inner loop ramp on a downgrade. Also, traffic making WoN and E-S movements must make left turns
Diamond ramps introduce many points of conflict on Molson Park Drive and potential for wrong-way moves. Ramp from Molson Park Drive onto ramps to Highway 400. Due to closely spaced ramp terminals, multiple left turn storage
movements are not consistent with driver expectation and there is potential for wrong way turns. lanes will be required for the W-N movement. Interchange design introduces many points of conflict on Molson Park
- Drive. Ra~movements are not consistent with driver expectation and there is potential for wrol!.8.. way turns.
Local road network access & operations Subjective Local access/routes maintained. Local access/routes maintained. Due to heavy volumes on Molson Park Drive, traffic from the S- W loop ramp may
- experience difficulty crossing the 3 westbound lanes to enter !he Barrie 400 Power Centre.
Degree to which existing geometric High Moderate to High
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are Subjective Diamond ramps maintain or upgrade existing ramps to meet urban interchange standards. DiamondlParclo B ramps maintain or upgrade existing ramps to meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban
addressed interchanges: S- W ramp meets minimum requirements; remaining ramps exceed urban interchange standards.
Construction Impacts Low Moderate to High
Construction complexity Subjective No impacts to Highway 400 during implementation of the improvements. Detours will be required on Highway 400 to implement structural work. Minor detours and temporary closures may be
-- ~ed on existing ramps to construct new ramps. -
Low Moderate
Impact on traffic during construction Subjective All movements maintained during construction. All movements maintained during construction. Highway 400 traffic may experience lower operating speed due to
detours. Ramps may require temporary closures.
Duration of Construction Quantitative 1 Season 2 Seasons
..
Cost
Cost Construction cost estimates Percentage of 100% 125 %
lowest
Property required (permanent) ha 1.0 ha 4.5 ha
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT mGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Molson Park Drive
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 21 b
CATEGORY - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT CATEGORY - ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
FACTOR AL TERNA TlVE 1 AL TERNATI\'E 2 COMMENTS FA<""'TOR AL TERNA T[VE I AI. TERNA TlVE 2 COMMENTS
OPERATIONAL DIAMOND (SB)/ OPERATIONAL DIAMOND (SB)/
IMPROVEMENTS PARCLOB (NB) IMPROVEMENTS PARCLO B (NB)
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
1 FISHERIES & 0 0 Neither al[emative impacts fisheries and aquatic habitat I AGRICULTURAL 0 0 Neither alternative impacts agricultural land or operations.
AQUATIC HABITAT
2 TERRESTRIAL 0 0 Neither alternative impacts the terrestrial environment. 2 COMMERCIAL I 0 ~ Alternative 2 results in higher disruption impacts to commercial property and impacts more
ENVIRONMENT INDUSTRIAL USES businesses than Alternative I.
0 0 Both alternatives result in low impacts to water wells. 3 SPECIAL POLICY 0 0 None of the alternatives affect Provincial or Federal initiatives for future land use.
3 GROUNDWATER
AREAS
4 SURFACE WATER 0 0 Both alternatives result in minor increases in paved areas and have opportunities for storm water 4 PROPERTY 0 ~ Alternative 2 will have an impact on land with the potential for waste and contamination
facilities in the interchange. WASTE & (former Molson Beer Store).
CONTAMINATION
CATEGORY 0 0 0 ~
SUMMARY CATEGORY
SUMMARY
Summary of Effects on the Natural EnvironmenJ Summary of Effects on the Economic EnvironmenJ
Neither alternative results in significant impacts to the natural environment.
Both alternatives result in relatively low impacts to the economic environment. Alternative I results in the least amount of impacts to businesses and commercial property, and
TIIEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED. avoids the Molson Park property.
CATEGORY - SOCIAL ENviRONMENT THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 JS PREFERRED.
FACTOR AI. TERNA TlVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 COMMENTS CATEGORY - CtJLTIJRAL ENVJRONMENl'
OPERATIONAL DIAMOND (SB)/
IMPROVEMENTS PARCLO B (NB) FACTOR AI. TERNA TlVE I ALTERNATIVE 2 COMMENTS
INTERCHANGE OPERATIONAL DIAMOND (SB)/
IMPROVEMENTS PARCLOB (NB)
1 AESTIIETICS 0 ~ Alternative 2 results in slightly greater impacts to the existing vegetation cover due to the new INTERCHANGE
ramp.
I ARCHAEOLOGICAL 0 0 Neither alternative impacts land with archaeological potential.
2 NOISE 0 0 Neither alternative involves changes to the interchange that causes noise impacts to sensitive RESOURCES
receptors.
3 RESIDENTIAL 0 0 Neither alternative impacts residential property. 2 HERITAGE 0 0 Neither alternative impacts heritage resources.
RESOURCES
4 COMMUNITY 0 0 Both alternatives will impact Molson Park, but Alternative 2 results in slightly greater impacts CATEGORY 0 0
EFFECTS because more land is required. Alternative 2 will improve community mobility from Highway SUMMARY
400 because of the free-flow movement provided by the ramps.
5 COMPATIBILITY 0 0 Neither alternative impact land dedicated to future land use. Summary Effects on the Cultural Environment
WITH FIJTIJRE . Neither alternative impacts known cultural resources.
LAND USE
CATEGORY 0 ~ THEREFORE, BOTII ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
SUMMARY
Summary of Effects on the &cial Environment
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social environment. Alternative 2 will provide a slight improvement to community mobility from Highway 400 because of the RAN'KlNG.oF.ALTERN'ATIVES
free-flow movement provided by the new ramps. 0 ......~
TIIEREFORE, ALTER."'IATIVE 1 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
Most}>refe:rred Least}>referred
@ Ontario HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY Evaluation of Molson Park Drive Exhibit
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHWAY 11 Interchange Alternatives 4. 22 a
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FACTOR
CATEGORY - TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING & COST
ALTERNATIVE 1
OPERATIONAL
IMPROVEMENTS
1 TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS
o
2 CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS
o
3 COST
o
o
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
SUnt1IIIlTV of Effects on TransDOtUltion and Enrrineerinl!:
ALTERNATIVE 2
DIAMOND (SB)I
PARCLOB (NB)
INTERCHANGE
~
~
~
~
COMMENTS
CATEGORY - SUMMARY OF EVALUATION
.. RELATIVE LEVEL OF ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
SIGNIFICANCE OPERATIONAL DIAMOND (SB)I
FACfOR IMPROVEMENTS PARCLOB (NB)
INTERCHANGE
1 NATURAL 0 0
ENVIRONMENT Low
2 SOCIAL 0 ~
ENVIRONMENT
Moderate
3 ECONOMIC 0 ~
ENVIRONMENT
Moderate
4 CULTURAL 0 0
ENVIRONMENT Low
5 TRANSPORTATION 0 ~
& ENGINEERING &
COST High
Both alternatives will require storage lanes for the left turn moves from Molson Park
Drive to Highway 400. Alternative 2 requires high-speed traffic 10 exit the freeway via
a low-speed inner loop ramp on a downgrade. Close proximity of traffic signals on
Molson Park Drive dilute the free flow characteristics of the Alternative 2 S-E and S- W
ramps. Also, traffic from the S- W loop ramp of Alternative 2 may experience difficulty
crossing tbe 3 westbound lanes on Molson Park Drive to enter the Barrie 400 Power
Centre during peak travel periods.
Simpler interchange geometrics reduce the constnlCtion complexity of Alternative I
and inlrOduce less impacts to traffic. Alternative I can be constnlCted in one
constnlCtion season with no impact to Highway 400 traffic. All interchange
movements can be maintained with minor detours. Alternative 2 will require two
constnlCtion seasons. During the implementation of Alternative 2, detours and lane
restrictions on Highway 400 will be necessary to carry out the stnlCtural work. while
the existing ramps may require minor detours and temporary closures to carry out the
ramp improvements.
Alternative I bas the lowest cost
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Alternative I provides slightly better traffic operations and can be implemented with less construction impacts and at a lower cost.
@ Ontario
COMMENTS
Neither alternative results in significant impacts to the natural enviromrent
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social enviromrent Alternative 2 will
provide a slight improvement to conmnmity mobility from Highway 400 because of the free-flow
movement provided by the new ramps.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives result in relatively low impacts to the economic enviromrent. Alternative I
results in the least amount of impacts to businesses and commercial property, aud avoids the
Molson ParI<: property.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS PREFERRED.
Neither alternative impacts known cultural resources.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Alternative I provides slightly better traffic operations and can be implemented with less
constnlCtion impacts and at a lower cost
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Summarv of EvallUltion:
Alternative 2 provides minimal transportation and engineering benefits and results in greater impacts to developed lands around the interchange. Alternative I provides acceptable traffic operations
and bas minimum impacts to the interchange area.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Evaluation of Molson Park Drive
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 22 b
NEW RIGHT
TURN LANE
~f
\,.//" ,';' ,'" \ g
,.
MOlSON p_
(PROPOSED FOR REDEVELOPMENT)
NEW RIGHT
TURN LANE
NEW RIGHT
TURN LANE
LEGEND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
.. PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
- - - EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
~
e
SCALE
r\.o.......-
50m 0
,
100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 MOLSON PARK DRIVE 4.23
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 TECHNICALLY PREFERRED PLAN
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MEASURE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARTIAL PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
Natural Enllironment
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat Subjective Low impact Low impact
--. ___~M - -.-
Number of fish habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel length #/m 2 crossings /17.5 m Type 2 Warmwater habitat 2 crossings /17.5 m Type 2 Warmwater habitat
affected by expanded ROW
Terrestrial Environment Number of wildlife travel corridors/linkages # 0 0
affected -- - ------
Area of significant wildlife habitats ha 0 0
impacted .--.-. - - .. -
Number and area of significant vegetation #/ha 0 0
communities impacted
--
Number and area of provincially significant #lha 0 0
wetlan~s impacted -- -------- -------. -.--.----
Area through upland forests impacted ha 0 0
---'- - -.-.------.
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) / Environmental #/ha 0 0
Significant Areas (ESAs)
Groundwater Potential interference with water wells and
# of wells impacted 0 0
area of flowing wells and high water table
--~_.__.- - --.--------------.---. --- ------- --.------
Potential impact to groundwater recharge ha 0 0
and discharge areas
Surface Water Ability to provide Storm Water Management Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net increase in pavement area. New Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net increase in pavement area. New and/or
Subjective and/or extended culverts are required, particularly for Hotchkiss Creek presently running through the northwest
(SWM) ouadrant. extended culverts are required, particularly for Hotchkiss Creek presently running through the northwest quadrant.
Social Environment
Aesthetics Impact to aesthetic quality of existing Low impact Low impact
Subjective Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field, tree plantations and hedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field, tree plantations and hedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the
landscape in the vicinity of ROW the interchange ramps I:Ind roa~~alignments. interchange ra...!.TI~d road r~~~_______..__.__..___...__..____
--. - ---.---
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the Subjective No significant impact No significant impact
road and from the road
Noise
Impact to noise sensitive receivers Analysis No impact No impact
Residential Number of residences displaced # 0 0
-- -- ..-----. __'M_ .----
Residential property affected #lha 0 0
(partial takings)
Community Effects Impact to community mobility Subjective No impact No impact
(maximum out-~f-way travel) .---- ---.---- .- .-------.---------------...-.--.------.---.----
Impact to community/recreational! #/ha Barrie Raceway /0.38 ha Barrie Raceway / 0.38 ha
institutional/park features
.---- -------.---.. -. ----~-- - --
Impact to municipal utilities/residential Subjective Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange. Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
services
..--.--.-- -- - -.-------
Impact to emergency services access Subjective No impact No impact
Compatibility with Future Impact to approved future land use plans Subjective Potential impact to Doral Marine & Recreation future expansion plans. Potential impact to Doral Marine & Recreation future expansion plans.
Land Use
@ Ontario
IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Essa Road
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 24 a
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE AL TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARTIAL PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
EC()nomic Environment
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 0 0
- -_.~
Number of operations displaced # 0 0
.-.----.---
Number of operations affected # 0 0
--- -- -
Impact to access (out-of-way travel) Subjective No impact No impact
CommerciallIndustrial Uses 0 0
Number of businesses displaced #
.- .---
Commercial property affected #lha 0.4 ha (Barrie Raceway) 0.4 ha (Barrie Raceway)
(partial takings)
f-------.--- --- --- .---------------.--
Impact to business access Subjective No impact No impact
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on Provincial/Federal Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected.
initiatives
Property Waste and Number of properties affected that have
Contamination known or high potential for # of properties I ha 0 0
waste/contamination
Cultural Environment
Archaeological Resources Area of properties affected with ha 0 0
archaeological Dotential
Heritage Resources Number and description of heritage!
bistorical features or cultural landscapes # 0 0
impacted
Transoortation & Enllineennfl
Traffic Operations Favourable Less Favourable
Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in advance of the. Free-flow moves onto freeway Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in advance of the structure. W -S movement must make
Interchange operations Subjective result in highest interchange capacity. Stops and traffic siguals for left turns are confined to ramps only, which left tum from Essa Road to Highway 400 ramp. This reqnires a left tum lane on Essa Road and increases the number of
eliminates the need for a left turn lane on Essa Road. Ramps are consistent with driver expectation for this conflict points. Ramps, with the exception of the W-S ramp, are consistent with driver expectation and lend well to
interchange type and lend well to si~_ silID';l!e.
Local road network access & operations Subjective No impact No impact
-.-
Degree to wbich existing geometric All ramps upgraded to meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban interchanges: compound loop ramps All ramps upgraded to meet or exceed minimum reqnirements for urban interchanges: compound loop ramps removed will
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are Subjective removed will be replaced with single radii Parclo A loop ramps; S-EIW and N-EIW ramps upgraded and meet urban be replaced with single radii Parclo A loop ramps; S-EIW and N-EIW ramps upgraded and meet urban interchange
addressed intercbange standards; E-N ramp upgraded and exceeds urban interchange standards; geometrics of remaining ramps standards; E-N ramp upgraded and exceeds urban interchange standards; geometrics of remaining ramps improved and
improved and meet or exceed minimum requirements. meet or 'exceed minimum requirements.
Construction Impacts High High
Construction complexity Subjective Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Structural work will complicate Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Structural work will complicate staging
--- _. staging and may require p~file Ildjustment on Essa Road. - and may.!.t:9,uire profile adjustment on Essa Road. .--.-
Impact on traffic during construction Subjective High High
Construction will reqnire detours and temporary ramp and lane closures on Highway 400 and on Essa Road. Constmction will require detours and temporary ramp and lane closures on Highway 400 and on Essa Road.
Duration of Construction Quantitative 2 Seasons 2 Seasons
Commuter Parking Moderate Moderate
Impact to commuter parking lot Subjective Need for additional commuter parking in vicinity of interchange is recognized. Need for additional commuter parking in vicinity of interchange is recognized.
Sufficient vacant (privatelv held) land in vicinity of interchange for siting commuter lot. Sufficient vacant (Drivatelv held) land in vicinity of interchange for siting commuter lot.
Cost
Cost Construction cost estimates Percentage of 105% 100%
Lowest
Property required (permanent) ha 3.1 ha 3.0ha
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Essa Road
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 24 b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CATEGORY - NATI;"RAL ENVIRONMENT
FACTOR
1 FISHERIES &
AQUATIC HABITAT
2 TERRESTRIAL
ENVIRONMENT
3 GROUNDWATER
4 SURFACE WATER
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
ALTERNATIVE 1 AI. TERNA TlVE 2
PARCLOA PARCLOB
INT&RCHANGE INTERCHANGE
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
COMMENTS
Both alternatives result in low impacts to fish habitat.
Neither alternative impacts the terrestrial environment.
Neither alternative results in impacts tQ water wells.
Both alternatives result in similar increases on paved areas and have opportunities for storm water
facilities in the interchange.
Summary of Effects on the Notural Environment
Both alternatives resuJt in low impacts to two warmwater aquatic habitats, however the impacts are not considered signifICant.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTEIL'IlATlVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
CA TEf'.oRY -- SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
FACTOR
ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLOA PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 AESTHETICS
2 NOISE
3 RESIDENTIAL
4 COMMUNITY
EFFECTS
5 COMPATIBILITY
WIm FUTURE
LAND USE
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
Summarv of Effects on the Social Enrironment
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social environment.
TlIEREFORE, BOm ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
@ Ontario
COMMENTS
Both alternatives result in low impacts to the existing vegetation cover and tQ sensitive viewer groups.
No noise impacts are anticipated with either alternative. Surrounding land use is primarily
commercial. 11Je nearest residential receptors are located on Cbieftan Crescent, off Little Avenue,
and are set back far enough ftom the interchange that the proposed alternatives will have minimal
effect.
Neither alternative impacts residential property.
Both alternatives will have minor connnunity effects due to the impact to the Barne Raceway
property. 11Je impacts are negligible since currently the Barne Raceway is closed.
Both alternatives will have an effect on future expansion plans for one local business.
CATEGORY - ECONOMJ(; ENVIRONMEJliT
FACTOR
1 AGRICULTURAL
AI. TERNA TlVE 1 AI. TERNA TIVE 2
PARCLO A PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 COMMERCiAL I
INDUSTRIAL USES
3 SPECIAL POLICY
AREAS
4 PROPERTY
WASTE &
CONTAMINATION
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
Summarv of Effects on the Economh: Environment
Both alternatives resuJt in the same low impacts to the economic environment.
TlIEREFORE, BOm AL TERNA TlVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
CATEGORY -- CI1L1lJRAI, ENVIRONMENT
FACTOR
ALTERNATIVE 1
PARCLO A
INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE
1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 0
RESOURCES
o
2 HERITAGE 0
RESOURCES
CATEGORY 0
SUMMARY
o
o
Summarv Effects on the Cultural Environment
Neither alternative impacts known cultural resources.
TlIEREFORE, BOm ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
COMMENTS
Neither alternative impacts agricultural land and operations.
Both alternatives result in similar effects to commercial property and business entrances.
Neither alternative impacts Provincial or Federal initiatives for future land use.
Neither alternative impact land with known or high potential for waste and contamination.
COMMENTS
Neither alternative impacts land with archaeological potential.
Neither alternative impacts heritage resoW"CCs.
Evaluation of Essa Road
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 25 a
CATEGORY - TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING & COST
FACTOR
1 TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS
2 CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS
3 COMMUTER
PARKING
4 COST
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLOA PARCLO B
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
0 <V
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 <V
Summarv of Effects on Transnortation and Enrrineerinll
COMMENTS
CATEGORY - SllMMARY OF EVALUATION
FACTOR
AL TERNA TlVE 2
PARCLOB
INTERCHANGE
Both address geometric deficiencies. Alternative I, however, provides superior interchange
operations as it provides free-flow for all movements from Essa Road to Highway 400.
Alternative 2 requires a left turn for the W -S movement, which introduces the need for a left
turn lane on Essa Road and is less consistent with driver expectation.
Both alternatives have high construction complexity and impacts to traffic. Each alternative
will require two construction seasons.
1 NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT
2 SOCIAL
ENVIRONMENT
3 ECONOMIC
ENVIRONMENT
4 CULTURAL
ENVIRONMENT
5 TRANSPORTATION
& ENGINEERING &
COST
Summarv of Evaluation:
Both alternatives have sufficient vacant (privately held) land in vicinity of interchange for
siting conunuter lot.
Alternative I has the lowest cost.
Both alternatives are similar from a transportation, engineering and cost perspective. Alternative I, however, allows for free flow access to Highway 400 southbound while
Alternative 2 does not.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
@ Ontario
*RELA TlVE LEVEL OF AL TERNA TIVE 1
SIGNIFICANCE PARCLOA
INTERCHANGE
0
Low
0
Low
Low 0
Low 0
0
High
o
o
o
o
<V
I
COMMENTS
I
Both alternatives result in low impacts to two wannwater aquatic habitats, however
the impacts are not considered significant.
I
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
I
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social environment.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives result in the same low impacts to the economic environment.
I
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Neither alternative impacts known cultural resomces.
I
THEREFORE, BOTH AL TERNA TIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
Both alternatives are similar from a transportation, engineering and cost perspective.
Alternative I, however, allows for free flow access to Highway 400 southhound while
Alternative 2 does not.
I
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE liS PREFERRED.
Overall, both alternatives result in relatively the same low impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural environments. Alternative 2 does not offer as many transportation benefits as
Alternative I since it requires a left turn lane for W -S movement.
I
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE liS SLlGHTI.. Y PREFERRED.
RANKING OF ALTERNATIVES
o
.~
Least Preferred
Most Preferred
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION A T HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Exhibit
4. 25 b
Evaluation of Essa Road
Interchange Alternatives
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
O i
ff!
.i::'J~ 0 00
..~ V '.\ \~ // W ----.---- .::::::-..,.., ///
<:=>--" ESSO \;: V eJJ ,..-..'.::::~::::::-.::.... . -::::::::.:_:::::/-
'---.......... .........,--- "
--~ --, /'. '\
'__.",,, _"__ // / '\ ..ep
---..,~. --_____ i f /' /// "'"
--.._ -S'-''''-" i / /
'---!!YNE"Ci/f.-- f ~.~,V"~\
--...-------<-.,,,,:l~__=-_-..f:;::..:.--~ \\"
. ! \'-'
/ \, '-
! '. " --I-
--- \-.t,~"
-~~~ )
., "-. /!
f'';'. _, /?"'-'
..
'.
, ,
''\\ \~\.
'\ "
v
/
o 'j"-''':::'lfj'l
() -.- /'1}
.",C;/_i. : /0
"0' : k,
o \\. ~,-///j~~>t!
''-.,{tf
.;Q
;, :.....i'
/;kJr;(~
FORMER BARRIE RACEWAY
PROPOSED FOR REDEVELOPMENT
'-'
LEGEND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
SCALE
~___ I
50m 0 100m
---
EXHIBIT
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
ESSA ROAD
TECNICALL Y PREFERRED PLAN
4.26
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
.I
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLO B INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
Natural Environment
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat Subjective Medium impact Medium impact
Number of fish habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel #/m 7 crossings /120 m Type 2 Coldwater habitat 5 crossings / 212.5 m Type 2 Coldwater habitat
length affected by expanded ROW
Terrestrial Environment Number of wildlife travel # 0 0
conidorsllinka~es affected ..------ -
Area of significant wildlife habitats ha 0 0
impacted - .--. -
Number and area of significant vegetation #/ha 0 0
communities impacted
Number and area of provincially #lha 0 0
significant wetlands impacted --..----.--
Area through upland forests impacted ha 0 0
- .-
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) / #lha 0 0
Environmental Significant Areas (ESAs)
Groundwater Potential interference with water wells and
area of flowing wells and high water table # of wells impacted 0 0
- - .- -
Potential impact to groundwater recharge ha 0 0
and discharge areas
Surface Water Ability to provide Storm Water Potential opportunities for stormwater management within interchange. Net increase in pavement area, partially off-set Potential opportunities for stormwater management within interchange. Net increase in pavement area, partially off-set
Subjective by removal of buildings and associated parking areas. New and/or extended culverts are required, particularly for by removal of buildings and associated parking areas. New and/or extended culverts are required. Significant impact
Management (SWM) Dvrnent's Creek. to Dvment's Creek in the southeast auadrant, and to the tributaries of Bunkers Creek to the north.
Social Environment
Aesthetics Impact to aesthetic quality of existing Low impact Low impact
landscape in the vicinity of ROW Subjective Existing vegetation cover (Le. grass, small hedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the interchange ramps and Existing vegetation cover (Le. grass, small hedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the interchange ramps
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the Subjective Low to moderate impact No significant impact to residences along Henry Street.
road and from the road Approximately 13 residences aloug Henry Street will be exposed to the new ramp.
Noise
Impact to noise sensitive receivers Analysis Low impact to residences on Henry Street. No impact
Residential Number of residences displaced # 7 residences 0
--- ._--- - --
Residential property affected #/ha 0 0
(partial takings)
Community Effects Impact to community mobility Subjective No impact Minor out-of-way travel due to the closure of Hart Dnve.
(maximum out-of-way travel) - ----..---.-- - -~-_._- -
Impact to community/recreatioual/ #lha 0 0
institutional/park features -
- . ----------~---
Impact to muuicipal utilities/residential Subjective Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, gas main, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange. Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, gas main, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
services
-- ---" --
Impact to emergency services access Subjective No impact No impact
Compatibility with Future Impact to approved future land use plans Subjective No impact No impact
Land Use
@ Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Dunlop Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 27 a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE AL TERNA TIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLO B INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
Economic.Enwronmellt
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 0 0
___u ----,~ .._._~--_.
Number of operations displaced # 0 0
~-'-'-' .-
Number of operations affected # 0 0
- ~-~--'-" -. -. -.-
Impact to access (out-of-way travel) Subjective No impact No impact
CommerciallIndustrial Uses 2 businesses (The Keg, Centennial Dodge Chrysler Jeep) 3 businesses (Comfort Inn- 60 rooms, Oakley Nisson, Travel Lodge - % rooms)
Number of businesses displaced # Dunlop Village Plaza (26 stores)
Cedar Pointe Plaza (Building No. 4 ::::-~pproximately 20 stores) Cedar Pointe Plaza (Building Nos. 15, 35,55 - Approximately 50 stores)
-- -----.....---- -
Commercial property affected #lha 2 properties (303 W Plaza - 9 storefronts), (Cedar Pointe Plaza - Building No. 14 approximately 5 stores) 2 properties (The Keg, Centennial Dodge Chrysler)
(partial takings) 1.4 ha 1.5 ha
- Low to Moderate impact -----.---
Low impact
Impact to business access Subjective 200 m out-of-way travel for 303W Plaza due to closure of Dunlop Street entrance. 1000 m out-of-way travel for businesses along Dyment Road because of the two cul-de-sacs that reroute traffic south
along Anne Street to George Street and VesDra Street.
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on Provincial/Federal Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected.
initiatives
Property Waste and Number' Area of properties affected that
Contamination have known or high potential for # of properties' ha 1 property with low to moderate potential for waste and contamination. , 2.6 ha 1 property with low to moderate potential for waste and contamination. '0.2 ha
waste/contamination
Cultural Environment
Archaeological Resources Area of properties affected with ha 0 0
archaeological Dotential
Heritage Resources Number and description of heritage! 2 2
historical features or cultural landscapes # Potential impact to Dunlop Street and Anne Street bridge overpasses due to road widening and interchange ramp Potential impact to Dunlop Street and Anne Street bridge overpasses due to road widening and interchange ramp
imoacted reDlacements. reDlacements.
Transoortation & Engineerina
Traffic Operations Less Favourable Favourable
N-E, S-E and SoW movements from the freeway do not pass through traffic signals, which reduces the possibility of Free-flow moves onto freeway result in highest interchange capacity. However, the benefits of high capacity will be
Interchange operations Subjective traffic backing up on the freeway. However, a disadvantage is that high-speed traffic must exit from the freeway to a low- diluted by the traffic metering effect from the close proximity of traffic signals on Dunlop Street (three traffic signals
speed inner loop ramp, which is operationally less desirable. Traffic making WoN and E-S movements must make left will be located within a span of 370 m). Stops and traffic signals for left turns are confined to ramp movements only,
turns from Dunlop Street onto ramps to Highway 400. This will require traffic signals and additional lanes for left turns which eliminates the need for left turn lanes on Dunlop Street. There is greater possibility that ramp queues could
.----- - on Dunlop Street. Ramp movements are not consistent with driver expectation. - _..- extend back to Hi~ 400 duri~~_ travel periods. Ramp~_are consistent with driver expectation.__
The Parclo B interchange configuration is expected to facilitate the critical ramp movements on Dunlop Street more freely N-FJW and S-FJW ramps will create additional new intersections along Dunlop Street, which are expected to further
Local road network access & operations Subjective and efficiently than the Parclo A alternative, reducing the likelihood of ramp queuing onto Highway 400. This alternative decrease the throughput efficiency on Dunlop Street. This alternative requires a minor realignment of Cedar Pointe
requires realignment of Cedar Pointe Drive. No impact to road access. Drive and closure of Hart Drive. Low impacts to road access as altemative access will be provided by Vespra and
--- Low to George Streets. --
Moderate
Degree to which existing geometric All ramps maintained or upgraded to meet or exceed minimum requirements for an urban interchange: S-E ramp All ramps maintained or upgraded to meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban interchanges: S-EIW and N-
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are Subjective maintained and exceed urban interchange standards; FJW-N ramp upgraded and meets urban interchange standards; FJW- FJW ramps upgraded and comply with urban interchange standards; EJ W -S ramp upgraded and exceeds urban
addressed S ramp upgraded and exceeds urban interchange standards; N-E and S- W ramps upgraded and comply with minimum interchange standards; E-N ramp improved and exceeds minimum requirements; E-S and WoN ramps upgraded and
reauirements. comDlv with minimum requirements.
Construction Impacts Moderate Moderate
Construction complexity Subjective Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Structural work may require profile Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction. Structural work may require profile
--- ------ adjustment on Dunlop Street. -- -- agjustment on Dunlop Street. ----------
Moderate to High Moderate
Impact on traffic during construction Subjective Construction will require detours and temporary lane closures on Construction will require detours and temporary lane closures but will be less disruptive to ramp traffic than
Dunlop Street. Some ramps may be subject to long term closures. Alternative. New ramps can be built while exiting ramps are kept open.
Duration of Construction Quantitative 2 Seasons 2 Seasons
Cost
Cost Construction cost estimates Percentage of 100% 125 %
lowest
Property required (permanent) ha 6.7ha 8.2 ha
I
I
I
@ Ontario
I
IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Dunlop Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 27 b
CATEGORY - NATURAL.El'I"VIRONMENT CATEGORY - E(:ONOMIC ENVIROl\'MENT
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE Z COMMENTS FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVEZ COMMENTS
PARCLOB INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARCLOB INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
1 FISHERIES & 0 ~ Alternative 2 results in slightly more coldwaIer stream channel impacts because of the wider right- 1 AGlUCULTURAL 0 0 Neither alternative impacts agricultural land or operations.
AQUATIC HABITAT of-way at these crossings.
0 ~ Alternative 2 results in a minor loss of upland forest in the southeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and Z COMMERCIAL I 0 ~ Alternative 2 results in greater effects to commercial uses since it displaces more businesses,
2 TERRESTRIAL Highway 400 where as Alternative I has no impact INDUSTRIAL USES disrupts more commercial property and reduces access to businesses along Dyment Road
ENVIRONMENT due to the closure of Hart Drive. Alternative 2 will displaces more than twice as many
0 0 Neither alternative impacts water wells. businesses as compared to Alternative I ( fifty three versus twenty two displacements).
3 GROUNDWATER 0 0 Neither alternative will have an affect on Provincial or Federal initiatives for future land use.
3 SPECIAL POLICY
0 ~ Alternative 2 will result in impacts to Oyment's Creek in the southeast quadrant, and to the AREAS
4 SURFACE WATER
tributaries of Bunker's Creek to the north. 4 PROPERTY 0 0 Both alternatives impact land with known or high potential for waste and contamination
WASTE & (Dodge Car Dealership).
CATEGORY 0 ~ CONTAMINATION
SUMMARY
CATEGORY 0 ~
Summan of Effects 011 the Notural Ellviro1l1tUlnt SUMMARY
Alternative 2 has greater impacts to fish habitat, upland forest, surface water impacts to Dyment's Creek, and impacts to the tributaries of Bunker's Creek. SWlInutrV of Effects 011 the Economic Ellvironment
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED. Overall, Alternative 2 results in higher impacts to the economic enviromrent because more businesses will be displaced, additional property is required to accommodate the new
interchange and business access along Dyment Road will be reduced.
CATEGORY - SO<1ALENVIRONMENT THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE Z COMMENTS
PARCLO B INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
0 0 Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the existing vegetation cover and to sensitive CATEGORY - CtJLTIJRAL E~'vlR()NMENT
1 AESTHETICS viewer groups. FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 2
ALTERNATIVE 1 COMMENTS
PARCLO B INTERCHANGE PARCLOA INTERCHANGE
2 NOISE ~ 0 SUlTouuding land use is mostly commercial, some residential receptors are located on Henry
Street For Alternative I, approximately eight residences on Henry Street would experience a low 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 0 0 Neither alternative impact land with archaeological potential.
to moderate increase in noise level due to the increased proximity of the new E-N ramps and the RESOURCES
necessary displacement of "Dunlop Village Place", which cwrently provides screening from the
highway noise. Receptors on Anne Street and Edgehill Drive are significantly set back from the 0 0 Both alternatives result in low impacts to built heritage features (bridge overpasses).
interchange and are not expected to experience impacts associated with either alternative. 2 HERITAGE
RESOURCES
3 RESIDENTIAL ~ 0 Alternative I results in greater impacts because residences located along Henry Street will be CATEGORY 0 0
displaced. SUMMARY
4 COMMUNITY 0 0 Both alternatives have similar impact to comnmnity features. SumnutrV Effects 011 the Cultural Ellvirollment
EFFECTS
5 COMPATmILITY 0 0 Neither alternative impacts land dedicated to future land use. Both alternatives result in similar impacts to cultural features.
WITH FUTURE THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
LAND USE
~ 0 -::-
CATEGORY
SUMMARY
Summan of Effects 011 the Social Ellvirollmellt
Alternative I results in greater impacts to residences and results in slightly greater noise impacts to residences and is therefore less preferred. .... .. ..~..".........;...... "
.(JIf
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS PREFERRED. (I .~...~
.. ,.
.-
~ Ontario HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY Evaluation of Dunlop Street Exhibit
FROM 1 K.M SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11 Interchange Alternatives 4. 28 a
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CA TEGORY- TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING & COST
FACTOR
ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
PARCLO B INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
COMMENTS
TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS
o
(?)
Both alternatives improve on existing geometrics. AI!bough Alternative 2 provides
greater capacity for ramp movements, it will also result in three signalized intersections
on Dunlop Street within a section 370 m long. This will greatly impact traffic
movements on Dunlop Street and subsequently impact ramp movements. The Pardo B
interchange configuration is expected to facilitate the critical ramp movements on
Dunlop Street more freely and efficiently than the Pardo A alternative. Alternative I,
therefore, has greater benefits to traffic operations.
Bo!b alternatives require complex staging to maintain all traffic movements during
construction. The construction of Alternative 2, however, will be less disruptive to
traffIC as the existing interchange will remain operable during most of the construction.
2 CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS
(?)
o
3 COST
o
o
(?)
(?)
Alternative 1 has the lowest cost.
CATEGORY
SlJMMARY
Sammarv of Effects on TranmOTttl/ion and Entrimlennfl
Alternative 2 is less disruptive to traffic during construction. The lower cost and greater benefits to traffic operations associated wi!b Alternative 1 are considered to be more
important. The benefits of Alternative I to traffic operations include improved traffic flow on Dunlop Street, resulting in lower potential for ramp traffic queuing onto
Highway 400.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
RANKING OF ALTERNATIVES
o
~~
Least PrefeITed
Most PrefeITed
@ Ontario
CATEGORY - SUMMARY OF EVALUATION
FAL"TOR *RELA TlVE LEVEL OF ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE PARCLOB INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE
1 NATURAL 0 (?) Alternative 2 has greater impacts to fish habitat, upland forest, surface water
ENVIRONMENT impacts to Dymeut's Creek. and impacts to the trihotaries of Bunker's Creek.
Moderate
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL (?) 0 Alternative I results in greater impacts to residences and results in slightly
ENVIRONMENT greater noise impacts to residences and is therefore less preferred.
High THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC 0 (?) Overall, Alternative 2 results in higher impacts to the economic environment
ENVIRONME.\"IT because significantly more businesses will be displaced, additional property is
High required to accommodate the new interchange and business access along
Dyment Road will be reduced.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL 0 0 Both alternatives result in similar impacts to cultural features.
ENVIRONMENT Low
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION 0 (?) Alternative 2 is less dismptive to traffic during construction. The lower cost
& ENGINEERING & and greater benefits to traffic operations associated wi!b Alternative I are
COST considered to be more important. The benefits of Alternative 1 to traffic
High operations include improved traffic flow on Dunlop Street, resulting in lower
potential for ramp traffic queuing onto Highway 400.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Samman of EvahuJtion:
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the natural and cultural environments. Alternative I impacts a number of residences on Henry Street. However, Alternative I has less impacts
to commercial properties, has more transportation benefits such as improved traffic flow on Dunlop Street, resulting in lower potential for queuing onto Highway 400, and lower construction
costs. Alternative 1 was considered to have !be lowest overall impacts and provides more transportation benefits.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Note: Refinements to the technkaHy preferred interchange have been made to further reduce impacts to adjacent land uses.
IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Evaluation of Dunlop Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 28 b
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerty 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 78 _
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
The traffic congestion on Dunlop Street would likely impact operations on the
interchange ramps and is also likely to affect operations on Highway 400. On the
basis that both alternatives have significant impacts to adjacent land uses in the
interchange are~ but Alternative 1 provides better traffic operation benefits,
Alternative 1 was selected as the preferred alternative. The preferred Dunlop Street
interchange is shown in Exhibit 4.29. Recognizing the extent of the impacts
associated with the interchange area of the preferred alternative, refinements to the
preferred design will be investigated during later design stages to further reduce
impacts and improve the traffic operation benefits, where possible.
Subsequent to the identification of Alternative 1 as the preferred alternative,
representatives of a Dunlop Street area landowner proposed an alternative for the
Dunlop Street interchange. The landowner alternative essentially realigned the
section of Dunlop Street east of HighWay 400 to the south, substantially reducing
impacts to the lands located on the north side of Dunlop Street. The Project Team
compared the landowner alternative to the recommended alternative and consulted
with the staff at the City of Barrie.
The Dunlop Street area landowner alternative had several disadvantages:
· The landowner alternative required an additional signalized intersection at the
EIW-N ramp tenninal on Dunlop Street, thereby reducing the benefits to traffic
operations on Dunlop Street;
· The landowner alternative did not eliminate property impacts. The impacts were
shifted to the properties on the south side of Dunlop Street; and
· The landowner alternative would result in an undesirable alignment on Dunlop
Street.
The Project Team and the City staff agreed the landowner alternative would result in
greater overall impacts and thus should not be carried forward.
Alternative 3 does provide better transportation benefits than Alternative 1 since it
has more free flow ramps. However, Alternative 1 does not negatively impact traffic
operations and will adequately serve existing and future travel demands.
On the basis that Alternative 1 addresses the traffic operations needs of the"
interchange and results in fewer impacts, Alternative 1 (Diamond I Parclo
configuration) is selected as the preferred alternative. The preferred Bayfield Street
interchange configuration is shown in Exhibit 4.32. Recognizing the extent of the
impacts to the interchange area with the preferred alternative, refinements to the
preferred design will be investigated during later design stages to further reduce
impacts and improve the traffic operation benefits, where possible.
Bayfield Street Interchange Evaluation
The complete analysis and evaluation for the Hayfield Street interchange alternatives
are provided in Exhibits 4.30 and 4.31, respectively. Alternative 2 (Diamond
configuration) was the only alternative that would negatively affect traffic operations.
A Diamond configuration at this interchange would require left-turn storage lanes
and, given the proximity of the two ramp terminals, there would be insufficient
storage to accommodate future traffic volumes during peak travel periods. This
situation would worsen traffic congestion on Bayfield Street during peak periods and
would likely impact traffic operations on both the interchange ramps and Highway
400. This alternative, is therefore, not preferred.
Alternative 3 (parclo configuration) has greater impacts to adjacent land uses in the
interchange area (including displacement of YMCA facility and impacts to Bayfield
Mall parking lot) than Alternative 1 (retaining existing configurations with geometric
improvements to the ramps).
Duckworth Street Interchange Evaluation
The complete analysis and evaluation for the Duckworth Street interchange
alternatives are provided in Exhibits 4.33 and 4.34, respectively. Alternatives 3 and
4 realign Duckworth Street and Cundles Road to provide a new continuous arterial
road. With minor improvements the interchange ramp tenninals, including the
Duckworth Street/Cundles Road intersection, will operate at acceptable levels during
peak travel periods over the planning horizon for this study. The additional costs and
property impacts associated with Alternatives 3 and 4 are not justified. These two
alternatives were, therefore, not preferred.
Alternatives 1 and 2 maintain the existing Duckworth Street/Cundles Road
intersection. Alternative 1 provides greater transportation benefits than Alternative 2,
primarily because Alternative 1 maintains the EIW -N loop ramp to northbound
Highway 400 and the direct connection to Georgian Drive from the S-EIW ramp
tenninal. With Alternative 2, access to northbound Highway 400 would be provided
through a direct ramp on the north side of Duckworth Street. Such a configuration
would impact traffic operations on Duckworth Street and would affect operations at
the road and ramp intersections east of Highway 400. In addition, access to Georgian
Drive from the S-EIW ramp would be offset, not direct. The additional turning
volume on Duckworth Street resulting from such a configuration would greatly
reduce traffic operations on Duckworth Street and may extend to reducing operations
on the interchange ramps and Highway 400.
Overall, Alternative" 1 has the lowest costs, property requirements, and offers
acceptable transportation benefits. Therefore, Alternative 1 is the preferred
alternative. The preferred Duckworth Street interchange is shown in Exhibit 4.35.
(Text continues on page 90)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4;)
t:::-
] ///
,,""_ /-~=~=~cci}ABl'Q!fI1g:~~~~/
/
.,,_d"~"",
~/' "-"""'-"'~" '
/",/,1'.-: ,,,.-,,. , .,~:' '-',-
~. .,,,
'. ."
~
'-., "-
"'~"
O'~,
~~
~
"' "
"-.......",'-...."
"
....... "_d
'"
,
,
/
/
/
/
/
LEGEND
e SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
- - - EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
SCALE
I
100m
~---
50m 0
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 DUNLOP STREET & ANNE STREET 4.29
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 TECHNICALLY PREFERRED PLAN
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
I
Natural Environment
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat
Terrestrial Environment
Groundwater
Surface Water
Social Environment
Aesthetics
Noise
Residential
Community Effects
Compatibility with Future
Land Use
Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat
Number of fish habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel
length affected by expanded ROW
Number of wildlife travel
~~dorsllink~es affected
Area of significant wildlife habitats
impacted
Number and area of significant vegetation
communities impacted
Number and area of provincially
significant wetlands imI:acted
Area through upland forests impacted
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) 1
Environmental Si ificant Areas (ESAs)
Potential interference with water wells and
area of flowing wells and high water table
Potential impact to groundwater recharge
and discharge areas
Ability to provide Storm Water
Management (SWM)
Impact to aesthetic quality of existing
landscape in the vicinity of ROW
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the
road and from the road
Impact to noise sensitive receivers
Number of residences displaced
Residential property affected
(partial takings)
Impact to community mobility
(maximum out-of-way travel)
Impact to community/recreationaV
institutionaVpark features
Impact to municipal utilities/residential
services
Impact to emergency services access
Impact to approved future land use plans
@ Ontario
Subjective
#/m
#
---
ha
#/ha
#/ha
ha
#/ha
# of wells impacted
.._._---~~--_.
ha
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
Analysis
#
#lha
Subjecti ve
#lha
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
Low impact
------
No new crossings but 22.5 m Type 2 Warmwater habitat affected by expanded
ROW.
o
--.-.---..---
o
Minor loss of planted red pine and Scots pine adjacent to southbound exit ramp
and no~bound entrance ramp.
o
< 0.1 ha
o
o
Low impact
No new crossings but 22.5 m Type 2 Warmwater habitat affected by expanded
ROW.
o
o
-
Minor loss of planted red pine and Scots pine adjacent to southbound exit ramp
and northbound entrance
o
< 0.1 ha
o
o
-----.--. --------~_..__.__.
o
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net
increase in pavement area. New and/or extended culverts are required.
Low impact
Minor impact to the existing vegetation cover (old field, plantations) in the
ROW.
Low impact
Residences adjacent to the highway will be affected due to additional property
requirements for road improvements.
Low impact to approximately 10 residences on Patricia Avenue.
2 residences
4 properties 1 <0.1 ha
Low impact
1500m maximum out-of-way travel for local traffic due to the closure of Rose
Street~~ northbound H.i@way 400.
2 parks 11.24 ha
OPP Station 1 <0.1 ha
YMCA 10.4 ha
Potential impact to transmission tower located on the northeast quadrant of
Bayfield Street and Highway 400 and potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable,
water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
Low impact
The closure of Rose Street to northbound Highway 400 affects the OPP Office
direct access onto the hi hwa .
No significant impact
Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange.
Possible increase in pavement area. New and/or extended culverts are required.
Moderate impact
Existing vegetation cover (Le. upland forests, old field, and plantations) required
to be removed to accommodate the interchange ramps and road realignments.
Low impact
Residences adjacent to the highway will be affected due to additional property
requirements for road improvements.
No noise impact to nearby residences due to interchange improvements.
2 residences
I
Low impact
No new crossings but 22.5 m Type 2 Warmwater habitat affected by expanded
ROW.
I
o
o
I
----.-.---.---
Minor loss of planted red pine and Scots pine adjacent to southbound exit ramp
and northbound entrance
I
o
o
---'--.-
I
o
o
I
-----.-.---------------..-.------
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within interchange. Net
increase in pavement area. New and/or extended culverts are required.
I
Low impact
Minor impact to the existing vegetation cover (old field, plantations) in the
ROW.
--------
Moderate impact
Residences adjacent to the highway will be affected due to additional property
requirements for road improvements and the new ramp will open up a view of
the road for a new ou of residences.
Low impact to 4 residences on the south end of Patricia A venue and residences
on Toronto Street and Grove Street west.
I
I
8 residences
I
.---------.-----. .---..-.-------..----------.-.-.---...-----.-
2 properties 1 <0.1 ha
I
4 properties 1 <0.1 ha
Low impact
1500m maximum out-of-way travel for local traffic due to the closure of Rose
Street t~ northbound Hi~ay 400.
2 parks 1 1.3 2 ha
OPP Station 1 <0.1 ha
YMCA 1 0.4 ha
.---
Potential impact to transmission tower located on the northeast quadrant of
Bayfield Street and Highway 400 potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable,
water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
The closure of Rose Street to northbound Highway 400 affects the OPP Office
direct access onto the hi hwa .
No significant impact
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G. W.P. 30-95-00
Moderate impact
2200m maximum out-of-way travel for local traffic due to the closure of Rose
Street t..o_!!..o.!'.ilih9.I!I1_cL.~~ 400 an<!.!:oad r~li~ment of Coultier Street.
2 parks 11.24 ha
OPP Station 1 <0.1 ha
YMCA (displaced)
I
Potential impact to Bell fibre optic cable, water and/or sewer mains in the
vicinity of the interchange.
Low impact
The closure of Rose Street to northbound Highway 400 affects the OPP Office
direct access onto the hi hwa .
I
No significant impact
I
I
I
Exhibit
4. 30 a
Analysis of Bayfield Street
Interchange Alternatives
I
I
Economic Environment
Agricultural
CommerciallIndnstrial Uses
Special Policy Areas
Property Waste and
Contamination
Cultural Environment
Archaeological Resources
Heritage Resources
Active agricultural land affected
Number of operations displaced
Number of operations affected
Impact to access (out-of-way travel)
Number of businesses displaced
Commercial property affected
(partial takings)
Impact to business access
Potential effect on ProvinciaVFederal
initiatives
Number of properties affected that have
known or high potential for
waste/contamination
Area of properties affected with
archaeolo ical ntial
Number and description of heritage!
historical features or cultural landscapes
impacted
Construction Impacts
Cost
Cost
Interchange operations
------------
Local road network access & operations
------
Degree to which existing geometric
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are
addressed .
Construction complexity
Impact on traffic during construction
Duration of Construction
Construction cost estimates
Property required (permanent)
@ Ontario
ha
#
#
Subjective
#
#lha
Subjective
o
-.----
o
-- ---.--
o
No impact
2 businesses (Color Your World, Shell Gas Station)
2 properties (fravel Lodge, Bayfield Mall) / 1.44 ha
Low impact
Travel Lodge Inn access would have to be relocated.
Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected.
# of properties / ha 1 property with moderate to high potential for waste and contamination.! 0.7 ha
ha 0
2
# Potential impact to the Sunnidale Road and Bayfield Street bridge overpasses
due to road widening and interchange replacements.
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
Quantitative
$ (Millions)
ha
Less Favourable
A disadvantage is that traffic making the WoN movement must make a left turn
from Bayfield Street to the Highway 400 ramp. Spacing between ramp terminals
is sufficient for left tum storage. Diamond ramps introduce many points of
conflict on Bayfield Street and have potential for wrong way moves. This
configuration is not consistent with driver expectation.
Access to Rose Street from.existing EIW-N ramp closed, resulting in some out-
of-way travel for local traffic. Realignment of Coulter Street required, which
will not significantly affect traffic operations. Although Bayfield Street presently
operates near capacity, no improvements to Bayfield Street are scheduled by the
City of Barrie within this study horizon.
Moderate
All interchange ramps meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban
interchanges: S-EIW ramp upgraded and exceeds urban interchange standards;
EIW -N ramp upgraded and exceeds urban interchange standards; W -S ramp
meets urhan interchange standards; N-EIW ramp upgraded and exceeds
minimum uirements; E-S ram u ed and meets minimum r uirements.
Moderate
Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction.
Structural work may require profile adjustment on Bayfield Street.
Moderate
Construction will require detours and temporary ramp and lane closures on
Bayfield Street.
2 Seasons
110%
4.8 ha
o
o
o
No impact
o
2 properties (fravel Lodge, Bayfield Mall) / 3.32 ha
Low to moderate impact
Travel Lodge Inn access would have to be relocated and partial displacement of
the Bayfield Mall parking lot.
No Special Policy Areas affected.
o
o
2
Potential impact to the Sunnidale Road and Bayfield Street bridge overpasses
due to road widening and interchange replacements.
Least Favourable
A disadvantage is that traffic making the WoN and E-S movements must make
left turns from Bayfield Street to the Highway 400 ramps. Therefore, left turn
storage lanes are required and traffic signals will be needed on Bayfield Street to
control traffic at the ramp terminals. Also, the diamond ramps introduce many
points of conflict on Bayfield Street and have potential for wrong way moves.
This conti tion is not consistent with driver e~~~.tion.
Access to Rose Street from existing EIW-N ramp closed, resulting in some out-
of-way travel for local traffic. New access to Travelodge from Coulter Street,
which will require minor realignment. Although Bayfield Street presently
operates near capacity, no improvements to Bayfield Street are scheduled by the
City of Barrie within this study horizon.
.------
High
All interchange ramps meet or exceed standards for urban interchanges.
Low to Moderate
Less complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during
construction. Ramp configuration will simplify construction. Structural work
ma r uire rofile adjustment on Bayfield Street.
Low to Moderate
Construction will require detours and temporary lane closures but will be less
disruptive to ramp traffic than the other Alternatives.
o
o
o
No impact
3 businesses (fravel Lodge, Color Your World, Shell Gas Station)
2 properties (fravel Lodge, Bayfield Mall) /2.13 ha
Moderate
Travel Lodge Inn access would be relocated. Partial displacement of the
Bayfield Mall parking lot required.
No Special Policy Areas affected.
1 property with moderate to high potential for waste and contamination.! 0.7 ha
o
2
Potential impact to the Sunnidale Road and Bayfield Street bridge overpasses
due to road widening and interchange replacements.
Favourable
This interchange type lends well to signage, which reduces the possibility of
wrong way moves. Free-flow moves onto freeway result in highest interchange
capacity. Traffic signals for left turns are confined to ramps only, which
eliminate the need for left tum lanes on Bayfield Street. Ramps are consistent
with driver expectation.
Access to Rose Street from existing EIW-N ramp closed, reSulting in'some;;;rt-
of-way travel for local traffic. Realignment of Coulter Street required, which
will not significantly affect traffic operations. Although Bayfield Street presently
operates near capacity, no improvements to Bayfield Street are scheduled by the
City of Barrie within this study horizon. The benefits of high capacity free flow
ram~ thereforeL are dilI!inished by the traffic operations on,~eld Street.
Moderate
All ramps, meet or exceed minimum requirements for urban interchanges: E-N
and W-S ramps exceed urban interchange standards; S-EIW and N-EIW ramps
exceed minimum requirements; E-S and WoN ramps meet minimum
requirements.
Moderate to High
Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during construction.
Structural work may require profile adjustment on Bayfield Street. Two ramp
terminals on structure will complicate stagi~~_,_
Moderate to High
Construction will require detours and temporary ramp and lane closures on
Bayfield Street.
2 Seasons 2 Seasons
100% 125 %
5.7 ha 7.3 ha
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Bayfield Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 30 b
CATEGORY - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT CATEGORY - ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ,
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE I ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMMENTS FACTOR AL TERNA TlVE I AL TERNA TlVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMMENTS
PARCLO A (SB)/ DIAMOND PARCLOA PARCLO A (SB)! DIAMOND PARCLOA
DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
1 FISHERIES & 0 0 0 All alternatives result in the same minor impact to aquatic habitat. I AGRJCUL TURAL 0 0 0 No alternative impacts agriculturaJland or operations.
AQUATIC
HABITAT Alternatives 1 and 3 displace cOlTDDefCial property, but Alternatives 2 and 3 impact more
2 TERRESTRIAL 0 0 0 All alternatives result in a minor loss of landscape plantings. Although Alternatives 1 and 2 impact 2 COMMERCIAL I 0 ~ ~ property, impact direct access to the Travel Lodge Inn and result in partial displacement of
ENVIRONMENT a small amount of forest area, this impact is considered minimal. Ii~DUSTRJAL USES the Bayfield Mall parldng lot. 1he realignment of Coulter Street in Alternative 3 results in
greater impacts to access to Travel Lodge Inn and Color Your World than Alternative 2.
3 GROUNDWATER 0 0 0 No alternatives impact water wells. Access to these businesses, under Alternative 3, will also be more complicated as it
requires more out-of-way travel and a cul-de-sac just off of Coulter Street.
4 SURFACE WATER 0 0 0 All alternatives result in similar increases on paved areas and have opportunities for stonn water 0 0 0 No alternatives will affect Provincial or Federal initiatives for future land use.
facilities in the interchange.
CATEGORY 0 0 0 3 SPECIAL POLICY
SUMMARY AREAS
SumllUUV of Effects on the Natural Environment 4 PROPERTY 0 0 0 All alternatives will have impacts to land with high waste and contamination potential
WASTE & (Shell Gas Station).
1here are no significant differences between the alternatives. CONTAMINATION
THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED. CATEGORY 0 ~ ~
SUMMARY
CA TEGORY- SOC1AtE~'VIRONMENT Summarv of Effects on the Economic Environment
FACTOR Alternative I results in less impact to conunercial property and fewer impacts to business access along Bayfield Street.
ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3 COMMENTS
PARCLOA (SB)! DIAMOND PARCLO A THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 PREFERRED.
DIAMOND(NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
INTERCHANGE
0 0 ~ CATEGORY -CULTtmALENvIRONMENT
1 AESTHETICS All alternatives result in low impacts to the existing vegetation cover. Alternative 3 results in
slightly higher impacts to sensitive viewer groups since more residences will be affected from the FACTOR AL TERNA TlVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3 COMMENTS
new ramp configuration. PARCLOA (SB)! DIAMOND PARCLOA
DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
2 NOISE 0 0 ~ Alternative 2 will not appreciably affect noise levels at nearby residences. Alternative I involves a INTERCHANGE
N- W ramp that could cause low impacts to residences on Patricia A venue. Alternative 3 has
possible low impact to several residences on Toronto Street and Grove Street west due to realigned 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 0 0 0 No alternative impacts land with archaeological potential.
E-S ramp and probable relocation of YMCA buildings. RESOURCES
3 RESIDENTIAL 0 0 ~ All alternatives result in impacts to residential property however Alternative 3 will have greater 0 0 0 All alternatives result in low impacts to built heritage features (bridge overpasses).
impacts since it displaces more residences. . 2 HERITAGE
RESOURCES
4 COMMUNITY 0 0 ~ All alternatives will have an impact on coinmunity mobility because of the closure of Rose Street to CATEGORY 0 0 0
EFFECTS northbound Highway 400, although Alternative 3 will result in slightly greater impacts due to the
cul-de-sac at Toronto Street and the ~ reaJigM1ent of Coulter Street. All alternatives will have a SUMMARY
minor impact OU the OPP Station property and affect two parks. Alternative 3 displaces the YMCA Summa,., Effects on the Cultural Environment
whereas Alternatives I and 2 result in ouIy minor disruption impacts to the YMCA property.
5 COMPATIBrLITY 0 0 0 None of the alternatives significantly impact land dedicated to future land use. All of the alternatives impact a known built heritage feature (bridge overpass).
WITH FUTURE
LAND USE THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
CATEGORY 0 0 ~ ."
SlJMMARY
SumllUUV of Effects on the Social Environment
All alternatives result in relatively low aesthetic impacts to the existing vegetation cover and to sensitive viewer groups. Alternative 3 has higher impacts to residences than the other
alternatives. All alternatives result in impacts to community mobility because of the out-of-way travel for local commuters due to the closure of Rose Street, however Alternative 3 .....
will have slightly greater impacts because of the additional road improvements including two cul-de-sacs and realignment of Coulter Street. All alternatives will have a minor impact
on the OPP Station property but will not significantly affect operations. Alternative 3 will displace the YMCA facility.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 & 2 ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED OVER ALTERNATIVE 3. M^<\t"'" . . ...... .~ .
,..,,"',. .
@ Ontario IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY Evaluation of Bayfield Street Exhibit
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11 Interchange Alternatives 4. 31 a
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CATEGORY - TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING & COST
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMM:ENTS
PARCLOA (S8)1 DIAMOND PARCLO A
DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
INTERCHANGE
1 TRAFFIC ~ Q) 4) Unlike Alternatives I and 3, which will adequately serve existing and future
traffic demands, Alternative 2 will negatively impact traffic operations on
OPERATIONS Bayfield Street as it eliminates the free-flow loop rnmp to Highway 400
southbound. 'Therefore, Alternative 2 is not preferred from a traffic operntions
perspective. 'The free-flow ramps of Alternative 3 provide the highest capacity
and eliminate the need for left turn lanes. 'The benefits of these free flow ranq>s,
however, are somewhat diminished by the traffic operntions on Bayfield Street.
In addition to a lower capacity, Alternative I will require left turn lanes as it
requires a left turn movement to Highway 400 northbound. Alternative 3 is
most consistent with driver expectation.
2 CONSTRUCTION ~ 4) Q) 'The constIUCtion of Alternative 2 is the least complex, which will result in the
IMPACTS lowest traffic disruptions.
3 COST 4) 4) ~ Alternative 3 is approximately 15 percent more expensive to construct than
Alternatives I and 2.
CATEGORY ~ Q) 4)
SUMMARY
Summan of Effects on Tl'Il1ISDl1rlotion and EnlriMerml!
Although Alternative 2 has the least constIUCtion impacts and a lower cost than Alternative 3, Alternative 2 negatively affects traffic operntions on Bayfield Street as it
eliminates the free flow loop rnmp to Highway 400 southbound. Alternative I maintains the free flow loop rnmp to Highway 400 southbound, so Alternative I is preferred
over Alternative 2. While Alternative 3 is more expensive than Alternative 2, it provides more favourable traffic operntions as this alternative provides three free flow ramps
to Highway 400. The more favourable traffic operntions of Alternative 3 are considered of more importance than the cost advantage of Alternative 2.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 318 SLIGHTI.. Y PREFERRED.
RANKING OF ALTERNATIVES
o ...(j)
. Most Preferred
Least Preferred
@ Ontario
CATEGORY - S'JMMARY OF Ev ALUA nON
FACTOR "RELATIVE LEVEL OF AI. TERNA TlVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE PARCLO A (S8)1 DIAMOND PARCLO A
DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
INTERCHANGE
1 NATURAL 'There are no significant differences between the alternatives.
ENVmONMENT Low 4) 4) 4) THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL 4) 4) ~ All alternatives result in relatively low aesthetic impacts to the existing
vegetation cover and to sensitive viewer groups. Alternative 3 has higher
ENVIRONMENT impacts to residences than the other alternatives. All alternatives result in
impacts to community mobility because of the out-of-way travel for local
co:mmnters due to the closure of Rose Street, however Alternative 3 will have
slightly greater impacts because of the additional road improvements including
High two cul-de-sacs and realignment of Coulter Street. All alternatives will have a
minor impact on the OPP Station property bnt will not significantly affect
operntions. Alternative 3 will displace the YMCA facility.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 & 2 ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED
OVER ALTERNATIVE 3.
3 ECONOMIC 4) ~ Q) Alternative I results in less impact to commercial property and fewer impacts
to business access along Bayfield Street.
ENVIRONMENT High
THEREFORE, AL TERNA TIVE 1 PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL 4) 4) 4) All of the alternatives impact a known built beritage feature (bridge overpass).
ENVIRONMENT Moderate THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION ~ Q) 0 Although Alternative 2 has the least constIUCtion impacts and a lower cost than
Alternative 3, Alternative 2 negatively affects traffic operations on Bayfield
& ENGINEERING & Street as it eliminates the free flow loop ramp to Highway 400 southbound
COST Alternative I maintains the free flow loop ramp to Highway 400 southbound,
so Alternative I is preferred over Alternative 2. While Alternative 3 is more
High expensive than Alternative 2, it provides more favourable traffic operations as
this a1temative provides three free flow ramps to Highway 400. TIle more
favourable traffic operations of Alternative 3 are considered of more
importance than the cost advantage of Alternative 2.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3 IS SLIGHTI..Y PREFERRED.'
SUtnmtlI'V of Evaluation:
While Alternative 3 provides more favourable transportation and engineering benefits, Alternative 3 results in the greatest social and economic impacts. 'The social and economic enviromnents are
considered to have a high level of significance and the impacts of Alternatives 2 and 3 are too great and cannot be overcome with refinement of design. Although the transportation and eugineering
benefits are lower for Alternative I, traffic operations will not be compromised, as this alternative will adequately serve existing and future traffic demands. Alternative I results in the least impact
to commercial property and provides favourable transportation and engineering benefits.
THEREFORE ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT ffiGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Evaluation of Bayfield Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 31 b
/...:
~'
-....c
<ij
,tfj
1""1--
--
50m 0
,
100m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
"
''-''-
'",
"'-".",
BA YFlELD MALL
"
,
j
i
/R;:~,
~~~7jF
c
z
z
a
)>
r
m
::tJ
o
)>
a
'"
i5
Q
fJ)
o
ill
!II
,~,
-
"
"
",
''-''-,
, ,
,/ "/-''-''-'
"
"
i '
"~,
"''''-"....,,,'-
"""::::'>"" ':
"
,
"'-"
-',
; !
/
SCALE
---
'.......,','......",
Q""'"
~,iib~'
, '""",]tS}'
""<"~:=::'" ,
./ /
j ;'
e
LEGEND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
'"
"
",
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 BAYFIELD STREET 4.32
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 TECHNICALL Y PREFERRED PLAN
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
Natural Environment
FISheries and Aquatic Habitat
Terrestrial Environment
Surface Water
Impact to fish species and aquatic habitat
Number of fish habitat
crossings/encroachments and channel length
affected by ex anded ROW
Number of wildlife travel coITidorsllinkages
affected
_._~-
Area of significant wildlife habitats
impacted
Number and area of significant vegetation
communities impacted
Number and area of provincially significant
wetlands impacted
Area through upland forests impacted
Potential impact to Area of Natural and
Scientific Interests (ANSIs) I Environmental
Significant Areas (ESAs)
Potential interference with water wells and
area of flowing wells and high water table
Potential impact to groundwater recharge
and discharge areas
Ability to provide Storm Water
Management (SWM)
Impact to aesthetic quality of existing
landscape in the vicinity of ROW
Impact to sensitive viewer groups of the
road and from the road
Impact to noise sensitive recei vcrs
Number of residences displaced
Residential property affected
(partial takings)
Impact to community mobility
(maximum out-of-way travel)
Impact to community/recreational!
institutionaVpaIt. features
Impact to municipal utilities/residential
services
Impact to emergency services access
Impact to approved future land use plans
I
@ Ontario
I
Subjective
#/m
#
ha
#/ha
#lha
ha
#/ha
# of wells impacted
ha
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
Analysis
#/ha
Subjective
#lha
Subjective
Subjective
Subjective
No impact
o
o
o
1/0.1 ha (contains Black Walnut) in the northwest quadrant.
o
0.22 ha
o
o
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within
interchange. Small increase in pavement area. New and/or
extended culverts are r uired.
Low impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. grass, fields, tree
plantationslhedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate
the interchan,ge ramps and road realignments.
No significant impact
No impact to nearby residences due to interchange
improvements.
#
o
--,-'---~-'-"-
o
No impact
---'-"-'--'-'-'--'-'-
I institutional facility I <0.1 ha
(Georgian College Residence - southeast quadrant of Highway
400 and Duckworth Street)
Potential low impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, Cable, gas
mains, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the
interchange.
No impact
Potential low impact on the proposed Site Plan for the "Building
Box" development on the southwest quadrant of Duckworth
Street and Cundles Road.
No impact
o
o
o
1/0.1 ha (contains Black Walnut) in the northwest quadrant.
o
0.23 ha
o
o
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within
interchange. Small increase in pavement area. New and/or
extended cui verts are r uired.
Low impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. grass, fields, tree
plantationslhedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate
the interchange ram~ and road realignments.
No significant impact
No impact to nearby residences due to interchange improvements.
o
o
Negligible impact on the out-of-way travel along realigned
Georgian Drive.
1 institutional facility 12.03 ha
(Georgian College Campus - northeast quadrant of Highway 400
and Duckworth Street)
No impact
o
o
o
Unknown vegetation type in northwest quadrant.
o
(No direct impact to the Little Lake PSW but approaches
the 120 m buffer)
1.26 ha
o
o
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within
interchange. Net increase in pavement area. New and/or extended
culverts are re uired.
Moderate impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field, upland forest, tree
plantationslhedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the
interchange ram~ and road realignments.
Low impact
4 residences affected because of the additional property
re uirements for interchan e ram s and road reali ents.
No impact to nearby residences due to interchange improvements.
o
o
Low impact
55 m out-of-way travel for users of Little Lake Road.
----..-------
.---..-
1 institutional facility I <0.1 ha
(Georgian College Residence - southeast quadrant of Highway 400
and Duckworth Street)
Little Lake Secondary Planning Area I 0.3 ha
Potential low impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, Cable, gas Potential low impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, Cable, gas
mains, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange. mains, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
No impact
Potential low impact on the proposed Site Plan for the "Building
Box" development on the southwest quadrant of Duckworth Street
and Cundles Road. Potential moderate impact on the proposed
Georgian Drive Secondary Plan - expansion of Georgian College
CaIn us.
mGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION A T HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
No impact
Potential high impact on the proposed Site Plan for the "Building
Box" development on the southwest quadrant of Duckworth Street
and Cundles Road.
No impact
o
o
o
Unknown vegetation type in northwest quadrant.
---.-
o
(No direct impact to the Little Lake PSW but approaches
the 120 m buffer)
1.26 ha
----.--
o
o
o
Potential opportunities for storm water management within
interchange. Substantial increase in pavement area. New and/or
extended culverts are uired.
Moderate to high impact
Existing vegetation cover (i.e. old field, upland forest, tree
plantationslhedgerows) required to be removed to accommodate the
interch3.!!ge ramps and road realignments..
Low impact
4 residences affected because of the additional property
r . ements for interchanae ram s and road reaIi ments.
No impact to nearby residences due to interchange improvements.
o
o
Low impact
50 m out-of-way travel for users of Little Lake Road and negligible
impact on the out-of-way travel along realigned Georgian Drive.
--.----.-
1 institutional facility I 4.92 ha
(Georgian College Residence - southeast quadrant of Highway 400
and Duckworth Street and Georgian College Campus - northeast
quadrant of Highway 400 and Duckworth Street)
Little 4J.c.e Secondary Planning Area I O.3ha ____
Potential low impact to Bell fibre optic cable, Hydro, Cable, gas
mains, water and/or sewer mains in the vicinity of the interchange.
No impact
Potential high impact on the proposed Site Plan for the "Building
Box" development on the southwest quadrant of Duckworth Street
and Cundles Road. Potential high impact on the proposed Georgian
Drive Secondary Plan - expansion of Georgian College.
Analysis of Duckworth Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 33 a
ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 4
EVALUATION FACTOR INDICATOR MEASURE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARCLO A (SB) I DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE PARCLO A INTERCHANGE PARCLO B INTERCHANGE
Economic Environment
Agricultural Active agricultural land affected ha 0 0 0 0
... -.---....
Number of operations displaced # 0 0 0 0
--
-.--- - 0 0
Number of operations affected # 0 0
,,,,-'--"--'--' "._~_._- -.-----.- ---. ...,-
Impact to access (out-of-way travel) Subjective No impact No impact No impact No impact
CommerciallIudustrial Uses J'!~ber of businesses displaced # 0 0 0 0
1--------.- lbusiness ("Building Box" commercial development affected) Ibusiness ("Building Box" commercial development affected) lbusiness ("Building Box" commercial development affected) Ibusiness ("Building Box" commercial development affected)
Commercial property affected #/ha 0.63 ha 0.63 ha 4.99 ha 6.72 ha
(partial takings) -- --.
Impact to business access Subjective No impact No impact No impact No impact
Special Policy Areas Potential effect on ProviuciallFederal Subjective No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected. No Special Policy Areas affected.
initiatives
Property Waste and Number of properties affected that have 0 0 0 0
Contamination known or high potential for # of properties I ha
waste/contamination
Cultural Environment
Archaeological Resources Area of properties affected with ha 0 0 0 0
archaeolO!!ical DOtential
Heritage Resources Number and description of heritage/ 0 0 0 0
historical features or cultural landscapes #
imoacted
Transportation & Engineering Less Favourable
Traffic Operations Least Favourable
Favourable Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit tenninals are located Favourable Movements from the freeway do not pass through traffic signals,
Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit tenninals are in advance of the structure. A disadvantage is that traffic making Configuration favours freeway traffic as exit terminals are located in which reduces the possibility of traffic backing up on the freeway.
located in advance of the structure. Free-flow moves onto the W-N movement must make a left turn from Duckworth Street advance of the structure. Free-flow moves onto freeway result in However, a disadvantage of this is that high-speed traffic exits from
freeway result in highest interchange capacity. Stops and traffic onto the ramp to Highway 400. Also, the diamond ramps have highest interchange capacity. Stops and traffic signals for left turns the freeway to a low-speed inner loop ramp on a downgrade, which
Interchange operations Subjective signals for left turns are confined to ramps only, which greater potential for wrong-way moves and introduce more points are confined to ramps only, which eliminates the need for a left turn is operationally less desirable. Traffic making W-N and E-S
eliminates the need for a left turn lane on Duckworth Street. of conflict on Duckworth Street than the other interchange lane on Duckworth Street. This interchange type lends well to movements must make left turns from Duckworth Street onto ramps
Ramps are consistent with driver expectation. This interchange alternatives. Traffic signals will be required on Duckworth Street signage, which reduces the possibility of wrong way moves. Ramps to Highway 400. This will require traffic signals and an additional
type lends well to signage, which reduces the possibility of to control traffic at the ramp terminals leading to Highway 400. are consistent with driver expectation. lane for left turns on Duckworth Street. Ramp movements are not
wrong way moves. Spacing between ramp terminals is sufficient for left turn storage. consistent with driver expectation at this interchange.
- Ramns are not consistent with driver expecta!ion. . --...-------
This alternative includes a realignment of Duckworth Street, which This alternative includes a minor realignment of Georgian Drive and
realignment of Duckworth Street. Access will be accommodated
Local access/routes maintained. Right turn queues are expected Minor realignment of Georgian Drive. Right turn queues are improve capacity will eliminate expected right turn queues for the via realigned/extended Little Lake Road. This will improve capacity
Local road network access & operations Subjective for the northbound approach on Cundles Road to Duckworth expected for the northbound approach on Cundles Road to northbound approach on Cundles Road to Duckworth Street. Minor for the northbound approach on Cundles Road to Duckworth Street.
Street during the PM peak travel periods. Duckworth Street during the PM peak travel periods. out-of-way travel be required for the Little Lake Road Minor out-of-way travel will be required for the Little Lake Road
, community. comm~_.___
-. .-
Moderate Moderate Moderate
All interchange ramps meet minimum requirements for urban All interchange ramps meet minimum requirements for urban All interchange ramps meet minimum requirements for urban Moderate to High
interchanges: S-E/W and N-E/W ramps maintained or upgrade interchanges: E/W-N ramp upgraded and exceeds urban interchanges: S-E/W and N-E/W ramps maintained or upgrade and All interchange ramps meet minimum requirements for urban
Degree to which existing geometric and meet urban interchange standards; W:S ramp design speed interchange standards; S-E/W and N-E/W ramps maintained or meet urban interchange Standards; W-S ramp design speed reduced, interchanges: inner loop ramps meet minimurn requirements; S-E
deficiencies and roadside safety issues are Subjective reduced, however meets urban interchange standards; E-S inner upgrade and meet urban interchange standards; W-S ramp design however meets urban interchange standards; E.S inner loop ramp and N-W ramps upgraded and meet urban interchange standards;
addressed loop ramp exceeds minimum requirements, which is an speed reduced, however meets urban interchange standards; E-S exceeds minimum requirements. which is an improvement on the E/W-N and E/W-S ramps upgraded and exceed urban interchange
improvement on the existing conditions; E/W-N inner loop ramp inner loop ramp exceeds minimum requirements, which is an existing conditions; EtW-N inner loop ramp meets minimum standards.
meets minimum requirements, which is an improvement on the improvement on the existing conditions requirements, which is an improvement on the existing conditions.
existing conditions.
Construction Impacts High
Moderate to High Moderate to High High Realignment of Duckworth Street will complicate staging and
Construcrion complexity Subjective Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements Complex staging required to maintain all traffic movements during Realignment of Duckworth Street will complicate staging and detours on Highway 400 and on ramps. Reconfiguration to a Parclo
during construction. construction. detours as it may result in long term closures of exiting ramps B interchange will make construction more complex than the other
altemati ves
-.-- .-
--. Moderate High High
Impact on traffic during construction Subjective Highway 400, Duckworth Street and ramps will require detours, Highway 400, Duckworth Street and ramps will require detours, Ramps may require long term closures, which will result in delays Ramps may require long term closures, which will result in delays
which may result in lower operating speeds. All movements will which may result in lower operating speeds. All movements will on Duckworth Street. on Duckworth Street.
be maintained. be maintained. --
Duration of Construction Quantitative 1.5 Seasons 2 Seasons 2 Seasons 2 Seasons
Cost
Cost Construction cost estimates Percentage of 100% 100% 120% 135%
lowest
Property required (permanent) ha 1.9 ha 4.9ha 7.3 ha 15.9ha
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Analysis of Duckworth Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 33 b
I
I
I
I
I CATEGORY - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT CATEGORY - EeONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
FACTOR AI.Th;RNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TI\'E 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 AL TERNA TIVE 4 COMMENTS FACTOR AL TERNA TIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 4 COMME!I.'TS
PARCLO A PARCI.O A (SB)! PARCLOA PARCLOB PARCI.O A PARCLO A (SB)! PARCLO A PARCLO B
I lNTF.RCIIANGE DIAMOND (NB) INTE\I.CJIANGE INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE DIAMOND(NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
INTERCIIANGf: INTERCHANGE
1 FISHERIES & 0 0 0 0 No alternative impacts fisheries or aquatic habitat. I AGRICULTURAL 0 0 0 0 No alternative impacts agricultural land and operations.
AQUATIC
I HABITAT
0 0 ~ ~ All alternatives result in low impacts to a forest community, although the loss in fores1ed 2 COMMERCIAL I 0 0 ~ ~ All alternatives resull in impacts 10 the proposed connnercial development of the
2 TERRESTRIAL "Building Box", however Alternatives 3 and 4 require more land.
ENVIRONMENT area for Alternatives I and 2 are less than the other alternatives. INDUSTRIAL USES
3 GROUNDWATER 0 0 0 0 None of the alternatives will have an impact on water wells. 0 0 0 0 No alternative will have an affect on Provincial or Federal initiatives for future
I 3 SPECIAL POLICY land use.
AREAS
4 SURFACE WATER 0 0 0 ~ All alternatives result in an increase on paved areas, however Alternative 4 results in a
substantial increase in paved area. All alternatives have opportunities for siting storm 4 PROPERTY 0 0 0 0 None of the alternatives impact properties with known or high potential for waste
water facilities in the interchange. WASTE & and contamination.
I CATEGORY 0 0 ~ Q) CONTAMINATION
SUMMARY CATEGORY 0 0 ~ ~
Sum11llUV of Effects on the Natural ElIvironml!llt SUMMARY
I All alternatives result in similar low impacts to the natural environment. All alternatives result in minor impacts to forest cover, but Alternatives 3 and 4 will have a slightly greater Summary of Effects on the Economic Environment
impact on upland forest cover.
All alternatives result in low impacts to the economic environment All alternatives impact the proposed commercial development of the "Building Box", although Alternatives 3
THEREFORE, ALTE&~ATIVES 1 AND 2 ARE SLIGHTLY PREFERRED. and 4 impacts more property.
I CATEGORY - SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2 ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTER!'iA TlVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 4 COMMENTS CATEHORY.....CuL'f\.JRALENVIROl'\'MENT
PARCLOA PARCLO A (SB)! PARCLO A PARCLO B
I L'lTERCHANGE DlAMOND(NB) lNTERCHANGE INTERClIANGE FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3 AL TERNA TIVE 4
INTERCHANGE COMMENTS
PARCLO A PARCLO A (SB)! PARCLO A PARCLO B
0 0 ~ Q) All alternatives impact the aesthetic quality of the existing vegetatioo cover, however INTERCHANGE DIAMOND (NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCHANGE
1 AESTHETICS Alternative 4 results in the greatest amount of impacts because it requires more land fur INTERCIIANGE
the interchan!!e ramos and road realhmments of Duckworth Street and Georcian Drive. 0 ~ ~ ~ Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 impact land with archaeological potential.
I Alternatives I and 2 involve ramp structures similar to existing conditioos and are not 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL
2 NOISE 0 0 0 0 expec1ed to cause noise impacts at nearby residences. Alternatives 3 and 4 involve more RESOURCES
significant changes but noise sensitive receptors are far removed and it is unlikely that No alternative impacts known heritage resources.
they will be impac1ed by a noise increase. 2 HERITAGE 0 0 0 0
RESOURCES
I 3 RESIDENTIAL 0 0 0 0 None of the alternatives will have an impact to residential property.
CATEGORY 0 ~ ~ ~
SUMMARY
4 COMMUNITY 0 ~ Q) @ Alternatives I and 3 result in the smallest amount of impacts to Georgian College and
EFFECTS negligible out-of-way travel impacts for local commuters as compared to Alternatives 2 Sum11llUV Effects on the Cultural Environment
I and 4. However, Alternatives 3 and 4 will impact the tittle Lake Secondary Planning
Area. Alternative I results in no impacts to the cultural environment where as Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 n;sults in low impacts to land with archaeological potential.
5 COMPATmILITY 0 ~ ~ Q) All alternatives will impact the proposed "Building Box" conunercial developmeot on
the southwest quadrant of Duckworth Street and Cundles Road. Alternatives 2 and 4 will THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
WITII FUTURE
I LAND USE also impact the proposed Georgian Drive Secondary Plan for the expansion of the
Georgian College Campus.
-' -
CATEGORY 0 ~ Q) @
SUMMARY
I Summary of Effects on the Social Environment ........ .....,..n...~
All alternatives have low noise impacts and noirnpacts to residential property. Alternatives 3 and 4 have the greatest impact to community features and future land uses. Between ~~
I Alternatives I and 2, Alternative I has lower impacts since it does out impact the Georgian College property.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED. ,
,J,
I
I @
I Ontario HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY Evaluation of Duckworth Street Exhibit
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11 Interchange Alternatives 4. 34
a
I G.W.P.30-95-00
t 'l~~Jt
FACTOR AI.TFA"IATIVE 1 AL 11IRNA TIVE:I ALTERl'lATlVEJ AL11IIINA TIVE 4 COMMENTS
PARCLOA PAIICLO A (8B)I PAIICLO A PARCLOB
IIm:RCHANGE DIAMoND(NB) INTERCHANGE INTERCIIANGI!
INTERCIIANGE
1 TRAFFIC Q) <ID . @ The configuration of Alternative 4 requires high-speed fteevllay traffic to
OPERATIONS exit to a low-speed inner loop ramp on a downgrade, which is
operationally less desirable than the exit conditions offered by the other
alternatives. The major E-S movement would be required to ma1re a left
turn ftmn Duckworth Street, which is also operationally less desirable.
Alternative 4 is, therefore, not preferred.
The diamond I1III1pS of Alternative 2 require the W -N movement to make
a !eft turn ftmn Duckworth Street, This is operationally less desirable.
A1so, diamond I1III1pS have a higher potential for wrong-way moves and
introduce _ points of conflict than Alternatives 1 and 3. Alternative 2
is, therefore, not preferred.
Alternatives 1 and 3 have similar traffic operations as both incorporate
ftee.f1ow ramps. The free-flow I1III1pS eliminate left turn movements
ftmn Duckworth Street to Highway 400. This results in higher capacity,
therefore, Alternatives 1 and 3 are preferred. Right turn queuing for the
northbound approach is expected in the 2011 PM peak period at CundJes
Road and Duckworth Street. With Alternative I, right turn queuing will
occur during PM peak periods for the CundJeslDuckworth movements.
This queuing will not impact operations of the interchange ramp
terminal. Alternative 3 realigns Cund1esIDuckworth, improving f10w for
the CundlesIDuckworth movements. Alternative 3 results in slightly
better traffic operations and is, therefore, slightly preferred over
Alternative 1.
2 CONSTRUCTION . . Q) <ID Alternatives land 2 will have the least eotq;)lex construction staging and
IMPACTS will pose least disruptive to traffic.
3 COST . . Q) <ID Alternatives 1 and 2 have the lowest costs. Alternatives 3 and 4 are
twenty and tbirty percent higher, respectively, than Alternatives 1 and 2-
CATEGORY . <ID Q) @
SUMMARY
SU1fI11UlTII of Effects on Tra1l811Orltltion tmd Enl!ineeriml
Alternative 4 is least preferred in all categories. Alternatives 1 and 3 provide better traffic operations than Alternative 2, and Alternative 1 bas similar construction impacts
and costs. Therefore, Alternative 2 is not preferred. Alternative 3 provides slightly better traffic operations than Alternative 1; however, Alternative 1 is less complex to
implement, bas less construction costs and requires much less property than Alternative 3. The difference in traffic operations between Alternatives I and 3 pertains to the
Cundles/Duckworth traffic flow, which is adequately served by both alternatives. Therefore. the differences in construction staging. cost and property are considered ID be
more important than a slight improvement to "through traffic movement".
TllEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE liS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED OVER ALTERNATIVE 3.
@ Ontario
I
FACTOR *RELATIVELEVEL AL 11IRNA TIVE 1 AL11IIINA TIVE:% AL11IIINA TIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 4 COMMENTS
PARCLOA PARCLO A (88)1 PARCLOA PARCLOB
OF SiGNIF1CANCE IN11\RCHANGE DIAMoND (NB) IN11\RCHANGE INTERcHANGE
IN"IEReJIANGE
1 NATURAL . . Q) <ID All atternatives result in similar low impacts to the natural
ENVIRONMENT env:iromrent. All alternatives result in minor impacts to forest cover,
but Alternatives 3 and 4 will have a slightly greater impact on upland
Moderate forest cover.
TllEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2 ARE SLIGHTLY
PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL . Q) <ID @ All alternatives have low noise impacts and 00 impacts to residential
ENVIRONMENT property. Alternatives 3 and 4 have the greatest impact to colJllDllllity
features and future land uses. Between Alternatives 1 and 2,
Low Alternative 1 bas lower impacts since it does not impact the Georgian
College property.
TllEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC . . Q) Q) All alternatives result in low impacts to the economic enviromnent.
ENVIRONMENT All alternatives impact the proposed commercial develupment of the
"Building Box", although Alternatives 3 and 4 impacts more
Moderate property.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2 ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL . Q) Q) Q) Alternative 1 results in 00 impacts to the cultural enviromneut
ENVlRONMEl\.'T wbereas Alternatives 2, 3. and 4 result in low impacts to land with
Low arcbaeological potential.
TllEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION . <ID Q) @ Alternative 4 is least preferred in all categories. Alternatives 1 and 3
& ENGINEERING & provide better traffic operations than Alternative 2, and Alternative 1
COST has similar construction impacts and costs. Therefore. Alternative 2
is not preferred. Alternative 3 provides slightly better traffic
operations than Alternative 1; however, Alternative 1 is Jess complex
ID implement, bas less construction costs and requires much less
property than Alternative 3. The difference in traffic operations
Moderate between Alternatives I and 3 pertains to the CundleslDuckworth
traffic flow, which is adeqnately served by both alternatives.
Therefore. the differences in construction staging, cost and property
are considered to be rmre important than a slight improvement ID
"through traffic movement".
TllEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED
OVER ALTERNATIVE 3.
SUmmarY of Evaluntin..:
Alternative I is preferred overall since it results in the least amount of impacts to the natmal, social and ecooomic environments, bas the lowest cost and property reqnirements, and offers acceptable
transportation benefits.
.-
TllEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
mGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT mGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Evaluation of Duckworth Street
Interchange Alternatives
Exhibit
4. 34 b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
d
I
I
~~~
GEORGIAN
C()llEGE
t
LEGEND
.. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
- - - EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
SCALE
I"'I-~--
SOm 0
,
100m
URS HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY EXHIBIT
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 DUCKWORTH STREET 4.35
(i) Ontario to Junction at Highway 11 TECHNICALLY PREFERRED PLAN
G.W.P.30-95-00
Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
4.7.3 Commuter Parking Lot Evaluation
The Ministry of Transportation recognizes the transportation system benefits that can
~ achieved through increasing vehicle occupancy. In this regard, opportunities for
locating commuter parking lots in proximity to interchanges were considered in this
study.
The commuter parking lots provide safe opportunity for people to carpOol, thereby
reducing the number of vehicles on highways and urban streets. Commuter parking
lots also encourage ridesharing, thereby increasing energy efficiency.
Generation of Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives
A new or" improved commuter parking lot was proposed at an interchange if the
interchange met one or more of the following conditions:
. An existing commuter parking lot was displaced by" proposed improvements at
the interchange;
. An existing commuter parking lot is known to be" inadequate in tenns of the
number of spaces it currently provides; and/or
. There was sufficient vacant/undevel~ped land in the' vicinity of the interchange
with suitable access to accommodate a commuter parking lot.
Interchange locations that met at least one of the criteria include:
· Highway 89;
· Molson Park Drive; and
· Essa Road.
Alternative commuter parking lot sites at each of the above mentioned interchanges
were developed where there was sufficient vacant/undeveloped land. Significant
natural features such as wetlands and woodlots were avoided.
Candidate sites were developed to provide enough spaces to accommodate the
minimum number of parking spaces deemed to be required. The minimum number
of parking spaces required varied" by interchange location. .
As development along the Highway 400 corridor continues, opportunities may arise
for new commuter parking lot locations and assessment of commuter parking lot
locations identified by this study could change significantly. The Ministry will
continue to work with landowners as much as possible to identify and implement
commuter parking lot locations along the entire corridor, which can be implemented
with as little impact/disruption as possible, while meeting capacity and operational
requirements.
W Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 89
Alternatives
The minimum number of parking spaces required for the proposed commuter parking
lot was based on the number of spaces available in the existing commuter parking lot
in the southwest quadrant of the interchange and the parking area at the service centre
in the northwest quadrant of the interchange. Casual observations indicated that both
parking areas were being half-utilized. This corresponds to approximately 100
vehicles using the existing parking lot at anyone time. This same number was
assumed for the rest station parking area. To allow for growth, the proposed parking
lot was sized to accommodate twice the current demand. Therefore, the minimum
capacity was detennined to be 400 vehicles. "
Four alternatives were assessed for the Highway 89 interchange:
. Alternative 1 sites the commuter parking lot in the northeast quadrant of the
interchange;
. Alternative 2 sites the commuter parking lot in the northwest quadrant of the
interchange;
. Alternative 3 sites the commuter parking lot in the southwest quadrant of the
interchange; and
. Alternative 4 incorporates a commuter parking lot into the existing outlet mall
parking area in the southeast quadrant of the interchange.
The general location and layout of each alternative is provided in Exhibit 4.36.
Evaluation
The complete evaluation of the Highway 89 commuter parking lot alternatives is
provided in Exhibit 4.37. Alternative 1 was preferred as it was considered to result in
the least overall impacts to property and provide for a high degree of accessibility to
and from the proposed interchange. This alternative has been incorporated in the
recommended plan at Highway 89.
(Text continues on page 93)
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 90-
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVE 2
(400 SPACES)
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVE 3
(400 SPACeS)'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400
r------.,
I COMMUTER
I PARKING LOT :\
I ALTERNATIVE 4 - .. ...
I UTILIZE OUTLET V
MALL PARKlNG*
,,------
*contingent on
agreement with
Outlet Mall
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
AL TERNA TIVE 1
(400 SPACES)
,/"'"
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
HIGHWAY 89
COMMUTER PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVES
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
'"
!iI
"
~
"
[
~
SCALE
1"---- I
50m 0 100m
EXHIBIT
4.36
CA TEGORY - NATURAL ENvIRONMENT
AI- TERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE 2 AL TERNA TlVE 3 AL TERNA TIVE 4
FACTORlINDICATOR NORTHEAST NORTHWEST SOUTHWEST UTILIZE COMMENTS
QuADRANT QuADRANT QuADRANT OUTLET MALL
PARKING
1 EFFECf ON Alternatives 1,3 and 4 will have similar impacts to a Type 2 seasonal
AQUATIC ./ ./ ./ water crossing adjacent to Highway 89. Alternative 3 will have the
HABITAT greatest impact.
2 EFFECT ON No sensitive terrestrial habitat was identified in the vicinity of any
TERRESTRiAL ./ ./ ./ ./
HABITAT alternative.
3 EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./ ./ No significant groundwater features were identified in the vicinity of any
GROUNDWATER alternative.
4 EFFECf ON All alternatives have good storm water management treatment potential.
SURFACE ./ Alternative 4 utilizes exiting storm water management facilities and is
WATER therefore easier to implement.
S EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./ ./ No significant wetlands were identified n the vicinity of any alternative.
WETLANDS
CATEGORY - SOCIO-ECONOMI<: ENVIRONMENT
1 EFFECf ON Alternatives 2 and 3 will impact one noise sensitive receiver. Alternatives
SENSITIVE ./ ./
RECEIVERS 1 and 4 will not significantly impact any noise sensitive receivers.
2 EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./ Alternatives 1, 2 and 4 will not require property from residences.
RESIDENCES Alternative 3 will require property from 1 residence.
3 EFFECf ON
COMMUNITY ./ ./ ./ ./ All alternatives will have low impact on community features.
FEATURES
4 EFFECf ON Alternative 3 will displace one business, while the other alternatives will
BUSiNESSES not displace businesses. Alternative 1 will impact two businesses through
minor partial property takings. Alternative 4 will impact all of the
./ businesses at the outlet mall as it may potentially reduce the number of
available spaces for tenants and customers. The property impact of
Alternative 4 to the Cookstown Outlet Mall would be dependent on the
terms reached between the Ministry of Transportation and the property
owner. Alternative 2 will have no impact on any of the businesses.
S EFFECf ON No agricultural operatious will be impacted by Alternatives 1 and 4.
AGRICULTURAL ./ ./ Alternative 2 will impact agricultural lands in the northwest quadrant of the
OPERATIONS interchange and Alternative 3 will impact agricultural lands in the
southwest qnadrant of the interchange.
@ Ontario
I
CATEGORY - CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT
ALTERNATIVE AL TERNATlVE2 ALTERNATIVE 3 AL TERNA TlVE 4
F ACTORlINDlCA TOR 1 NORTHWEST SOUTHwEST UTILIZE COMMENTS
NORTHEAST QUADRANT QuADRANT OUTLET MALL
QUADRANT PARKING
1 EFFECf ON
HERITAGE ./ ./ ./ ./ No heritage features were identified in the vicinity of any alternative.
FEATURES
2 EFFECf ON No areas of archaeological potential were identified in the vicinity of
AREAS WITH Alternatives 1 and 4.
ARCHAEOLOGI- ./ ./ Alternative 2 will impact areas of archaeological potential in the northwest
CAL POTENTIAL qnadrant of the interchange and Alternative 3 will impact areas of
archaeological potential in the southwest quadrant of the interchange.
CA1'EGORY- TE(1tNICAL CONSIDERA110NS
1 ACCESSffiILITYI All alternatives have high degree of accessibility as they are located in
CONVENIENCE ./ ./ ./ vicinity of interchange. Alternatives I, 2 and 3 have direct access from
Highway 89, while access to Alternative 4 must be made via a private
entrance and parking lot owned by Cookstown Outlet Mall. Therefore, the
location of Alternative 4 is less convenient than the other alternatives.
2 CAPACITY Alternatives 1,2 and 3 each have a capacity of approximately 400 spaces.
(ASSUMED 400 ./ ./ ./ ./ Alternative 2, however, has greater potential for expansion.
SPACES
REQUIRED) The capacity of Alternative 4 would be contingent on an agreement
between the Ministry of Transportation and Cookstown Outlet MalL
3 CONSTRUCTION ./ ./ ./ ./ All alternatives are isolated from Highway 89 and Highway 400 operations
IMPACfS and entrances. Construction Impacts will be minimal for all alternatives.
SUMMARY OF EVAUJATION
Although commuter parking lots are generally beneficial in reducing travel demand, such benefits do not justify the displacement of businesses. The
implementation of Alternative 3 would result in the displacement of Motel 400. None of the other alternatives displace businesses. Alternative 3, therefore, is not
preferred.
The viability of Alternative 4 would be contingent on an agreement between Cookstown Outlet Mall and the Ministry of Transportation. As such, there is
uncertainty with respect to impacts to property, businesses and capacity. In addition, the location of Alternative 4 is less convenient than the others, as access to
and from this location must be made via a private entrance. Alternative 4, therefore, is not preferred.
Alternative 2 does not impact any businesses, however, Alternative 2 has a much greater impact on agricultural lands, as it is located on lands that are presently
used for agricultural operations. Alternative I impacts two businesses, however, the impacts are partial property taking which are not expected to have
significant effect on the operations of those businesses. Alternative I is slightly preferred over Alternative 2.
THEREFORE, AL TERNA TIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
Evaluation of Highway 89 Commuter
Parking Lot Alternatives
Exhibit
4.37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Ontario
Molson Park Drive
Four alternatives were assessed for the Essa Road interchange:
· Alternative 1 incorporates a commuter parking lot into the former Barrie
Raceway parking area;
· Alternative 2 sites the commuter parking lot in the northwest quadrant of the
interchange;
· Alternative 3 sites the commuter parking lot in the southwest quadrant of the
interchange adjacent to the existing commercial development; and
· Alternative 4 expands the existing site to the west.
The general location and layout schematic layout of each alternative is provided in
Exhibit 4.40.
Alternatives
The Molson Park Drive interchange does not currently provide a designated
commuter parking lot. There is, however, sufficient vacant land in the vicinity of the
interchange with suitable access to accommodate a commuter parking lot. The
minimum number of parking spaces required at the Molson Park Drive interchange
was determined to be 320, based on the demand for spaces currently observed at the
Essa Road interchange.
Two alternatives were assessed for the Molson Park Drive interchange:
· Alternative 1 incorporates a commuter parking lot into the former Molson Park
Beer Store site in the northeast quadrant of the interchange; and
· Alternative 2 incorporates a commuter parking lot into the existing Barrie Power
Centre parking area in the southwest quadrant of the interchange.
The location and layout of each alternative is provided in Exhibit 4.38.
Evaluation
The complete evaluation of the Essa Road commuter parking lot alternatives is
provided in Exhibit 4.41. Alternatives 2 and 3 are preferred on the basis that both are
located within the existing Ministry of Transportation right-of.way on lands that are
unlikely to be developed and both sites have comparable capacities. No alternative
has been incorporated in the recommended plan of this interchange, pending
negotiations for access for Alternative :3 with the landowner of the adjacent
commercial property. The Ministry of Transportation will continue to investigate
opportunities for incorporating / expanding commuter parking at the Essa Road
interchange.
Evaluation
The complete evaluation of the Molson Park Drive commuter parking lot alternatives
is provided in Exhibit 4.39. Alternative 1 is preferred as it offers a higher degree of
access to and from the interchange and will not impact existing businesses. However,
the current owners of the Molson Park lands have indicated in writing that they were
opposed to any proposed commuter p~king lot on their property. No commuter
parking iot location has been incorporated in the recommended plan at the Molson
Park interchange. MTO will continue to seek opportunities for siting a commuter
par~g lot at this interchange.
Finalizing Preferred Commuter Parking Lot Locatiol')s
It is recognized that the alternative commuter parking lot locations identified at the
interchanges discussed above are based on current land uses and estimated capacity
requirements. As development along the Highway 400 corridor continues,
opportunities may arise for new commute! parking lot locations and assessment of
commuter parking lot locations identified by this study could change significantly.
The Ministry of Transportation will continue to work with landowners as much as
possible to identify and implement commuter parking lot locations along the entire
corridor, which can be implemented with as little impact/disruption as"possible, while
meeting capacity and operational requirements.
Essa Road
Alternatives
The Essa Road interchange area includes a commuter parking lot with approximately
80 spaces, located just west of the interchange in the northwest quadrant of the Essa
Road! Ardagh Road intersection. An additional facility is proposed for the Essa Road
interchange as the existing lot currently operates at capacity. This second lot would
be of equal size to the existing lot to bring commuter parking capacity at this
interchange to approximately 160 spaces.
(Text continues on page 98)
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 93 _
April 2004
URS
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVE 2 -
UTILIZE MALL
PARKING*
*contingent on
/~,'
.
.
...~""""""
URS
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
MOlSON PARK
(PROPOSED FOR REDEVELOPMENT)
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVE 1
'contingent on
agreement with
land owner
~
SCALE
1""--.-
50m 0
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
MOLSON PARK DRIVE
COMMUTER PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVES
,
100m
EXHIBIT
4.38
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
CATEGORY - NATURAL ENVlROl'o'MENT
ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2
FACTORnNrKCATOR UTILIZ'''; BARRIE PoWER COMMEl~TS
FORMER BEER SToRE CENTRE PARKING
1 EFFECT ON
AQUATIC ./ ./ No sensitive aquatic habitat was identified in the vicinity of either alternative.
HABITAT
2 EFFECT ON
TERRESTRIAL ./ ./ No sensitive terrestrial habitat was identified in the vicinity of either alternative.
HABITAT
3 EFFECT ON ./ Both alternatives will have low effects on ground water features. Alternative 2 will
GROUNDWATER have no effect on ground water features as it utilizes an existing parking facility.
4 EFFECT ON Both alternatives have good storm water management treatment potential. Alternative
SURFACE WATER ./ 2 utilizes exiting storm water management facilities and is therefore easier to
implement.
S EFFECT ON ./ ./ No significant wetlands were identified in the vicinity of any alternative.
WETLANDS
CA TEGOBY - SOeJ()..ECONOMIC Em'IRONMENT
1 EFFECT ON NOISE ./ ./
SENSITNE Neither alternative impacts noise sensitive receivers.
RECEIVERS
2 EFFECT ON ./ ./ Neither alternative impacts residential property.
RESIDENCES
3 EFFECT ON
COMMUNITY ./ ./ Neither alternative impacts community features.
FEATURES
4 EFFECT ON Neither alternative displaces businesses. Alternative 2 will impact the Barne Power
BUSINESSES Centre as it may potentially reduce the number of available spaces for tenants and
./ customers. The property impact to the Barrie Power Centre is dependent on the terms
reached between the Ministry of Transportation and the property owner. Alternative 1
will require property from the owner of the former Beer Store site, which has potential
for future development.
S EFFECT ON
AGRICULTURAL ./ ./ Neither alternative impacts agricultural operations.
OPERATIONS
I
I
I
I @ Ontario
I
I
CAT'EGORY - CUL11)RAL ENV1RO~'MENT
FACTORllNDICATOR
ALTERNATIVE 1
FORMER BEER STORE
SITE
AL TERNA TIVE 2
UTILIZE BARRIE POWER COMMENTS
CENTRE PARKING
1 EFFEcr ON
HERITAGE
FEATURES
2 EFFEcr ON AREAS
WITH
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
POTENTIAL
./
./ Neither alternative impacts heritage features.
./
./ Neither alternative impacts areas of archaeological potential.
CATEGORY - TEfHNICAL CONSU>ERATlONS
1 ACCESSIBILITYI
CONVENIENCE
The entrance to the parking lot in Alternative 1 is located away from the
interchange and the Barrie View Drive intersection. With Alternative 2, traffic
entering and exiting the parking lot will be required to use an intersection which
currently operates at Level of Service D. In addition, the location of Alternative
2 is less convenient than Alternative 1 since access to and from the commuter lot
must be made via a private entrance.
./
2 CAPACITY
(ASSUMED 320
SPACES REQUIRED)
Alternative 1 can provide the capacity required of approximately 300 spaces and
has a high potential for future expansion.
The capacity of Alternative 2 would be contingent on an agreement between the
Ministry of Transportation and Barrie Power Centre.
./
3 CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS
./
./
Construction impacts will be minimal for both alternatives.
SUMMARY OFEv ALUATION
Alternative 1 offers better access from Molson Park Drive since it is located away from the interchange and the congested Barne View Drive intersection.
Also, Alternative 1 will not impact businesses, while Alternative 2 may potentially reduce the number of parking spaces available to the Barrie Power Centre.
The viability of Alternative 2 would be contingent on an agreement between Barrie Power Centre and the Ministry of Transportation. Without such an
agreement there is uncertainty with respect to the extent of impacts to property and businesses as well as parking capacity.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Evaluation of Molson Park Drive
Commuter Parking Lot Alternatives
Exhibit
4.39
"
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVE 4
(160 SPACES)
t>~_"
COMMUTER
PARKING LOT
TERNA TIVE 3*
(150 SPACES)
"
/
/
/,/ 11M
_,J.F~ HORTONS ,r'
" "r""
/
"
i<+€ PAPEFi
GEORC*ANRNE
" pAPERI/
"'"''--'",../
"
(. ./,""
COMFORT
INN
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
(i) Ontario
Ministry ofTransportation
, '
:-....--,
,~. "''''-,
~-"~,._~-.....~,
, '-
"'..... ~p ,
/" "'i;~ . '<', "',
o-,;{ ~::~/''''''''
COMMUTE~'
PARKIN'G~'QT '.
AL TERNA TIVE\i
(150 SPACES)
.......--
I COMMUTER I
. PARKING LOT I
ALTERNATIVE 1 - I
IIUTILlZE RACEWAY I
PARKING* I
\ , . I!!I ._IIII!~. . .
\~':::*cOntingenton
agreement with
Pfo~rty owner
FORMER BARRIE RACEWAY
PROPOSED FOR REDEVELOPMENT
<',
~
SCAlE 1 :2500
~~__ I
50m 0 100m
EXHIBIT
ESSA ROAD
COMMUTER PARKING LOT
ALTERNATIVES
4.40
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CATE(;c)RY - NATIJRAL ENVIRONMENT
ALTERNATIVE 1
UTILIZE ALTERNATIVE 2 AL TERNA TIVE 3 AL TERNA TIVE 4
F ACTORIINDICA TOR BARRIE NORTHWEST SOUTHWEST EXPAND COMMENTS
RACEWAY QUADRANT QuADRANT EXISTING
PARKING
1 EFFECf ON
AQUATIC ./ ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives impact aquatic habitat.
HABITAT
2 EFFECf ON No sensitive terrestrial habitat was identified in the vicinity of any
TERRESTRIAL ./ ./ ./ ./
HABITAT alternative.
3 EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives impact ground water features.
GROUNDWATER
4 EFFECf ON All alternatives have good storm water management treatment potential.
SURFACE ./ ./ Alternative 4 can utilize exiting storm water management facilities and is
WATER therefore easier to implement.
S EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./ ./ No significant wetlands in the vicinity of any alternative.
WETLANDS
CATEGORY - Soclo.ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
1 EFFECf ON
NOISE ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives will impact noise sensitive receivers. Surrounding
SENSITIVE land use is primarily commercial.
RECEIVERS
2 EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives impact residential property.
RESIDENCES
3 EFFECf ON
COMMUNITY ./ ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives impact community features.
FEATURES
4 EFFECf ON Alternatives 2 and 4 Will not displace or require property from businesses.
BUSINESSES Altemative 1 will require developable property (former Barrie Raceway)
./ ./ from the City of Barrie. Alternative 3 may require property from an
existing business (Zehrs).
All alternatives may potentially increase business around the interchange
area due to increased traffic.
S EFFECf ON
AGRICULTURAL ./ ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives impact agricultural operations.
OPERATIONS
@ Ontario
CATEGORY - CtJLTURAL ENVIRONMENT
ALTERNATIVE 1 AL TERNA TIVE 2 AL TERNA TlVE 3 AL TERNA TIVE 4
F ACTORIINDICA TOR UTILIZE BARRIE NORTHEAST SOUTHwEsT EXPAND COMMENTS
RACEWAY QuADRANT QUADRANT EXISTING
PARKING
1 EFFECf ON ./ ./ ./
HERITAGE ./ None of the alternatives impact heritage features.
FEATURES
2 EFFECf ON
AREAS WITH ./ ./ ./ ./ None of the alternatives impact areas of archaeological potential.
ARCHAEOLOGI-
CAL POTENTIAL
CATEGORY-TE<ElI(~ALC()NSlDERATIONS
1 ACCESSffiILlTYI All alternatives have a high degree of accessibility as they are located in
CONVENIENCE the vicinity of interchange. The location of Alternative 2, however, may
have a negative impact on traffic operations at the S-FiW ramp terminal
./ and Fairview Road intersections. The location of Alternative 3 is less
convenient than the other alternatives as there is no direct access to Essa
Road. Access must be made via a private entrance (Zehrs). Alternative 1
incorporates an existing entrance that has direct access to Essa Road.
Alternative 4 is situated away from the interchange.
2 CAPACITY Alternatives 2 , 3 and 4 provide comparable capacities and meet
(ASSUMED 80 ./ ./ ./ minimum needs.
SPACES Unknown at
REQUIRED) this time (150) (150) (160) The capacity of Alternative 1 is contingent on an agreement between the
Ministty of Transportation and the City of Barrie but it is expected that
this site can provide the required minimum number of spaces.
3 CONSTRUCTION All alternatives are isolated from Essa Road and Highway 400
IMPACfS ./ ./ ./ ./ operations and entrances. Construction Impacts will be minimal for all
alternatives.
St:iMMARY OF EVALtJATION
Alternatives 1 and 4 will occupy lands with high potential for development, while Alternatives 2 and 3 will be located within the existing Ministty of
Transportation right-of-way, on lands that are unlikely to be developed. Alternatives 1 and 4 are not preferred.
Alternative 2 has only a slightly greater advantage over Alternative 3 in terms of effect on businesses. For all other factors, Alternatives 2 and 3 result in very
similar impacts. The impacts of both alternatives will require further refinement and investigation during later design stages.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 2 AND 3 ARE PREFERRED.
IDGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Exhibit
4.41
I
Evaluation of Essa Road Commuter
Parking Lot Alternatives
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-oo
4.8 Summary of the Technically Preferred Alternatives
The following lists the technically preferred alternatives and recommended 'improvements to
Highway 400 within the study limits:
Highway 400 Technic~lIy Preferred Mainline Alternative
. From one kilometre south Highway 89 to Essa Road - Widen to the west from six lanes to
eight with property protection for 10 lanes, with concrete median banier
. From Essa Road to Bayfield Street - Widen about the centreline from six lanes to 10 lanes,
with concrete median banier
. From Bayfield Street to Junction at Highway 11 - Widen about the existing centreline from
six lanes to eight lanes, with concrete median barrier
Highway 400 Technically Preferred Interchange Alternatives
· Highway 89 - Parclo A Interchange
· Innisfil Beach Road - Parclo A Interchange
· Molson Park Drive - Operational Improvements
· Essa Road - Parclo A Interchange
· Dunlop Street - Parclo B Interchange
· Bayfield Street - Parclo A (SB) I Diamond (NB) Interchange
· Duckworth Street - Parclo A Interchange
All of the above interchanges would be constructed to allow for the widening of the Highway
400 mainline to ten lanes within the project limits. For the study's planning horizon of 2011,
eight lanes on Highway 400 are required between Bayfield Street and Duckworth Street. To
provide future capacity beyond the study's planning horizon, the Bayfield Street and Duckworth
Street interchanges (including structures) were designed to accommodate ten lanes on Highway
400.
In addition to the mainline and interchange modifications, the following improvements to
Highway 400 are recommended:
· Provide concrete median banier throughout;
· Construct new noise baniers at warranted locations;
. Install "high-mast" illumination north of Molson Park Drive to Duckworth Street and
improve illumination at all interchanges;
. Replace the median sewer and improve the culverts and drainage as necessary;
· New pavement on the existing section of Highway 400; and
@ Ontario
. Provide a commuter parking lot at the Highway 89 interchange in the northeast quadrant.
MTO will continue to investigate opportunities for incorporating I expanding commuter
parking at Essa Road and providing a commuter parking lot at the Molson Park Drive
interchange.
As noted in various locations in the discussions on the evaluation of mainline Highway 400 and
interchange alternatives, refinements to the preferred alternatives will be incorporated to reduce
the overall impacts and improve traffic operations, where possible. Details on the recommended
plan are provided in the Preliminary Design Report, submitted under separate cover.
It should be noted that staging details and' timing of construction of the recommended
improvements will be determined subsequent to the completion and clearance of this
Transportation Environmental Study Report.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 98 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
5 CONSULTATION
The public and various government agencies were provided the opportunity to review and
comment on the alternatives, evaluation method, identify concerns and comment on the
proposed mitigation measures. The following sections outline the consultation process
implemented for this undertaking.
The environmental assessment process implemented for this study is consistent with the requirements
of a Group 'B' project under the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation
Facilities (2000).
The sequence of key events (activities) and study schedule is summarized in Figure 5.1.
The study process used is divided into five major steps:
1) Review Transportation Needs Assessment;
2) Generate, Evaluate and Select Preferred Planning Alternatives;
3) Generate and Assess Preliminary Design Alternatives;
4) Evaluate and Select Preferred Preliminary Design Alternative; and
5) Develop Preferred Preliminary Design Alternative.
The study process provided for public and external review at key stages during the project, as well as
for a continuous approach to the technical work involved. Refer to Figure 5.2 for an overview of the
study process.
There are five features, related to consultation, that are key to a successful planning study. The five
features include:
1) Consultation with affected parties;
2) Consideration of reasonable alternatives;
3) Consideration of all aspects of the environment (i.e. natural, social, economic, cultural and
technical);
4) Systematic evaluation of net environmental effects; and
5) Clear and complete documentation of the planning process.
(Source: Interim Guidelines on Environmental Assessment Planning and Approval, Ministry of
Environment, 1989.) ,
The consultation process developed for this study assisted in achieving each of these key features.
One of the intentions of this study was to ensure'that, from the earliest stages of planning, decisions
were made after considering environmental impacts. Consultation with affected parties was an
essential component of the planning process and provided a mechanism to define and respond to
Issues.
5.1
Public Involvement
A Notice of Study Commencement was published in the Barrie Advance and Toronto Star on
November 8, 2000 and in the Barrie Examiner and Alliston Herald on November 10, 2000 to
infonn area residents of the project and requesting them to contact the Project Team if they
require infonnation and! or to be placed on the mailing list.
A mailing list of interested individ~s was established and continuously updated throughout the
study. The purpose of this list was to ensure that individuals who had an interest in the study
were kept infonned of upcoming events and the progress of the project. The list included all
property owners within the comdor (derived from the City of Barrie and Town of Innisfil
property assessment roles) and individuals who signed the visitor's register at the Public
Infonnation Centres (PICs).
The public was fonnally involved in the decision-making process through PICs held at two
major decision points:
· Development of the Problem, Evaluation Method and Criteria, and Preliminary Alternatives;
and
· Evaluation of Alternatives and Selection of the Preferred Alternative.
Notification of the PICs was provided in:
· Advertisements in local newspapers:
· Notice of First Public Infonnation Centre was published in the Barrie Advance,
Barrie Examiner and Toronto Star on May 16,2001 and in the Alliston Herald
on May 18,2001;
· Notice of Second Public Infonnation Centre was published in the Barrie
Advance, Barrie Examiner, Innisfil Scope and Toronto Star on June 19,2002;
· Brochures delivered to over 3000 area businesses and residences via Canada Post's ad-mail
service;
· Letters mailed to individuals on the Project Team mailing list;
· Invitation letters to the first PIC, dated May 8, 2001, were distributed to those on the project
mailing list, including those individuals who requested to be added to the mailing list,
government agencies, ministries, municipalities and interest groups;
· Invitation letters to the second PIC, dated June 5, 2002, were couriered to potentially
affected property owners; and
(Text continues on page 102)
As mentioned, the first key feature to successful planning under the EA Act involves early
consultation with affected parties. The study was organized so that affected parties were:
· Involved throughout the study at appropriate times;
· Provided access to information;
· Provided sufficient time to respond to questions and data requests; and
· Encouraged to participate in an issue identification/resolution process.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 99-
URS
@ Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF mGHW A Y 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Study Schedule
Exhibit
5.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
TASKS & = cI ~ t .. .. i c: - J 'So '; = I c: .a .. -' i .: - f ... & = cI c: .a I .. i c: - D '!. & = ! = i i .. =-
.. :I :I I .!I l I :I ~ I .!I l :I :I .i , . c.
Z u.. :I C ., ., 0 Z Q "'t C Z C ., ., z ., u.. c :I
Data COIIectioft I Issue
ldeI1tiIcation
Gemmde and Evatuate
AIter'natIwa to the
Undertatd",
Generlte'~
and WidtmIftg
.AfternatiVtI& r .....
.........) May 22 and 23, 2001
First Round of Public *
- ........
InformatJonCentres
EvaI....lnteFClluge ami
Widening AIternatiwIa .
.
Select P.efOlled
~ ( .....
/J June 25 and 26, 2002
komi RoumI of Pt*1ic *
.....
InformatiafI Centres -
Refine Preferred
Altemative and Prepare
PreUminafy Design
Complete TESR and ~ ~
for Public Review
Consult with Municipal * * * * * *
and EdemaI~ ,':v. .-,<,- it'
.....
=
.....
==
QI
a
==
Q
..
.-
~
~
PLANNING
Review of
Transportation
Needs
Assessment
Generate,
Evaluate and
Select
Preferred
Planning
Alternative
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
Generate and
Assess
Preliminary
Design
Alternatives
Develop
Preferred
Preliminary
Design
Alternative
Evaluate and
Select
Preferred
Preliminary
Design
Alternative
Environmental Protection in Preliminary Design
Environmental
Protection in
Detail Design
.
.
.
.
.
.
Transportation
Environmental
Study Report
(TESR) and Notice
of Completion *
Design and
Construction
Report (DCR) in
Detail Design **
@ Ontario
~
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM
TO THE JUNCTION AT IDGHW A Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Study Process
Environmental
Protection in
Construction
* Bump-up Opportunity
Ends Following
Completion of 30-Day
Review Period for TESR
** DCR is Optional - No
Bump-up Opportunity
Exhibit
5.2
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 102 _
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(ff) Ontario
The first round of Public Information Centres (PICs) were held on May 22, 2001 at
the Stroud Arena in the Town of Innisfil from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and on May 23,
2001 at the Innisdale Secondary School in the City of Barrie from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00
p.m.
The purpose of the PICs was to introduce the study, present the alternatives under
consideration, including mainline widening and interchange improvements. The
PICs also provided the public an opportunity to review and comment on the
following:
· Project Limits;
· Study Schedule;
· Class Environmental Assessment Process;
· Study Purpose and Problem Statement;
· Existing Conditions;
· . Plarining Alternatives;
· Proposed Evaluation Method and Criteria;
· Mainline Widening Alternatives; and
· Interchange Alternatives.
A total of 197 members of the public chose to sign the visitor's register for the PIC
(71 members of the public signed the register at the PIC held at the Stroud Arena and
126 members of the public signed the register at the PIC held at Innisdale Secondary
School). In addition to responding to verbal comments, the Project Team encouraged
visitors to express, in writing, all comments and concerns they had regarding the
study. In total, 120 comment sheets were received.
Table 5.1 summarizes the issues raised at the first round of PICs. Refer to Appendix
C for the Public Information Centres summaries. .
Innisfil sessions were held on June 26, 2002 at the Stroud Arena in the Town of
Innisfil from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
The purpose of these PICs was to present the results from the first PICs, the analysis
and evaluation of alternatives, the preferred alternatives and the proposed mitigation
measures. The PICs also provided the public with an opportunity to review and
comment on the following:
· Project Limits;
· Background;
· Regional Transportation Needs;
· Project Need and Justification;
· Summary of Technically Preferred Alternatives;
· Class Environmental Assessment Process;
· Study Schedule;
· Widening Requirements;
· Existing and Future Operational Conditions at all the Interchanges;
· Alternatives and Evaluation of Alternatives;
· Summary of Issues and Concerns Raised During the First Public Information
Centre;
· Analysis and Evaluation of Widening and Interchange Alternatives;
· Preferred Alternatives;
· Ministry of Transportation Noise Policy, About Noise, Preliminary Noise
Assessment;
· Closure of Service Centres;
· Staging of Construction;
· Proposed Highway Illumination;
· Commuter Lot Options and Evaluation; and
· Summary of Potential Environmental Effects, Mitigation Requirements,
Commitment to Future Work and Monitoring.
A total of 354 members of the public chose to sign the visitor's register for the PIC
(298 members of the public signed the register at the PIC held at the Holiday Inn and
56 members of the public signed register at the PIC held at the Stroud Arena). In
addition to responding to verbal comments, the Project Team encouraged visitors to
express, in writing, all comments and concerns they had regarding the study. In total,
102 written comment sheets and 25 emails were received. Table 5.2 summarizes the
major issues and concerns raised by the public and the appropriate response to the
Issues.
· Invitation letters to the second PIC, dated June 5, 2002, were distributed to those on the
project mailing list including those individuals who signed up at the first PIC, individuals
who requested to be added to the mailing list, government agencies, ministries,
municipalities and interest groups.
The PICs were a drop-in centre format, wher~ members of the public could discuss the project
on an individual basis with Project Team representatives.
5.1.1 First Round of Public Information Centres
5.1.2 Second Round of Public Information Centres
The second round of PICs were held in the City of Barrie and the Town of InnisfiL
The City of Barrie sessions were held on June 25, 2002 at the Holiday Inn in the City
of Barrie from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. The Town of
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
I
@ Ontario
Table 5.1 Summary of Issues Raised at the First Round of Public Information
Centres
I
ISSUE/CONCERN
Noise level increase and the
need for noise barriers at
residential areas.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Oppose widening of
Highway 400 to 10/12 lanes.
(widening is not necessary)
I
I
Need for commuter rail
service/ restoration of GO
transit to alleviate traffic
along Highway 400.
I
I
Vehicle emissions/air
quality/air pollution.
I
I
I
I
I
RESPONSE
Proposed retrofit noise barrier site locations are described in Section 6.6.4. As part of scheduling the
planned highway improvements, ministry staff will review each of the noise barrier locations and
detennine whether it would be technically feasible to construct the noise barriers in advance of the
Highway 400 widening projects. This review will consider issues such as the expected timing for the
construction on Highway 400, and the potential conflict between the proposed highway construction and
the barrier locations. In some cases, it may be necessary to defer construction of the noise barriers until
the time of the highway improvements. Those sites that can be constructed in advance of the highway
improvements will be scheduled, subject to the availability of funding and based on regional priorities.
A noise impact assessment was conducted as part of this study. As part of our analysis, we detennined
the future noise conditions both with and without improvements to Highway 400 using a computerized
noise model approved by the Ministry of Environment (MOE). Year 2001 and projected 20ll traffic
data was used in accordance with the procedural guidelines set out by MOE and MTO. It must be
recognized that traffic volumes on Highway 400 will continue to increase even without additional
improvements to the corridor. Factors considered in the noise assessment model included the highway
grades, local elevations and contours, ground cover (absorption), traffic volumes, and percentage of
trucks and vehicle speeds, identified the worst-case noise sensitive areas (NSAs). In certain areas along
Highway 400 changes in noise levels will slightly increase (less than 2 decibels) whether Highway 400
is improved (widened with interchange improvements) or not improved. This slight increase in noise
levels does not warrant mitigation under current Ministry policy. An increase in five decibels is required
before noise mitigation must be considered.
Alternatives other than widening Highway 400, such as commuter rail, would reduce but not eliminate
the need for widening improvements in the Highway 400 corridor within the planning horizon of this
project.
Widening of Highway 400 is required to address the projected future capacity deficiencies along
Highway 400.
Rail and transit expansion would provide a more competitive choice of travel modes for some users of
Highway 400, and thus reduce the traffic volumes somewhat on Highway 400. However, the
improvements would be limited since the Highway 400 significantly serves a diverse nature of trips.
Commuter rail service would reduce but not eliminate the need for highway widening improvements in
the Highway 400 corridor within the planning horizon for this project.
Significant air quality impacts are not anticipated as a direct result ofthis project because traffic volumes
are expected to increase regardless of highway width and the additional lanes will not in themselves
contribute to more traffic.
The Highway 400 study improvements are expected to reduce localized air quality concerns associated
with incidences of traffic congestion in the area. The Ministry also supports the reduction of emissions
through the promotion of ride sharing. Improved parking areas at certain interchanges are being
DroDosed in coni unction with the Highwav 400 Droiect.
ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Provision for highway Highway illumination is required north of Molson Park Drive as well as at aU interchanges, in
illumination! potential light accordance with Ministry standards. During the detail design stage, the Ministry of Transportation will
trespass onto properties . identifY adjacent residential areas that warrant appropriate light trespass mitigation (such as shielding).
adjacent to the highway. Details of the illumination lighting patterns and the locations of illumination poles will be detennined
during detail design, at which time the Dublic will have the oPDortunitv to review and comment.
Highway A preliminary hydrogeological review was undertaken to detennine the hydrogeology of the study area,
drainage/wells/stonnwater . groundwater recharge and discharge impact areas and to identify water well interference locations.
quality. Potential impacts to specific wells will be examined during detail design.
Stonnwater quality and quantity issues have been being considered as part of this study and an
appropriate plan for the technically preferred alternative has been developed (refer to Section 6.1.5 for
additional details).
Access during construction! Implementing the improvements to Highway 400 will disrupt traffic during construction. Contingency
construction disruption. plans will be developed during detail design in consultation with the local community to address the
local and regional emergency services access during construction. Although some disturbances during
construction are inevitable, mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce negative impacts (i.e.
minimizing construction traffic).
Impacts to businesses. . Impacts to businesses have been addressed in the evaluation of alternatives. Alternatives were
comparatively evaluated on the basis of natural, social and economic and cultural environments as well
as transportation and cost factors (refer to Section 6.2.3 regarding impacts to businesses and
correspondine; mitigation measures).
Impact to historical trail at The historical trail at Sunnidale Road will be retained and appropriate mitigation measures will be
Sunnidale Road. employed to minimize impacts to the features within the project limits.
Impact to pedestrian trail at Pedestrian access to Bayfield Street from Rose Street will be provided for in the improvements to the
Bayfield A venue Highway interchange.
400 ramp intersection.
A realignment of Duckworth The preferred alternative for the Duckworth Street interchange does not include realignment of
Street and Cundles Road Duckworth Street/Cundles Road.
will have damaging
consequences on proposed
commercial develonment.
Impacts to Little Lake There will be no direct impacts to the Little Lake Wetland complex as a result of this project.
wetland comDlex.
Vibration impacts to Vibration impacts to adjacent properties are not anticipated as a result ofthis project. Potential vibration
sensitive receivers impacts will be examined during the detail design stage.
Properties.
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
I
- 103 -
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(i) Ontario
I
Table 5.2 Summary of Issues Raised at the Second Round of Public Information
Centres
ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Disa!!ree with the Problem Statement
Widening is not The assessment of planning altematives detennined that the widening of Highway 400 is required to address
warranted. current traffic capacity deficiencies and future traffic volumes that wilt increase as a result of development in the
Barrie area as well as growth in long distance travel.
The technically preferred alternative for widening the Highway 400 mainline identified the number of additional
lanes required to meet this future travel demand. By 2011, Highway 400 design hour traffic volume in the Barrie
area is expected to reach approximately 17,000 vehicles (northbound and southbound). The capacity of a single
freeway lane is approximately 1,600 to 2,000 vehicles per hour, therefore additional capacity is required.
Cottage traffic account Currently, certain sections of Highway 400, including interchanges in Barrie, operate at or near capacity in
for the traffic weekday peak travel periods. In the future, weekday traffic volumes will continue to exceed the capacity of the
congestion. highway. It is recognized that weekend peak travel periods are also congested on the highway, however this
study addresses operational and capacity concerns based on both weekend and weekday travel demand.
Examine Alternative Methods
Express/collector An express/collector system was considered as an alternative but was not carried forward. An express/collector
system. system would require a 12-lane cross-section, which is wider than what is required for mainline widening to to
lanes. An express/collector system would therefore, result in greater impacts to the adjacent properties along the
Highway 400 conidor, which include residential, recreational and commercial uses, natural features and
watercourses, and unique cultural features.
Further, the express/collector system offers limited operational advantages over mainline widening, while it has
higher costs (approximately 25 percent). Widening mainline Highway 400 provides the additional capacity
required and several operational benefits but with fewer environmental impacts and significantly less property
reQuirements.
Rail and bus transit. Rail and bus transit expansion (i.e. GO Bus/Train) was considered as an alternative to improving the Highway
400 conidor but was not carried forward. While rail/bus transit expansion would provide more competitive
choice of travel modes for some users of Highway 400, it would not address the specific operational and
capacity problems (i.e. ge~metric. deficiencies, roadside safety improvements to reflect current standards) to
ensure safe and efficient operations along the Highway 400 corridor. Commuter rail/bus service would reduce
but not eliminate the need for highway widening improvements in the Highway 400 conidor within the
planning horizon for this project. The Ministry of Transportation, however, is committed to improving rail and
bus transit service in Ontario .and will work with municipalities to implement efficient and effective rail and bus
transit service alternatives in the future.
Consider alternative In June 2002, the Ministry com~leted the Simcoe Area Transportation Network Needs Assessment Study,
routes, Highway 427 which will guide long range (30 year) planning for provincial transportation facilities in the Simcoe County
extension, by-pass area. This study made recommendations for rail, transitways and highway improvements. The Simcoe Study
Barrie. detennined that there is a need to not only widen the Highway 400 to 8 lanes, with protection for a future
widening to 10 lanes, but there is also a need to plan for a new transportation conidor to the west of Highway
400, which extends from Highway 427 northerly around Barrie.
I
IssuE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Consider alternative The Ministry is initiating the tenns of reference for the planning of this new transportation conidor around
routes, Highway 427 Barrie. Recognizing that the planning, design and construction of new transportation corridors may take to
extension, by-pass years or more, sections of the Highway 400 through Barrie will require an interim widening to 8 lanes. Over
Barrie (continued) the longer tenn, Highway 400 could be widened to 10 lanes as traffic warrants,. or, if the new transportation
conidor does not receive approval. More infonnation on the Simcoe Area Transportation Netw~rk Needs
Assessment Study can be obtained by visiting the Ministry of Transportation website www.mto.gov.on.ca and
reviewing the June 14th news release.
Comments on the Preferred Alternative
Creation of With development of backups (i.e. bottlenecks) at areas north of the project limits, the Ministry has initiated a
bottlenecks north and study of Highway II north of the Junction at Highway 400. It is anticipated that the results of this study will be
south of project used to identify the appropriate number oflanes on Highway 400 north of Barrie, beyond 201 L
limits.
The Ministry has plans for widening Highway 400 from Major MacKenzie Drive to Highway 11 to improve
traffic operations. As well, the Ministry has initiated a study to extend Highway 427 northerly around the City
of Barrie. These works would improve traffic operations on Highway 400 south of the project limits and within
the Droiect limits.
Service The technically preferred plan includes the closure of the service centre at the Highway 89 interchange and the
centres/commuter closure of the service centre just south of Essa Road. The Ministry is currently reviewing its policy on service
lots. centres/rest areas. The outcome of this policy review will be used to detennine the adequacy of the Highway
400 conidor with regard to current and future service centres/rest areas.
Possible future commuter parking lot locations have been identified along Highway 400 at the Highway 89,
Molson Park Drive and Essa Road interchanges.
Illumination. Highway illumination is required north of Molson Park Drive as well as at all interchanges, in accordance with
Ministry standards. During the detail design stage, the. Ministry of Transportation will identify adjacent
residential areas that warrant appropriate light trespass mitigation (such as shielding). Details of the
illumination lighting patterns and the locations of illumination poles will be detennined during detail design, at
which time the Dublic will have the onnortunitv to review and comment.
Access during Implementing the improvements to Highway 400 will result in traffic disruption. Contingency plans will be
construction. developed during detail design in consultation with the local commun'ity to address the local and regional
emergency services access during construction. The construction of the proposed improvements will be carried
out under a series of contracts. It is anticipated that the construction will extend over several seasons.
Although some disturbances during construction are inevitable, mitigation measures will be implemented to
minimize nuisance impacts (i.e. minimizing construction traffic), where possible. Night work and bonuses for
reducing construction timetable are examples of ways the Ministry has tried to reduce impacts in the past.
Consultation with the public during detail design on signage (i.e. portable changeable message signs) to further
reduce congestion and address motorists of construction delays will be carried out. Notification will also be
Drovided mior to startinl! the construction of the imnrovements to Highwav 400.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 104 -
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
Table 5.2 Summary of Issues Raised at the Second Round of Public Information
Centres (continued)
I RESPONSE
I
ISSUE/CONCERN
I
Noise
Noise levels.
A noise impact assessment was conducted as part of this study. As part of our analysis, we determined the
future noise conditions both with and without improvements to Highway 400 using a computerized noise model
approved by the Ministry of Environment (MOE). Year 2001 and projected 2011 traffic data was used in
accordance with the procedural guidelines set out by MOE and MTO. It must be recognized that traffic
volumes on Highway 400 will continue to increase even without additional improvements to the corridor.
Factors considered in the noise assessment model included the highway grades, local elevations and contours,
ground cover (absorption), traffic volumes, and percentage of trucks and vehicle speeds, identified the worst-
case noise sensitive areas (NSAs). In certain areas along Highway 400 changes in noise levels will slightly
increase (less than 2 decibels) whether Highway 400 is improved (widened with interchange improvements) or
not improved. This slight increase in noise levels does not warrant mitigation under current Ministry policy.
An increase in five decibels is reQuired before noise mitil!ation must be considered.
The Ministry maintains a Candidate Sites for Noise Barrier Retrofit List (Retrofit List). For a site to be placed
on the Retrofit List it must meet all of the following site qualification warrants:
I
I
Noise retrofit.
I
(a) the noise sensitive area must be next to a provincial freeway;
(b) the noise sensitive area must be ground-level outdoor leisure areas of residential properties for which
development was approved under the Planning Act before February 8, 1977;
(c) the average daily noise levels must be more than 60 decibels; and
(d) barrier implementation must be on MTO right-of-way and must be sufficiently effective to provide a noise
level reduction for ground level residential outdoor leisure areas of at least five decibels (a change in noise
level that is less than 3 decibels cannot be perceived).
I
I
The Ministry has identified areas in Barrie along Highway 400 that are eligible for construction of noise
barriers under the Noise Barrier Retrofit Program. In addition to meeting the approval date requirement,
eligibility for construction under this program is determined on the basis of a barrier being able to cost-
effectively reduce sound levels for adjacent residential areas. Factors which influence the cost-effectiveness of
a barrier includes the distance homes are located from the traffic noise, topography, the density of homes, and if
there are any intervening land uses.
I
I
The installation of noise retrofit barriers were determined to be warranted and cost effective at the following
locations:
. North east side of Highway 400IDunlop Street interchange and Anne Street;
. South east side of Highway 400/Bayfield Street interchange in the vicinity ofthe YMCA;
. North east side of Highway 400/Bayfield Street interchange behind Ottaway A venue; and
North west side ofHiphwav 400/Bavfield Street interchanl!e behind Patricia Avenue.
I
I
Consultation
Consultation plan.
From the earliest stages of planning, the public was provided the opportunity to review and comment on the
alternatives to the undertaking, evaluation method, technically preferred alternatives, and the proposed
mitigation measures.
I
The open house Public Information Centres (PICs) format was determined to be the most effective public
consultation program as it was responsive to the characteristics and concerns of the community and the needs
of the project. The objective of the PICs was to encourage upfront, proactive consultation by allowing the
nublic comments and reviews to influence the studv and its recommendations.
Highway 400 is a provincial facility serving the needs of all Ontarians. The Ministry of Transportation is
responsible for ensuring that all who are interested have an opportunity to participate and comment on this
study. All comments received on the project, whether through letter, phone call, email or at the Public
Information Centres, are essential to the planning and decision making process. In addition to having the
project limits within their City, the residents of Barrie are also uniquely represented by their municipal council.
The City of Barrie has been an active partner in all the stages of this project.
I
Voting on whether
the project is
required.
I
I
I
ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Prooertv Imoacts
Impact on property With respect to property impacts, the proposed improvements to Highway 400 will not directly affect property
value. value.
Property acquisition. Under this planning study, properties have been identified as being required to accommodate the technically
preferred plan and individual properties would typically be acquired two to three years in advance of
construction. . Subsequent to the approval of the planning study document, the Ministry will be able to provide
more assurance on their intentions for the reQuired imorovements to this corridor.
Other Indirect Imoacts
Air quality. Degradation in air quality due to additional traffic on the highway depends on the distance from the highway.
For areas beyond 1 kIn from the highway the effect is insignificant. For areas within 100 metres, the effect is
almost proportional to traffic volume. The actual ambient air quality conditions at a given location, at any
given time, may vary depending on other factors such as atmospheric conditions and topography.
It should be noted that the Federal Government is developing more stringent light and heavy-duty vehicle
emission standards for 2004 to 2010 along with improvements in vehicle technology, the introduction of
cleaner fuels, and the use of alternative fuels, which emit fewer pollutants. The Ministry of Transportation is
not responsible to set the standards or implement the Drive Clean Program, however, the program is currently
being expanded to the whole province and will have a positive effect on overall vehicle emission levels. The
first phase of the program, according to the Ministry of the Environment has reduced emissions by
anoroximately 10%.
Increased property The Highway 400 project is a provincial initiative and as such, the Ministry of Transportation is responsible for
taxes. the costs of the improvements. However, where the City of Barrie has identified areas for widening local
municipal roadways and structures, to meet local traffic needs that will be constructed at the same time as the
Highway 400 improvements then cost-sharing arrangements would be negotiated between the Ministry and the
City.
EnvironmentallmlJacts
Impacts to natural The recommended improvements will impact approximately 14 metres of the Brereton Field Naturalist Club
environment features property. The Ministry is looking at alternative mitigation measures to address the impacts to the property such
(i.e. Kidd's Creek, as the use of retaining walls. The Project Team has been in contact with the Manager of Property and Planning
Brereton Field from the Simcoe County District School Board and has discussed the potential impacts, the possible
Naturalist property). refinements and mitigation to minimize the impacts to the natural environment.
Concerns for impacts to Kidd's Creek and the fish habitat have been noted. Mitigation measures will be
developed in consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Conservation Authorities, as well as the
Simcoe District School Board and Brereton Field Naturalist Club to minimize the effects to the creek. Such
measures include the implementation of sediment and erosion control plans (Le. sediment fences) and
stockoiles located and isolated to ensure material will not enter any watercourses.
Impacts to cultural The proposed improvements to Highway 400 will not directly impact adjacent land uses with historical and
environment features cultural features. Where a potential impact with historical or cultural feature is identified, mitigation measures
(Le. history of the will be identified for consideration in detail design.
City).
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 105 -
URS
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 Ian to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 106 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
The Municipal Team was comprised of technical support staff from the Town of
Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town of Innisfil, City of Barrie, Township of
Springwater, District of Muskoka, and the County of Simcoe.
Representatives of the Municipal Team were provided the opportunity to review and
comment on the alternatives, identify concerns and comment on the preferred
alternatives.
Consultation with the local municipalities took place as follows:
· Initial letters dated November 3, 2000 were distributed to the municipalities;
· Joint Meeting with the County of Simcoe, City of Barrie, Town of Innisfil,
Township ofSpringwater and District of Muskoka on December 14,2000;
· Meeting with the City of Barrie on January 11,2001;
· Joint Meeting with the City of Barrie, Town of Innisfil, and Township of
Springwater on May 16, 2001;
· Meeting with the City of Barrie on April 3, 2002;
· Draft comments regarding the. technically preferred alternative from City of
Barrie on July 10,2002.
· Presentation to City of Barrie Council on September 16,2002;
· Meeting with the Ministry of Natural Resources, Conservation Authorities and
City of Barrie on February 6, 2003;
· Two letters to City of Barrie on March 12, 2003;
· Letter from City of Barrie on May 15,2003;
· Letter from City of Barrie on May 22,2003;
· Two letters from City of Barrie on June 3, 2003;
· Meeting with City of Barrie on June 23, 2003;
· Meeting with City of Barrie on July 22,2003;
· Letter to City of Barrie on August 26,2003;
· Letter to City of Barrie on September 17, 2003;
· Letter from City of Barrie on September 26,2003;
· Letter from City of Barrie on October 1,2003;
· Letter from City of Barrie on October 7, 2003;
· Conference call with City of Barrie on October 22, 2003.
· The letters and minutes of meetings are documented in Appendix B.
The issues raised by the municipal team were addressed and considered as a part of
the study. Overall, the issues were not significant in that they did not change the
outcome of the evaluation process of this study
Table 5.3 summarizes the issues raised by the external team during the course of the
study.
5.2 External Ministry I Agency and Municipal Input
A multi-team approach was used to effectively address the problems in the Highway 400
corridor. Teams and their respective roles are defined in the following sections.
5.2.1 Municipal Team
5.2.2 External Team
The External Team was comprised of government agencies and ministries including:
· Ministry of Environment - Barrie/Owen Sound District
· Ministry of Culture
· Ministry of Tourism and Recreation
· Ministry of Municipal Mfairs and Housing
· Ministry of Natural Resources - Midhurst
· Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
· Ontario Native Affairs Secretariat
· Ministry of Health
· Ministry of Economic Development and Trade - Midhurst District
· Lake Simcoe and Region Conservation Authority
· City of Barrie Police Department
· City of Barrie Fire Department
· Hydro One Networks Inc. Environmental Services and Approvals
· Ontario Power Generation
· Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
· Ontario Provincial Police - Barrie Detachment
· Innisfil Fire and Rescue Service
· Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board
· Simcoe District School Board
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
I
@ Ontario
Table 5.3 Summary of Issues Raised by the Municipal Team
I
MUNICIPALITY ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Generation of Alternatives
City of Barrie For the Innisfil Beach Road The commuter parking lot at this interchange was developed in the northeast quadrant in conjunction
Interchange, consideration with the interim improvements planned by the Ministry. It should be recognized that the location of a
should be given to providing an commuter parking lot is dependent on the availability of local land as well as proper operation of the
additional commuter parking lot interchange.
on the west side to accommodate
the GO Bus route serving this
interchanl!e.
City of Barrie Rose Street is utilized as an Rose Street is an emergency detour route, however, Grove Street is a nearby parallel alternative, which
emergency detour route when could be designated to maintain the continuity of the emergency services. MTO will continue to work
Highway 400 north of the with emergency service providers at subsequent design stages.
Bayfield Street Interchange is
closed.
Technicallv Preferred Plan
City of Barrie The Ministry should undertake As the Ministry of Transportation is not the proponent of this initiative, our involvement would be
extending Lockhart Road limited to commenting and participating as an external review agency to this undertaking.
over/under Hi~hwav 400.
City of Barrie Design of all drainage culverts, URS has been in contact with and has been coordinating with the City of Barrie throughout this project
utility crossings, water and trunk regarding drainage issues. A commitment to on-going consultation with the City on drainage, utilities
sewer infrastructure etc. should and water and sewer infrastructure issues is included in our study report.
be coordinated with the City of
Barrie.
City of Barrie Consideration should be given to The recommended improvements satisfy the projected traffic demand for 20 II. Traffic demand will be
constructing the highway to 10 reviewed prior to Detail Design and, if warranted, ten lanes will be implemented.
lanes between Molson Park
Drive and Essa Road closer to
the time of construction.
City of Barrie Big Bay Point Road and Harvie As the Ministry of Transportation is not the proponent of this initiative, our involvement would be
Road should be extended across limited to commenting and participating as and external review agency to this undertaking.
Highway 400. This should be
undertaken bv the Ministrv
City of Barrie The M.T.O. will need to address As part of the Environmental Assessment process for the Highway 400 study, a noise impact
all noise concerns along assessment was undertaken. The purpose of this assessment was to detennine the future noise
Highway 400 through the conditions without improvements and the future noise conditions with improvements. Factors used in
existing residential areas of the noise assessment included the highway grades, local elevations and contours, ground cover
Barrie. (absorption), traffic volumes (Summer Average Daily Traffic), the percentage of trucks and vehicle
speeds. The results of this noise assessment indicated that the predicted noise impacts or change in
noise levels associated with the Highway 400 widening and interchange improvements were less than 5
decibels (the level at which mitigation of noise impacts must be considered).
In accordance with the Ministry's program for retrofit installation of noise barriers in residential areas
adjacent to freeways that were approved prior to 1977, the Ministry has identified four locations where
barrier installations are warranted and feasible: Northeast side of Highway 400IDunlop Street
interchange and Anne Street; Southeast side of Highway 400IBayfield Street interchange in the vicinity
of the YMCA; Northeast side of Highway 400IBayfield Street interchange behind Ottaway Avenue;
and Northwest side of Highway 400IBayfield Street interchange behind Patricia Avenue.
The Ministry will review and detennine which of the specific retrofit areas noted above could be
constructed prior to the Highway 400 widening. These barriers will be installed at the specific sites as
fundin~ becomes available.
City of Barrie A large commuter parking lot Possible commuter parking lot sites were investigated at the Essa Road interchange. Our work to date
should be constructed at Essa considered a number oflocations in the interchange area. It has been detennined that the existing lot
Road interchange. should be maintained and additional space should be provided. There are potential commuter parking
lot replacement sites available in either the northeast or southwest quadrants ofthe interchange. The
exact location and details of the commuter Darkin~ lot will be detennined in later desi<m still!es.
City ofBarrie Provision should be given to the The proposed Tiffin Street structure is designed to accommodate four lanes, in accordance with the
design of the Tiffin Street Barrie Transportation Study (April 1999, page 47). In addition, adequate width has been provided
I underpass to accommodate the under the structure to accommodate sidewalks.
future construction of Tiffin
Street to 6 lanes with sidewalks.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MUNICIPAUTY ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
City of Barrie Consideration for a commuter The Ministry is supportive of providing commuter parking along Ministry Highways. This planning
parking lot should be given at and preliminary design study has identified and made recommendations on the opportunities to provide
the Dunlop Street interchange. commuter parking throughout the study area. However, commuter parking lots were not considered at
this interchange since there is Dot an existing commuter parking lot at the interchange and there is a lack
of suitable vacant land in the vicinity of the interchange. MTO will, however, continue to investigate
opportunities to implement commuter parking lots at various locations along the corridor, as they
become available.
City of Barrie Provision should be given in the The proposed structure will accommodate the City of Barrie's proposed widening of Dunlop Street.
design of the overpass for the We are proposing that six lanes (four westbound and two eastbound lanes) be provided on the structure
construction of Dunlop Street to itself. This will facilitate incorporating the ramp entrance onto eastbound Dunlop Street from
7 lanes. northbound Hi!!hwav 400.
City of Barrie Rose Street closure should be Emergency Response Group will be contacted to discuss the proposed closure of Rose Street.
discussed with the Emergency Placement of noise barriers proposed at this location may preclude options for keeping Rose Street open
Response Group as Rose Street as a one-way facility. Design of noise barriers will be initiated. This comment will be included in the
is part of the current emergency commitments to future work listed in the Study Report.
detour route. If this road is to be
closed, design concepts such as
gates or knock-down barricades
should be considered.
City of Barrie Rose Street is considered a The MTO acknowledges the City's concerns with impacts to local streets due to the closure of Rose
collector road in the City of Street. However, MTO has serious concerns with the direct connection of this municipal collector road
Barrie's Transportation Study, to a freeway ramp. It is recognized that, while the proposed closure will significantly improve
therefore the City is concerned operations and safety for interchange users, it will also create out-of-way travel for residents at the
with the proposed closure of this south end of Rose Street. In evaluating the alternatives, the closure of Rose Street was considered to
road and the traffic impact on provide a greater benefit to the overall operations and safety of the Bayfield Street interchange, with
local streets in this area. acceptable impacts to local access. The use of Grove Street, identified as a collector road in the Barrie
Transportation Study, was considered a suitable alternate for access to areas currently served by Rose
Street.
City of Barrie The St. Vincent Street bridge No changes to the St. Vincent Street structure are proposed as part of this study. We understand that
structure is to be viewed to this requirement will be part of the City's future needs for widening the St. Vincent Street corridor. At
accommodate 6 lanes of traffic an appropriate time, prior to commencement of your road widening project, the City and MTO should
and sidewalks over Hi!!hwav. discuss the renuired ontions for wideninl! of this structure.
City of Barrie The Duckworth Street bridge The proposed structure is designed to accommodate four through lanes, one left turn lane and two speed
structure should be constructed change lanes. The structure also accommodates sidewalks on both sides.
to accommodate 6 to 7 lanes of
traffic, plus sidewalks on both
sides for Duckworth Street
undemass.
City of Barrie Concerned that the 2011 traffic The Highway 400 Planning Study is consistent with the Simcoe Area Transportation Network
projections do not forecast far Assessment (Simcoe Study), which will guide transportation planning over the long tenn (30 years). As
enough into the future. per the Simcoe Study, the Highway 400 Planning Study will serve the Barrie area in the interim to
20 I I. Over the long tenn, an 8 to 10 lane Highway 400 in conjunction with a new corridor (Highway
427 Extension) will serve the needs of the City of Barrie.
City of Barrie The recommendation for the Agreed. The landowner alternative essentially realigned the section of Dunlop Street east of Highway
realignment of Dunlop Street to 400 to the south, substantially reducing impacts to the lands located on the north side of Dunlop Street.
the south, made by a Dunlop The Project Team compared the landowner alternative to the recommended alternative and consulted
Street area landowner, will have with the staff at the City of Barrie. The Dunlop Street area landowner alternative had several
more traffic impacts on the disadvantages:
City's arterial streets than the . The landowner alternative required an additional signalized intersection at the E-WIN ramp
Ministry's technically preferred tenninal on Dunlop Street, thereby reducing the benefits to traffic operations on Dunlop Street;
alternative. . The landowner alternative did not eliminate property impacts. The impacts were shifted to the
properties on the south side of Dunlop Street; and
. The landowner alternative would result in an undesirable alignment. on Dunlop Street.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
- 107 -
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kin South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kin to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
Table 5.3 Summary of Issues Raised by the Municipal Team (continued)
MUNICIPAUTY IssuE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Drainage and Hydrology Report
City of Barrie Hurricane Hazel, not the In accordance with the MTO Drainage Manual, the Highway 400 Drainage and Hydrology Report used
Timmins Storm, should be used the Timmins Design Storm as the regulatory Regional Storm in the hydrologic analysis. Recent (Spring
for the Regional Storm event for 2003) information from the Ministry of Natural Resources indicates that Hurricane Hazel is to be
the project area. considered the Regional Storm for the Greater Barrie Area. Therefore, any analyses in this study based
on Regional Storm flows will need to be revisited in later design stages using Hurricane Hazel storm
flows.
URS will add a Note To Readers and footnotes as appropriate in the Highway 400 Drainage Report,
"This report is to be read in conjunction with the Master Drainage Plans and Environmental
Assessments beine: nrenared bv the City of Barrie", or similar.
City of Barrie There are currently spills MTO criteria state that "If a drainage facility designed to the criteria specified in the table would
between drainage basins within increase flooding of buildings of developable land during a regional flood, the facility shall be designed
the study area. to the regional flood criteria... ". For each creek within the City of Barrie, spills currently exist.
Proposed improvements by the MTO would not increase flooding or spills over existing levels and
therefore satisfY MTO criteria.
As the Highway 400 improvements and the City's Master Drainage Plans advance to later design and
construction stages, MTO will work with the City of Barrie to provide assistance to the extent possible
under MTO's mandate in achieving the City's objectives pertaining to spills between watersheds.
Achieving these objectives may require upgrades to the MTO conveyance structures above and beyond
those that are identified in this Drainae:e and Hvdrolo!!V Renort.
City of Barrie Highway 400 should be Highway 400 is not deemed a "vital route" in terms of drainage criteria.. Further requests to designate
desi!!:TIated as a vital route. Hi~wav 400 as a "vital route" under Directive B- I 00 should be directed to MTO Policy offices.
City of Barrie Would prefer for the Ministry to As the Highway 400 improvements and the City's Master Drainage Plans advance to later design and
commit to working with the City construction stages, MTO will work with the City of Barrie to provide assistance to the extent possible
as it completes Master Drainage under MTO's mandate in achieving ~ City's objectives pertaining to spills between watersheds.
Plans (MDP's) and
Environmental Assessments
(EA's):
Natural Sciences Technical Renort
City of Barrie Remove reference to Vespra The correct township reference will be reflected in the final Natural Sciences Technical Report.
Twp. and replace with
Townships of Springwater and
OrolMedonte in Natural
Sciences Technical Renort. .
City of Barrie The culvert crossings are The references will be changed in the final Natural Sciences report to match the Drainage and
numbered differently in the Hydrology report.
Natural Sciences and the
Drainalle and HvdrolollV renorts.
City of Barrie Section 5.0 Surface Drainage The appropriate names will be added to the associated final report sections.
identifies Innisfil and Lover's
Creek but does not acknowledge
the urban watersheds in the City
of Barrie (i.e. Whiskey,
Hotchkiss, Dyment's, Bunkers,
Kidd's and Sonhia Creeks'.
City of Barrie City investigations indicate that Details of these recharge areas will be obtained from the City and appropriate detailed mitigation will
there are groundwater recharge be developed during later design stages.
areas in the area of crossing
26+750 and 29+280. These
recharge areas should be further
investigated to ensure no
negative imnacts arise.
MUNIClPAUTY ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
City of Barrie There are two indicated The second location is described in Section 6.2 and is located in the Lowland Cedar Thicket
groundwater discharge areas Community. It is also describe~ in Section 7.1.12 as well. A chainage reference will be added to the
noted in the report. However, final report to clarifY the location. No groundwater seepages at the Bunkers Creek crossings of
only the site located at 12+925- Highway 400 were identified during field investigations undertaken for this study. The fisheries manual
13+080 is discussed. The City prescribes that the station location will extend 20 metres upstream and 100 metres downstream. It is
has information indicating that possible that there are groundwater seepages upstream of our station. Further investigations will be
there are a number of undertaken during later design stages to confirm the presence of groundwater seepages in the Bunkers
groundwater seeps in the Creek valley and potential impacts associated with the recommended plan.
Bunkers Creek valley as it
approaches Highway 400.
Imnacts should be considered.
City of Barrie The 3rd and 4th points in The revegetation guidelines are typical MTO performance measures. They can be modified if warranted
Section 7.3 Mitigation may be in view of site specific conditions. In addition, the typical mitigation section for watercourses is in
inadequate to protect against Section 10.2 and includes a sediment and erosion control plan, isolated stockpiles, silt fencing etc.
erosion and sedimentation. Detailed sediment and erosion control plans are typically developed by the contractor and are subject to
Stockpiles should be reseeded review by the'contract administrator and any agencies that have approval authority.
following unsatisfactory results
after 14 davs.
City of Barrie Section 10.1 Expected impacts There are eight crossings identified in the Drainage and Hydrology report for potential twinning or
do not appear to address the upsizing. Only one culvert, # 76, is considered fish habitat. The Natural Sciences Technical Report is
areas where highway cross- limited to assessing impacts to fish and aquatic habitat. Drainage and hydrology impacts are contained
culverts are identified to be in the Drainage and Hydrology report. Impacts related to the possible twinning of culvert #76 will be
twinned. The Drainage and added to the final report.
Hydrology report identifies 8
crossings that will require
additional culverts.
City of Barrie Figures 9 & 10 appears to have Ontario Base Mapping was used for the background which does not reflect the most recent changes.
discrepancies for Natural However, the mapping is suitable for illustrative purposes and to provide general locations of
Heritage features located at significant natural features.
chainage 11+030, 11+600 and
12+400. The base mapping also
annears outdated.
City ofBarrie Crossing 29+280 was identified No species were identified at this station that would reflect a cool water fishery. MNR's in-water timing
in the City of Barrie's master restrictions do not include separate restrictions for coolwater fisheries. They are generally grouped with
drainage planning as cool water warm water fisheries. If there are records of specific cool water species in this reach, mitigation can be
fisheries. develoned to nrotect these snecies and their habitats.
City of Barrie Additional details are required Detailed layouts for the stormwater management ponds will be developed during detailed design that
on how thermal pollution effects may incorporate features to buffer water temperatures prior to release to coldwater streams.
would be mitigated within
watersheds identified as
supporting cold or cool water
fisheries.
City of Barrie Please advise how culvert As a general rule for MTO projects, culverts are embedded at least 300 mm. Specific features for fish
retrofits would be made fish passage will be examined as required during detail design. In addition, MTO implements a regular
passable. maintenance program for all major culverts.
Existing and expected flow velocities will be investigated during later design stages once culvert sizing
and placement has been finalized. If velocities are expected to be significantly elevated, then more
detailed studies at the site may be required to address any expected changes in the benthic invertebrate
and fish passage.
Recommendations during later design stages will include embedding the culvert into the natural
substrate. In watercourses that experience volatile flows, low-flow channels and/or baffles may be
recommended.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 108 -
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerty 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
~ Ontario
At the start of the study, External Team members were contacted by mail and asked
to respond to the following questions:
· Does your Ministry or Agency have an interest in the study?
· Who will act as your Ministry's or Agency's spokesperson and our contact?
· Does your Ministry or Agency have any relevant background information?
· Does your Ministry of Agency have any comments or concerns?
Subsequent to the agencies responses to the questionnaire, meetings were arranged
for the agencies that were interested and wanted to participate in the study. The dates
and minutes of the meetings are found in Appendix B.
Consultation with the agencies and ministries took place as follows:
· Initial letters dated November 3, 2000 were distributed to those on the extemal
and agency list including government agencies, ministries, municipalities and
interest groups;
· Meeting with the Ontario Provincial Police and Barrie Police Services on
January 11,2001; and
· Meeting with the Ministry of Natural Resources, Conservation Authorities and
City of Barrie on February 6, 2003.
External Team Meetings
An External Team meeting was arranged prior to the first of Public Information
Centre on May 22, 2001 at the Stroud Arena in the Town of Innisfil. The objective
of the meeting was to update the External Team on the project activities undertaken
and the project schedule, discuss problems and opportunities along the Highway 400
corridor, as well as discuss the preliminary altematives under consideration.
Representatives from the City of Barrie, Township of Springwater, and Town of
Innisfil attended the meeting.
A second External Team meeting was held prior to the second Public Information
Centre on June 25; 2002 at the Holiday Inn in the City of Barrie. The objective of
this meeting was to provide an opportunity to discuss the analysis and evaluation of
alternatives and the preferred mainline and interchange alternatives. Representatives
from the Town of Innisfil, Barrie Agricultural Society, and Simcoe Muskoka
Catholic District School Board attended the External Team Meeting while members
from the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury; City of Barrie, and Township ofOro-
Medonte attended the Public Information Centre, which was held immediately after
the External Team meeting.
The issues raised by the agencies were addressed and considered as a part of the
study. Overall, the issues were not significant in that they did not change the outcome
of the evaluation process of this study
Table 5.4 summarizes the issues raised by the external team during the course of the
study.
Additional Meetings
A meeting with the potentially affected businesses adjacent to the Dunlop Street
interchange was held on March 21, 2002. This meeting was organized by the Project
Team and provided an opportunity for 'the business property owners/tenants at
Dunlop Street to discuss their concerns and corm:nents on the alternatives under
consideration. Three representatives from the local business area as well as a
municipal representative from the City of Barrie attended the meeting.
The local businesses identified key issues associated with their individual
establishments. They were interested in the evaluation of alternatives that would
ultimately select the preferred alternative and what the overall impact would be on
the local businesses in that area.
The following summarizes the key issues raised at the meeting:
· Potential property impacts as a result of the proposed improvements to the
Dunlop Street / Highway 400 improvements; and
· Compensation for the impacts to the businesses.
The Project Team advised that the issues and comments raised would be incorporated
into the evaluation of alternatives as well as the selection of the preferred and would
be presented at the second Public Information Centre. The businesses were
encouraged to contact the Project Team if there were any further outstanding
concerns or comments regarding the alternatives.
Two meetings were held between URS and representatives of a Dunlop Street area
business relating to the technically preferred plan at Dunlop Street. Refinements to
the technically preferred plan to reduce the impacts properties adjacent to Dunlop
Street were suggested. The refinements were reviewed by the Project Team, but not
carried forward, noting the proposed refinements would not reduce overall impacts.
Discussions were also held with owners and tenants of properties within the Highway
400 corridor regarding the technically preferred plan. Suggested refinements to the
technically preferred plan to reduce impacts to adjacent properties were considered
by the Project Team in the finalization of the technically preferred plan.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 109 -
April 2004
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(ff) Ontario
I
Table 5.4 Summary of Issues Raised by the External Team
AGENCY ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Teehnicallv Preferred Plan
CNRail Noted that the former CN Line eomment noted.
Technical located in the City of Barrie was
Services sold to the City of Barrie and the
City has contracted a private firm to
manage the operations of the rail
line.
Simcoe Interested in receiving information Information to be provided in Transportation Environmental Assessment Report. Details relating to
Muskoka regarding the duration of the construction timelines, dates and road closures to be determined during later design stages as more
Catholic construction period, construction information becomes available.
District timelines, and dates of road closures.
School
Board
City of Highway 400 though Barrie is a key Comment noted.
Barrie Fire access/egress corridor for emergency
and response. As long as the highway is
Emergency not closed during construction,
Services improvements should not pose a
oroblem to emergency resoonse.
Natural Sciences Technical Report
Ministry of The total number of watercrossings A listing of all culverts and locations, including both fish habitat and non-fish habitat, to be provided in
Natural for the project is unclear in the final report. The number of culverts involved in entrance/exit ramp locations will be confirmed.
Resources Natural Sciences Technical Report.
Ministry of Section 6.1 and 6.2 of the Natural The watercrossing runs along the edge of vegetation community 12 where there were some
Natural Sciences Technical Report requires groundwater seepages. However, based on secondary sour.ce information and con.sultation with the
Resources clarification regarding the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and the Nottawasaga Valley and Lake Simcoe Conservation
groundwater discharge and recharge Authority, no evidence was found during the study to suggest that any seepages discharging directly
function for Vegetation Community into the creek creating a coldwater thermal regime. Additional investigations of designation of the
9 and 12 and request that the watercrossing will be undertaken during later design stages. Investigation of fish community records
watercrossing at 23+272 be changed beyond the study limits will be considered as they may provide evidence that indicates a coldwater fish
to a coldwater desilIDation. community.
Ministry of We suggest that Community 9 is not Community 9 refers to the Narrow Emergent Marsh only. It is situated on a relatively flat plain
Natural strictly a groundwater recharge zone. between two higher elevation features and eventually drains into the Lover's Creek lowland. It collects
Resources and holds surface water ITom the upland areas north and south of it and likely' is the product of
drainage changes ITom the original highway construction. It is shown as an open area immediately
adjacent to the highway on 1:50,000 topographic mapping and on the MNR Values Mapping.
Groundwater discharges were not evident within the study area and it is likely. that this isolated
community contributes to attenuating surface flows by absorbing storm flows. and releasing them at a
slower controlled rate. The extensive forested area east of this community towards the National Pines
Golf Course is well beyond the study area and likely does contain groundwater discharges at the edge
of the Lover's Creek lowland. Investigations will be undertaken during later design stages to determine
if there are known groundwater discharges associated with Community 9. Appropriate mitigation
measures will be develooed as reauired.
Ministry of The Natural Sciences Technical The necessary mitigation details regarding impacts to groundwater discharge at this location will be
Natural Report does not identifY impacts to added to the final Natural Sciences Technical Report.
Resources groundwater discharges in
Community 12.
Ministry of New information indicates that the The final Natural Sciences Technical Report will be revised to indicate coldwater designations for the
Natural watercrossing at 26+750 and 12+817 watercrossings at 23+273 and 12+817.
Resources should be designated as coldwater.
Consideration should be given to Water quality at crossings are addressed in the Drainage and Hydrology report and in correspondence
what can be done at the crossings to and meetings with the City of Barrie between June 2003 and October 2003. Correspondence and
improve water quality and possibly minutes of meetings with the City of Barrie are provided in Appendix A and Appendix B of this report.
fish movement.
Ministry of A statement indicating existing The range of existing culvert sizes and the proposed extended culvert sizes will be added to the final
Natural culvert lengths and proposed Natural Sciences Technical Report.
Resources extensions should be added to the
renort.
Ministry of The Department of Fisheries and A letter will be prepared for DFO requesting a file number and habitat biologist assignment. The actual
Natural Oceans should be consulted to Letter of Intent and Authorization application, however, will not be prepared and submitted until the
Resources authorize any HADD's detail design, once the design has been finalized and all impacts can be assessed.
AGENCY ISSUE/CONCERN RESPONSE
Ministry of In the Natural Sciences Technical The expected impacts discussed in the report are general in nature. As the design is advanced to later
Natural Report the descriptions of perceived design stages, it is expected that changes will occjlr which could affect the nature and/or extent of
Resources impacts to fish habitat resulting ITom anticipated impacts. Typically, detailed impact, mitigation and compensation strategies are developed
the culvert extensions are over during later design stages once the final location, footprint and design have been developed.
simplified. More detailed
descriptions are required to develop
aDorooriate comnensation.
Ministry of Increased flows in the culverts could Existing and expected flow velocities will be investigated during later design stage once culvert sizing
Natural negatively impact benthic and placement has been finalized. If velocities are expected to be significantly elevated, then more
ResourceS invertebrate distribution. Inventories detailed studies at the site may be required to address any expected changes in the benthic invertebrate
of benthic invertebrates should be and fish passage.
completed. Increased flows could
also become a barrier to fish oassage.
Ministry of Warmwater "no in-water work Warmwater timing restriction will be revised to April I to June 30 in the final Natural Sciences
Natural period" should read April I - June 30 Technical Report.
Resources
Ministry of Coldwater "no in-water work period" Coldwater timing restriction will be revised to September 15 to June 15, where both coldwater species
Natural should read September 15 - June 15 and baitfish are both present the composite timing restriction will be revised to September 15 to June
Resources 30
Ministry of Detailed site-specific prescriptions Detailed habitat assessment and compensation measures will be developed during later design stages.
Natural should be prepared for compensation
Resources at each crossing location.
Ministry of Impacts to crossings at 12+879 and Additional. details are required at 12+879 and 13+100 to better determine the extent of potential
Natural 13+ I 00 require more specific details impacts and options for compensation. Detailed habitat values and compensation strategies are not
Resources concerning habitat values and options appropriate in the PlanninglPreliminary Design Stages as per the Environmental Manual-Fisheries
for compensating measures (if Volume I. Typically this would be undertaken during later design stages when design details are
deemed doable). further advanced and/or finalized and more accurate survev information is available.
Ministry of Section 12.0 indicates a deer yard at Section 12.0 of the Natural Sciences Technical Report describes a linkage/corridor at 18+402 as
Natural 18+402 on Figure 5 while on Figure evidenced by a well-used trail linking an open feeding area with a lowland forest shelter area. There is
Resources 4 the deer yard is shown at 16+724. a deer wintering area east of the highway but it is outside of the study area and therefore not shown.
The deer vardin!!: area on Fi!!:llre 4 at 16+724 is correct as shown on the MNR GIS Values manoin!!:.
Ministry of A clear statement identifYing the A general statement will be added to the Natural Sciences Technical Report to clarifY the present and
Natural present width of the ROW at each future width of the corridor
Resources corridor feature versus after the
exoansion is needed.
Ministry of No details are provided regarding the Details will be added to the Natural Sciences Technical Report
Natural extent of crossing of the ROW by
Resources wildlife. We have anecdotal reports
of turtles and ITogs crossing the
ROW near the Cookstown wetland
area as well as seasonal deer
movements.
Ministry of What design changes are proposed The suggested ROW plantings are to provide lateral cover to link habitat components and not
Natural that might interfere with cross-ROW specifically to encourage cross-ROW linkages. All of the major deer wintering areas are on the east
Resources . travel by wildlife. side of the highway on the south portion of the project. While there are seasonal movements to and
ITom these locations there would not be significant daily movements across the ROW to access critical
habitats. The same is true in the north portion of the project. A deer wintering area is contained on the
west side of the highway between Essa Road and Hwy 90 while the urban area is on the east side of the
highway. There is no significant fragmentation or impacts to these critical habitats that would
encourage increased risks to deer.
Ministry of Herpetile assessments of life history Features to improve habitat for hepetiles such as turtle nesting areas away ITO the highway shoulder
Natural and habitat requirements should be would require work outside the MTO right-of-way and the associated land acquisition may not be
Resources done for both sides of the ROW: appropriate or feasible.
Feasibility of installing cross culverts
and turtle nesting areas away ITom
the shoulders of the hie:hwav.
Ministry of What types of deer passage measures Large-scale wildlife passage structures such as overpass/underpass and extensive fencing are not
Natural have been used in other jurisdictions usually considered for highway upgrades but can be incorporated into new highways or new
Resources that may address issues here (i.e. alignments.
large culverts, bridge spans, funnel
fencin!!:).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 110 -
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
5.3 Transportation Environmental Study Report
Submission
A notice of "Transportation Environmental Study Report Submission" was placed in local
newspapers to notify interested parties of the ppportunity for review (30-day review period) and
comment on this TESR. Letters were also sent to individuals on the Project Team's mailing list.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 111 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
.(ff) Ontario
6 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND COMMITMENTS
variable throughout the project limits, but will be highest in areas of significant
recharge, namely within the Camp Borden sand plain area between Station
29+000 in the Town of Innisfil and Station 13+000 in the City of Barrie, between
Essa Road and Bayfield Street. Based on a relatively large area :(rom which deep
overburden water wells and streams derive groundwater recharge, this reduction
. in overall groundwater recharge is not expected to be significant;
· Dewatering through excavation and disturbance of sediment from equipment
vibration could potentially result in physical interference with shallow water well
. supplies in the immediate vicinity of construction activities (i.e. mobilization of
sediment within nearby wells). These impacts are expected to be temporary.
Shallow wells are distributed along much of the project area. Specific well
locations are provided in the Preliminary Geotechnical I Pavement Design
Report under separate cover;
· Increases in deicing salts required to treat the additional pavement area are not
expected to be significant enough to cause a noticeable change in groundwater
quality;
· Accidental fuel releases from vehicle re-fuelling activities during construction
could potentially result in impacts to groundwater quality. Minor releases (i.e.
less than 100 litres) would not have an adverse impact on local water well
supplies.
The following mitigation measures are proposed:
· A Stonnwater Management Plan will be developed which includes the creation
of ponds and ditches designed to promote infiltration that will address the minor
impacts to groundwater recharge function in Vegetation Community 9 at Station
23+400, north of Tenth Line in the Town oflnnisfil;
· A realignment of the stream channel between Station l2+295 and 13+080, south
of Fourth Line in the Town of Innisfil, will be constructed at the base of the
drumlin features matching as closely as possible to the existing elevations to
maintain groundwater discharges to the stream system;
· A review of wells in the vicinity of significant earth cuts will be undertaken as
appropriate during detail design to detennine pre-construction well conditions
(i.e. baseline water quality and quantity data);
· It is anticipated that any recharge lost to impenneable surfaces will, in part, be
mitigated by direction of runoff to ditches where some additional recharge,
above what is currently occurring, can be anticipated. Impacts to sensitive
recharge areas will be further examined during detail design and appropriate
mitigation will be developed as necessary.
· Opportunities to address potential impacts associated with deicing salt
application will be addressed as a part of the Ministry's ongoing review of
environmental standards of practice; and
This section identifies the impacts on environmental features resulting from the recommended
improvements and discusses the proposed measures for mitigation.
It should be noted that the recommended improvements have been modified and refined to further
reduce impacts since the analysis and evaluation of alternatives stage. As such the impacts, as
discussed in the following sections, may differ in degree from the impacts measured in the analysis
and evaluation stage (refer to Chapter 4).
6.1 Natural Environment
The potential environmental impacts on fisheries and aquatic habitat, terrestrial habitat, wildlife,
groundwater areas associated with highway widening and interchange improvements as well as
proposed mitigation measures have been assessed as described in the following sections.
6.1.1 Hydrogeology
Existing groundwater uses within the study area consist of private domestic and
commercial water wells associated with private residences, farms and commercial
properties along the Highway 400 right-of-way.
Existing well uses within the study area generally consist of drilled wells which
utilize relatively shallow overburden aquifers. Of the 257 water well records
reviewed, 70 of the wells utilize shallow aquifers (less than 15 metres deep) and a
further four wells utilize bedrock aquifers. One- hundred and seventy-four wells.
utilize deep overburden aquifers greater than 15 metres below the ground surface.
Thirteen well records indicated flowing conditions and 13 were dry to the depth
drilled. (Thirteen water well records offered no water level infonnation.)
A water well location plan is provided in the Preliminary Geotechnical I Pavement
Design Report available under separate cover. The report also provides discussion of
well characteristics and summary of water well records.
Potential impacts to groundwater resources associated with the proposed widening
and interchange improvements include:
· Approximately 0.35 ha of groundwater recharge area in Vegetation Community
9 may be impacted near Station 23+400, between Tenth Line and Molson Park
Drive in the Town of Innisfil;
· Alterations to groundwater discharges between Station 12+925 and Station
13+080, south of Fourth Line in the Town of Innisfil, on the west side of the
highway;
.
As the recommended Highway 400 improvements involve widening the
impenneable pavement surfaces, some reduction in potential ground water
recharge within the study limits may occur. The reduction is expected to be
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 112 -
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
~ Ontario
I
6.1.2
. The risk of spillage will be minimized and managed through standard practices
of not permitting contractors to refuel or maintain vehicles in a manner, which
would permit entry of spilled fuels into permeable ground surfaces or water
sources. Refueling operations in proximity to shallow wells in areas of relatively
higher water table such as the northern and southern portions of the study area
and the Camp Borden sand plain area are PQtentially most susceptible to fuel
impacts will not be permitted. In addition, an emergency response plan must be
in place to address accidental releases.
Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat
In general, the fish habitat impacts are related to platform widening. All of the
crossings will require culvert extensions to accommodate the additional lanes.
Culvert extensions will cause a minor reduction in primary productivity as a result of
shading. Many of the culverts will be in the range of 70 to 100m long. The natural
meander width for many of these smaller streams would be in the order of 10m. The
extended culverts effectively straighten and shorten the natural stream length, which
in turn increases velocities. This changes the hydraulic properties of the reach and
can increase the erosive potential. Changes in velocities that affect the erosive
potential in the channel can also negatively impact benthic invertebrate distribution.
Stream realignments will'be necessary. Specifically there is a stream that parallels the
right-of-way from approximately station 12+600 to 13+200 in the Town of Innisfil,
south of Fourth Line.
Temporary impacts can be expected during construction including brief interruptions
to fish passage, vegetation disturbance and some sedime~tation.
The Ministry of Natural Resources has determined that the proposed improvements
constitute a Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction (HAD D) of fish habitat
and that authorization from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) will be
required. In general, mitigation and compensation strategies will be implemented to
address the common negative conditions at most of the crossings and accommodate
the enhancement opportunities identified in the Fisheries Inventory and Assessment
under separate cover. In terms of a conceptual approach, compensation measures
will be focused on each individual watercourse rather than improving one isolated
area / watercourse. Under existing conditions, invasive vegetation (cattails) chokes
the stream channel at many of the crossings to the extent that open water is limited
and fish passage is difficult. The other common negative condition is periods of
drought or no flow. To enhance (compensate) for the fish habitat impacts on site, the
construction of refuge pools and the addition of hard substrate to decre~e the
occurrence of invasive cattails is recommended at several of the impacted crossings.
The following table summarizes the crossings that will experience impacts as a result
of the proposed widening improvements. The crossing locations are shown on
Exhibit 3.2.
I
Table 6.1 Potentially Impacted Fish Habitat Crossings and Proposed Mitigation
Measuresl Conceptual Compensation Strategy
FISH HABITAT CROSSING LOCATION
Location: Station 27+300, Town of
Bradford West Gwillimbury
Type: Warmwater
Related Systems: Tributary ofInnisfil
Creek
Fish Communities: Supports warmwater
baitfish community.
Location: Station 27+527, Town of
Bradford West Gwillimbury
Type: Warmwater
Related Systems: Tributary ofInnisfil
Creek
Fish Communities: Supports warmwater
baitfish community.
Location: Station 10+282, Town of
Innisfil
Type: Warmwater
Related Systems: Tributary ofInnisfil
Creek
Fish Communities: Supports limited
warmwater baitfish community.
Location: Station 10+760, Town of
Innisfil
Type: Coldwater
Related Systems: Innisfil Creek
Fish Communities: Supports coldwater
and baitfish community.
Location: Station 11+688, Town of
lnnisfil
Type: Warmwater
Related Systems: Tributary ofInnisfil
Creek
Fish Communities: Supports a
warmwater baitfish community.
POTENTIAL IMPACT AND PROPOSED MITIGATION
This crossing is a tributary of Innisfil Creek and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The existing
structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
. The culvert will be extended -28.0m on the west (downstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -8.5m on the east (upstream) side; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
I
I
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Construct a small pool in the stream channel on the downstream end of the culvert to dissipate flow energy
and provide refuge to resident fish during low flows; and
. Add hard substrate (gravel 80"10, cobble 20%) to the stream bottom within the ROW to diversify habitat
and reduce vee:etation barriers within the channel.
This crossing is a tributary of lnnisfil Creek and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The existing
structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
. The culvert will be extended -12.0m on the west (downstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -18.5m on the east (upstream) side;
. A new culvert will be installed at approximately 10+140 on the W-S ramp;
. New culverts will be installed at approximately 10+345 and 10+080 on the W-N ramp; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
I
I
I
I
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and bufferine: aualities.
This crossing is a tributary of Innisfil Creek and supports a limited warmwater baitfish community. The existing
structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
. The culvert will be extended -11.5m on the west (upstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -37.5m on the east (downstream) side; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
I
I
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and buffering qualities.
This crossing is Innisfil Creek and supports a coldwater and baitfish community. The existing structures include
two corrugated steel pipe arches and a corrugated steel pipe. The widening of the highway platfonn will require
an extension to the existing structure.
. The CSPA's will be extended -1l.5m on the west (downstream) sid~;
. The CSPA's will be extended -15.0m on the east (upstream) side;
. The CSP will be extended -17.0m on the west (downstream) side;
. The CSP will be extended -15.0m on the east (upstream) side; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
I
I
I
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Repair perched culverts on downstream side to allow fish passage;
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and buffering qualities; and
. Add woodv debris (i.e. root wads and/or tree tons) anchored into the bank to imnrove fish cover habitat.
This crossing is a tributary of lnnisfil Creek and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The existing
structure is a corrugated steel pipe arch. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
. The culvert will be extended -23.5m on the west (upstream) side; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
I
I
I
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and buffering qualities; and
. Add gravel (<5cm diametre) at the outlet of pool on downstream side to improve spawning facilities for
creek chub.
I
URS
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 113 -
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 krn to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
I
Table 6.1 Potentially Impacted Fish Habitat Crossings and Proposed Mitigation
(ff) Ontario
I
Measuresl Conceptual Compensation Strategy (continued)
FISH HABITAT CROSSING LOCATION POTENTIAL IMPACT AND PROPOSED MITIGATION
Location: Station 12+879 and 13+100, This crossing is a tributary of Innistil Creek and supports a high quality coldwater community. These two
Town ofInnisfil crossings were sampled together since the nonnal stations overlap. The sampling station included 20m upstream
of the 13+ I 00 culvert, continues downstream for 220m to the 12+879 culvert and continues 100m downstream.
Type: Coldwater . The culvert at 12+879 will be extended -6.5m on the west (upstream) side;
. The culvert at 13+100 will be extended -31.0m on the west (downstream) side;
Related Systems: Tributary of Innisfil
Creek . Approximately 220m of specialized coldwater spawning habitat will be lost on the west side of the
highway from approximately 12+920 to 13+080 due to platfonn widening; and
Fish Communities: Supports a high . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
quality coldwater community. The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way on the east side of the highway
downstream of culvert 12+879 to improve shading, bank stability and buffering qualities;
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way on the east side of the highway
upstream of culvert 13+ I 00 to improve shading, bank stability and buffering qualities;
. Construct a new, natural channel system on the west side of the highway to replace the existing displaced
channel; and
. Addition of wood v debris in riffle margins to imnrove nursery habitat for coldwater snecies.
Location: Station 16+722, Town of This crossing is a tributary of Innisfil Creek and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The existing
Innisfil structure is a concrete arch culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
Type: Warmwater . The culvert will be extended -24.0m on the west (upstream) side;
. Approximately 20m of stream channel on the upstream side may be realigned to connect to the extended
Related Systems: Tributary ofInnisfil culvert; and
Creek . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Fish Communities: Supports a The following mitigation measures should be employed:
warmwater baitfish community. . Create a low flow channel within the existing culvert; and
. Adjust streambed elevation on downstream end of culvert to remove fish passage barrier created by
perched culvert.
Location: Station 18+400, Town of This crossing is a seasonal tributary of Lovers Creek and supports a warmwater baitfish community downstream
Innisfil of the ROW. The existing structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require
an extension to the existing structure.
Type: Warmwater . The culvert will be extended -24.0m on the west (upstream) side.
Related Systems: Seasonal tributary of No mitigation is required because the culvert extension and abundance of vegetation within the channel will
Lovers Creek shade and buffer the water that contributes to fish habitat downstream of the study area.
Fish Communities: Supports a
warmwater baitfish community.
Location: Station 23+273, Town of This crossing is a tributary of Lovers Creek and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The existing
Innisfil structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
Type: Warmwater . The culvert will be extended -23.5m on the west (upstream) side; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Related Systems: Seasonal tributary of
Lovers Creek . The following mitigation measures should be employed:
Fish Communities: Supports a . Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
warm water baitfish community. and bufferinl! aualities.
Location: Station 26+750, Town of This crossing is a tributary of Kempenfelt Bay and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The existing
Innisfil structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the
existing structure.
Type: Warmwater . The culvert will be extended -23.0m on the west (upstream) side; and
. There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Related Systems: Tributary of
Kempenfelt Bay The following mitigation measures should be employed:
Fish Communities: Supports a . Construct a small pool in the stream channel on the downstream end of the culvert to dissipate flow energy
warmwater baitfish community. and provide refuge to resident fish during low flows; and
. Embed flat stones into the bank of the pool to provide spawning facilities for the resident fathead
minnows.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FISH HABITAT CROSSING LOCATION POTENTIAL IMPACT AND PROPOSED MmGATlON
Location: Station 29+282, Town of This crossing is a seasonal tributary of Kempenfelt Bay and supports a warmwater baitfish community. The
Innisfil existing structure is a concrete box culvert The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to.
the existing structure.
Type: Warmwater . The culvert will be extended -13.5m on the west (upstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -13.Om on the east (downstream) side; and
Related Systems: Seasonal tributary of . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Kempenfelt Bay
Fish Communities: Supports a The following mitigation measures should be employed:
warmwater baitfish community. . Construct a small pool in the stream channel on the downstream end of the culvert to dissipate flow energy
and provide refuge to resident fish during low flows; and
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and buffering aualities.
Location: Station 11+025, City of Barrie This crossing is a pennanent coldwater tributary of Kempenfelt Bay. The existing structure is a concrete box
culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the existing structure.
Type: Pennanent coldwater . The culvert will be extended -34.0 on the west (upstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -5.0m on the east (downstream) side; and
Related Systems: Tributary of . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Kempenfelt Bay
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
. and butrering aualities.
Location: Station 12+200, City of Barrie This crossing is a pennanent coldwater tributary of Kempenfelt Bay. The existing structure is a concrete box
culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the existing structure.
Type: Pennanent coldwater . The culvert will be extended -14.5m on the west (upstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -5.5m on the east (downstream) side; and
Related Systems: Tributary of . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Kempenfelt Bay
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and bufferin!! aualities.
Location: Station 13+450, City of Barrie This crossing is a pennanent coldwater tributary of Kempenfelt Bay. The existing structure is a concrete box
culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require an extension to the existing structure.
Type: Pennanent coldwater . The culvert will be extended -10.5 on the west (upstream) side;
. The culvert will be extended -10.5m on the east (downstream) side; and
Related Systems: Tributary of . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Kempenfelt Bay
The following mitigation measures should be employed:
. Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and buffering qualities.
Location: Station 12+800, City of Barrie This crossing is a pennanent coldwater tributary of Kempenfelt Bay and supports a warmwater baitfish
community. The existing structure is a concrete box culvert. The widening of the highway platfonn will require
Type: Pennanent coldwater an extension to the existing structure.
. The culvert will be extended -13.5m on the west (upstream) side;
Related Systems: Tributary of . The culvert will be extended -9.0 on the east (downstream) side; and
Kempenfelt Bay . There will be some minor loss of primary productivity resulting in a HADD.
Fish Communities: Supports a The following mitigation measures should be employed:
warmwater baitfish community. . Plant native shrub species in the riparian zone within the right-of-way to improve shading, bank stability
and bufferin!! aualities.
Location: Station 18+280, Township of This crossing is Willow Creek; a pennanent warmwater community supporting baitfish and sportfish. The
Springwater existing structure is a three span, steel beam bridge.. The widening of the highway platfonn will require
rehabilitation to the existing structure to facilitate taper to four-lane highway.
Type: Pennanent warm water
Mitigation measures are not proposed since the culvert extension and abundance of vegetation within the
Related Systems: Willow Creek channel will shade and buffer the water that contributes to fish habitat downstream of the study area.
Fish Communities: Supports a
warmwater baitfish and sportfish
community.
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 114 -
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 115 _
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
@ Ontario
General Mitigation Measures
Typical mitigation strategies will be employed for both the coldwater and wannwater
crossings. In order to minimize the potential for construction related impacts,
standard Ministry mitigation approaches will be implemented. Operational
constraints (in the fonn of special provisions) will be developed during detail design
and included in the highway construction contract documents. Mftigation measures
include:
· No in-water work from March l5 to June 30 (wannwater);
· No in-water work from September 1 to June 1 (coldwater);
· Implement an erosion and sediment control plan with typical mitigation
measures including sediment fences, check dams and/or straw bales in affected
drainages and re-vegetation of exposed soils within a maximum of 45 days of the
start of grading. On steeper slopes, geotextiles should be used to enhance slope
stability and the growth of the vegetation. An Environmental Inspector will be
employed to monitor the success of the sediment and erosion control methods
used and to provide guidance on maintenance requirements. Sediment and
erosion controls will remain in place and maintained until such time as the
vegetation has taken sufficiently to provide adequate protection for the
watercourses;
· Stockpiles will be located and isolated to ensure material will not enter any
watercourse;
· All culvert work will be isolated from stream flows;
· All dewatering and flow diversion must be conducted in a manner that prevents
sedimentation;
· Areas for refuelling of machinery will be located well away from any
watercourse or drainage ditch;
· All construction debris and litter will be removed frequently. Stockpiles will not
be pennitted within the regulatory floodplain. All stockpiles will be removed
upon completion of the works and the site restored, as appropriate;
· Where instream works are taking place, flows shall be maintained and without
excessive sedimentation or erosion. Flows may be diverted by piping or
damming and pumping for short duration. In the event temporary channel
bypass measures are required in areas known to contain fish species, all fish
would be removed and transplanted upstream of construction activities prior to
channel dewatering; and
· An Environmental Inspector with a natural channel or biological background and
construction experience should be employed for all instream works on
pennanent watercourses to ensure that mitigation and compensation measures
are implemented as designed.
6.1.3 Vegetation, Wetlands, Areas of Natural and
Scientific Interest (ANSI)
Vegetation commuriities 1,2,6, 8,9, 10, 12 and 13 are considered significant (Refer
to Exhibit 3.1 and Appendix E for locations of vegetation communities).
Communities 1 and 2 are significant as they are uncommon within the study area and
fonn part of the Little Lake Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW). Community 10
is significant since it is part of the adjacent lands of Little Lake PSW and is a
relatively uncommon community within the study area. The remaining significant
communities are in excellent health, sensitive to disturbance and/or are very diverse.
There is an isolated patch of Black Walnut near the Duckworth interchange that
would be considered significant since they are relatively uncommon here at the
northern"extent of their range.
The following outlines potential impacts to significant vegetation communities as a
result of the proposed widening and interchange improvements:
· Approximately 0.4 7ha of community I will be impacted in the vicinity of 18+000
and 18+350, south of Highway 11 in the City of Barrie;
· Approximately 0.14ha of community 2 will be impacted near 18+200, South of
Highway 11 in the City of Barrie;
· Approximately l.4ha of community 6 will be impacted at Station 13+010, south
of Fourth Line in the Town of Innisfil and 12+800, south of Bayfield Street in
the City of Barrie;
· Approximately 0.79ha of community 8 will be impacted in the vicinity of
26+200, north of Molson Park Drive in the City of Barrie;
· Approximately 0.35ha of community 9 will be impacted near 23+400, north of
Tenth Line in the Town ofInnisfil;
· Approximately O.lOha of community l2 will be impacted at 23+100~ north of
Tenth Line in the Town ofInnisfil; and
· Approximately 0.09ha of Black Walnut will be impacted near 16+450, north of
Duckworth Street in the City of Barrie.
The following mitigation measures will be implemented to address the above noted
vegetation communities:
· Retain vegetation within new highway right-of-way wherever possible to reduce
loss of native vegetation;
· Use a selective vegetation removal strategy to ensure that the disturbed area is
only as large as required to complete the platfonn widening;
· Any trees that must be cut that are suitable for fish habitat compensation
measures will be stockpiled and used for such works;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
· Individual trees of significant value (i.e. Black Walnut) shall be marked for
retention wherever possible;
· All exposed soils will be re-vegetated immediately following the completion of
the required work and the final grade has been established. All seeded areas shall
be inspected at 30, 60 and 90 days after seeding to ensure success of the seed
mix and cover application as per Seeding and Cover Quality Assurance Visual
Inspection Field Guide (MTO 1999);
· Stockpiled soil and other materials will be located outside of vegetated areas;
· Those areas not successfully meeting the performance measures will be re-
seeded and subject to a further 90-day inspection cycle;
· Plant native trees and shrubs where possible to contribute to slope stabilization,
naturalize right-of-way and provide linkage between isolated vegetation
commurcities;and
· Plant replacement Black Walnut trees to compensate for those lost.
placement of fill to minimize disturbance beyond the fill footprint and use of
sediment and erosion control measures (i.e. silt fencing, straw bale etc.).
6.1.4 Wildlife Linkage/Corridor, Vulnerable, Threatened
or Endangered (VTE) Species
Approximately 1.02 ha o( deer wintering habitat will be affected as a result of the
widening and interchange improvements.
To minimize the impacts on wildlife habitat, the following mitigation measures shall
be employed:
· Use selective vegetation removal strategies to ensure the disturbed area is only as
large as required to complete the platform widening; and
· Planting native conifers within the right-of-way, where possible to provide
linkages between isolated forested deer wintering areas.
Significant Wetlands
The following impacts to the wetlands located in the highway corridor are expected
as a result of the proposed widening and interchange improvements:
· Approximately 1.03ha of the Cookstown Hollows Swamp Provincially
Significant Wetland (PSW) near 26+550, south of Highway 89 in the Town of
Bradford West Gwillimbury, will be affected by vegetatioD removal and filling
activities;
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
There will be a loss of a linkage associated with Vegetation Commurcities 11 and 6 at
12+920, south of Fourth Line in the Town of Innisfil, associated with platform
widening. .
To minimize the impacts on wildlife linkages and corridors native conifers will be
planted within the right-of-way, where possible to provide linkages between isolated
forested deer wintering areas.
· Approximately 0.60ha of the Little Lake PSW near 18+200, south of Highway
11 in the City of Barrie, will be affected by vegetation removal and filling
activities; and
· Loss of flood storage and attenuation areas.
The features of the Cookstown Hollows Swamp and Little Lake PSWs are location-
specific and may not necessarily be impacted by the recommended improvements to
the Highway 400 corridor. Impacts to specific features within the PSWs will be
investigated during detail design and mitigation measures will be developed in
consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources.
The following mitigation measures are proposed to address impacts to wetlands:
· A Stormwater Management and Drainage Plan will address impacts related to
lost flood storage areas, changes in drainage and impacts to fill-regulated areas
by implementing stormwater management practices (SWMP's) such as wet
ponds, dry ponds, and/or constructed wetlands; and porous, vegetative SWMP's
such as buffer strips, grassed swales and filter strips.
· To minimize direct impacts to wetland areas, mitigation measures may include,
but not be limited to barrier fencing at the toe of fill embankments, careful
Vulnerable, Threatened or Endangered (VTE) Species
There will be no impacts on VTE species within the Highway 400 corridor.
6.1.5 Stormwater Management
MTO Directive B-l00
MTO Directive B-I00 governs the design requirements and criteria for the hydraulic
design of highway conveyance structures. In accordance with this Directive, where
improvements to existing structures are proposed, this design is to be based on the
100-year storm criteria. Regional Storm flows are also considered in the hydraulic
analysis to determine whether the flood hazard condition associated with the event is
negatively impacted upon by the proposed road improvements. .
In accordance with the MTO Drainage Manual, the Highway 400 Drainage and
Hydrology Report used the Timmins Design Storm as the regulatory Regional Storm
in the hydrologic analysis. Recent (Spring 2003) information from the Ministry of
Natural Resources indicates that Hurricane Hazel is to be considered the Regional
Storm for the Greater Barrie Area. Therefore, any analyses in this study based on
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 116 -
April 2004
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 krn to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Regional Storm flows will need to be revisited in later design stages using Hurricane
Hazel storm flows.
Municipal Drainage Plans
The City of Barrie is updating the Master Drainage Plans for a number of watersheds
in the City. Master Drainage Plans and Class EA documents provided by the City of
Barrie and incorporated in the Drainage and Hydrology Report, submjtted under
separate cover, include:
. Hotchkiss Creek;
. Bunker's Creek;
. Kidd's Creek;
. Dyment's Creek; and
· Whiskey Creek.
The watershed management goals and objectives for these watersheds are based on
City of Barrie Storm Drainage Policies, and include:
· conveyance and floodproofing;
· watercourse erosion and bank stability; and
· protection of the natural environment.
One of the City's objectives pertaining to conveyance and floodproofing is
preventing and correcting of spills between watersheds. The analysis of Highway
400 conveyance structures identified spills between watersheds could occur under
Regional Storm flows under the 'No-Build' (i.e. existing) scenario as well as post-
construction of the recommended improvements to Highway 400.
As the Highway 400 improvements and the City's Master Drainage Plans advance to
later design and construction stages, MTO will work with the City of Barrie to
provide assistance to the extent possible under MTO's' mandate in achieving the
City's objectives pertaining to spills between watersheds. Achieving these objectives
may require upgrades to the MTO conveyance structures above and beyond those
that are identified in the Drainage and Hydrology Report.
Recommendations
Within the study area, runoff from the Highway 400 discharges to a combination of
intermittent and permanent watercourses via the median storm sewer system and
highway ditches. To assess the potential impacts of the proposed widening on the
water quality and quantity of downstream watercourses, as well as the potential for
erosion and fish habitat impacts, two types of critical areas were identified:
· Highway areas draining to watercourses that support fish habitat adjacent to the
highway; and
ff) Ontario
I
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Highway areas that result in a large increase in pavement area relative to their
total upstream drainage area, either because the upstream drainage area is
relatively small or because the drainage area includes a large section of the
highway. This results in a lm:ger potential for erosion, flood risk, and water
quality degradation in these watercourses.
· Fourteen of the forty-four culverts convey a watercourse supporting fish habitat.
These include culverts 43, 44, 45, 49, 50, 55, 58, 62,69, 71, 73, 76, 77, and 78.
Culvert locations are shown on Exhibit 6.1. In addition, Willow Creek supports
warmwater fisheries.
The proposed improvements to the highway will result in an increase in pavement
area. The total increase in pavement area from the existing six lanes to eight/ten
lanes is approximately 54.8 ha, which represents a 57 percent increase in pavement
area. Of a possible 45 drainage areas, there are 11 areas where the increase in
pavement area relative to the upstream drainage area represents more than five
percent, identified as culverts 41, 42, 47, 48, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, and 59. Exhibit
6.1 indicates the locations of culverts and proposed stormwater management pond
locations.
The proposed stormwater management strategy consists of flat-bottomed grassed
swales in all locations where the design criteria can be met, additional enhanced
ditches along critical highway areas, seven water quality control wet ponds/wetlands,
and localized erosion control measures. Alternatively, where watershed
improvements are proposed in municipal Master Drainage Plans, MTO will work
with the municipality to provide stormwater management measures consistent with
the recommendations of approved Master Drainage Plans. This could include cost-
sharing in municipal improvements in lieu of the stormwater management
improvements identified in the Drainage and Hydrology Report.
Due to the steep grades, all sections of the highway are not conducive to treatment
with grassed swales. Thus, grassed swales that meet the MOE criteria for water
quality control can be implemented over 64% of the study area. In the remaining
areas, the slope of the highway exceeds 1.5% and the effectiveness of the grassed
swales in removing pollutants is reduced.
Detailed layouts for the stormwater management ponds will be developed during
detailed design. A stormwater management pond is proposed to be located within the
Dunlop Street interchange, while the remaining ponds are located adjacent to the
highway. Pond locations are shown on Exhibit 6.1. The following is a brief
description of the proposed ponds:
.. Pond 1 is located on the west side of the highway, just north of culvert 47
(station 12+000, Town of Innisfil). This pond will treat 710m of southbound
highway and the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately
2.85ha.
· Pond 2 is located on the west side of the highway, just north of culvert 50
highway and the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately
4.0ha.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 117 _
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
G)
~
~
$
....
o
-+
to.)
~
....
o
-+
-.I
~
@
TOWN OFi
BRADFORD WEST It
GWILLlMBURY
@ CULVERT NUMBER AND LOCATION
URS
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
8
9
~
~
+
w
o
'"
~ ~
~ N
+ +
'" 0
0> 0
0> 0
~ ~ ~
NNW
~a;.!
~ -.j 0
~ <0 0
@
@
@@
@@@
~
~
r-
Z
Q rn
. ~ ~ ~ ~
.\:>. (J1 (J1
.i.\:>. + 0>
0> + + + +
N--I (J1 -.j
00 (J1 ~ -.j <0
N~ 0> (J1 N -.j
r- N 0>
G>~ @ @~ @@
~
@
~
~
....
6>
@@
@
@
TOWN OF INNISFIL
To.
"TO! @
A V to>
~ ~ ~
~.9. ~ \:s:J
~ ...
~ ~
e&\
A
E"Ss,,\
RO"\D
CITY OF BARRIE
@
@
rn = PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POND NUMBER AND LOCATION
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
;;;
.,. ;;:;
& +
r-:J\ c ~
"IY (fi) IS' <><::.,; c
~ '1e ~~
<<'~ 0..0 '\::U
/-~
~
/-
z
z
(jj
.."
F
CP
rn
b
~
~
E;
80
HIGHWAY 400
~ ~
000>
+ +
N .\:>.
.\:>.0
wo
@)(ID
(/I
;
()
o
rn
~
E;
to.)
....
@
'),'0
~
-1-~
~(j
@ ~v<:>
,.J..<<'~
<of?- ,,<<:-~
~
~....
"
If '!\,....
<:s ~
@ ~
@)
~
~...."
<::)
~ ~"S\
@()
DUCKWORTH
STREET ,,~\
~s\
~
@
,,~\
~>qS
@)
....
~
~
r-
Z
rn
N
o
+
-.j
o
o
@)
@
CULVERT AND
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
POND LOCATIONS
tj
~
C;J
@
w
EXHIBIT
6.1
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Pond 3 is located on the west side of the highway, just north of culvert 52
(station 14+668, Town of Innisfil). This pond will treat 885m of southbound
highway and the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately
3.5ha.
· Pond 4 is located on the west side of the highway, just south of culvert 57
(station 18+243, Town of Innisfil). This pond will treat 740m of southbound
highway and the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately
2.9ha.
· Pond 5 is located on the west side of the highway, just north of culvert 58
(station 18+400, Town of Innisfil). This pond will treat 1200m of southbound
highway and the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately
4.8ha.
· Pond 6 is located on the east side of the highway, just south of culvert 71 (station
29+282, City of Barrie). This pond will treat 1900m of northbound highway and
the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately 7.1ha. There is
an opportunity for a cost sharing agreement for this pond, as the City of Barrie
has also proposed a pond at this location.
· Pond 7 is located in the south-west quadrant of the Dunlop Street interchange.
This pond will treat 900m of southbound highway, the E/W-S ramp, the N-E/W
ramp and the median drainage, for a total impervious area of approximately
4.5ha.
It is recommended that plunge pools be placed at the downstream ends of all culverts
with watercourses that support warmwater fish habitat. The plunge pools will
provide energy dissipation for any increased flow as a result of the proposed highway
widening, and will enhance the fish habitat.
It also is recommended that, where possible, stonn sewers outlet to the highway
ditches, instead of within the culverts, with plunge pools placed at all stonn sewer
outlets. The pools will provide energy dissipation for any increased flow as a result
of the proposed highway widening.
The analysis of Regional stonn flows for the eight culverts where the drainage area
exceeds 125 ha indicated that the capacity of five of the culverts will be exceeded.
Thus, breaks in the proposed concrete median barrier will be required at some
locations to provide a relief flow route and to prevent increases in flood elevations.
At Culvert 78 (Kidd's Creek), measures to address spills to Bunker Creek Watershed,
being developed by the City of Barrie for the Master Drainage Plan, will also be
considered in later design stages.
As the Highway 400 improvements and the City's Master Drainage Plans advance to
later design and construction stages, MTO will work with the City of Barrie to
provide assistance to the extent possible under MTO's mandate in achieving the
City's objectives pertaining to spills between watersheds. Achieving these objectives
may require upgrades to the MTO conveyance structures above and beyond those
that are identified in this Drainage and Hydrology Report.
Overall, stonnwater mitigation effectively reduces any decrease in stonnwater
quality or increase in stonnwater quantity to near pre-development conditions.
Details of the stonnwater management plan will be reviewed during detail design.
(station 13+100, Town of Innisfil). This pond will treat 1000m of southbound
6.2 . Socio-Economic Environment
. 6.2.1 Community Impacts: Road Closures/Out-of-Way
Travel
Construction staging of the Highway 400 widening was developed for the following
major components:
· Highway 400 mainline widening;
· Highway 89 underpass and interchange improvements;
· Fourth Line underpass and realignment;
· Sixth Line overpass and profile adjustment;
· Innisfil Beach Road overpass and interchange improvements;
· Barrie/Collingwood Railway overpass (Site 30-209);
· Tenth Line underpass and profile adjusment;
· Essa Road overpass and interchange improvements;
· Barrie/Collingwood Railway overpass (Site 30-177);
· Tiffm Street overpass and profile adjustment;
· Dunlop Street underpass and interchange improvements;
· Anne Street underpass and profile adjustment;
· Sunnidale Road underpass and profile adjustment;
· Bayfield Street underpass and interchange improvements; and
· Duckworth Street overpass and interchange improvements.
Details of the assumed construction staging scheme for each component are provided
in Appendix C of the Preliminary Design Report submitted under separate cover.
Each construction staging sequence illustrates and documents the construction and
traffic activities that occur during each stage.
The staging schemes developed for each component are preliminary and were
developed to identify property requirements to accommodate construction and any
constructability issues. In addition they are dependent on the preliminary designs
developed for the Highway 400 mainline, interchanges and crossing roads. The
preliminary designs are subject to more accurate survey and field infonnation, which
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 119 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
(ff) Ontario
will become available during detail design. During later design stages, these
conceptual construction staging plans will be refined and detailed.
The Highway 400 Improvements will be staged in a manner such that the impacts to
the local municipalities will be reduced. It is anticipated that construction of the
proposed improvements to Highway 400 will be carried out under a series of
contracts and that the duration of the construction will extend over several seasons.
The series of contracts will be timed in a manner whereby adjacent contracts are not
implemented simultaneously (e.g. Dunlop St. and Anne St. improvements will not be
implemented at the same time). ,This will provide reasonable alternate routes to
minimize out-of-way traveL
The staging was developed on the basis that traffic flow on Highway 400 will be
maintained at all times. Lane width reductions and localized single lane overnight
closures, however, will be required on Highway 400 and the crossing roads to
accommodate the construction staging.
While the staging schemes were developed to maintain all interchange ramp
movements to and from Highway 400 for the duration of construction, occasional
closures of interchange ramps during construction may be required to effect
interchange improvements.
With the, exceptions of Sixth Line, Tenth Line and Sunnidale Road, it is anticipated
that construction on all interchanges and crossing roads will be carried out without
complete road closures. To reduce construction time, this study plans for closures at
Sixth Line, Tenth Line and Sunnidale Road for one full construction season. The
closures of these roads are included in a particular construction staging scenario
assumed for this project. It is recognized that other staging alternatives may be
considered and developed in later desigri stages, which may change the requirements
for road closures.
6.2.3 Commercial/Industrial Property Impacts
The following identifies the businesses that will be displaced as a result of the
widening and interchange improvements to the highway.
Highway 89
· Petro Canada gas station located on the northwest quadrant of the interchange;
and
· McDonald's restaurant located on the northwest quadrant of the interchange.
Both businesses are located on lands leased from MTO.
Essa Road
· Petro Canada gas station in the service centre complex that serves northbound
Highway 400 located on the east side of Highway 400 between Molson Park
Drive and Essa Road; and
· McDonald's restaurant in the service centre complex that serves northbound
Highway 400 located on the east side of Highway 400 between Molson Park
Drive and Essa Road. '
· Both of the above businesses are located on lands leased from MTO.
Dunlop Street
· Dunlop Village Plaza (26 storC?s) lqcated on the northeast quadrant of the
interchange; and
· Cedar Pointe Plaza (Building No.4 approximately 20 stores) located on the
northwest quadrant of the interchange. .
6.2.2 Residential Property Impacts
The recommended plan will require the displacement of thirteen residences,
including eight residences on Bayfield Street east of Highway 400, three residences
located on the west side of Sunnidale Road and two residences on the east side of
Sunnidale Road. A total permanent residential property taking of approximately 36
ha will be required for the proposed widening and interchange improvements.
The Ministry is committed to consulting with affected property owners as the project
proceeds.
Property impacts will be addressed as identified in Section 6.2.5 of this report. Both
permanent and temporary property requirements will be confirmed in detail design
when more detailed survey information is available.
Bayfield Street
· Shell gas station located on the northwest quadrant.
A total property taking of approximately 14 ha from businesses abutting the Highway
400 right-of-way will be required. The proposed highway widening and interchange
improvements will impact the following businesses:
Highway 89
· Motel 400 located on the southwest quadrant of Highway 89 and Highway 400;
· Cookstown Outlet Mall located on the southeast quadrant of Highway 89 and
Highway 400;
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 120 _
April 2004
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Road Show Antiques located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 89 and
Highway 400; and
· KOA Campground located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 89 and
Highway 400.
Innisfil Beach Road
· Sandy Cove Marine located on the southeast quadrant of Innisfil Beach Road
and Highway 400.
Molson Park Drive
· Barrie 400 Power Centre located on the southwest quadrant of Molson Park
Drive and Highway 400
· Car Dealership located on the northwest quadrant of Molson Park Drive and
Highway 400; and
· Cineplex Odeon Theater located on the southwest quadrant of Molson Park
Drive and Highway 400.
Essa Road
· Former Barrie Raceway (abandoned) located on the northeast quadrant of Essa
Road and Highway 400.
Dunlop Street
303 W Plaza located on the southeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and Highway.
400;
· Cedar Pointe Plaza located on the northwest quadrant of Dunlop Street and .
Highway 400;
· The Keg located on the southwest quadrant of Dunlop Street and Highway 400;
· Centennial Dodge Chrysler located on the southwest quadrant of Dunlop Street
and Highway 400;
· Prime Auto Sales located on the southeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and
Highway 400;
· Tim Horton's located on the southeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and Highway
400;
.
· Carla's Restaurant located on the northeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and
Highway 400;
· Home Life located on the northeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and Highway 400;
and
6.2.4
6.2.5
· Eden Gate Sales Office located on the northeast quadrant of Dunlop Street and
Highway 400.
Bayfield Street
· Travel Lodge located on the southwest quadrant of Bayfield Street and Highway
. 400; and
· Bayfield Mall Parking Lot located on the southwest quadrant of Bayfield Street
. and Highway 400.
Duckworth Street
· Proposed development located on the northwest quadrant of Duckworth Street
and Highway 400.
Property impacts will be addressed as identified in Section 6.2.4 of this report. Both
permanent and temporary property requirements will be confirmed in detail design
when more detailed survey information is available.
Access Agreements
A new two-way access road to the commercial development will be aligned opposite
the proposed N-EIW ramp at the Essa Road interchange. Entry to the access road will
be available from the N-EIW ramp (ie. entry from Essa Road will be prohibited).
Access to Essa Road from the access road will be limited to right-out access from the
development to eastbound Essa Road.
Agricultural
The proposed highway widening and interchange improvements will impact
approximately 5.9 ha of Class 1-5 agricultural land. There are no Class 6 agricultural
lands located within the study corridor. Six active farming operations will be
affected. These impacts will not have a significant impact on regional agricultural
production.
Property impacts will be addressed as identified in Section 6.2.4 of this report. Both
permanent and temporary property requirements will be confirmed in detail design
when more detailed survey information is available.
Mitigation measures to address impacts to agricultural operations include:
· Replace fences removed during detail design; and
· Areas used for temporary basis for construction will be restored to current
conditions in consultation with affected agricultural operators.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 121 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 krn to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@?) Ontario
6.2.6 Property Process
Both the college and Hospital have plans for expansion. The college is preparing a
master plan, and expects an intensification of the campus that could involve the
construction of 9 to 18 new buildings. The hospital plans a major expansion
inc~uding the construction of a regional cancer centre, emergency services expansion,
new ambulance bays, medical building, outpatient expansion and improved parking
facilities. New subdivision plans are proposed for the residential neighbourhood.
surrounding Georgian Drive. The proposed highway widening and interchange
improvements will not adversely affect plans for expanding Georgian College or the
Royal Victoria Hospital or development aspirations under the Georgian Drive.
Secondary Plan Area.
The former horse racing track and marine and recreation facility located in the
northeast quadrant of Essa Road intersection are developable lands within the study
area. Future land use plans are expected for these areas. The proposed
improvements to the Highway 400/Essa Road interchange will impact 0.6ha of the
lands.
Because of the significant growth in Barrie, traffic volumes have increased
substantially on some of the major streets. A traffic simulation model was developed
to forecast the future travel patterns based on projected land use information (Read,
Voorhees & Associates Ltd., City of Barrie Transportation Study, 1999). Refer to
Section 3.4.5 for further details on the Barrie Transportation Plan. In light of this
significant growth, the City of Barrie, in 1999, updated the land use conditions of the
traffic forecasts that were documented in the 1992 Barrie Transportation Study,
which provided recommendations for the street plans to meet future needs.
Compensation will be provided for property required by MTO to implement the
recommended improvements. For permanent property taking, compensation will be
provided at fair market value, which is determined at the time of purchase by a
property appraisal report forming the basis for negotiations. Other ancillary costs are
negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Compensation will also be provided with respect
to temporary property requirements. Upon completion of construction, temporary
property will be returned to the owner. All reasonable attempts will be made to
restore the land to its original condition.
6.2.7 Future Land Use Developments
The proposed ramp configuration and realignment at Highway 400 and Innisfil
Beach Road may impact possible future commercial/industrial development
proposed on the northwest and southwest quadrant of the interchange.
A site plan application has been filed with the Town of Innisfil to facilitate the
development of lands located at the corner of Highway 89 and Reive Road. The
proposed development includes a recreational vehicle and boat sales and service
centre. The proposed E-N Ramp to Highway 400 and the realignment of Reive Road
was developed in discussions with the affected property owners, and will impact the
development of the lands since the proposed alignment of Reive Road bisects the
area considered for development.
Opportunities to minimize potential property impacts associated with the interchange
improvements will ~e re-yiewed during detail design in consultation with the property
owners and the Town of Innisfil.
The City of Barrie has planned residential and mixed commercial use development in
the Ardagh Road Area. This development will likely increase traffic volumes at the
Essa Road interchange and could potentially cause additional capacity deficiencies at
this interchange. .
A Special Policy Area is located west of Highway 400 and south of Duckworth
Street and is designated for a commercial development (Huronia Corporate Centre)
consisting of retail commercial uses, automotive retail, ancillary offices or hotel uses.
There is one known development application, a site plan for a future commercial use
involving 18.16 acres in the southwestern region of Duckworth Street. There is also
a proposed site plan for a hotel located in the southwest quadrant of the Duckworth
Street/Cundles Road intersection. The proposed highway widening and interchange
improvements will require approximately 0.6 ha from this area but will not adversely
affect the development plans in this area.
The Georgian Drive Secondary Plan Area contains a business park, designated in
recognition of its strategic location adjacent to the Georgian College and the Royal
Victoria Hospital. These are the two largest institutional land uses in the City of
Barrie, together occupying 5.5 ha.
6.2.8 Noise
The noise impact assessment for this project has been undertaken in accordance with
the procedural guidelines set out in the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and the
Ministry of Transportation (MTO) Joint Protocol and MTO Directive QST-Al, and
identifies the change in the average 24-hour noise level from the future "no build" to
the future "build" condition. The future "no build" condition is based on the future
traffic volume (at least ten years from the date of completion), assuming that no
roadway changes take place. The future "build" condition is also based on the future
traffic volume, but with the undertaking in place.
Thirty-five Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs), consisting of scattered rural residences in
the Town of Innisfil and selected dwellings in the City of Barrie, represent "worst-
case receivers" of predicted noise impacts along Highway 400 in the study area.
Table 6.2 identifies the locations of the representative mainline NSAs and identifies
the existing, predicted Future "No Build", and Future "Build" sound levels at
representative mainline NSAs.
According to the MTO and MOE noise protocol, noise mitigation is required for
increases in sound exposures (future "build" versus future "no-build") of more than 5
dBA. The results of the noise modeling indicate that the preferred Highway 400
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 122 _
April 2004
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 123 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
widening and interchange improvements will result in a noise increase of less than 5
dBA and therefore, noise mitigation is not required.
Although, noise mitigation is not required throughout the entire study area, the
Ministry has identified areas along Highway 400 that are eligible for construction of
noise barriers under the Noise Barrier Retrofit Program. This program applies to
residential areas approved under the Planning Act prior to February 8, 1977 when the
retrofit policy was approved. In addition to meeting the approval date requirement,
eligibility for construction under this program was also determined on the basis of a
barrier being cost-effective in reducing sound levels for adjacent residential areas.
Factors which influence the cost-effectiveness of a barrier include the distance homes
are located from the traffic noise, topography, the density of homes, and if there are
any intervening land uses.
In the case of the Highway 400 corridor through Barrie~ the locations shown on
Exhibit 6.2 have been identified by MTO for construction of noise barriers under the
Retrofit Program. These locations were deferred when the Highway 400 Planning
Study was announced. Approximate locations of these proposed noise barriers along
Highway 400 are as follows:
. Northeast quadrant of the Dunlop Street interchange;
. Southeast quadrant of the Bayfield Street interchange;
. Northeast quadrant of the Bayfield Street interchange; and
. Northwest quadrant of the Bayfield Street interchange.
As part of scheduling the planned highway improvements, ministry staff will review
each of the noise barrier locations and determine whether it would be technically
feasible to construct the noise barriers in advance of the Highway 400 widening
projects. This review will consider issues such as the expected timing for the
construction on Highway 400, and the potential conflict between the proposed
highway construction and the barrier locations. In some cases, it may be necessary to
defer construction of the noise barriers until the time of the highway improvements.
Those sites that can be constructed in advance of the highway improvements will be
scheduled, subject to the availability of funding and based on regional priorities.
Tabie 6.2
Predicted "No-Build" and "Build" Sound Levels at
Representative Mainline NSAs
RECEPTOR NEAREST EXISTING PREDICTED PREDICTED DIFFERENCE IN SOUND
LOCATIONS INTERCHANGE (DBA) FUTURE "No FUTURE LEVEL BETWEEN PREDICTED.
BUILD" (DBA) "BUILD" (DBA) FUTURE "No BUILD" AND
"BUILD" (DBA)
89H3 North of Hwy 66 68 67 -1
89
INHlO North of 61 62 62 0.
Innisfil Beach
Road
ESH2 Essa Road 71 73 73 0.
ESH3 Essa Road 61 62 62 0.
ESH4 Essa Road 59 61 61 0.
ESH5 Essa Road 63 64 64 0.
ESH6 Essa Road 59 61 61 0.
ESH7 North ofEssa 71 72 72 0.
Road
ESH8 Dunlop Street 67 68 68 0.
DNA2 Dunlop Street 69 71 71 0.
DNHl Dunlon Street 67 69 71 2
DNH2 Dunlon Street 64 66 66 0.
DNH3 Dunlon Street 62 64 64 0.
DNH4 Dunlon Street 68 70. 72 2
DNH5 North of 67 68 68 0.
Dunlop Street
BAR I Bayfield Street 72 74 75 I
BAR2 Bavfield Street 66 67 71 4
BAR3 Bavfield Street 69 70. 71 I
BAR4 Bavfield Street 69 70. 71 1
BAR5 BavJ eld Street 67 68 68 0.
BAR6 BavJ leld Street 58 59 59 0.
BAR7 BavJ leld Street 71 72 72 0.
BAR8 B~eld Street 70. 71 72 I
BAR9 Bavfield Street 69 70. 71 I
BARIo. BaYfield Street 68 69 69 0.
BARIl Bavfield Street 66 67 67 0.
BARI2 Bavfield Street 59 60. 60. 0.
BAR 13 Bavfield Street 59 60. 60. 0.
BAR 14 Bavfield Street 60. 61 62 I
DKAI Duckworth. 70. 71 71 0.
Street
DKHl Duckworth 58 59 59 0.
Street
DKH2 North of 71 73 73 0.
Duckworth
Street
DKH3 North of 63 65 65 0.
Duckworth
Street
DKH4 North of 73 75 75 0.
Duckworth
Street
DKH5 North of 71 73 73 0.
Duckworth
Street
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NOISE BARRIER TO BE
CONSTRUCTED UNDER MTO
NOISE BARRIER RETROFIT
PROGRAM
LOCATION DOES NOT MEET
ALL MTO CRITERIA
FOR CONSTRUCTiON UNDER
RETROFIT PROGRAM
PROPOSED NOISE BARRIER
LIMITS (APPROXIMATE)
EXHI
400 PLAN
1 South
J at
89
6~
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
~ Ontario
Construction Noise
Numerous active farming operations are present along the right-of-way, but no
specific issues of potential environmental concern were noted at the farm properties.
However, farming operations typically include vehicle maintenance and refueling,
historical waste disposal and fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide storage. During detail
design, mitigation measures will be determined on a case-by-case basis where farm
properties are to be acquired and include the farm buildings (as opposed to fields).
Noise from construction activities, such as bulldozers and dump trucks, has the
potential to be noticeable, particularly if construction occurs outside of normal
weekday construction periods when ambient sound levels are lowest. Noticeable
noise effects from heavy equipment are typically limited to areas where residences
are in close proximity to the highway.
V ~ous mitigation measures are available to minimize noise impacts during
construction, including:
· Maintenance of mufflers and other noise reduction devices on heavy equipment;
· Enforce construction codes of practice and local municipal noise by-laws and
codes to provide means of limiting excessively noisy operations and equipment.
If required, noise by-law exemptions will be obtained prior to construction;
· Specify hours of operation during construction; and
· Monitor complaints on construction noise and investigate.
Mitigation measures to address construction noise concerns will be developed during
detail design.
6.2.10 Community Effects
Out-af-Way Travel
The realignment of Reive Road in the vicinity of the Highway 400/Highway 89
interchange will result in a minor increase in travel distance for vehicles destined for
Highway 400 (756 metres maximum out-of-way travel).
The closure of Rose Street to northbound Highway 400 will also result in increase
travel distance for vehicles destined to Highway 400 (approximately 1.5 Ian
maximum out-of-way travel). The Ministry will consider signage improvements in
the Highway 400 corridor to address the change in access.
Emerg~ncy Services
There is an O.P.P. station at the east end of Rose Street. The O.P.P. station is
proposed to be relocated in the future. Rose Street is a designated Emergency Detour
Route (EDR). Grove Street is a nearby parallel alternative, which could be
designated to maintain the continuity oftheEDR. MTO will continue to consult with
eme~gency service providers at subsequent design stages.
6.2.9 Property Waste and Contamination
Based on the waste and contamination and excess material assessment conducted,
there are commercial/industrial properties with known or high potential for waste and
contamination that may potentially be impacted by the proposed improvements to
Highway. All commercial/industrial properties affected by the proposed
improvements will need to be investigated for contamination. Based on the nature of
these sites, it is recommended that subsurface investigations be undertaken during
detail design. This investigation should include borings adjacent to the Highway 400
right-of-way at each of the properties. These borings should be reviewed by an
environmental consultant for evidence of subsurface gasoline and diesel
impact/contamination on these sites. As such, property-specific Phase 1
Environmental Site Assessments and limited Phase 2 Environmental Site
Assessments are recommended for lands to be acquired at these properties.
There were no environmental concerns observed within the right-of-way, with the
exception of the known Trichloroethylene (TCE) in the Highway 400 right-of-way,
south of the Tiffin Street overpass in the City of Barrie. Presence of TCE in the
Highway 400 right-of-way (ROW) was identified in a report published in January
1999. MTO is not responsible for causing the contamination. At the time this TESR
is being published, MTO is responding to an Order from the Ministry of
Environment (MOE) for the investigation and management of the TCE
contamination. Any future design and construction work in this area must take
account of this issue. The extent and nature of the ICE contamination will be
specifically investigated during detail design.
Snow Drift Areas
Areas'with potential for snowdrift occur at the following five locations:
· 800 metres north of Highway 89;
· 4th Line Road (Killamey Beach Road);
· South of Innisfil Beach Road;
· North ofInnisfil Beach Road; and
· South of 10th Line.
Drifting snow is a hazard for highway traffic and increases the potential for
collisions. Property will be required along the west side of the highway right-of-way
to provide sufficient area for snow drifting mitigation measures to be implemented.
Such measures include berms, fencing and/or tree plantings placed at a sufficient
distance from the Highway 400 lanes to allow drifting snow to accumulate. Property
required for snowdrift measures will be acquired in accordance with Sections 6.2.1
and 6.2.3 of this document.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 125 -
April 2004
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Commuter Parking Lots
There are three commuter parking lots within the study area at the following
locations:
· Highway 89, Southeast Quadrant - This commuter parking lot was closed to 6 3
commuters during site investigation. The commuter lot was in the process of ·
being expanded as part of Contract 2000-006. Proposed improvements include
increased capacity to 208 vehicles, and improved access to the SIE- W and EIW-
N ramps. A new commuter parking lot location is being recommended at
Highway 89, as part of this project.
. Innisfil Beach Road, Southwest Quadrant - A total of 155 vehicles were
observed during the September 2000 field investigation. This parking lot was
relocated along Industrial Park Drive in 2003 under Contract 2003-3006.
. Essa Road Interchange, Northwest Quadrant - A commuter parking lot is
located on the west side of Highway 400 along Ardagh Road. The parking lot
was filled to capacity during the September 2000 field investigation, in addition
to a number of vehicles parked in non-designated spaces. The existing
commuter parking lot will be maintained. The Ministry will continue to examine
an additional or replacement location for a commuter parking lot at this location.
As development along the Highway 400 corridor continues, opportunities may arise
for new commuter parking lot locations and assessment of commuter parking lot
locations identified by this study could change significantly. The Ministry of
Transportation will continue to work with landowners as much as possible to identify
and implement commuter parking lot locations along the entire corridor, which can
be implemented with as little impact/disruption as possible, while meeting capacity
and operational requirements.
6.2.11 Aesthetics
The proposed improvements to Highway 400 will result in minor changes to the
existing aesthetic quality of the vegetation cover along the study corridor.
The following measures will be implemented to mitigate the aesthetic qualities of the
highway through this area: .
. Keeping vegetation removals to a minimum; and
. Undertaking post-construction landscape planning and berming where
possible/appropriate.
City of Barrie Landscaping Agreements
. There are legal agreements between the City of Barrie and owners of private
properties within the study area that include provisions for landscaped areas or
plantings on the private lands. With involvement from the City of Barrie, the
Ministry is committed to providing/replacing landscaping where possible. The
provision of landscaping will depend on the right-of-way width as the existing
and proposed Highway 400 right-of-way widths vary. A landscaping plan will
be developed during detail design.
Cultural Environment
6.3.1 Archaeological Resources
During the Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment for the existing Highway 400 right-
of-way and associated interchange land, it was determined that no archaeological
sites are located in the limits of the study area. However, based on the extent of
settlement in the vicinity of the study area, it may be concluded that there is potential
for identification of historic archaeological material within the subject property.
The intensity of historic land use, the close proximity of archaeological sites and the
proximity of the subject property to Lake Simcoe and the numerous creeks and rivers
are indicators that the region maintains potential for archaeological resources.
Further investigation will offer additional information valuable to the history of the
regIon.
In light of this, the following measures will be undertaken at subsequent .gtages of
this project:
. Prior to any land disturbance, all lands currently under or formerly under
agricultural production should be subjected to a Stage 2 archaeological
assessment in accordance with the Stage 1-3 archaeological technical guidelines
provided by the Ministry of Culture (formerly the Ministry of Tourism, Culture
and Recreation). All land should be ploughed and allowed to weather through at
least one significant rainfall, then pedestrian surveyed at five metre intervals to
facilitate the recovery of archaeological material;
. Woodlots or areas containing scrub brush should be test pitted at five metre
intervals. All test pits must be excavated to sub-soil and the material screened
through six metre mesh to facilitate the recovery of small artifacts;
. Should deeply buried archaeological remains be found on the property during
construction activities, the Heritage Operations Unit of the Ministry of Culture
(MTC) should be notified immediately;
. In the event that human remains are encountered during construction, the
proponent should immediately contact both MTC and the Registrar or Deputy
Registrar of the Cemeteries Regulation Unit of the Ministry of Consumer and
Commercial Relations at (416) 326-8392; and
. Additional lands beyond the proposed right-of-way required for the construction
of temporary facilities (staging areas, storage areas, access roads etc.), will be
subject to archaeological assessment during detail design.
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 126 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(i) Ontario
6.3.2 Built Heritage Features
Based on available mapping of the study area and field investigations undertaken in
September 2000, 41 built heritage and cultural landscape features within
approximately 500 metres from the right-of-way of Highway 400 were identified.
From a built heritage and cultural landscape perspective, there are very little key
cultural features within the Highway 400 corridor including churches, cemetery, fann
complexes and bridge overpasses. Widening of the Highway 400 corridor is not
anticipated to result in significant impacts to these cultural resources. A summary of
impacts to built heritage and cultural landscape features is provided in Table 6.3.
Table 6.3 Impacts to Built Heritage" Cultural Landscapes
RESOURCE DESCRIPTION LOCATION IMPACT
TYPE
CLU I Roadscape 6th Line east and west ofHwy 400, Disruption (property
road passes under Hwy 400. Photo 1- acquired at south end)
17.
CLU2 Fonner farm Molson Park, Bayview Ave., north of Disruption (land
complex Molson Park Drive, City of Barrie, east acquisition)
ofHwv 400. Photo 1-21, 1-22.
BHF I Concrete underpass, Sta. 10+000 Displacement
built 1951 4th Line/Churchill Sideroad Underpass (removal)
(MTO 30-212) over Hwy 400, City of
Barrie Pots 1-9 l-lO
BHF2 Concrete underpass Sta. 11+147 Displacement
built 1951 Hwy. 90IDunlop Street Bridge (MTO (removal)
Site 30-175) over Hwy 400, City of
Barrie. Photo 1-23.
BHF3 Residence 105 Edgehill Drive, City of Barrie. Disruption (some
Photo 2-14. land acquisition)
BHF4 Concrete underpass, Sta. II +827 Displacement
built 1951 Anne Street Underpass (MTO 30-347) (removal)
Hwy 400, City of Barrie. No photo.
BHF5 Concrete underpass, Sta. 12+ 648 Displacement
built 1951 Sunnidale Road Underpass (MTO Site (removal)
30-173) Hwy 400, City of Barrie. No
Dhoto.
BHF6 Concrete Underpass Sta. 13+50 I Displacement
built 1951 Bayfield Street Underpass (MTO 30- (removal)
172) Hwy 400, City of Barrie. No
Dhoto.
The proposed configuration of the Innisfil Beach Road interchange will impact a
fann complex (located north of Innisfil Beach Road and west of Highway 400) with
potential cultural landscape significance. The nature of the impact to this cultural
landscape unit is visual in nature and is not expected to be significant. To mitigate
negative aesthetic impacts at the Innisfil Beach Road interchange, a landscape plan
will be developed during the detail design phase of this project.
Three underpass structures dating from the original construction of the Barrie section
of Highway 400 in 1951 were identified as being of some heritage value. They
include: the relatively unaltered Fourth Line underpass, which was built as a rigid
frame concrete structure with provincial coat-of-anns on both sides; and the
6.4
Sunnidale and Bayfield underpasses, both constructed as composite steel and
concrete rigid frame structures with provincial coat-of-anns. The Sunnidale Road
bridge has undergone other alterations to the deck and side barriers while the
Bayfield Street underpass has been significantly altered. The Dunlop Street and Anne
Street underpasses were built later. The Dunlop underpass has a metal substructure
and concrete deck without decorative coat-of-anns.. The Anne Street underpass is a
concrete structure without any decorative coats-of-anns.
The roadscape of the 6th Line is a rural gravel road that runs east-west under
Highway 400. A former 19th century fann complex.includes a one and-a-half storey
dichromatic brick farmhouse and barn. on the east side of Highway 400 in Molson's
Park, Barrie.
There are no locally identified properties, Ontario Heritage Foundation easement
properties, federally recognized properties or cemeteries impacted by the technically
preferred alternative.
The principal impacts of the technically preferred improvements will be the
replacement of five underpasses built along Highway 400 in 1951: 4th Line/Churchill
Sideroad underpass; Anne Street underpass; Bayfield Street Underpass; Sunnidale
Road underpass; and the Dunlop Street underpass.
Other impacts will be property acquisition in the vicinity of the Molson Park
interchange that will affect the former farmhouse located to the east of Highway 400.
The design and construction of the new bridges may disrupt buildings in the vicinity
of the bridge replacements.
As a mitigation measure, the underpasses will be photographically documented
before demolition. ~ h~ritage documentation report will be prepared for the
appropriate municipality and the Ministry of Culture (MCL). Depending upon their
condition, the provincial coat-of-anns on the Fourth Line underpass could be reused
on the replacement underpasses. Consideration should be given to incorporating new
cast provincial coats of ann as part of the replacement bridge design. The cast can be
made of fibre glass and used in the construction of the new bridges. Two casts should
be made with one as a backup. Prior to demolition, the Fourth Line, Sunnidale,
Bayfield, Dunlop underpasses and Anne Street bridges should be documented
photographically. An interpretive plaque high1ight~ng the history of the bridge
structures over the Highway 400 corridor should be considered.
The photography will be completed in black and white accompanied with a photo
key plan. All elevations are to be photographed along with extant coat of annsand
any structural features of note. The bridge context will be documented and the bridge
location mapped.
Summary of Environmental Effects and Mitigation
Commitments for mitigation to address specific concerns with the selected alternative are listed
in Table 6.4.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
- 127 -
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Table 6.4 Summary of Environmental Concerns and Commitments to Future Work
@ Ontario
I
I
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNED
ID# ELEMENT/CONCERN AND ID# MITIGATION/COMMITMENTS TO FUTURE WORK
POTENTIAL IMPACT AGENCIES
1.0 Hydrogeology - Impacts to existing MNRlMTO/ 101 . A Stonnwater Management Plan will be developed which i!1cludes the creation of ponds and ditches designed to promote infiltration that will address the minor impacts to
wells and groundwater discharge / Property groundwater recharge function in Vegetation Community 9 at Station 23+400, north of Tenth Line in the Town of Innisfil;
recharge areas being affected. Owners 102 . A realignment ofthe stream channel between S~. 12+295 and 13+080, south of Fourth Line in the Town ofInnisfil will be constructed at the base of the drumlin features
103 matching as closely as possible to the existing elevations to maintain groundwater discharges to the stream system;
. A review of wells in the vicinity of significant earth cuts will be undertaken as appropriate during detail design to detennine pre-construction well conditions (i.e. baseline water
quality and quantity data);
104 . It is anticipated that any recharge lost to impenneable surfaces will, in part, be mitigated by direction of runoff to ditches where some additional recharge, above what is
currently occurring, can be anticipated. Impacts to sensitive recharge areas will be further examined during detail design and appropriate mitigation will be developed as
necessary.
105 . Opportunities to address potential impacts associated with deicing salt application will be addressed as a part of the Ministris ongoing review of environmental standards of
practice; and
106 . The risk of spillage will be minimized and managed through standard practices of not pennitting contractors to refuel or maintain vehicles in a manner, which would pennit
entry of spilled fuels into penneable grounds surfaces or water sources. Refueling operations in proximity to shallow wells in areas of relatively high water table such as the
northern and southern portions of the study area and the Camp Borden sand plain area are potentially most susceptible to fuel impacts and will not be pennitted. In addition, an
emer!!:encv resoonse plan must be in olace to address accidental releases.
2.0 Aquatic Features - Protection and TRCA/MNR/ 201 . No in-water work from March 15 to June 30 (warmwater);
enhancement of fish and aquatic MTO 202 . No in-water work from September I to June I (coldwater);
habitats and species. 203 . Implement an erosion and sediment control plan with typical mitigation measures including sediment fences, check dams andlor straw bales in affected drainages and re-
vegetation of exposed soils within a maximum of 45 days of the start of grading. On steeper slopes, geotextiles should be used to enhance slope stability and the growth of the
vegetation. An Environmental Inspector will be employed to monitor the success of the sediment and erosion control methods used and to provide guidance on maintenance
requirements. Sediment and erosion controls will remain in place and maintained until such time as the vegetation has taken sufficiently to provide adequate protection for the
watercourses;
204 . Stockpiles will be located and isolated to ensure material will not enter any watercourse;
205 . All culvert work will be isolated from stream flows;
206 . All dewatering and flow diversion must be conducted in a manner that prevents sedimentation;
207 . Areas for refueling of macnmery will be located well away from any watercourse or drainage ditch;
208 . All construction debris and litter will be removed frequently. Stockpiles will not be pennitted within the regulatory floodplain. All stockpiles will be removed upon completion
of the works and the site restored, as appropriate;
209 . Where instream works.are taking place, flows shall be maintained and without excessive sedimentation or erosion. Flows may be diverted by piping or damming and pumping
for short duration. In the event temporary channel bypass measures are required in areas known to contain fish species, all fish would be removed and transplanted upstream of
construction activities prior.to channel dewatering;
210 . An Environmental Inspector with a natural channel or biological background and construction experience should be employed for all instream works on pennanent watercourses
to ensure that mitigation and compensation measures are implemented as designed;
211 . See details in Section 6.1.2 for details of soecific mitil2ation measures at individual fish habitat crossin!!:s.
3.0 Vegetation, Wetlands, Areas of MNR/MTO/ 301 . Leave vegetation on newly acquired right-of-way wherever possible to reduce loss of native vegetation;
Natural and Scientific Interest Property 302 . Use a selective vegetation removal strategy to ensure that the disturbed area is only as large as required to complete the platfonn widening;
(ANSI) - Vegetation protection and Owners 303 . Any trees that must be cut that are suitable for fish habitat compensation measures will be stockpiled and used for such works;
restoration. 304 . Individual trees of significant value (i.e. Black Walnut) shall be marked for retention wherever possible;
305 . All exposed soils will be re-vegetated immediately following the completion of the required work and the final grade has been established. All seeded areas shall be inspected at
30,60 and 90 days after seeding to ensure success of the seed mix and cover application as per Seeding and Cover Quality Assurance Visual Inspection Field Guide (MTO
1999);
306 . Stockpiled soils and other materials will be located outside of vegetated areas;
307 . Those areas not successfully meeting the perfonnance measures will be re-seeded and subject to a further 90-day inspection cycle;
308 . Plant native trees and shrubs where possible to contribute to slope stabilization, naturalize right-of-way and provide linkage between isolated vegetation communities; and
309 . Plant reolacement Black Walnut trees to comoensate for those lost.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 128 -
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
Table 6.4 Summary of Environmental Concerns and Commitments to Future Work (continued)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNED
ID# ELEMENT/CONCERN AND AGENCIES ID# MITIGATION/COMMITMENTS TO FUTURE WORK
POTENTIAL IMPACT
4.0 Significant Wetlands - Loss of MNRlMTO 401 . A Stormwater Management and Drainage Plan will address impacts related to lost flood storage areas, changes in drainage and impacts to fill-regulated areas by implementing
flood storage and attenuation areas stormwater management practices (SWMP's) such as wet ponds, dry ponds, constructed wetlands and underground storage tanks; infiltration SWMP's such as infiltration
basins, infiltration trenches, sand filters and porous, vegetative SWMP's such as buffer strips, grassed swales and filter strips.
. To minimize direct impacts to wetland areas, mitigation measures may include, but not be limited to batTier fencing at the toe offill embankments, careful placement offill to
minimize disturbance beyond the fill footprint and use of sediment and erosion control measures (i.e. silt fencing, straw bale etc.).
. Additional investigations will be undertaken in consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources during later design stages to identify specific wetland habitat values
impacted bv the recommended plan.
5.0 Significant Wildlife - Wildlife MNRlMTO 501 . Use selective vegetation removal strategies to ensure the disturbed area is only as large as required to complete the platform widening; and
Linkage/Corridor 502 . Planting native conifers within the right-of-wav, where possible to provide linkages between isolated forested deer wintering areas.
6.0 Erosion Control - To minimize the MNRlMTO 601 . Limit the time slopes are exposed prior to stabilization to 45 days from commencement of grading. Use erosion blankets on steeper slopes to enhance slope stability; and
potential for erosion of newly 602 . Employ sediment fences and check dams where appropriate.
exposed cut and fill slopes.
7.0 Storm water Management MTO/MNR 701 . Flat-bottomed grassed swales where design criteria can be met;
702 . Plunge pools be placed at the downstream ends of all culverts with watercourses that support warmwater fish habitat;
703 . Storm sewers outlet to the highway ditches, instead of within culverts, with plunge pools placed at all storm sewer outlets;.
704 . Additional enhanced ditches along critical highway areas;
705 . Seven water quality control wet ponds/wetlands;
706 . Localized erosion control measure; and
707 . As the Highway 400 improvements and the City's Master Drainage Plans advance to later design and construction stages, MTO will work with the City ofBatTie to provide
assistance to the extent possible under MTO's mandate in achieving the City's objectives pertaining to spills between watersheds. Achieving these objectives may require
upgrades to the MTO conveyance structures above and bevond those that are identified in this Draina!!e and Hvdrology Report.
8.0 Air Quality MTO 801 . Open burning will not be pennitted; and
802 . Application of calcium chloride flakes and/or water to reduce dust.
9.0 Aesthetics - Impacts to vegetative MTOlProperty 901 . Keeping vegetation removal to a minimum;
screening Owners 902 . Undertaking post-construction landscape planning and berming where possible/appropriate;
903 . There are legal agreements between the City ofBatTie and owners of private properties within the study area that include provisions for landscaped areas or plantings on the
private lands. With involvement from the City of BatTie, the Ministry is committed to providing/replacing landscaping whet:'e possible. The provision of landscaping will depend
on the right-of-wav width as the existin!! and nronosed Hi!!hwav 400 ri!!ht-of-wav widths Vary. A landscaping plan will be developed durin!! detail desi!:!:n.
10.0 Agricultural MTO 1001 . Replace fences removed during construction;
1002 . For areas that are used on a temporary basis for construction, all reasonable attempts will be made to restore the lands to current conditions in consultation with the affected
agricultural operator; and
1003 . Property impacts will be addressed as identified in Section 6.2.4 (refer to 10 # 120n
Il.O Noise - Construction related noise. MTO 1101 . Maintenance of mufflers and other noise reduction devices on heavy equipment;
1102 . Enforce construction codes of practice and local municipal noise by-laws and codes to provide means oflimiting excessively noisy operations and equipment. If required, noise
by-law exemptions will be obtained prior to construction;
1103 . Specify hours of operation during construction; and
1104 . Monitor complaints on construction noise and investigate.
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 129 -
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Table 6.4 Summary of Environmental Concerns and Commitments to Future Work (continued)
@ Ontario
I
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNED
ID# ELEMENT/CONCERN AND ID# MITIGATION/COMMITMENTS TO FUTURE WORK
POTENTIAL IMPACT AGENCIES
12.0 Property Requirements MTO/ 1201 . Compensation will be provided for residential, commercial and agricultural property impacts. For permanent property taking, compensation will be provided at fair market
Property value, which is determined at the time of purchase by a property appraisal report forming the basis for negotiations. Other ancillary costs are negotiated on a case-by-case basis.
owner Compensation will also be provided with respect to temporary property requirements. Upon completion of construction, temporary property will be returned to the owner. All
reasonable attemDts will be made to restore the land to its original condition.
13.0 Out-of-Way Travel- Realignment MTO / Local 1301 . The Ministry will consider signage improvements in the Highway 400 corridor to address the change in access at a later design stage.
ofReive Road and closure of Rose Residents 1302 . Rose Street services on O.P.P. station, which is proposed to be relocated in the future. Rose Street is an emergency detour route, however Grove Street is a nearby parallel
Street to northbound Highway 400 alternative, which could be designated to maintain the continuity of the emergency services. MTO will continue to consult with emergency service providers at subsequent
will result in increased travel for design stages.
vehicles destined to Highwav 400.
14.0 Snow Drift - Areas with potential for. 1401 . Property will be required along the west side of the highway right-of-way to provide sufficient area for snow drifting mitigation measures to ~e implemented. Such measures
snowdrift occur at: 800 metres north include berms, fencing andlor tree plantings placed at a sufficient distance from the Highway 400 lanes to allow drifting snow to accumulate. Property required for snowdrift
of Highway 89; 4th Line Road measures will be acquired in accordance with Sections 6.2.4 of this document.
(KilIarney Beach Road); South of
Innisfil Beach Road; North of Innisfil
Beach Road; and South of 10th Line.
15.0 Future Development MTO / Local 1501 . Opportunities to minimize potential .
Residents . property impacts associated with the realignment of Reive Road,;
. potential impacts to the future development proposed for the northwest and southwest quadrants of the Innisfil Beach Road interchange;
. potential impacts to future developm~nts proposed for the southwest quadrant of the Duckworth Street interchange; and
. potential impacts to the developable lands of the former horse racing track in the northeast quadrant of the Essa Road interchange will be reviewed during detail design
in consultation with affected Darties and the aDDroDriate municiDalitv.
16.0 Mana!!ement of Excess Material MTO 1601 . DisDosal of excess material is controlled bv a sDecial Drovision in the contract.
17.0 Property Waste and MTO 1701 . Property-specific Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments and limited Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessments will be undertaken as necessary for lands to be acquired in
Contamination areas of potential for contamination;
1702 . Any future design and construction work near the Trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination (groundwater plume) identified within the highway right-of-way in the vicinity of
Tiffm Street, must take account of this issue; The extent and nature of the TCE impacted groundwater plume will be specifically investigated during detail design, to address
health and safety and the potential generation of soil and groundwater waste; and
1703 . With respect to active farming operations, where farm properties are to be acquired that include the farm buildings (as opposed to fields), then the properties will be assessed on
a case-by-case basis.
18.0 Heritage Resources MTO 1801 . Bridge assessment forms will be completed during detail design for the heritage bridges to be replaced;
1802 . Underpasses will be photographically docUIl1ented before demolition. A heritage documentation report will be prepared for the appropriate municipality and the Ministry of
Culture (MCL);
1803 . Retaining the Coat of Arms panels structure on the overpass structures for use on the new bridge; and
1804 . A landscaDe Dlan will be develoDed durin!! the detail deshm phase to minimize imDacts.
19.0 Archaeological Resources MTO 1901 . Prior to any land disturbance, all lands currently under or formerly under agricultural production should be subjected to a Stage 2 archaeological assessment in accordance with
the Stage 1-3 archaeological technical guidelines provided by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation (MTCR). All land should be ploughed and allowed to weather
through at least one significant rainfall, then pedestrian surveyed at 5 metres intervals to facilitate the recovery of archaeological material;
1902 . Woodlots or areas containing scrub brush should be test pitted at 5 metres intervals. All test pits must be excavated to sub-soil and the material screened through 6-metre mesh
to facilitate the recovery of small artifacts;
1903 . Should deeply buried archaeological remains be found on the property during construction activities, the Heritage Operations Unit of the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and
Recreation (MTCR) should be notified immediately;
1904 . In the event that human remains are encountered during construction, the proponent should immediately contact both MTCR and the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the
Cemeteries Regulation Unit of the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations (416) 326-8392; and
1905 . Additional lands beyond the proposed right-of-way required for the construction of temporary facilities (staging areas, storage areas, access roads etc), will be subject to
archaeolo!!ical assessment durin!! detail deshm.
20.0 Commuter Parking Lots MTO 2001 . The Ministry of Transportation will continue to work with landowners as much as possible to identifY and implement commuter parking lot locations along the entire corridor,
which can be implemented with as little impact/disruption as possible, while meeting capacity and operational requirements. Specific locations to be investigated include the
Highwav 89 and Essa Road interchan!!es.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
- 130 -
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-o0
@ Ontario
6.6.1 Socio-Economic Environment
6.5 Future Consultation
6.5.1 Agency Consultation
Property and Waste Contamination
· . Property-specific Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments and limited Phase 2
Environmental Site Assessments will be undertaken as necessary for lands to be
acquired in areas of potential for contamination;
· Any future design and construction work near the Trichloroethylene (TCE)
contamination (groundwater plume) identified within the highway right-of-way
in the vicinity of Tiffm Street, must take account of this issue. The extent and
nature of the TCE impacted groundwater plume will be specifically investigated
during detail design; and
· With respect to active farming operations, where farm properties are to be
acquired that include the farm buildings (as opposed to fields), then the
properties will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
During the detail design phase of this project, the Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources (MNR) and the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans will be
consulted regarding the Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction (HADD) of
fish habitat associated with the proposed improvements (approvals under Section 35
of the Federal Fisheries Act). Detailed mitigation measures and the need for fish
habitat compensation will be detennined at that time.
At a minimum, the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Simcoe County
Federation of Agriculture, and Ontario Federation of Agriculture will be consulted
regarding the proposed improvements during detail design.
6.5.2 Municipal Consultation
Noise
The Project Team will arrange meetings during detail design to discuss impacts of
the project (i.e. future development, emergency services, drainage and hydrology)
and the. recommended ~mitigation measures with the Town of Bradford West
Gwillimbury, Town of Innisfil, City of Barrie, Township of Springwater and the
County of Simcoe.
· As part of scheduling the planned highway improvements, ministry staff will
review each of the noise barrier locations and detennine whether it would be
technically feasible to construct the noise barriers in advance of the Highway 400
widening projects.
· Mitigation for construction noise will be developed during detail design.
6.5.3 Public Consultation
6.6.2 Cultural Environment
During detail design, there will be complementary' consultation activities (i.e.
infonnation sessions, individual meetings) made available to the public to consult on
the proposed improvements and detailed mitigation measures.
Archaeology Resources
· Prior to any land disturbance, all lands currently under or fonnerly under
agricultural production should be subjected to a Stage 2 archaeological
assessment in accordance with the Stage 1-3 archaeological technical guidelines
provided by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation (MTCR). Allland
should be ploughed and allowed to weather through at least one significant
rainfall, then pedestrian surveyed at 5 metre intervals to facilitate the recovery of .
archaeological material. Woodlots or areas containing scrub brush should be test
pitted at 5 metre intervals. All test pits must be excavated to sub-soil and the
material screened through 6-metre mesh to facilitate the recovery of small
artifacts.
6.6 Commitments to Future Work
Prior to detail design, further survey is required to provide an accurate Digital Terrain Model
(DTM), locate precise property lines and accurately tie-in all hard surfaces. Horizontal
alignment staking should be completed as part of this survey. In addition, geotechnical and
foundations work will be completed during detail design to confinn the feasibility of the
structural foundations. The following outlines commitments to future environmental work to be
undertaken at subsequent design stages of this project.
Built Heritage Features
· The proposed widening of Highway 400 will result in the widening and
replacement of the existing Dunlop Street, Anne Street, Sunnidale Road, and
Bayfield Street overpass structures, recognized as a built heritage feature. The
most significant characteristics from a cultural heritage perspective are the Coat
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 131 -
April 2004
URS
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 132 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
~ Ontario
of Arms panels on either side of the structures. Retaining the Coat of Arms
panels for use on the new structures is the preferred mitigation approach and this
option will be examined during detail design in consultation with appropriate
government agencies. In addition, bridge assessment forms will be completed
for these bridges during the detail design stage..
. The proposed configuration of the Innisfil Beach Road interchange will impact a
fann complex (located north of Innisfil Beach Road and west of Highway 400)
with potential cultural landscape significance. The nature of impact to this
cultural landscape unit is visual in nature and is not expected to be significant.
To mitigate negative aesthetic impacts at the Innisfil Beach Road interchange
within the Highway 400 corridor, a landscape plan will be developed during the
detail design phase of this project.
. Environmental monitoring, after a project is completed, may involve follow-up
monitoring of significant measures and lor significant concerns.
6.7.2 Project Specific Class EA Monitoring
During the planning and design stage, MTO ensures compliance with the Class EA
process before MTO issues "environmental clearance" for project implementation.
During cQnstruction, MTO ensures that external notification and consultations are
consistent with any commitments that may have been made earlier. Following
construction, monitoring will ensure that any follow-up information is provided to
external agencies as per any outstanding environmental commitments.
6.6.3 Utility Relocations
6.7.3 Implementation of Environmental Monitoring.
Framework
It is expected that utility relocations will be required for the construction of the
Highway 400 improvements. These may include Bell Canada, Hydro One, cable
television, the town of Innisfil and the City of Barrie.
It is recommended that all of these utilities be contacted early during detail design to
confirm plant location and discuss relocation strategies I cost sharing.
Inspection by Construction Staff
Construction is subject daily to general on-site inspection to ensure the execution of
the environmental component of the work and to deal with environmental problems
that develop during construction. This is the primary method for compliance
monitoring.
6.6.4 Design and Construction Report
During detail design, a Design and Construction Report will be prepared to provide
information for compliance and monitoring purposes and to document existing
conditions, potential impacts and mitigation measures. This report. will also
document how the commitments to future work identified in this Transportation
Environmental Study Report have been addressed.
Site Visits by Environmental Staff
Construction projects with significant mitigating measures I concerns are subject to
periodic site visits by consultant environmental staff. The timing and frequency of
such site visits are determined by the schedule of construction operations, the
sensitivity of environmental concerns and the development of any unforeseen
environmental problems during construction. MTO staff will be available should
difficulties arise.
6.7 Project Monitoring
6.7.1 Project Specific Technical Monitoring
During construction, MTO or its agent ensures that the implementation of the
mitigating measures and key design features are consistent with the contract. In
addition, MTO or its agent will assess the effectiveness of its environmental
mitigating measures to ensure the following:
. Individual mitigating measures are providing the expected control and/or
protection;
. Composite control and/or protection provided by mitigating measure is adequate;
. Additional mitigating measures are provided as required for any unanticipated
environmental conditions which may develop during construction;
· Information is available for the overview assessment of mitigating measures.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
7 APPLICATION OF CLASS EA PRINCIPLES AND
PROCESS
The planning and preliminary design of improvements to Highway 400 from 1 kIn south of Highway
89 northerly 30 kIn to the Junction at Highway 11 followed the study principles and process set forth
in the Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) for Provincial Transportation.Facilities (2000).
This section summarizes how the transportation engineering, environmental protection, external
consultation, evaluation, documentation, bump-up, and environmental clearance principles were met
through the study process undertaken for this project.
7.1 Transportation Engineering Principles
The transportation engineering principles set forth in the Class EA were addressed throughout
the course of this study. The improvements to this section of the Highway 400 corridor will
result in a highway that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods,
meets the needs of the traveling public, and addresses transportation problems and opportunities
by addressing existing and anticipated deficiencies on this section of the highway (refer to
Chapter 4). Throughout this project, sound engineering judgement was used to develop a design
that responded to the specific needs of the Highway 400 corridor. An analysis of the existing
and projected traffic volumes, collision records, highway geometrics and existing structures was
performed to determine where upgrades were required to meet or exceed current provincial
design standards and practices and to address future needs.
Various technically feasible design alternatives were evaluated and technically preferred
alternatives were selected for preliminary design (refer to Chapter 4). The selection of the
technically preferred alternatives was based on a number of factors that included~ minimizing
environmental impacts, minimizing property requirements and impacts to adjacent properties,
and providing the maximum transportation benefits for the lowest cost.
7.2 Environmental Protection Principles
The environmental protection principles described in the Class EA were addressed throughout
this study. Minimizing impacts to the environment was a guiding principle at .each stage of the
planning and preliminary design process. Design alternatives were evaluated, in part, on the
basis of potential environmental impacts.
In order to characterize baseline conditions, the existing natural and socio-economic
environments were inventoried and described and sensitive and significant features were
identified (refer to Chapter 3). Potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures were
identified and described (refer to Chapter 6). A strategy for monitoring the implementation of
environmental protection and mitigation measures is provided in Table 6.4.
This study has been conducted to meet the statutory duties and other requirements of federal and
provincial environmental legislation and to adhere to MTO's Statement of Environmental
Values. In some instances, transportation engineering considerations necessitate activities that
~ Ontario
would result in impacts to the environment. Appropriate and technically feasible mitigation
measures were recommended where such impacts were unavoidable.
Liaison between members of the transportation engineering and environmental teams was an
essential component of the study process. This ensured a balance between transportation
engineering and environmenta:1 considerations and allowed the development of reasonable and
technically feasible solutions on those instances where environmental impacts would not be
avoided entirely.
7.3 External Consultation Principles
The external consultation principles outlined in the Class EA were addressed through the
external and public consultation process described in Section 2.5 of this report. An initial
notification letter advising of study commencement was distributed to external stakeholders on
the Project Team's mailing list. Two rounds of Public Information Centres (PICs) were held for
this project to provide an opportunity for the public and agencies to provide input. The PICs
were scheduled at key stages of the project, namely the generation of alternatives stage,
evaluation of alternatives and selection of the preferred alternative stage. Both PICs were held
during the late afternoon/early evening for convenience to stakeholders and were held at the
Stroud Arena, Innisfil School and Barrie Holiday Inn. A public notice ("Notice of Public
Information Centre") was placed in the Barrie Advance, Barrie Examiner, Innisfil Scope and
Toronto Star for each PIC. The consultant project manager's contact information was' provided
in the notices for those who were unable to attend the information centre.
Consultation with the public and external agencies was used to obtain information regarding the
study area, potential effect on external agency mandates as it pertains to. the project, and identify
issues and concerns. Comments raised by the public and external agencies were addressed
appropriately. Letters were prepared in response to specific concerns and the design features
were reviewed in light of comments received and incorporated appropriately. Issues and
concerns raised during consultation are outlined in Tables 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 and refinements to
the technically preferred alternative are outlined in Section 4.9. .
Meetings were held with the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, Town of Innisfil, Township
of Springwater, City of Barrie, County of Simcoe and District of Muskoka to identify issues and
concerns and seek endorsement on the proposed improvements. Meetings were also held with
the Ministry of Natural Resources, Lake Simcoe and Region Conservation Authority, and the
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority to discuss potential impacts to natural features,
stormwater management issues and to obtain agreement on mitigation measures to address
adverse environmental impacts.
The project team mailing list was continually updated throughout the project to ensure that all
individuals and external agencies were kept apprised of project activities.
7.4 Evaluation Principles
The evaluation principles outlined in the Class EA were addressed through the analysis and
evaluation of alternative design as described in Section 4.5 of this report. The evaluation
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
-133- ~
Transportation Environmental Study Report - 134 -
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
process employed and consideration of all factors relevant to the decision-making process is
discussed in the Section 4.6 to 4.8. The evaluation method used in this study included a
combination of subjective reasoning and the evaluation of quantitative data. Alternatives were
evaluated based on their benefits/disadvantages to the natural environment, social environment,
cultural environment, economic environment, transportation considerations and cost.
~ Ontario
7.5 Documentation Principles
The documentation principles set forth in the Class EA were addressed through the preparation
of the TESR, which fulfills the content requirements outlined in the Class EA. This document
provides a summary of the need and justification for the proposed undertaking, outlines existing
environmental conditions, identifies the significant features of the preferred alternative,
identifies potential environmental impacts and appropriate mitigation measures, and summarizes
the consultation process employed throughout this study.' .
7.6 Bump-up Principles
The bump-up principles identified in the Class EA will be addressed upon submission of the
TESR. A notice of study completion that explains the study process and the bump-up
opportunity will be published in the Barrie Advance, Barrie Examiner, Innisfil Scope and
Toronto Star and letters will be directly sent to those on the project team's mailing list upon
submission of the TESR. Following the publication of the notice of study completion, the
TESR will be available for public review for a period of 30 days. No construction activities can
commence until bump-up request (if any) have been dealt with.
7.7 Environmental Clearance Principles to Proceed
This project has followed the study principles and processes set forth in the Class
Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The environmental
clearance for this project to proceed is subject to the following:
· No bump-up requests submitted during the 30-day TESR review period and all public and
external agency comments have been addressed.
· There are no outstanding issues related to the design of this project that prevent it from
proceeding.
If a bump-up request is received, the decision rests with the Minister of the Environment on
whether the project complies with the requirements of the Class EA.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
A
E....N..
,,'.~~ . ; ;
~.." .1:
I'XA
~ "">,, Jc
,'7 ,c"
..:..... ....) .:..
. '. <>
.....~, .... ..!i .......
CORRESPONDENCE
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
/),:;. : -4-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ 11/ '.: i)!'~
,~\:yL (
)lt~ '~'
'--~~'
""~@'~REq1!J:qrYj "
CITY HALL
70 COLLIER STREET
TEL (705) 739-4207
FAX. (705) 739-4247
P.O. BOX 400
BARRIE, ONTARIO
L4M 4TS
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
COMMUNITY SERVJCES
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
"Committed to Total Service Excellence"
October 7, 2003
T05-HI
",'.;,.- ..>
>c'='o'-l
~)...r;n. \I
1:'_",,'.1 . ,
I'\IIAZ i
t:.WoiI' \
I
I
i
j
URS Cole Sherman
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario
L3T 7N9
QCT 15
Attention:
L. Kozachuk, Project Manger
..
Dear Sir:
\
\
:- --~----
Re:
Drainage and Hydrology Report "Highway 400 - Highway 89 to Highway 11"
Thank you for your letter dated August 26, 2003, responding to our concerns listed in our letter dated
June 3, 2003. Mr. Art Groenveld, Senior Drainage Engineer, MTO, St. Catharines, has advised us that
he has recommended that the MTO adopt Hurricane Hazel as the Regional Storm Event in Barrie, as
recommended by the MNR, and that spills between watersheds be eliminated. Comments received from
the MTO on August 26, 2003, were added in bullet form. Our acceptance of the proposed resolution, or
counter proposal for each item, has been itemized in "bold italics".
1. Page #1- Section 2.0 -"Study Area." Reference is made to the County of Springwater. This
should be revised to indicate Township of Springwater. The study area would also appear to
include the Township of Oro/Medonte at the northerly limit of the project.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Summary Response Limits to be confirmed at the detailed design phase. Drainage and
hydrology report(s), produced during detailed design, will reflect the proper names of
the adjacent municipalities.
This is a minor change which should be made at this time to avoid future confusion.
2. Page #2 - Section 2.0 -"Study Area." The first paragraph should also indicate that runoff drains
into Little Lake and Willow Creek as it extends around the north end of the City of Barrie.
· Summary Response - Drainage patterns and catchments to be examined at the detailed
design phase when more detailed information is available.
Action Proposed - Drainage areas to be revised, as appropriate, during detail design
stage.
This is a minor change which should be made to avoid future confusion. Information is
available at this time.
BARRIE 150
SESQUICENtENNIAL' \ 853,21303
- (~ ~
-- ( -'.":.-
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
October 7,2003
-2-
3. Page #2 Section 3.1 -"Structural Report." The report would appear to only analyse 10% of the
existing culvert inventory within the project boundary. Also, the structural analysis did not
address any culverts located within the City of Barrie Boundaries. The report indicates that the
structural condition of the culverts inspected is identified as only being in fair condition. We
have concerns with the less than optimum conditions of the existing culverts inspected. These
structures, located in a rural area, would have much less aggressive environmental conditions
placed upon them than those within the City of Barrie. These Structures are +/- fifty (50) years
old and are nearing their life expectancy. It would only appear prudent to consider replacing
them to provide another 50+ years of service. In that regard, we would strongly recommend that
further structural investigation of alJ the culverts be undertaken.
· Summary Response - Decisions to replace or rehabilitate existing culverts are made by
MTO according to their criterion that includes structural integrity. Final decisions are
made at the detailed design stage.
Action Proposed - Culvert conditions to be investigated in detail design.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
· Summary Response - Structural inspection of culverts is only conducted for culverts
with >5m rise.
Action Proposed - None.
Given the age of the culverts, we recommend all culverts, regardless of size, be inspected at
detailed design stage and that this not he ruled out just based on the rise of the pipe.
4. Page #5 - Section 3.3 -"Watershed Studies." The list of watersheds that are within the City of
Barrie should not include Innisfil Creek, as this water course is not located within the City of
Barrie Boundaries.
· Summary Response - Innisfil Creek, while not within the City of Barrie, is in the
project study area and, as such, should be listed in Section 3.3.
Action Proposed - None.
Section 3.3 states that Innisfil Creek is within the City of Barrie. This item should be changed
to avoid future confusion.
5. Page #6 - Sections 3.3.b, c, d, e, f, g - "Watershed Studies". The City of Barrie is undertaking a
Master Drainage Study Update for the watercourses Identified from (c) to (g), with each study
including a Class Environmental Assessment. The Whiskey Creek (EA) document is scheduled
for public review in 2003. It should also be noted that the existing Whiskey Creek and
Hotchkiss Creek crossings produce hydraulic backwater conditions, adjacent to the highway
embankment. The Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan is tentatively scheduled to have a
public hearing in July or August of 2003, with the Master Drainage Plan document to follow by
October 2003. The Bunker's Creek EA document has been presented to the public, and the
Master Drainage Plan Report is proposed to be completed by June 2003. The Kidd's Creek EA
report has been presented to the public, and the Master Drainage Plan is proposed to be
completed by August 2003. A list of available information, related to the Master Drainage Plan
documents, within the City of Barrie, is attached. This information can be made available upon
request (release of digital data is subject to a signing of a Letter of Understanding).
Engmeering Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
October 7,2003
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS Cole Shennan
October 7,2003
URS Cole Shennan
-3-
-4-
. Summary Response When the URS report was completed and circulated to the City of
Barrie, in January 2003, watershed study infonnation was current.
Action Proposed During detail design, the most current watershed studies within the
City of Bame are to be reviewed.
· Action Proposed Report to be revised, if necessary, upon review of Master Dramage
Plan.
The City of Barrie's Master Drainage Plans for the various watersheds include the
consultation/resolution of concerns with the MTO. We need a clear direction from the MTO
stating which alternatives are preferred under the Municipal Class EA process for the Kidd's
Creek, Dyment's Creek and Jf7tiskey Creek watersheds. Watershed information available, as
of January 2003, was not used (see Item 7). We request that the MTO provide input into a
preferred alternative for the Kidd's Creek MDP.
The MTO Summary Response for Item 5 states that URS used current watershed study
information for the City of Barrie available as of January 2003. The Sophia Creek MDP was
completed and adopted in February 2002. Please revise.
6. Page #7 - Section 3.3 g.-" Kidd's Creek Culverts, #77 and #78". The City of Barrie's Kidd's
Creek EA document indicates that this creek is a cold water fish habitat. In that regard, the
drainage report should be revised to identify this important issue. It should be noted that the
City of Barrie has concerns with the Kidd's Creek regional stonn spil1 southerly to Bunker's
Creek. Bunker's Creek has existing serious capacity problems downstream, and this potential
spi11 would only further increase the damages on the watershed. Also, Culvert #77 is located
within the Bunker's Creek Watershed, and should be identified under item (f) of the document.
8. Section 5.0 - "Proposed Conditions". The document identifies that the section of the project,
located between the interchanges of Highway 89 and Essa Road, wi11 be moved westerly to
preserve the east edge of asphalt. This road alignment could impact upon an existing
Stonnwater Management Facility, located south of Molson Park Drive. This facility provides
pre to post runoff controls for development adjacent to the west side of the highway. The loss or
alteration of this facility could impact upon the capacity of the highway crossing and the
watershed downstream. It is our understanding that the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation
Authority, the Ministry of the Environment, and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation provided
the review and approval of the facility at the time the project was developed; therefore, you may
wish to investigate the Ministry files to ensure that there are no negative impacts upon this
facility when the highway is expanded.
. Summary Response - The Natural Sciences Investigation indicates that the station
sampled did not result in any coldwater species, and the negative impacts on the thennal
regime by the Sunnidale Detention Pond compromises the coldwater properties.
Action Proposed - Preliminary Report will be revised to reflect Kidd's Creek as a
coldwater habitat that will change the in-water timing restrictions.
· Summary Response URS has confinned that proposed widening does not affect the
existing SWMF
Action Proposed - The location of the existing SWMF is to be noted.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
Sunnidale Pond was designed as a "dry pond". Thermal effects are minimal in dry ponds. A
beaver pond has recently created a temporary pool close to the outlet of Sunnidale Pond.
9. Page #11 - Table #4 - "Comparison of Existing and Future Pavement Areas". In respect to the
culverts located within the City of Barrie, Culverts #64 to 85, could you please provide a copy of
the background drainage plan that identifies the existing and future pavement area for each
culvert.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
. Summary Response - The spill to Bunker's Creek is an existing drainage condition.
Proposed improvements by the MTO would not increase flooding or spi11s over existing
levels and therefore satisfy the MTO criteria.
Action Proposed - None.
. Summary Response - Pavement Areas are calculated using existing and proposed cross-
sections not by CADD methods. Plans of the proposed improvements were provided to
the City of Barrie previously.
Action Proposed - pavement area calculations or plans developed during detail design
may be provided to the City.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
No detention facilities were proposed by URS in this area to detain the additional run-off
from the proposed highway widening. The proposed highway widening would therefore
increase the spill problems from Kidd's Creek to Bunker's Creek. There has been no
commitment by the MTO to any of the proposed alternatives identified in the Kidd's Creek
Class EA which could address this issue. Please advise which alternative the MTO prefers for
the Kidd's Creek Class EA or how it intends to prevent spills into Bunker's Creek.
Plans previously provided do not provide sufficient information to use in checking pavement
area calculations. We request that this information be provided at this time.
Action Proposed.- Culvert #77 to be shown within Bunker's Creek Watershed.
10. Page #12 - Section 6.1 - "Hydraulic Criteria". As noted in our meeting, the Highway 400
Corridor is considered a vital route to Central and Northern Ontario for emergency and
transportation services. The Ministry Directive, note (3), indicates that the criteria may be
modified to maintain these vital routes during regional flood conditions. Also, in respect to the
Kidd's Creek, Bunker's Creek and Dyment's Creek crossings, the regional storm flows will spill
to adjacent watersheds along the highway, not only affecting the traffic functions but also the
affected watersheds. As noted in the City of Barrie's EA documents for these crossings, and the
public infonnation meetings that have occurred, City of Barrie staff and the general public have
supported the recommendation of no drainage overtopping on the road surface of the highway.
It also has been the understanding of the City of Barrie that pennitting the spil1 of floodwaters to
adjacent watersheds would be in contravention of the Provincial Flood Plain Policy Statement,
and would not satisfy the design criteria set by the MTO. In that regard, it is recommended that
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
7. Page #8 - Section 3.3 h. - "Sophia Creek Culvert #79". The Sophia Creek Master Drainage Plan
Update has been completed, and the document was adopted in February of 2002.
I
Engmeering Department
File: T05-HI
Engineermg Department
File: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
October 7, 2003
URS Cole Sherman
October 7, 2003
I
I
I
-5-
-6-
the design criteria for culvert crossings be reconsidered as the impacts of the proposed design
criteria may produce less than positive impacts.
· Summary Response - It is our understanding, based on discussions with MTO staff, that
Highway 400 is not deemed a "vital route" in terms of drainage criteria. Further
requests to designate Highway 400 as a "vital route" under Directive B-100 should be
directed to MTO Policy offences.
what design features are being implemented to account for fish passage and proper maintenance.
In addition to the maintenance issues, could you please clanfy what the hydraulic impacts of
these culvert extensions will have upon adjacent service road crossings such as Fairview Road,
Dyment Road, and Hart Drive.
I
I
Highway 400 i~ a continuous major road through Barrie in Central Ontario linking the GT A
to Northern Ontario, and if it is not deemed a vital route, we would like to request
clarification as to the definition of what constitutes a vital route. Please advise to whom we
should be speaking, to resolve (name, position, telephone, e-mail, address, etc.).
· Summary Response - As a general rule for MTO projects, culverts are to be embedded
at least 300 mm. Specific features for fish passage are developed at detailed design. In
addition, MTO implements a regular maintenance program for all its major culverts.
Action Proposed - Fish passage measures to be considered at detail design stage.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Summary Response - MTO criteria state that "If a drainage facility designed to the
criteria specified in the table would increase flooding of buildings of developable land
during a regional flood, the facility shall be designed to the regional flood criteria...".
For each creek within the City of Barrie, spil!s currently exist. Proposed improvements
by the MTO would not increase flooding or spills over existing levels and therefore
satisfy MTO criteria.
Action Proposed None.
· Summary Response - The hydraulic impacts of culvert extensions at service road
crossings such as Fairview Road, Dyment Road and Hart Drive will be analyzed during
the detailed design stages.
Action proposed - Culvert extensions at service road crossings such as Fairview Road,
Dyment Road and Hart Drive are to be analyzed for their impacts on adjacent lands at
the detail design stage.
The reduced hydraulic capacity resulting from the culvert extensions must be analyzed.
Not all creeks in Barrie have spills. Spills between drainage catchment areas are not good
engineering practise. We have the opportunity to fIX these existing problems through good
drainage engineering and planning. The effects of the MNR recommended regional storm,
Hurricane Hazel, was not considered in your study. Please review.
l3. Page #18 - Table #8 - "Culvert Peak Flow Summary". Upon reviewing the modelling supplied
with the report, and comparing the flows indicated on Table #8, there appears to be differences
in the pre and future condition flows. Please review and clarify.
11. Page #13 - Section 6.2 - "Stormwater Management Criteria". The City of Barrie recognizes the
limitations that the Ministry of Transportation has with regard to the provision of quantity and
quality control facilities in the highway corridor. In that regard, the City of Barrie would expect
mutual cooperation with regard to the cost sharing of construction, maintenance and liabilities of
downstream structure upgrades, associated with the increased hydraulic loading upon municipal
facilities where control facilities cannot be constructed.
· Summary Response - Model output matches with flows in Table #8. Please note that
Table #8 refers to flows within the culvert (ie. upstream drainage area, upstream RO.W.
and median) and is used for determined headwater levels. The model output also
contains a STANHYD command that accounts for downstream RO.W. drainage and is
used for pre and post development flow purposes.
Action Proposed - None.
· Summary Response - MTO's impact on water quantity and quality is not significant
enough to become involved in D/S SWM works.
Action Proposed - Further discussions of this nature should be held between the City
and MTO during detail design.
Otthymo flows found in Appendix "F" are typically higher than those reported in Table #8
for the ones we checked (Culverts #64 to #85). Please clarify this discrepancy.
The proposed highway widening is perpendicular to the natural drainage path. During the
construction phase, water quality will be reduced due to silt and chemicals. In the long term,
chemicals, petroleum products, and heavy metals due to automobile pollution will
contaminate water. Winter maintenance will result in chloride/sand run-off; summer
maintenance by the MTO may involve the use of herbicides, causing further deterioration in
water quality. We are suggesting that MTO adopt a proactive long range planning approach
in cooperation with the City of Barrie to resolve these issues. These concerns must be
addressed as part of the current study being undertaken by URS, and the MDP's being
undertaken by the City of Barrie and not left until the detailed design stage.
14. Page #19 - Section 8.2 - "Hydraulics". The City of Barrie's studies for Bunker's Creek and
Dyment's Creek, as well as Kidd's Creek, have identified that spills occur at these highway
crossings. Kidd's Creek will only spill during a regional event. These spills, however, will be
directing drainage from one watershed to another. It is our understanding, based upon the
criteria indicated by the MTO, that the 1: lOO year event is to be conveyed without overtopping
the highway surface or spilling to adjacent watersheds. Also, please advise us of the Ministry of
Natural Resources and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority's position regarding the
Ministry of Transportation's intentions to direct drainage from one watershed to another, as a
direct result of these conveyance limitations. It would appear that the study has made the
assumption that all the culverts are functiomng under inlet control conditions. The drainage
studies, undertaken by the City of Barrie that have been conducted on Whiskey Creek, (Culvert
#69), Dyment's Creek (Culvert #73), Bunker's Creek (Culvert #'s 74, 75, and 76), all function
under outlet control, which reduces the conveyance capacity of the structures. In that regard, we
would request that the above noted culverts be re-assessed. It should be noted as well that
culverts, located downstream from the spill, must account for the additional flows that are being
directed to its inlet.
12. Page #14 - Section 8.0 - "Culvert Analysis". As discussed in the meeting, the City of Barrie is
concerned with the increased length of the culvert structures. Please provide clarification as to
I
Engmeenng Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
I
URS Cole Shennan
October 7, 2003
URS Cole Shennan
October 7, 2003
-7-
-8-
I
. Summary Response - Spills at these crossings exist under current conditions (ie.
proposed improvements do not create these spills). Our analysis indicates that Highway
400 will not be overtopped during the 100 year event, therefore satisfying MTO criteria.
MTO improvements are destined to maintain the "status quo" condition.
Action Proposed - Hydraulic analysis will be revisited at detailed design. Criteria used
during this investigation will be applied during detail design subject to the direction of
MTO.
Our MDP has sometimes recommended solutions that incorporate the proposed highway
widening, as in the case with Kidd's Creek. We would like input from the MTO related to the
proposed alternatives identified in the Class EA. We cannot wait until the detailed design
phase to identify the MTO's preferred alternative. A response from the MTO is required.
I
Our analysis demonstrates that spills from Kidd's Creek occur during the Regional Storm
Event (Hurricane Hazel), to Bunker's Creek and subsequently Dyment's Creek, and also
shows that spills occur from Bunker's Creek to Dyment's Creek during the 100 year event.
We have proceeded with the Bunker's Creek and Dyment's Creek MDP's on the basis that
these inter-catchment spills would be eliminated by containing flows to within the historic
catchment boundaries. We need MTO support on thislnitiative. The City of Barrie cannot
wait for the detailed design stage to resolve this issue.
Summary Response - The Ministry of the Environment reviews the TESR document as
a whole, but generally does not conduct an individual review of the Drainage and
Hydrology rcport. The Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources
typically review drainage and hydrology issues for MTO projects.
Action Proposed None
I
I
Please advise whether the Conservation Authority and/or the Ministry of Natural Resources
have acknowledged and accepted the controls proposed.
I
Summary Re{Jonse - CulvertMaster v2.0 is a recognized program for the analysis of
culverts. The program analyzes culvert hydraulics under both inlet and outlet control
and selects the method which presents the "worse-case scenario".
Action Proposed - None.
16. Page #29 - Section 10.2 - "Impacts of Highway Widening". The watershed studies, being
undertaken by the City of Barrie, have all identified fish habitat in the watercourses that cross
Highway 400, specifically brook trout that are an indicator species for fish habitat. It would be
expected that the drainage study would address the potential impacts of water quantity and
quality, not only at the highway crossing but also downstream. The report, however, does not
address any existing deficient conditions that should also be corrected in addition to the
widening works.
I
I
Our concern is not with the program used for the analysis, but rather with the assumptions
that were used. On Page 19, Section 8.2 of the URs report, the tai/water elevation was
assumed to be 0.6 times culvert height. Our backwater analysis completed using HEc; as part
of our MDP's has found that the tailwater elevation is sometimes higher. Assumptions used
for tai/water elevation should be reviewed.
I
. Summary Response - Proposed improvements may lessen spills to adjacent watersheds
and presents an improvement over the current conditions.
Action Proposed - Hydrologiclhydraulic analysis may be revisited at detail design.
. Summary Response - While all of the watersheds contribute to fish habitat to some
extent, the Natural Sciences Investigation did not capture fish at all of the stations in the
study area. The watershed studies also indicate that fish were not captured in all reaches
because of degraded habitat or impassable sections (stonn sewers).
Action Proposed - The main concerns would be the preservation of base flows and
thermal regime. Mitigation measures to be considered at the Detail Design Stage to
minimize any potential negative impacts.
I
I
Lengthening of the existing culvert, as proposed for Kidd's Creek, would worsen the spill
condition. Please review.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report identifying proposed water quality
improvements.
I
15. Page #27 Section 10.0 - "Stonnwater Management". We recognize the various alternatives, and
have no objections to their use; however, as with all new developments within each watershed in
the City of Barrie, we have concerns with the increase of flows and pollutants into the
watercourses. In that regard, the City of Barrie has identified, in the watershed study updates,
that all development/redevelopment wil1 be required to provide quantity and quality controls.
The quantity controls can be either site controls or a mutual facility that is shared. In respect to
the quality issue, each development must provide Ministry of the Environment Level "1" quality
controls. It should be noted that the City of Barrie has had to provide such controls on its
projects that directly outlet to these watercourses. Please confinn if the Ministry of the
Environment has acknowledged the controls proposed.
. Summary Response - In general, stormwater management improvements are only
applied to "new" pavement area.
Action Proposed - Improvements to existing deficiencies to be considered in Detail
Design and in the Ministry's ongoing Maintenance Program.
I
I
The City of Barrie would like to work proactively with the MTO to incorporate proposed
storm water management improvements into our overall watershed plan. Good engineering
practice would also include quantity and quality control facilities for the existing pavement
area. We would like a commitment from the MTO to work proactively with the City of Barrie,
in a timely manner, to address any existing deficient conditions that should also be corrected
in addition to the widening works.
I
I
.
Summary Response - Due to the nature of MTO project, exceptions are frequently
granted to MTO with respect to the requirements of municipalities, Conservation
Authorities, MNR and MOE.
Action Proposed - Additional assessment of stonnwater management requirements is to
be completed at the detail design phase.
17. Page #31- Section 10.3 - "Proposed Stonnwater Management Measures". Pond #6 is being
proposed in a location that has already been identified by the City of Barrie in the Hotchkiss
Creek Master Drainage Plan EA update. This proposal has already received approval from the
Provincial Ministries, including Transportation. The City of Barrie would have no objection to
I
I
I
I
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
October 7, 2003
URS Cole Shennan
October 7,2003
I
I
I
-9-
-10-
a shared facility under the understanding that the City of Barrie's requirements would take
priority should size limitations arise, and that the costs of design, land acquisition, construction,
and maintenance are shared appropriately.
. Summary Response - A shared facility is possible at this location.
Action Proposed - MTO to consider working with the City of Barrie to work out a cost
sharing agreement.
. Summary Response The spill from Bunker's Creek to Dyment's Creek along Highway
400 is governed by the elevation of the Dunlop Street interchange, not by the capacity of
ditches in the area.
Action Proposed - Assessment of flood elevations to be considered in Detail Design.
I
Provided that the cost sharing agreement is worked out in a timely manner with the City of
Barrie in association with the MDP's, we find this proposed solution acceptable.
With the highway widening, the spills could potentially be forced onto private land. Spills
between catchment areas should be eliminated, and assessment of flood elevations completed
at this time.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
18. Page #32 - Section 1 0.3 - "Proposed Stonnwater Management Measures". The second paragraph
(last line) indicates that the proposed grassed swales do not meet the Ministry of the
Environment criteria; therefore, the City of Barrie would not consider these features acceptable
for providing primary water quality measures. As noted in previous comments, the City of
Barrie is expected to confonn to the MOE criteria for its projects as regulated by the Ministry of
the Environment, The Ministry of Natural Resources, The Department of Fisheries and Oceans,
and conservation authorities. Therefore, it would be our understanding that this project would
only support and provide leadership in implementing Provincial and various other authorities'
requirements for water quality.
20. Page #33 Section lOA - "Increase in Peak Flow". We have concerns with any peak flow
increases on the watersheds within the City of Barrie. As identified in this section, the Culvert
#70 (Whiskey Creek North crossing) experiences the greatest percentage of increase. The City
of Barrie is investigating methods of controlling the Whiskey Creek watershed downstream of
this crossing to limit flood impacts upon the watercourse. Similar to the Ministry of
Transportation, we must acquire lands to construct a facility. The areas for such a facility are
limited, and with the increased peaks now being proposed with the widening, places a greater
design and financial burden upon the City of Barrie. Please advise how the Ministry intends
assisting us in resolving this issue.
. Summary Response - Enhanced ditches, as proposed in Table 15, do not meet the
MOE's criteria for grassed swales because grades of swales exceed 1.5%. Although
these swales do not meet criteria, they do provIde some water quality treatment.
Action Proposed - Additional Assessment of stonnwater management requirements is
to be completed at the detail design phase.
. Summary Response - As no opportunities exist to control the peak flows, MTO to
consider a cost-sharing agreement with the City of Barrie regarding this issue.
Action Proposed - MTO to consider working with the City of Barrie.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
Provided that the MTO commits to working with the City of Barrie, in a timely manner in
providing input into a preferred alternative as part of our Class EA and MDP for the
Whiskey Creek watershed, we acknowledge this proposed action, pending receipt of the
revised report.
Summary Response - Due to the nature of MTO project, exceptions are frequently
granted to MTO in regard to the requirements of municipalities, Conservation
Authorities, MNR and MOE.
Action Proposed - None.
21. Pages #36 and #37 - Section lOA - "Table 17: Summary of Treatment Levels." The table has
not identified the following culverts as supporting Fish Habitat: Lover's Creek Tributaries (#64,
65,66, and 68), Hotchkiss Creek Tributary (#72), and Bunker's Creek Tributaries (#74, and 75).
The studies, undertaken by the City of Barrie for these watercourses, have identified these
tributaries as areas that supply base flow to the main watercourse channels. We would
recommend that any proposed works on these tributaries must consider the impacts, if any, to
the habitat of the watershed.
We trust that the MTO commitment to good drainage practices would preclude resorting to
this option unless all other alternatives have been ruled out, including joint treatment
facilities with the City of Barrie.
. Summary Response - Reduction of baseflow has not been identified as an impact of
proposed improvements. Continuity of flow would be maintained during construction
by bypassing the work area. The MTO Environmental Manual-Fisheries prescribes a
station that includes 20 metres upstream and 100 metres downstream of the ROW
unless there is a reason to believe that significant impacts may result beyond.
Action Proposed - During the development of SP's and NSSP's at the Detail Design
stage, typical erosion and sediment controls along with the continuity of flow measures
to be considered.
I
I
I
19. Page #32 - Section 10.3 - "Table 15: Enhanced Ditch Locations". We have concerns with the
proposed location of enhanced ditches at stations 26+325 to 26+755, 27+330 to 10+090 and
12+315 to 14+510. The existing culvert crossings, in all these areas, experience backwater
adjacent to the highway. In respect to the area 12+315 to 14+510, the existing culverts spill
southerly through the ditches from the Bunker's Creek watershed to Dyment's Creek. The
implementation of this control will produce increased flood elevations on private lands, as well
as increase the probability of spill from the Bunker's Creek watershed to Dyment's Creek.
. Summary Response - The provision of enhanced ditches would reduce backwater
effects and lower flood elevations as trapezoidal ditches have more capacity than V-
ditches at similar elevations.
Action Proposed - Additional hydraulic analysis to be conducted during detailed design.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
22. Modelling Comments and Concerns:
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
I
Engineenng Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
I
URS Cole Shennan
October 7, 2003
URS Cole Shennan
October 7, 2003
-11-
-12-
· Summary Response - Sub-catchment areas are detennmed based on the MTO
Drainage Mosaic for the area. Sub-catchment infonnation is included in Appendix
"E" of the URS report. In accordance with modern sub-watershed planning, the City
of Barrie is to ensure that future development occurs without increasing flows in local
watercourses.
Action Proposed - None
Action Proposed During detail design, regional stonn analysis is to be revised
through the project limits, using up to date limits of the appropriate regional events.
The regional event is to be used to identify where median breaks are required to
eliminate any increase in headwater levels during the regulatory event.
Both the MNR and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority have recommended the
use of Hurricane Hazelfor the regional storm event. Given the importance of this issue and
the effect it will have on determining the preferred alternative for the Class EA's and MDP's,
we request that this issue be addressed, at this time, in the current URS report.
I
I
I
a) Sub-catchment areas, used for the modelling of culverts within Barrie, should be clearly
depicted. Catchment areas and future drainage basin characteristics for the existing,
future, and regional stonn analysis, should be indicated and updated based on ultimate
development conditions (per MTO Directive B-100) and the City of Barrie Zoning
By-Law 85-95;
. Summary Response - Improvements proposed by MTO do not create or
increase flood hazards. According to Directive B-I00, it is not required to
convey the regional stonn event without overtopping the highway.
Action Proposed - None.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sub-catchment information in Appendix "E" is out of date and difficult to interpret with
respect to what was modelled. All future development, within the City of Barrie, must include
provision for not increasing flows in local watercourses, but this does !lOt resolve the existing
drainage problems caused by development prior to this practice and initiated by the highway
construction in the first place. MTO Policy B-100 requires that the design floods for bridge
and culverts shall be based on run-off conditions anticipated 20 years from the time of design,
taking full account of present and probable future municipal controls over increases of run-
off from new development. The Report should be updated using the regional storm,
Hurricane Hazel, as recommended by the MNR and your Senior Drainage Engineer, Art
Groen veld.
d) Please provide details on how the regulatory stonn (the more critical of the Hurricane Hazel
or the 100 year stonn) would be safely conveyed without impacting other watersheds,
adjacent buildings, developable land or overtopping the highway. As a minimum, the City
of Barrie would anticipate that all culvert crossing draining areas greater than 130 ha (per
the MTO Drainage Manual), or otherwise identified by the City of Barrie through the master
drainage planning, be designed to convey the more critical of the regional flood (Hurricane
Hazel) or the 100 year flood for the ultimate development conditions; and
b) Modelling used rain data from Toronto. Local rain data for the 100 year, 24 hour event is
approximately 15% greater in total rainfall than the Toronto rain data. The City of Barrie
Drainage and Stonn Sewage Policies and Criteria contain rainfall distribution based on rain
data from Orillia. Rain data, recorded by MOE at the Barrie WPCC since 1968, confinns
that the Toronto Airport rain data typically underestimates the total rainfall for the Barrie
area. Local rain data should be used for all modelling;
Summary Response - Rainfall data is appropriate according to the MTO Drainage
Manual. However, the hydrologic analysis may be revised within the City of Barrie.
Action Proposed - Hydrologic Analysis to be revised during detail design. The detail
design will use the most up to date watershed studies available throughout the City of
Barrie.
It is our understanding that Art Groenveld, Senior Drainage Engineer with the MTO in St.
Catharines, agrees with the City of Barrie's position and interpretation of the "~TO's Policy
B-100 with respect to spills between drainage catchment areas. Please accept Art's
recommendations and address our concerns.
.
e) Page #16 - Section 8.1 - "Hydrology". Upon reviewing the Hydrologic modelling for
Culvert #69 (Whiskey Creek), we have concerns with the use of the Nashyd command. The
catchment, in accordance with your background infonnation, appears to have greater than
20% of the catchment area as impervious. On that basis, we understand the stonn model
used, and that the catchment area should be modelled using a Standhyd command to
represent the response trom the catchment. It is suggested that all catchments, located
within the city, be modelled under the Standhyd command. Also, could you please advise
why a Chicago 3-hour stonn event was modelled? Typically, the City of Barrie would use a
4-hour Chicago event.
Local representative rain data must be used so that results from the URS hydrologic
analysis can be compared to the various MDP's. Please revise.
c) The Timmins Regional stonn was modelled but not the Hurricane Hazel stonn event. A
recently completed study undertaken by Environment Canada on Ontario heavy rainfall
events confinns that the use of Hurricane Hazel, as a regulatory event, is realistic. It is also
our understanding that the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority requires that all
watercourses that are a tributary to the Lake Simcoe watershed basin be modelled with the
Hurricane Hazel stonn event;
· Summary Response - According to the MTO Drainage Manual, the Timmins Stonn or
the 100-year event should be used as the regulatory event in this area. However, should
the LSRCA recommend usage of Hurricane Hazel, regional stonn analysis will be
revisited.
. Summary Response - The Whiskey Creek watershed study may replace any revised
hydrologic modelling at the detail design phase.
Action Proposed - Whiskey Creek watershed study to be utilized or hydrologic analysis for
Culverts #69, #70 and #73 to be revised during detail design.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
. Summary Response - A 3-hour Chicago Stonn is used to assess watershed with rapid
responses, due to its more intense peak, as compared to a 4-hour Chicago Stonn
Action Proposed - None.
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
I
I
Engineenng Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
October 7,2003
URS Cole Sherman
October 7, 2003
I
I
I
-13-
-14-
23. For ease of review, we would like to recommend that the Highway 400 plans be combined with
the corresponding profiles.
· Summary Response - Comment noted. Separate plates for plans and profiles are an
MTO standard.
Action Proposed - None.
If you have any questions or concerns with regard to the above comments, or should you wish to
arrange a meeting to discuss them, please contact the undersigned at (705) 739-4220, extension
4782.
Yours truly,
I
I
Acknowledged.
I)j I'
/~i / ,/
,'<::,-...f, 1 / C~<t .............
Table 6, Page 16, Culvert #81 is missing from Table.
R. Scheunemann, P. Eng.
Infrastructure Planning Engineer
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Summary Response - There is no information available regarding Culvert #81;
therefore, it is not listed on this table~
Action Proposed - Information regarding this culvert is to be obtained during detail
design.
Action Proposed - Culvert #81 is to be analyzed as part of detail design.
cc: R. G. Newlove, Director of Engineering, City of Barrie
R. Fonvard, Manager of IntTastructure Planning, City of Barrie
T. Hogenbirk, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
G. Switzer, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
G. Finley, Ministry of Natural Resources (Midhurst)
R. McArthur, Manager of Design and Construction Services, City of Barrie
J. Parent, Planning Engineer, City of Barrie
L. Cooney, Senior Project and Service Technologist, City of Barrie
A. Groenveld, Senior Drainage Engineer, MTO, St. Catharines
K. Boudreau, Project Engineer,Planning and Design Section, Southwestern Region
L. Vaz, MTO
The existing and proposed length can be found on your Figure 30. [fyou like, we could
confirm the size for you in the field.
25. Culverts should be made fish passable. Please provide details on how this will be
accomplished.
· Action Proposed - Existing and expected flow velocities will be investigated at the
Detail Design Stage once culvert sizing and placement has been finalized. If
velocities are expected to be significantly elevated, then more detailed studies at the
site may be required to address any expected changes in the benthic invertebrate and
fish passage.
· Action Proposed - Recommendations at the Detail Design stage will include
embedding the culvert into the natural substrate. In watercourses that experience
volatile flows, low-flow channels and/or baffles may be recommended.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Acknowledged, pending receipt of revised report.
26. To expedite future review, please include digital copies of all computer models, associated
rain data, and output files.
· Summary Response - For quality control purposes, digital copies of models, rain data
and output are not typically provided, but specific data could be provided if requested
within a reasonable time frame.
Action Proposed - None.
Data exchange is an essential component in the review of reports of this complexity. If
information is burned to CD-R, it cannot be changed. Please reconsider.
I
SEP~2b-2003 10:18
MTO P&D
J 1':1 tf (..5 4b~~
t-'.~..5
SEP-25-2UU5 lU:l~
1'1IU t-'&U
::>.1.':' 0(.) ~O"-'IQ
i.I:::}'+
CITY MALI..
'10 COLLIER STREET
T~t.. (705) '39-.4207
FAU(.(70S)739-4147
Engineering Department
File: TOS-HI
TOTAL P,103
TOTAL P.04
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ministry of Transnortation Ontario. K. Boudreau
September 26. 2003
-2-
P.O. BOX 400
BARRI'&:.ONTAJUO
L4M 4T5
Secondly, we have still not received and viewed a copy of your EA document and drawings
showing the alternatives. including such things as the number of lanes a.t the under and
overpasses fOT City of Barrie streets, and the impact at these under and overpasses. This. was
requested in our letter dated August 5, 2003, and is still outstanding.
THE CORPORATION Of'TIiE CITY Of' BARRIE.
COMMUNITY SERVrc1..S
tNCINUJUNC DUA-RTMI:NT
"Co""".ittcd I~ 7011'1 StlI"IIICt E:z.CtUSIICt"
September 26, 2003
File: TOS-HI
If you have any questions, andJoI concerns, please contact the undersigned at (705) 739-4220.
extension 4362, by fax (705) 739-4247, or e-mail iparent@barrie.city.on.ca.
Ministry of Transportation Ontario
Planning and Design SeGtion
Southwest Region
659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario
N6E lL3
YOUlOtrnll
J/6y=re
J. Parent. P. Eng.
Infrastructure PlaJ'lning Engineer
Dear Sir:
cc: R. Forward, Manager of InfrastrUct'W"e Planning
W. McArthur, Manager of Design and Construction
R. Newlove, Director of Engineering
L. Vaz. Senior Project Engineer, MTO (Central Region)
Atteutjoo: K. Boudreau, P. Eng.
Re: G.W.P. 30-95-00 Highway 400 - Preliminary Design Study
One Kilometre South of Highway 89, Northerly 30 Kilometres to Highway 11
Di!trict 33, Owen Sound
Unresolved Concerns by the City of Barrie
Further to your letter dated September 17, 2003. in which you have tried to address the
outstanding concerns, raised by the City of Banie, and are looking for our endorsement in
your project., we provide the fonowing conunents,
The City of Barrie feels tha.t our concerns have not been adequately addressed for the
following tvlo major items, and, therefore, are not prepared to endorse the project at this time.
First of all, the City of Barrie feels that dra.inage issues have not been adequately addressed,
and generally does not agree with the letter from your Consultant, URS. dated August 26,
2003. It is our understanding, in speaking with your senior drainage engineer. Art Groenveld
in St. Catharines. that he has reconunended that the MTO use Hurricane Hazel, as
recommended by the MNR for the regional stonn event, and that spills between drainage
catchment areas be eliminated. These major issues have not been addressed as required by
l~e MTO policy BIOO. In addition. the City of Barrie feels Highway 400 should be
considered a vital route.
~ ,j' .
, . ,
I .. , -
, .j ,
~I '.
BARRIE 150
IUO~I".'t..'H' .."....,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ministry of
Transportation
~. .,stere des
Transports
"1 Jf-' . [J,Q. [;0\f
l~ Ontario ~~~~A)
-2-
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region
Section de la planification et de la conception
Region du Sud-Ouest
659 Exeter Road
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Facsimile: (519) 873-4600
659, rue Exeter
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Telecopieur: (519) 873-4600
As discussed, we believe the MTO has addressed the outstanding concerns raised by the
City of Barrie and we therefore look forward to obtaining your endorsement of this project.
COpy
September 17, 2003
Yours Iy,
,~
Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Senior Project Engineer
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region, London
l"~ ,,"'" ..""'C. r.--I'tI .. E-
rr.:t,['-... 'i- ,"'~ ' 't.! U
M .. ~:..., ~, !~. ~ .
SE~ 2Z 2003
Mr. Jeff Parent, P.Eng.
Planning Engineer
The City of Barrie
P.O. Box 400, 70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
U-- ~r_.:">;1
I ' ;i :tN.- ._'.
. _'~0.J
Dear: Mr. Parent
RE: G.W.P. 30-95-00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 km south of Highway 89, northerly to 30 km to Highway 11
District 33, Owen Sound
c. Joel Foster
Lola Vaz (Central Region)
Len Kozachuk (URS Cole Sherman)
Further to our meeting on June 23, 2003 at your office, in which we discussed our drainage
report for the above referenced corridor, we offer the following for your records.
At this point in time the differences between the recommended drainage upgrades within our
planning study and your on-going watershed studies are related to policies and practices.
As I understand, in the case of Kidd's Creek, the City has recommended upgrading of the
Highway 400 crossing and all related downstream areas through your watershed plan. The
Ministry has not recommended upgrading for capacity reasons, since this crossing meets
our current standards and guidelines.
Should the City want to pursue upgrading this culvert as part of your overall improvement
strategy for the watershed, the Ministry will work with the City, during our detail design phase
for expansion of Highway 400, to address your needs. Cost sharing associated with any
upgrade beyond our recommendation would be subject to further discussions with the
Ministry during detail design.
The above approach can be used for this type of variance in recommendation between the
studies.
.. ./2
URS
-. ....~"'.. ...-_......... ""'_.~~...".._",-~....--
I
00\4'1- 1-1 ({J(Mo/t~
v
/'/X/--J --I- i:.e' ~
~r { :.:::> .:.....7, ,,-'
I
I
I
August 26, 2003
Our Ref.: 33013952
City of Barrie
Engineering Department
P.O. Box 400, 70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
Attention:
Mr. Ralph Scheunemann, P.Eng.
I
Dear Mr. Scheunemann:
I
Re: Drainage and Hydrology Issues, Highway 400 - Highway 89 to Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
I
I
I
On January 24, 2003, URS submitted a copy of the Drainage and Hydrology Report, dated January 2003, to
the City of Barrie. This was followed by a meeting on February 6,2003, attended by representatives of MTO,
URS and City of Barrie. G. King, L. Cooney and 1. Parent were present on behalf of the City of Barrie.
According to the minutes of that meeting, the followmg was noted; "Overa11, there were no significant issues
and/or comments raised on drainage and stormwater conditions on the proposed management plans. In
summary, the agencies were provided draft copies of the Natural Sciences Technical Report prepared by FRi
Ecological Services and the Drainage Hydrology Report prepared by URS Cole Sherman and comments on the
reports were requested by March 6, 2003."
On June 3, 2003 the City of Barrie provided their comments on the Drainage and Hydrology report. To
resolve these comments, on June 23, 2003, a meeting was held between MTO, URS and City of Barrie and a
second meeting was held on July 22,2003 between representatives ofURS and the City of Barrie.
I
I
I
Information received by URS from the City of Barrie has been reviewed and incorporated, as appropriate, in
the Drainage and Hydrology Report and Preliminary Design Report (PDR). To summarize our revisions to the
reports in response to comments received from the City of Barrie, we have provided the enclosed table which
addresses the City's comments (as per the Jun~ 3, 2003 letter addressed to the undersigned).
Yours very truly,
URS Canada Inc.
~
~ Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
Project Manager
I
LK/mb
Enc!.
I
I
cc.
Mark Bassingthwaite, URS Water Resources
Brian Plazek, URS Water Resources
Jeff Parent, City of Barrie
Kevin Boudreau, MTO
Lola Vaz, MTO
I
I
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada l3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
I
I
----------
summar)' Response Action proposed
comment comment summar)'
No.
-------- . Drainage and hydro\Og)'
. URS report refers to Count)' of . . Lunits to be confl""ed at the detailed design
\ . report(s) produced during
SpringWater, wbicb is actuallY 10,,",sbtP of phase. detailed design will reflect the
Springwater. proper names of the ad)acent
. 1be project limits may include tbe munic1.pa\\ties.
TownshiP of ororM-edonte.
. Runoff from part oftbe studY area drains to . Drainage patternS and catcbments to be . Drainage areas to be revised,
2. e~amined at tbe detailed design phase w.en as appropriate, during detail
Little Lake and Willow Creek around tbe more detitiled info_tion is "ailable desi\!J\ stage.
north end of the Cit)' of Barrie
. Decisions to replace or rebab e~isting . culvert conditions to be
3. . 1be Cil)' baS concerns witb plans to rebab cul,erts are made by !>A10 according to tbeir investigated in detail design.
older culverts and would rather see criterion tbat inel udes strUctural integril)'.
replacement. final decisions are made at tbe detailed
design stage.
. StrUctural inspection of cul,erts is only . None.
. StrUctural report does not include e,etj
culvert or any cul,erts withtn tbe Ctl)' of conducted for cuNerts witb ?5m rise.
Barrie.
. \itnsiftl Creek tS not witbin tbe limits oft.e . \itnisftl Creek, wbile not witbio tbe Cil)' of . None.
4. Cit~ of Barrie and sbould be not be listed Barrie, is in tbe project studY atea and, as
sucb, should be listed in section 3".
in section '3.3.
. '{1te Cil)' """ides an update of tbe stit\Us of . Wlten tbe tJRS report was completed and . During detail design, the most
5. circulated to the Cil)' of Barrie, m January current watershed studies
variouS watershed studies. 2003, watersbed study tnfo""ation was withU1 the City of Barrie are
current. to be reviewed.
5
1
N:\COmmon\COiln\ora'nage\response \able.dOC
comment summar)' summar)' Response Action proposed
comment
No.
. Cil)"S J(jdd's Creek E" indicates tbat tbe . '{1te Natural Sciences Investigation indicates . Preliminary report win be
6. tbat the station sampled did not result in any revised to reflect Ridd's
creek is a cold water fish habitat. coldwater species and tbe negative impacts Creek as coldwater habitat
on t\te tbermal regime by the sunnidale that w1\\ change the in_water
Detention pond compromises tbe coldwater timing restrictions.
properties.
. Cil)' bas concerns witb Kidd's Creek . Tbe spill to Bunker's Creek is an existing . None.
regional sto"" spill soutberlY to Bunket'S drainage condition. Proposed impro,ements
Creek. by tbe !>A10 would not increase flooding or
spills o,er e,isting levels and t.erefore
satisfy ~1TO criteria.
. Cul,ert 77 is located witbin Bunker's . Culvert 77 to be shown within
Bunker's Creek watershed.
Creek watershed not Ridd' s Creek
watershed.
7. . Snpbia Creek !>Aaster Drainage plan was . Report to be revised, if
necessary, upon review of
adopted in February 2002 Master Drainage plan
. \\tgbway widening between Higbway &9 . URS .as conftrmed tbat proposed widening . The location of the existing
8. SWMF is to be noted.
and Essa Road may affect an existing does not affect the existing SWMF
SWMF south of Molson park Drive
. City would like a copy of the plan . Pa,ement areas ate calculated using existing . Pavement area ca\cn\ations or
9. and proposed cross_sections not by CpJ)D plans developed during detail
identifying existing and fu\Ure pa,ement design may be provided to the
area for each culvert methods. plans of the proposed
impro,ements were proYlded to tl;< City of Cit)'.
Barrie previonslY.
2
".\~"mmQn\CQ\I(\\ora\(\age\(eSPQnse lable .dOC
suU\U\ar)l Response ;\ct\on froposed
:::oU\U\cnt CoU\U\ent SuU\U\ar)l
~o. . It is out understanding, based on discUssions
\0. . Cil)' notes that j\ighway 400 was with ]vITO staf!' that j\\ghway 400 1S not
considered a ",tal tOute at the February deemed a ",ital toute" in tertt's of dtalnage
2003 \11eeting. ctitetia. Futlhet tequests to d~;,gnate
j\' hwaY 400 as a ",,;tal tOUte undet
;i~ecti'e \J. 100 should be ditected to J-A'IO
pohcy off\ces.
. J-A'IO ctiteria state that "If a ,\tainage facihty . None.
CI)"s E}>. docun1Cnts fot j(idd'S Creel<, d 'gned to the criteria spcc,fled ,n the taule
. \ 'C k eS\ 'ld' f
\Junket' s Cteek and Dyment s tCC ",ould increase 1\ooding ofuu' ,ngs 0
indicate suppotl fot "nO dtalnage de,elopable land during a teg,onal 1\ood, the
o"tlopping on the toad surface of facility shall be designed to the teg,onal
highway" 1\ d 't' "Fot each cteel< w,th,n the
00 CD eDa... . .
. pennitting the spill of 1\ood",atetlO Ci I)' of \Jarrie, spills cuttently eX'"
rtO osed iml"O,ements by the J-A'IO ",ould
adjaCent watersheds would be ,n , not inctease 1\ooding ot spills o,et ex"t,ng
contt"enrion 01 rto'incial Flood rlam le,els and thetefore satisl)' J-A'IO c"Ie"a.
rolicy statement and would not sausl)'
tA1'O desi~ cntena . J-A'IO's impact on ",atet quantiI)' and quality . Futthet discUssions of this
. 1'\1e Cil)' 01 \Jarrie understandS I imitations nat\1te shO\1ld be held ~etween
\l. is not signil,cant enough to becoto< ,n,ol,ed the City and tA1'O d\1Dng
01 SVIM in J-A'IO R.O.W . and ",ould in DIS SWtA worKS. . detail desi!?J\
expect co.operation in te""S 01 cost
sharing of DIS sWtA fac\hues
')
1'I'\COft\ft\OO\COliO\Ora'oage\fesPonse \aole.dOC
suU\U\ar)l Response A,ct\on froposed
comment comment SumU\ar)l
~o. . }>.s a general ",Ie for J-A'IO ptojects, cul"'''s . fish passage \11easutes to be
. 'What design features ate being consideted at detail des\gn
n. ate to he embedded at least ,00 mm. stage.
implemented to account lot 11Sh passage Specif'C lea""es lot 11Sh passage ate, '
, ')
and proper \11a\ntenance. de,eloped at detailed destgn. In add,ttOn,
J-ATO imPlements a tegulat "",ntenanCC
ptogram lot all its majot cul,etls. . Culvett e)(.tensions at service
. 'Ihe hydrauliC impacts 01 cuNetl extensions
. What ate the hydtauhc impacts 01 cuNetl road crossings such as
at se,,"ce road ctOsSings such as Fa,,,,,ew Fairview Road, Dytnent Road
extensions at set";Ce toad crosstngs such as Road, Dyment Road and j\atl ])ti,e ""II he and Hatt Drive ate to be
Fai",iew Road, Dyment Road and j\art
analyzed during Ihe detailed destgn stages, analyzed for their i\11pacts on
Drive'? ad}acent lands at the deta\l
des\~ stage.
. Thete appears to he d,lleteT\Ces hetween . J-Aodel output ""lehes with 1\ow5 in Table g. · }lone,
\3. rlease note that 'Iable g telers to 1\ows
model output and 1\o"'s in'Iable g. within the cul,etl (ie. upstteam dtalnage ,
area, upstteam R.O.W, and median) and"
used lot detennined headwatet le,els. 'Ihe
model output also contains a S'I p.,}\D\1YD
com""nd that accounts lot downstteam
R.O.W, drainage and is used fot pte and post \
develo~\11ent flow ~urposes.
,_h"n\{)f3,03ge\respoose \aole .dOC
--------
4
......
-------------
-
Comment Comment Summary Summary Response Action Proposed
No.
14. . The City is concerned with spins at Kidd's . Spins at these crossings exist under current . Hydraulic analysis win be
Creek, Dyment's Creek and Bunker's conditions (ie. proposed improvements do revisited at detailed design.
Creek during 100 year and regional events. not create these spills). Our analysis Criteria used during this
indicates that Highway 400 will not be investigation will be applied
overtopped during the 100 year event during detail design subject to
therefore satisfying MTO criteria. MTO the direction ofMTO.
improvements are designed to maintain the
"status quo" condition.
. The study appears to assume all culverts . culvertMaster v2.0 is a recognized program . None.
function under inlet control and requests for the analysis of culverts. The program
that Culverts 69, 73, 74, 75 and 76 be analyzes culvert hydraulics under both inlet
reassessed and outlet control and selects the method
which presents the "worst-case scenario".
. Culverts downstream of a spill must . Proposed improvements may lessen spills to . Hydrologic/hydrauhc analysis
account for the additional flows that are adjacent watersheds and presents an may be revisited at detail
being directed towards its inlet. improvement over the current conditions. design.
15. . The City has identified that an . Due to the nature of MTO project, exceptions . Additional assessment of
development/re-development is to provide are frequently granted to MTO with respect stormwater management
quantity and quality controls. The City to the requirements of municipalities, requirements is to be
notes that it must provide these controls on Conservation Authorities, MNR and MOE. completed at the detail design
its projects. phase.
. Confirm if the MOE has acknowledged the . The Ministry of Environment reviewS the . None.
proposed controls. TESR document as a whole, but generally
does not conduct an individual review of the
Drainage and Hydrology report.
Conservation authorities and the Ministry of
Natural Resources typically reviewS drainage
and hydrology issues for MTO projects.
5
N:\COmmOf1\COI'f\\Draif1age\response table.doc
Comment Comment Summary Summary Response Action Proposed
No.
16. . Watershed studies by the City have . While all of the watersheds contribute to fish . The main concerns would be
identified fish habitat in the watercourses habitat to some extent, the Natural Sciences the preservation of base flows
that cross Highway 400. Investigation did not capture fish at an of the and thermal regime.
stations in the study area. The watershed Mitigation measures to be
studies also indicate that fish were not considered at the Detail
captured in all reaches because of degraded Design Stage to minimize any
habitat or impassable sections (storm sewers) potential negative impacts
. The URS report does not identify existing . In general, stormwater management . Improvements to existing
deficiencies that should be corrected in improvements are only applied to "new" deficiencies to be considered
addition to the widening works. pavement area. in Detail Design and in the
Ministry's ongoing
Maintenance Program.
17. . Proposed Pond #6 is in a location identified . A shared facility is possible at this location. . MTO to consider working
by the City of Barrie in the Hotchkiss with the City of Barrie to
Creek Master Drainage Plan EA and has work out a cost sharing
been approved by the agencies including agreement.
MTO. The City would have no objection
to a shared facility provide the City has
priority should size limitations anse.
18. . Some grassed swales do not meet MOE . Enhanced ditches, as proposed in Table 15, . Additional assessment of
criteria and are therefore unacceptable to do not meet the MOE's criteria for grassed stormwater management
the City for quality control. swales because grades of the swales exceed requirements is to be
1.5%. Although these swales do not meet completed at the detail design
criteria, they do provide some water quality phase.
treatment.
. The City of Barrie is expected to conform . Due to the nature of MTO project, exceptions . None.
to requirement of MOE, MNR, DFO and are frequently granted to MTO in regards to
Conservation Authorities. the requirements of municipalities,
Conservation Authorities, MNR and MOE.
6
N:\comm0f1\CQ\\f110rainagelreSP0f1se table.dOC
summar)' Response t\ct\on froposed
:omment comment summar)'
No. . Tne yrovision of en\wnced ditcnes would . Additiona\ b:ydrauhc analysis
. 1\\e City is concerned witn proposed to be conducted during
\9. reduce nac\<Water effects and loWer ~ood detailed design-
ennanced ditcnes at sta. 26+32\ to 26+ 7 \ \, e\evations as trapezoidal dltcneS n"e more
27+330 to \0+090 and \2+3\\ to \4+\ \0 . ty tnan Y ditcnes at similar e\"ano115.
as a\\ cu\"" C!ossings, in tnese areas, c~Wac\ ~
"e~perience nac\<Water adjacent to tne
highway" . Tne spill from \lunker' s Creek to Dyment's . Assessment ot flood '
. Spcc i 11call Y, netween \2+3\ \ and \4+\ \ 0, elevations to be considered \n
. Creek along \lignway 400 is governed ny tne Detai\ Design-
tne City is concerned with inC!eased ~ood e\evation of tne Dun\oP Street Interchange,
elevations on private lands an~ ,ncrease In not bY tne capacitY of ditches ,n tne area.
probabih\'l of soill to Dvment s creek. . p.s nO opportunitieS e~ist to control the peak . tvffO to consider working
. Col"" 70 e~periences a signif"ant peak witb. tb.e City of Barrie.
20. ~ows, "nO to consider a cost,shaf1ng .
~ow increase. 'fne City \S ,n"s\lgaung agreement with tne City of \lame regardIng
methOds to control ~ows downstream and this issue.
e~pects assistance from ~nO. . Reduction of base !low has not been . During the develO?ment of .
. \.reS rel"''' doeS not identify cul""s (,4, SP's and NSSy'sat the Detal\
2\. identifred as an \mpact of proposed \d b Design stage, t':{Pica\ eroS\on
6\,66,68,71,74 and 7\ as supl"'r\lng f\Sh impro"ments. continuity of ~ow woU . e and sediment controlS along
habitat and ,uyylY base !low to nraln . maintarned during con,,,,,ctiOn bY b)'PaSSlng with continuity of flow
tributarieS. AnY work on theSe tf\butaf1es the work area. The M'f0 Env\tonmenta\ measures to be considered.
shOuld consider the imyacts to the nahltat Manua\' f\Sneries preScribes a sta\lon mat
ot the watersb.ed. indudeS 20m upstream and lOom
downstream of the RO VI unleSS thef"sa
rea",n to beheve t\wt signif"ant ,mpacts
may result beyond.
\
'7
"",\COf1\f1\O"\CO,,"\\Jf3\"3ge\feSPOnse \aple ,dOC
summar)' Res\,onse t\ct\on froposed
comment Comment Summar)'
No. . sub,catc\utlent areas are determined based on . 'None.
22. . sub<atchment areas and future. drainage the M'f0 Drainage Mosaic for the area. sub,
baSIn cnaracteristiCS shOuld he \nd"ated catchment information is iochlded \n
based on ultimate de"IOpment cond,\10115. Mpendi~ E of the DRS rePO'" \!l
accordance witn modern sub,watershed
planning, tne City of \laTrie is to ensure tnat
future development occurs w,tnout
increasing !loWs in local watercourses.
. Rainfall data i' appropriate according to tne . Hydro\ogic ana\ysi~ to be
. Mode\hng using rain data for'forontO revised during detail des\gn-
M'fO Drainage Manua\. \lowever, tne 1he detail design wi\\ use the
LOca\ data is "ailable and shOuld be used. nydro\ogic ana\YSls maY be re",sed wlth,n most u? to date watershed
the City ofBarDe. studies a\la\\ab\e tb.roughout
the C\ty of Barrie.
. Accordin~ to tne M'fO Drainage Manua\, lne . Doring detail design, regional
. 'f\mmins Storm was used as tne regional storm analysis is to be revISed
T . Storm or the IOo-yea! even\Snou\d through the ?roject limits,
"enl. 1\\e use of \lotticane \laze\ " \mm\ns . .
be osed as tne regnlatofY event In tn\S area. using u? to date hmits of the
rea\\stic. \loweve<, should Ine LSRCA recommend a??fO?riate regional events.
usage onlurricane \la"el, regIonal storm 1he reg\ona\ event \S to be ,
ana\)lsis wi\\ be rev\s\ted. used to identify where med\an
breaks are tequired to
ehnlinate an)' increase in
headwater \evels during the
regn\atolJ' event.
;:_\nn~,oage\fesPOf\se tab\e,dOC
----------
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Comment Comment Summary Summary Response Action Proposed
No.
. Outline how the regulatory storm (either . Improvements proposed by MTO do not . None.
Hurricane Hazel or the 100 year event) is create or increase flood hazards. According
proposed to be conveyed without to Directive B-I00, it is not required to
impacting other watersheds, buildings convey the regional storm event without
developable land or overtopping the overtopping the highway.
highway.
. The City has concerns with the use of the . The Whiskey Creek watershed study may . Whiskey Creek watershed
NASHYD command in the modeling of replace any revised hydrologic modeling at study to be utilized or
Whiskey Creek, culvert #69. It is the detail design phase. hydrologic analysis for
recommended that all catchments within culverts 69, 70 and 73 to be
the City be modeled with the ST ANDHYD revised during detail design.
command.
. Why was the 3 hour Chicago Storm . A 3 hour Chicago Storm is used to assess . None.
modeled and not the 4 hour Chicago watershed with rapid responses, due to its
Storm? more intense peak, as compared to a 4 hour
Chicago Storm.
23. . Highway 400 plans should be combined . Comment noted. Separate plates for plans . None.
with corresponding profiles and profiles is an MTO standard.
24. . Culvert #81 is missing from Table 6. . There is no information available regarding . Information regarding this
culvert 81; therefore it is not listed on this culvert is to be obtained
table. during detail design.
. Culvert #81 is to be analyzed
as part of detail design.
N:\common\colln\Drainage\response table.doc
9
Comment Comment Summary Summary Response Action Proposed
No.
25. . Culverts should be made fish passable. . Existing and expected flow
Please provide details on how this will be velocities will be investigated
accomp 1 ished. at the Detail Design Stage
once culvert sizing and
placement has been finalized.
If velocities are expected to
be significantly elevated, then
more detailed studies at the
site may be required to
address any expected changes
in the benthic invertebrate and
fish passage.
. Recommendations at the
Detail Design stage will
include embedding the culvert
into the natural substrate. In
watercourses that experience
volatile flows, low-flow
channels and/or baffles may
be recommended.
26. . To expedite future review, please include . For quality control purposes, digital copies of . None.
digital copies of all computer models, models, rain data and output are not typically
associated rain data and output files. provided, but specific data could be provided
if requested within a reasonable timeframe.
N :\common\colin\Drainage\response table ,doc
10
I
P.O. BOX 400
BARRIE, O:-iT ARlO
L4\I4TS
304 Dunlop Street West
15-75 Cedar Pointe Drive
395 Dunlop Street West
306 Tiffin Street
11-21 Patterson Road and 287 Tiffin Street
31 Patterson Road
11 Bryne Drive
81 Bryne Drive
35 Bryne Drive
65 Barrieview Drive
75-85 Barrieview Drive
35 Molson Park Drive
22 Commerce Park Drive
22, 28, 34 (!ommerce Park Drive
Engineering Department
Kevin Boudreau, MTO
CITY HALL
70 COLLIER STREET
TEL. (705) 739-4207
F A.X. (705) 739-4247
~
THE CORPOR.HION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
COMMUNITY SERVICES
ENGINEERI:\'G DEPARTMENT
"Committed 10 Total Service Excellence"
June 23, 2003
File: T05-HI
Ministry of Transportation
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region
659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario
N6E lL3
South and East Side of Highway 400_
201 Georgian Drive
1 Georgian Drive
140-148 Bell Fann Road
120-126 Bell Fann Road
22 Grove Street
126-128 Wellington Street
28 Fairview Road
50 Fairview Road
21 Molson Park Drive
41 Molson Park Drive
110 Saunders Road
Saunders Road
Attention:
Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
Dear Sir:
Re:
G. W. P. 30-95-00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 Kilometres South of Highway 89, Northerly to 30 KIn. to Highway 11
District 33, Owen Sound
Further to the letter dated May 22nd, 2003, and May 15th, 2003, we are forwarding a current list of
properties which are impacted by the Highway 400 widening, in either the landscaped areas or the
plantings on private lands, which are on registered site plans and legal agreements with the City of
Barrie. As such, any proposed changes to the landscape areas and planting treatments, on any of these
properties, will require the approval of the City of Barrie, and subsequent amendments to the
registered site plans.
File: T05-HI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 23, 2003
-2-
Plaza
Cedar Pointe Plaza
Keg/Chrysler
Hydro One
Business Condominium
Barrie Hydro
Zems
Leon's Furniture
Home Deport
Georgian Pontiac
Plazas
Scotia Bank to LCBO - Wal-Mart - 1 st Pro
Various Businesses
Business Park
Georgian College
Royal Victoria Hospital
Georgian Residence Condominium
Condo Owl Developments
YMCA
Wellington Square
Mandarin Restaurant
Autohaus
Ontario Tourism Centre
Costco
Industrial Plaza
Various Industrial
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the undersigned at 705-739-4220.
cc: J. G. Harkness, MTO
J. Foster, MTO
L. Kosniak, URS Cole Shennan
N. Bricks, URS Cole Sherman
R. G. Newlove, Director of Engineering
R. Forward, Manager of Infrastructure Planning
A. Hill, Manager of Planning and Development
Yours truly,
North and West Side of Highway 400
CITY OF B~
J YiJ. Eng
Planning Infrastructure Engineer
Extension 4362
273 Cundles Road East
243 Cundles Road East
29 Sperling Drive
15 Sperling Drive
1 Sperling Drive
151 Ferris Lane
129 Ferris Lane
Frere Andre School
St. Peter's High School
Barrie Police
Simcoe County Health Unit Building
Rogers Cable
Office Building
The Barrie and District Association for People
with Special Needs
Shell
Venture Inn
Canadian Tire/Canpro
309 Bayfield Street
300 Bayfield Street
320 Bayfield Street
BARRlE 150
SESQUICENTENNIAl.. 18S3-1003
~~
Landscape Architectural Technologist
Extension 4342
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY HALL
70 COLLIER STREET
TEL. (705) 739-4207
FAX. (705) 739-4247
tZ/tA:1 * '87
Engineering Department
FIle: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
June 03, 2003
-2-
-.
t~i~REW:!LC:Ltl7'"
P.O. BOX 400
BARRIE, ONTARIO
L4M 4T5
5. Page #6 - sections 3.3.b, c, d, e, f, g, "Watershed Studies. The City of Barrie is undertaking a
Master Drainage Study Update for the watercourses identified from c to g, with each study
including a Class Environmental Assessment. The Whiskey Creek (EA) document is scheduled
for public review in 2003. It should also be noted that the existing Whiskey Creek and
Hotchkiss Creek crossings produce hydraulic backwater conditions, adjacent to the highway
embankment. The Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan is tentatively scheduled to have a
public hearing in July or August of 2003, with the Master Drainage Plan document to follow by
October 2003. The Bunker's Creek EA document has been presented to the public, and the
Master Drainage Plan report is proposed to be completed by June 2003. The Kidd's Creek EA
report has been presented to the public, and the Master Drainage Plan is proposed to be
completed by August 2003. A list of available information, related to the Master Drainage Plan
documents within the City of Barrie, is attached. This information can be made available upon
request (release of digital data is subject to a signing of a Letter of Understanding).
June 03, 2003
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
COMMUNITY SERVICES
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
"Committed to Total Service Excellence"
/0
,/ " <',- ,) \
",'" ""J" .-;;:~., ..~~~~. >,\
/' :.~.. \
T05-HI
/
~)'~)")
'.'
"
\
\>
6. Page #7 section 3.3 g.-" Kidd's Creek Culverts, #77 and #78". The City of Barrie's Kidd's
Creek EA document indicates that this creek is a cold water fish habitat. in that regard, [he
drainage report should be revised to identify this important issue. It should be noted that the
City of Barrie has concerns with the Kidd's Creek regional storm spill southerly to Bunker's
Creek. Bunker's Creek has existing serious capacity problems downstream, and this potential
spiU would only further increase the damages on the watershed. Also, culvert #77 is located
within the Bunker's Creek Watershed, and should be identified under item (f) of the document.
URS Cole Sherman
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario
L3T 7N9
(/
",
~
~\
..-
//
/
/..-/
\
\
",
'''\\
\
Attention:
L. Kozachuk, Project Manger
/
Dear Sir:
Re:
Drainage and Hydrology Report "Highway 400 - Highway 89 to Highway 11"
7. Page #8 - section 3.3 h. - "Sophia Creek culvert #79". The Sophia Creek Master Drainage Plan
Update has been completed, and the document was adopted in February of 2002.
Further to the receipt of the above noted report on January 24th, 2003, and the meeting at the local
district Ministry of Natural Resources offices in Midhurst on February 6,2003, please be advised of the
City of Barrie's following concerns and comments associated with your document:
8. Section 5.0 - "Proposed Conditions". The document identifies that the section of the project,
located between the interchanges of Highway 89 and Essa Road, will be moved westerly to
preserve the east edge of asphalt. This road alignment could impact upon an existing
Stormwater Management Facility, located south of Molson Park Drive. This facility provides
pre to post runoff controls for development adjacent to the west side of the highway. The loss or
alteration of this facility could impact upon the capacity of the highway crossing and the
watershed downstream. It is our understanding that the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation
Authority, the Ministry of the Environment and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation provided
the review and approval of the facility at the time the project was developed; therefore, you may
wish to investigate the Ministry files to ensure that there are no negative impacts upon this
facility when the highway is expanded.
1. Page #1- section 2.0 -"Study Area." Reference is made to the County of Springwater. This
should be revised to indicate Township of Springwater. The study area would also appear to
include the Township of Oro/Medonte at the northerly limit ofthe project.
2. Page #2 - section 2.0 -"Study Area." The first paragraph should also indicate that runoff drains
into Little Lake and Willow Creek as it extends around the north end of the City of Barrie.
=. P~ge #2 - S~::ticn 3.1 . "Str..lcr..rr::.! P..~pC'rt" ~~ r~p0rt \"I.'OqJ(1 ap;,ear to only analyse 10 % of
the existing culvert inventory within the project boundary. Also, the structural analysis did not
address any culverts located within the City of Barrie Boundaries. The report indicates that the
structural condition of the culverts inspected is identified as only being in fair condition. We
have concerns with the less than optimum conditions of the existing culverts inspected. These
structures, located in a rural area, would have much less aggressive environmental conditions
placed upon them than those within the City of Barrie. These Structures are +/- Fifty (50) years
old and are nearing their life expectancy. It would only appear prudent to consider replacing
them to provide another 50+ years of service. In that regard, we would strongly recommend that
further structural investigation of all the culverts be undertaken.
9. Page #11 - Table #4 - "Comparison of Existing and Future Pavement Areas". In respect to the
culverts located within the City of Barrie, Culverts #64 to 85, could you please provide a copy of
the background drainage plan that identifies the existing and future pavement area for each
culvert.
10. Page #12 - section 6.1 - "Hydraulic Criteria". As noted in our meeting, the Highway 400
Corridor is considered a vital route to Central and Northern Ontario for emergency and
transportation services. The Ministry Directive, note (3), indicates that the criteria may be
modified to maintain these vital routes during regional flood conditions. Also, in respect to the
Kidd's Creek, Bunker's Creek and Dyment's Creek crossings, the regional storm flows will spill
to adjacent watersheds along the highway, not only affecting the traffic functions but also the
affected watersheds. As noted in the City of Barrie's EA documents for these crossings, and the
public information meetings that have occurred, City of Barrie staff and the general public have
supported the recommendation of no drainage overtopping on the road surface of the highway,
4. Page #5 - section 3.3 -"Watershed Studies." The list of watersheds that are within the City of
Barrie should not include Innisfil Creek, as this water course is not located within the City of
Barrie Boundaries.
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS Cole Sherman
June 03, 2003
URS Cole Sherman
June 03, 2003
-3-
-4-
It also has been the understanding of the City of Barrie that permitting the spin of floodwaters to
adjacent watersheds would be in contravention of the Provincial Flood Plain Policy Statement,
and would not satisfy the design criteria set by the MTO. In that regard, it is recommended that
the design criteria for culvert crossings be reconsidered as the impacts of the proposed design
criteria may produce less than positive impacts.
16. Page #29 - Section 10.2 - "Impacts of Highway Widening". The watershed studies, being
undertaken by the City of Barrie, have an identified fish habitat in the watercourses that cross
Hlghway 400, specifically brook trout that are an indicator species for fish habitat. It would be
expected that the drainage study would address the potential impacts of water quantity and
quality, not only at the highway crossing but also downstream. The report, however, does not
address any existing deficient conditions that should also be corrected in addition to the
widening works.
11. Page #13 - Section 6.2 - "Stormwater Management Criteria". The City of Barrie recognizes the
limitations that the Ministry of Transportation has with regard to the provision of quantity and
quality control facilities in the highway corridor. In that regard, the City of Barrie would expect
mutual cooperation with regard to the cost sharing of construction, maintenance and liabilities of
downstream structure upgrades, associated with the increased hydraulic loading upon municipal
facilities where control facilities cannot be constructed.
12. Page #14 - section 8.0 - "Culvert Analysis". As discussed in the meeting, the City of Barrie is
concerned with the increased length of the culvert structures. Please provide clarification as to
what design features are being implemented to account for fish passage and proper mamtenance.
In addition to the maintenance issues, could you please clarify what the hydraulic impacts of
these culvert extensions will have upon adjacent service road crossings such as Fairview Road,
Dyment Road and Hart Drive.
17. Page #31- Section 10.3 - "Proposed Stormwater Management Measures". Pond # 6 is being
proposed in a location that has already been identified by the City of Barrie in the Hotchkiss
Creek Master Drainage Plan EA update. This proposal has already received approval from the
Provincial Ministries, including Transportation. The City of Barrie would have no objection to
a shared facility under the understanding that the City of Barrie's requirements would take
priority should size limitations arise, and that the costs of design, land acquisition, construction,
and maintenance are shared appropriately.
14. Page #19 - Section #8.2 - "Hydraulics". The City of Barrie's studies for Bunker's Creek and
Dyment's Creek, as well as Kidd's Creek, have identified that spills occur at these highway
crossings. Kidd's Creek will only spill during a regional event. These spills, however, will be
directing drainage from one watershed to another. It is our understanding, based upon the
criteria indicated by the MTO, that the 1: 1 00 year event is to be conveyed without overtopping
the highway surface or spilling to adjacent watersheds. Also, please advise us of the Ministry of
Natural Resources and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority's position regarding the
Ministry of Transportation's intentions to direct drainage from one watershed to another, as a
direct result of these conveyance limitations. It would appear that the study has made the
assumption that all the culverts are fimctioning under inlet control conditions. The drainage
studies, undertaken by the City of Barrie that have been conducted on Whiskey Creek, (culvert
#69). Dyment's Creek (culvert #73), Bunker's Creek (culvert #'s 74, 75, 76), all function under
outlet control, which reduces the conveyance capacity of the structures. In that regard, we
would request that the above noted culverts be re-assessed. It should be noted as well that
culverts, located downstream from the spill, must account for the additional flows that are being
directed to its inlet.
18. Page #32 - SectionlO.3 - "Proposed Stormwater Management Measures". The second paragraph
(last line) indicates that the proposed grassed swales do not meet the Ministry of the
Environment criteria; therefore, the City of Barrie would not consider these features acceptable
for providing primary water quality measures. As noted in previous comments, the City of
Barrie is expected to conform to the MOE criteria for its projects as regulated by the Ministry of
the Environment, The Ministry of Natural Resources, The Department of Fisheries and Oceans,
and conservation authorities. Therefore, it would be our understanding that this project would
only support and provide leadership in implementing Provincial and various other authority's
requirements for water quality.
13. Page #18 - Table #8 - "Culvert Peak Flow Summary". Upon reviewing the modelling supplied
with the report, and comparing the flows indicated on Table #8, there appears to be differences
in the pre and future condition flows. Please review and clarify.
19. Page #32 - Section 10.3 - "Table 15: Enhanced Ditch Locations". We have concerns with the
proposed location of enhanced ditches at stations 26+325 to 26+755, 27+330 to 10+090 and
12+ 315 to 14+510. The existing culvert crossings, in all these areas, experience backwater
adjacent to the highway. In respect to the area 12+315 to 14+510, the existing culverts spill
southerly through the ditches from the Bunker's Creek watershed to Dyment's Creek. The
implementation of this control will produce increased flood elevations on private lands, as well
as increase the probability of spill from the Bunker's watershed to Dyment's Creek.
15. Page #27 Section 10.0 - "Stormwater Management". We recognize the various alternatives and
have no objections to their use; however, as with all new developments within each watershed in
the City of Barrie, we have concerns with the increase of flows and pollutants into the
watercourses. In that regard, the City of Barrie has identified, in the watershed study updates,
that all development/redevelopment will be required to provide quantity and quality controls.
The quantity controls can be either site controls or a mutual facility that is shared. In respect to
the quality issue, each development must provide Ministry of the Environment Level "1" quality
controls. It should be noted that the City of Barrie has had to provide such controls on its
projects that directly outlet to these watercourses. Please confirm if the Ministry of the
Environment has acknowledged the controls proposed.
20. Page #33 Section 10.4 - "Increase in Peak Flow". We have concerns with any peak flow
increases on the watersheds within the City of Barrie. As identified in this section, the culvert
#70 (Whiskey Creek North crossing) experiences the greatest percentage of increase. The City
of Barrie is investigating methods of controlling the Whiskey Creek watershed downstream of
this crossing to limit flood impacts upon the watercourse. Similar to the Ministry of
Transportation, we must acquire lands to construct a facility. The areas for such a facility are
limited, and with the increased peaks now being proposed with the widening, places a greater
design and financial burden upon the City of Barrie. Please advise how the Ministry intends
assisting us in resolving this issue.
21. Pages #36 and #37 - Section 10.4 - "Table 17: Summary of Treatment Levels." The table has
not identified the following culverts as supporting Fish Habitat: Lover's Creek Tributaries (#64,
65, 66, 68), Hotchkiss Creek tributary (# 72), and Bunker's Creek Tributaries (#74, 75). The
studies, undertaken by the City of Barrie for these watercourses, have identified these tributaries
as areas that supply base flow to the main watercourse channels. We would recommend that any
proposed works on these tributaries must consider the impacts, if any, to the habitat of the
watershed.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
June 03,2003
URS Cole Sherman
June 03, 2003
-6-
-5-
22. Modelling Comments and Concerns:
a) Sub-catchment areas, used for the modelling of culverts within Bame, should be clearly
depicted. Catchment areas and future drainage basin characteristics for the existing,
future, and regional stonn analysis, should be indicated and updated based on ultimate
development conditions (per MTO directive B-I00) and the City of Barrie Zoning
By-Law 85-95;
b) Modelling used rain data from Toronto. Local rain data for the 100 year, 24 hour event
is approximately 15% greater in total rainfall than the Toronto rain data. The City of
Barrie Drainage and Stonn Sewage Policies and Criteria contain rainfall distribution
based on rain data from Orillia. Rain data, recorded by MOE at the Barrie WPCC since
1968, confinns that the Toronto Airport rain data typically underestimates the total
rainfall for the Barrie area. Local rain data should be used for all modelling;
If you have any questions or concerns with regard to the above comments, or should you wish to arrange
a meeting to discuss them, please contact the undersigned at (705) 739-4207, extension 4514.
L. Cooney
Senior Project and Services Technologist
c) The Ti1T:mins RegioD.al storm \vas i110delled but :10t the Hl~rricane lIaz~l 2t0!TI1 e'lent. ...~
recently completed study undertaken by Environment Canada on Ontario heavy rainfall
events confinns that the use of Hurricane Hazel, as a regulatory event, is realistic. It is
also our understanding that the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority requires
that all watercourses that are a tributary to the Lake Simcoe watershed basin be
modelled with the Hurricane Hazel stonn event;
d) Please provide details on how the regulatory stonn (the more critical of the Hurricane
Hazel or the 100 year stonn) would be safely conveyed without impacting other
watersheds, adjacent buildings, developable land or overtopping the highway. As a
minimum, the City of Barrie would anticipate that all culvert crossing draining areas
greater than 130 ha (per the MTO Drainage Manual), or otherwise identified by the City
of Barrie through the master drainage planning, be designed to convey the more critical
of the regional flood (Hurricane Hazel) or the 100 year flood for the ultimate
development conditions; and
e) Page #16 - section 8.1 - "Hydrology". Upon reviewing the Hydrologic modelling for
culvert #69 (Whiskey Creek), we have concerns with the use of the Nashyd command.
The catchment, in accordance with your background infonnation, appears to have
greater than 20 % of the catchment area as impervious. On that basis, we understand
the stonn model used, and that the catchment area should be modelled using a Standhyd
command to represent the response from the catchment. It is suggested that all
c~tchree~.it3, located .'f'vith~n the city, be rr:oden~d u~d~r ttl(' S!uildhyd c(\njm.ar~d. !-..150::
cc: R. G. Newlove, Director of Engineering, City of Barrie
R. Forward, Manager of Infrastructure Planning
T. Hogenbirk, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
G. Switzer, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
G. Finley, Ministry of Natural Resources (Midhurst)
R. Scheuneman, Planning Engineer
could you please advise why a Chicago 3-hour stonn event was modelled? Typically,
the City of Barrie would use a 4-hour Chicago event.
23. For ease of review, we would like to recommend that Highway 400 plans be combined with the
corresponding profiles.
24. Table 6 Page 16, Culvert #81 is missing from Table.
25. Culverts should be made fish passable. Please provide details on how this will be accomplished.
26. To expedite future review, please include digital copies of all computer models, associated
rain data, and output files.
Lovers Creek Watershed
Master Plan / Environment / Hydrologic
o Lovers Creek & Hewitts Creek Master Watershed Plan, December 1995. (LSRCA)
Whiskey Creek
Class EA
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document March 2002. ("Draft")
Background / Aquatic Habitat
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update BackgrOlmd Summary Report March 2002. ("Draft")
Hydrologic
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document Appendix Document- Volume 1
March 2002. ("Draft")
Hydraulic
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document Appendix Document- Volume 2
March 2002. ("Draft")
Hotchkiss Creek
Class EA
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document October 2000.
Background / Inventory
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Background Summary Report April 2000.
Hydrologic
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Appendix Document -Volume 1 October
2000.
Hydraulic
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Appendix Document -Volume 2 October
2000.
Aquatic Environment
o Existing Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat conditions on Hotchkiss Creek at eight culvert crossings in the City of Barrie July
2001.
Master Drainage Plan
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, January 2002. ("Draft")
Dyments Creek
Hydrology
o Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan Study Update Technical Appendix No.1 Hydrology, March 2003. ("Draft")
Background
o Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan Study Update Background Study Report, May 2000. ("Draft")
Inventory
o Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan Study Update Structure Inventory Report, November 1999. ("Draft")
Bunkers Creek
Class EA
o Bunkers's Creek Ivlaster Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document, March 2001.
o Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document Appendix -E- Hydrotechnical
Assessments, March 2001.
Background / Inventory / Aquatic Environment
o Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Existing Conditions Report, October 1999.
Hydrologic / Hydraulic
o Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Drainage Conditions Report, May 1999.
Kidds Creek
Class EA
o Kidd' s Creek Master Drainage Plan Class Environmental Assessment Report, December 2001.
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Class Environmental Assessment Report Appendix -D- Hydrologic and Hydraulic
Calculations (Alternatives B & C), December 2001.
Hydraulic / Hydrology
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Report December 200l.
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Appendix -A- Hydrology, December 2001.
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Appendix - B- Hydraulics, December 2001
Background / Inventory / Aquatic Environment
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Background Study Report, December 2001
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Background Study Report Appendices A to G, December 2001.
Sophia Creek
Master Drainage Plan
o Sophia Creek Watershed Master Drainage Plan February 2002
Class EA
o Sophia Creek Watershed Master Drainage Plan Class Environmental Assessment planning process Synopsis of Planning
process & conclusions December 1997
Barrie Digital Data (NAD 83)
o Aerial Photo Mosaic of Barrie, December 2001
o Land Parcel Base
o Barrie Stonn Map
o Contours (circa 1980)
Miscellaneous
o City of Barrie's Drainage & Stonn Sewage Policies and Criteria (contains IDF curves, and design storms)
o Atmospheric Environment Service IDF Data for the Barrie Vv'aste Pollution Control Center
o Barrie Official Land Use Plan
o Barrie Zoning By-Law 85-95 and associated plan
o Barrie population projections
o Environment Canada Heavy Rainfall Study, commissioned by MNR and Conservation Ontario and associated staff
report from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY HALL
70 COLLIER STREET
TEL. (705) 739-4207
FAX. (705) 739-4247
iVi4',- B,5
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
2
File: T05-HI
URS Cole Sherman
June 3. 2003
P.O. BOX 400
BARRIE, ONTARIO
L4M 4TS
THE CORPORA nON OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
COMMUNITY SERVICES
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
"Committed to Total Service Excellence"
T05-HI
4. Page #5 - Section 6.1 "Groundwater Recharge Areas" As noted above in Item #4 the
City investigation of the various watersheds has indicated that the Whiskey (Station
26+750) and Hotchkiss (Station 29+280) Creek watersheds have areas adjacent to
Highway 400 that are identified as recharge areas. To maintain the existing water
conditions and habitat of the water courses the impacts upon these recharge areas should
be further investigated to ensure no negative impacts arise with the proposed highway
widening.
June 3, 2003
..-~"\
\
URS Cole Sherman
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario
L3T 71"';9
JU\'\ 9 'l.UU~
5. Page #6 Sections 6.2, "Groundwater Discharge Areas" - The report indicates that there
are two (2) significant locations with groundwater discharge within the project area,
however, it only identifies the site between chainage (Stations 12+925 and 13+080).
Please advise as to where the second location is? The environmental assessment study
completed by the City of Barrie for the Bunkers Creek watercourse (Stations 12+200 and
12+448) indicates that the watercourse has numerous groundwater seeps in the creek
valley as it approaches the watercourse crossing of Highway 400. The impacts of the
highway widening in this area upon this water source for the Bunkers Creek should be
considered.
Attention:
L. Kozachuk Project Manager.
Dear Sir:
RE: Natural Sciences Technical Report
"Planning Study Highway 400
from Highway 89 northerly to Highway 11"
6. Page #26 Section 7.3." Mitigation" We have concerns with the third and fourth points.
The City, in addition to the MNR, DFO and Conservation Authorities have developed
criteria based upon our experiences with construction sites and DFO litigation issues.
The criteria specifies that construction areas that exceed 30 days of inactivity shall be
stabilized by seeding. This includes all stockpiles of fill and topsoil. The criteria also
indicates that all areas that have not sustained any growth within 14 days of application
shall receive supplemental applications until the surface vegetation is established. We
have found that the 30 day period is insufficient and that severe erosion and sediment
damage can occur over this time period. On this basis we would request that the
proposed mitigation measures be re-evaluated.
Further to the receipt of the above noted report on January 24th, 2003 and the meeting at the
local district MNR offices in Midhurst on February 6th 2003, please be advised of the City's
following concerns and comments associated with your document:
1. Page #2 - Section 3.0 "Setting". The second sentence should be revised to indicate
through the Town of Innisfil and the Townships of Springwater and Oro/Medonte as
well as the City of Barrie. In that regard, all reference to Vespra Township should be
revised to indicate the appropriate Municipality.
2. It is sUQQested that coordinating the identification of culvert crossings in this Natural
Science~'-' report with the URS -Cole Sherman Drainage and Hydrology report would
assist in cross referencing the issues with each culvert crossing for the two (2) studies.
7. Page #29 - Section lO.l, "Expected Impacts" The report does not appear to address the
areas where highway cross-culverts are identified to be twinned. The Cole Sherman
Drainage and Hydrology Report specifically identifies eight (8) crossings that will
require additional culverts. Also, subject to our comments regarding the Drainage and
Hydrology report, the number of additional culverts required may increase. In that regard
the report should be revised to address the additional culverts and the impacts upon the
watercourse.
3. Page #4 Section 5.0 "Surface Drainage" The report specifically identifies Innisfil and
Lover's Creek however it does not acknowledge the various watersheds (Whiskey,
Hotchkiss, Dyment's, Bunkers, Kidd's and Sophia Creek) located in the City of Barrie.
The City is currently undertaking update studies of all these watercourses through
various Municipal Class Environmental Assessments. The Municipal Class EA
documents for Hotchkiss, Bunkers, Kidd's and Sophia Creeks are now complete. A
complete list of available related master drainage planning documents within the City of
Barrie is attached. This information can be made available upon request (release of
digital data is subject to a signing of a letter of understanding).
8. Figure 9 & 10, a quick review of the depicted Natural Heritage Features has found
discrepancies at the following chainages (Stations 11 +030, 11 +600 and 12+400). The
base maps used in these figures appear outdated. The city has an aerial photo taken on
December 2001, which may be of assistance, and is available upon request.
9. Crossing at Station 29+280 (Hotchkiss Creek) was identified in the City of Barrie's
master drainage planning as cool water fisheries. As part of the Master Drainage
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
3
File: T05-HI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS Cole Sherman
June 3, 2003
Planning the natural environment of selective creeks within Barrie were assessed and
these reports are available upon request.
10. Additional details are required on how thermal pollution effects would be mitigated
within watersheds identified as supporting cold or cool water fisheries.
11. Please advise how culvert retrofits would be made fish passable.
The water courses that cross the Highway 400 system and drain through the City of Barrie, all
outlet to Kempenfeit Bay. The Bay has been identiiied as a Ministry of the Environment Levei
#1 receiver. In that regard, the Natural Sciences Technical Report must consider not only the
direct impacts associated with the highway expansion, it must also address the eventual impacts
upon the receiving outlet into the Bay.
If you have any questions and/or concerns with regard to the above comments, or should you
wish to arrange a meeting to discuss them, please contact the undersigned at (705) 739-4207
extension number (4514).
Yours truly,
CITY OF BARRIE
~~
L. Cooney,
Senior Project and Services Technologist
LMC:deg
:J'" R. Newlove, Engineering D~p:::.rtll~en!
R. Forward, Engineering Department
T. Hogenbirk, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
R. Scheuneman, EngiDeering Department
G. Switzer, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
G. Findley, Ministry of Natural Resources (Midhurst District office)
I
Lovers Creek Watershed
Master Plan / Environment / Hydrologic
o Lovers Creek & Hewitts Creek Master Watershed Plan, December 1995. (LSRCA)
Whiskey Creek
Class EA
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document March 2002. ("Draft")
Background / Aquatic Habitat
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Background Summary Report March 2002. ("Draft")
Hydrologic
o Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document Appendix Document- Volume I
March 2002. ("Draft")
Hydraulic
D Whiskey Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document Appendix Document- Volume 2
March 2002. ("Draft")
Hotchkiss Creek
Class EA
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document October 2000.
Background / Inventory
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Background Summary Report April 2000.
Hydrologic
D Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Appendix Document -Volume 1 October
2000.
Hydraulic
D Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Appendix Document -Volume 2 October
2000.
Aquatic Environment
D Existing Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat conditions on Hotchkiss Creek at eight culvert crossings in the City of Barrie July
200l.
Master Drainage Plan
o Hotchkiss Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, January 2002. ("Draft")
Dyments Creek
Hydrology
D Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan Study Update Technical Appendix No.1 Hydrology, March 2003. ("Draft")
Background
D Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan Study Update Background Study Report, May 2000. ("Draft")
Inventory
D Dyment's Creek Master Drainage Plan Study Update Structure Inventory Report, November 1999. ("Draft")
Bunkers Creek
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Appendix -B- Hydraulics, December 2001
Background / InventOlY / Aquatic Environment
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Background Study Report, December 2001
o Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Background Study Report Appendices A to G , December 2001.
Sophia Creek
Master Drainage Plan
o Sophia Creek Watershed Master Drainage Plan February 2002
Class EA
o Sophia Creek Watershed Master Drainage Plan Class Environmental Assessment planning process Synopsis of Planning
process & conclusions December 1997
Barrie Digital Data (NAD 83)
o Aerial Photo Mosaic of Barrie, December 2001
D Land Parcel Base
o Barrie Stonn Map
D Contours (circa 1980)
Miscellaneous
o City of Barrie's Drainage & Stonn Sewage Policies and Criteria (contains IDF curves, and design storms)
D Atmospheric Environment Service IDF Data for the Barrie Waste Pollution Control Center
o Barrie Official Land Use Plan
o Barrie Zoning By-Law 85-95 and associated plan
o Barrie population projections
D Environment Canada Heavy Rainfall Study, commissioned by MNR and Conservation Ontario and associated staff
report from the Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authority
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Class EA
I
o Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document, March 2001.
o Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Environmental Assessment Document Appendix -E- Hydrotechnical
Assessments, March 2001.
Background / Inventory / Aquatic Environment
D Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Existing Conditions Report, October 1999.
Hydrologic / Hydraulic
D Bunkers's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update Drainage Conditions Report, May 1999.
Kidds Creek
Class EA
D Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Class Environmental Assessment Report, December 200l.
D Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Class Environmental Assessment Report Appendix -D- Hydrologic and Hydraulic
Calculations (Altematives B & C), December 200l.
Hydraulic / Hydrology
D Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Report December 200l.
D Kidd's Creek Master Drainage Plan Hydrology and Hydraulics Report Appendix -A- Hydrology, December 2001.
I
I
I
I
I
CITY HAll
70 COLLIER STREET
TEL. (705) 739-4207
FA,X. (705) 739-4247
P.O. BOX 400
BARRIE. ONTARIO
l4M 4T5
THE CORPORA nON OF THE CITY OF BARRIE
COMMUNITY SERVICES
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
"Committed to Total Service Excellence"
May 22, 2003
T05-HI
_' ------1
- ,
,
Ministry of Transportation
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region
659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario
N6E 1L3
" i,{
\ \~~....
i
\
\
~
\ =--
)IJIi"....-.:$'-
U).
. (~ 'to
~>>v -
Attention:
Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
Dear Sir:
RE: G. W. P. 30-95-00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 KIn South of Highway 89, Northerly to 30 KIn to Highway 11
District 33, Owen Sound
Thank you for your letter dated March 12,2003, which is in response to our comments on the
proposed Highway 400 improvements dated July 24, 2002.
The City of Barrie staff have reviewed your response and wish to provide the following
general comments:
The City of Barrie is cUlTently updating our 1999 Transportation Study which should be
completed in 2003. Upon completion and acceptance by Council of this Transportation
Study, we will forward a copy to your office. Coordination between the City of Barrie and
the MTO will be necessary in dealing with Highway 400 interchanges and under/overpasses,
especially for the number of lanes required over/under the Highway 400 on the City of
Barrie's road network.
" ,,-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
MTO. K. Boudreau
May 22. 2003
-2-
Part of this coordination effort will involve completing an Environmental Assessment for the
under/over passes with City of Barrie streets in order that proper planning and public
consultation can take place. The City of Barrie will involve the MTO at various stages, and
an ongoing relationship is necessary to provide a safe and effective road network.
We would be pleased to discuss any widening of bridge works in Barrie to develop a cost
sharing alTangement at your earliest convenience.
Upon review, the MTO states that the proposed planning and design of the proposed Highway
400 widening is based on the 2011 traffic projections that were made in 1999. The City of
Barrie is concerned that these 2011 traffic projections are under estimated. Recent
information shows that Barrie and the surrounding areas are significantly exceeding the
population and traffic projections. It is probable that the design capacities may be exceeded
in a matter of only a few years after construction is complete. These traffic projections are
crucial to the planning, design, and implementation of the proposed Highway 400 widening.
The City of Barrie Council would like to be briefed at certain stages of your Environmental
Assessment process and notified if there are any major changes and/or issues within the City
of Barrie. We are relying on your discretion to set up any briefing or meetings between the
Ministry of Transportation of Ontario and our Counci1.
The following "italicized" comments are in response to your letter and follow the original
numerical form:
Point 1 - Hh?:hways 400 and 89
City of Barrie - Consideration should be given to the installation of a commuter parking lot on
the southwest side of Highway 400. This would save commuters time by not requiring them
to travel under the bridge to the east side commuter parking lot and then back under the bridge
to the west to access the highway. A delay of 1 minute in a.m. peak could cause 5 to 15
minute delay down the highway due to traffic backups and gridlock to the south.
MTO - The ministry is supportive of providing commuter parking along ministry highways.
This principle supports the ministry's desire to reduce congestion and energy consumption as
well as improving traffic operation and reducing potential hazards of unauthorized parking.
This planning and preliminary design study will identify and make recommendations on the
opportunities to provide commuter parking throughout the study area. Commuter parking lot
sites were investigated at the Highway 400 and Highway 89 interchange. The result of this
analysis suggests that there is a potential commuter parking lot replacement site available in
the northeast quadrant. The exact location and details of the commuter parking lot will be
determined in later design stages.
City of Barrie - The a.m. peak is the most crucial time period, therefore we feel strongly that
commuter parking lots along Highway 400 should be constructed on the southwest quadrant,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Engineering Department
File: TOS-HI
Engineenng Department
File: TOS-HI
MTO, K. Boudreau
Mav 22, 2003
MTO, K. Boudreau
May 22, 2003
-3-
-4-
if at all possible. This area will be the most effective location for commuters and at a number
of locations is vacant land at this time, especially from Barrie south.
traffic for a total of four (4) lanes. It is unclear to us whether the MTO is planning to have
four (4) or six (6) lanes of traffic on the Innisfil Beach Road underpass.
Point 7 - Highway 400 and 4th Line of Innism
POINT 17 - Highway 400 and Lockhart Road
City of Barrie - Consideration should be given to constructing the bridge to four (4) lanes, or
have the ability to easily twin the bridge to accommodate potential future growth in the area.
City of Barrie - Consideration should be explored regarding the extension of Lockhart Road
either under or over Highway 400.
MTO - Based on available traffic information, the proposed two (2) lane cross-section on the
structure is adequate to serve the 2011 travel demand on this facility. The need for additional
lanes on the structure will be reviewed in consultation with the local municipality upon
commencement of detail design. If, at this time of detail design, there is not a clearly defined
widening need approved by the City, the consultation will include, whether or not there is a
need to design a specific structure type to allow for width expansion.
MTO As the MTO in not the proponent of this initiative our involvement would be limited
to commenting and participating as an external review agency to this undertaking.
City of Barrie - We are concerned that the 2011 traffic projections do not forecast far enough
into the future, and would like clarification regarding your growth projections which are
incorporated in your planning and design works.
City of Barrie - The Ontario Ministry of Transportation should consider an
overpass/underpass at Lockhart Road to help relieve traffic congestion at the Molson Park
Drive Interchange. The City of Barrie will advance this alternative for consideration in the
Municipal Class EA, but we feel that the construction works should be undertaken by the
MTO.
POINT 18 - Highway 400 and Molson Park Drive
POINT 8 - Highway 400 and 6th Line of Innism
City of Barrie - The southbound east/west off-ramp and the northbound east/west off-ramp
should be widened to provide three (3) lanes for the entire length of the ramps. More storage
. is required as traffic presently backs up onto the Highway at both locations. The centre ramp
lane should be used for right or left turning traffic.
City of Barrie - Consideration should be given to constructing the bridge to four (4) lanes, or
have the ability easily twin the bridge to accommodate potential future growth in the area.
MTO - Based on available traffic information, the proposed two (2) lane cross-section on the
structure is adequate to serve the 2011 travel demand on this facility. The need for additional
lanes on the structure will be reviewed in consultation with the local municipality upon
commencement of detail design. If, at this time of detail design, there is not a clearly defined
widening need approved by the City, the construction will include, whether or not there is a
need to design a specific structure type to allow for width expansion.
MTO - A third lane will be provided on the southbound east/west ramp. The ramp will be
two (2) lanes south of the bullnose. The third lane will be developed north of the bullnose.
Projected traffic volumes indicate that this configuration will be adequate to beyond 2011.
City of Barrie - We are concerned that the 2011 traffic projections do not forecast far enough
into the future, and would like clarification regarding your growth projections which are
incorporated in your planning and design works.
City of Barrie - You have addressed our comments on the south-east/west ramp to our
satisfaction but have not provided any comments on the north-east/west ramp (N-E/W).
Please advise us of your plans on the north-east/west ramp of the Molson Park Drive
Interchange.
POINT 19 - Highway 400 and Molson Park Drive
POINT 12 - Highway 400 and Innism Beach Road
City of Barrie Design of all drainage culverts, utility crossings, water and trunk sewer
infrastructure, etc. should be coordinated with the City of Barrie.
City of Barrie Bridge structure should have capacity for six (6) lanes of traffic (two (2) lanes
for ramp traffic and two (2) lanes for through traffic in each direction).
MTO - URS Cole Sherman has been in contact and coordinating with the City of Barrie
throughout this project regarding drainage issues. A commitment to on-going consultation
with the City on drainage, utilities and water and sewer infrastructure issues is included in our
study report.
MTO - The Innisfil Beach road structure has been designed to accommodate six (6) lanes.
City of Barrie - The Innisfil Beach Road structure should have six (6) lanes of traffic under
Highway 400. Your drawings show two (2) lanes of ramp traffic and two (2) lanes of through
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l\1TO, K. Boudreau
May 22, 2003
MTO, K. Boudreau
May 22, 2003
-5-
-6-
City of Barrie - The City of Barrie is undergoing a comprehensive review of your drainage
report and significant comments to this report will be forwarded to your office in the near
future.
City of Barrie - The City of Barrie is undergoing a comprehensive review of the drainage
report and significant comments to this report will be forwarded to your office in the near
fitture.
POINT 21 - Highwav 400 and Molson Park Drive
POINT 31 - Highway 400 and Essa Road
City of Barrie - Consideration should be given to constructing the highway to ten (10) lanes
between Molson Park Drive and Essa Road.
City of Barrie - Size of culvert crossings should be reviewed.
MTO - Staging details and timing of construction of the recommended improvements will be
detennined subsequent to the completion and clearance of the Transportation Environmental
Study Report.
MTO - The sizes of the existing and proposed culverts were reviewed. The revised
infonnation was included in the draft Drainage and Hydrology Report that was provided to
the City of Barrie for review. We will incorporate any comments and revisions in our final
reports.
City of Barrie - To clarify our previous comment, we believe that consideration should be
given to constmcting Highway 400 to 10 lanes between Molson Park Drive and Essa Road.
This is part of your future plans, but we believe that it will be essential at the time this
widening is constructed.
City of Barrie - The City of Barrie is undergoing a comprehensive review of the drainage
report and significant comments to this report will be forwarded to your office in the near
future.
POINT 33 - Highway 400 and Tiffin Street
POINT 22 - Highway 400 and Big Bay Point Road
City of Barrie - Big Bay Point Road and Harvie Road should be extended across Highway
400 at the time of construction.
City of Barrie - The existing structure for the Barrie Collingwood Railway Bridge just south
. of Tiffin Street should be reviewed. This may need rehabilitation or expansion.
City of Barrie The Ontario Ministry of Transportation should consider an underpass to help
relieve traffic congestion at the Molson Park Drive Interchange. The City will advance this
alternative for consideration in the Municipal Class EA, but we feel that the constmction
works should be undertaken by the MTO.
MTO - The railway structure was reviewed as part of this study. The recommendation is to
replace the structure with a hollow slab bridge deck with integrated abutments. The new
bridge will be sufficiently wide to accommodate the ultimate widening of Highway 400 and
the span will accommodate the existing single track. We have included the preliminary
general arrangement drawings of the structure for your review.
MTO - As the MTO in not the proponent of this initiative our involvement would be limited
to commenting and participating as an external review agency to this undertaking.
City of Barrie - We are reviewing the drawing and will comment under separate cover.
POINT 34 - Highway 400 and Tiffin Street
POINT 26 - Highwav 400 and Essa Road
City of Barrie - There are a number of watercourses throughout this area that do not seem to
be identified. It should also be clarified whether or not Environmental Assessments are
required for these facilities.
City of Barrie - As per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study, provision should be given to
the design of the underpass to accommodate the future construction of Tiffin Street to six (6)
lanes with sidewalks.
MTO - Our study included a review of natural drainage features and other surface drainage
features and a review of City of Barrie drainage reports. Draft copies of the Natural
Environment Impact Assessment Report and the drainage and Hydrology Report were
provided to the City of Barrie for review. We will incorporate any of your comments as part
of revisions to our final reports.
MTO - The proposed Tiffin Street structure is designed to accommodate four (4) lanes, in
accordance with the Barrie Transportation Study (April, 1999, page 47). In addition, adequate
width has been provided under the structure to accommodate sidewalks.
City of Barrie - With recent growth predictions that are forecasted within Barrie and the
surrounding areas, we believe that the filture construction of Tiffin Street to 6 lanes, with
sidewalks, will be warranted. Again, once our Transportation Study is completed we will
contact you with filrther comments.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
Engmeering Department
File: T05-HI
MTO, K. Boudreau
Mav 22,2003
MIO, K. Boudreau
May 22, 2003
-7-
-8-
POINT 37 - Hi2hway 400 and Dunlop Street
POINT 48 - Hi2hwav 400 at St. Vincent Street
City of Barrie - As per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study, provision should be given in
the design of the overpass for the construction of Dunlop Street to seven (7) lanes.
City of Barrie - The bridge structure is viewed to accommodate six (6) lanes of traffic and
sidewalks over Highway 400 as per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study.
MTa - The proposed structure will accommodate the City of Barrie's proposed widening of
Dunlop Street. We are proposing that six (6) lanes (four (4) westbound and two (2) eastbound
lanes) be provided on the structure itself. This will facilitate incorporating the ramp entrance
onto eastbound Dunlop Street from northbound Highway 400.
MTO - No changes to the St. Vincent Street structure are proposed as part of this study. We
understand that this requirement will be part of the City's future needs for widening the St.
Vincent Street corridor. At an appropriate time, prior to commencement of your road-
widening project the City and MTa should discuss the required options for widening of this
structure.
City of Bame - Once the City of Barrie has completed the update to the 1999 Transportation
Report, the City will be approaching the MTO on this matter.
City of Barrie - Southbound off-ramp should be two (2) lanes at Dunlop Street.
City of Barrie - The City of Barrie will be initiating a Municipal Class Environmental
Assessment of the under/overpasses as stated above, and this will determine the bridge
structure that is needed to accommodate future transportation needs. The City of Barrie will
be involving the MTO in the Environmental Assessment and will forward a copy of the
updated Transportation Study. We feel that you should include this structure in your
planning, engineering, and construction of the widening of High way 400.
POINT 40 - Hi2hway 400 and Dunlop Street
MTa - The southbound exit at Dunlop Street has been designed with an extended
deceleration lane and wider throat at the ramp terminal, which will increase capacity and
storage at this highway exit. The single lane exit is appropriate for projected traffic volumes
using this exit.
POINT 49 - Hi2hway 400 at Duckworth Street
City of Barrie - We are concerned that the 2011 traffic projections do not forecast far enough
into the future, and would like clarification regarding your growth projections which are
incorporated in your planning and design works.
City of Barrie - Bridge structure should be constructed to accommodate a minimum of seven
(7) lanes of traffic, plus sidewalks on both sidewalks for Duckworth Street underpass as per
discussion with the City of Barrie and Read Voorhees and Associates.
POINT 47 - Hi2hway 400 at Rayfield Street
MTO - The proposed structure is designed to accommodate four (4) through lanes, one (1)
left turn lane and two (2) speed change lanes. The structure also accommodates sidewalks on
both sides.
City of Barrie - Pedestrian access from Rose Street to Bayfield Street needs to be addressed
due to the high number of students that use this route to access businesses along Bayfield
Street north of Highway 400.
City of Barrie - The City of Barrie will be initiating a Municipal Class Environmental
Assessment of the under/overpasses as stated above, and this will determine the bridge
stmcture that is needed to accommodate future transportation needs. The City of Barrie will
be involving the MTO in the Environmental Assessment and will forward a copy of the
updated Transportation Study. We feel that you should include this structure in your
planning, engineering, and construction of the widening of Highway 400.
MTa The recommended plan provides for sufficient boulevard along the ramp to provide a
sidewalk from Rose Street to Bayfield Street.
City of Barrie - Pedestrian access from Rose Street to Bayfield Street will have to be
addressed if Rose Street vehicle accesses are removed from Bayfield Street. The City of
Barrie must be involved in the plans for pedestrian access from Rose Street to Bayjield Street
so that a safe and effective pedestrian access is maintained. Also, the City of Barrie may have
traffic congestion problems because of the termination of Rose Street to Bayjield Street, and
will work with MTO on a resolution.
Engineering Department
File: T05-HI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MTO, K. Boudreau
May 22, 2003
-9-
In conclusion, we understand that the MTO is moving forward with their Environmental
Assessment regarding the Highway 400 widening and we would like to advise the MTO that
the City of Barrie will be initiating a Class Environmental Assessment on the
under/overpasses and interchanges with City of Barrie streets this year. The City of Barrie
would like to be closely involved with the MTO's works in progress so that everyone's best
interests can be coordinated in the future works of the Highway 400 widening, as while the
MTO must be part of our EA team. We will contact you in the near future to set up a meeting
between the MTO and ourselves so that we can discuss some of the above comments, and the
scheduling of the proposed future works.
Also, please find attached comments with respect to landscape and signage issues.
Yours truly,
Jlh7!JE
1. Parent, P. Eng.
Plaming Engineer
JP/deg
Encls.
pc:
R. Newlove, Director of Engineering
R. Forward, Manager of Infrastructure Planning
C. Mahar, Parks, Recreation and Culture
J. G. Harkness, MTO
J. Foster, MTO
L. Kozachuk, URS Cole Sherman
M. Bricks, URS Cole Sherman
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS
URS
May 21,2003
May 21, 2003
Mr. Jeff Parent
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
Mr. Mike Dodd
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
8195 Concession 8
Angus, Ontario
LOM 1BO
Dear Mr. Parent:
Dear Mr. Dodd:
RE: Comments Arising from Agency Meeting for the Ministry of Transportation
From 1 km south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway
lllHighway 400 (G.W.P. 30-95-00)
RE: Comments Arising from Agency Meeting for the Ministry of Transportation
From 1 km south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway
lllHighway 400 (G.W.P. 30-95-00)
We are working towards the completion of our Transportation Environmental Study Report
(TESR) and supporting documentation early June 2003 for the above project. We would like to
incorporate your comments on the Draft Natural Sciences Technical Report and Drainage and
Hydrology Report presented to you at our agency meeting held February 6, 2003 at the Midhurst
District Office. In order to adequately address any comments you may have, your cooperation in
submitting your comments by May 30, 2003 would be greatly appreciated.
Weare working towards the completion of our Transportation Environmental Study Report
(TESR) and supporting documentation early June 2003 for the above project. We would like to
incorporate your comments on the Draft Natural Sciences Technical Report and Drainage and
Hydrology Report presented to you at our agency meeting held February 6, 2003 at the Midhurst
District Office. In order to adequately address any comments you may have, your cooperation in
submitting your comments by May 30, 2003 would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Yours.'ruly, I J t /
)v.Mff/,flnLJ-r-
\jV Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
1) Senior Project Manager
Yours truly,
jJw 1lt1~rM!'/L
r Len Kozachuk, P .Eng.
Senior Project Manager
cc: K. Boudreau - MTO
J. Foster - MTO
cc: K. Boudreau - MTO
J. Foster MTO
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
www.urs.ca
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
www.urs.ca
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
www.urs.ca
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS
May 21, 2003
Mr. Graham Findlay
Ministry of Natural Resources
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1 XO
Dear Mr. Findlay:
RE: Comments Arising from Agency Meeting for the Ministry of Transportation
From 1 km south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway
ll/Highway 400 (G.W.P. 30-95-00)
Weare working towards the completion of our Transportation Environmental Study Report
(TESR) and supporting documentation early June 2003 for the above project. We would like to
incorporate your comments on the Draft Natural Sciences Technical Report presented to you at
our agency meeting held February 6, 2003 at the Midhurst District Office. In order to adequately
address any comments you may have, your cooperation in submitting your comments by May
30, 2003 would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Yours truly,
~1d/J~tfL
r Len Kozachuk, P .Eng.
~ Senior Project Manager
cc: K. Boudreau - MTO
J. Foster - MTO
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f'1f::1'1' -22-2003 it:,: 44
I'UI iT C I P8L bJORI<S-6TH FL.
'70S '739 424'7 P .1112
f'lt:i'f'-.22-20L33 16:44
I'IUIJIC IPAL hIORI<S-6TH FL.
70S '739 4247 P.1212
CITY HAU.
70 COLLTF.Il STRUT
TEL.. {7OS) 739-4:07
FAX. (105) 73''''~1
a) Southeast comer of the Molson Park BridgelIntcrchange.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
2
File: T05-HI
Hililiway 400 Preliminary Design Study
Ma.y 14.2003
P.O. BOX 400
BARJUE, om ARlO
LAM 4TS
THE COJtPORAnON OFTBE crrv OF 9MUUE
COMMUN1TYSER.VlCES
ENGINUIUNG DEPARTMENT
-CD_indlD Tolifl $8rPit:e &elllfer.u"
b) Northeast comer of the Duckworth Street BridgelInterchauge.
The City will be in touch with you in the near future with a proposal regarding the
above.
May 15, 2003
File: T05-HI
Ministry of Transponation Ontario
Planning & Design Section
Southwestern Region
659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario
N6E IL3
4. The impacts to both landscape areas and the plantings on tbe private lands are not simply
negotiation issues to be dealt with solely witb the private landowners in cases where
registered site plans and legal agreements with the City of Barrie are in place. The City
ofBamc will forward you a CUITent list of the properties which are in this category. The
private landowners and the MTO are required to involve the City of Barrie in the
development and approval of all such mitigation measures.
Attention: Mr. Kevin Boudreau. P. EDg.
Project Engineer
s. The City win wod::: with the MTO on the replacement structures and would like to
provide input to ensure that adequate provisions and design standards are incorporated in
the design. The City of Barrie is currently initiating an Environmental Assessment
process to assess the needs of these strUctures and will keep the MTO advised.
Dear Sir:
If you have any questions and/or concerns, please contact the undersigned at (705) 7394220.
RE: G.W.P. 30-95..00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 km South of Hi&hway 89, Northerty to 30 km to Highway 11
District 33, OweD SOUDd
Yours truly,
~Bn
J. Parent, P. Eng.
InfrastrUCtUre Planning Engineer
Ext. 4362
CITY OF BARRIE
~~
Thank you for your letter dated March 12. 2003, which is in response to our draft comments
on the proposed Highway 400 improvements dated July 24, 2002. City of Banie staff have
reviewed your response and provides the following conunents, which coincide with your
numerical fonn:
c. Maher
Landscape Architectural T eclmologist
Ext. 4342
L We concur.
2. Whereas original Highway 400 planting, as implemented by MTO may not be defined as
being within the context of a legal conunitrnen~ the City of Barrie believes that the large
scale removal of existing vegetation within the corridor will have a significant negative
visual impact,. and as such should be addressed as a mitigation measure and not simply a
post constrUction contract for landscaping. The City of Batrie would prefer to work in
partnership with the MTO in the development of the criteria for a landscape master plan.
JP:deg
Ends.
pc: J. G.-Harlmess - MTO
J. Foster-MTO
L. Kozachuk - URS Cole Shennan
M. Bricks - URS Cole Shennan
R. Newlove - Director of Engineering
R. Forward - Manager ofInftastructure Planning
3. We concur with the stipulated requirements regarding the process of developing entry
signage features. We would like to relocate the two (2) existing designated signage
locations to the following potential locations:
~ .
,../
, -
BARRIE 150
~Hqu/~f"Thllll&l . UU.2DOS
TOTAL P. 12
Ministry of
Transportation
6l) Ontario
Mimstere des
Transports
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region
Section de la planification et de la conception
Region du Sud-Ouest
659 Exeter Road
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Facsimile: (519) 873-4600
659, rue Exeter
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Telecopieur: (519) 873-4600
March 12, 2003
'-,,....
. ~"'"""'-"~'''''--''''''''''J
R. --j!;~""/;!'f"!W?<'VE '. I
'~~~ ~"'':f!i1' D t
-- ~. I".-!'" . j'
w ,
t.f.,H 1? 2DUj {
~1It'!'ri""~';-".,A"" ~
'1i.', .', "..'...... "I." . '.. '-,..,'.....,
",' .' 1"\1',1 -; '.," ,'.
~t,,1 ~;.', ';".;".."'~.:. ,':,r ':.' .... '..:; .... "" Ii."". ~
<____'_'" .._.:~ C~~'"i\'~..~'~': .:_.f-..~:..~'~" v,#-~ ?o''.;t'
Mr. Rick Newlove, P.Eng.
Director of Engineering
The City of Barrie
P.O. Box 400,70 Collier Street
Barriel, Ontario
L4M 4T5
Dear: Mr. Newlove
RE: G.W.P. 30-95-00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 km south of Highway 89, northerly to 30 km to Highway 11
District 33, Owen Sound
Thank you for your draft comments on the proposed Highway 400 improvements. The Project Team
has been addressing the City's comments, along with the comments from other stakeholders and
property owners along the Highway 400 corridor, over the last several months. Your comments have
been useful to the Project Team in refining the recommended plan.
Overall, we believe that the ministry and the City of Barrie have worked proactively in achieving a
recommended plan that not only provides for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods
but also one that recognizes the constraints that are present when planning for highway expansion
through the Barrie area.
As you are aware, the recommended improvements at the interchanges and grade separations
described in our preliminary design take into consideration the City's future plans for each municipal
road. We recognize that it is in everyone's best interest to coordinate the City's needs with our own.
However, any improvements to the bridges, the interchanges, and/or intersecting municipal roads
along Highway 400, which relates to growth and development within the City, will be the financial
responsibility of the City.
The following provides a response to the City's initial comments, and reflects the current status of the
recommended plan.
Hiqhwavs 400 and 89
1. Consideration should be given to the installation of a commuter parking lot on the west side of
Highway 400. This would save commuters time by not requiring them to travel under the
bridge to the east side commuter parking lot and then back under the bridge to the west to
access the highway. A delay of 1 minute in a.m. peak could cause 5 to 15 minute delay down
highway due to traffic backups and gridlock to the south
.. ./2
s,'
()r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-2-
· The ministry is supportive of providing commuter parking along ministry highways. This
principle supports the ministry's desire to reduce congestion and energy consumption as
well as improving traffic operation and reducing potential hazards of unauthorized
parking. This planning and preliminary design study will identify and make
recommendations on the opportunities to provide commuter parking throughout the study
area. Commuter parking lot sites were investigated at the Highway 400 and Highway 89
interchange. The result of this analysis suggests that there is a potential commuter
parking lot replacement site available in the northeast quadrant. The exact location and
details of the commuter parking lot will be determined in later design stages.
2. On/off ramps should be aligned and signalized to allow for easy access for bu.ses. This
would promote the use of commuter lots, or park and ride programs.
· The recommended interchange configuration complies with MTO design guidelines and
provides free-flow moves onto Highway 400 from Highway 89. Traffic signals are
recommended at the ramp terminals, as determined by the traffic operations report.
3. Exclusive lanes for buses/high occupancy vehicles should be considered.
· The design of the widening of Highway 400 south of the Molson Park Drive provides for
bus/high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes in the ultimate 10-lane cross section. Provision
of HOV lanes through the City limits to the north end of the project is under review by the
ministry as part of a larger program to identify requirements and design issues for HOV
lanes on 400-series highways. Where appropriate and feasible, requirements to
accommodate HOV lanes north of Molson Park Drive will be incorporated in the future
during detail design.
4. Bridge structure should have capacity for six lanes of traffic (two lanes for ramp traffic and
two lanes for through traffic in each direction).
· The proposed design provides for six lanes over Highway 400.
5. Consideration should be given to some form of corridor for light rail transportation/passenger
rail within or along the Highway 400 corridor.
· Transit was considered as an alternative to address the operation and capacity issues
along Highway 400. Rail transit (GO TRAIN) expansion would provide a more
competitive choice of travel modes for some users of Highway 400, and thus reduce the
traffic volumes somewhat on Highway 400. However, the reductions would be limited
since the Highway 400 significantly serves a diverse nature of trips. (As an example,
current daily GO ridership from Southwestern Ontario to the GTA is less than 700 which,
when applied to the Barrie area, would not eliminate the need for road based
improvements). Commuter rail service would reduce but not eliminate the need for
highway widening improvements in the Highway 400 corridor within the planning horizon
for this project. The Ministry of Transportation is also committed to improving rail and bus
transit service in Ontario and will work with municipalities to implement efficient and
effective rail and bus transit service alternatives.
.. ./3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-3-
-4-
HiQhway 400 and !nnism 4th Line
10. On/off-ramps should be aligned and signalized to allow for easy access for buses. This
would promote the use of commuter lots, or park and ride programs.
6. Consideration should be given to constructing the new bridge structure closer to the existing
bridge to align the existing road better.
. The recommended interchange configuration complies with MTO design guidelines and
provides free-flow moves onto Highway 400 from Innisfil Beach Road. Traffic signals are
recommended at ramp terminals, as determined by traffic operations report.
. The existing 4th line structure has insufficient span to accommodate the widening of
Highway 400 and will therefore require replacement. The proposed realignment of 4th
Line reduces the skew angle of the structure crossing Highway 400, reducing the overall
length of the structure. Further, for the purposes of this study, it has been assumed that
traffic on 4th line would be maintained during construction of the replacement structure.
The proposed realignment provides sufficient clearance from the existing structure during
construction of the new structure. During later design stages, the need to maintain traffic
on 4th Line during construction, as well as the realignment of 4th line will be reviewed in
consultation with the local municipality and other stakeholders (e.g. emergency services).
Further refinements to the construction staging including the alignment of 4th line will be
incorporated during detail design.
11. Exclusive lanes for buses/high occupancy vehicles should be considered.
. See earlier response under item 3.
12. Bridge structure should have capacity for six lanes of traffic (two lanes for ramp traffic and
two lanes for through traffic in each direction).
. The Innisfil Beach Road structure has been designed to accommodate six lanes.
13. Consideration should be given to aligning the ramps and providing commuter parking lots
similar to the design at Highway 9 and Highway 400 for southbound traffic.
7. Consideration should be given to constructing the bridge to four lanes, or have the ability to
easily twin the bridge to accommodate potential future growth in the area.
. The commuter parking lot will be designed to provide acceptable access to the
interchange.
. Based on available traffic information, the proposed two-lane cross-section on the
structure is adequate to serve the 2011 travel demand on this facility. The need for
additional lanes on the structure will be reviewed in consultation with the local municipality
upon commencement of detail design. If, at this time of detail design, there is not a
clearly defined widening need approved by the City, the consultation will include, whether
of not there is a need to design a specific structure type to allow for width expansion.
HiQhway 400 and !nnisfil 6th Line
14. Consideration should be given to include the construction of sidewalks as part of the standard
design for all over/under pass structures.
. If sidewalk already exists and that crossing is replaced or widened, MTO will incorporate
sidewalks into the new/widened structure. Sidewalks can otherwise be provided on new
structures, subject to negotiations between MTO and the local municipality. The Town of
Innisfil has not indicated a concern regarding sidewalks on the proposed crossing. MTO
will confirm the local municipal need for sidewalk during detail design.
8. Consideration should be given to constructing the bridge to four lanes, or have the ability to
easily twin the bridge to accommodate potential future growth in the area.
15. The existing structure for Barrie Collingwood Railway bridge should be reviewed. This may
need rehabilitation or expansion.
. See response under item 7.
HiQhway 400 and !nnisfi! Beach Road
. The railway structure was reviewed as part of this study. The recommendation is to
replace the structure with a hollow slab bridge deck with integrated abutments. The new
bridge will be sufficiently wide to accommodate the ultimate widening of Highway 400 and
the span will accommodate the existing single track. We have included the preliminary
general arrangement drawing of the structure for your review.
9. Consideration should be given to the installation of a commuter parking lot on the west side of
Highway 400. This would save commuters time by not requiring them to travel under the
bridge to the east side commuter parking lot and then back under the bridge to the west to
access the highway. A delay of 1 minute in a.m. peak could cause 5 to 15 minute delay down
highway due to traffic backups and gridlock to the south.
HiQhway 400 and !nnisfil1 oth Line
. The commuter parking lot at this interchange was developed in the northeast quadrant in
conjunction with interim improvements planned by the ministry. It should be recognized
that the location of a commuter parking lot is dependant on the availability of local land as
well as proper operation of the interchange.
16. Consideration should be give to constructing the bridge to four lanes, or have the ability to
easily twin the bridge to accommodate potential future growth in the area.
. See response under item 7.
., ./5
.. ./4
-5-
-6-
Hi~hway 400 and Lockhart Road
23. Consideration should be given to constructing a southbound off-ramp at this location to
relieve traffic congestion at the southbound Molson Park Drive off-ramp.
17. Consideration should be explored regarding the extension of Lockhart Road either under or
over Highway 400.
· A southbound exit ramp at Big Bay Point will introduce an undesirable weaving condition
on Highway 400 between Essa Road and Big Bay Point Road. MTO cannot provide any
additional access points between Molson Park Drive and Essa Road.
· As the MTO is not the proponent of this initiative our involvement would be limited to
commenting and participating as an external review agency to this undertaking.
Hi~hway 400 and Essa Road
24. Consideration should be given to relocating the Barrie detachment of the O.P.P. to the
Fairview Rest station area (McDonald'S/Petro Canada site).
25. The City of Barrie may require some of the land associated with the rest station area for the
proposed construction of the Big Bay Point Road/Harvie Road under/over pass.
Hi~hway 400 and Molson Park Drive
18. The southbound east/west off-ramp and the northbound east/west off-ramp should be
widened to provide three lanes for the entire length of the ramps. More storage is required as
traffic presently backs up onto the Highway at both locations. The centre ramp lane should
be used for right or left turning traffic.
· The ministry recommended the closure of the Essa Road service centre as part of the
overall preferred options for improving Highway 400. A final decision with regard to this
proposal will be made shortly for inclusion into the Transportation Environmental Study
Report document. If closure is recommended, the timeline and future use of the site
would be dependant on the timing of the Highway 400 expansion.
· A third lane will be provided on the S-EIW ramp. The ramp will be two lanes south of the
bullnose. The third lane will be developed north of the bullnose. Projected traffic volumes
indicate that this configuration will be adequate to beyond 2011.
19. Design of all drainage culverts, utility crossings, water and trunk sewer infrastructure, etc,
should be coordinated with the City of Barrie.
26. There are a number of watercourses throughout this area that do not seem to be identified. It
should also be clarified whether or not Environmental Assessments are required for these
facilities.
· URS Cole Sherman has been in contact and coordinating with the City of Barrie
throughout this project regarding drainage issues. A commitment to on-going
consultation with the City on drainage, utilities and water and sewer infrastructure issues
is included in our study report.
· Our study included a review of natural drainage features and other surface drainage
features and a review of City of Barrie drainage reports. Draft copies of the Natural
Environment Impact Assessment Report and the Drainage and Hydrology Report were
provided to the City of Barrie for review. We will incorporate any of your comments as
part of revisions to our final reports.
20. Clarification of the bridge works required at Molson Park Drive is requested.
· The existing bridge is to be widened to the west to accommodate ten lanes on Highway
400 by extending the west side abutments and adding girders. We have included the
preliminary general arrangement drawing of the structure for your review.
27. The M T.O. will need to address all noise concerns along Highway 400 through the existing
residential areas of Barrie.
21. Consideration should be given to constructing the highway to 10 lanes between Molson Park
Drive and Essa Road closer to the time of construction.
· As part of the Environmental Assessment process for the Highway 400 study, a noise
impact assessment was undertaken. The purpose of this assessment was to determine
the future noise conditions without improvements and the future noise conditions with
improvements. Factors used in the noise assessment included the highway grades, local
elevations and contours, ground cover (absorption), traffic volumes (Summer Average
Daily Traffic), the percentage of trucks and vehicle speeds. The results of this noise
assessment indicated that the predicted noise impacts or change in noise levels
associated with the Highway 400 widening and interchange improvements were less than
5 decibels (the level at which mitigation of noise impacts must be considered).
· Staging details and timing of construction of the recommended improvements will be
determined subsequent to the completion and clearance of the Transportation
Environmental Study Report.
Hi~hway 400 and Bi~ Bay Point Road/Harvie Road
22. Big Bay Point Road and Harvie Road should be extended across Highway 400 at the time of
construction.
· In accordance with the ministry's program for retrofit installation of noise barriers in
residential areas adjacent to freeways that were approved prior to 1977, the ministry has
identified four locations where barrier installations are warranted and feasible:
· See response under item 17.
.../6
.. ./7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-7-
-8-
North east side of Highway 400/Dunlop Street interchange and Anne Street;
South east side of Highway 400/Bayfield Street interchange in the vicinity of the
YMCA;
North east side of Highway 400/Bayfield Street interchange behind Ottaway Avenue;
Northwest side of Highway 400/Bayfield Street interchange behind Patricia Avenue.
. Retaining walls have been shown on the plates in areas where, based on a preliminary
analysis, such structures reduce impacts. The need for additional retaining walls along
the corridor will be refined during the design stages when more detailed survey and
geotechnical information is available. As part of this preliminary design study the MTO is
not recommending retaining walls along Fairview Road, adjacent to Chieftain Crescent.
. The ministry will review and determine which of the specific retrofit areas noted above
could be constructed prior to the Highway 400 widening. These barriers will be installed
at the specific sites as funding becomes available.
HiQhwav 400 and Tiffin Street
33. The existing structure for the Barrie Collingwood Railway bridge just south of Tiffin Street
should be reviewed. This may need rehabilitation or expansion.
28. M. T. O. to ensure that aI/lighting issues are adequately dealt with through existing residential
areas.
. See earlier comment under item 15.
. Illumination design is carried out in accordance with Ministry standards. Our report
includes a commitment to investigate mitigation of light trespass and other impacts during
future design stages.
34. As per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study, provision should be given to the design of
the underpass to accommodate the future construction of Tiffin Street to six lanes with
sidewalks.
. Possible commuter parking lot sites were investigated at the Essa Road interchange. Our
work to date considered a number of locations in the interchange area. It has been
determined that the existing lot should be maintained and additional space should be
provided. There are potential commuter parking lot replacement sites available in either
the northeast or southwest quadrants of the interchange. The exact location and details of
the commuter parking lot will be determined in later design stages.
. The proposed Tiffin Street structure is designed to accommodate four lanes, in
accordance with the Barrie Transportation Study (April, 1999, page 47). In addition,
adequate width has been provided under the structure to accommodate sidewalks.
29. A large commuter parking lot should be constructed at this interchange.
HiQhwav 400 and Dunlop Street
35. Consideration for a commuter parking lot should be given at this interchange.
. Adequate width has been provided under the structure to accommodate sidewalks. As
we indicated on the first page of this letter, cost-sharing discussions related to the new
structure will take place as the project moves forward into detail design.
. As noted previously, the ministry is supportive of providing commuter parking along
ministry highways. This planning and preliminary design study has identified and made
recommendations on the opportunities to provide commuter parking throughout the study
area. However, commuter parking lots were not considered at this interchange since
there is not an existing commuter parking lot at the interchange and there is a lack of
suitable vacant land in the vicinity of the interchange. That said, MTO will continue to
investigate opportunities to implement commuter parking lots at various locations along
the corridor, as they become available.
30. The bridge structure at Essa Road must include the provision of sidewalks for pedestrian
movements. The City of Barrie received a land dedication from the Developer of the
Commercial southwest corner, which is to be credited to the City's share of the bridge
structure at this interchange.
31. Size of culvert crossings should be reviewed.
36. Consideration should be given to an east/west northbound ramp to be provided off of Anne
Street instead of Dunlop Street.
. The sizes of the existing and proposed culverts were reviewed. The revised information
was included in the draft Drainage and Hydrology Report that was provided to the City of
Barrie for review. We will incorporate any comments and revisions in our final reports.
. This alternative was considered at the conceptual alternatives stage, but was not carried
forward for further development and analysis. Providing ramps to/from Anne Street and
Highway 400 would create an undesirable weaving condition on Highway 400 between
Anne Street and Bayfield Street. It would impact significantly on lands adjacent to
Highway 400 and significantly affect operation of the Anne Street/Dunlop Street
intersection.
32. Retaining wal/ should be utilized in the areas of the Fairview Road and Chieftain Crescent to
minimize the need for property acquisition.
...18
.. .19
-9-
-10-
37. As per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study, provision should be given in the design of
the overpass for the construction of Dunlop Street to seven lanes.
44. Rose Street closure should be discussed with the Emergency Response Group, as Rose
Street is part of the current emergency detour route. If this road is to be closed, design
concepts such as gates or knockdown barricades should be considered.
· The proposed structure will accommodate the City of Barrie's proposed widening of
Dunlop Street. We are proposing that six lanes (four westbound and two eastbound
lanes) be provided on the structure itself. This will facilitate incorporating the ramp
entrance onto eastbound Dunlop Street from northbound Highway 400.
· Emergency Response Group will be contacted to discuss the proposed closure of Rose
Street. Placement of noise barriers proposed at this location may preclude options for
keeping Rose Street open as a one-way facility. Design of noise barriers will be initiated
as noted under item 27. This comment will be included in the commitments to future work
listed in the Study Report.
38. As per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study, provision should be given in the design of
the overpass for the construction of Anne Street to six lanes.
· The proposed structure has been designed to accommodate six lanes over Highway 400.
45. Consideration should be given to making Rose Street a one-way street from Bavfield Street
to Peel Street in order to maintain the current Emergency Detour Route. .
46. Rose Street is considered a collector road in the City of Barrie's Transportation Study,
therefore the City is concerned with the proposed closure of this road and the traffic impact
on local streets in this area.
39. There are a number of drainage crossing in the area that should be coordinated with the City
of Barrie.
· See response 'under item 19.
· The MTO acknowledges the City's concerns with impacts to local streets due to the
closure of Rose Street. However, MTO has serious concerns with the direct connection of
this municipal collector road to a freeway ramp. It is recognized that, while the proposed
closure will significantly improve operations and safety for interchange users, it will also
create out-of-way travel for residents at the south end of Rose Street. In evaluating the
alternatives, the closure of Rose Street was considered to provide a greater benefit to the
overall operations and safety of the Bayfield Street interchange, with acceptable impacts
to local access. The use of Grove Street, identified as a collector road in the Barrie
Transportation Study, was considered a suitable alternate for access to areas currently
served by Rose Street.
40. Southbound off-ramp should be two lanes at Dunlop Street.
· The southbound exit at Dunlop Street has been designed with an extended deceleration
lane and wider throat at the ramp terminal, which will increase capacity and storage at
this highway exit. The single lane exit is appropriate for projected traffic volumes using
this exit.
41. The City has concerns with the lack of storage remaining on Dunlop Street for westbound to
northbound left-turn movements onto Anne Street.
· We assume the City is referring to the eastbound to northbound left-turn storage at Anne
Street. The proposed design generally provides the same left turn storage on Dunlop
Street at the Anne Street intersection as currently exists. Left turn storage at Anne Street
is currently limited by the Hart Drive/Dunlop Village Plaza intersection.
47. Pedestrian access from Rose Street to Bayfield Street needs to be addressed due to the high
number of students that use this route to access businesses along Bayfield Street north of
Highway 400.
· The recommended plan provides for sufficient boulevard along the ramp to provide a
sidewalk from Rose Street to Bayfield Street.
Hiqhwav 400 at Sunnidale Road
Hiqhwav 400 at St. Vincent Street
42. Bridge structure should be constructed to a minimum of four lanes with sidewalks on both
sides to accommodate future traffic growth in area.
48. The bridge structure is to be viewed to accommodate six lanes of traffic and sidewalks over
Highway 400 as per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study.
· This is incorporated in the preliminary design of the structure.
· No changes to the St. Vincent Street structure are proposed as part of this study. We
understand that this requirement will be part of the City's future needs for widening the St.
Vincent Street corridor. At an appropriate time, prior to commencement of your road-
widening project the City and MTO should discuss the required options for widening of
this structure.
Hiqhwav 400 at Bavtield Street
43. Bridge Structure should be constructed to accommodate the construction of Bayfield Street to
seven lanes.
· Proposed design accommodates seven lanes.
. ../11
.../10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-11-
HiQhway 400 at Duckworth Street
49. Bridge structure should be constructed to accommodate six to seven lanes of traffic, plus
sidewalks on both sides for Duckworth Street underpass as per discussion with the City of
Barrie and Read Voorhees and Associates.
· The proposed structure is designed to accommodate four through lanes, one left turn lane
and two speed change lanes. The structure also accommodates sidewalks on both sides.
50. Retaining walls will probably be required in the area of Georgian Drive as property
acquisitions may not be available.
· This comment will be carried forward into the preliminary design report documentation.
HiQhway 400 at HiQhway 11
51. Consideration should be given to providing access from Highway 11 southbound to Highway
400 northbound. 'Currently, when travelling southbound on Highway 11, you must travel to
Duckworth Street and then circle back to access the Highway 400 extension.
52. Consideration should also be given to providing access from Highway 400 southbound to
Highway 11 north/east bound.
· Improvements to the Highway 11 corridor, including access between Highways 400 and
11, are currently under review by us. Your comments will be brought forward into the
Highway 11 study for consideration.
The ministry is currently finalizing the Transportation Environmental Study Report and would like to
be in a position to publish a notice of commencement for the 30-day review period shortly. We
understand that our consultant had an earlier discussion with one of your staff in which a meeting
was suggested in March, to discuss the above noted information (if necessary).
If you have any questions or concerns, or if you would like to arrange a meeting, please contact the
undersigned directly at your earliest opportunity.
Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region, London
Enc\.
c. Jennifer Graham Harkness
Joel Foster
Len Kozachuk (URS Cole Sherman)
Mike Bricks (URS Cole Sherman)
Ministry of
Transportation
~
'Y -,
@ Ontarioo:J
-2-
Ministere des
Transports
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region
Section de la planification et de la conception
Region du Sud-Ouest
659 Exeter Road
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Facsimile: (519) 873-4600
3. That a northbound and southbound entry feature area be designated for the City to develop
as a welcome gateway.
659, rue Exeter
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Telecopieur: (519) 873-4600
. MTO has accommodated gateway signing/entry features along provincial highways for
numerous municipalities across the province. Details of any such amenities will be
subject to approval by MTO and would be strictly at the City's initiative and cost. Gateway
signage/entry features do not require environmental clearance and the City can discuss
any proposals in this regard with ministry at any time.
March 12, 2003
Mr. Rick Newlove, P.Eng.
Director of Engineering
The City of Barrie
P.O. Box 400,70 Collier Street
Barriel, Ontario
L4M 4T5
4. That the detail designs address the loss of private landscaping as required by the city on
registered site plans due to the widenings. This can be addressed by fully restoring the
established landscape at a prescribed setback, or if parking standards! building envelopes
are restrictive, then replanting a comparable treatment on the hwy corridor.
Dear: Mr. Newlove
. The impacts to private landscaping will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis during later
design stages. The loss of private landscaping would be subject to negotiations with
private landowners, recognizing the City's desire for a landscaped buffer area.
RE: G.W.P. 30-95-00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 km south of Highway 89, northerly to 30 km to Highway 11
District 33, Owen Sound
5. That the detail design address the issue of pedestrian access over or under the highway
interchanges, especially the Trans-Canada trail crossing at the Sunnidale bridge.
Thank you for your draft comments from the Parks, Recreation and Works Department on the
proposed Highway 400 improvements. The Project Team has been addressing the City's comments,
along with the comments of other stakeholders and property owners along the Highway 400 corridor,
over the last several months. Such comments have been useful to the Project Team in refining the
recommended plan. The following provides a response to the City's initial comments, and reflects
the current status of the recommended plan.
. Existing pedestrian access/crossings impacted by the proposed Highway 400
improvements will be replaced, as appropriate. Any improvements to existing facilities or
new crossings would be subject to negotiations with MTO, and are generally completed at
the cost of the City or Trail organization.
The ministry is currently finalizing the Transportation Environmental Study Report and would like to
be in a position to publish a notice of commencement for the 30-day review period shortly. We
understand that our consultant had an earlier discussion with one of your staff in which a meeting
was suggested in March, to discuss the above noted information (if necessary).
1. That City parklands and e.p. or open spaces either impacted or otherwise required as
widenings be made available subject to compensation to our Dept's satisfaction, be it
monetary, land exchange or restoration efforts.
If you have any questions or concerns, or if you would like to arrange a meeting, please contact the
undersigned directly at your earliest opportunity.
· Mitigation of parkland impacts and property requirements will be negotiated with the MTO.
Compensation can include monetary consideration, commitments to restoration and,
under certain conditions, land exchange.
2. That the detail designs address the issue of tree preservation and replanting as a master
landscape plan for the corridor as a whole within the City limits, to our dept's satisfaction.
· The Transportation Environmental Study Report will incorporate these comments as part
of the commitments to future work. Vegetation impacted by construction will be retained
and protected to the extent possible. Additional landscaping will be completed as
appropriate to mitigate project impacts and address concerns where commitments have
been made. Post-construction landscaping plans of the MTO right-of-way will be
developed in consultation with the local municipality.
Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region, London
.../2
c. Jennifer Graham Harkness
Joel Foster
Len Kozachuk (URS Cole Sherman)
Mike Bricks (URS Cole Sherman)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Jr-'~ JUL -2~-2003
705 739 4247
MUNICIPAL WORKS-6TH FL.
P.01/01
705 739 4247
10:50
'.
@ Ontario
\ 4t - \ l
I
I
I'
Ministry of
Tran.porution
Planning ilnd DesIgn Section
Southwestern Region
659 EI\et8r Road
LondOl1 ON NeE 1L3
Tel~pMno: (519) 813....550
F3c:ttmUI!I' (519) 873-.4600
Mlnlat6ra des
TrI1nspor18
SeCtIon d81a planlflcatlon .t de i. CIOne&ptJon
Ret;lion du Sud.Ouo.al
659, N8 Exeter
London ON N6E 1L.3
TelephOne: (519) 873-4550
nl~~iO\Jr: (519) 813-4600
\'Y/&YGc 'X,'ilsorl, C.A.O.
FEED FAX THIS END
FAX
December 30, 2002
To;
Dept.:
Fax No.: (ij(')"~)
No. of psg :
From:
Date:
Company;
Fax No:
Comments:
Harold M. Parker, Chair
Chris Carrier, Vice-Chair
I
Mr. William Gilbert. P.Eng.
City of Barrie
P.O. Box 400
70 Collier Street
Barrie. Ontario
L4M 4T5
Est. 1960
I
I
I
........::!!..
la. pac 7t03E
Dear Mr. Gilbert:
RE: Kidd's Creek, City of Barrie, Master Drainage Plan - MunicIpal Cla$s~'-
-----
Our Member
Municipalities
AdJala.Tosorontlo Township
Amaranth Township
City of Barrie
Town of Bradford.
West Gwillimbury
Town of Collingwood
Town of11,e Blue Mountains
As you are aware the ministry is finalizing a planning and preliminary design SI~J~l i~~:;9~~~I!~~~~\..~
from Highway 89 to HIghway 11 This study will be recommending widening 0 \9' . t ... e
. . f H' h 400 north of the Bayfield Street Iii ercl,ang ,
to 10 lanes (ultimate) except for a section 0 Ig way, '11' I de the installation of median
where 8 lanes is required. Some other recommendations WI IliC U . r vements
barrier and highmast lighting, structural replacements, Interchange and drainage Imp 0 .
As part of this study we are currently finalizing the details of our Drainage and Hydrology Report for
this corridor, It is for this reason that the ministry has not formally responded to your study.
Our recommendations in the area of the Kldd's Creek culvert crossing include widening of H'gr\wC'lY
400 to 10 lanes and a culvert extension, which will include property acquisition. Our dra,nag~ repOfl
has concluded that the existing culvert under Highway 400 (2.4mx18m) has adequate c..3paCI~ Ir..
allow for the 50-year storm with 1.0m of freeboard. Moreover. the 1 DO-year storm will no~ove op t
Highway 400 in this area. The capacity of this culvert is therefore acceptable, as It IS wit, Ir"I curren
ministry guidelines
. . 2002 d N ber 6 2002 we understand that the
From your consultants facsimiles dated July 17, an ovem , I rt t
preferred improvement is Altematlve 8 This will include twinning of the a~o~ referenced cu v~ Ok
contain the regional storm event within the crossing and prevent overtopping Into the Bunkers ree
Watershed during this event.
Given the findings of our on-going studies the ministry carlfiot Su::JPCII '/0w( 1110;;0::(;:.1 ;'.I(.,r:lcl'" I.'
without further information supporting your objective.
I
I
Clearview Township
Essa Township
Town ofInmsfil
I
I
Melancthon Township
Mono Township
Mulmur Township
Town of New Tecumseth
Oro.Medonte Township
MuniCIpality of Grey Highlands
I
I
I
Tv......... v[Sheiburnc:
Spnngwater Township
Town ofWasaga Beach
Watershed Counties
COUll ty 0 f Slfncoe
County of Duffenn
County of Grey
I
I
I
.. ./2
I --- -- nn
TOT~L P.01
N ottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
366 Mill Street, Highway 90, R. R. # 1, Angus, Ontario LOMW~
TEL (705) 424-1479, FAX (705) 424-2115'..;~'1':'~
,.;I, t.c~,
Web site Address: WWW.nvca.on.ca 'f. .,
November 11, 2002
FRi Ecological Services
Attention: Mr. Ron Bilz, Environmental Specialist
1875 Seymour Street, Ste. 1
North Bay, Ontario PIB 8G4
COpy
Dear Mr. Bilz:
Re: Natural Sciences Technical Report: Highway 93 From 4.0 km North of Highway
400 To 4.5 km North of Simcoe County Road 27, Waverly, produced by FRi
Ecological Services, dated August 2002.
The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority has reviewed the Natural Sciences Technical
Report for the proposed improvements to Highway 93.
As detailed in our Level II fish habitat agreement with the Department of Fisheries and
Oceans (DFO), the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority is responsible to evaluate
proposed works as to their impact on fish habitat in the Nottawasaga River watershed.
In addition to the measures set out in the project proposal, the following mitigative measures,
if incorporated into the project, are intended to alleviate any potentially hannful impacts to
fish and fish habitat:
· Sediment and erosion control measures are implemented prior to, and maintained
during the construction phase, to prevent entry of sediment into the water.
· All sediment and erosion control measures shall be inspected daily to ensure that they
are functioning properly and are maintained and/or upgraded as required.
· No in-water works shall occur between September 15th and May 31st.
· The soils disturbed during construction and access shall be stabilized and re-
vegetated/seeded as soon as possibie upon completion of work and restored to a pre-
disturbed state or better.
· All materials and equipment used for the purpose of site preparation and project
completion shall be operated and stored in a manner that prevents any deleterious
substance from entering the water.
· Any part of a vehicle and/or equipment entering the water shall be free of fluid leaks
and extremely cleaned/degreased to prevent any deleterious substance from entering
the water.
Please note that permit approval from this Authority is required prior to any straightening,
changing, diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek,
stream or watercourse, in accordance with Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act.
...2/
Building Partnerships IVith Our COlJilJiwZl{yfor a Healthy rWaten-hed
Help us .cI"eve our goals by becomIng a member of the
Nottaw:i.saga Valley Conservation Foundation
Cc: Ministry of Natural Resources, Attn: Brad Allen (Midhurst)
Ministry of Transportation, Attn: Charles Organ - 659 Exeter Road, London ON N6E IL3
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd., Attn: Mark Bassingthwaite - 75 Commerce Valley
Drive East, Thornhill, ON L3T 7N9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 2
In order to complete the replacement and upslzmg of existing culverts throughout the
proposed project area, please fill out the attached copy of the required Fill, Construction and
Alteration to Waterways permit application. The associated fee is $200.00. Please return the
permit application to the NVCA offices upon completion.
If you have any questions concerning fisheries mitigation or the NVCA permit application
process, please contact the undersigned at (705) 424-1479 ext. 237.
Gre~~) - Environmental Technologist
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
Attaclunent( s)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\ \
14 'J
~ ..
~'" (-.J'" t" "'\, ': :
W Ontario.
-2-
Ministry of
Transportation
Ministere des
Transports
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region
Section de la planification et de la conception
Region du Sud-Ouest
659 Exeter Road
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Facsimile: (519) 873-4600
659, rue Exeter
London ON N6E 1 L3
Telephone: (519) 873-4550
Telecopieur: (519) 873-4600
I trust the above noted information clarifies MTO's position with regard to structural improvements as
part of a highway expansion project. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact the
undersigned directly.
August 2, 2002
His Worship Brian Jackson
The Town of Innisfil
P.O. Box 5000,2147 Innisfil Beach Road
Innisfil, Ontario
L9S 1A1
Kevin Boudreau, P. Eng.
Project Engineer
Planning and Design Section
Southwestern Region, London
,>
-~
Dear Mayor Jackson:
RE: G.W.P. 30-95-00, Highway 400 Preliminary Design Study
1.0 km south of Highway 89, northerly to 30 km to Highway 11
District 33, Owen Sound
c. Jennifer Graham Harkness
Joel Foster
Len Kozachuk (URS Cole Sherman)
As a follow up to your discussions with URS Cole Sherman during our recent Public Information
Centre in Innisfil, regarding potential cost sharing of structures within ministry right-of way, we offer
the following comments.
If recommendations from the ministry's Highway 400 planning studies require the replacement of a
bridge because of a need to increase the number of lanes on Highway 400, the ministry will replace
the bridge with the same number of lanes that currently exist on the municipal road.
However, should expansion of a structure/interchange be required due to development pressures:
. The ministry expects developers to fully fund highway infrastructure improvements driven by their
development;
. Multiple developments generally drive improvements to interchanges, therefore, the Ministry
looks to form a cost sharing agreement with the municipality in order to fund the interchange
improvements needed to support the growth in their municipality;
. The level of cost sharing between the Ministry and the Municipality is evaluated on its own merits
based on the scope and magnitude of the interchange improvements, and;
. Negotiations are premised on the Ministry bearing responsibility for improvements that benefit the
through highway. The Municipality would be responsible for improvements that benefit traffic
using or destined for the crossing road.
.../2
JUL-~1-2002 10:20
t'1Tf") P8.D
519 873 4600
P.02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.~;'~)f4~--'1 ~
.~!
The City Qf
B:kFRJE
c ()IJI/1riUtd to T OIGI Suviff Ercell~
The Corporation of the City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
P.O. Box 400
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
FAX TRANSMITTAL RECORD
TO:
Kevln Boudreau, MTO
FAX NUMBER:
(519)873-4600
FROM:
Rick Newlove, Director of Engineering
DATE:
July 10,2002
PHONE NUMBER: 739-4220, ext. 445l
FAX NUl'v1BER:
(105) 739-4247
No. of Pages (incL cover pages): 9
NOTES:
Draft comments regarding Highway 400 widening attached for your review.
Also attached for your review is a copy of correspondence regarding Highwa.y 400 signing.
Thill injOl"fllQ,iOft (~ (IIltttd<<i only for UU! af ,he indlvld"",1 01" IInllty whil1h it;' (u:la..essed, (lnd IIID)' cOfllal1l In/OI"motiort fhal is prMk~t:I, conjidenliDl (Inti
csemprftotrf djsc/os_ IJUkr 1M MUNICIPAL FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND I'ROTEC110N OF' PR/'VACY ACT.
Jj lire rtcdllr of Ihilt mt!:ut1" 11110tt~ inlt"ded 1't!t:;pl,ttl qf I~ ll".plC<yl:t or agr'" ~JpcMibJI! for dclivumg I;'~ ".,e:UtJf" 10 ,~ Jnll!ndcd rt"pJ~n:. y<nt
art! hcnhy ""Iifilui thai ""y d;~""l'tC>Iit>", di~lribJlI;on ,or copying ofthlt c",.,....m..c4tiOnJ i~ 3,,.icl1y p"ohjbtll!t:!. 1/'}IO" N!CI!/ved thl.:: (;Qn.".",,/c(Jllon i"
"""0". p/Cl1H! nD11/y '" ;mrn<:J;DI./y b)> tr1q>ho.." ,.10<1 ndwrn Ihtt "",;&;"..1'0 1//1 by p03U1t HI"VW "I fl." DJ.JN:;~ "Of""" lib".....
I JU:_,- u - 2002
519 873 4500
10:20
t"'......... P&D
DRAFT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ij:i2hwav 400 Widenin1! Comments
Highway 400 and Hif!hwav 89
)> Consideration should be given to the installation of a commuter parking lot on the
west side of Highway 400. This would save commuters time by not requiring them to
travel under the bridge to the east side commuter parking lot and then back und~r the
bridge to the west to access the highway. A delay of 1 minute in a.m. peak could
ca.use 5 to 15 minute delay do.....-n highway due to traffic backups and gridlock to the
south.
;;:. On/off-ramps should be aligned and signalized to allow for easy access for buses.
This would promote the use of commuter lots, or park and ride programs.
:? Ex.clusive lanes for buseslhigh occupancy vehicles should be considered.
>- Bridge structure should have capacity for 6 lanes of traffic (2 lanes for ramp traffic
and 2 lanes for through traffic in each direction).
> Consideration should be given to some fonn of corridor for light rail transportation}
passenger rail within or along the Highway 400 corridor.
Hjgfry.;~ 4QO and in Line of lnnisfil
)i> Consideration should be given to constructing the new bridge structure closer to the
existing bridge to align the existing road better.
);> Consideration should b~ given to constructing the bridge to 4 lanes, or have the
ability to easily twin the bridge to accommodate potential future growth in the area.
Highway 400 Qnd 6/1: Line Qilnnisfil
>- Consideration should be given to constructing the bridge to 4 lanes. or have the
ability to easily twin the bridge to accommodAte potential future growth in the area.
Hif!hwt:1V 400 and Inn;s(il Beach Road
)> Consideration should be given to the installation of a commuter parking lot on the
west side of Highway 400. This would save commuters time by not requiring them to
travel under the bridge to the east side commuter parking lot and then back under the
bridge to the west to access the highway. A delay of 1 minute in a,m, peak could
caus~ 5 to 15 minute delay down highway due to traffic backups and gridlock to the
south.
:> On/off-ramps should be aligned and signalized to allow for easy access for buses.
This would promote the use of corrunuter lots, or park and rid!: programs.
)> Exclusive lanes for buseslhigh occupancy vehicles should be considered.
P.03
519 873 4500
P.04
JLJL-H-2002 10:21
""-" P&D
-2-
>>- Bridge structure should have capacity for 6 lanes of traffic (2 lanes for ramp traffic
and 2 lanes for through traffic in each direction).
> Consideration should be given to aligning the ramps and providing commuter parking
lots similar to the design at HighWClY 9 and Highway 400 for southbound traffic.
y Consideration should be given to include the construction of sidewalks as part of the
standard design for allover/under pass structures.
~ The existing structure for the Barrie Collingwood Railway bridge should be reviewed.
This may need rehabilitation or expansion.
Hif!hway 400 GYJd ] 0';' Li7'Je of Inn is (i}
>> Consideration should be given to constructing the bridge to 4 lanes, or ha.ve the
ability to easily twin the bridge to accommodate pote:ntial future gTo\Vth in the area,
Highway 400 and Lockhart Road
)I> Consideration should be explored regarding the extension of Lockh~ Road either
under or over Highway 400.
Highway 400 and llllolson Park Drive
~ The southbound eastlwest off..ramp and the north bound east/west off.ramp should be
widened to provide 3 lanes for the entire length of the ramps. More storage is
required as traffic presently backs up onto the Highway at both locations. The center
ramp lane should be used for right or left turniDg traffic.
)I> De&ign of all drainage culverts, utility crossings, water and trunk sewer infrastructure,
etc, should be coordinated with the City of Barrie,
)I> Clarification of the bridge works required at Molson Park Drive is requested.
y Consideration should be given to constructing the highway to 10 lanes between
Molson Park Drive and Essa Road closer to the time of construction.
Highway 400 and Big Bav Porn! Road/Harvie Road
)> ~ig Bay Point Road and Harvie Road should be extended across Highway 400 at the
tlme of construction.
);>- Co?sideration should ~e give to constructing a SOUthbOW1d off-ramp at this location to
relIeve traffic congestlOn at the southbound Molson Park Drive off-ramp.
Hif!./rway 400 aM Essa Road
:> Co.ns~deration should be given to relooating the Barrie detachment of the O.P,P. to the
F3.lTV1eW Rest station area (McDonald'slPetro Canada site),
}> The City of Barrie may require some of the land associated with the rest station area
for the proposed construction of the Big Bay Point Road/Harvie Road under/over
pass.
Jl~-11-2002 10:21
I'r ., P&D
519 873 4600
- 3 -
~ There are a number of watercourses throughout this area that do not seem to be
identified. It should also be clarified whether or not Environmental Assessments are
required for these: facilities.
)> Th~ M.T.Q will need to address all noise concerns along Highway 400 through the
existing residential areas of Barrie.
)> M.T.O. to ensure that aU lighting issues are adequately dealt with through existing
residential areas.
y A large commuter parking lot should be constructed at this interchange.
);> The bridge structure at Essa. Road must include the provision of sidewalks for
pedestrian movements. Tne City of Barrie received a land dedica.tion from the
Developer of the Commercial southwest corner which is 10 be credited to the City's
share of the bridge structure at this interchange,
~ Size of culvert crossings should br: reviewed_
)> Retaining wall should be utilized in the areas of the Fairview Road and Chieftain
Crescent to minimize the need for property acquisition.
Highwav 400 and Tiffin Streer
~ The existing structure for the Barrie Collingwood Railway bridge just south ofTiffm
Street should be reviewed. This may need rehabilitation or expansion.
~ As per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study, provision should be: given to the
design of the underpass to accommodate the future construction of Tiffin Street to 6
lanes with sidewalks.
HiJt..hWQV 400 a1]tl DunlQP Street
)> Consideration for a commuter parkiDg lot should be: given at this interchange.
,.... Consideration should be given to an east/west northbound ramp to be provided off of
Anne Street instead of Dunlop Street.
>- As per the City of Ba.rrie's Transportation Study, provision should be given in the
design of the overpass for the construction of Dunlop Street to 7 lanes.
:? As per the City of Barrie)s Transportation Study. provision should be given in the
design of the overpass for the construction of Anne Street to 6 lanes,
> There are a number of drainage crossing in the area that should be coordinated with
the City of Barrie.
};o Southbound off-ramp should be 2 lanes at Dunlop Str~t.
)> (The City has concerns v.ith the Jack of storage remaining on Dunlop Street for
( westbound to northbound left-turn movement3 onto Anne Street.
P.05
JI JL -11- 2002 10: 21
MTfl P8.D
519 873 4600
- 4 -
HiJthwov 400 and Sunnidale Road
~ Bridge structure should be constructed to a minim'WIl of 4 lanes with sidewalks on
both sides to accommodate future traffic growth in area.
Highwav 400 and Bavfield Street
)> Bridge Strocture should be constructed to accommodate the construction of Bayfield
Street to 7 lanes,
;;. Rose Street closme should be discussed 'With the Emergency Response Group as Rose
Street is part of the current emergency detom route. If this road is to be closed,
design concepts suoh as gates or knock-down barricades should be considered.
~ COnSideration should be given to making Rose Street a one:~way street from Bayfield
Street to Peel Street in order to maintain the current Emergency Detour Route.
;.. Rose Street is considered a collector road in the City of Barrie's Transportation
Study, therefore the City is concerned with the proposed closure of this road and the
traffic impact on local streets in this area.
);> Pedestrian access from Rose Street to Bayfield street needs to be addressed due to the
high number of students that use t.his route to access businesses along Bayfield Street
north of Highway 400.
Highway 400 and St, Vincent Street
)- The bridge Structure is to be widened to accommodate 6 lanes of traffic and sidewalks
over Highway 400 as per the City of Barrie's Transportation Study.
Hi~hwav 400 and Duckworth Street
)> Bridge structure should be constructed to accommodate 6 to 7 lanes of traffic, plus
sidewalks on both sides for Duckworth Street underpass as per discussion with the
City of Barrie and Read Voorhees and Assooiates.
);I- Retaining walls will probably be required in the area of Georgian Drive as property
acquisitions may not be available.
Highwav 400 and Highwav 11
> Consideration should be given to providing access from Highway I 1 southbound to
Highway 400 northbound. CUITent)y, when traveling southbound on Highway 11,
you must travel to Duckworth Street and then circle back to access the Highway 400
extension.
:;.. Consideration should also be given to providing access from Highway 400
southbound to Highway 11 north/east bound.
P.06
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TnTOI P 01'::
Mr. Len Kozachuk
Senior Project Manager
URS Cole, Shennan & Associates
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
THORNHILL, Ontario
L3T 7T9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ontario Native Affairs
Secretariat
421 S. James St.
Suite 101
Thunder Bay ON P7E 2V6
Tel.: (807) 473-3132
Fax.: (807) 473-3153
June 25, 2002
Dear Mr. Kozachuk:
\....../1 v .~-
Secretariat des affaires
autochtones de l'Ontarlo
@ Ontario
421, rue S. James
Bureau 101
Thunder Bay ON P7E 2V6
Tel.: (807) 473-3132
Telae.: (807) 473-3153
," ,- " '----.--.-...--.---.-...--.-~::J~~--l
~, t ~ I
I
\ ~JUN 28 'lOO!'
'\
\ ~.~r,i~~~:"~.::r":J
L__-~---.---._-
RE: Hwy 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 km Soutb ofHwy 89 Nortberly 30 km to Junction ofHwy 11
Preliminary Design I Class EA, Group "B" Project
GWP 30-95-00
Thank you for your letter informing us of the above noted information.
We trust that you have been in contact with any First Nations in the area and that they have been
notified about the issues under consideration and their opportunities to participate in the process.
Yours truly,
/}~-
Mary Carl
Associate Negotiator
Thunder Bay
lIst
~002 09:58
'"
~ Ontario
Ministry of
Northern Development
and Mines
Ministere du
Developpement du Nord
et des Mines
Resident Geologist Program
Ontario Geological Survey
933 Ramsey Lake Road, 6TH Floor
Sudbury, Ontario
P3E 685
June 14,2002
Mr. Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Cole, Sherman and Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
RE: Highway 400 Planning Study
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(Ref: CN29900147)
Mr. Kozachuk:
The purpose of this letter is to thank you, and confirm that the Ministry of Northern
Development and Mines (MNDM) received your notice of External Team meeting letter
dated June 5, 2002. Unfortunately. an MNDM representative will not be present at the
June 25 meeting in Barrie.
Please continue to keep us informed with regards to this project.
~
Dave Rowell, P.Geo.
Regional land Use Geologist - Southern Ontario
Tel: (705) 670-5737
FAX: (705) 670-5807
E-Mail: dave.row~n@ndrn.gov.on.ca
E:/02Corres!URS 02.05.30.Doc
TOTAL P.02
Q?{t'1-8. c-
1+1 Fisheries and Oceans
Canada
Peches et Oceans
Canada
1+1 Fisheries and Oceans
Canada
Peches et Oceans
Canada
Coast Guard
Central & Arctic Region
201 N. Front Street, Suite 703
Sarnia, Ontario
N7T 881
Garde cotiere
Region du Centre et de I'Arctique
Coast Guard
Central & Arctic Region
Garde cotiere
Region du Centre et de I'Arctique
Your file Votre reference
201 N. Front Street, Suite 703
Sarnia, Ontario
N7T 8B1
Your file Votre reference
Our file Notre reference
8200-02-6456
Our file Notre reference
8200-02-6316
March 28,2002
March 28, 2002
---.'\
-' I
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
c/o Cole, Sherman and Associates Ltd
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, ON L3T 7N9
Attention: Tvler Drygas
_------ ,,.___~""'4
\
\
\
\ M>R 4: 1t'!1l
\
\
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
c/o Cole, Sherman and Associates Ltd
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, ON L3T 7N9
Attention: Tyler DryQas
Dear Sir:
L.....--...--""' .-
Dear Sir:
RE: Application for approval of a bridge, Willow Creek, Crossing 30-139, Highway
400, County of Simcoe, Province of Ontario
RE: Navigability Enquiry of various waterway crossings, #30-399, 30-571 to 573,
and 30-415, Highway 400, County of Simcoe, Province of Ontario
Receipt is acknowledged of your correspondence dated January 22, 2002 in connection
with the above noted work.
Reference is made to your letter dated January 22, 2002 regarding the above
navigability inquiry.
Following a review of our records, please be advised that the waters of Willow Creek at the
above location are navigable. Consequently, an application for approval is required.
In the opinion of Coast Guard officials, the crossings at the sites indicated are
considered not navigable. Consequently, we have no interest in any works at these
sites.
Coast Guard's review of the proposal will be made under the Navigable Waters Protection
Act. Enclosed is an Application Guide which will assist you in making an application under
the Navigable Waters Protection Act.
The project may cause adverse effects on fish and fish habitat and the proponent
should contact Fisheries and Oceans, Fish Habitat Management, 3027 Harvester Road,
Suite 304, PO Box 85060, Burlington, Ontario, L7R 4K3 for expert advice as it pertains
to the Fisheries Act.
Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (519) 383-1866.
Should you have any questions, please contact our office at telephone number 519-
383-1866.
'; ...._-:::-~.-;:-,.,~, \.~ r: r~ 1
. ",,^~. ,c. ~ r...;
""A::~::; - \
pections Officer
Naviga e Waters Protection
MW/dmp
Encl
~p~..,............
~,
,_ r"'.....,~ ~
," ......r:::c, A....
)'- _::\--iM I'\~
Ma
A/NWP Inspections Officer
Navigable Waters Protection
MW/dmp
Canad~
Canad~
o j .:7'"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS
Cole Stlerman
January 22, 2002
Our Ref.: CN29900147
I
I
Canadian Coast Guard
Central Region
Navigable Waters Protection Division
201 North Front Street, Suite 703
Samia, Ontario
N7T 8Bl
I
I
I
I
I
Attention:
Mr. Rick McLean
Superintendent
Dear Mr. McLean:
Re: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to Junction of Highway 11
Preliminary Design / Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P.30-95-00
URS Cole, Shennan & Associates Ltd. has been retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation
(MTO) to undertake a Preliminary Design Study to examine improvements to Highway 400 from 1 km
south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the junction of Highway 11 in the County of Simcoe (refer to
the attached key map).
I
The purpose of this study is to determine the nature of improvements required to address traffic
operation, capacity and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The need for
drainage, illumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements is being examined as
part of this project. Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements have been identified
and evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution.
I
I
I
I
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class
Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The opportunity for public
input is being provided throughout the course of the project. A Transportation Environmental Study
Report (TESR) will be prepared for this study.
Within the project limits there is one bridged water crossing (Willow Creek Bridge, site # 30-139) and
five small structural culverts over watercourses (site # 30-399,30-571,30-572,30-573,30-415). As part
of the improvements being developed for the Highway 400 corridor, the bridge and these five culverts
may be extended / widened to accommodate addirional lanes on Highway 400. If you could kindly
provide infonnation pertaining to the navigability of these watercourses at the Highway 400 crossing
including required navigable clearances for each (if necessary) it would be greatly appreciated.
I
I
I
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, Canada l3T 7N9
Tel 9058824401
Fax 905.8824399
\ \.-:.il'9"}NW02\DAT ^ \P1anmng\t XU41 Hwy400\Do(UmC1ln\Unen\Co:ast Guard Jan 2002.1..10(
~
URS
Cole Sherman
If you have any questions in this regard, please feel free to contact the undersigned.
0;:-
Yours very truly,
URS CO~~ ASSOCIATES LID.
(~~
Tyler Drygas
Environmental Planner
cc: Kevin Boudreau - MTO
Joel Foster - MTO
Len Kozachuk - URSCS
Mike bricks - URSCS
Shu Liang He - MH
Att.
\ \S099NW02\DAT ^ \Pfann,nR\(:NNJOfJI-C { '1W)'"WH\Do<:umcntJ\JI"tn \(~vv, (;wrd}m 2OO2.do<
Project Limits
.
-{w--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Not to Scale
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STu.,--
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Ministry 01 Transportation
Ih 519 873 4500
IIJEC-05-2001 11:41 MTr ~D
Post.lt'. Fax Note 767' E
To '/
I r....p 'Z.-.... c..... v ~
Co./Dep!
I Fa)' <\~S 882 -\f~;;'
I
I November 16. 200 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
519 873 4600
PhQne #
P.O, SOX 400
BA1UUJt. ONTARIO
lAM <ITS
~
Fax #
r
ai-~
'1
THE CORPORATION OJ.!' THE CITY OF BAR.RI:E
MUN'IClPAL WORKS DEPARTMENT
"CommLtted to Total Servi.ce EJt~Z~e"
File: TOO- W A
To all area residents I business owners I tenants:
The City of Bame is undertaking a study to examine roadway improvements in the Waterfront!
Downtown area. The City of Barrie's Transportation Study (1999) and Waterfront Master Plan (1999)
identified a need to increase north-south traffic capacity of the road systems in the waterfront, as well as
improve access to the waterfront.
The WaterfrontIDo1'Vntown Transportation bnprovement Study is following the guidelines of Master
Plans as part of the public planning process outlined in the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment
document (June 2000). A1ternatives have been developed that address the problems associated with
future traffic needs as well as access to the waternont areas.
A public i.oformation center (May 2000) reviewed the various alternatives of which the public's
preference was to increase the width of Anne Street and Bradford Street to five lanes. Lakeshore Drive to
four lanes and have IrtnisfiI Street remain as two lanes. Further to the result of the May 2000 Public
Information Centre; City Council has requested that staff develop a concept for the closing of Lakeshore
Drive between Tiffin and Mulcaster Streets for consideration by the Public. Several options relating to
accommodating traffic at the north and south limits of this concept have been developed.
A second Public Information Center will be held to present the Lakeshore Drive Closed Concept:
Thursday, November 29, 2001
Southshore Community Centre
205 Lakesbore Drive
Barrie, Ontario
Please join us any time between 4:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. to learn
more about this project and discuss any concerns or issues you
may have.
An insert highlighting the issues relating to the removal of Lakeshore Drive will be delivered to residents
on November 23, 2001 through the Barrie Examiner, The insert contains information regarding the
various options as welJ as a questionnaire to obtain feedback. The complete environmental assessment
document wHl be available for review at the Barrie Public Library, City Hal1, Clerk's Office - 1$1 Floor
and the Municipal Works Department - 6th Floor, from Friday, November 16,2001 to Friday, December
7,2001.
-TME PEOPLE ARE THE CITY-
P.'01
DEC-05-2001 11:41
MTO P&D
---.....-.-----
.. -----
-2-
519 873 4500
November 16, 2001
P.02
It is recognized that the closure of Lakeshore Drive requires special consideration and we encourage you
to atten:I the information centr: and provide comments. If you are unable to attend, you may forward
your wntten conunents or questlOns before Friday, December 7) 200 1 to:
Mr. Wiltiam Gilbert, P. Eng.
Senior Engineer
The Corporation of the City of Barrie
70 Collier Street, P.O. Box 400
Banie, Ontario
L4M 4T5
Tel: 705-737-6800
Fax: 705-739-4247
E-mail: communicatewithus@city.barrie.on.ca
Yours/troy,
W~i,.,q~
W.G. Gilbert, P,Eng.
Senior Engineer
RECEIVED
NOV 2 0 2001
,"1?)
\,' .
, '< /;>-
",' ~"'f
....:<./r::-n.....
......'~,'i~~ ;~~~.=_" .
t
~~
4(~
~ ,)1
,.~
TOTAL P.02
{J. "
1
2
I
I
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ministry of Tourism,
Culture and Recreation
Ministere du Tourisme,
de la Culture et des Loisirs
~ Ontario
in this Ministry's Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines. Cultural heritage resources
include all resources or features of historical, architectural, or archaeological interest.
400 University Avenue 400, avenue University
Toronto ON M7A 2R9 Toronto ON M7A 2R9
Heritage and Libraries Branch
Heritage Operations Unit
Tel:( 416)314-7132 Fax:( 416)314-7175
18 May 2001
Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Len Kozachuk
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Sherman & Associates Limited
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill ON L3T 7N9
I
John MacDonald
Heritage Planner
Dear Mr. Kozachuk:
c. Penny Young, Environmental Services Unit, Planning and Environmental Office, Ministry
of Transportation, 3rd Floor, Atrium Tower, 1201 Wilson Avenue, Downsview
ON M3M 118
RE: Class Environmental Assessment, Improvements to Highway 400 from 1.0 krn South
of Highway 89 Northerly to Junction of Highway 11 Preliminary Design, MTO File
G.W.P. 30-95-00, MTCR File 400H009
A principal concern of this Ministry is the adverse effects that undertakings such as the above
mentioned may have on cultural heritage resources. If a preferred alternative is determined to have
the potential to have an impact on cultural heritage resources, then this Ministry would recommend
that a cultural heritage resource assessment be prepared as part of the Environmental Assessment. If
any significant cultural heritage features are identified, then any negative impacts would have to be
mitigated by either avoidance or documentation.
Using the available heritage databases and mapping in this office, and based on the information
received, it has been determined that this project has the potential to impact cultural heritage
resources. This determination is based on the proximity of numerous registered archaeological sites.
Consequently, this Ministry recommends that, subsequent to the finalisation of the plans for this
project, that the proponent carry out a cultural heritage resource assessment of the areas to be
impacted by construction and mitigate, through avoidance or documentation, adverst:: impacts to
any significant cultural heritage resources found. No demolition, grading, filling, or any form of soil
disturbances, should take place in the areas proposed to be impacted prior to the issuance of a letter
rrom the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation indicating that all cultural heritage resource
concerns have met licensing and resource conservation requirements.
It is recommended that a licensed consulting archaeologist be retained to prepare an assessment
(detailed determination of potential) of the areas to be impacted by construction that initially
determines their need for further testing. Where such areas are determined to require further testing,
a licensed archaeological consultant should carry out such work according to the standards outlined
42-054C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
~ Ontario
Ministry of
Northern Development
and Mines
Ministere du
Developpement du Nord
et des Mines
Resident Geologist Program
933 Ramsey Lake Road, 6TH Floor
Sudbury, Ontario
P3E 685
May 16, 2001
Mr. Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Cole, Sherman and Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
RE: Hiqhwav 400 PJanninq Study - GW.P. 3P-95-00 (Ref: CN29900147)
Mr. Kozachuk:
The purpose of this letter is to thank you and confirm that the Ministry of Northern
Development and Mines (MNDM) received your notice of External Team Meeting letter
dated May 08, 2001. MNDM will assess the need to attend the meeting at the Stroud
Community Centre.
Dave Rowell
Regional Land Use Geologist - Southern Ontario
Tel: (705) 670-5737
FAX: (705) 670-5807
E-Mail: dave.rowell@ndm.gov.on.ca
E:/01 Corres/URS-May16.Doc
o /-
Ontario Native Affairs
Secretariat
Secretariat des affaires
autochtones de l'Ontario
@ Ontario
421 S. James SI.
Suite 101
Thunder Bay ON P7E 2V6
421, rue S. James
Bureau 101
Thunder Bay ON P7E 2V6
Tel.: (807) 473-3132
Fax.: (807) 473-3153
Tel.: (807) 473-3132
Telae.: (807) 473-3153
May 16,2001
Len Kozachuk, Project Engineer
Senior Project Manager
Cole Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
THORNHILL, Ontario
L3T 7N9
.~-~
~(]t
.., ."e.l....
~~~ '"
,
Dear Mr. Kozachuk:
Re: Hi2hwav 400 Plaooio2 Study
Thank you for your letter dated May 8, 2001, informing us of the above noted information.
We trust that you have been in contact with any First Nations in the area and that they have been
notified about the issues under consideration and their opportunities to participate in the process.
Yours truly,
.
;/1 0
/1/l\._ L~L!v'~
Mary Carl
Associate Negotiator
Thunder Bay
/lst
CITY HALL
70 COLLIER STREET
TEL. (705) 739-4210
FAX (705) 739-4248
~~/ V~/'f \lVIIIA' {j')
.~~ .J/J~'k-uLU0
~ M~ W.~ ?-M-r
\M.r-' - .
'ltALr P l4 .\lo'l\j ':htJ u... s .
MUNICIPAL WOR'-- DEPARTMENT
File: 8302-P134
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
February 16,2001
. .
~~
P.O. BOX 400
BARRIE,O:'iTARIO
L4M 4T5
- 2 -
Further infonnation may be obtained by contacting the undersigned at 705-739-4220
extension 4444, email diamesW2citv.barrie.on.ca.
THE CORPORATION OFTHE CITY OF BARRIE
MUNICIPAL WORKS DEPARTMENT
"CommiJ1~d to Total S~rvic~ Exc~l1~nc~"
February 16,2001
File: 8302-P 134
C--:SS truly, r:l
D M~ac;:;;j ~
Project Engineer
To Whom It May Concern:
DMJ/
Attachments
The Corporation of the City of Barrie is undertaking a Class Environmental Assessment
for improvements to Essa Road between Ferndale Drive and approximately 150 metres
south of Ardagh Road, pursuant to the approved procedures for Schedule 'B' activities as
defined in the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (E.A.). Subject to the
comments received and the receipt of necessary approvals the City of Barrie intends to
proceed with the planning, design and construction of this project in 2001.
cc: R. W. McArthur, P. Eng.
Manager of Design and Construction Services
The Corporation of the City of Barrie wishes to advise that an Open House will be held
on Wednesday, February 28, 2001 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the Sir Robert Barrie
Room, 2nd Floor City Hall, 70 Collier Street to review the alternatives and receive
comments regarding the planning and design for Essa Road.
An Environmental Assessment Document has been prepared that identifies deficiencies
on Essa Road that include traffic capacity, pavement structure, sidewalk, stonn and
sanitary sewer deficiencies. Solutions to these problems in terms of alternatives have
been established and screened with respect to potential environmental effects. The
Environmental Assessment Document will be available for review between the hours of
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.at the following locations:
Clerks Office
70 Collier Street
City of Barrie
151 Floor
Municipal Works Department
70 Collier Street
City of Barrie
7th Floor
Attached is a copy of an executive summary of the Environmentai Assessment Document
and a questionnaire. If you have any concerns or comments please complete the attached
questionnaire and bring it to the Open House or submit it by mail before March 9, 2001
to:
Mr. D. James, P. Eng.
Corporation of the City of Barrie,
Municipal Works Department,
70 Collier Street, Barrie, Ontario,
L4M 4T5
Fax: 705-739-4248
"THE PEOPLE ARE THE CITY"
I The City of
I BARRIE
I -Commiued 10 TOlal Service Excellence
I TO:
FROM:
I SUBJECT:
I DATE:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MUNICIPAL WORKS
DEPARTMENT
Municip31 Works Committee
Land Use Planning and Traffic Issues.../2
MEMO
The College cllnemly has 3 vehicular access points, 2 from Georgian Drive \vhich is designated
as an arterial road in the City's Official Plan with a planned right-of-way of 26m (85 ft.). The
third access point on the southerly boundary of the College with the adjacent existing residential
area at Cook Street which is a local road with a 20m (66 ft.) ri~ht-of-wav. The 4th and final
"- .
access point to the College is at Nelson Street, again along the southerly boundary with the
existing residential area. Nelson Street is also a local road and is cunently used for pedestrian
access to the College. Nelson Street provides for vehicular access to an approximately 150 car
parking lot which serves 2 ball diamonds constructed on College property and leased to the City
under a 20 year agreement, which is nearing the end of its tenn.
Municipal Works Committee
George Kaveckas
Georgian Drive Area
Thursday, January 11, 2001
The roadways of Duckworth and Georgian Drive were reconstructed in 1997. The configuration of the
roadways included the following assumptions:
· Georgian College would not significantly increase in size (approximately 5,000
students)
· Royal Victoria Hospital expanding to 500 beds (initial design 350, expansion within a 5
to 10 yr period)
· Georgian Drive Secondary Plan with 3,800 population (Traffic Impact Study completed
by Read Voorhees in September 1995)
· Future background traffic to grow by 25 %
The Hospital has 2 access point(s) onto Georgian Drive, and a service road (Galley Court) at its
easterly boundary separating the Hospital from the Business Park.
The Georgian Drive Secondary Plan contains the following policy intended to separate
residential and traffic associated with a major institutional use:
The above assumptions did not assume the recent growth projections announced by Georgian College where
student enrolment could increase by a factor of 3, to about 15,000. Also, considerable expansion of the
hospital is being considered.
A norTh-solllh major collector road continuing from the end of Johnson Street north through to
Georgian Dril'e will provide primary access throughout the Georgian Drive Secondary Plan
Area. An)' access/egress to the Georgian College lands abutting to the west, may be provided
through The local road system for residential purposes, provided that sllch access/egress is
compatible with the residential character of the secondary plan. The intent of the road system is
TO separale local traffic associaTed with the residential area from traffic associated with major
institllTions sllch as Georgian College and the Ro.val Victoria Hospital. The intent is also to
separaTe Traffic associated with the industrial business parkfrom local residel1liaLtraffic.~n
Preliminary discussions with Al Lacey of Read Voorhees and Associated Ltd. (Traffic consultant who did the
City of Barrie Transportation Study), indicate that Georgian Drive may have sufficient capacity however the
intersections would require review and possible improvements to handle the added traffic generated by these
above developments. All access points to Georgian College and Royal Victoria would require review and
improvements to handle the additional traffic.
Many of the 3,800 residents of the developing Georgian Drive Secondary Plan area wi]] access
Highway 400 via Georgian Drive, placing a further demand on this arterial road and its
intersection with Duckworth Street. Pratt Construction has commenced the servicing of the
northerly half of the planning area, the fonner Dunsmore Fanns with a fall completion date.
It is suggested that an overall Traffic Impact Study be carried out addressing the traffic impacts along with
suggested roadway and intersection improvements. This study would also identify the impact on all roads in
this area. Read Voorhees indicate that a traffic impact study could be carried out for a price of approximately
$10,000 and be completed within 4 weeks. Given the Regional nature of Royal Victoria Hospital, it is
imperative that there be unrestricted traffic flow to and from this facility. Efficient Transit access to and from
these sites is an important component of the overall Transportation Plan and should be included in the Traffic
Impact Study.
Residents in the existing residential neighbourhood to the south, particularly the Cook Street area
have expressed concerns over traffic accessing the College via Cook Street. Their concern is
further increased by the plans for expansion of the College's physical plant and the traffic
assoc1~lted with the significant growth anticipated in the student and staff body.
Also, staff suggests that a functional servicing study be carried out by the property owners to identify any
concerns with servicing these sites.
Please Find attached several maps and plans intended to assist in the review and consideration of
this matter. George Kaveckas, Traffic, Transit and Parking Manager has provided the attached
commentary with respect to traffic engineering and servicing. City staff will be presenting this
information at the meeting on Tuesday, January 16th.
Attached is the following background information:
· overall drawing of the area including Georgian College and Royal Victoria Hospital
· Comments from Read Voorhees and Associates Limited.
· Road Classification map from the Transportation Study.
Attch
J\VT:sg
~.~
MElVI0RANDUM
/
//
I
I
I
I
..
fe" t ,~,
.. " '...
::~-- .'Y&
, ,.3ft
--";""O'\I...uartu;;:- -
City of Barrie
Planning and Development Department
FROM:
Municipal Works Committee
James W. Taylor, Director of Planning and Development~ tl ~
January 10,2001 ()
SUBJECT:
Land Use Planning and Traffic Issues in the Georgian Drive Area
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO:
DATE:
FILE:
D09-Georgian Drive Secondary Plan
The Georgian Drive area contains Georgian College and the RVH, the two largest institutional
uses in the City of Barrie, together with a 5.5ha. (l3.5ac.) Business Park intended to complement
the referenced institutional uses, surrounded by an existing and developing residential area with a
combined population of 5,000 persons.
Both the College and the Hospital serve a population far beyond the City's boundaries. The
RVH is a regional hospital, with approximately 55% of its patients generated from within the
City of Barrie and 45% beyond. The College serves an even larger area with students generated
locally, regionally, national1y and even internationally. The College has recently formalized a
relationship with York University which will further enhance its stature. Approximately 50% of
the student body arrives by car. Both the college and the hospital have significant staffs (1,100
and 1,200 respecti veil') together with associated service and deli very vehicles. The RVH has a
further 1,200 volunteers.
Both the College and Hospital have plans for expansions that wil1 generate significantly greater
volumes of traffic. The Col1ege is currently preparing a master plan with the potential to increase
the student body from 5.000 to 15,000 with an intensification of the campus which could involve
the construction of several new buildings. The Hospital plans a major expansion including a
regional cancer centre which will take its annual trips from 225,000 to 400,000 and will add an
additional 800 staff and 300 volunteers. The Hospital requires timely access to and from its
facility in order to accommodate urgent care situations involving ambulances, patients and
doctors.
The Georgian Dri ve Secondary Plan Area contains a Business Park. designated in recognition of
its strategic location adjacent to the two major institutional uses noted. The Business Park is
intended to attract uses associated with and complementary to a regional hospital and major
educational institution.
12: 15
1 705 487 0133
ORO MEr' 'E TWP ~ 19058824399
Page 3/3
1/05/2001
W Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NO. 808
[;)001
12/08/00 11:38 To:LEN KOZACHUK
~ Ontario
Ministry of Tramsportation
URSCOLE
SHERMAN
From:Town of Innisfi1
Town of Inn isf il
I. .iWt\Y 400 PlANNING Snmy
~OM 1 KM SoUTH OF HJGHWAY 89 NORTHEJtLY 30 ICM TO
THE TO JUNC110N OJ: HICHWAY 11
O::xINTYOF SIMCXJE
G. WP. J0-9U)O
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWt\Y400 PLANNINGSTlJDY
FROM 1 !eM SOU'I"H OF HJGHWAY 89 NORTHER!. Y 30 KM TO
THE. TO JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
CXXlNTYOF SIMOOE
G. W P. 30-95.00
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
S"r.r\J.tE.fJOlDEIt OJl"rrACr It''tEoIU'di\'rIOt'T FOlt1'd (
Jiu;~ F#\.'t .w\C1tA~ ~Ot'h\'; l'05.~btl'IO: (~) aa"l-&J'-J
1.) Does your organization wish to panicipate in this study and continue to receive notices of project
activities and information as this study progresses? ~ 0
~r.t~!O!.DE.1\ COl'rrACf 1l"tp()lti'dA'f101"t F01'.l'd
P1.E;~ .rj\.! ~\Ctt.t~ ~Ot'1 #)S lIt.~~mLI'{~ (~$) a:r1..4)'1)
L) Does your organization wish to participate in this stUdy and continue to receive notices of project
activities and infonnation as this study progresses? ~ 0
Yes
No
Yes
No
2.) If your organization wishes to participate in this study, please provide who will act 2S the Project
Team's contact. Please be sure to include the contact's name, title, department, full organization
name and mailing address.
2.) If your organization wishes to participate in this study. please provide who will act as the Project
TC2ffi'S contaCt. please be sure to include the contact's name, tide, department, full organization
name and mailing address.
NAME:
Le.,~~
L Ov-; N S H \ PLAN JJ (d~....
b t-Jt( I ~iG€l?..., -'.:><1 T~J;(...t'1( j S\
-1t r'\- 0 (2 \ A
c; ~I N W'A-T5 ~
NAME:
TITLE:
TITLE:
DEPARTMENT:
I~N\ ~ Sff.J2AL~
TawN oF- INNISF'( L
(
DEPARTMENT:
f k/\ ~I\..) 'IN G-
ORGANIZA TJON:
ORGANIZATION:
~F
o /'t? - h(' f),') )v -) ?
IJvvrvS Ii \ r
MAILING ADDRESS:
21k'
1>-J,.Jl ":> FlL-- ~'2,ALu ~IY.) . l i,lM '> '):. l. i G^-/i
F / ' )
L-Cl<; I A I
MAILING ADDRESS:
p. () .
I" 0
v~ J f\J
,
L-o L 2.X'~
f) ~ 0)(
PHONE NUMBElt:
. ~
'/ D S - 40 1 - J- \ 'I 1
PHONE NUMBER:
4-''-' - 3 --, 10
FAX:
'f 3G - 7 f 2..0
FAX:
1"C;-4&i- O\~3
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
Orr--.;:AJM'.1'"\ 0> bccrlf\c2X, fie +
E-MAIL ADDRESS;
c;~ ,~M6~~~h;A.. (M.c.-.
Your infonnanon and comments will be kept on file for use during the study. Please submit this
form to:
Your information and comments will be kept on file for use during the study. Please submit this
fonn to:
Submitted By:
Len Kozachu~ P.Eng.,
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Sherman &:: Associates i..td.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, UT 7N9
Fax: (905) 882-4399
E-mail: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
Submitted By: "'-
L:f A v 1.0.....) W 4-r-.?"O,.J
(-
,.....j~
Len KOZ8Chuk, P .Eng.,
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Shennan &: Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Onwio, UT TN9
Fax: (90S) 882.4399
E-mail: len_kozachuk@uncorp.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
s \ fY\ CcE r f~')U. ruT( t='E D 'E:"'RATIC\l'd 0+ ~. f r\C' uJ+UJ~ _ I
c::-- , C f\ ' r. ...L 0
~\fY\' t'\dJ'(,"\\{\. 0TI
MAILING ADDRESS: I \ it) Hl0\.j;JC:, (Y) \(~ \,l A ~+" 0(\ LC)L I Y-..O I
1~) C... - <1 ~CX) e--)(~ ~-:)/),Y-
I
(Jf JdC,-]cr9J I
E-MAIL ADDRESS: ~~~rrM" .~ dc~ '0\'"\ '~-i4~ (c~_l\ \OuJkf"\ I
/~~~ l-c.tte~
I
I
I
I
I
01115/01
1 (!:J:::J 4<:::4 <:::11:::J
16:58 FAX 1 705 '~4 2115
~ Ontario
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
N.V.C.A.
[4)001/001
HIGHWAY 400 PlANNING STIJDY
FR0... 1 KM SOUTIi OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTIlERLY 31. .oM TO
TIlE TO ]UNCDON OF HIGHWAY 11
CbUNTYOF SIMCOE
C.I.v.P.30.95-00
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SoUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORmERL Y 30 s:M TO
TIlE TO JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
CbUNrYOF SIMCOE.
G. W:P. 30-95.00
Ministry of Transportation
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Ministry of Transportation
~rAitEf.10r .t).iUt cal'rrAC'r b'tfOlU'd,\:rl01'f Fa.itl'tl
}'U;\:lS P4~'t~\a~~ ~fJt'r~~'W-al"1 e 'to: (~J5) airl-IJ!;!)
!ifiU"tEHO!.t}B.it COl'rrAcr INFOItl'dt\."flOf'. FOltl.~J
P!..S;\~ F~\t.! .lli\a!A~ ~()t't~~ }I~Ut.E: 'It): (~.s) a;n.4J!1)
1.) Does your organization wish to participate in this study and continue to receive notices of project
activities and information as this study progresses? IKJ 0
1.) Does your organization wish to participate in trus study and continue to receive notices of project
activities and information as trus stUdy progresses? [K] 0
Yes
Yes
No
No
2.) If your organization wishes to participate in this study, please provide who will act as the Project
Team's contaCt. Please be sure to indude the contact's name, title, department, full organization
name and mailing address.
2.) If your organization '\vishes to participate in trus study, please provide who will act as the Project
Team's contact. Please be sure to include the contact's name, tide, department, full organization
name and mailing address.
NAME:
NAME:
t\\ R bc)ES
~ES \ rJ \:: 1\\1
N. e.v \ ~C) I\J
TITLE:
TITLE:
DEPARTMENT:
(i)
Charles F. Burgess
Director of Planning
DEPARTMENT:
"Conservation through Co.operation"
ORGANIZATION:
ORGANIZATION:
MAILING ADDRESS:
360 M~I St., RR #1
Angul>, Ontario L.OM 180
Web: www.nvca.on.ca
Tel: (705) 424-'479 Ext.229
Fax: (705) 424-21 15
Email: CburgBSS@nvca.on.ca
PHONE NUMBER:
NOTTAWASAGA VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHOR1TY .
PHONE NUMBER:
FAX:
FAX:
.5.5 fI
'1 :2;2 -
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
c
Your information and comments will be kept on file for use during the study. Please submit this
fonn to: .
Your infonnation and comments will be kept on fIle for use during the study. Please submit this
fonn to:
Submitted By:
Len Kozachuk, P .Eng.)
Senior Project Manager
Cole) Shennan &. Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill) Ontario) L3T 7N9
Fax: (90S) 882-4399
E-mail: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
Submitted By:
Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.,
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Fax: (905) 882.4399
E-mail: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
513 475 3835
NCJU :~8 '013 (3'3: 51 FR OMRFRA .- -, I GHTON
P.01/02 ~s>. ~
@ Ontario
NOV 28 '00 0'3:52 FR OMRFRA BRIGHTON
513 475 3835 TO '31'30588243'3'3
P.02/{:j2
613 475 3835 TO 919r
124399
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
.L ...I.GHWA Y 400 PlANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOt.JTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NOJlTIiERLY 30 KM TO
THE TO JUNcnON OF HIGHWAY 11
Ct>UNTYOF SIMOOE
G. WP. 30.95-00
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Ministry of
Agriculture, Food
and Rural Aftair5
RR. #3. 95 Dundas St.,
Brighton.Ontano KOK 1HO
Tel: (613) 475-4764
Fax: (613) 47~383S
Minister. de
I' Agriculture, de \' Alimentation
8t des Affaires rurales
R.~. #3, 95. rue Dundas
Btigtlton, Ontario KOK 1HO
UI.: (613) 475-4764
Telec.: (613) 475-3835
~r.iUta.f.lO!.IJ.iUt COl'rrAC'rh'lF()lu.'di~rl01'r 'Ft)iu~l
P~~FA.it~\Q!i~,~~'I~~l'~-abt 8 'ro: (m) aa2-4~~)
Agriculture & Rural Division
1.) Does your organization wish to participate in this stUdy and continue to receive notices of project
activities and information as this study progresses? I:i3 0
DATE;
%V... 2.. Y } .L(}.~
L e ". k:' a. ~& hVi)C
FAX: ~Q &,-8<f'L -43t1CJ
Yes
No
TO:
.....
FROM: Ray Valaitis, Rural Planner
NUMBER OF PAGES - INCLUDING COVER SHEET: 2-
2.) If your organization wishes to participate in this study, please provide who will act as the Project
Team's contact. Please be sure to include the contact's name, title, department, full organization
name and mailing address.
Re:
~IAnr) 1.f 00,
~'j. Vex IO\;+H
~ tA ~ \ P \OI-"^ er-
NAME:
TITLE:
A -5 t"' h ki ll-u rz::". 1 1- CJ"-a rA U S~_
ORGANIZATION: ~r-la h; (\,' (+1'; QUe:> r-lr n t+.. ~c. J FQ~..i;;
~U'r-l^ \ APF"",>~
MAILING ADDRESS: ~R. .4:j..3 J c-, S \::)u ~ f S' -I- rf e-f J P:..r- r~ ~..}-Q hJ Q",7 ~ ) /{ 0 K I H 0
G \3- LLlS-l-tl h 4
~ (3- '-tiS-- 3 ~3S-
DEPARTMENT:
PHONE NUMBER:
FAX:
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
YOW" information and comments will be kept on file for use during the study. Please submit this
form to:
Submitted By: ~"'~ l/"" It<~+; -5
AtAr~ L.eJ CA. /\e
Qr'\AFAA
Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.,
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Fax: (905) 882-4399
E-mail: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
@
~$
Ontario, there's no taste like home
Un bon gout de chez nous
** TOTAL PAGE.02 **
/';?1 J
C/1Y
/
;...
Tn' r' CI""" 01"
~ . -. ',' 'j
:Ie: ::;;-::. -2:" :::-, C:"~ :;'"',E ::ry :: Sa;"'it
-n.' .A PRJD TE,'
t---<~_.. 1 .
J ~ t _ .
~..L 1- ' ..
-: :~1 i~" :,:r?-=',
;':, ,-- :,..",. L:;:'
:::J,"r'fI'r;Jt:,:::: i(; -;ctt:/ :;;-;:-",:; ;-:::=':"l"t:r.==
..,.,::. :;,.. - ~-'--
'~i .:: -::
~
-""""""""~
- ~
.... --:-:... ...::-. ---- - - -, - - .-. - -
- - - -- - - > --.- -... -- - '-' "--' - --
0_'
Lv1:. :?=:~:- J a:1:.::::
-_~ _L_~::.: ,01'7'1" _"""\._, ", ,.," ~. -__ P- .. j I" C" J
- ,--.-_~ .:._ 5:~-::~3.."'":":36
...".... < ""- .
~V.tl:-"":'S::'.Y c:: 1 :-~:::;?8r::":.J:-i
?R':)I'L
-. ... -
...-\.1C::: :'ev;lOv:;
Ma..."lager of Planni:1g &: ?olicy Se:vices
-.,....--~ --
,-...... -- - ""'.- - - ...
v' -:.. ,;";::._~-..;.....~ ':";::. ...:..-:-
;." '=-.1.'_'_ "'''='' :
-= A Y r --jr ,r~-::> '-0.' -~c, .' -; ,-
... _h;. ~"L-Y1D':::'l\.: (/ "J /j/--:.:...,./
DA~.
'Th '- J. $". 0'-" Q- ".., 2,",("1"',
. t:.so.ay, _pt_oHD_. VI, .....""-.)
No. or Pages (inel. cove!" Da2'~;: S
. -
NOTES:
..A..s per our conversation, here is the information regarding rail.
17ris mJormario" l:s Inlcnded o"Iy Jar u~ of rhe ",di1ndual or .:nriry whIch ills addressed, and may conram mformatlon IhallS privileged. corrJidc!IIlal and
C:<<:IIIPlfrOnl disclosure under the MUNICIPAL FREEDOM OF INFORMA110N AND PROTEC110N OF PRiVACY ACT. .
Jj Ihc reader of Ihis message i:s lIot the IlIIended rcclplelll of rhe employee or agenl responsible for delivering the mcssage 10 Ihe -'inlended reCJf)I~nr, yOIl
are hereby Itolified Ihal any dillseminatlon, dlslriblltton or copying aflhis commllnicatlons Is :SIMelly prohibited. /fYOII received this commuflicatian in
error. please notIfy UII Immediately by telephone and relurn Ihe original 10 liS by paslal scr....i<:e at the addf'Cs! noted above,
;0/r0' d
Lt>2!7 6[L <;0,L
'l= H19-S~~OM lddIJINnW
20:60 000c-~0~d35
-j
i
I,
II
Simcoe Muskoka
Catholic District School Board
I
I
Telephone (705) 722-3555
Fax (705) 72:::6534
,'"
Mr. Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
Senior Project Manager
an & Associates Ltd.
'';erce Valley Drive East
,,'1, ON
T7N9
y,- ';'
(){) 2\)0,
'"
f'
FIighway 400 Planning Study
from 1.0 km South ofHwy 89 northerly 30 km to Junction ofHwy 11
Preliminary Design I Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P. 30-95-00
County of Simcoe
RE:
Dear Len Kozachuk,
The Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board is responding to your request for
information or comments related to the Highway 400 Planning Study for Highway
Improvements.
Currently, our Board has 5 buses that use Highway 11 and Highway 400 between the Oro-
Medonte area and Duckworth Street in Barrie. There are also several cars and busettes (smaU
buses) that use Highway 400 between either Highway 89 or Innisfil Beach Road and Dunlop
Street or Duckworth Street in Barrie.
As a result of the transportation requirements to and from our schools, our Board is interested in
receiving some additional information about this project so that we can consider alternate
transportation solutions while construction is underway.
1. The duration of the construction period.
2. The timelines for the construction projects.
3. The dates and timings of any road closures.
Otherwise, this Board has no real concerns with the project at this time, but would appreciate
remaining informed about the project's progress. If you have any questions or require further
information, please contact the undersigned or Kristin Dibble at extension 250.
Sincerely,
i)~~ aPJ
Jennifer Sharpe
Senior Planner
cc. Mary Ann Pope, Transportation Officer - SMCDSB
\\ nA.\,..,,, ('f:"D',r.D\ ("v('\ c:u" Dr.ry.. P1 A lVN1Nr;\.M,m;rinof\.MIScv-lwv400Plall1tinRStudv.d(}('
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- " ".. - - .. ""
.:....;lS: 0: f,-Or:.ll~I71eC .L_tten aet::
,~ ~.... - <
~ - -"' : ~<':::" :. _: ~_ ~: __ ~~ ~ ::- ' _=- :. _~. 2. ~~ E- ~ ~
r'-..--.__~ ";"\.,tr ";0.- .'\' 1\./"-Q (" c-i-c' -..."....g.......,..,.,.. ,.- . T 1'"'> _ ~'!'"
1.J4.: _yl.c."el., L.;....r:~~.lL~ ..Jl. _.....U.. IJO .:.. r,ITs....
Diznne Betts. on behalf of ~"liniste:- of T ransDOrt2rion. David Tu~bliE
. '
ivIayor Frank Jonkman, Town of Bradford "y\'es~ GwiUimburj'
Iviayor Brian Jackson, Town of Innisfil
Bob Lemon, Town of Innisfil
Peter Lee, City Administrator, City of Ba:-rie
Rick Newlove, City of Barrie
Alderman Alison Eadie, Acting Mayor, City of Barrie
Sean Morlev on behalf of David Lindsav. President and CEO Ontario
'" . .
Superbuild Corp.
Allan Tonks, Greater Toronto Service Board
Ernie Eves Office - Representative from lVLM.A.H.
3.
-- -.-. --__ f ('"'] r...,r--
Proposed Ivleeting ~ ate,
GO - . ....;r. ~~., ~ - r .... n .... r G 0
' , 1 r~un ~\.l.eetln~ - v~ ea.nesClZ '\'. _vl..a.:rCtl ...:::. ~U ..'
-. .. . ,
Qt TU' P-D.D ~, "P ".:< '!"' l-' - L n', <) 11"" .To e "7"., c ,... 0 n.., \,;fD P
. ..................... ""'- c...;...... ....... k........... "..... '.L. L.t.. "-' _, '-- _ ...........L ..l..
..
i
A'
....., .
t"lo-e~' ~ c :.:--~:~:
:>
- ...... .,
:::':. \-: -::-_ ~~ .,' ~ -~~_. ..~C. -:.. --=.:- -\7,~ t ~_ =2-.:.-:: 2.:-~': --..: ..~:_:' -~-_
-...'
- ..-".-... -; -., - ~ -
___'....;,;,...:..~.J....i....,_
........ W' .. .. ~
e::1Clent t:-a:::SDor:a.:lor_ Ior D~ODle., ~OiJQ.: 2..LiQ se:'''v~lces~
..... -. ... ~ - .
r'on;;711'.oC~ o/""'nnGr--17r"' ~-,~....,^-~~~ t"~~ D. ("1'7" ~c. ,~~~t'?;~O~
..... -.....-_..........___ ____..........''-'__'___..............~,..... ...._.... .......~_ ..I... 'v.. :.....).... "-' __ ...._.._1........._..
-
> ~_t""'>_-, ......,~r--~......._ --_----~.- f"""--__-'" __.,"'~~.-_ --_~, -~'-.. , ....__._ -,.-__-_....'!
.i....;.'l....~.)DUJ,.\,...;:..~l~.).l.~ :;,\'.':)L=...~_::.: C-.;.l\..- JUJ..l..,j,.'=~ L........Ct...... r.~l..i.l ;:,:,;....v-;:, ',-,~~l~.J..c...l
. ..
O ""l""'I_. '""'n d "'-'h.c. P~-"G ro-Of'" rt.,...o ~mDO~""'''''''- ~ssut:).c :o~ ...."<ha
ITw::::Ll.IO c.... ' L.i.J.~ J..).::u .i.l_ c\... ,,",a. Cl.l ""' .I. H... J.. ..~.u... ... ""''-' 1 .i. L... ....
Provincial economy.
01
)> Special anention must be paid to integrated transporration
svstems from t.~e G.T.A.. to Barrie.
'"
)> Special attention to the Highway 400 Corridor has to be
reviewed and assessed, along with other transportation
links and modes.
i
-.
)> Barrie is the fastest growing municiDalitv in all of Canada,
_ "-" "J....
therefore, transportation issues must be addressed.
Suggested Key .A..reas to Explore the Needs and Opportunities for
Rail Services to the Barrie Area:
)> Good transportation network is a critical service for all
levels of government.
)> Central Ontario is important for the economic
development of Ontario.
Other Issues to Note:
)> The cost of widening Highway 400 is approximately $1.5
million dollars per kilometer not counting property or
bridge structures.
~~/~~.~ )~/M C~) ~~)
[0:60 000c-~0-c3S
',~ ~!O-~~~nM iHri1iTNnW
;::2'::: -::::'lO.1..
-..
;->-
!'....l,...!~,..~f""\~,:. ...~: 0 -"j--; 1 ("'0-- OT LT; ~;"""I_ '0,\' LLt)ri T ~-~,,",,\"! 1'::;;'-I.:=o~~- ...:::....-._
_....--..........._UJ._, ............... L..........__....... .:::>... _ ....._..._....~y\ ~ _ . _ '..... _ _, 't. _......,;: i: -,
~ _ ."t -.......::-... -- -....--...........--........ .........-...""
:--;-.-'~7,-. "~i ":,J:;:.~~-:... ("1 r,(": 1--.> ~-;:.. :-~~:_""'_..::._": ,..._~
..... VA._v.1....v Lv .J-J_......:..__ \.J.. JV L.....:...J......; """"".......... ........,:,...J..;...J.c...~~....... G.....
p r~~"f;J."'\-:'-::
_ \....J;...-_ \ \' ,,-' _ ~..._
s ~ 5 ',:: . .=i ,=, ~=- ~ :~; ;,-J ',=~
~-;"":,:,,"':::' ~,":'-~--~- /":''''""'----:''
--'.......__w-
':', .:':. "'\ \' I""'; ,"'\ _r .""'\ /'''\ r
;-';......,;/"'.
----'--~_._- .._~
-'. ... - .-.
~." :J/.I -.
-,'-
,'~,
~/!
~
Boarcl~m
Bl7!.df:Jrd I
~ GwiWmouri
Public: UIX'Zr.'
36 Mulcast~ Sl
[;arne, ON L4M ::M1
Te" (iQS; 7:;i~2t;2
i-eOC0-46i-5C3
Fe.;: (70S! 737 -lOE3
Mor,.-Thur::.; SalTr-4pm
FL.: 9arn-2or;",
-. .,,__. -. M"I
If:.. i='''';;'' ,/;'-v,-,
~.: lGaIT1-:::rr .
Cr.'r'~c
LE::;i:J:T1V= JSS:rr~BLY
'-.-r; i
,.;,. ,,-J 1".___....
(':::.r :,y,r '1 'V.
_' __ _- ... 4 .~' ',-' ..- ... .... .....
- -- ....
:":Z~l-:. ~;:71::;~ ~~::-:~:
I am pleased to advise that we are ready to proceed to the nex.t stage of discussions with respect [0
bringing GO rail service to Bame. Bou'l th~ City of Ba...-ne and the Town of Innisfil have passed
resolutions to continu~ dis:'Ussion with. yot: 2-'1d the Greate:- Toronto A..rea Services Board. I enclose
eODies of the resolutions for vour l.."1formation.
.. -
JOE TA-SCOW.., E.t:.;:,
..;;:-
.-" ~~ ~ - "
:'::, ~~.": :~. -",;\:2.~, JrO\71Gt.C tC'~ ..:; 2.::-::;' 1.:-:
- - .... '-'.
..
'-..' '-1 ;
~ '-
.... - ,-". .-,'"
..:._u~~s: ..:..:. ~U..i,--!
>
~.. .... -.... ... I,' ..... r', r.-,#'-." .
l.ne POPUls.:lOn IE DC:Ine IS !lC'\Y o\r~:- l,.JU:\jJ,-,i: -\::/ne;=-~2.S 1:-1
~ (101"0"""" '~ < .' .. - ,..
'10-01 t 1 ~ ,....-,::::;;.. ::- D,--" ~,-...., '1-, 1:;;;'''' I"'" -"""'-""'''''''''U''''I- ,..,....... I...... "'"'" n ,')()n
........ .,/\",... --..;:::....:._.J.~ ...; ~ '-'1.........).....;...J..c...;...~'........:...4. 't\~,::;. .:::..:!r:...._.-.....:....~.....:.:.;..::;..; _f\.;~,t__'__\..,;~
...,u'-' -;::,~.. St~""" :::.Ul',,," ~'v'\."I
_ ......(4:: .1.__... -.; I...... V V
-=- aromo uma.riCi ~':5~ :'~y;::
--.. . .....-. .""'..
-, 1-:-0.- t' "-,-, ""'I....~-
_.\,.,;,.... __ _._"'= _......~.J..
--.. ....,.- .
... - . -- o;,c".
~ .........l _... G....\..-JJ....
>- Other municipalities that are smaller than Darrie, such as
Milton, G~orgeto\vn, Ajax, V/hitby, Stouffville, and
N ewmarket, presently receive Go Service.
Dear Mr. King,
4.
Conclusion:
>- Congestion will cost this Province lost economic
'-'
opportunities if we do not solve our rranspo:-ration needs.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
We are also in the process of setting up a Citizen's Advisory Comminee and we should have that
initiative comDlered bv the first wee!:: in September.
. .
>- We need to develop a Team to work together to find a
solution to transportation needs for u1e Bfu-rie .A.rea if we want
Central Ontario to continue to prOSDer.
- ...
t would like to set up a date and time for our nex.t meeting at your earliest convenience. I would
appreciate it if you could select a couple of alternatives and advise me accordingly.
5.
Recommendation:
I look fOI:'\Vard to continuing our dis\:ussions and I look forv.'z.rd to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
That we setup a working team of relevant organizations such as
Go Transit, the Greater Toronto Services Board, Ministry of
Transportation, and representatives from Barrie, Bradford, lnnisjil
and Chaired by Joe Tascona, to study the feasibility of providing
Go Service to the Barrje Area and report back to this overall
Group with a proposed implementation plan.
Estimated Populations of Other Service Areas
Joe (I; scona MPP
Bao/ie Simcoe Bradford
cc Mayor Laking & Council Barrie
Mayor Jackson & Council Innisfil
Rick Newlove, City of Barrie v
Ajax- 75,000
Pickering - 85,000
Whitby - 85,000
Jvfilton - 40,000
Stouffville - 25,000
N ewmarket - 65,000
j
RRI'-
~~@~O\y~[Q)
SEP 1 2000
THE CITY OF BARRIE
MUNICIPAL WORKS
i CITY OF BA t: i
1II~ICIPAL WORKS DEi'ARTMENT
ACTION INFO INITIAL
Dlr9Ctlr
M. of 1\.5. \
M. of D.&c.l_J
M.ofE.S. ) /
I .
--'-j"7
M.ai?&i' L 1
M. o! R.&T. \ -\
1
OTHER I
FilE # I
- ~~
.-" --
'l~ H19-S~~OM lodIJINnW
~~/~0'd L7C7 6[L ~0L
1bronto Off\~: Mowat Blod<' 22nd Aoar' 900 Bay SL . Taomn. OntArio M7A 11.2'~. (416) 325-4579' Fax (416) 325-4620
C;;;1/170 . d
L72t7 sri, 5;0L
[0:60 0002-L0-d=S
'l~ H~9-S~~OM lodiJiNnW
[0:60 000c-L0-d=S
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
A
E....."."....................N
'" . ,
,"""-- :: }
.~:..
IXB
MINUTES OF MEETING
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS
DRAFT MEETING NOTES
DRAFT MEETING NOTES
PROJECT:
Highway 400 ImproveIIlents Planning Study
4. URS will add text to the TESR indicating that MTO will continue to work with the City of
Barrie to provide assistance to the extent possible under MTO's mandate in achieving the
City's objectives pertaining to spills between watersheds.
5. URS will add text that any additional improvements identified as a result of Items 3 and 4,
will be addressed in later design stages and will be subject to cost-sharing discussions
between the City and MTO.
6. URS will send a letter with Items 1 to 5 noted to the City, as a response to the City's letter of
October 7, 2003.
DATE: October 2003
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
MTG:
PROJECT No. 30013951
LOCATION:
PURPOSE:
Teleconference
.--.--.--
---------------.-
.-----
Coordination ~f Draina~ Improvements
._-"~
ATTENDEES: City of Barrie Staff
K. Boudreau, MTO
L. URS
The City offered that their letter to URS dated October 7, 2003, identified five areas of
concern with the current Drainage and Hydrology Report:
7. The City will provide a letter to MTO, circulated to URS and the recipients of the City's
October 7, 2003 letter, indicating that the URS letter addresses the City's concerns as they
relate to the Drainage and Hydrology Report for W.P. 30-95-00.
1. Hurricane Hazel, not the Timmins Storm, as the Regional Storm for the project area;
2. Spills between drainage basins;
8. MTO will provide the City with a TESR, once completed.
3. Highway 400 should be designated as a vital route;
4. MTO Commitment to work with the City as they complete their Master Drainage Plans
(MDP's) and Environmental Assessments (EA's); and
5. Providing the City with a draft TESR.
The following Actions Items were agreed:
1. URS will add a Note To Readers and footnotes as appropriate to the Highway 400 Drainage
Report. "This report is to be read in conjunction with the following MDP's and EA's being
prepared by the City of Barrie", or similar.
2. Barrie will provide URS with text regarding the purpose of the City's watershed studies and
the objectives Barrie is trying to achieve through the implementation of these studies, such
as:
a. Convey the greater of the 100 year or regional storm
b. Stop inter-basin spills
URS will incorporate this text into the TESR, as appropriate.
3. URS will add text to the appropriate sections of the TESR indicating that in light of Item 2,
there may be improvements to Highway 400 drainage facilities and measurers beyond that
which are included in the TESR.
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
Len Kozachuk to file
Submitted by:
URS Canada Inc.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
www.urs.ca
- 2-
URS
Minutes of Meeting
URS
Project: GWP 30-95-00 Highway 400 Planning Study
Project No. 33013952
Meeting No. 4
Date: June 23, 2003
Items
Location:
Purpose:
Present:
City of Barrie 4th Floor Boardroom
Time:
1 :30 pm
Preliminary Design Comments
Lorran Cooney - City of Barrie
Graeme King - City of Barrie
Wendell McArthur - City of Barrie
Geoff Mitchinson - City of Barrie
Jeff Parent - City of Barrie
Ralph Scheunemann - City of Barrie
Kevin Boudreau
Lola Vaz
Leonard Kozachuk
Colin Wong
- Ministry of Transportation
- Ministry of Transportation
-URS
-URS
Items
Description
Action by:
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the City's comments on the technically preferred plan,
as provided in one letter dated May 22,2003 and two letters dated June 3, 2003. It was agreed at
the meeting that these meeting minutes will serve as documentation of URS' s response to and
discussion of the City's comments.
It was noted that the Ministry of Transportation expects to file the Transportation Environmental
Study Report by the fall of 2003. The TESR is currently in draft fonn.
1. City of Barrie Rail Comments
G. MitchinsoD made a request for eXlstmg and proposed General URS
Arrangements for the Barrie/CollingwoodlHighway 400 structure south of
Tiffin Street. URS to provide.
G. Mitchinson indicated that the sight triangles at the URS
Barrie/CollingwoodlHighway 400 structure north of Innisfil Beach Road
would be reduced by the Highway 400 widening improvements. URS to
examme.
2. City of Barrie Roads Comments
Point 1
MTO has noted the City's concern regarding the location of commuter
parking lots. The location of Ministry commuter parking lots can be
reconsidered at a time closer to detail design.
Points 7,8.37 & 40
To clarify the Ministry's reasoning for projecting traffic volumes to 20ll,
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
URS Canada Inc. ''''''_'''___23 Jww03-'_
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Markham, ON Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
www.urs.ca
Page 2
Description Action by:
the Highway 400 study was intended to provide an interim solution for the
Barrie and Innisfil areas. It is the Ministry's Simcoe Area Transportation
Network Needs Assessment that provides guidance for long tenn
transportatioD solutions for Simcoe County.
The Ministry is satisfied with results of the Highway 400 Study traffic
assessment. It was clarified, however, that the number of lanes shown for
the crossiDg roads and ramps on the preliminary plans do not necessarily
represent the number of lanes that will be constructed; if it is found that
more lanes are required during later design stages, the Ministry is willing to
coordinate efforts with the Town of Innistil and/or the City of Barrie to
implement additional lanes.
URS agreed to note City of Barrie EA works on Preliminary Design Report URS
plates and exhibits.
URS to provide the City of Barrie (Attention: Jeff Parent) with a summary URS
of the number of lanes to be accommodated by each structure.
Point 12
~1l agreed that the Innisfil Beach Road structure should have capacity for
SIX lanes (2 through lanes and 1 speed change lane per direction). It was
explained that the proposed structure, as shown on the plans reviewed by
the City of Barrie, accommodates six lanes. .
The City inquired about pedestrian access at Innisfil Beach Road. The
Ministry indicated that since Innisfil Beach Road is rural, no plans were
made to include pedestrian access in the preliminary design, however, there
will be opportunities to reconsider pedestrian access in later design stages.
Point 17 & 22
As per the May 22, 2003 letter, the City of Barrie reiterated that crossings
at Lockhart Road and Harvie Road should be undertaken by MTO as
~TO's recon:mended improvements to the Molson Park Drive interchange
dId not consIder the new development in the northeast quadrant of the
interchange. The City of Barrie clarified that additional traffic to and from
this development would negatively impact traffic operations on Molson
Park Drive. Additional crossings at Lockhart Road and Harvie Road would
serve to divert through traffic from Molson Park Drive.
URS and MTO to review development/land use assumptions for this area.
The City of Barrie to review historical zoning of the site and
documentation in the City of Barrie Transportation Study.
URS,
MTO&
City of
Barrie
N:\P~147~lMeebngs~ie23JUI'MI03_3.dCIe
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Items
3.
4.
Page 3
Description
Point 18
URS clarified that the northbound exit ramp will also be improved to three
lanes.
Point 2l
URS clarified that while the number of lanes shown on the preliminary
plans accommodates the study's planning horizon and projected traffic
requirements, MTO's recommendations do not preclude ten lanes on
Highway 400 between Molson Park and Essa Road. While the 8 paved
lanes are shown on the plans, the cross section will accommodate 10 lanes.
Implementing 10 lanes for this section of Highway 400 can be reconsidered
during later design stages, as appropriate.
Point 47
URS indicated that the issue of pedestrian access at the Bayfield and Rose
Street area was considered for this study. Sufficient property is available in
the boulevard to accommodate a sidewalk from Bayfield to Rose Street.
This will be reflected in the text of the Preliminary Design Report
Indicating details of sidewalk design on plates and drawings is not
appropriate or consistent with the nature of the Study's Preliminary Design
Report. Such details will be addressed in later design stages in consultation
with the City of Barrie.
City of Barrie Parks .Comments
The City of Barrie would like to be actively involved in the development of
landscaping related to the Highway 400 improvements.
With involvement from the City of Barrie, MTO will provide/replace
landscapiDg where possible. The provision of laDdscaping will depend on
the right-of-way width. The existing and proposed Highway 400 right-of-
way widths vary through the City of Barrie.
City of Barrie Drainage Comments
URS drainage staff (not present at this meeting) have noted, addressed
and/or acted on most of the comments provided by the City. URS staff
present at the meeting provided a summary of the responses made by URS
drainage staff. The discussion focused on the issues relating to EA studies
being undertaken by the City.
URS
Page 4
Action bv:
Items
Description
Action bv:
The issue of the Ministry implementing drainage improvements, in
addition to those described in the Highway 400 Drainage Report to
accommodate proposals being made in various ongoing EA's undertaken
by the City upstream and downstream of the Highway 400 drainage system,
requires further discussions betweeD MTO, URS and the City of Barrie.
It is the City's position that the Ministry and the City should cost share any
improvements that are necessary to accommodate the City's proposed
improvements upstream and downstream of the Highway 400 drainage
system.
MTO noted that the recommendations, as per the Highway 400 Drainage
Report, are consistent with MTO guidelines and improve on the existing
conditions. MTO and URS agreed to review the EA' s and drainage studies
undertaken by the City and to continue discussions with the City and their
drainage staff. The City agreed to arrange for the circulation of the studies
to the appropriate MTO and URS staff.
5. Dunlop Village Plaza
URS,
MTO&
City of
Barrie
The owners or Dunlop Plaza have suggested an alternative to the
technically preferred alternative for the Dunlop Street interchange that
would reduce the impacts to their property (the preferred alternative would
displace their plaza). The alternative includes realigning Dunlop Street to
the south, thereby shifting the proposed S-W loop ramp off of the plaza's
property. The plaza's suggested alternative would require three signalized
intersections spaced approximately 130 metres apart along Dunlop Street.
By 20 II serious traffic operations problems, including traffic queues
extending into the intersections and through and left-turn lane blockages,
will occur at these intersections. As well, existing developments on the
southeast quadrant of the interchange would be displaced by the Dunlop
Street realignment.
The City agreed to review the Dunlop Village Plaza proposal and provide
an official comment within two weeks time.
City of
Barrie
The meeting adjourned at approximately 3:30 pm.
Submitted by:
Colin Wong
Distribution:
All Present
Mark Bassingthwaite - URS
Brian Plazek - URS
Shu Liang He - Morrison Hershfield
N:\Plenmng'Cn29900147 f1wy4OOI.Do::umts'Me8tlngs'MuniClpel\Benie 23 JW'18 03 .3_doc
N:\P1annmg\cn29900147 hwy400\DocumentJlMuetings'M1mlcip&\8ame 23 Juoe 03 -3.doc
~+1- 'l3'L
URS
URS
MINUTES OF MEETING
Page 2
Cole Sherman
Cole Sherman
PROJECT:
Higbway 400 Planning and Preliminary MEETING No.
Design Study
From 1 kIn south of Highway 89 northerly 30 kIn
to the Junction of Highway II/Highway 400
CN29900147 (G.W.P. 30-95-00)
1
DATE: February 6,2003
TIME: 1: 30 PM
Items Description
shifted to the west, preserving the existing east edge of
pavement and property line.
· From Essa Road to the northern limits to the junction of
Highway 11, Highway 400 will be widened on both sides
about the existing centreline with the section from Essa Road
to Bayfield Street being widened to 10 lanes and the section
from Bayfield Street to the north limit being widened to 8
lanes.
Action bv:
PROJECT No.
LOCATION:
Ministry of Natural Resources
Midhurst District Office
PresentationlDiscussion of Natural EnviroDment and Drainage Issues Related to
the Technically Preferred Alternative
Graham Findlay - Ministry of Natural Resources (Midhurst District)
Mike Dodd - Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
Tom Hogenbirk - Lake Simcoe and Region Conservation Authority
Lorran M. Cooney - City of Barrie
Graeme King - City of Barrie
Jeff Parent - City of Barrie
Rod Bilz - FRi Ecological Services
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole Sherman
Liza Gervais - URS Cole Sherman
Susan Smyth - URS Cole Sherman
Rod Bilz outlined the key natural features within the project
limits. There are three general areas of multiple natural
environment constraints, Holland River Valley Complex, Innisfil
Creek Tributaries and the Cooks town Hollows Swamp. An
information package outlining the significant natural
environment features, potential impacts and proposed mitigation
was provided to all attendees. (See attached).
The following questions/comments were made regarding impacts
to natural environment features:
PURPOSE:
PRESENT:
2. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OVERVIEW
Items Description
1. T. Hogenbirk asked when and what season could you
notice brook trout spawning. R. Bilz replied that during
a field visit (October 2001, he noticed an abundance of
groundwater seepages and upwellings along with suitable
substrate of a coldwater tributary of Innisfil Creek
(12+879 and 13+100). He suspects that the presence of
ripe fish (brook and rainbow trout) and excellent habitat
indicates that spawning occurs there. L. Cooney
mentioned that there has been brook trout spotting at
Hotchkiss Creek. R. Bilz will note this information in
the documentation.
Action by:
1. INTRODUCTIONIPROJECT OVERVIEW
Len Kozachuk welcomed all in attendance to the meeting to hear
an overview of project status and to discuss the natural
environment and drainage issues related to the technically
preferred alternative.
Susan Smyth reviewed the purpose of the study and described the
technically preferred alternatives for widening mainline Highway
400 and interchange improvements.
The following points were noted:
· From Highway 89 to Essa Road, Highway 400 will be
widened to eight lanes with a provision to widen to ten lanes.
Within this section of Highway 400, the ceDtreline will be
2. G. Findlay asked about the research undertaken to
determine the impacts on fish habitat (i.e. culvert
velocity). R. Bilz mentioned that an accumulative
assessment was conducted and has been documented in
the Natural Sciences Technical Report, April 2002
prepared by FRi Ecological Services.
.....1....:.1:............1 +..... ..t......... ............... __............_.;__ +.......... ........:.......:__ ................. ........J_..... _J:'
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
!II.'J'>~141~~~NR_CA.~~Mtnule$doC:
3. T. Hogenbirk inquired about the extension of culverts
and if that would prohibit movement of fish. R. Bilz
noted that the length of the culvert does not necessarily
place limitations on culvert velocity and it may be of
. "
URS Cofe. Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.862.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
N:\f'~1"7~1.~'~R~CA~~Mtnu_dor;:;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS
Page 3
Cole Sherman
URS
Page 4
Cole Sherman
Items Description
some consideration, but at this time impacts are
unknown. G. King further commented on the extension
of culverts or connection of culverts that could create
CODcerns for fish passage and suggested this issue should
be examined further. R. Bilz agreed to conduct further
research into this issue and report back with findings.
Action bv:
Items Description
crossmg.
Action by:
3. DRAINAGE OVERVIEW
Liza Gervais provided a brief overview of the existing drainage
and stormwater management conditions within the project limits.
4. G. Findlay asked if the culvert openings would impact
the movement of fish. R. Bilz replied that in some areas
where velocity in culverts or where certain tunnel sizes
are impassible then there may need to be proper
replacements of culverts rather than extensions. Based
on the structural assessment carried out on the culverts, 8
culvert replacements are recommended. R. Bilz noted
that most culverts are 15 years or older and are in fair
condition and could be repaired or rehabilitated, from a
hydraulic standpoint.
RB
The following summarizes the findings/recommendations in the
Draft Drainage and Hydrology Report:
· The proposed widening of the highway from 6 to 8/1 0 lanes
will result in an increase in pavement area of approximately
57%. The proposed stormwater management measures,
consisting of a combination of wet ponds/wetlands and
grassed swales, will provide quality treatment for the
proposed increase in pavement area. All watercourses with
fisheries concerns will be provided with some form of
quality treatment (i.e. wet ponds/wetlands, grassed swales or
enhanced ditches).
5. T. Hogenbirk noted that there have been several
occasions over the last five years when Highway 400 has
experienced flooding. He expressed concern that the
Rainfall Intensity Curves used in MTO design may
require updating/revising. . He recommended that a vital
roadway such as Highway 400 be designed to ensure the
road is passable during a major storm event, to provide
access to any areas for emergeDcy services, etc. R. Bilz
noted the comment and agreed that this issue will be
discussed with MTO.
· The majority of the culverts have adequate capacity to
convey the 50 year flow with at least 1.0 m freeboard. For
seven culverts it is recommended to accept a reduced
freeboard and it is proposed to either twin or replace the
existing culvert at seven other locations to provide adequate
capacity to convey the 50 year flow with the required
freeboard.
6. T. Hogenbirk stated that when considering joining the
culverts should keep the platform as tight as possible (i.e.
use headwalls where possible). R. Bilz responded that
this issue would be looked at more closely during detail
design.
RBILK
· Breaks in the proposed concrete median barrier or other
measures will be considered in order to provide a relief flow
route and to prevent increases in flood elevations at certain
locations.
· It is proposed to replace the entire storm sewer system in
conjunction with the widening.
7. G. King noted that the MTO and Barrie should work
together for twinning or replacing culverts through the
area. L. Kozachuk agreed, and noted that his
understanding is it was the MTO's intent to have a
cooperative approach on such issues.
· The proposed stormwater management strategy also consists
of flat-bottomed grassed swales in all locations where the
design criteria can be met, additional enhanced ditches along
critical highway areas, localized erosion control measures,
and seven water quality control wet ponds/wetlands.
Property is required to construct these stonnwater
management ponds. Detailed layouts for the stonnwater
management ponds will be developed during detailed design.
8. J. Parent suggested examining the wildlife crossing at
12+900 which links to communities 6 and 11. R. Bilz
responded that he would have a closer look at the wildlife
N,Ip~147~t'~~NA_CA"g.'ICy""-Ong~dcc
N\P~147hwy~I'~~cyWNA_CA~M8IIIIngMof'\l./IPdot
URS
Page 5
URS
MINUTES OF MEETING
Cole Sherman
Cole Sherman
Items Description
PROJECT:
MEETING No.
1
Hwy 400 Planning Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction
at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
PROJECT No. CN29900147.00
Action by:
· It is recommended that plunge pools be placed at the
downstream ends of all culverts with watercourses that
support warmwater fish habitat. The plunge pools will
provide energy dissipation for any increased flow as a result
of the proposed highway widening, and will enhance the fish
habitat. Also, it is recommended that, where possible, storm
sewers outlet to the highway ditches, instead of within the
culverts, with plunge pools placed at all storm sewer outlets.
Once again, the pools will provide energy dissipation for any
increased flow as a result of the proposed highway widening.
DATE: 18 September 2002
TIME: 9:30 am - 10: 15 am
LOCATION: URS Cole Sherman Offices -
Conference Room B
PURPOSE:
PRESENT:
Utility conflicts around Molson Park Drive Area
Kevin Dinsmore - Bell Canada
Tad Barzda - Bell Canada
Colin Wong - URS Cole Sherman
1nnisfil Creek Culverts
· In order to facilitate a proposed widening of Highway 400,
fisheries sub-consultants have recommended that the existing
culverts under Highway 400 and Reive Road be connected.
Connection of the culverts does not increase headwater
levels for either the 50 or 100 year event. It is also
recommended that the condition of the culverts be verified,
during later design stages that are closer to construction, to
determine if the culverts are to be extended or replaced.
Overall, there were no significant issues and/or comments raised
on drainage and stormwater conditions on the proposed
management plans.
In summary, the agencies were provided draft copies of the
Natural Sciences Technical Report prepared by FRi Ecological
Services and the Drainage Hydrology Report prepared by URS
Cole Sherman and comments on the reports were requested by
March 6, 2003.
Items Description
1. Identification of Conflicts
o All agreed that there is a conflict between the proposed
improvements to Highway 400 in the Molson Park Area and the
Bell plant, which parallels Highway 400 on the west side in an
easement that runs within the MTD right-of-way from Molson
Park Drive to Salem Road.
o K. Dinsmore indicated that two national fiberoptics plants and one
incidental conduit run continuously (without splices) through the
easement within the conflict area.
2. Relocation Issues
o K. Dinsmore indicated that it is possible to relocate the Bell plant
to accommodate the improvements to Highway 400. There are
several concerns to address however:
o Roadway Access - The plant must be relocated to an area that is
accessible to staff and maintenance vehicles;
o Location - It is preferable to relocate the plant to an area that is
within the existing or proposed MTD right-of-way, as 100
percent of all costs associated with relocating to private
property would be paid by MTD. T. Barzda indicated a concern
over the side slopes of Highway 400 within the conflict zone.
Action by:
Submitted by: Susan Smyth
Environmental Planner
Distribution: Those Present
Kevin Boudreau - MTO
Joel Foster - MTO
Attachment
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
N,\P~141hW';'~~~R_CAAgtIItI:y~~doc
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
t'np~1.7 ~\M..cngs\Otw.1fW C.,... 14 ScIpI oz_Ooe
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URS
Cole Sherman
Page 2
Items Description
Action by:
CSA to determine the possibility of locating a 3m easement
within the proposed MTO right-of-way;
o Quantities & Costs - The length of plant to be relocated and/ or
replaced within the conflict area will be determined by Bell. Bell
will also provide preliminary cost estimates of relocation within
the MTO right-of-way.
c.w.
K.D.
Submitted by:
Colin Wong
Distribution:
All Present
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole Sherman
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions. please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax 905.882.4399
N\PI~147~h~~.\&IIc...-1eStlpt02doc:
URS
MINUTES OF MEETING
URS
Cole Sherman
Cole Sherman
Page 2
PROJECT: Highway 400 Planning Study Hwy 89 to Jet MEETING No.
Hwy 11 - WP 30-95-00
PROJECT No. CN29900147 DATE: April 3, 2002
LOCATION: Barrie City Hall 3rd Floor Boardroom TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PURPOSE: Project Status Update with Barrie Senior Staff
PRESENT: Peter Lee - City of Barrie, City Administrator
Rick Newlove - City of Barrie, Acting Director of Engineering
Wendell McArthur - City of Barrie, Acting Director of Engineering
Richard Forward - City of Barrie, Senior Project Manager
Bill Gilbert City of Barrie, Senior Engineer
George Kaveckas - City of Barrie, Traffic, Transit & Parking Manager
Al Lacey - Read, Voorhees and Associates Limited
Kevin Boudreau - MTO, Project Engineer
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole Sherman, Consultant Project Manager
Items Description
Comments were received during the discussion:
· The City is looking to extend Harvie Road easterly across Highway
400 and connect to Big Bay Point Road. The City feels it may be
advantageous to have at least limited access available at this new
crossing, to serve as an alternative to Essa Road both during and
after construction of the Essa Road interchange improvements.
MTO will consider noting the City's plans for the future road crossing
on the PIC displays. MTO will advise City shortly.
· The City can accept Alternative 1 at Duckworth Street. The City is
satisfied that, with the widening of Duckworth through the
interchange, the proposed reconfigured intersection of
Duckworth/Cundles will operate at acceptable levels in future. The
city also recognizes that traffic operation issues on
Duckworth/Cundles extend beyond the Highway 400 interchange
area.
Items Description
Action by:
Following introductions of all in attendance, Kevin Boudreau briefly
reviewed project limits and status: The Project Team is in the process of
identifying the preferred alternatives for mainline and interchanges.
Once the OPSEU strike is resolved, MTO intends to work towards
presenting the preferred alternatives through internal meetings and
meetings with various Agencies, the Municipal Team and area Councils.
As well, two Public Information Centres (PICs) will be scheduled to
present the findings for comment.
Kevin also noted that Duckworth Street has been the subject of much
discussion between the City and the Project Team. The City's views on
the Ministry's position, as expressed in recent correspondence, will be
discussed at this meeting.
Len Kozachuk briefly reviewed the alternatives considered for mainline
widening. Through Barrie, a core-distributor system has been evaluated,
along with a lO-lane widening.
Len also discussed the rationale, and some of the advantages and
disadvantages apparent in the short list of alternative configurations
evaluated at each of the interchanges in Barrie.
· Understanding the timing of the construction of the Highway 400
improvements is crucial for Barrie's capital expenditure planning.
MTO does not have a set timetable for implementing any of the
improvements in the Highway 400 Planning Study.
· The City places a high priority on improvements to the Dunlop Street
interchange. Through its review of the implementation of the
possible improvements, Cole, Sherman would suggest the City
consider completing whatever Municipal EA' s it can in advance of
the MTO construction, to reduce the likelihood of delays to
implementation. In particular, the City should consider advancing
the Anne Street widening and the Harvie Road exteDsion.
· The City will advise MTO if Barrie Council would prefer a
presentation either prior to or following the PICs.
L. Kozachuk
Submitted by:
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once. otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
Distribution:
K. Boudreau
J. Foster
R. Newlove
MTO
MTO
- City of Barrie
URS Cole, Sherman &Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario. Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905.882.4401
Fax: 905.882.4399
N:\P1annir\g'tcTl29147 hWy4OO\DocumentslMeetings'Municipel\BarTie Apt .3.Q2.doc
Action by:
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MTO
Barrie
N: \ Planning \cn2990014 7 hwy400\Documents \Meetings \Municipal \Barrie Ap' .3.02.doc
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
<.; ~
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
URSCOLL..
SHERMAN
a member of the URS group of companies
a member of the URS group of companies
MINUTES OF MEETING
PROJECT NAME: Hwy 400 Planning Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 to the
Junction at Highway 11
MUNICIPAL TEAM
MEETING NO.
MINUTES OF MEETING
3
PURPOSE:
Presentation of Reasonable Alternatives to Municipal Team
PROJECT NAME: Highway 400 Planning Study
G.W.P. 30-95-00
PROJECT No. CN29900 147
LOCATION: City Hall
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
PRESENT: Rick Newlove - City of Barrie - Planning & Development
Kerry Columbus - City of Barrie - Municipal Works
Merwan Kalyaniwalla - City of Barrie
Steven McInnis - MTO - Planning and Design
Joel Foster - MTO - Planning and Design
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole, Sherman
Mike Bricks - URS Cole, Sherman
Matthew Hum - URS Cole, Sherman
2
MUNICIPAL TEAM
Meeting No.
PROJECT No.
LOCATION:
PRESENT:
G.W.P.30-95-00
CN29900l47
DATE: May 16th, 200l
DATE:
January 11, 2001
1:30 p.m.
Barrie City Hall- Georgian Room - 2nd Floor TIME: 1 :30 p.m.
Rick Newlove - City of Barrie
Don Priest - Township of Springwater
Gavin Watson - Town of Innisfil
Michael Vyse - MTO, Project Manager, Planning & Design
Terence Mitchell - MTO, Planning & Design
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole, Sherman
Matthew Hum - URS Cole, Sherman
TIME:
Len Kozachuk distributed an information package to the attendees and delivered a 30 minute
presentation that included the following: identifying the existing deficiencies, the need for
improvements, alternatives for improvements to the Highway 400 mainline and interchanges.
Comments from this review included the following:
. Construction of the interim design improvements for the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
will not likely begin this year.
. For the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange, consideration should be given to providing an
additional commuter parking lot on the west-side to accommodate the GO Bus route serving
this interchange.
. The Holiday Inn located on Fairview Road is planning an addition on the south-side of its
existing building.
. Rose Street is utilized as an emergency detour route when Highway 400 north of the
Bayfield Street Interchange is closed.
URS Cole Sherman will present the alternatives to the public at PIC#l on May 22nd and 23rd,
2001.
. PURPOSE: Municipal Team Meeting #2
Items Description Action by:
1. Introduction
Len Kozachuk reviewed the purpose and study limits of the project
to the attendees. The study area extends from 1.0 kIn south of
Highway 89 to the Highway 400IHighway 11 Junction and the
following interchanges are within the Barrie city limits: Molson
Park Drive, Essa Road, Dunlop Street, Bayfield Street and
Duckworth Street. The purpose of this planning study is to
examine mainline and interchange requirements and improvements
to meet the year 2011 traffic operations.
Kerry Columbus noted the City of Barrie is experiencing
significant growth and is expected to continue to rapidly grow. In
addition, City of Barrie is receiving numerous development plans
and applications for properties alongside the Highway 400 corridor
Submitted by: Matthew Hum, P. Eng.
Distribution: Those Present
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions,
please advise the writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
N,\Planrnng\CN299Q0147 Hwy4OO\Documentt\MMbngs\Municipal\No, J Mun-MeeMg May 16.01.doc
Cole, Sherman & Associates Limited
75 Commerce Valley Drive East.
Thornhill, Ontano L3T 7N9
teL 905-882-4401 fax 905-882-4399
- 1 -N:\planning\cn29900147 hwy4OO\Documents\MeetingslMunicipaJ\No. 2 Jan 11_2001 City of Barrie.doc
-"/V'\"iVV .cciesh~)rman. ~~om
Items Description
Action by:
Items Description
Action by:
such as the proposed development in the southwest quadrant of the
Duckworth Street interchange. He suggested that the City of
Barrie and MTO should consider acquiring or protecting for
properties adjacent to the Highway 400 corridor and particularly at
the interchanges at the earliest conveniences.
It was noted that the City of Barrie prefers the Highway 400
widening and interchange improvements as opposed to the Barrie
By-pass alternative.
2. Interchange Considerations
For each interchange, Len Kozachuk briefly described the existing
condition and any possible constraints (i.e. buildings, service
roads). Subsequently, the attendees discussed issues and concerns
that would assist the Project Team in generating viable
alternatives. The following comments for each interchange are
summarized below:
It was noted that the planned Trans Canada Trail crosses in the
vicinity of Tiffin Street.
The City of Barrie owns and operates the CN rail line thorough-out
the city including the crossing south of Tiffin Street. The City of
Barrie envisions a rail terminal and a commuter parking lot on the
abandoned Barrie Raceway on the west side of Highway 400
between Tiffin Street and Essa Road to handle the rail line for the
connection between Barrie and Toronto.
City of Barrie may also use a portion of the Barrie Raceway as a
storm water facility.
MTO also is negotiating the use of a portion of the former Barrie
Raceway as a commuter parking lot.
Dunlop Street
Hart Drive tightly parallels the off-ramp from Highway 400 to
Dunlop Street and closing Hart Drive at Vespra Street will be
considered to free up space for potential interchange
improvements. There are mainly hotels and motels located
alongside Hart Drive and reversing the frontage will be considered.
Similarly a mini-mall situated in the northeast quadrant may be
completely displaced to provide adequate space for potential
interchange improvements.
Diverting traffic to Anne Street as the new Dunlop Street structure
over Highway 400 is constructed is a stagiDg possibility.
Widening Anne Street to accommodate the additional traffic will
be considered as part of such a staging strategy.
Bayfield Street
It was noted that the Shell Station located on the west side of
Highway 400 may be displaced to free up space to accommodate
the highway widening and interchange improvements.
Opportunity for relocating the entrance to the Travelodge and
parking lot further south along Coulter Street and also realigning
Coulter Street further west will also be examined.
Limiting the Highway 400 northbound on-ramp to one way
operation and closing access to Rose Street will be considered.
Duckworth Street
Molson Park Drive
Molson Park Drive interchange was recently reconstructed to
accommodate the widening of Molson Park Drive. The structure
over Molson Park Drive is overbuilt on the west side (a staging
requirement) and the overall construction was completed last year.
On the west side of Highway 400, commercial developments are
located closely alongside the on- and off ramps. On the east side,
an Ontario Travel Centre is located in the southeast quadrant and
the Molson Brewery, which is abandoned, is situated in the
northeast quadrant.
Just further north of Molson Park Drive, a feasibility study is in
progress to ex amiDe the Harvie Road extension and crossing of
Highway 400 to connect with Big Bay Point Road I Fairview
Road. It was noted that the City of Barrie is proposing this
additioDal crossing. If the proposed plan is approved in time, the
construction may coincide with the widening of Highway 400.
Essa Road
MTO owns property in the southwest quadrant of Essa Road I
Highway 400 (between Bryne Drive and Highway 400). Bryne
Drive is an unassumed road.
The buildings which are mainly restaurants (Wendy's, Tim
Hortons and Pizza Hut) located on the east side of Fairview Road
are well setback from the road. If property is required on
southwest quadrant for ramp improvements, realigIliDg Fairview
Road outward toward the buildings will be considered.
Royal Victoria Hospital and Georgian College are both planning to
expand. The Barrie Master Plan will be updated to include these
changes.
N:lplanning\cn29900147 hwy4OO\DocumeotsIMeetingslMunicipallNo. 2 lan 11_2001 City of Banie.doc - 2 -
N:lplanning\cn29900147 hwy4OO\DocumentslMeetingslMunicipallNo. 2 lan 11_2001 City of Banie.doc - 3 -
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Items Description
Action by:
A commercial development is planned for the southwest quadrant
of Duckworth Street I Highway 400 and a residential subdivision is
planned on west side of Cundles Road (across from the
commercial development).
For the Vincent Street structure, consider providing 7 lanes to
minimizing left-turn delays onto Bell Farm Road.
It was noted that there is a high concentration of traffic moving
between Duckworth Street and Cundles Road. As such realigning
Duckworth Street at Cundles Road will be considered.
Submitted by: Matthew Hum
Distribution:
Those Present
N:\planning\cn29900147 hwy4OO\DocumentsIMeetingsIMunicipa1\No. 2 Ian 11_2001 City of Barne.doc - 4 -
2 ~'4' IN i (17 9)
Items Description
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
2. Mainline Traffic Concerns
a member of the URS group of companies
Winter weather conditions along the Highway 400 corridor varies, as
specific areas are subject to "streamers" from the lake. The most
hazardous areas along Highway 400 are located at the foJJowing
locations:
MINUTES OF MEETING
PROJECT NAME: Hwy 400 Planning Study MEETING No.
GWP 40-00-00 - From the North Side of the
South Canal Rd Bridge to 1 km South of
Highway 89.
GWP 30-95-00 - From 1 km South of Highway
89 to Junction at Highway 11.
G.W.P. 30-95-00 and G.W.P. 40-00-00
CN29900147, CN29900167
· Crown Hill, between the Highway 11 split and Penetanguishene
Road 93 interchange
· Between Anne Street and Sunnidale Road
· North of Essa, in the "sag"
· Crest south of Stroud (10th line), north of 1nnisfil Beach Road
. Between 4th and 5th Lines
OPP-l
PROJECT No.
DATE: Jan 11,2001
Some measures have been used to combat the blowing snow and
drifting. Trees have been planted at Fifth Line, and snow fences have
been installed at critical locations.
ColJisions also appear more frequent at some of the bridges. Icing on
the Highway 400 crossing of the North Canal and at Essa Road are
particularly bad.
The addition of guide rail along the southbound lanes of Highway 400
between Bayfield and Anne Street should be considered. There are a
number of large trees within the right-of-way at this location, and the
slope appears to be non-traversable.
OPP provided Cole, Sherman with a plan which identifies detour routes.
On average, Highway 400 is closed twice per winter due to snow
conditions.
LOCATION:
PRESENT:
TIME:
9:30 a.m.
OPP Rose Street
Scott Couse
Greg Yeoman
Mark Neelin
Tim Sorochinsky
Matthew Hum
- OPP
- OPP
- Barrie Police Services
-CSA
-CSA
PURPOSE: Meeting with OPP and Barrie Police
I terns Description Action by:
1. Review of Project Scope
T. Sorochinsky provided a summary of the project limits and purpose. The
planning study limits extend from the South Canal Road bridge to the
Highway 11 split, north of Barrie. The purpose of the planning study is to
investigate midterm and ultimate widening requirements along the corridor.
Our preliminary review of traffic data has identified a need for a ten lane
cross-section from the South Canal Road bridge to Highway 88, eight lanes
to Molson Park Drive, ten lanes between Molson Park Drive and Bayfield,
and eight lanes from Bayfield to Duckworth. A twelve lane "express-
collector" system will be reviewed as an option through the City of Barrie.
Breaks in the median for OPP patrol would be beneficial. Breaks in the
median barrier should be provided without creating opportunities for
vehicles to make U-turns,
3. Interchange Considerations
OPP noted that a majority of incidents occur at the interchanges. The
foJlowing is a summary of OPP observations and recommendations:
.
Additional ramp movements should be considered at the Highway
400/split, such as providing a move from Highway 400 southbound
to Highway 11 northbound and from Highway 11 southbound to
Highway 400 northbound.
OPP noted that there is a relatively high number of pedestrians
along Duckworth, mostly Georgian CoIlege students who live by
Little Lake and walk to Campus.
.
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions,
please advise the writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
Co e, erman ssoclates Limited
75 Commerce Valley Drive East.
Thornhill, Ontario L3T 7N9
tel. 905-882-4401 fax. 905-882-4399
www.colesherman.com
Action by:
\\S099NW02\DATA\Planmng\CN29900147 Hwy400\D{)t;uf1~nls\Met'!mgs\Agt'ncy\Mt::.eling with OPP Jao 11 Ol.doc - 2 -
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
- 1 -\\S099NW02\DATA\Planning\CN29900147 Hwy400\Dol.:umt=nls\."'At'enngs\AgcOI..:y\Mt't'fmg with OPP Jan II OLtkx:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Items Description
Action by:
Items Description
Action by:
. The direct ramp from Duckworth to Highway 400 northbound was
removed and replaced with a left turn movement three years ago.
. Queues from Bayfield onto Highway 400 occur frequently. Some
queuing has been observed at Dunlop as well.
. Congestion at Bayfield could be improved by further extending the
right turn lane along the S-EfW ramp.
. Eastbound traffic on Bayfield is known to block the Bayfield/Ramp
S-EfW intersection, restricting vehicles on Ramp S-EfW from
turning left on Bayfield. Moving the stop bar on the Bayfield
eastbound lanes further away from Ramp S-E/W would help.
. The striped out area of the Bayfield bridge was originally used as a
through lane, but was eventually closed due to many collisions
associated with improper merging, east of Ramp S-EfW.
. Restricting access by converting Ramp E-N to a one way operation,
and limiting Rose Street to a right in, right out movements is not
desirable, as it would reduce response times. OPP stated that they
would be able to make adjustments to their travel routes to
accommodate access restrictions to the ramp. OPP noted that the
long term requirements and function for the Rose Street detachment
building are unknown at the present time.
. Longer acceleration lanes should be considered, particularly at the
Dunlop Street EfW -N ramp
. Tight loop ramps, such as at Essa Road, Highway 88 and Highway
89 should be removed or enlarged.
. Molson Park Drive has operated quite well since reconstruction
.
Maintenance crews should be called out sooner after snowfalls to
clear snow that has been ploughed against the bridge abutments.
After a snowfall, the speed change lane widths are often reduced in
half after ploughing.
Gates should be installed at all ramp entrances to Highway 400 to
facilitate Highway closures. OPP does not have sufficient
manpower to safely close the Highway during inclement weather or
other emergencies.
.
.
oPP ~as previously requested that rumble strips be installed along
the HIghway 400 off ramp at the Highway 11/400 split to Parry
Sound.
.
Rumble strips should be considered along the outside lanes, and cats-
eyes reflectors should be considered to better delineate lane
markings
Electronic signs should be placed to facilitate closures and detours.
A mi~imum of three signs should be considered: south of Highway
89, HIghway 11 north of the Highway 400/11 split, and on Highway
400 north of the Highway 400/11 split.
Congestion at Bayfield could be reduced by improvements to the
exis~ing local road network to provide a "Barrie By-pass" to
Collmgwood. The by-pass would use Innisfil Beach Road, Simcoe
Road 27, County Road 90, and County Road 28 to King's Highway
26. County Road 28 requires the most work.
MTO should consider a Highway 11 bypass around gasoline alley as
part of this work.
5.0 Other Business
Distribution:
Those Present,
Len Hassberger
Steven McInnis
Joel Foster
Len Kozachuk
. Motorists have been observed traveling in the wrong direction at
the Innisfil Beach Road interchange ramps.
. Ramp collisions are frequent on sections of ramps which
accommodate two way travel, particularly at Highway 89 and
Innisfil Beach Road.
. The Highway 400/Simcoe Road 88 Ramp S-E taper on Simcoe
Road 88 is very short, and should be extended.
Submitted by:
. The Canal Road intersection does not seem to have a large number
of collisions. Bridge icing on the North Canal crossing is a bigger
concern.
4. Other Improvements
The following improvements should also be considered:
\\S099NW02\DA T A\Planning\CN29900147 Hwy400\Documcms\Met:tings\Agcncy\Mt:cti.ng with OPP Jan 11 01 ,une - 3 -
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
\\S099NW02\DATA\Plannmg\CN29900147 Hwy400\D(){:umt~nts\Mcclll1gs\Agt:m:y\Mt:cltng wuh opp Jan J 1 OLJoe - 4 -
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
.
.
.
OPP requested that traffic data be forwarded to the office, along with any
other generallllformatlOn regarding the project scope. CSA has indicated
that the requested information will be forwarded prior to the first Public
Information Centre, scheduled for early February.
CSA
Tim Sorochinsky
-OPP
- MTO Project Manager
- MTO Environmental
- Cole, Sherman & Associates
Items Description
Action by:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
a member of the URS group of companies
PROJECT NAME: Highway 400 Planning Study
G.W.P. 30-95-00/ G.W.P. 40-00-00
PROJECT No. CN29900147 / CN29900167
MUNICIPAL TEAM
Meeting No.
1
3. Project Schedule
A copy of the project schedule was distributed (and is attached to
these minutes). The project is just getting underway and is at the
problem generation/alternative generation stage. Two rounds of
Public Information Centres are scheduled (February 2001 and May
2001). The project is anticipated to be complete by September
2001.
MINUTES OF MEETING
LOCATION:
County of Simcoe Offices
L.E. Clark Room
Administrative Centre
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst
DATE:
TIME:
December 14, 2000
10:00 a.m.
4. ConcernlIssues
The floor was then opened to the municipal representatives to
discuss issues and concerns which could assist the project team in
generating and evaluating alternatives. The following summarizes
the comments received.
PRESENT:
Bill Brown
Rick Newlove
Todd Stocks
Paul Feehely
Judi Brouse
Mike Bricks
Len Kozachuk
County of Simcoe
- City of Barrie
- Township of Springwater
- Bradford West Gwillimbury
- District of Muskoka
- URS Cole, Sherman
- URS Cole, Sherman
Barrie - has conducted an O-D Study - a copy of this will be
provided to CSA.
Emergency service access will have to be considered if MTO
implements a core/distributor section through the City of
Barrie.
City of Barrie
1. Introduction
Len Kozachuk began the meeting by introducing the Project Team.
He noted that the MTO Project Manager, Steve McInnis was
unable to attend the meeting due to weather conditions and noted
that Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd. has been retained by MTO
to undertake the study.
2. Purpose of the Project
Len noted that the purpose of this project was to examine short to
mid-term operations and issues (to year 2011) to Highway 400 to
determine mainline and interchange improvements. It was noted
that other MTO studies are examining long-term network
improvements required in Simcoe County.
Possible venues for the PICs include Barrie City Hall,
Thornton Arena/Community Centre, and Bradford West
Gwillimbury Community Centre.
Information packages should be provided to Councils in
advance of the PICs. Staff will determine whether a
presentation is required in advance of the PICs.
In Bradford it was noted that the major issue was the
interchange at Canal Road. It was noted that Canal Road was
used as a commuter route and that the road has a load
restriction due to poor geotechnical conditions. It was agreed
that a separate meeting would be arranged with various
Bradford representatives (including the Holland Marsh
Drainage Commission) to discuss issues related to the marsh.
Opportunities for new or expanded Commuter Parking Lots
should be examined.
It was noted that there is a letter on file from the Mayor of
Barrie to the Minister of Transportation noting that Barrie
prefers Highway 400 widening through Barrie as opposed to a
Bypass.
It was noted that VIA was undertaking a business study for rail
service which could affect travel demands.
PURPOSE: Municipal Team Meeting #1
Items Description Action by:
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions,
please advise the writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
Cole, Sherman & Associates Limited
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario L3T 7N9
tel. 905-882-4401 fax. 905-882-4399
www.colesherman.com - 1 -N:IPIallningICN299IXJl47 Hwy4IK)IDocumenlsIMeetingsIMunicipaIINIl. I Mun-MEETING Dec.I4.00.doc
N:IPIanningICN299!KIl47 Hwy4IK)IDocumemsIMeClingsIMunicipaIINo. I Muo-MEETING Dcc.14.IK).doc
- 2 -
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Items Description
5. Data Collection
It was noted that much for the preliminary information required to
complete this study has already been obtained. Additional data is
required on developments in the corridor. Andrew Hill (Barrie)
and Ian Bender (County of Simcoe) were identified as Planning
Department Contacts.
Submitted by: Mike Bricks
Distribution:
Those Present
c. S. McInnis - MTO P & D
J. Foster - MTO Environmental
N:\Plannjng\CN2Y900J47 Hwy400\Dncumcnts\Mcetings\Municipal\No, ! Mun~MEETING Dee 14.00.doc - 3 -
Action by:
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
PROJECT: Highway 400 Planning Study
PROJECT No. CN29900147.00
DATE: December 4,2000
TIME: 10:00 a.m.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
a member of the URS group of companies
MINUTES OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
LOCATION:
PRESENT:
URS Cole, Sherman Offices
Gavin Watson - Town of Innisfi1
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole, Sherman
The Town of Innisfil designated contact is: Gavin Watson
Engineering Technologist
Tel. 705-436-3740, ext. 306
gavin. watson @town.innisfil.on.ca
· We spoke of future improvements to local roads connecting to Highway 400. Innisfil Beach
Road will need to be widened in the future.
· L. Kozachuk inquired as to suitable PIC venues (arena In Stroud, Community Centre In
Churchill)
· At Innisfil Beach Road MTO has designated some property and has forwarded an offer to
purchase additional property.
· The existing carpool parking lot is moving out of interchange area east to north side of Innisfil
Beach Road.
· Rail line owned by ACDC (City of Barrie). There are tracks still used.
· L. Kozachuk inquired as to why it seemed there were weather-related problems consistently
report north of Innisfil Beach Road. G. Watson explained that snow 'streamers' from
Georgian Bay pass through this area, due to topography.
Submitted by: Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Project Manager
Distribution: All Present
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
N:IPlanningICN29900 147 Hwy4OOlDo<;umenCSIMeetingsIMunicipall Tel Conver - WalSOn DccA.OO.doc
Cole, Sherman & Associates Limited
75 Commerce Valley Drive East.
Thornhill. On18'!O L3T 7N9
tel. 905-882-4401 fax. 905-882-4399
www.colesherman.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
~ Ontario
A
I'Xf C'
:.:,. ......::/ (:...--- ,_~N
" ,.:-- ..
: ,0 ~
._,~, ., ,.' h __'"....'.P'
E,N
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRES
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P. 30.95-00
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P.30.95-00
TABLE OF CONTENTS
@ Ontario
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Ministry of Transportation
1.0 INTR 0 D U CTI ON ....................................................................................................... 1
2.0 P URPO S E ... ...... ............. ...... ..... .... ........... ........ ... ........ .............. .......... ........ ... ........ ...... 1
3.0 PUBLI C N OTIFI C A TI 0 N ........................................................................................ 1
HIGHWAY 400
PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 kIn South of Highway 89
Northerly 30 kIn to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe
G.W.P.30-95-00
4.0 PRE PIC MEE TIN GS ................................................................................................ 2
5.0 D ISPLA Y MATERIAL .............................................................................................. 2
6.0 A TTENDANCEI SUMMARY OF COMMENTS.................................................... 3
APPENDIX A
News Ad I Brochure and Notice Letters
APPENDIX B
Minutes of Meeting
PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE
ROUND #1 SUMMARY REpORT
APPENDIX C
Displays I Information Package
MAY 2001
2
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Public Information Centres were held regarding improvements to ad~ress traffic operation,
capacity and safety needs along the Highway 400 from 1.0 kIn South ofHlghwa~ 89 Northerly ~O
kIn to the Junction of Highway 11. The Information Centres p~ovided the pubhc an opportumty
to review and discuss the project with representatives ofthe Project Team.
2. Letters dated May 8th, 2001 were directly sent to owners and tenants abutting the
Highway 400 corridor throughout the project limits as well as to those people on the
Project Team's mailing list, including government agencies and ministries,
municipalities, interest groups, and individuals who requested to be added to the mailing
list. (see Appendix A for letters).
The information centres were held on:
4.0 PRE PIC MEETINGS
Tuesday May 22od, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Y onge St. (Stroud)
Wednesday May 23rd, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Innisdale Secondary School
95 Little Avenue (Barrie)
Municipal Team Meeting
Representatives of Cole, Sherman & Associates and the Ministry of Transportation staffed the
Public Information Centres.
A Municipal Team meeting was held on May 16t\ 2001 at Barrie City Hal1. Representatives
from the City of Barrie, Township of Springwater, Township ofInnisfil as well as MTO and CSA
attended the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to present the existing deficiencies, the
need for improvements, and alternatives for improvements to the Highway 400 mainline and
interchanges.
1. Project Limits
2. Study Schedule
3. Class Environmental Assessment Process
4. Study Purpose and Problem Statement
5. Existing Conditions
6. Planning Alternatives
7. Proposed Evaluation Method and Criteria
8. Mainline Widening Alternatives
9. Interchange Alternatives
Comments raised at this meeting include the following:
. Construction of the interim design improvements for the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange will
not likely begin this year.
. For the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange, consideration should be given to providing an
additional commuter parking lot on the west-side to accommodate the GO Bus route serving
this interchange.
. The Holiday Inn located on Fairview Road is planning an addition on the south-side of its
existing building.
. Rose Street is utilized as an emergency detour route when Highway 400 north of the Bayfield
Street Interchange is closed.
2.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Public Information Centre~ (~ICs) .was. to intro~uce the stu~y, present the
alternatives under consideration including: mamhne wldenmg, and mterchange Impr?Vements.
The PICs also provided the public an opportunity to review and comment on the followmg:
External Team Meeting
An External Team Meeting was offered prior to the Public Information Centre on Tuesday May
22od, 2001 from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Stroud Community Centre. The purpose of the
meeting was to discuss project needs, alternatives under consideration and issues concerning the
Highway 400 corridor. No significant issues or concerns were raised at the meeting.
3.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
5.0 DISPLA Y MATERIAL
Prior to the PIC, the following measures were carried out in order to make d~tails of the
information centre known to study area residents and interested members of the pubhc:
1. An Ontario Government Notice (Notice of Public Information Centre) was placed in the
following newspapers:
. Toronto Star- Wednesday May 16th, 2001
. Barrie Examiner/Advance - Wednesday May 16th, 2001
. Alliston Herald - Friday May 18th, 2001
(see Appendix A for notice).
The following display material was presented at the Public Information Centre
(see Appendix C):
. Welcome to the PIC / Purpose of the PIC;
. Study Area;
. Background;
. Environmental Assessment Process;
. Overview of the Class EA Process;
. Study Schedule;
. Regional Transportation Needs;
Public Information Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Public Information Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
. Need and Justification;
. ExistinglFuture Operational Conditions (for each interchange location)
. Widening Requirements;
. Planning Alternatives;
. Evaluation of Planning Alternatives
. Widening Alternatives: between Highway 89 and Molson Park Drive (including typical
cross-sections );
. Widening Alternatives: through the City of Barrie (including typical cross sections);
. Highway 400 Express / Collector System;
. Interchange Alternatives (for each interchange within the project limits);
. Evaluation Process and Criteria; and,
. What's Next.
Refer to Appendix C for displays / information package:
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P. 30.95-00
. An Express / Collector system is beneficial 2
. Bayfield bridge over Highway 400 needs to be widened (due to traffic congestion) 2
. Highway drainage / wells / storm water quality 2
. Median barrier is preferred over a grass median 2
. Access during construction / construction disruption 2
. Widening Highway 400 will only attract more traffic / expansion not sustainable 2
. Interchange modifications and capacity improvements needed at Dunlop St. 2
interchange
. Impact to O.P.P. building 1
. Impacts to businesses 1
. Consideration to retaining existing Hwy 400 for northbound and construction of a 1
new facility for southbound traffic
. Litter along the Highway 400 corridor 1
. Dead-ending Rose St. is desirable 1
. A continuous right-turn from Highway 400 north to Fairview Ave. is needed 1
. Pedestrian crossing at Essa Road should be on the south side 1
. A 10-lane cross section is ideal 1
. Cost to taxpayers 1
. Need to correct sag at Highway 400 between Essa Rd. and Tiffen St. 1
. Impact to historical trail at Sunnidale Road 1
. Dead-ending Rose St. is desirable 1
. Concern with exit from Highway 400 to Molson Park Dr. 1
. Improvements to 5th Line and 10th Line are needed 1
. Need for 8-laning Highway 400 1
. Need to extend Byrne Drive further north 1
. Reconfigure proposed Molson Park Drive Interchange to minimize impact to 1
commercial parking at south-east quadrant
. Construct a fly-over at Toronto Street. 1
. Congestion on local streets (need for City of Barrie to address...) 1
. Concerned with ramp radii at Essa Road interchange 1
. Long-term planning for the Highway 400 corridor is needed 1
. Capacity improvements are necessary for tourism expansion in the City of Barrie 1
. Northbound highway 400 ramp to Essa Road should be four lanes 1
. Interchange improvements needed at Bayfiled Ave. 1
. Consideration to construction of an interchange at St. Vincent St. 1
. Need for an effective corridor to Collingwood 1
. More information needed on sources of data collection and capacity projections 1
. Pedestrian options for Essa Road are too costly to be independent of the bridge 1
widening
. Impacts to the Crown Hill area associated with improvements to the Highway 93
interchange
. Ramp closures during construction
. Impact to pedestrian trail at Bayfield Ave. / Highway 400 ramp intersection.
. A realignment of Duckworth St. and Cundles Rd. will have damaging consequences
on proposed commercial development
. Impacts to Little Lake wetland complex 1
. Vibration impacts to sensitive receivers / properties 1
. Ramps should be constructed on Highway 400 at Anne St 1
6.0 A TTENDANCE/ SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
A total of 191 members of the public chose to sign the visitor's register for the Public Information
Centre (71 members attended the May 22nd PIC in Stroud and 126 members attended the May
23rd PIC in Barrie).
In addition to verbal comments, the Project Team encouraged visitors to express, in writing, all
concerns or comments they had regarding the information presented. To date, one hundred and
twenty (120) written comments have been received as follows:
. May 220d - Stroud PIC 25
. May 23rd - Barrie PIC 42
. Mailed-in 16
. Via E-mail 37
Total 120
The following summarizes the comments, issues and concerns raised at the PIC:
. Noise levels / noise pollution 33
. Need for noise barriers at residential areas 26
. Construction of a by-pass / parallel route corridor to Highway 400 at Barrie is a more 25
desirable alternative
. Oppose widening of Highway 400 to 10/12 lanes (widening not necessary) 21
. Impacts to property / expropriation 17
. Need for commuter rail service / restoration of GO transit to alleviate traffic along 14
Highway 400
. Vehicle emissions / air quality / air pollution 9
. Support widening of Highway 400 5
. Aesthetic / visual impacts / need for landscaping 4
. Provision for highway illumination / potential light trespass 4
. Need to improve local transit service / infrastructure in Barrie 3
. Consideration to construction of an interchange at Tenth Line / between Innisfil 3
Beach Rd. and Molson Park Drive
. More than 8 lanes on Highway 400 is unnecessary 3
. Impacts to property value 3
. Need for barrier wall for safety in the vicinity of the O.P.P. building 2
Public Information Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
Public Information Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
3
4
Public Information Centre Round # 1 SUl1l1I1ary Report
May 2001
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
Public Information Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
URSCOLE,
SHERMAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P.30.95.00
. Widen Highway 400 from Toronto to King City only 1
. Concern with transition from 6 to 10 I 12 lanes 1
. Widening of Highway 400 should commence in the south and proceed northward 1
. Concerned with potential for accidents with a wider highway. 1
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P.30.95-o0
In addition to the above noted comments, thineen requests for infonnation were submitted to the
Project Team.
Preference of Interchange Alternatives
The following outlines the public preferences of the alternatives presented as noted in the
comments submitted:
Alternative 1 - Parclo A Interchange
Alternative 2 - Parclo B
1
Alternative 1 - Parclo A Interchange
Alternative 2 - Parclo B Interchange
3 - Diamond Pardo A
1
2
APPENDIX A
Alternative 1 - Operational Improvements
Alternative 2 - Diamond I Pardo B
1
Alternative 1 - Pardo A Interchange
Alternative 2 - Partial Pardo A
News Ad / Brochure
and Notice Letters
Alternative 1 - Pardo B Interchange 1
Alternative 2 - Pardo A
Alternative 1 - Pardo A (SB) I Diamond (NB) Interchange
Alternative 2 - Diamond 1
Alternative 3 - Parclo A 1
Alternative 1 - Pardo A Interchange
Alternative 2 - Pardo A (SB) I Diamond (NB) Interchange 1
Alternative 3 Pardo A Interchange wi realignment 1
Alternative 4 - Pardo B Interchange wi realignment
5
I
I
ONTARIO GOVERNMENT NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTIi OF HIGHWAY 89
NORTHERLY 30 KM TO THE TO jUNCI10N OF HIGHWAY 11
COUN1Y OF SIMCOE
G.W.P. 30-95-00
EXTERNAL (GOV/MUNICJPAL) LETTER
I
I
May 8, 2001
Our Ref.: CN29900147
I
THE STUDY:
Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd. has been retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to undertake a
Preliminary Design Study to examine improvements to Highway 400 from 1 Ian south of Highway 89 northerly 30
Ian to the junction of Highway 11 in the County of Simcoe.
<<Address>>
Dear <<Namo>:
I
The pwpose of this study is to determine the nature of improvements required to address traffic operation, capacity
and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The need for drainage, illumination, roadside safety,
structural and interchange improvements will also be examined as part of this project. Reasonable alternatives to
address the required improvements will be identified and evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution.
Re: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 Ian South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 Ian to Junction of Highway 11
Preliminary Design / Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P.30-95-00
I
THE PROCESS:
This study will follow the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental
Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The opportunity for public input will be provided
throughout the course of the project. A Transportation Environmental Study Report (fESR) will be available for
review and comment upon completion of the study.
I
PUBliC INFORMATION CENTRES:
The first of two rounds of Public Information Centres have been arranged for the public to provide input and
discuss the project with representatives of the Project Team. This Information Centre will focus on the identification
of project needs and alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives for widening Highway 400 (including an
express - collector system through Barrie) and possible alternative interchange configurations will be presented.
Cole, Sherman .&. Associat~s Ltd. has been retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MfO) to
undertake a Prelimin~ Des~ Stud~ to exa~e improvements to Highway 400 from 1 k.m south of Highway 89
northerly 30 k.m to the }unctlon of HIghway 11 In the County of Simcoe (refer to the attached key map).
The purpose of this letter is to notify your office of the upcoming External Team Meeting for the above noted
study.
I
I
Tuesday May 2200, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Y onge St. (Stroud)
Wednesday May 23"", 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Innisdale Secondary School
95 Little Avenue (Barrie)
The ~urpose of this study is to. dete~e the na~e of improvements required to address traffic operation,
capa~ty and safety needs for, this sectlo~ of the HIghwa~ 400 corridor. The need for drainage, illumination,
roadsId~ safety, structural and Inte:cha~ge unprovernents will also be examined as part of this project. Reasonable
alternatl:"es to a~dress the reqwred unprovements will be identified and evaluated to determine the most
appropnate solutlon.
I
Information Centres will be held as follows:
I
You are encouraged to attend the Information Centres and to provide us with your views and concerns so that they
can be addressed early in the study.
This study will follow the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental
Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The opportunity for public input will be provided
thr?ughout the course of the project. A Transportation Environmental Study Report (fESR) will be available for
reVlew and comment upon completion of the study.
I
Comments and information regarding this project are being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation in
meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file for use
during the project and may be included in project documentation. Information collected will be used in accordance
with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Ptivacy Act. With the exception of personal information, all
comments will become part of the public record. .
For further information, or to be added to the mailing list, please contact:
1?e first of two. roun~s of Public In~ormation Centres have been arranged for the public to provide input and
?iscu~s tI:e project .Wlth representatlves of the Project Team. This Information Centre will focus on the
Id~nti.ficatlon o~ pro}~ct needs and reasonable alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives for widening
Highway ~OO (~duding an express - collector system through Barrie) and possihle alternative interchange
configuratlons will be presented.
I
A second Public Information Centre (pIq will be held in Summer 2001 at which time the evaluation of alternatives
and technically preferred alternative will be presented. A further notice will be published regarding the second PIC.
COMMENTS:
An External Tean: Meetin~ has been arr~nged in .advance of the Information Centre to discuss project needs,
reasonable alternatlves and Issues concerrung the Highway 400 corridor.
I
The External Team Meeting will be held as follows:
I
Mr. Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East,
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Fax: (905) 882-4399
Tel: (905) 882-3540
e-mail: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
Mr. Michael Bricks
Senior Environmental Planner
Cole, Shennan & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Dtive East,
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Fax: (905) 882-4399
Tel: (905) 882-3549
e-mail: mike_bricks@urscorp.com
Tuesday May 22nd, 2001
4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Y onge St. (Stroud)
I
Following the External Team Meeting, a Public Information Centre will be held.
I
You are encouraged to attend the External Team Meeting and to provide us with your views and concerns so
that they can be addressed early in the study.
I
Visit us at: http://Highway400.planningstudy.on.ca
~ Ontario
b;ITERNAL (GOVIMUNICJPAL) LETTER
A seco~d Public ~ormation Centre (pIq will be held in Summer 2001 at which time the evaluation of
alternattves and technically preferred alternative will be presented. A further notice will be published re din th
second PIC. gar g e
PUBUC LETTER
Co~ents and ~foIII1ation regardin~ this study are being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation in
meeting the reqwrements of the Env:tronmental Assessment Act. TIUs material will be mam. "ft;~ed ill r
d . th d .. L4LU on e lor use
unng e stu y and may be tncluded tn study documentation.
Should you require further information please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Yours very truly,
May 8, 2001
Our Ref.: CN29900147
<<Address>)
Dear <<Namo>:
COLE, SHERMAN & ASSOCIATES LIMITED
Re: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 Ian South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 Ian to Junction of Highway 11
Preliminary Design I Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P. 30-95-00
Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
Cole, Shennan & Associates Ltd. has been retained by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to
undertake a Preliminary Design Study to examine improvements to Highway 400 from 1 km south of Highway 89
northerly 30 km to the junction of Highway 11 in the County of Simcoe (refer to the attached key map).
cc: Michael Vyse - MTO
Joel Foster - MTO
The purpose of this study is to determine the nature of improvements required to address traffic operation,
capacity and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The need for drainage, illumination,
roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements will also be examined as part of this project. Reasonable
alternatives to address the required improvements will be identified and evaluated to determine the most
appropriate solution.
Att.
This study will follow the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental
Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The opportunity for public input will be provided
throughout the course of the project. A Transportation Environmental Study Report (fESR) will be available for
review and comment upon completion of the study.
The first of two rounds of Public Information Centres have been arranged for the public to provide input and
discuss the project with representatives of the Project Team. This Information Centre will focus on the
identification of project needs and reasonable alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives for widening
Highway 400 (including an express - collector system through Barrie) and possible alternative interchange
configurations will be presented.
Information Centres will be held as follows:
Tuesday May 22nd, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Y onge St. (Stroud)
Wednesday May 23rd, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Innisdale Secondary School
95 Little Avenue (Barrie)
You are encouraged to attend the Information Centres and to provide us with your views and concerns so that
they can be addressed early in the study.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PUBUC LETTER
A second Public Information Centre (pIq will be held in Summer 2001 at which time the evaluation of
alternatives and technically preferred alternative will be presented. A further notice will be published regarding the
second PIC.
o
.-
l.-
re
.....,
c:
o
~
Comments and information regarding this study are being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation in
meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act This material will be maintained on file for use
during the study and may be included in study documentation.
Should you require further informacion please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Yours very truly,
COLE, SHERMAN & ASSOCIATES LIMITED
fOr:
~~G\~ k
Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
cc: Michael Vyse - MfO
Joel Foster - MTO
At!.
<
w
a:
<
~
=
Ii;
.t
en
w
~
I-
Z
w
U
.....Z
oS
w!c
~%
I-~
00
Z.....
Z
....
U
....
-I
m
::::>
A.
......
......
~
3:
::r:
0\!::2
)-co:I:
o Q ~~
o ::::> ~ t5 w
~ 1-!::26S8
en:I:z::[~
>- u..:;:)- 0\
C ~ Ol""l~ 6
~Z~gOM
;:>:c .... 0 w ~ c.:
ZU)F:;:)~
~ Z ~ g8 ~
.... CI:......::[
::r: ...J ::[ ~
D. ~ ~
U->-
..J
0::
W
~
o
z
fa
Q.
::>
~
<.::>
z !i
~ w
_ :E:
VI VI
W ~
o VI
~ U)
<( <(
Z ...J
~ g
::1 w
W :E:
0:: Z
Q.
~
-
>
z
w
VI
VI
:S
u
@.......
-"z',';
. - .~
r
;/'<'i
,'^w
'j~~. .
c.. "0
....0
:rw
IIJ%
z,
~~
~~
o
}~f
"} 1:!:tJ
... !~
c ...., "'C
CCC::I
N .cuo
c.u -
,,"'c :>.~
c c... '-"
N ...-
NO\C"':;
>0::1(1)
ftS...,Ecu
2: . E en
>Eoc
ftSriU~
"CSc"'C_
1ft c ::I ..,
cu"OCO
::lion-CO
... ...,,,
II)
u..
o
f!;<t
:rVl
(1)11)
zw
=3:
=0
:J,^~
.- CD
,;:_.::,~S~*;1i"'1,x7
r._ 0
...Irt)
~ .
cuG:
'0' ;:
.. .
c.t:J
c: o~
c .ocu
N E"5-c
. II) -
,,'" C. ftS
p..g~e.
N..ftlcu
> 0\ "'C ::I
"0 ftlOCC
c::: 2:"" 8cu
co ~E~~
"CS . cu cu
1ft c._ -
cuC~!;
cclft.....
"CS .n -- Ion
cu CO\
3= S
~~
CLW
"C :E:
.s:!::>
~u
~ 0
... 0
e: U)
o -
"C J:
J!:! l-
e: w
.;:: ...J
CLU
,!!! G
~ W
::J 0::
"5w
e U)
..c <(
I/) ~
~ Q.
c
o
oW
C
...
o
.c
1-...
" ,',.
\
%t
\
@
1ft
C
o
:c
ra
u
o
....
u
....
c.
4c
1. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has initiated a Planning and Preliminary
Design Study to examine possible improvements required to address the existing
and projected future (2011) traffic operation, capacity and safety needs associated
with the Highway 400 corridor.
The need for drainage, illumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange
improvements will also be examined as part of the study. Reasonable alternatives
to address the required improvements will be identified and evaluated to determine
the most appropriate solution.
2. STUDY PROCESS
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under
the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000).
The opportunity for public input will be provided throughout the course of the
project. A Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR) will be available for
review and comment upon completion of the study.
3. PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRES
The first of two rounds of Public Information Centres have been arranged for the
public to provide input and discuss the project with representatives of the Project
Team. This Information Centre will focus on the identification of project needs and
reasonable alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives for widening Highway
400 (including an express - collector system through Barrie) and alternative
interchange configurations for all interchange locations within the project limits will
be presented.
You are encouraged to attend the Information Centres and to provide us with your
views and concerns so that they can be addressed as the study progresses.
Information Centres will be held as follows:
Tuesday May 22nd, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Yonge St. (Stroud)
and
Wednesday May 23rd, 2001
5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Innisdale Secondary School
95 Little Avenue (Barrie)
A second Public Information Centre (PIC) wi, e
held in Summer 2001 at which time the
evaluation of alternatives and technically
preferred alternative will be presented. A further
notice will be published regarding the second
PIC.
Comments and information regarding this study
are being collected to assist the Ministry of
Transportation in meeting the requirements of
the Environmental Assessment Act. This
material will be maintained on file for use during
the study and may be included in study
documentation. With the exception of persr 'I
information, all comments will become part cJf
the public record.
For further information,. or to be added to the
mailing list, please contact:
Mr. Leonard Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Cole, Sherman 8r. Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Tel.: (905) 882-3540
Fax: (905) 882-4399
Email: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
~itOZ~ b~~[~~ ~~~[ g~~ 5~~[~~:: ~~~f~~ ZO....[tljO~ Zb"tv[b" :: 6: ~Q:
s: .... ::3 ~ U1g::j , 08 'oo~ ~ ~ ~ 'B!ii' ~ 0\::3 it '::3~ ~J
t"-4g::~ ,g::~ Q 0 tI:I ",' > a c ,::t,::t., :;'\: 0 0 ' ,e tI1 Q. ::!J ",' Q. , Q.
t1engo' ~"~ [~ ~ ~ .. Co') . tI:I n' ::I , '" 0 . e; ~
0....:..,. 0' g, ~ ~ t1 II> ~ >0 tv::; e~~~o tv::;~~ O':;'\: 0'\ .........n .... 0 0 ~ 0 tI:I ~~
8-< ~ en tv~ ~.-+ . r't1o t1!:: (/I
~ 8 Z a, E::: ~r~' ;::dp<=:' on::r tI10 a"t:) 0 (/I
" en S' ~ ~o~g.,o~t1 U1" en a t1 O\g 00 tI1ri ~"O"tot 0 ~ ~ . <::>
~Oi=ig., <::>
g'Oll>g~ o 0 ....... t)-< ~Oi=igo~ ~t1 g........oi;r " 0'\.......0 2'
-< en ct. <n -< ::3 ~ Z!ii' ~ ::3 0 ~ 5 '11> ::3 ~. (') ~ ~ ~ ::3 f: .-+ ::3 0 o..eng.::3 .=:: ::3 U1 tI1 03,
" en<=: tIj- g,~ ~ . '--< g ~ "':!J ::3 ~ g, :: g; ~ s' g \0 c:t 0
g :;d [ e, 0 n '" ~ oi=ineno;' t-JQ:
~~f;.~~ 0' 2 A 2:: a: g. 5- 0' > ~ a. ~ t) ::Iawg~b:1 o' ~ ~, ~ ~ I.C ~.
o ~ n' <=: c:t 0 0 o U1~ o..~ ~~
g .-+ ~ n 0.. O~ g..a' ~ 0 0 9 <n c:t ::3 g. 0.. (') , g, ~ ~. 8. ~ ~ g 0 c:t
, "en ~, ::r ~ :;d .....," ::!J~ c:t " ~fc 5: ::!J~g~ ~ B .....,~ <::>s
o S. <n ~ e ~I'rt) tljt) O<noo :;dgl'r"'d """~
o > ~ "() e, g ~ ~ ~ r e ~. ~~
.-+ en ' o 0 !ii' tot ):t' 2.-+og- ~Oo
o 0 c: .... ~ e. o ffi = ~ 0 "'d en
s- .-+ tot~n~ b 0 e.
.... n ::3 0 tot ~, tot n A ::!JE.. 0.. c:t I.C
S~o..Z n n ~::ro .-+ 0 ::s n 0 ~
0 .-+ en o ~ ' tI1 tot . .-+'-+ tot
~~~ <n "'d o tot tIj
t> ~ ~ ~ .-+ ::3
, tIj 0 n ago 0 ~
.-+ ~ g. ::3 0.. ... I>) >4
c:t ~(/I c:t 0 \0
08 ~ 0.. g, 0\ 9-
0 ~
.....,tot s: ~ ~
c:ti <n ~
n S' ~ crq ~
~ crq
II> ~
ct,
0 ~
c:t ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~
~ ~ fI) ....
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 53 C)
n ~
0 ~ tj S' 9- 1::1
=:: <n "1-
~ g- O 0 ~ i=i ~
~ ::3 !:? 0 ~.
~ Jg
f 0.. ~
~
~
~
"""
"""
C':I
Q
I::!
~
~
"1-
~
....
t/)
"1-
-
---..--
------
.....
-
-
..---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 8~ ..fortherly to the Junction at Highway 1.1 Government List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
P7E 2V6" Mr. Taylor
2
"Mr. Ray V alaitis
Rural Planner
Central and Northern Ontario Region
Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs
RR 3, 95 Dundas Street
Brighton, Ontario
KOK tHO" Mr. Valaitis
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Government List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
M5J 2W2" Ms Wyatt
3
"Mr. Wayne Frechette, Police Chief
Barrie City Police
295 Sperling Drive, P.O. Box 188
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T2" Mr. Frechette
"Ms. Ruth Debicki, Planner
Ministry of Northern Development and Mines
Level A-3 Willet Green Miller Centre
933 Ramsay Lake Rd
6th Floor
Sudbury, Ontario
P3E 6B5" Ms. Debicki
"Mr. Mark N eelin, Inspector
Barrie Police Service
295 Sperling Drive, P.O. Box 188
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T2" Mr. Neelin
"Ms. Ann Fraser
Business Development Consultant
Ministry of Economic Development and Trade
Midhurst District Office
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO" Ms. Fraser
"Staff Sergeant L. J. (Len) Hassberger
Barrie Detachment
Ontario Provincial Police
20 Rose Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 2T2" S
ergeant Hassberger
"Ms. Ruth Alves, Administrative Officer
Health Services Division
Ministry of Health
Hepburn Block. 10th Floor, 80 Grosvenor Street
Toronto, Ontario
illA lR3" Ms. Alves
"Mr. Wayne Wilson, CAO
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
R.R.l
Angus, Ontario
LOM IBO" Mr. Wilson
"Mrs. Heather Brown, Environmental Planner
Environmental Services and Approvals
Hydro One Networks Inc.
483 Bay Street, 6th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5G 2P5" Mrs. Brown
"Mr. Tom Hogenbirk, Conservation Engineer
Watershed Management
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
P.O. Box 282,120 Bayview Parkway
Newmarket, Ontario
L3Y 4Xl" Mr H b
. ogen irk
"Ms. Helen Howes, Director
Corporate and Environmental Affairs
Ontario Power Generation
700 University Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
M5G lX6" Ms. Howes
"Ms. Kristin Dibble
Planning Technician
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board
46 Alliance Blvd.
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 5K3" Ms. Dibble
"Ms. Eve Wyatt
Manager - Corporate Planning, Project Development
GO Transit
20 Bay Street, Suite 6000
Toronto, Ontario
"Mr. David Few
Manager of Property and Planning
Simcoe County District School Board
1170 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO" Mr. Few
"Mr. Jerry McNeill
Service Centre Maintenance Officer
Ministry of Transportation
Maintenance Officer
Address
Name
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 8~ Ivortherly to the Junction at Highway 11 Government List
(RejNo. CN29900147)
4
Garden City Tower, 2nd Floor
301 St. Paul St.
St. CatharU1es,Ontucio
L2R 7R4"
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Municipal List
(RejNo. CN29900147)
Mr. McNeill
"Ms. Helen MacRae, Clerk
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst,Ontucio
LOL lXO"
Ms. MacRae
"Mr. Ian Bender
Director of Planning
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst,Ontucio
LOL lXO"
Mr. Bender
"Mr. Bill Brown, P. Eng.
County Engineer
Road and Engineering
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontucio
LOL 1XO"
Mr. Brown
"Mr. John Craig, Clerk
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5"
Mr. Craig
"Mr. J ames Taylor
Director of Planning
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
LAM 4T5"
Mr. Taylor
"Mr. Rick Newlove
Manager of Planning and Policy Services
Municipal Works Department
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street, Box 400
Barrie, Ontario
LAM 4TS"
Mr. Newlove
"Mr. Ronald D. Hickey
Fire Chief
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street, P.O. Box 400
Barrie, Ontario
LAM 4T5"
Mr. Hickey
"Mr. Paul Landry, Clerk
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 8~ ~ ,,"ortherly to the Junction at Highway:u Municipal List
(Rei No. CN29900147)
2
Town of Innisftl
2147 Innisf.tl Beach Road
p.o. Box 5000
Stroud, Ontario
LOL 2MO"
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Municipal List
(Rei No. CN29900147)
3
Bradford, Ontario
L3Z 2A8"
Mrs. Dempster-Evans
Mr. Landry
"Mr. Ron Kneeshaw
Superintendent of Public Works
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
Box 419,
Bradford, Ontario
L3Z 2A9"
Mr. Kneesahw
"Mr. Wayne Young
Manager of Operational Services
Town of Innisftl
2183 Innisf.tl Beach Road
Innisfil, Ontario
L9S lA3"
Mr. Young
"Mr. Eric Hodgin, Town Planner
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
Box 160, 61 Holland Street E.
Bradford, Ontario
L3Z 2A8"
Mr. Hodgin
"Mr. Gavin Watson,
Engineering Technologist
Town of Innisftl
2183 Innisfil Beach Road
Innisftl, Ontario
L9S lA3"
Mr. Watson
"Ms. Brenda Sigouin, Clerk
Township of Essa
Box 10
Angus, Ontario
LOM IBO"
Ms. Sigouin
"Chief Scott Griffith
Fire Department
Innisf.tl Fire and Rescue Service
780 Innisftl Beach Road
P.O. Box 5000
Innisftl, Ontario
L9S 2C3"
Chief Griffith
"Ms. Colleen Phillips
Manager of Planning & Development
Township of Essa
5786 County Road 21
Utopia, Essa Township, Ontario
LOM 1 TO"
Ms. Phillips
"Ms. Patricia Middlebrook
Clerk and Manager of Administration
Town of New Tecumseth
Box 910, 10 Wellington Street
Alliston, Ontario
L9R 1A1"
Ms. Middlebrook
"Mr. Greg Murphy
Manager of Public Works and Parks
Township of Essa
5786 County Road 21
Utopia, Ontario
LOM ITO"
Mr. Murphy
"Mr. Stephen Naylor
Manager of Planning
Town of New Tecumseth
Box 910, 10 Wellington Street
Alliston, Ontario
L9R lAl"
Mr. Naylor
"Ms. Eleanor Rath, Clerk
Township of Springwater
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO"
Ms. Rath
"Mr. George DeGroot
Director of Public Works
Town of New Tecumseth
Box 910, 10 Wellington Street
Alliston, Ontario
L9R lAl"
Mr. DeGroot
"Ms. Elaine Clairncroff
Planning Coordinator
Township of Springwater
111 0 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO"
Ms. Clairncroff
"Mrs. Juanita Dempster-Evans
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
Box 160, 61 Holland Street E.
"Mr. Donald Priest
Superintendent of Public Works
Township of Springwater
Hwy. 400 - Highway 8'~ _ oIortherly to the Junction at Highway i.... Municipal List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
111 0 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1XO"
4
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Interest Group List
(ReINo. CN29900147)
Address
Mr. Priest
"Ms. Vicki Robertson
Township of 01'0 Mendonte
Box 100
01'0, Ontario
LOL 2X0"
"Ms. Kristin Dibble
Property & Agreements Officer
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board
Plant and Planning Department
46 Alliance Blvd.
Barrie, Ontario
LAM 5IG"
Ms. Robertson
"Mr. Keith Mathieson
Manager of Public Works
Township of 01'0 Mendonte
Box 100
Ora, Ontario
LOL 2X0"
"Mrs. Wendy Moore, Executive Director
Federation of Ontario Cottagers
239 McRae Drive
Toronto, Ontario
M4G 117"
Mr. Mathieson
"Mr. Jim Crosscombe, President
Ontario Cycling Association
1185 Eglington, Avenue E., Suite 408
North York, Ontario
M3C 3C6"
"Ms. Andria Leigh, Planner
Township of Ora Mendonte
Box 100
01'0, Ontario
LOL 2X0"
Ms. Leigh
"Mr. Ron Purchase, General Manager
Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs
106 Saunders Road, Unit 12
Barrie, Ontario
LAN 9A8"
"Ms. Judi Brouse
Director of Long Range Planning
Planning and Economic Development
District of Muskoka
70 Pine Street
Bracebridge, Ontario
P1L lN3"
Mr. Green
"Ms. Sybil Goruk, CAD
Greater Barrie Chamber of Commerce
89 Dunlop S1. E., Suite 201
Barrie, Ontario
LAM IA 7"
"Mr. Don Stevenson
Ontario Federation of Agriculture
110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL IXO"
"Ms. Peggy Wong
Partner
The Resource Management Consulting Group
6 Oakridge Drive
Barrie, Ontario
LAN 5N7"
"Mr. Jack Irwin
Manager of Real Estate
Petro Canada
3275 Rebecca Street
Oakville, Ontario
L6L 6N5"
1
Name
I
I
I
Ms. Dibble
I
Mrs. Moore
I
Mr. Crosscombe
I
I
Mr. Purchase
I
I
Ms. Goruk
I
I
Mr. Stevenson
Ms. Wong
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Irwin
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P. 30.95-00
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
a member of the URS group of companies
MINUTES OF MEETING
PROJECT NAME: Hwy 400 Planning Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 to the
Junction at Highway 11
MUNICIPAL TEAM
MEETING NO.
3
PROJECT No.
LOCATION:
PRESENT:
G.W.P. 30-95-00
CN299ool47
DATE:
May l6th, 2001
1:30 p.m.
Barrie City Hall- Georgian Room - 2nd Floor TIME:
Rick Newlove - City of Barrie
Don Priest - Township of Springwater
Gavin Watson - Town of Innisfil
Michael Vyse - MTO, Project Manager, Planning & Design
Terence Mitchell - MTO, Planning & Design
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole, Sherman
Matthew Hum - URS Cole, Sherman
APPENDIX B
PURPOSE:
Presentation of Reasonable Alternatives to Municipal Team
Minutes of Meeting
Len Kozachuk distributed an information package to the attendees and delivered a 30 minute
presentatioD that included the following: identifying the existing deficiencies, the need for
improvemeDts, alternatives for improvements to the Highway 400 mainline and interchanges.
Comments from this review included the followiDg:
. Construction of the interim design improvements for the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
will not likely begin this year.
. For the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange, consideration should be given to providing an
additional commuter parking lot on the west-side to accommodate the GO Bus route serving
this interchange.
. The Holiday Inn located on Fairview Road is planning an addition on the south-side of its
existing building.
. Rose Street is utilized as an emergency detour route when Highway 400 north of the
Bayfield Street Interchange is closed.
URS Cole Sherman will present the alternatives to the public at PTC#1 on May 22nd and 23rd,
2001.
Submitted by: Matthew Hum, P. Eng.
Distribution: Those Present
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
N:~147~~\Munic:ipeI\No.3~Mafte.01.doc
Public Infonnation Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
Cole, Sherman & Associates Limited
75 Commerce Valley Drive East.
Thornhill, Ontario L3T 7N9
tel. 905-882-4401 fax. 905-882-4399
www.colesherman.com
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE]UNCTlON OF HIGHWAY 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KMSOUTHOFHIGHWAY89
NORTHERLY 30 KM TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHW.-\ Y 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
APPENDIX C
Preliminary Design
Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B'
Displays / Information
Package
Public Information Centre #1
May 2001
Public Information Centre Round # 1 Summary Report
May 2001
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
@ Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Welcome to the First Round of Public Information Centres
Study Area
for the
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
NORTHERLY 30 KMTOTHE]UNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
~WP 10-9S-00
\
''!h
"\'
..~.... .......-...................-...-..........-....---............--.
\
Please Sign In
Members of the Project T earn are available to discuss and answer any questions you may
have.
Purpose of this Public Information Centre
Project Limits
G.W.P.30-95-00
The purpose of this Information Centre is to update you on the progress of the project and
obtain comments so your input can be considered as this project progresses. Major
elements presented today include:
. Project Limits
. Study Schedule
. Class Environmental Assessment Process
. Study Purpose and Problem Statement
. Existing Conditions
. Planning Alternatives
. Proposed Evaluation Method and Criteria
. W'hat's Next
The Project T earn encourages you to fill out a comment sheet recording your comments
and concerns.
it
\
#
Not to scale~\
~,
~
\
\.......
.
.
~..~
~
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
@ Ontario
BIGHW AY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM Soum: OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
@ Ontario
Ministry of T ransportalion
BIGHW AY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOum: OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS~MAN
Ministry of T ransportalion
Background
Environmental Assessment Process
The Ministry of Transportation (MfO) has initiated a Planning and Pr~liminary ~esign
Study to examine possible improvements required. to address traffic oper~tlon, :apa~lty ~nd
safety needs associated with the Highway 400 comdor. The ~eed for drama~e, illurmnatlon,
roadside safety, structural and interchange improveme~ts ~ also be ex~ed ~s p~ of
the study. Reasonable alternatives to addres~ the req~ed tmprovements will be Identlfied
and evaluated to determine the most appropnate solutlon.
This stQdy is following Mfa's "Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial
Transportation Facilities" (Class EA), which was approved under the Ontario
Environmental Assessment Act in Fall 1999. The Class EA defines groups of projects and
activities, and the associated environmental assessment process requirements which Mfa
has committed to following for each group of project. Provided that this process is
followed, projects and activities included under the Class EA do not require formal review
and approval under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.
The purpose of this study is to:
. Determine the existing and projected future (2011) traffic on Highway 400;
This project is following the Class EA process for Group 'B' projects. The steps involved in
the Class EA process are shown in the next display.
. Identify the capacity and operational deficiencies;
The purpose of the Public Information Centre is to update you on the progress of the
project and to obtain comments on the project limits, study schedule, Class EA process,
study process and problem statement, existing conditions, planing alternatives, and the
proposed evaluation method and criteria.
. Evaluate and select alternatives to address existing deficiencies; and,
. Submit a Transportation Environmental. Study Repo~ for environmental approval in
order to proceed with the detail design and constructlon process.
The initial Notice of Study Commencement was published in the following new~papers and
dates.
The next steps that follow this Public Infonnation Centre are:
. Review the comments received from the Infonnation Centre and respond to any
questlons
. Evaluate interchange and widening alternatives
. Select a preferred alternative
. Hold the second Public Information Centre to present the study findings
. Refine the preferred alternative and prepare preliminary design plan of the proposed
highway widening including the interchanges
. Identify environmental impacts and develop mitigation measures to II1l111m1Ze the
identified impacts
. Prepare a Transportation Environmental Study Report (fESR) and file for public review
. Toronto Star - Wednesday November 8th, 2000 (URS Cole, Sherman & Associates)
. Barrie Advance - Wednesday November 8th, 2000 (URS Cole, Shennan & Associates)
. Barrie Examiner - Friday November 10th, 2000 (URS Cole, Sherman & Associates)
. Alliston Herald - Friday November 10th, 2000 (URS Cole, Sherman & Associates)
@ Ontario
HIGBW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Ministry of Transportation
HIGBW AY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
~ Ontario
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Overview of the Class EA Process
PLANNING
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
"d'.
~
bJj
.~
u."
u...
.~.
1:1'
~::~
_o",eI
....,.'.,......'..'9
..~.::.
t'4
1::'0
Oeo;!:!
g;.:'~.
CD=:
~~:
Review of
Transportation
Needs
Assessment
Generate,
Evaluate and
Select
Preferred
Planning
Alternative
Generate and
Assess
Preliminary
Design
Alternatives
Evaluate and
Select
Preferred
Preliminary
Design
Alternative
Develop
Preferred
Preliminary
Design
Alternative
~
1-4
en
~
~
z
o
1-4
t
~
&4
en
Z
"'!'I".
'\;ijOI
.r't".
.\iriiJI
Environmental Protection in Preliminary Design
Environmental
Protection in
Detail Design
Environmental
Protection in
Construction
.
.
.
.
.
.,
Transportation
Environmental
Study Report
and Notice of
Bump-Up
Opportunity
d
o
';:1
t'4
i
CD
d
o
U
( ,
PIC #1 PIC #2
May 2001 Fall 2001
\.. ~
~ Ontario
HIGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
MinistlV of Transportation
I Study Schedule / Class EA Process \
The following chart outlines the major tasks to be completed in the next few months.
Data Collection I
Issue Identification
w__....__._w__....___._
Generate and Evaluate
Alternatives to the
Undertaking
Generate Interchange
and Widening
Alternatives
First Round of Public
Infonnation
Centres
...w_..._mM'_WW'_"_'
-.-..---.--..--
.-----.--.------.-
Evaluate Interchange
and Widening
Alternatives
----..-.-.-
.....____..___,w__..__....,._______
,.----,,--.--.
Technically Preferred
Alternative
.----.....-.-.-.--
----...------..
...---,-.---..-.---...----
Second Round of Public
Infonnation Centres
*
M..._._._..___._M__....____......__.__.M.___......MM__..__--...----
Refinement to the
Technically Preferred
Alternative and Prepare
Preliminarv Desi
File TESR for Public
Review
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 km South of Highway 89
to the Junction of Highway 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
@ Ontario
Regional Transportation Needs
\
Need and Justification
The purpose of this study is to examine the nature of improvements needed to address existing
and future traffic operating capacity and the need for drainage, illumination, roadside safety,
structural and interchange improvements.
This area map shows the transportation needs in a regional perspective:
. Recreation and population / employment growth in the north.
. Industrial and population / employment growth pressures in the south
Highway 400 Mainline:
Currendy the section of Highway 400 within the project limits experiences congestion during peak.
travel periods. In addition, roadside safety, illumination and drainage features require improvement
to reflect current ministry standards.
""
~
Pi.i.R1.r.~'~
? h.....;'~.'I#'""
-.
,t:.'-.....'-._'
....t..
Due to the anticipated future development within the City of Barrie and surrounding area, corridor
operations are expected to deteriorate rapidly. As traffic volumes continue to increase, congestion
on Highway 400 will worsen. This will lead to increased driver frustration, potential for collisions,
trip delays and associated waste of energy resources, increased cost of moving goods and
significant diversion of traffic to other adjacent roadways.
r:~sm})
J!U.AN'u
~;,.;!;~,:' s,,>;H
NDt:~_'jj/Y3!NJfJ/)
Traffic volumes are projected to exceed the existing capacity of a 6-lane freeway in certain sections
as early as 2001.
Highway 400 Interchanges:
All interchanges within the project limits have traffic operatlons issues which warrant
improvements.
Traffic volumes at all interchange ramps will exceed capacity by 2011. This can result in queuing
ont.o Highway 400 mainline, which will also negatively effect traffic operations and safety.
The following display boards describe the existing and future conditions at interchanges within the
project limits.
, -
(,
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIm ]UNCI10N OF HIGHWAY 11
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Highway 89 Interchange
I
Sorvice --
ftom off-ramp DOt
desirable
Ramp junction over capllCityby ~OU.
which will affect fmeway ~ons
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds, . )
ramp queuing and increased congestion
Collision rate ftom 1996-1999 was 2.7
Provincial Average Rate is 0.70
- 2 fatal collisions
-49 rear end collisions
- 47 lost control single vehicle collisions
- 23 sideswipe collisions
Ramp terminal identified as
a collision prone area
- 6 injury collisions
- 14 turn related collisions
By 2009. ramp junction will
operate poorly ~ ~
travel period. JeSUltillg m
significant speed reduction
on &ccway
3 Lanes on Highway 89
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
SIMCOE ROAD 89
I
All approach volumes exccc:'~
intersection capacity. ~
in excessive delay for all
approaches. which may ~
in queuing and affect operatIOn
of ramps
Parking lot cntnmce
to twO way ramp not
desirable
I
I
By 2009. ramp junction will ope.rate. poorly
during peak _1 pcrlod, resulting m
significant speed reduction on freeway
f
I
Ramp junction over capacity by ~009.
which will affect freeWay opcrattons
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds. cstion)
ramp queuing and incrcaSCd cong
Ramp terminal idcntiited as a
collision prone area
. 6 injury collisions
- 8 turn related collisions
. S rear end collisions
I
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2009
o
Scale L....I
SO 10
.J ,...j
I ~ Ontario
I Ministry of Transportation
'lJBS52hWMAI
Highway 400 Planning Study .
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
Ramp junction over capacity by ~006.
which will affect freeway operations
(Le. reduction in operating speeds. .
ramp queuing and increased congestIOn)
Ramp geometry
does not mect current
standards
INNISFIL BEACH ROAD
I
l
Collision rate from 1996-1999 was 2.8
Provincial Average Rate is 0.70
. S8 rear end collisions
- SO lost control single vehicle collisions
. 36 sideswipe collisions
Ramp junction over capllCity by 2006,
which will affect ftceway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds,
. ramP queuing and incrcascd congestion)
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approsches, which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
SIMCOE ROAD 21
3 Lanes on Innisfil Beach
Road is insufficient for future
traffic operations
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capllCity. resulting in excessive ,":laY for
all approaches, which may result m
queuing and affect operation of ramps
By 2006. ramp junction will operate poorly
during peak travel period, resul1ing in
signiitcant speed reduction on freeway
Ramp junction over cap8AOity by ~006,
which will affect freeWay opcrattons
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds, .
ramp queuing and incrcaSCd congcstwn)
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2006
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
f
so
.J-
100m
,....I
o
Scale L..-
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
1JRSiRhtMAJ
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Molson Park Drive Interchange
o
Scale L
SO
I
IOC
,...j
Ramp junction over capacity by ~006.
which will affect &-way operationS
(Le. reduction in operating speeds. .
ramp queuing and increased c:ongeStiOn
Reconstruc::tion of Molson Parle. rumps
was initiated in October 1998 and
completed in August 2000
STOllE
.:- -- .:;- .:;-
= = = =
MOLSON PARK DRIVE
AU approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity, resulting in excessive .u:lay for
all approaches, which may result m
-queuing and affect operation of ramps
AU approach volumes exceed intImIection
capacity resulting in excessive delay for
all ~ which may result in
..-uin& and affect operation oframps
Ramp junction over capacity by ~OO6,
which will affect &-way operat1ons
(Le. reduction in operating speeds. .
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
By 2006, ramp junction will o~. poorly
during peak travel period, resulting m
significant speed reduction on &-way
f
Highway 400 Desip Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-laDe capacity by 2006
(y) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 Planning Study .
1 KIn South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G. W .P. 30-95-00
1JIISfiR1iMu
I
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Essa Road Interchange
I
Ramp junction over c:ap8City by 200 I,
which will affect fieeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
I
I
Insufficient width under
strueture to widen Bssa
Road and provide sidewalks
,I
All approach volumes exceed intersecti<>>
capac:ity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches,:which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
ESSAROAl>
I
City ofBanie bas identified
that 4 Lanes on Essa Road
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
I
I
Ramp geometry
does not meet current
standards
All approach volumes exceed intersection
c:ap8City, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches, which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
Ramp junction over capac:ity by 2006,
which will affect fteeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and increased c:ongestion)
I
I
f.
I
so lOOmI
.J ,...j
I
Collision rate nom 1996-1999 was 1.0
Provincia1 Average Rate is 0.7
· 24 rear end collisions
. 23 sideswipe collisions
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane c:ap8City by 2006
o
Scale L
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
J
I
. . 0 1. al Conditions At Dunlop Street Interchange
EXIstmg / Future pera Ion
I
t
Ramp junction 0V101' capacity by ~OOl,
which will affect UeewaY operaUODS
. in ...--......... speeds.
(i.e. reducuon ~""'- esti)
ramp queuing and increased cons on
congestion at the inIerIIe<:tion of
Downst:ream . '"'-'-_ __
Dunlop Street and Cedar PointC ....nw ~J.
result in queuing and affec:t ~ operaUODS
J.nsufficient width under
~to widen
HIghway 400
All approecb volumes exceed. inteneCUon'
. resuhing in excessi.... delay for .
Cllp8City, . result m""- '
.n approKhes. which may
queuin& and affect operation oframps
~
'2
tr
tI
...
~
t'1
...
Signals warranted by
2006 due to ....cessive
delays to minor
approaches
I
city of Barrie has identified
that 2 Lanes on Dunlop S_t
is insufficien1: fur future
traffic operations
GEORGE STREET
I
Ramp junction 0V101' capacity by ~OO I,
which willafi'ect .I'ree'wBY operanons
-"' . . -" speeds.
(i.e. .....ucuon m v,...'--,--. esti)
ramp queuing and increased cons on
COllision rau: fi:om 1996-1999 was 0.9
(Provincial Average Rate is 0.7)
. 24 sideswipe collisions
. 18 rear and collisions
. 15 lost c:onttol single vehicle collisions
I
VESPRA STREET
I
I
o 50 100m
Scale \,.. ,,-.J ,...., d
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exc:eeds 6-\ane cap8City by 2001
I @ Ontario
I Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 Planning Study .
1 KIn South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
1JBSit~~
"-"'-
Existing I Future Operational Conditions At Bayfield Street Interchange
t
BAYFlELD
STREET
Collision rate from 1996-1999 was 0.7
(Provincial Average Rate is 0.7)
. 12...... and collisions
· 10 sideswipe collisioDs
· 9 lost conttol single vehicle collisions
Ramp jUDCdon OWl' capacity
by 2006. which will d"ect
fi:eewaY openIIioas
(i.e. reductioD in openI.tiq
speeds.' ramp queuing and
Uu:reased congestion)
By 2006, ramp jum:tlon _11
operate poorly duriDg P.'*
_vel period, ~ In
significan1: speed reduetion
on~
Less tbaa desirable
separation ~
imersectioDs
City of Barrie baa \dfIIJdfted
that 5 Lanes 00. ~1d Street
is insufficienI: fix" future
ttaffic operations
)
HIGHWAY 26
"I
l
All approach volumes exceed iDtersection,
capacity, resulting in excessive &;Iay fix"
.n appIOIIChes. which may result U1
queuing and d"ect operation ofnunps
c=:~
Rampjum:tlonover Cllp8City by 2001,
which will affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and inc:reased congestion)
Highway 400 Design Hourly Vohunes
exc:eeds 6-\ane cap8City by 2001
o
ScaleL
50
.J
100m
...!
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 PJanning Study
1 KIn South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G. W.P. 30-95-00
_illMAl'
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Duckworth Street Interchange
DUCKWORTH
s'fl'tEBT
\ \lOYAL VlCTOlUA
HOSPITAL
Q
~\?Q
\~Q
.\~
. \ <)
..~
By 2006, nmp junction will operate poorly
during peak traVel period. resulting in
significant speed reduction on fteeway
City of Barrie bas identified
that 2 LImes on Duckworth Street
is insufficient fi:Ir future
traffic operations
AU approach volumes ~ intersection
capllCity. resultiDg4n'eXces..ive delay for
liUapproucbeS. which may result in
~ .................. .'-
-
-
-
~
~
.-n
\
~
J.nsufficieat width under
sttuCtUre to widen
DuckwoI1h Street
Signals WIIr'I'IU1ted in 2006 due to excessive
delays to minor approaches
~
~
C/'J
~
~
PIanDed developmen1s lit southwest quadrant
ofCundles Road and Duckworth Street along
with a proposed cxpausion of Georgian
College and Royal Victoria Hospital will
greatly increase traffic volumes in this area
of Barrie
~
o
Sc:aIcL
SO
L
100m
~
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-1ane capacity by 2011
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 KIn South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
~ ...... CO::
rn
=
a.>
S
a.>
~
.1""'1
&
~
OJ)
.9
=
~
~
Ii
c
-
u
.D
't:S
u
N
'5
s
~
<1.1
<1.1
....
<1.1
U
....
o
=
u
....
o
tQ
u
't:S
~
.~
g-
o
't:S
u
....
o
u
.S'
""
Q..
c.,.,
Q
tID
=
:~
....
u
-=
r-<
bo'
.,,~
<v",oa
<:t.
Jv
~.q;
'::!.",o
~o
bo'
~
~ ",'"
"",'" ~bo'
.p ,,~
.;~~
'tJo, ~
-i-~ bo':O
~~
~~ (JO'lJ
~~
.t'Z c -
:1io :::
t= ':. >>
oc.: &:I &:I
u u
j j
'0 ...
...'
-i-~ o~
~ !I.~
~~~..;~~"
...
~'O ;;
:=-= g N
0.. N ..
&;~~
<
j j
'0 ..
~.....
~
-i-O
(fr
-<yO::;
.~ ~ C;
i1 ~ t
~c:! ~ 4::
<
j j
'0 ..
~....
b.
~...;)
""'~
...
,tta \C -
~-5g~
c.... N ~
~c:! ~ 4::
<
:I :I
J! .!!
'0 ..
'"
~ro~
~....
'::!.o~
i:t~
-<y
...
~g;c::>
~-5 c::> N
t~ ~ .a
<
j j
'0 ..
I
I
I
I
...
~
a..CI ~
~i ..
-c:! ~
<
I
j
'0
I
I
n~c>
i1 ~ c:
-c:! ~ ..!
<
i>.
"t;j
:::s
.;..0
tZ)
bJ)
=
.-
=
=
cd
-
~
o
o
~
i>.
cd
~
..d
bJ)
.-
tI:
0..
c:.= I
as>.,
~CIS
.=~
g:;
\o.4':I:1
0\0.4
.=c
-as:
c.!:
~jl
_u
a-=
~.sl
I
u u
j j
... ac
~.:; -
i1::: ~
-c:! ~ Gi
u u
j j
... ..
I
I
....,... -
-.., = -
i1 ~ ~
~c:! ~ Gi
I
I
u u
j j
.... ..
.2 Ii
I... II
ea 8.
..... !
C~
0'5
(81
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Planning Alternatives
Several planning alternatives were identified and assessed as possible solutions to the
identified Highway 400 Corridor capacity-related problems: .
.
Do Nothing: Traffic is expected to continue to increase. To do nothing would result
in a further deterioration of the level of service; this in turn would result in an
increase in travel time, congestion, collisions, fuel wastage and air pollution. The
negative consequences of the "Do Nothing" approach clearly suggest that actions
must be taken in order to address the existing and projected deficiencies of Highway
400.
.
Localized Geometric Improvements (Road Based Solutions): Geometric
improvements would increase traffic operations, but would not address the capacity
deficiencies.
.
Traffic Operations Improvements: The implementation of a traffic management
system would inform the driver of problems ahead; and with ramp metering, the use
of available highway capacity could be improved by an increase of about 5% to 100/0
(as observed on the QEW in Mississauga). This will extend the time frame for the
improvements but will not eliminate the need.
.
Vehicle Occupancy Increase: This would involve reducing the number of vehicles
along major highways by encouraging carpooling. Again, this will extend the time
frame for the improvements but will not eliminate the need.
Adjacent Road System Improvements: Other existing parallel arterial roads will
provide only limited diversion for Highway 400 through-traffic due to the distances
of these other roads from Highway 400 and the fact that many are already saturated
with local traffic. Widening of arterial roads will not provide sufficient additional
capacity for through-traffic to be significantly diverted from Highway 400.
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
FROM 1 KM Sot.ITH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Planning Alternatives (continued)
.
Rail and Transit Expansion: Rail and transit expansion would provide a more
competitive choice of travel modes for some users of Highway 400, and thus reduce
the traffic volumes somewhat on Highway 400. Specifically, transit expansion within
the City of Barrie would reduce some inter-city travel. However, inter-city travel
volumes comprise a relatively small percentage of Highway 400 traffic through Barrie
and would not address corridor travel demand. Although beneficial to the overall
transportation network, these modal improvements would be limited since Highway
400 significantly serves a diverse nature of trips. This alternative alone would not be
able to adequately address travel demand throughout the p.roject limits.
.
Combination of Alternatives: The combination of all of the previously stated
alternatives will not sufficiently address projected future travel demand.
.
Freeway Capacity Improvements: This alternative would provide the needed
capacity to improve Highway 400 to an acceptable level of service. It also would
provide the opportunity to improve the facility to current Ministry standards. There
would be some property impact and limited environmental impact along the corridor.
.
Provincial Highway Network Expansion: A new parallel highway cannot. address
the immediate and medium terms capacity deficiencies of the Highway 400 Corridor.
The Ministry has undertaken a study to examine the feasibility of expanding the
highway network in Simcoe County.
Based on the assessment of alternatives, the preferred alternative is
"freeway capacity improvements". The basic feature of the "freeway
capacity improvements" is widening Highway 400.
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URSCOLE.
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89 SHERMAN
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
en
~
.~
....
~
e
~
~
OJ)
d
. .....
d
d
~
"...
~
c..-.
o
d
o
.::1
~
.a
~
>
rJ:J
=
'tI ... 0
C:::.- --
l'I;~ ">
:;f!g,.
=:~&3
a ~
... " =
= ... "
" " ~ a
;> ~ CI:I ~
.tj ;a- 'tI 0
l'I -< l'I ..
e 0 g.,
" =: a
~ -
.1" ~"
- = '"
U l'I l'I
-:ag.,,,
~ " =' t
...... u =
...- u_
o
'"
...
'" =
= "
u 0 e!
15';: ..
l'I l'I ~
.. .. 0
~ " ..
g.,g.,
o a
-
'"
...
_ u =
....s u
U a
~ U U
l'I a ..
u 0 0
Q u ..
~~g.,
a
-
bI!
.S
-5
o
Z
o
CI
..
o
...
U
l'I
u..
">
)(
">
">
l1
.;:
=
u
...
o
~
.S ~
= .S!
o '"
.;: ==
u 0
='u
1 ..
=:..2
"> )()(
)('>
-=
bI)
:E
t'
u
~
"> )()(
)( ">
-=
bI)
....
-=
t'
u
~
"> )()(
)( ">
-=
bI)
:E
"> )( '>
'>">
~
o
-
"> )( '>
'>">
~
-
)( '> )(
u
...
(!I
'"
u
"0
o
e
)( ">
)(
)( )( '>
'> )(
~
o
-
'"
u
.... 'S
o "
- a
~ 0 '3:;...
G,! r~ ....-
~ ..., 5:;:1
'tI 'tI a :s
" u = -ci
~ 8 ....0 S g.,
~:E g., 'j: e
e" e = 0
_CI:I _ f;I;1U
~
"
g.,
o
..
~
"
oS ~
o ~
....c:
~.~ ...
5::t:: a
e l1 U
~'u ~ u
s.! ! 'i
as " :3
_~Z '""
~
bE)
(1\
...
~ ~
~ ~
(1\ c::
en (1\
a ~
... ~
~ a
u
tt:: '"'
.~ 0
U) ~
~
z
~
c,:,
~
~.
)( )(
...
tt::
~
c:: ...
~ tt::
~ ~
... c::
c:: ~
t1 ~
tt:: '"'
.~ 0
U) ~
'>">
~
o
-
"0
d ....
~ ....CI)
d ....
o 5
.~ e
1:: ~.
o ~g
~ . ~ "d"
CI) CI) ~
d ~ e ~
~ ":J'''' ~
.... C'$ .t-.:=
S E.... bJJ
CI) ~~;;
....- ,...~
u::: C'$ ~
~~to)bJJ
d ~ >-"S
~oS~5
.... 0 p "C
; J ~.~
to)....c:::
u::: 0:: .~
.... .... CI)"'
d "C .... "'CI)
CJ) ~....
"; ~ ~ d
1.+-1 C'$":J ~
O~C'$e
d e E ~
o 0 ~ ;;.
':J to).:: E
C'$ CI) C'$ ~
d C'$ "0 e
::c ;: ~.~
e~tt'
o e ~ .~
to) ... ~ to)
.. ~ C'$
-o~~
C'$ ~ C'$
e"s: ~ to)
':J d oS ~
~~ ....C'$
o ~ CI) ~
~..d~~
..d .... .~ ~
...."OC'$c:::
Cl)dE~
~ C'$ ~
~ ~~ oS
o ti C'$I.+-I
CI) ~ 1.+-1 0
;:g.o~
~ ~ .... ~
e ~ 5 E
~ 0 e C'$
~.... ~
o CI) CI) ~
~....CI)to)
~ to) ~"~
e C'$ CI) CI)
~ CI) C'$
- e C'$,.Q
.t-.... ~ ~
.... +J .:=
to) d E-4
~ 0
rj ~
CI)
~ C'$
~ I:Q
~
~
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
z
~
'a:
~w
OJ:
B
Widening Alternatives
Projected traffic volumes will exceed the capacity of the existing 6-lane freeway. Widening
Highway 400 will be required to accommodate future (2011) travel demand.
Generally, widening about the existing Highway 400 centteline is the preferred method of
achieving the required road widening. This method is preferred in part because;
-
-
><
~
()
::2
u..
o
>- Z
cQ
;;;Jf-o
Eo-U
r:r;.Z
~2.
z ~
- :r:
Zf-o
Zo
<f-o
..Jo...
~oo
=><
=<
"d"~
>-()
< .....
~:r:
::::: u..
~o
- :r:
=f-o
::>
o
C/)
~
. By splitting the property impacts along the east and west sides of the right-of-way,
the overall impacts to adjacent property owners is reduced;
. Such widenings are less disruptive to stage and construct;
. Such widenings are less costly to implement; and,
. Maintaining the existing alignment provides more desirable geometries.
In areas where property limits and/or physical constraints suggest a shift of the centreline
will reduce impacts, alternative methods of widening will be developed. Depending on the
extent and significance of the constraint, the following alternatives will be considered:
1.) Widening about the existing Highway 400 centreline;
2.) Widening to the east;
3.) Widening to the west; and,
4.) A combination of the above.
-
::E
~
tJ..
012
'i:: ~
19 ~
c: '"
o ~
2:
~~
eiJ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URSCOLE.
FROM 1 KM Soum OF HIGHWAY 89 SHERMAN
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Widening Alternatives
Widening Alternatives
Between Highway 89 an~ Molson Park Drive
Widening alternatives in this section will consider alternative median designs, as follows:
Widening Through the City of Barrie
1.) Median barrier; and
To address the projected future capacity deficiencies along Highway 400 through the City of
Barrie, as well as operational and maintenance issues in this urban section, the following
alternatives will be examined as part of this study:
2.) Open (grassed) median.
1.) 10-lane cross section (5 lanes per direction);
2.) 12-lane Express - Collector system (3 express lanes, 3 distributor lanes per direction).
8.8m BARRIER MEDIAN (8 Lane1ll
EXISTING NWY VA.l\fES fRON 53m TO 141m
........
u
!
'.n i 12L-}!1'.....~
tit i i
! ! i
I ! I
I..... '",'
_._-~
~
. I IT~l; I ~ l:rm~~; ~I ; I"~ I
~ .__ - ~- -~-- !_~ - --'II
1. -- ---
u-' ~
i... 1_~ J."
!-. St4LO
i i .
I II
~.= i(>i_..
~r--
'.1-.
t
:.." S 11't 11
. I · I J I
:roo.-
-- f\ -....
.
..
1'1
II!
JJI ,n
tit
--"
8J!m BARRIER MEDIAN 18 Umesj
\QJ
22.Om OPEN MEDIAN (8 Lanesl
~ !lOW VAIIIU..- UIft 'TO _
SUm
~'" I :U5 12,0 L15 I 115 I
!
~ 3J! >1. ... ... ~ 'I 1:5 ". J" 1. ."j
...." ; \ I · ~ ~~ !" I""" I I I """u
@ _J~ . I t t t t
I
I I I
I
n_ -- .. _n ; _1"'IL ..... ..._ t:I
..
i
i
i
I
~1
L ......--
u_
12 - LANE EXPReSS - COu.ECTOft SYSTIOM
~:trrtDp;M~~J
-- '~
~"'-zp-'" ~
~
~
N,T.S.
N.T.S.
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URSCOLE.
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 SHERMAN
TOTIiE JUNcnON OF HIGHWAY 11
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URSCOLE.
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 SHERMAN
TO THE JUNcnON OF HIGHWAY 11
Express-Collector System
North of Molson Park Drive to
South of Duckworth Street
~
,\,\><'1
~'<J;'
~;f.
#~'f.
o~s
<J#
pRELIMINARY
25m D SDm
b.J I
(j) Ontario
MlnIatry 01 T\'IIMPCIftIIIkm
Interchange Improvements
"
"
~
~
~
~~
?>
<11
1..1 ~ \
'<h
~
~
~
~
Conceptual design alternatives for each interchange are shown on the following displays.
In addition to mainline improvements, interchanges t:hroughout the project limits are being
reviewed to identify alternative improvements which address traffic operation issues.
t
j').o/"1-;1:))
\~
_1:f,"f I..S\\\-
,C:;~f""'
HIGHWAY 400
EXPRESS/COLLECTOR
From North of Molson Park Drive
to South of Duckworth Street
..,.
QO
..,.
ot
....
:J
~
~
cr:
<(
<11
<11
(;Q
5-1-'1.\'1.)
I..s\\\-'1.
...<L t)~
o~yp..".r
~0\J$
NTS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 km South of Highway 89 URSCOLE.
to Junction at Highway 11 SHERMAN
G.W.P. 30-95-00
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URSCOLE.
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89 SHERMAN
TO mE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-.. -
----------
-
-
- -
- -
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Parclo A Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Parclo B Interchange
f
8LOCA11OM
--
__IDT ,.,('
mOHW4r~?( .
f
--'""
';",
;1~'...o',\'\'!.
\
~'.~'.~., .^
"....
.'.
--'""
1..............00.]
I-~
POSSIBLE LOCATION
FOR_
PARKING LOT
moHW.
pBBLI~IN.4BY
8
i
>
~I!
g,j
.,
,BBJJ~IJ'i,.tJI.Y
...~
'~
URSCDLE
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Highway 89 (Simcoe Road 89) Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Parclo A Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Parclo B Interchange
ill
U
L BEACH RI
PROPOSED
I\IIIDMIION
C<OT_
f
PROPOSED
IIJIDMlION
C<OT_
f
--
LOT
"" 0 ....
~
...-:"
;"'... .,
o. '~ MUHRaI
I FUIIHI.......
j'
/.... ,
:> :~><;;:
,,;./"'iioHi';'~.:'
. I
i
i . ,
. ,IWIOY ctM!
~'-
i
I'
;
;
1:) ~ ,~;::'
! ,';',',.,;':>
I'IOOI'OIEO
COMMI/T!R
pNUQHG LOT
$IMCOIHlOAD2L
b
~
~
BASE PLAN REFLECTS
IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED
TO BE CONSTRUCTED
BASE PLAN REFLECTS
IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED
TO BE CONSTRUCTED
,JBL1ldIJ'i,.tJI.Y
...~
PJtELIMIJ'iAJtY
URSCDLE.
, SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Innisfil Beach Road (Simcoe Road 21) Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
(W) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 3 - Diamond (NB) IParclo A (SB) Interchange
I'IIOI'OIED
-
(401'-
~
f
pgt;L~JNMtf
....~
p-
LOT
, MUHRaa
"",1IiSHIHOI
Ii,
~
BASE PLAN REFLECTS
IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED
TO BE CONSTRUCTED
URSCOLE
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Innisfil Beach Road (Simcoe Road 21) Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
GY) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Operational Improvements
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Diamond (SB) IParclo B (NB) Interchange
pgt;LlMINABf
....~
-
PARI(
;
,-
i
j
j
i
i
j
i
If
<-,i
!!<' Ii
q.. /'.' .
~".' . .
~':.., ......1.
I........<CWI~./ .
.' .' I
"l :<' . .... ./
S'IIIJpMAu. 'I
"'tf' /.
t=:"'J .
.:.....-. ~..,
......""
PARI(
MOLSON PARK DRIVE
pgt;JJ1dINMtf
...~
,
i
.\
.........0' \
:fOWERCEHnU! :\
i
i
i
:i
i
i
i
i
j
fi
;../
~i;. .
=" ,
0, '
5: I ' :
, ,-"
i
i
,-
,-
i
I
i
./
i
!
I
',i ~
/ : II
! I,
I I
;
i.~,~
' . . "ORAOI!
, ,
f
f
URSCOLE.
. SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Molson Park Drive Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P. 30-95-00
(w) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
-..----------------
-
-------
-
-
- -
- --
- -
- --
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Parclo A Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Partial Parc!o A Interchange
'~
"'
~
~
i";"~I;p,.'''''
~r.,.;",ijj;;,,""""
I'X">,~ ->'It
,t'. /i'~'::'
11" r..j"i,.,.~,"""
./ '~[:P+.~:~''7't~ Qo..
"."~' '<0.\'
...----
.$'
.,.
#
~Q",~~
"%
:1~
~
\\\
\'\
\, "
!, .,', ,~" <19>....
Itl .(. ";". " "lit.....
/. ,..,. .' ->'It
.. 'k' "",./ .
/. :<.: ,~~/
II'.....~."'"
." :r~;~~
..,]1., '
\~
/17:'
~,~;
~~.:".~,."
'I.,',~'\,';'
.'.'./::~~'.'. ..'~
l.P.~~" ~
i:" <) " ..,
i,,'r.;~"',>: ~
/,.' .
/,;...
rJtl<:LlMINAJO'
~
..,~
rJtl<:IJMIN,.utl'
....~
URSCDLE
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Essa Street Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
(W) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Parclo B Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Parclo A Interchange
rBBLIMIN,.utl'
....~
I
I
~. .,.................'. ,,"".;,.: ","";".,; i":'~,..~, ;'t~~~;' ~PSTREET
./:,,;". . '" :11 aAATDit:
;\\' "1 ,q ,
~ \ GEORGE STREET
GEORGE STREET
VESPRA STREET
rBBLlMIN,.tJI.l'
~
URSCDLE.
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Dunlop Street Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Parclo A (SB)/Diamond (NB) Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Diamond Interchange
...~
r~LIMINARY
...~
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Diamond Interchange
r~LJMlNA.RY
PEEL ST.
PEEL ST.
~
I
Iii
~
'"
C)
Iii
!:!
S
IlAma..DMAU
....VfIELD MAU.
~
,
~
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
Cw) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 3 - Parclo A Interchange
r~LIMJ1IIA.RY
...~
PEEL ST.
f;;
~
<
~
~
,.;
II>
!:!
~
C)
I IWUOHCOULmlST.!
~
,
~
.~
'"
\'
''\
"
\
"
1Ui<.~ "
P-,"". \
\
~~\
7,.1.\
"i,\
,
\
OAY1I1!LD MAll
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
------------
-
- -
- -
..
-
------
-
-
-
- -
- --
- -
- --
ALTERNATIVE 1 - Parc!o A Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 2 - Parc!o A (SBYDiamond (NB)
O\>ORO~
cou,\>o\>
..........1.01
...-
...-
~
~
~
O\>ORO~
cou,\>01>
...........01
pBB~~f
....~',
~~
, .po
.' ~
PllELIMINAllf
'~
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P.30-95-00
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
ALTERNATIVE 3 - Parclo A Interchange
ALTERNATIVE 4 - Parc!o B Interchange
,~t40\.O"
\.
\.
\.
\"
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
'\
"
\
;'
;
;
;
L
"
;
i
DUC~WO\l11tS'f\\EE.T i.' '.
~'
\;
...-
\'"
'U
\.,
\.'
'\
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
\
"
\
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
i
I
l~f\l~:~~~i
~
...-
~
~
.....~
O\>ORO~
cou,1>01>
~
~
g
pBBLJMl1"AJtf
...~
....
\..
\.
\..
\.
\.
\.
t\.
~,
~~~ED "1'.1.\
DEVELOPMENT '\\
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
\.
\,
pBBLltJINAJtf
l~
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Highway 400 Planning Study
Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO 1HE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Evaluation Process and Criteria
What's Next
Evaluation criteria proposed to be used in the evaluation of median, highway interchange
and service road alternatives are provided as follows:
.After this Information C.entre, the following will be carried out:
ENVIRONMENTAL
i'COMPO~Nr
Natural Environment
.
Review the comments received and respond to any questions.
.
Continue to consult with the public and external agencies for input in
the assessment of the proposed highway cross-sections and the
interchange improvements.
Transportation
. Effect on Fish and Aquatic Habitat
. Effect on Terrestrial Habitat and Vegetation
. Effect on Wedands
. Effect on Greenways and Open Space
Linkages
. Effect on Groundwater
. Effect on Naturally Significant Areas
. Effect on A . cultural Lands soils
· Aesthetics
· Noise
. Community Effects (residential, institutional,
recreational and community features, and out-
of-wa travel
. Effects on Commercial / Industrial uses
. Effect on Agricultural Operations
. Property Waste and Contamination
. Effect on Archaeological Resources
. Effect on Heritage Resources
· Traffic Operations
· Traffic Safety
. Construction Impacts
· Cost
.
Refine alternatives based on comments received.
.
.Analysis and evaluation of design alternatives.
.
Hold the Second Public Information Centres to present study findings.
Develop preliminary design plan of the proposed highway widening
including the interchange improvements.
.
Social Environment
.
Identify environmental impacts and develop rmt1gat1on to nuru.nu.ze
identified impacts.
Economic
Environment
Cultural Environment
Following the second Public Information Centre, a Transportation
Environmental Study Report (fESR) will be prepared and placed on the Public
Record for the 30-day review period.
Thank 'yOU for attending.
Please feel free to ask questions and fill out a comment sheet before you leave.
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY URS~~MAN
FROM 1 KM soum OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Freedom of Information and
Protection Privacy
Comments and information regarding this study are being collected to assist
the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) in meeting the requirements of the
Provincial Environmental Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file
for use during the study and may be included in study documentation. With
the exception of personal information all comments will become part of the
public record.
You are encouraged to contact the MfO Project Team if you have questions
or concerns regarding the above information.
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URSCOLE.
SHERMAN
Cole S~Jerman
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
URS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ministry of Transportation
Cole Sherman
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 PURPOSE....................... ........ ......... ............................................................................................................. 1
3.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION .. ............................. ........................ .......................... ......................... ................. 1
4.0 PRE PIC MEETINGS .................... ........ '" .......... ... .................. ............ ....... .......... ....................... ............. .... I
5.0 DISPLAY MATERIAL ................................................................................................................................2
6. 0 ATTENDANCE.............................................................................................................. ............. ..... ............ 2
7.0 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS ....................................................................................................................3
HIGHWAY 400
PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
From 1 km South of Highway 89
Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe
G.W.P.30-95-00
Appendix A News AdlBrochure/Notice Letters
Appendix B Minutes of Meeting
Appendix C DisplayslInformation Package
PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE ROUND #2
SUMMARY REpORT
JUNE 2002
Public Infonnation Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kID to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
1.0
INTRODUCTION
External Team Meeting
Public Information Centres (PICs) were held regarding improvements to address the existing and projected future
(20 II) traffic operation, capacity and safety needs associated with the Highway 400 corridor. The need for
drainage, iJJumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements were also examined as part of this
project. The PIC provided the public and opportunity to review and discuss the project with representatives of the
Project Team.
An External Team meeting was held prior to the second Public Information Centre on June 25, 2002 at the Holiday
Inn in the City of Barrie. The objective of this meeting was to provide an opportunity to discuss the analysis and
evaluation of alternatives and the preferred mainline and interchange alternatives.
The Information Centres were held on:
Representatives fTom the Town of Innisfil, Barrie Agricultural Society, and Simcoe Catholic District School Board
attended the External Team Meeting while members fTom the Town of Bradford West GwiJIimbury, City of Barrie,
and Township of Oro-Medonte attended the Public Information Centre, which was held immediately after the
External Team meeting.
Tuesday June 25, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - Churchill Conference Centre
20 Fairview Road, Barrie
Wednesday June 26, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Y onge Street, Innisfil
Refer to Appendix B for the Minutes of Meeting.
5.0 DISPLA Y MATERIAL
Representatives fTom URS Cole Sherman and the Ministry of Transportation staffed the meetings.
The following display material was presented at the PIC (refer to Appendix C):
2.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of the PICs was to present the results fTom the first PICs, present the analysis and evaluation of
alternatives, the preferred alternatives, and the proposed mitigation measures.
3.0
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Prior to the PIC, the following measures were carried out in order to make details of the information centre known to
study area residents and interested members of the public:
l. An Ontario Government Notice (Notice of Public Information Centre #2) was placed in the Toronto Star,
Barrie Examiner, Barrie Advance, and Innisfil Scope newspapers on June 19, 2002.
2. Invitation letters dated June 5, 2002 were distributed to those on the project mailing list including those
individuals who signed up at the first PIC, government agencies, ministries, municipalities and interest
groups.
Refer to Appendix A for the news ad and letters.
4.0 PRE PIC MEETINGS
Municipal Team Meeting
A Municipal Team Meeting was held with the City of Barrie on April 3, 2002 at Barrie City Hall. The purpose of
the meeting was to update on the project, review the analysis and evaluation of widening and interchange
alternatives, and the timing of construction.
.
Project Limits;
Background;
Regional Transportation Needs;
Project Need and Justification;
Summary of Technically Preferred Alternatives;
Class Environmental Assessment Process;
Study Schedule;
Widening Requirements;
Existing and Future Operational Conditions at all the Interchanges;
Planning Alternatives and Evaluation of Planning Alternatives;
Summary ofIssues and Concerns Raised During the First Public Information Centre;
Analysis and Evaluation of Widening and Interchange Alternatives;
Preferred Alternatives;
Ministry of Transportation Noise Policy, About Noise, Preliminary Noise Assessment;
Closure of Service Centres;
Staging of Construction;
Proposed Highway Illumination;
Commuter Lot Options and Evaluation; and
Summary of Potential Environmental Effects, Mitigation Requirements, Commitment to Future Work and
Monitoring.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6.0 ATTENDANCE
A total of 354 members of the public chose to sign the visitor's register for the Public Information Centre (298
signatures recorded at the June 25th PIC in Barrie and 56 signatures recorded at the June 26th PIC in Stroud).
Public Infonnation Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
Cole Shc'm8",
URS
Public Infonnation Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
URS
2
Cole She",,"",
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
I
I
In addition to verbal comments, the Project Team encouraged visito rs to express, in writing, all concerns or
comments they had regarding the infonnation presented. To date, 127 comments have been received as follows:
· Concerned with potential for more accidents with a wider highway
OTHER INDIRECT (AIR QUALlTYIILLUMINATlONIOUT-OF-WA Y TRA VEL)
· Vehicle emission, air pollution
· Light trespass on adjacent residences
· Closure of Rose Street access to Bayfield Street is unacceptable
· Impact to pedestrian trail at Bayfield Street
· Maintain bridge crossing at lOth Concession for snowmobile access
DISAGREE WITH ALTERNA TlVE METHODS (I.E. ADDITIONAL ROAD CAPACITY VS. RAIL)
· Expand GO Transit (rail/bus services)
· Construct high speed rail system
· Build an express highway above the existing Highway 400
GENERAL PROPERTY IMPACTS
· Fear of expropriation, property value and re-sale
IMPACTS TO NA TURAL ENVIRONMENT FEA TURES
· Impacts on wildlife/ecology
· Impacts on water systems (drainage, water tables, water quality), Kidd's Creek
· Brereton Field Naturalist Club
IMPACTS TO ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT FEATURES .
· Impact on agricultural lands
· Concerns about cost to Barrie taxpayers for highway improvements
SPECIFIC PROPERTY IMPACTS
· Property requirements from adjacent residences and businesses (i.e. Petro-Canada,
Keg Restaurant, Cedar Pointe Plaza)
COMMENTS ON CONSULT A TION PLAN
· Residents of Barrie should vote on whether this project should continue
· Contact the First Nations
IMPACTS TO CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT FEA TURES
· Impact to historical trail at Sunnidale Road
· Widening improvements impact the culture and history of the city
June 25th - Barrie PIC
June 26th Stroud PIC
Mailed-in
E-mail
Total
77
8
17
127
7.0 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
The following summarizes the comments and issues raised at the PIC.
COMMENTS/ISSUES
NUMBER OF
COMMENTS ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
· Commuter parking lots removed should be replaced appropriately
· Consider a toll route
· An express/collector system is beneficial
· Concerns with bottleneck affect if widening a section of Highway 400
· Interchange modifications
· Lower the speed limit, increase traffic safety
· Synchronize traffic signals
· Provide landscaping around the interchanges
· Provide larger signs and high mast lighting at the interchanges
· Maintain Sunnidale Road (road grade)
· Realignment of Reive Road will have an impact on site pan approvals for future
development
· Access during construction
NOISE
· Noise retrofit barriers installed at residential areas
· Widening of the highway will increase noise levels
· More infonnation required on noise study
· Disruption of OPP sirens redirected into immediate residential area
DISAGREE WITH ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS (WIDEN HIGHWAY 400)
· By-pass route (i.e. Highway 427, alternative roadways)
· More infonnation on the Simcoe County Needs Assessment
· Consider building a causeway/bridge over Kempenfelt Bay over Barrie
DISAGREE WITH PROBLEM STATEMENT
· Oppose to widening to 10 lanes (traffic does not warrant widening)
· Traffic problems are primarily due to cottage/weekend traffic
· Widening will only attract more traffic/expansion not sustainable
52
51
I
19
I
I
17
I
15
I
12
I
11
I
9
I
4
I
3
I
In addition to the above comments, 27 requests for site-specific mapping were submitted to the Project Team.
I
38
26
I
I
I
I
I
Public Information Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
4
URS
I
Public Information Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
3
URS
Cole She:"?'na"-
COiC Sherm:.y:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kIn South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kIn to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
APPENDIX A
News Ad / Brochure / Notice Letters
Public Information Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
URS
Cole Shem13C
ONTARIO GOVERNMENT NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM I KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 NORTHERLY 30 KM TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY II
COUNTY OF SIMCOE (G.W.P. 30-95-00)
o
.-
'-
to
......
c:
o
~
THE STUDY:
URS Cole Sherman on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is undertaking a Planning and Preliminary
Design Study of Highway 400 from I kIn south of Highway 89 northerly 30 kIn to the junction of Highway II in the
County of Simcoe.The purpose of this study is to detennine the nature of improvements required to address traffic
operation, capacity and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The need for drainage, illumination,
roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements have also been examined as part of this project. Reasonable
alternatives to address the required improvements have been developed and evaluated to detennine the most appropriate
solution.
The technically preferred alternative includes mainline widening of Highway 400 as follows:
From Hil!bway 89 to Essa Road - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes (including property protection for up to 10 lanes).
From Essa Road to Bayfield Street - Widen from 6 lanes to 10 lanes.
From Rayfield Street to Junction at Hil!bway 11 - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes.
The improvements also include interchange reconfigurations and improvements, installation of concrete median barrier,
construction of noise barriers at warranted locations, installation of high-mast illumination at required locations, and
improvements to highway drainage. Closure of the existing northbound. and southbound rest areas along Highway 400 in
the project limits is also proposed in order to satisfY safety and operational requirements.
THE PROCESS:
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental Assessment for
Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). Opportunities for public input are being provided throughout the course of the
project. A Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR) will be available for review and comment upon completion
of the study. A further notice will be published regarding the availability of the TESR for review.
PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRES:
The first round of Public Infonnation Centres (PICs) was held in May 200 I with the focus on the identification of project
needs and reasonable alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives for widening Highway 400 (including an express -
collector system through Barrie) and possible alternative interchange configurations were presented.
The technically preferred alternatives for improvements to this section of the Highway 400 corridor will be presented at the
second round ofPICs to allow the public to review and provide comments.
The Information Centres will be held as follows:
Tuesday June 25, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - Churchill Conference Centre 20
Fairview Road, Barrie
Wednesday June 26, 2002
2:00 p.Ol. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Y onge Street, Innisfil
You are encouraged to attend the Information Centres and provide us with your views and concerns so that they can be
addressed in the study.
COMMENTS:
Comments and infonnation regarding this project are being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation in meeting the
requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This rnaterial will be maintained on file for use during the project and
may be included in project documentation. Infonnation collected will be used in accordance with the Freedom of
Infonnation and Protection of Privacy Act. With the exception of personal information, all comments will become part of
the public record.
For further infonnation, or to be added to the mailing list, please contact:
Mr. Kevin J. Boudreau, P. Eng.
Ministry of Transportation
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3n! Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario. N6E I L3
Tel: (519) 873-4603
Fax: (519) 873-4600
E-mail: Kevin.Boudreau@mto.gov.on.ca
Mr. Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Cole Shennan
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Tel: (905) 882-3540
Fax: (905) 882-4399
E-mail: len_kozachuk@urscorp.com
Mr. Michael Bricks
Senior Environmental Planner
URS Cole Shennan
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thornhill., Ontario, L3T 7N9
Tel: (905) 882-3549
Fax: (905) 882-4399
E-mail: mike_bricks@urscorp.com
<C
w
~
<C
>
Q
::>>
t;
rt:f
@ Ontario
Visit us at: bttp:// Hi:bway400.planningstudy.on.ca
U')
W
U~
t-tl-
....Z
caw
::)U
A.Z
u.o
Ot-t
w~
~:E
b~
zf2
z
t-t
>- :::
Q ~
:::) 5
t: G
VI C'\ ....
"co:J:
Z~~
....5Z
z~68g
Z:J:z~~
C~gV)cp
..J 0 u.. 0
D.,:I:......Ot""l
o ,~ ~ ~ 0.;
0.."......:::>3:
~~~8l6
>-.-4~
~ ~g
;:>IJ..>-
::z: ~
" ~
.... ~
:c 0
z
(II
u
e
CU
a.. cu
N · . -! .;:
oEEe I.
o · · 0 ra
N 0. o.u CD
"'00- ...
Lnoo= -a
N......ccura
CUlnChua..O
e 0 0 a.. ..... ~ "C
:s ..... ..... :s e c:
.., . ...c cu ~ ttI
>-EEuucu
ra a. a. I .~
ioo e .-
cuooS {f,
:::I .. ..
....N" ~ ~
-0
.-
15
:c
N cuiE
o. .a..CI)
o E E 1: '2
N · · cu e
v$ 0. 0. U ....
Ngg~..J'
CD .. ...- QJ
eLnCheCU
~SSE~
>- · · E cu
~EEoc:ft
(It a.a.u S
~gg-g>
-0....0""
CUN"J:iCO
3: U')~
fa
c..
:::>
o
0:::
l?
.........
ZZ
I..::JLU
.....~
V'IV'I
LUV'I
Ctx
>-V'I
0:::<(
<(...J
~~
~z
::JLU
LU~
O:::z
0..0
0:::
.....
>
Z
W
V'I
V'I
:5
u
I
f-o
~ Z
o.lJ;.:I
g,::;E
-g ~
u u
G'O
cu Q
... r:r.J
c _
o _
'0 ......
cu f-o
.5 IJ;.:I
... ...J
o.u
.:!J >-
~ U
=' IJ;.:I
-e A:::
e ::...:0
.c r:r.J
:E -<
...... :3
c..
I
I
@
I
I
I
I
I
I
oS!
eJ
U)
.a
....
~
I
I
I
I
I
VI
C
o
~
~
o
...I
U
"'"
Q.
VI
ell
....
o
C
ell
Q
.
I
I
I
I
I
1. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
--- -- ------- -
URS Cole Sherman on behalf of the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is undertaking a Planning and Preliminary Design
Study to determine the nature of improvements required to address the existing and projected future (2011) traffic
operation, capacity and safety needs associated with the Highway 400 corridor.
The need for drainage, illumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements have also been examined
as part of this project. Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements have been developed and
evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution.
The preferred alternative includes mainline widening of Highway 400 as follows:
From Hi9hway 89 to Essa Road - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes (including property protection for up to 10 lanes).
From Essa Road to Bayfield Street - Widen from 6 lanes to 10 lanes.
From Bayfield Street to Junction at Highway 11 - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes.
The improvements also include installation of concrete median barrier, interchange reconfigurations and improvements,
construction of noise barriers at warranted locations, installation of high-mast illumination at required locations, and
improvements to highway drainage. Closure of the existing northbound and southbound rest areas along Highway 400 in
the project limits is also proposed in order to satisfy safety and operational requirements.
2. STUDY PROCESS
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental Assessment
for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The study process consists of five major components including: (1) a
review of the Transportation Needs Assessment; (2) generate, evaluate and select the preferred planning alternative; (3)
generate and assess preliminary design alternative; (4) evaluate and select preferred preliminary design alternative; and
(5) develop preferred preliminary design. Opportunities for public input are being provided throughout the course of the
project.
3. PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRES
The first round of Public Information Centres (PICs) was held in May 2001 with the focus on the identification of project
needs and reasonable alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives for widening Highway 400 (including an express
- collector system through Barrie) and possible alternative interchange configurations were presented.
The second round of Public Information Centres (PICs) has now been arranged to allow the public to review and
comment on the evaluation of alternatives and the technically preferred alternatives for improvements to this section of
the Highway 400 corridor.
The Information Centres will be held as follows:
Tuesday June 25, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - Churchill Conference Centre
20 Fairview Road, Barrie
Wednesday June 26, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Stroud Community Centre
7883 Yonge Street, Innisfil
You are encouraged to attend the Information Centres and to provide us with your views and concerns so that they can
be addressed as the study progresses.
- -
Comments received will be used to review the
evaluation of alternatives and determine any additional
mitigation requirements. The results and any follow-up
to the PIC will be documented in the Transportation
Environmental Study Report (TESR). The TESR will be
made available for review for a mandatory 30-day
period. Notice of the availability of the TESR for review
will be placed in local newspapers and sent directly to
individuals on the mailing list.
Prior to completion of the review period for the TESR,
any individual who has outstanding concerns may
request that the project be "bumped-up" to an
individual environmental assessment requiring a formal
review and approval process, Once the review process
for the TESR is completed, and concerns have been
addressed, the project may proceed to the design and
construction stages.
Design and Construction Reports (DCRs) may be
prepared for portions of the project to document the
design and construction details including any necessary
follow-up mitigating approaches to address public
concerns, The DCRs will be made available for public
information as necessary but are not eligible for "bump-
up".
Comments and information regarding this study are
being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation
in meeting the requirements of the Environmental
Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file
for use during the study and may be included in study
documentation. With the exception of personal
information, all comments will become part of the public
record.
For further information, or to be added to the mailing
list, please contact:
Mr, Kevin J. Boudreau, p, Eng.
Ministry of Transportation
Southwestern Region
Planning and Design Section
3rd Floor, 659 Exeter Road
London, Ontario, N6E 1L3
Tel: (519) 873-4603
Fax: (519) 873-4600
E-mail:
Kevin.Boudreau@mto.gov.on.ca
Mr. Len Kozachuk, P.Eng.
Senior Project Manager
URS Cole Sherman
75 Commerce Valley Drive
East
Thornhill, Ontario, L3T 7N9
Tel: (90S) 882-3540
Fax: (90S) 882-4399
E-mail:
len_kozachuk@urscorp,com
~~
~ ~
~=
=
-.
z
-6
..
"
,
i'
N
~
~
J
..
o
~
n
'"
n
'"
f
~
<fi
t::
a
'"
&"
3
6
o
<
3
3
~
a
,...
5!
!i
Q.
g
QC
I.C)
-
=
~
1:1>
1:1>
=
.~
=
=
Q..
I
:E
Q.:
n>
::3
::t'
o
S
0\
g
n>
'"
.....
o
00
~
::3
n>
'"
--
S'
(')
;:
0..
S'
OQ
"0
'"'I
o
"0
n>
~
"0
'"'I
o
.....
n>
(')
.....
o'
::3
8"'
'"'I
s::
"0
.....
o
-
o
...-j
:::r
n>
"0
'"'I
n>
(t>
::t
n>
0..
e:..
.....
n>
8
~
:;::.
n>
S'
(')
;:
0..
n>
'"
S
j:.)
[
S'
n>
~
Q.:
n>
::3
S'
OQ
o
.....,
::r:
dQ'
:::r
~
~
.j::;.
o
o
j:.)
'"
~
0'
~
'"
::t''''rI
o 0
3 g:
N~
oS'
OOQ
"0 .....
. :::r
3 n>
:"'tr1
o ><
v.(t
08
OJ:.)
"0 -
. ...-j
3 n>
. ~
g; S
o..~
::t'n>
o n>
S ::to
::3
-.l0Q
0:"-
O:::r
"0 n>
a ::tI
. ;;1
..... .....
o 0
\0.....,
g~
"0 0
. '"
S (')
. :::r
n>
0..
s::
(b'
0..
--0
s::
g:
(S.
......
::3
8"'
8
~
o'
::3
n
n>
::3
.....
'"'I
n>
'"
~.
-
-
g.g.-<
n> j:.) 0
S ;: s::
n> :::r j:.)
n> n> '"'I
::to '< n>
::3 (') n>
~ g; ;:;
:::r0
n> e;
j:.) j:.)
o..OQ
o..n>
'"'I 0..
n> .....
'" 0
'" j:.)
~:::t
S. g
.....0..
:::r.....
n> :::r
'" n>
gtr1
~~
. n>
8
'"OJ:.)
(b':i
~ n>
g S
g.~
~~
g. S'
n>OQ
s:: j:.)
::3 ::3
0..0..
n> .....
;;1 0
_. "0
~ a
n> <
0.. _.
~~
.....s::
s:: '"
::3 ~
n> _.
-g.
-
u '<
NO
oS::
0'"'1
N<
_. (Do
.....,~
'6 '"
s:: j:.)
"0 ::3
_0..
j:.) (')
::3 0
b ?S
j:.) n>
~ ~
::3 '"
0..0
:::r
n>
:::r
n>
0::
=
~
_. :::r
0.. n>
= :::r
'< n>
N ;" 0::
= = .... ~ .0
~ I "= ::3
= = t'TJ ..
_. ("') = 1:1>
"I =- "C Q..
<: . =
;. = = '<
~ ::1 . '-i
=--=
~===
= - N t'TJ
=("')"N
Q.....=UI
... ... =...
t=="C N
= ~. =
"I ., a =
., t'TJ . N
-. =
t'TJ (')
t'TJ
("')
t'TJ
=
-
~
...-j
:::r
n>
tr1
~
n>
8
e:.
(') n> )>
0<_
::t e:. -
Q.:S::tr1
o ~ ><
..., _.r""+-
. 0 n>
::3 8
o j:.)
.....,-
~~
n> j:.)
3 S
~
_. ~
< n>
n> n>
'" .....
~ -.
::3 ::3
o..OQ
.....:::r
:::rj:.)
n> '"
.....:::r
~ n>
:::rn>
::3 ::3
(S'j:.)
e:..::t
-j:.)
'< ::3
"OOQ
'"'I n>
n> 0..
(t>
::t b
n>
0.."0
'"'I
j:.) 0
;:;:'<:
n> _.
3 ~
~.....
_. :::r
(ii n>
'" 0
8"'''0
'"'1"8
-.::\.
3 s::
"0 ::3
'"'I _.
~q'
n> .....
3 0
n> '"'I
::3 n>
11 <
~ (6"
o ~
g.j:.)
n> ::3
::r:o..
_. 0..
~ Vi'
~ (')
j:.) s::
'< ~
.j::;......
o:::r
on>
...-j
n>
j:.)
3
~
n>
~
S'
OQ
~
o..~a(')...-j
~~~~~
::! 0 ~. (') "0
;:j ::3 0.. -. s::
5' j:.) n> q' -a
n> g:", 1::0
..... n> j:.) ... '"
~ (t>o..(!)
S ~9 !G g,
~3~(t>g.
..... j:.) '"'I q' _.
j:.) ..... s:: '"
"0 -. (') ::3
~(iic~a
o '" '"'I 0.. 0..
"0 ..... e:.. '" '<
::!.O j:.) 8"'-'
j:.) ::3 '"'I VJ
(t~o..g.b
rJJ c.....,....-.
~~a"'~
s:: '" n> ~ .....
::t.'" ;:! () n>
Q ..... :::r ::to 8
_ :::r j:.) 0 _.
. n>::3::3::3
OQ 0 n>
~ n> .....,.....
..0 -...... :::r
s:: S :::r n>
::;'''0 n> ::3
n>a::r:~
0.. < _. s::
_. n> ~ @
S S ~ 0
~gj:.)"""
o ..... '< _.
<: '" .j::;. 3
n> :::r 0 "0
S j:.) 0 '"'I
n> < (') ~
an>on>
'" e:.. ::t 3
V'1 --('D
g-o g-::3
<::::r'"'l11
n> n> .
n> '"'I
:::r::3 ...-j n>
:::r...Q
n> n> n> s::
n> >< _.
::3 e: ::3 ~
o..:d ~ 0..
~ S' 0.. b
~n> 8"'j:.)
00..'"'10..
"O~o..o..
n> '" '"'I '"'I
0.. "0 1::. ~
j:.) j:.) ::3 '"
::3 ::\.~ ~
o..on>j:.)
.....,u ~
n> -. ::ti
< g.=(')
j:.) _. s:: 0
;:"'S"C
j:.) "0 _. n>
..... '"'I ::3 '"'I
n> 0 j:.) ~
o..~. ~. ~.
..... (') 0 0
o;+??
::3 j:.) c:::
o ::3 ,.,.;
::\.0..,...
:::r--oen
~ '"'I n
- n> 0
'-< =:-
w 3 n>
o _. en
i'5'::3::r-
8 ~ n>
btj8
..... n> g;
:::rVJ
n> _. 0
,-.~ ::3
=
::3en:::r
(') ..... n>
r=. s:: :::r
o .9- e:.
::3 ~ .....,
o ..... 0
.....,0.....,
::r:n>.....
dQ' ~ ~
:::r30
..: _.
<; ::3 ::3
~ n> S
_0."'1
::: 3 o.
"0
S' a ~
r-t- -< _.
:::r n> 2.
n> 3 ~
Qg~
s:: 11 0
::3 ..... .....,
q'0...-j
o ::r: iJ
....., _.::3
en OQ VJ
_. :::r "0
3 ~ 0
(') '" ::\.
o ~ j:.)
n> .j::;. r=.
-- 0 0
~ 0::3
(t>~9
'"'I '"'I ;::...
.....o...-j
~30
:::r-'-'
n> S -.
j:.) '"
:::t =
j:.) '" ::3
(') 0 0..
:::r s:: n>
n> ..... ::\.
o..:::rj:.)
@0C:
'< .....,::3
::r:OQ
3 -. j:.)
j:.)~'"O
"0 ..: _
';-"<;j:.)
~ S
00 5'
\OOQ
~ 0
t'TJ n>
" j:.)
'"'I
~
0..
0..
~
'"
'"
:::::
0;:
s:: ::3
'"'I n>
~V1
n> u
~~
(10
ZN
N
\0
\0
o
o
-
.j::;.
-.I
z
.....~~= j:.)
\01., ., _. 3
~t'TJ =(IQ n>
.::e~~
:-= e. .... =
tH= ='<
==~....
1"1 =
~~ =
~Oen~
=t'TJ=_
[!;. = =
(IQ-=
= =- =
-. = S'
("') ..... (IQ
-=en
= -.-
1:1> (IQ =
I:I>=-Q..
~~'<
= =
:s. '<
~ QC
= I.C)
= ~
t'TJ =
= ::1-
-=-
= t'TJ
-.,
>-
1:1>'<
1:1> tH
~ =
1:1> ~
a a
~ ....
~=
~ '-i
C'}=
"I =
= (')
= r=.
"= =
" =
t==
~.....
'"0=
., -.
....= (IQ
.=-
~ ~
-=
'<
'""'
'""'
t""':!
~
-!
t""':!
~
>
t""
~
o
<:
t""':!
~
::
t""':!
z
-!
'-'
t""
t""':!
-!
-!
t""':!
~
EXTERNAL (GOVERNMENT) LETTER
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Government List
(ReINo. CN29900147)
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Should you require further information please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Address Name
"Mr. Bill Armstrong, Planner
london Regional Office
Ministry of Environment
2nd Floor, 659 Exeter Road
london, Ontario
N6E lU" Mr. Armstrong
"Ian Mitchell, P.Eng.
District Engineer
Barrie/ Owen Sound District
Ministry of the Environment
1520 - 20th Street East, P.O. Box 967
Owen Sound, Ontario
N4K 6H6" Mr. Mitchell
"Mr. Ken Rovinelli, Manager
Development and Contract Engineering
Management Board Secretariat
777 BayStreet, 15th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
MSG 2E5" Mr. Rovinelli
"Mr. John MacDonald
Heritage Planner
Heritage Operations Unit
Ministry of Gti.zenship, Cultural and Recreation
400 University Avenue, 4th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M7 A 2R9" Mr. MacDonald
"Mrs. Diana Jardine, Director
Plans Administration Branch
Ann: Dianne McArthur Rogers
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
777 Bay Street, 14th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
MSG 2E5" Ms. McArthur Rogers
"Ms. Kathy Woeller, District Planner
Midhurst District Office
Ministry of Natural Resources
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, Ontario
lOl lXO" Ms. Woeller
"Mr. Bill Taylor, Associate Negotiator
Negotiations Branch, Thunder Bay Office
Ontario Native Affairs Secretariat
421 S. James Street, Suite 101
Thunder Bay, Ontario
P7E 2V6" Mr. Taylor
"Mr. Ray Valaitis
Rural Planner
Central and Northern Ontario Region
Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs
RR 3, 95 Dundas Street
Brighton, Ontario
From Essa Road to Bayfield Street - Widen from 6 lanes to 10 lanes.
From Bavfield Street to Junction at Hi2hwav 11 - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes.
The improvements also include installation of concrete median barrier, interchange reconfigurations and
improvements, construction of noise barriers at warranted locations, installation of high-mast illumination at
required locations, and improvements to highway drainage. Closure of the existing northbound and
southbound rest areas along Highway 400 in the project limits is also proposed in order to satisfy safety and
operational requirements.
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental
Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The study process consists of five major
components including: (I) a review of the Transportation Needs Assessment; (2) generate, evaluate and
select the preferred planning alternative; (3) generate and assess preliminary design alternative; (4) evaluate
and select preferred preliminary design alternative; and (5) develop preferred preliminary design.
Opportunities for public input are being provided throughout the course ofthe project.
Comments received will be used to review the evaluation of alternatives and determine any additional
mitigation requirements. The results and any follow-up to the PIC will be documented in the Transportation
Environmental Study Report (TESR). The TESR will be made available for review for a mandatory 30-day
period. Notice of the availability of the TESR for review will be placed in local newspapers and sent directly
to individuals on the mailing list.
Prior to completion of the review period for the TESR, any individual who has outstanding concerns may
request that the project be "bumped-up" to an individual environmental assessment requiring a formal review
and approval process. Once the review process for the TESR is completed, and concerns have been
addressed, the project may proceed to the design and construction stages.
Design and Construction Reports (DCRs) may be prepared for portions of the project to document the design
and construction details including any necessary follow-up mitigating approaches to address public concerns.
The DCRs will be made available for public information as necessary but are not eligible for "bump-up".
Comments and information regarding this study are being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation in
meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file for
use during the study and may be included in study documentation.
Yours very truly,
URS COLE, SHERMAN & ASSOClA TES LTD.
Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
cc: K. Boudreau, Project Engineer - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
J. Foster, Environmental Planner - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
Att.
N\planning\cn29900147 hwy400\PIC\PIC #2\Merge Lists & Letters\Government Letter doc
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Government List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
KOK 1HO" Mr. Valaitis
"Ms. Ruth Debicki, Planner
Ministry of Nonhem Development and Mines
Level &3 Willet Green Miller Centre
933 Ramsay Lake ReI, 6th Floor
Sudbury, Ontario
P3E 6B5" Ms. Debicki
"Ms. Ann Fraser
Business Development O:msultant
Ministry of Economic Development and Trade
Midhurst District Office
2284 Nursery Road
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1XO" Ms. Fraser
"Ms. Ruth Alves, Administrative Officer
Health Services Division
Ministry of Health
Hepburn Block. 1 Orh Floor, 80 Grosvenor Street
Toronto, Ontario
M7 A 1R3" Ms. Alves
"Mrs. Heather Brown, Environmental Planner
Environmental Services and Approvals
Hydro One Networks Inc.
483 Bay Street, 6th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
MSG 2P5" Mrs. Brown
"Ms. Helen Howes, Director
O:>Ipofate and Environmental Affairs
Ontario Power Generation
700 University Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
MSG 1X6" Ms. Howes
"Ms. Eve Wyatt
Manager - Corporate Planning, Project Development
GO Transit
20 Bay Street, Suite 6000
T oromo, Ontario
MSJ 2W2" Ms Wyatt
"Mr. Wayne Frechette, Police Chief
Barrie City Police
295 Sperling Drive, P.O. Box 188
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T2" Mr. Frechette
"Mr. Mark Neelin, Inspector
Barrie Police Service
295 Sperling Drive, P.O. Box 188
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T2" Mr. Neelin
"Staff Sergeant L. J. (Len) Hassberger
Barrie Detachment
Ontario Provincial Police
20 Rose Street
2
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Government List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
3
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 21'2" Sergeant Hassberger
"Mr. Wayne WIlson, CAO
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, R.R. 1
Angus, Ontario
LOM 1BO" Mr. WIlson
"Mr. Tom Hogenbirk, Conservation Engineer
Watershed Management
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
P.O. Box 282, 120 Bayview Parkway
Newmarket, Ontario
L3Y 4X1" Mr. Hogenbirk
"Ms. Kristin Dibble
Planning Technician
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board
46 Alliance Blvd.
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 5K3" Ms. Dibble
"Mr. David Few
Manager of Propeny and Planning
Simcoe County District School Board
1170 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1XO" Mr. Few
"Mr. Jerry McNeill
Service Centre Maintenance Officer
Ministry of Transponation
Maintenance Officer
Garden City Tower, 2nd Floor
301 St. Paul St.
St. Catharines, Ontario
L2R 7R4" Mr. McNeill
INTEREST GROUP LETTER
INTEREST GROUP LETTER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 5, 2002
Our Ref: CN29900 147
Ms. Kristin Dibble
Property & Agreements Officer
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board
Plant and Planning Department
46 Alliance Blvd.
Barrie, Ontario L4M 5K3
Dear Ms. Dibble:
Re: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to Junction of Highway 11
Preliminary Design I Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P.30-95-00
From Essa Road to Bayfield Street - Widen from 6 lanes to lO lanes.
From Bayfield Street to Junction at Hi2hway 11- Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes.
The improvements also include installation of concrete median barrier, interchange
reconfigurations and improvements, construction of noise barriers at warranted locations,
installation of high-mast illumination at required locations, and improvements to highway
drainage. Closure of the existing northbound and southbound rest areas along Highway 400 in
the project limits is also proposed in order to satisfy safety and operational requirements.
URS Cole Sherman on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is undertaking a
Planning and Preliminary Design Study to examine improvements to Highway 400 from 1 Ian
south of Highway 89 northerly 30 kIn to the junction of Highway 11 in the County of Simcoe
(refer to the attached key map).
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class
Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The study process
consists of five major components including: (1) a review of the Transportation Needs
Assessment; (2) generate, evaluate and select the preferred planning alternative; (3) generate and
assess preliminary design alternative; (4) evaluate and select preferred preliminary design
alternative; and (5) develop preferred preliminary design. Opportunities for public input are
being provided throughout the course of the project.
The purpose of this study is to determine the nature of improvements required to address traffic
operation, capacity and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The need for
drainage, illumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements have also been
examined as part of this project. Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements
have been developed and evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution.
Comments received will be used to review the evaluation of alternatives and determine any
additional mitigation requirements. The results and any follow-up to the PIC will be documented
in the Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR). The TESR will be made available for
review for a mandatory 30-day period. Notice of the availability of the TESR for review will be
placed in local newspapers and sent directly to individuals on the mailing list.
The first round of Public Information Centres (PICs) was held in May 2001 with the focus on the
identification of project needs and reasonable alternatives within the project limits. Alternatives
for widening Highway 400 (including an express - collector system through Barrie) and possible
alternative interchange configurations were presented.
Prior to completion of the review period for the TESR, any individual who has outstanding
concerns may request that the project be "bumped-up" to an individual environmental assessment
requiring a formal review and approval process. Once the review process for the TESR is
completed, and concerns have been addressed, the project may proceed to the design and
construction stages.
The second round of Public Information Centres has now been arranged to allow the public to
review and provide comments on the evaluation of alternatives and the technically preferred
alternatives for improvements to this section of the Highway 400 corridor.
Design and Construction Reports (DCRs) may be prepared for portions of the project to
document the design and construction details including any necessary follow-up mitigating
approaches to address public concerns. The DCRs will be made available for public information
as necessary but are not eligible for "bump-up".
The Information Centre will be held as follows:
Tuesday June 25, 2002 Wednesday June 26, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - Churchill Conference Centre Stroud Community Centre
20 Fairview Road, Barrie 7883 Y onge Street, Innisfil
You are encouraged to attend the Information Centre and to provide us with your views and
concerns so that they can be addressed in the study.
The preferred alternative includes mainline widening of Highway 400 as follows:
From Highway 89 to Essa Road - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes (including property protection
for up to 10 lanes).
Comments and information regarding this study are being collected to assist the Ministry of
Transportation in meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This material
will be maintained on file for use during the study and may be included in study documentation.
Should you require further information please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Yours very truly,
URS COLE. SHERMAN & ASSOCIATES LIMITED
?z~
Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
I
I cc:
I Att.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTEREST GROUP LETTER
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Interest Group List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
1
K. Boudreau, Project Engineer - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
J. Foster, Environmental Planner - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
Address
"Ms. Kristin Dibble
Property & Agreements Officer
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board
Plant and Planning Department
46 Alliance Blvd.
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 5K3"
"Mrs. Wendy Moore, Executive Director
Federation of Ontario Cottagers
239 McRae Drive
Toronto, Ontario
M4G IT7"
"Mr. Jim Crosscombe, President
Ontario Cycling Association
1185 Eglington, Avenue E., Suite 408
North York, Ontario
M3C 3C6"
"Mr. Ron Purchase, General Manager
Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs
106 Saunders Road, Unit 12
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 9A8"
"Ms. Sybil Goruk, CAO
Greater Barrie Chamber of Commerce
89 Dunlop St. E., Suite 20 I
Barrie, Ontario
L4M lAT'
"Mr. Don Stevenson
Ontario Federation of Agriculture
110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL I XO"
"Ms. Peggy Wong
Partner
The Resource Management Consulting Group
6 Oakridge Drive
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 5N7"
"Mr. Jack Irwin
Manager of Real Estate
Petro Canada
3275 Rebecca Street
Oakville, Ontario
L6L 6N5"
"Mr. John La Brie, Director
Physical Resources
Georgian College
One Georgian Drive
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 3X9"
Name
Ms. Dibble
Mrs. Moore
Mr. Crosscombe
Mr. Purchase
Ms. Goruk
Mr. Stevenson
Ms. Wong
Mr. Irwin
Mr. La Brie
MUNICIP AL LETTER
MUNICIP AL LETTER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 5, 2002
Our Ref: CN29900147
From Essa Road to Ravfield Street - Widen from 6 lanes to 10 lanes.
From Rayfield Street to Junction at Hi2hway 11- Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes.
Ms. Helen MacRae, Clerk
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1 XO
The improvements also include installation of concrete median barrier, interchange
reconfigurations and improvements, construction of noise barriers at warranted locations,
installation of high-mast illumination at required locations, and improvements to highway
drainage. Closure of the existing northbound and southbound rest areas along Highway 400 in the
project limits is also proposed in order to satisfy safety and operational requirements.
Dear Ms. MacRae:
Re: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kID to Junction of Highway 11
Preliminary Design I Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P. 30-95-00
URS Cole Sherman on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is undertaking a
Planning and Preliminary Design Study to examine improvements to Highway 400 from 1 km
south of Highway 89 northerly 30 km to the junction of Highway 11 in the County of Simcoe
(refer to the attached key map).
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class
Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The study process
consists of five major components including: (1) a review of the Transportation Needs
Assessment; (2) generate, evaluate and select the preferred planning alternative; (3) generate and
assess preliminary design alternative; (4) evaluate and select preferred preliminary design
alternative; and (5) develop preferred preliminary design. Opportunities for public input are
being provided throughout the course of the project.
The purpose of this study is to determine the nature of improvements required to address traffic
operation, capacity and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The need for
drainage, illumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements have also been
examined as part of this project. Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements
have been developed and evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution.
Comments received will be used to review the evaluation of alternatives and determine any
additional mitigation requirements. The results and any follow-up to the PIC will be documented
in the Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR). The TESR will be made available for
review for a mandatory 30-day period. Notice of the availability of the TESR for review will be
placed in local newspapers and sent directly to individuals on the mailing list.
An External Team Meeting has been arranged to provide the opportunity to review and discuss
the evaluation of alternatives and the technically preferred alternatives for improvements to the
Highway 400 corridor.
Prior to completion of the review period for the TESR, any individual who has outstanding
concerns may request that the project be "bumped-up" to an individual environmental assessment
requiring a formal review and approval process. Once the review process for the TESR is
completed, and concerns have been addressed, the project may proceed to the design and
construction stages.
The External Team Meeting will be held on:
Tuesday June 25, 2002
1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - Churchill Conference Centre
20 Fairview Road, Barrie
You are encouraged to attend the External Team Meeting and to provide us with your views and
concerns so that they can be addressed in the study. Please notify the undersigned by June II,
2002 if you plan to attend the meeting.
Following the External Team Meeting, the first of two scheduled Public Information Centres will
be held from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Design and Construction Reports (DCRs) may be prepared for portions of the project to
document the design and construction details including any necessary follow-up mitigating
approaches to address public concerns. The DCRs will be made available for public information
as necessary but are not eligible for "bump-up".
Comments and information regarding this study are being collected to assist the Ministry of
Transportation in meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This material
will be maintained on file for use during the study and may be included in study documentation.
Should you require further information please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Yours very truly,
URS COLE. SHERMAN & ASSOCIATES LTD.
The preferred alternative includes mainline widening of Highway 400 as follows:
From Highway 89 to Essa Road - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes (including property protection
for up to 10 lanes).
?z~
Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
cc: K. Boudreau, Project Engineer - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
J. Foster, Environmental Planner - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
Att.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Municipal List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
2183 Innisfil Beach Road
Innisfil, Ontario
L9S lA3"
"Mr. Gavin Watson
Engineering Technologist
Town of Innisfil
2183 Innisfil Beach Road
Innisfil, Ontario
L9S 1A3"
"Chief Scott Griffith
Fire Depanment
Innisfil Fire and Rescue Service
780 Innisfil Beach Road, P.O. Box 5000
Innisfil, Ontario
L9S 20"
"Ms. Patricia Middlebrook
derk and Manager of Administration
Town of New Tecurnseth
Box 910, 10 Wellington Street
Alliston, Ontario
L9R lA1"
"Mr. Stephen Naylor
Manager of Planning
Town of New Tecurnseth
Box 910, 10 Wellington Street
Alliston, Ontario
L9R lAl "
"Mr. George DeGroot
Director of Public Works
Town of New Tecurnseth
Box 910,10 Wellington Street
Alliston, Ontario
L9R lA1"
"Mrs. Juanita Dempster- E vans
Town of Bradford West Gwillirnbury
Box 160,61 Holland Street E.
Bradford, Ontario
L3Z 2A8"
"Mr. Ron Kneeshaw
Superintendent of Public Works
Town of Bradford West Gwillirnbury
Box 419,
Bradford, Ontario
L3Z 2A9"
"Mr. Eric Hodgin, Town Planner
Town of Bradford West Gwillirnbury
Box 160,61 Holland Street E.
Bradford, Ontario
L3Z 2A8"
"Ms. Brenda Sigouin, derk
Township of Essa
Box 10
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Municipal List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
Address
"Ms. lielen MacRae, derk
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO"
"Mr. Ian Bender
Director of Planning
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO"
"Mr. Bill Brown, P. Eng.
County Engineer
Road and Engineering
County of Simcoe
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO"
"Mr. John Craig, derk
Gty of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M4T5"
"Mr. James Taylor
Director of Planning
Gty of Barrie
70 Collier Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5"
"Mr. Rick Newlove
Manager of Planning and Policy Services
Municipal Works Department
Gty of Barrie
70 Collier Street, Box 400
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5"
"Mr. Ronald D. Hickey
Fire Chief
Gty of Barrie
70 Collier Street, P.O. Box 400
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 4T5"
"Mr. Paul Landry, derk
Town of Innisfil
2147 Innisfil Beach Road
P.O. Box 5000
Stroud, Ontario
LOL 2MO"
"Mr. Wayne Young
Manager of Operational Services
Town of Innisfil
1
Name
Ms. MacRae
Mr. Bender
Mr. Brown
Mr. Craig
Mr. Taylor
Mr. Newlove
Mr. Hickey
Mr. Landry
2
Mr. Young
Mr. Watson
Chief Griffith
Ms. Middlebrook
Mr. Naylor
Mr. DeGroot
Mrs. Dempster-Evans
Mr. Kneesahw
Mr. Hodgin
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Municipal List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
3
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Municipal List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Angus, Ontario
LOM 1BO"
"Ms. CDlleen Phillips
Manager of Planning & Development
Township of Essa
5786 CDW1ty Road 21
Utopia, Essa Township, Ontario
LOM 1 TO"
"Mr. Greg Murphy
Manager of Public Works and Parks
Township of Essa
5786 CDW1ty Road 21
Utopia, Ontario
LOM 1 TO"
"Ms. Eleanor Rath, Oerk
Township of Springwater
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1XO"
"Ms. Elaine Claimcroff
Planning CDordinator
Township of Springwater
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL 1XO"
"Mr. Donald Priest
Superintendent of Public Works
Township of Springwater
1110 Highway 26
Midhurst, Ontario
LOL lXO"
"Ms. Vicki Robertson
Township of Oro Mendonte
Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO"
"Mr. Keith Mathieson
Manager of Public Works
Township of Oro Mendonte
Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO"
"Ms. Andria Leigh, Planner
Township of Oro Mendonte
Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO"
"Ms. Judi Brouse
Director of Long Range Planning
Planning and Economic Development
District of Muskoka
70 Pine Street
Ms. Sigouin
Bracebridge, Ontario
P1L 1N3"
Ms. Brouse
Ms. Phillips
Mr. Murphy
Ms. Rath
Ms. Claimcroff
Mr. Priest
Ms. Robertson
Mr. Mathieson
Ms. Leigh
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PUBLIC LETTER
PUBLIC LETTER
June 5, 2002
Our Ref: CN29900147
From Essa Road to Bavfield Street - Widen from 6 lanes to 10 lanes.
From Bavfield Street to Junction at Hi2:hwav 11 - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes.
Dear Sir / Madam:
The improvements also include installation of concrete median barrier, interchange reconfigurations and
improvements, construction of noise barriers at warranted locations, installation of high-mast illumination at
required locations, and improvements to highway drainage. Closure of the existing northbound and
southbound rest areas along Highway 400 in the project limits is also proposed in order to satisfy safety and
operational requirements.
Re: Highway 400 Planning Study
From 1.0 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kIn to Junction of Highway 11
Preliminary Design / Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B' Project
GW.P.30-95-00
URS Cole Shennan on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is undertaking a Planning
and Preliminary Design Study to examine improvements to Highway 400 from 1 kIn south of Highway 89
northerly 30 kIn to the junction of Highway 11 in the County of Simcoe (refer to the attached key map).
The purpose of this study is to detennine the nature of improvements required to addre~s traf~c op~rat!on,
capacity and safety needs for this section of the Highway 400 corridor. The nee~ for dramage, Ill~mma~lOn,
roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements have also been exammed as part of thIS project.
Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements have been developed and evaluated to
determine the most appropriate solution.
This study is following the approved planning process for a Group B project under the Class Environmental
Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities (2000). The study process consists of five major
components including: (1) a review of the Transportation Needs Assessment; (2) generate, evaluate and
select the preferred planning alternative; (3) generate and assess preliminary design alternative; (4) evaluate
and select preferred preliminary design alternative; and (5) develop preferred preliminary design.
Opportunities for public input are being provided throughout the course of the project.
Comments received will be used to review the evaluation of alternatives and determine any additional
mitigation requirements. The results and any follow-up to the PIC will be documented in the Transportation
Environmental Study Report (TESR). The TESR will be made available for review for a mandatory 30-day
period. Notice of the availability of the TESR for review will be placed in local newspapers and sent directly
to individuals on the mailing list.
The first round of Public Infonnation Centres (PICs) was held in May 2001 with the focus on the
identification of project needs and reasonable alternatives within the proje~t limits. ~lternatives ~or
widening Highway 400 (including an express - collector system through BarrIe) and possIble alternatIve
interchange configurations were presented.
The second round of Public Infonnation Centres has now been arranged to allow the public to review and
provide comments on the evaluation of alternatives and the technically preferred alternatives for
improvements to this section of the Highway 400 corridor.
Prior to completion of the review period for the TESR, any individual who has outstanding concerns may
request that the project be "bumped-up" to an individual environmental assessment requiring a formal review
and approval process. Once the review process for the TESR is completed, and concerns have been
addressed, the project may proceed to the design and construction stages.
Design and Construction Reports (DCRs) may be prepared for portions of the project to document the design
and construction details including any necessary follow-up mitigating approaches to address public concerns.
The DCRs will be made available for public infonnation as necessary but are not eligible for "bump-up".
The Infonnation Centre will be held as follows:
Tuesday June 25, 2002 Wednesday June 26, 2002
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - Churchill Conference Centre Stroud Community Centre
20 Fairview Road, Barrie 7883 Y onge Street, Innisfil
You are encouraged to attend the Infonnation Centre and to provide us with your views and concerns so that
they can be addressed in the study.
The preferred alternative includes mainline widening of Highway 400 as follows:
From Highway 89 to Essa Road - Widen from 6 lanes to 8 lanes (including property protection for up to 10
lanes).
Comments and infonnation regarding this study are being collected to assist the Ministry of Transportation in
meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file for
use during the study and may be included in study documentation.
Should you require further infonnation please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Yours very truly,
URS COLE, SHERMAN & AS SOCIA TES LIMITED
Len Kozachuk, P. Eng.
Senior Project Manager
cc: K. Boudreau, Project Engineer - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
J. Foster, Environmental Planner - MTO Southwest Region, Planning & Design
Att.
N.lplanninglen29900147 hwy400IPICIPIC #2lMerge Lists & LettersIPublie Letter doc
Nlplanninglen29900147 hwy400IPICIPIC #2lMerge Lists & LettersIPublic Leueedoe
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
"Mr. Howard V. Walker FRAIC
1506 - 140 Dunlop St. E.
Barrie, Ontario
L4 M 6H9"
"Mr. Lome Smart
35 Rose Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 2T3"
"Ms. Lynn DoHin
Councillor - Ward 7, Town of Innisfil
P.O. Box 409
Cookstown, Ontario
LOL lLO"
"Mr. Sal Mortelliti
3445 14th Line
Cookstown, Ontario
LOL lLO"
"Tim & Eileen Bancroft-Wilson
3573 6th Line
Innisfill, Ontario
L9S 3L 7"
"Ms. Adrian Cowman
127 Tupper St. E.
Alliston, Ontario
L9R IGl"
"Mr. Brian Van Dommele
38 Strathmore Boulevard
Toronto, Ontario
M4J 1 P2"
"Mr. Angelo Mastrodicasa
Moreland Properties Inc.
922 Sheppard Avenue West
North York, Ontario
M3H 2T6"
"Mr. Mike Sullivan
7 Drake Drive
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 8W3"
"Ms. Joan Marie Pringle
238 Bayfield Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 3B7"
"Ms. Cindy Heran
c/o Morguard Investments
Unit 1411, 64 Cedar Point Drive
Barrie, Ontario
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
1
Address
"Mr. Ralph Bond
B.A. Consulting Group
45 St. Clair Avenue West, Suite 300
Toronto, ON
M4V IK9"
"Mr. Ralph Holt
50 Hemford Crescent
Toronto, Ontario
M5B 2S5"
"Mr. Russell Godwin
Northwest Atlantic Canada Inc.
15 Lesmill Road
Toronto, Ontario
M3B 2T3"
"Ms. Jessie Rowe
38 Burton Avenue
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 2R4"
"Mr. John Ayliffe
3345 Line 4
Cookstown, Ontario
LOL ILO"
"Mr. Jacob Huyer
336 Y onge Street, Unit 346
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 4C8"
"Mr. Paul Thompson
R.R. 1
Hillsdale, Ontario
LOL I VO"
"Canpro Investment
Bayfield Mall
Attention: Ralph Chestennan
320 Bayfield Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 3Cl"
"Mr. John Cancilla
I 02 Violet Street
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 9M8"
"Sam Concilla
27 Shoreview Drive
Barrie, Ontario
L4M IG2"
Name
Mr. Bond
Mr. Holt
Mr. Godwin
Ms. Rowe
Mr. Ayliffe
Mr. Huyer
Mr. Thompson
Mr. Chestennan
Mr. Cancilla
Mr. Concilla
Mr. Howard V. Walker FRAIC
Mr. Smart
Ms. DoHin
Mr. MorteHiti
Tim & Eileen Bancroft-Wilson
Ms. Cowman
Mr. VanDommele
Mr. Mastrodicasa
Mr. Sullivan
Ms. Pringle
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List 3
I (ReI No. CN29900147)
L4N 5R 7" Ms. Heran
"Mr. Mario Delgobbo
I 156 Lamar St.
Maple, Ontario
L6A 1 A6" Mr. Delgobbo
I "Ms. Karen Stewart
R.R.l
Thornton, Ontario
I LOL 2NO" Ms. Stewart
"Mr. William Joseph Johnson
937 Sadler Crescent
I Ottawa, Ontario
K2B 5H6" Mr. Johnson
"Ms. Brenda Johnston
I 364 Livingstone St. W.
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 7K7" Ms. Johnston
I "Mr. Howard Walker
140 Dunlop Street E. unit 1506
I Barrie, Ontario
L4M 6M9" Mr. Walker
"Mr. Tim Ross
I 29 Jane Crescent
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 3T9" Mr. Ross
I "Mr. Jack Dougan
Borden Ladner Gervais
40 King Street West, Suite 4400
I Toronto, Ontario
M5H 3Y4" Mr. Dougan
"Ms. Claudia Eiselt
I 119 Cheltenham Road
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 6S6" Ms. Eiselt
I "Mr. Gord Profit
7 Glenhuron Drive
Barrie, Ontario
I L4M 6T4" Mr. Profit
"Ms. Janine Armstrong
100 Chieftain Crescent
I Barrie, Ontario
L4N 613" Ms. Armstrong
"Mr. Ron Collingbourne
I 4 Fitzroy Terrace
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 2Z3" Mr. Collingbourne
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List
(ReINo. CN29900147)
"Mr. Jim Willis
94 Lillian Crescent
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 5HT'
"Ms. Cyndee Jackson
117 Chieftain Cres.
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 6J2"
"Ms. Wendy Hill
34 Columbia Road
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 8C7"
"Mrs. Linda Bumstead
519 Grove Street East
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 5Z3"
"Mr. John McGee
556 Leacock Drive
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 7Bl"
"Mr. Dan Knezacek
17 Pratt Road
Barrie, Ontario
L4 M 2K9"
"Ayla Demiray
45 Shirley Ave.
Barrie, Ontario
L4N IM8"
"Mr. Scott McCrindle
33 Hodgson Dr.
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 7Z2"
"Mr. Gord McNeice
42 Patricia Avenue
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 5S6"
"G. M. Barz
63 Ottaway A venue
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 2Xl"
"Mr. Frank B. Petty
42 Ottaway Ave.
Barrie, Onto
L4M 2W9"
"Mr. Eric Hollerer
General Manager
4
Mr. Willis
Ms. Jackson
Ms. Hill
Mrs. Bumstead
Mr. McGee
Mr. Knezacek
Ayla Demiray
Mr. Hodgson
Mr. McNeice
G.M. Barz
Mr. Petty
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
Holiday Inn
20 Fairview Road
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 4P3" Mr. Hollerer
"Mr. Clayton Groh
30 Ottaway Ave.
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 2W7" Mr. Groh
"Mr. Peter Osmond
Development Institute in Collingwood
P.O. Box 576, Station Main
Collingwood, Ontario
L9W 4E8" Mr. Osmond
"Hope Park
259 Bayfield Street
Barrie, ON
L4M 3B8" Hope Park
"Mr. Robert McTavish
1 08 Charles Street
Milton Ontario
L9T 2G9" Mr. McTavish
"Canadian Tire Corporation Limited
Attention: Mr. David J. Drake
2180 Yonge Street, P.O. Box 770, Station K
Toronto, Ontario
M4P 2V8" Mr. Drake
"Ms. Shara Dalby
273 Tiffin Street, Suite 102
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 2N3" Ms. Dalby
"Brillinger Investments Limited
Jerome Etkin Limited
Alamo Investments Limited
9675 Yonge Street, 2nd Floor
Richmond Hill, Ontario
L4C 1 V7" Sir or Madam
"Ms. Daphne Walton
5 Bellevue Cres.
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 2S9" Ms. Walton
"Mr. Jacob Huyer
336 Younge Street, Unit 346
Barrie Ontario
L4N 4C8" Mr. Huyer
"Mr. Paul Thompson
RRl
5
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
Hilldale, Ontario
LOL 1 VO" Mr. Thompson
"Canpro Investment
Attention: Ralph Chesterman
Bayfield Mall, 320 Bayfield Street
Barrie Ontario
L4M 3Cl" Mr. Chesterman
"Ms. Ruth Davis
29 Patrica Avenue
Barrie, Ontario
N4M 3J6" Ms. Davis
"Mr. David Norman Latour
21 Claremont Crescent, RR 1
Orillia; Ontario
L3V 6Hl,j Mr. Latour
"Mr. Tim Arnott
B.A. Group
45 St. Clair West
Toronto, Ontario
M4V lK9" Mr. Arnott
"Mr. Paul Scargall
Worden Ladner Gervais Ltd.
Scotia Plaza, 40 King Street W.
Toronto, Ontario
M5H 3Y4" Mr. Scargall
"Mr. Grahame Davis
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
120 Bayview Parkway, Box 282
Newmarket, Ontario
L3Y 4Xl" Mr. Davis
"Weston Consulting Group Inc.
Attention: Mr. Mark Emery
201 Millway Ave., Unit 19
Vaughan, Ontario
L4K 5K8" Mr. Emery
"Ms. Jan Robertson
81 Wellington Street West
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 1 K8" Ms. Robertson
"Ms. Lillian Guolla
45 Jane Crescent
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 3T9" Ms. Guolla
"Mr. Jacob Huger
336 Y onge Street, Unit 346
Barrie, Ontario
6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hwy. 400 - Highway 89 Northerly to the Junction at Highway 11 Public List
(Ref No. CN29900147)
7
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
L4N 4C8"
"Mr. Brammer Long
Principal, The Keg Steakhouse and Bar
395 Dunlop St. W.
Barrie, Ontario
L4Nl C3"
"Mr. Brent Clarkson
MHBC Planning Ltd.
545 North Rivermede Road, Suite 105
Concord, Ontario
L4K 4Hl"
"Mr. Dale Pearson
2 Ottaway Avenue
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 2W7"
"Mr. Howard Bruton
3 7 Weeping Willow Drive
Innisfil, Ontario
L9S IPl"
"Mr. & Mrs. Djoke & Willy Huyssen
88 Chieftain Crescent
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 613"
"Mr. Stanley A. Symonds
89 Shirley Avenue
Barrie, Ontario .
L4N 1 M8"
"Adriaan Karmel
92 Chieftain Crescent
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 613"
Mr. Huger
Mr. Long
Mr. Clarkson
Mr. Pearson
Mr. Bruton
APPENDIX B
Minutes of Meeting
Mr. & Mrs. Djoke & Willy Huyssen
Mr. Symonds
Adriann Karmel
Public Information Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
URS
CQle Shwm3~
URS
URS
MINUTES OF MEETING
Cole Sherman
Cole Sherman
Page 2
PROJECT: Highway 400 Planning Study - Hwy 89 to Jct MEETING No.
Hwy 11 - WP 30-95-00
PROJECT No. CN29900147 DATE: April 3, 2002
LOCATION: Barrie City Hall- 3rd Floor Boardroom TIME: 1 :30 p.m.
PURPOSE: Project Status Update with Barrie Senior Staff
PRESENT: Peter Lee - City of Barrie, City Administrator
Rick Newlove - City of Barrie, Acting Director of Engineering
Wendell McArthur - City of Barrie, Acting Director of Engineering
Richard Forward - City of Barrie, Senior Project Manager
Bill Gilbert - City of Barrie, Senior Engineer
George Kaveckas - City of Barrie, Traffic, Transit & Parking Manager
Al Lacey - Read, Voorhees and Associates Limited
Kevin Boudreau - MTO, Project Engineer
Len Kozachuk - URS Cole Sherman, Consultant Project Manager
Items Description
Comments were received during the discussion:
· The City is looking to extend Harvie Road easterly across Highway
400 and connect to Big Bay Point Road. The City feels it may be
advantageous to have at least limited access available at this new
crossing, to serve as an alternative to Essa Road both during and
after construction of the Essa Road interchange improvements.
MTO will consider noting the City's plans for the future road crossing
on the PIC displays. MTO will advise City shortly.
· The City can accept Alternative 1 at Duckworth Street. The City is
satisfied that, with the widening of Duckworth through the
interchange, the proposed reconfigured intersection of
DuckworthlCundles will operate at acceptable levels in future. The
city also recognizes that traffic operation issues on
DuckworthlCundles extend beyond the Highway 400 interchange
area.
Items Description
Action by:
Following introductions of all in attendance, Kevin Boudreau briefly
reviewed project limits and status: The Project Team is in the process of
identifying the preferred alternatives for mainline and interchanges.
Once the OPSEU strike is resolved, MTO intends to work towards
presenting the preferred alternatives through internal meetings and
meetings with various Agencies, the Municipal Team and area Councils.
As well, two Public 1m ormation Centres (PICs) will be scheduled to
present the findings for comment.
Kevin also noted that Duckworth Street has been the subject of much
discussion between the City and the Project Team. The City's views on
the Ministry's position, as expressed in recent correspondence, will be
discussed at this meeting.
Len Kozachuk briefly reviewed the alternatives considered for mainline
widening. Through Barrie, a core-distributor system has been evaluated,
along with a 10-lane widening.
Len also discussed the rationale, and some of the advantages and
disadvantages apparent in the short list of alternative configurations
evaluated at each of the interchanges in Barrie.
· Understanding the timing of the construction of the Highway 400
improvements is crucial for Barrie's capital expenditure planning.
MTO does not have a set timetable for implementing any of the
improvements in the Highway 400 Planning Study.
· The City places a high priority on improvements to the Dunlop Street
interchange. Through its review of the implementation of the
possible improvements, Cole, Sherman would suggest the City
consider completing whatever Municipal EA's it can in advance of
the MTO construction, to reduce the likelihood of delays to
implementation. In particular, the City should consider advancing
the Anne Street widening and the Harvie Road extension.
· The City will advise MTO if Barrie Council would prefer a
presentation either prior to or following the PICs.
L. Kozachuk
Submitted by:
PLEASE NOTE: If your records of this meeting do not agree with this document, or if there are any omissions, please advise the
writer at once, otherwise the contents of this document shall be assumed accurate and correct.
Distribution:
K. Boudreau - MTO
J. Foster - MTO
R. Newlove - City of Barrie
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates Ltd.
75 Commerce Valley Drive East
Thomhill, Ontario, Canada L3T 7N9
Tel: 905,882,4401
Fax: 905,882.4399
N_\pWmIng\cn2lillilOO1.7~umenlslMelllings~APf302dcx
Action by:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MTO
Barrie
N \ planning \ cn29900J 47 hwy400\ Documenls\ MI't'tU'lgs \ MUI\IC1paJ\ Barrre Apr.302.doo:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning And Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kIn South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kIn to the Junction of Highway 11
County of Simcoe, G.W.P. 30-95-00
APPENDIX C
Displays / Information Package
Public Information Centre Round #2 Summary Report
June 2002
URS
COie: Shermar:
@ Ontario
URS
Welcome to the Second Round of
Public Information Centres
Cole Sherman
for the
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 K.M SOUTH OF HrGHW A Y 89
NORTHERLY 30 KM TO THE JUNCTION OF HrGHW A Y 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
NORTHERLY 30 K.M TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
Please Sign In
Preliminary Design
Class Environmental Assessment, Group 'B'
Members of the Project Team are available to discuss and answer any questions you may
have.
Purpose of this Public Information Centre
Public Information Centre #2
The purpose of this Information Centre is to present the results from the first Public
Information Centre and to present the evaluation of alternatives and the technically
preferred alternatives. Major elements presented today include:
. Project Limits
. Study Schedule
. Class Environmental Assessment Process
. Study Purpose and Problem Statement
. Summary of Issues and Concerns Raised During the First Public Information Centre
. Analysis and Evaluation of Alternatives
. Technically Preferred Alternatives
. What's Next
June 2002
The Project Team encourages you to fill out a comment sheet recording your comments
and concerns.
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Sherman
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
(@ . Ontario
URS
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Ministry of Transportation
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Study Area
Background
....-- ...................................--............................
t('v'P;""\
.
"ftl1?-
~
The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) initiated a Planning and Preliminary Design
Study to identify improvements required to address traffic operation, capacity and safety
needs associated with the Highway 400 corridor. The need for drainage, illumination,
roadside safety, structural and interchange improvements were also examined as part of
the study. Reasonable alternatives to address the required improvements were
developed and evaluated to determine the most appropriate solution.
.-.-- ...............................................-..........-.....---....--
The objectives of this study are to:
. Determine the existing and projected future (2011) traffic on Highway 400;
. Identify the capacity and operational needs;
Project Limits
G.W.P.30-95-00
. Evaluate and select alternatives to address identified needs; and,
. Submit a Transportation Environmental Study Report as required under the
approved Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation Facilities
(2000) prior to proceeding with the detail design and construction process.
Not to Scale
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM Sourn OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
@C>ntario
Cole Sherman
Cole Sherman
Regional Transportation Needs
Project Need and Justification
This area map shows the transportation needs in a regional perspective:
. Recreation and population I employment growth in the north
. Industrial and population I employment growth pressures in the south
The purpose of this study was to determine the nature of improvements required to
address existing and future traffic operating capacity and safety needs, as well as the
need for drainage, illumination, roadside safety, structural and interchange
improvements.
Highway 400 Mainline:
Currently the. section of Highway 400 within the project limits experiences congestion
during peak travel periods. In addition, roadside safety, illumination and drainage
features require improvement to meet current ministry standards.
Due to the anticipated future development within the City of. Barrie and surrounding
area, traffic operations in the Highway 400 corridor are expected to deteriorate rapidly.
Sections on Highway 400 are operating poorly during peak travel periods. As traffic
volumes continue to increase, congestion on Highway 400 will worsen. This will lead to
increased driver frustration, potential for collisions, trip delays and the associated waste
of energy resources, increased cost of moving goods and significant diversion of traffic
to other adjacent roadways.
Highway 400 Interchanges:
All interchanges within the project limits have traffic operations issues that warrant
improvements.
Traffic volumes at all interchange ramps will exceed capacity by 2011. This could result
in queuing onto Highway 400 mainline, which would also negatively affect traffic
operations and safety.
Display boards describe the existing and future conditions at interchanges within the
project limits, are included in this presentation.
@ Ontirio
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Ministry oi Transportation
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
@Ontario
URS
CoJe Sherman
Cole Sherman
Ministry oi Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Summary of the Technically Preferred Alternatives
Environmental Assessment Process
The following lists the technically preferred alternatives and recommended
improvements to Highway 400 within the study limits:
This study is following MTO's "Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) for
Provincial Transportation Facilities", which was approved under the Ontario
Environmental Assessment Act in Fall 1999. The Class EA defmes groups of projects
and activities, and the associated environmental assessment process requirements which
MTO has committed to following for each group of project. Provided that this process is
followed, projects and activities included under the Class EA do not require formal
review and approval under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.
Highway 400 Technically Preferred Mainline Alternative
· From Highway 89 to Essa Road - Widen to the west from 6 lanes to 8 with property
protection for 10 lanes, with concrete median barrier
· From Essa Road to Bayfield Street - Widen about the centreline from 6 lanes to 10
lanes, with concrete median barrier
· From Bayfield Street to Junction at Highway 11 - Widen about the existing
centreline from 6 lanes to 8 lanes, with concrete median barrier
This project is following the Class EA process for Group 'B' projects. The steps
involved in the Class EA process are shown in the next display.
Highway 400 Technically Preferred Interchange Alternatives
The purpose of this Public Information Centre is to update you on the progress of the
project and to obtain comments on the technically preferred alternatives and the
proposed mitigation measures. Comments received will be used to review the evaluation
of alternatives and determine any additional mitigation requirements.
· Highway 89 - Pardo A Interchange
· Innisfil Beach Road - Pardo A Interchange
· Molson Park Drive - Operational Improvements
· Essa Road - Pardo A Interchange
· Dunlop Street - Pardo B Interchange
· Bayfield Street - Pardo A (SB) / Diamond (NB) Interchange
· Duckworth Street - Parclo A Interchange
The results and any follow-up to the PIC will be documented in the Transportation
Environmental Study Report (TESR). The TESR will be made available for review for a
mandatory 30-day period. Notice of the availability of the TESR for review will be
placed in local newspapers and sent directly to individuals on the mailing list.
Prior to completion of the review period for the TESR, any individual who has
outstanding concerns may request that the project be "bumped-up" to an individual
environmental assessment requiring a fonnal review and approval process. Once the
review process for the TESR is completed, and concerns have been addressed, the
project may proceed to the design and construction stages.
All of the above interchanges will be constructed to allow for potential 10 lane widening.
In addition to the mainline and interchange modifications, the following improvements
to Highway 400 are recommended:
· Provide concrete median barrier throughout
· Construct new noise barriers at warranted locations
· Install "high-mast" illumination north of Molson Park Drive to Duckworth Street
and improve illumination at all interchanges
· Replace the median sewer and improve the culverts and drainage as necessary
· New pavement on the existing section of Highway 400
Design and Construction Reports (DCRs) may be prepared for portions of the project to
document the design and construction details including any necessary follow-up
mitigating approaches to address public concerns. The DCRs will be made available for
public infonnation as necessary but are not eligible for "bump-up".
@ Ontario
HIGHWA Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM Sourn OF HrGHW A Y 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KMSournOF HrGHWAY89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HrGHW A Y 11
00 Ontario
URS
Ministry of Transportation
Cole Srlerman
Ministry of Transportation
Cole Shen~an
Overview of Class EA (2000) Process for Group 'B' Projects
PLANNING
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
Review of
Transportation
Needs
Assessment
Generate,
Evaluate and
Select
Preferred
Planning
Alternative
Generate and
Assess
Preliminary
Design
Alternatives
Develop
Preferred
Preliminary
Deslgu
Alternative
Evaluate and
Select
Preferred
Preliminary
. Design
Alternative
Environmental Protection in Preliminary Design
.
.
.
.
.
.
Transportation
Environmental
Study Report
(TESR) and Notice
of Completion ·
Design and
Construction Repod
(DCR) in Detail
Design ..
. Bump Up Opportullity
Ellds Followillg Completioll
of 30-Day Review Period
(or TESR
\,
.. DCR is Optiollal- No
Bump-Up Opportullity
GV Ontario
URS
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Coie Shennan
I Study Schedule I Class EA Process I
The following chart outlines the major tasks to be completed in the next few months.
""._m..".,..__..,.~...._m"_"___"_''''''m~~
Generate and
Evaluate
Alternatives to the
____!!~~~rta~
Generate
Interchange and
Widening
Alternatives
---"'-~.__..._-
First Round of
Public Information
Centres
.....~...._..~..._.._."_H_.._____.__
Evaluate
Interchange and
Widening
__~~~rnati~
Technically
Preferred
Alternative
Second Round of
Public Information
Centres
~-~"--'
Refinement to the
Technically
PrefelTed
Alternative and
Prepare
Preliminary Design
File TESR for
Public Review
--_....----..._.--''*-_..."_._._-_.,~....._--_._._-
*
.-....----+--...-----.-
t2J OntgriQ
Ministry of Transportation
-
-
-
HIGHW AY400PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Cole Sherman
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.~ ;; -
-
.,... c:> c:>
..., M M
"""
.." '" '"
u=: (:Q (:Q
~ " "
'" ~
~
"" ""
~
0
'0
.&:i
~
4)
r.1l .~
...
'E '"
s
s
Q) :s
8 '"
'"
.-
'"
Q) 4)
~ '0
.~ =
~ .~
Q
cr <;::
4)
~ ~
;..,
-
'0
on '"
c..
'"
~ Q
.~ ~
~ I.)
-
Q
Q) I.)
....,
"0 0
...
c..
.~ .....
~ 0
0lJ
.S
.5
-
4)
..d
~
,,"
.:i-'r1~o~
:-<> "'......
-$'~v~
c::
<13
E
~
(J)
I~
58
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Highway 89 Interchange
Service entrance
nom off-ramp not
desirable
Ramp junction over capacity bY 2011;'
which will affect fi:eeway operations
(Le. reduction in operating speeds,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
-
.~ c:>
.,... N
..., ~
"".. "
.." <:::
u=: -<
"
'"
~
""
~.
'11~
"9"., .~ "" ;;
c:>
.,.... c:> M
..., M ..
"".. ...
.." '" <:::
u=: (:Q -<
" ...
'" '"
~ ~
"" ""
Ramp terminal identified as
a collision prone area
. 6 injury collisions
. 14 tum related collisions
Collision rate:&om 1996-1999 was 2.7
Provincia! Average Rate is 0.70
. 2 fatal collisions
. 49 rear end collisions
.47 lost conttol single vehicle collisions
. 23 sideswipe collisions
By 2009, ramp junction will
operate poorly during peak
travel period, resulting in
significant speed reduction
on li'eeway
<::t....
~~
.:i-O .~ -co c:>
2f c:>
.,... c:> N
'V~ ..., M ~
""..
'V... ..... '" ...
u=: (:Q <:::
.v'+- -<
~ ~ ""
O~ c:> ;; ... ...
~.. .,.... c:> M ~ ~
..., M ..
~ "'..
..... '" ... -co GO
u=: (:Q <:::
-<
... "
'" ~
~
"" ""
<::t....
:...~
~'lJ .~
~~ ;;
.,... c:> c:>
~. ..., M N
"""
.." '" '"
~ u=: (:Q i:C
~ "'....
'lJ'1I ~.
~ <f
~~ O'lJ ... "
.~ "" ;; '" !
." c:; c:> ~
,,<:><:>'\i c:,,~ .,.0= Q M "" 00
..., M ..
""..
..... '" ...
u=: i:C <:::
-<
... ...
~ ~
"" ...
...
4'lJ"
<::t....
~O~ .~ ;; -
-
.,.0= c:> c:>
"00, ~ ,::,<:> ..., N N
Co"
-<y .." '" '"
.:i-'I1~ ~."O U=: i:C i:C
.~ '" ;;
:-<><f Q
.:;;.0() "O~ ".0= Q N
..., N ..
c.... '" ... " ...
.."
c:,,~ u=: I:tI <::: '" ~
-< ~
"" 00
" "
'" '"
~ ~
"" ...
>-
"'0
::s
......
C/J
OJ)
=
.-
=
=
~
-
~
o
o
~
>-
~
~
..=
OJ)
.-
~
SIMCOE ROAD 89
3 Lanes on Highway 89
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
0'1
00_
;..,-
~:>.
~'"
..d;::
.~..d
:I:.~
.....:I:
0.....
..dO
~g
0._
OOt)
S=
::4~
_ 4)
S;9
00
...-
~
Signalized intersection operations
expected to be satisfactory in 2011
All approach volumes exceed
intersection capacity, resultUig
in excessive delay for all
approaches, which may result
in queuing and affect operation
of ramps
By 2009, ramp junction will operate poorly
during peak travel period, resulting in
significant speed reduction on freeway
Ramp junction over capacity by 2009,
which will affi:ct li'eeway operations
(Le. reduction in operating speeds,.
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Ramp tenninaJ identified as a
collision prone area
· 6 injury collisions
. 8 turn related collisions
. 5 ....ar end collisions
f
o 6
.- ...
"- t1!
CO 8-
+oJ l!!
C:~
0;
@)j
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2009
o
Scale L..
50 100m
"j ~
@ Ontario
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 K.m South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
Ministry of Transportation
Cole Sherman
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Innisfil Beach Road Interchange
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Molson Park Drive Interchange
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect fteeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Collision rate ftom 1996-1999 was 2.8
Provincial Average Rate is 0.70
. S8 rear end collisions
. SO lost control single vehicle collisions
.36 sideswipe collisions
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect fteeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds,
, ramp queuing and increased congestion)
f
Ramp geometry
does not meet current
standards
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity. resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches, which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect fteeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
SIMCOE ROAD 21
-- -=-
-- --
=
=
3 Lanes on lDnisfiJ. Beach
Road is insufficient for future
lrafilc operations
All approach volumes exceed ~on
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches, which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
Reconstruction of Molson Park ramps
was initiated in October 1998 and
completed in August 2000
MOLSON PARK DRIVE
By 2006, ramp junction will operate poorly
during peak 1ravel period, resulting in
significant speed reduction on fteeway
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches, which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity. resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches, which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect fteeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
By 2006, ramp junction will operate poorly
during peak travel period, resulting in
significant speed reduction on fteeway
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds,
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2006
f
SO
..J
100m
~
o
Scale L...
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-1ane capacity by 2006
@ Ontario
@ Ontario
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G,W.P. 30-95-00
URS
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Ministry of Transportation
o so
Scale L... .J
URS
Cole Sherman
I
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Essa Road Interchange
Ramp junction over capacity by 2001,
which will affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Insufficient width under
structure to widen Essa
Road and provide sidewalks
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches. 'which may result in
queuing and affect openWon of ramps
City of Barrie has identified
that 4 Lanes on Essa Road
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches. which may result in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
Ramp junction over capacity by 2006,
which will affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
f
Collision rate from 1996-1999 was 1.0
Provincial Average Rate is 0.7
· 24 rear end collisions
. 23 sideswipe collisions
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2006
o
Scale L..
so
.J
100m
-"'"
Ministry of Transportation
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P. 30-95-00
Cole Sherman
URS
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Dunlop Street Interchange
f
Ramp junction over capacity by 2001,
which will affect freeway openWons
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Downstream congestion at the intersection of
Dunlop Street and Cedar Pointe Drive may
result in queuing and affect freeway operations
Insufficient width under
structure to widen
Highway 400
All approach volumes exceed intersection!
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches. which may result in' . .--...
queuing and affect operation of ramps
i
~
~
ST.
Signals wamurted by
2006 due to excessive
delays to minor
approaches
City of Barrie has identified
that 2 Lanes on Dunlop Street
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
GEORGE STREET
Ramp junction over capacity by 2001,
whichwill.affect freeway oPerations
(i.e. reduction in operatij:tg Speeds.
ramp queuing and incre8sed) congestion)
i ;
Collision rate from 1996-1999 was 0.9
(Provincial Average Rate is 0.7)
· 24 sideswipe collisions
. 18 rear end collisions
. IS lost control single vehicle collisions
VESPRA STREET
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2001
o
Scale L..
100m
,...j
SO
.J
@ Ontario
URS
Highway 400 P1anning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Bayfield Street Interchange
f
BAYFIELD
STREET
Collision rate fi:om 1996-1999 was 0.7
(Provincial Average Rate is 0.7)
. 12 rear end collisions
. 10 sideswipe collisions
. 9 lost control single vehicle collisions
Ramp junction over capacity
by 2006, which will affect
freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating
speeds. ramp queuing and
increased congestion)
Direct access to ramp is :not
desirable and a safety concern
Shared roadway for ramp and
municipal street is not desirable
By 2006, ramp junction will
operate poorly during peak
ttavel period. resulting in
significant speed reduction
on fteeway
Less than desirable
separation between
intersections
City of Barrie has identified
that S Lanes on Bayfield Street
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
j
IDGHWAY26
I
L
All approach volumes exceed intersection
capacity, resulting in excessive delay for
all approaches,. which may n:su1t in
queuing and affect operation of ramps
Ramp geometry
does not meet current
standards
Ramp junction over capacity by 2001,
which win affect freeway operations
(i.e. reduction in operating speeds.
ramp queuing and increased congestion)
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2001
o
Scale L..
so
.J
100m
-..-I
~ Ontario
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Existing / Future Operational Conditions At Duckworth Street Interchange
\ ROYAL VICTORIA
HOSPITAL
By 2006, ramp junction will operate poorly
during peak travel period. resulting in
significant speed reduction on freeway
City of Barrie has identified
that 2 Lanes on Duckworth s_
is insufficient for future
traffic operations
All approach volumes excee4 intersection
capacity, reswting-in"excCSsive delay for
lil).apprDaehcs, which may result in
\:Z- ~--~~~
......"..".....
_n,..H.."
u"_.."
..
m;...
Insufficient width under
structure to widen
Duckworth S_
Signals warranted in 2006 due to excessive
delays to minor approaches
~
~
fJ'1
:5
~
Planned developments at southwest quadrant
ofCund1es Road and Duckworth S_ along
with a proposed expansion of Georgian
College and Royal Victoria Hospital will
greatly increase traffic volumes in this area
of Barrie
~
o
Scale L..
SO 100m
.J _ -..-I
Highway 400 Design Hourly Volumes
exceeds 6-lane capacity by 2011
~ Ontario
Highway 400 Planning Study
1 Km South of Highway 89 To Highway 11 Junction
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Planning Alternatives
Planning Alternatives (Continued)
The following planning alternatives were identified and assessed as possible solutions to
Highway 400 Corridor capacity-related problems:
. Do Nothing: Traffic is expected to continue to increase. To do nothing would result
in a further deterioration of the level of service; this in turn would result in an
increase in travel time, congestion, collisions, and fuel wastage. The negative
consequences of the "Do Nothing" approach clearly suggest that actions must be
taken in order to address the existing and projected deficiencies of Highway 400.
· Rail and Transit Expansion: Rail and transit expansion would provide a more
competitive choice of travel modes for some users of Highway 400, and thus reduce
the traffic volumes somewhat on Highway 400. Specifically, transit expansion
within the City of Barrie would reduce some inter-city travel. However, inter-city
travel volumes comprise a relatively small percentage of Highway 400 traffic
through Barrie and would not address corridor travel demand.
Recently the Province of Ontario has announced initiatives to expand transit
systems in the Golden Horseshoe and resumed responsibility for GO Transit.
While both of these events may lead to increased capacity of transit networks, this
will not increase the capacity pf overall transportation network in the Highway 400
corridor sufficiently to eliminate the need for roadway-based improvements. This
alternative alone would not be able to adequately address travel demand throughout
the project limits.
· Combination of Alternatives: The combination of all of the previously stated
alternatives will not sufficiently address projected future travel demand. Based on
the current transportation plans of the government ministries and agencies that
would be involved in providing the combination of alternatives, achieving a timely
implementation to sufficiently meet the travel demands of the corridor is unlikely.
Further, while each of the previously stated alternatives would contribute to
delaying the need for additional improvements, together they would not adequately
offset the need for such improvements.
. Localized Geometric Improvements (Road Based Solutions): Geometric
improvements would improve traffic operations, but would not address the capacity
deficiencies.
. Traffic Operations Improvements: The implementation of a traffic management
system would inform the driver of problems ahead; and with ramp metering, the use
of available highway capacity could be improved by an increase of about 5% to
10% (as observed on the QEW in Mississauga). This would delay but not eliminate
the need for improvements.
. Vehicle Occupancy Increase: This would involve reducing the number of vehicles
along major highways by encouraging carpooling. Again, this would delay but not
eliminate the need for improvements.
. Adjacent Road System Improvements: Other existing parallel arterial roads will
provide only limited diversion for Highway 400 through-traffic due to the distances
of these other roads from Highway 400 and the fact that many are already saturated
with local traffic. Widening of arterial roads will not provide sufficient additional
capacity for through-traffic to be significantly diverted from Highway 400.
· Freeway Capacity Improvements: This alternative would provide the needed
capacity to improve Highway 400 to an acceptable level of service. It also would
provide the opportunity to improve the facility to current Ministry standards. There
would be some property impact and limited environmental impact along the
corridor.
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
@ Ontario
URS
Coie ShErman
Minisiry of Transportation
Ministry of Transportation
COle Sherman
f:@)
~ O.
S<.
ii :;:::,
i); t""+
-g OJ
;:I. ~
OJ _.
g 0
~ ~ t:::d
~ =? ~
~ n> tfj
~ n> n>
~~=--
... ~ Q
~ ~ =
a.~ 5r
~ ~ n>
~ ~ ~
Q ~ tfj
-< ...tfj
n> .... n>
~ ~ tfj
.. ...tfj
fg a ~
.... "= =
tfj~ a .....
... -< Q
tfj n> I-It
~ a e:..
... n> ....
=--=n>
n> .... "'i
~ tfj...::s
... ... ~
= . ....
Q'CI ~:;.
rMt:rn>
c:':n>J"I
~c-5r
~ ~ n>
~ ... "=
~ ~ ~
.J;i;.~n>
e~~
e....~
. = ~
~ n>
n> =--
Q ~
I-It=
5rn>
n> 8
~ ~
=?Ct.
n> -<
n> n>
~ ...
~ tfj
~
(")~o..eno.."O
o ..... CD CD CD ~
0.. ::n ~ ~. ;:+
a. CD (") ..... (Jq
o..::s ~. 0 .... 0
o ('D '" ::s .... .....,
'"1o..~en~!:!:..
0.. .... . 0 ::3 ;::r
OO('D.....,o..CD
('D en..,.... ("') '"1
en I-' ..... ..... 0 ('D
::s 0 ::s <1Q' ::s 8
o .....::ren~
....._::r~a
~~~~(j""
(") ('D ........... ..... '"
CD en .... " .... . ::s
..... 0 - 0 0..
~~:4oo::S~
en lOP-.
~~~~.....,g
"0 a. 0.. 0 ~ en
'"1 t:H.... . s:: "0 0
~nS::S(Jqa"""
~ ::r "0 9-
~ ~ ft to 0 .....
~s~2.:
~. ::t E!
::3 ('D::3 0..
fijO(;'CD,<
<:. ~.....
o~(Jq""'::S
1-1 .,' '"1 0..
..... 1-1 ~ .....
.... . ::r \",I ::3 (")
.....,CDs::en~
9-0'e.] ft
CD ::s .g B 9-
"0 (Jq (/.J p-. ~
'"1..... 0"
o SCD@ ::s ~
"0 "" en
o u (") en
en" .....oS::
& ~ ~ a. e.
::s (Jq ~ go::s
('D ::r '-' '"1 (Jq
~ ~ 8 ~. g-
.....'<s::~.....
1-1+:>.~('D.....
~ ......en::r
~ g CD 00 ('D
"0 (") ~ .:.. "0
g.OCDO~
~ e.::t. '< S
p-. 0.. g ~ .....
o _ >-;::S
....v(")en(Jq
....('DCD~ "
..,"T1=
olt1....
~~~
.....~:>
~~~
g~~
o~CJ
~o~
"'I1 :>
~"'I1Z
....~z
~az
~~~
>;:...Cf.J
-<-<--3
:::008
1.00<
~5I
rom
(f)
::r
cD
3
gj
.
CDn9-~
:>< 0 CD ~
"0 ~ ~
~ p. ..... ....
o..o..~~
..... 0 t")
.... '"1 ....
..... ('D $::I
(Jq 0..-
~~~'~
::r CD ;:r<
<1Q' s: g ~
~ ..... 0.. ~
~ ~. S ~
'<.....CD~
~ ~ e:?
'::::t::rS::Q
~~S;t
o en .....-
'"1
~s::ftt:t1
S' 8. S ~
(/.J('D en $::I
..... :4 ;::s
S ~. ("') ~.
(") ~~ Q
o ('Dv ;::s
CD ::s ~ '.
(")
n ~ ..... ~
o ~....
s:: en ....
::s S 0.. CD
.....O"CD~
~ '< ::n "0
(")
..... ..... ~
o g ~
CD 0, ~
:>< CD -
~ en ::r
.....
. 0 (Jq
::S.....,::r
CD ~
..... 9-,~
::rCD~
CD (")
::r:~
~ ..... ::s
~ (Jq ::s
en ::r 0
a:~"'"
;-0' ~ ~
~ '< 0..
..... 0..
'< +:>. ~
ooen
.....,0 en
~
--
=
=
=
..... .
=
rIQ
>
--
~
(D
~
=
=
~
..... .
-<
(D
r:Il
"-..,,
(1
o
=
~
..... .
=
=
(D
Q.
'-'
Evaluation of Planning Alternatives
Planmn!! Alternative
Factor I Do Nothing I Localized Traffic Vebicle Adjacent Rail and
Geometric Operations Occnpancy Road System Transit
Improvements Improvements Increase Improvements Expansion
Reduction in Potential X I ./ ./ X ./ ./
for Collisions
Improved Level of X X ./ ./ ./ ./ ./
Service
Improved Geometries I X I v' X X X X X
Environmental v' X v' v' X X X
Compatibility
Property v' X v' v' X X X
Improvements to the I X ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ v'
Provincial Highway
Network
Relative Cost low moderate low low high very high very high
I
Legend
v' Significant Benefit X Significant Disadvantage
./ Minor Benefit X Minor Disadvantage
Freeway Capacity Improvements offers the optimal combination of significant benefits to transportation and low
impacts to property and the environment as compared to the other alternatives. Based on the assessment of
alternatives, the preferred alternative is "freeway capacity improvements". The basic feature of the "freeway
capacity improvements" is widening Highway 400.
@J Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
MinistlY of Transportation
URS
Cole Sherman
-------------------
---------------~~~-
Summary of Issues and Concerns Raised at the
First Public Information Centre
The purpose of the first Public Infonnation Centre (PIC) was to introduce the study, present the alternatives under
consideration including the mainline widening and interchange improvements. A total of 191 members of the public
attended the PIC and a total of 120 written comments were received. The following table summarizes the major issues and
concerns raised by the public and how these matters are being addressed in the study.
Noise levels and noise I Public
pollution, a need for
noise barriers at
residential areas
Oppose widening of I Public
Highway 400 to 10/ 12
lanes (widening is not
necessary)
Need for commuter rail I Public
servicelrestoration of
GO Transit to alleviate
traffic along Highway
400
Refer to the Noise Displays
Widening of Highway 400 is required to address the projected future capacity
deficiencies along Highway 400. The technically preferred alternative for widening
the Highway 400 mainline identifies the number of additional lanes required to meet
the future travel demand to 2011.
Rail and transit expansion would provide a more competitive choice of travel modes
for some users of Highway 400, and thus reduce the traffic volumes somewhat on
Highway 400. However, the improvements would be limited since the Highway 400
significantly serves a diverse nature of trips. Commuter rail service would reduce
but not eliminate the need for highway widening improvements in the Highway 400
corridor within the olannim! horizon for this oroiect.
(ff) Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FRoM 1 KM SoU11l OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Cole Sr.erman
Ministry of Transportation
Summary of Issues and Concerns Raised at the
First Public Information Centre (Continued)
Vehicle emissions/air
quality/air pollution
. Whenever traffic volumes exceed 100,000 (average annual daily traffic),
under certain conditions, some residents living in the immediate vicinity of
a highway may experience an atmosphere that does not meet the provincial
ambient air quality criteria 100% of the time.
. Degradation in air quality due to additional traffic on the highway depends
on the distance from the highway. For areas beyond 1 kIn from the highway
the effect is insignificant. For areas within 100 metres, the effect is almost
proportional to traffic volume. The actual ambient air quality conditions at
a given location, at any given time, may vary depending on other factors
such as atmospheric conditions and topography.
. While greater traffic volumes potentially may result in further affects to air
quality, there are a number of ameliorating factors. Federal agencies are
helping to reduce the effects of rising traffic volumes by regularly
tightening standards. Thanks to new federal vehicle emission and fuel
quality standards, emissions per vehicle kilometre are dropping, and they
will drop even more strongly beyond 2004. The Drive Clean Program,
which is currently being expanded to the whole province, will have a
positive effect on overall vehicle emission levels. The first phase of the
program, according to the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy,
reduced emissions bv aODfoximatelv 10%.
(i') Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Summary of Issues and Concerns Raised at the
FirstPublic Information Centre (Continued)
Provision for highway I Public
i llumination!potential
light trespass onto
properties adjacent to
the highway I
Highway drainage/ MNR / Public
wells/ storm water
quality
Landscaping will be employed for the project limits to mitigate impacts.
Landscape plans will be developed during the detail design phase of the project.
An inventory of existing vegetation has been conducted and significant trees and
shrubs will be retained where possible. Requirements for barriers for tree
rotection will be determined during detail design.
Highway illumination is required on urban sections of Highway 400 (i.e. north of
Molson Park Drive to Duckworth Street) as well as at all the interchanges, in
accordance with Ministry Standards. Where necessary methods to reduce light
trespass onto adjacent properties such as shielding will be incorporated in the detail
design.
A preliminary hydrogeological review was undertaken to determine the
hydrogeology of the study area, groundwater recharge and discharge impact areas
and to identify water well interference locations. Potential impacts to specific
wells will be examined during detail design.
Aesthetic/visual I Public
impacts/need for
landscaping
A realignment of I Public
Duckworth Street and
Cundles Road will have
damaging consequences
on proposed commercial
develoDment
Storm water quality and quantity issues are being considered as part of this study
and an appropriate plan for the technically preferred alternative will be developed.
The technically preferred alternative for the Duckworth Street interchange does not
include realignment of Duckworth Street/Cundles Road.
&'J Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Summary of Issues and Concerns Raised at the
First Public Information Centre (Continued)
Impact to historical trail I Public
at Sunnidale Road
Implementing the improvements to Highway 400 will disrupt traffic during
construction. Contingency plans will be developed during detail design in
consultation with the local community to address the local and regional emergency
services access during construction.
Although some disturbances during construction are inevitable, mitigation
measures will be implemented to minimize nuisance impacts (i.e. minimizing
construction traffic), Refer to the "Staging of Construction" display board for
further details on construction disruptions.
Potential impacts to businesses have been considered in the evaluation of project
options and in developing a technically preferred design.
The historical trail at Sunnidale Road will be retained and appropriate mitigation
measures will be employed to minimize impacts to the features within the project
limits.
Pedestrian access to Bayfield Street from Rose Street will be maintained.
Access during
construction!
construction disruption
Impacts to businesses I Public
Impact to pedestrian I Public
trail at Bayfield A venue
Highway 400 ramp
intersection
Impacts to Little Lake I MNR / Public
wetland complex
Vibration impacts to I Public
sensitive receivers
roDerties
There will be no direct impacts to the Little Lake Wetland Complex as a result of
this project.
Vibration impacts to adjacent properties are not anticipated as a result of this
project.
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTIl OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Ministry of T ransportalion
Cole Sherman
-------------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Evaluation Process
Widening Alternatives
The evaluation of alternatives considered both the impacts generated by the alternative,
and the relative importance of the impacts. Each factor in the evaluation (i.e. Natural,
Social, Economic, Cultural, Transportation and Cost) contributes a relative level of
significance to the decision making process.
Projected traffic volumes will exceed the capacity of the existing 6-lane freeway.
Widening Highway 400 will be required to accommodate future (2011) travel demand.
Generally, widening about the existing Highway 400 centreline is the preferred method of
achieving the required road widening. This method is preferred in part because;
Based on the range of issues involved and the nature of the problems, a level of
significance was assigned for each factor within the study section. Levels of significance
were determined based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specific study area
conditions in each of the study sections.
· By splitting the property impacts along the east and west sides of the right-of-way,
the overall impacts to adjacent property owners is reduced;
· Such widenings are less disruptive to stage and construct;
· Such widenings are less costly to implement; and,
· Maintaining the existing alignment provides more desirable geometrics.
Significant net impacts were focused on in the selection of the preferred alternatives.
Differences in impacts between alternatives were compared considering both the
magnitude and the relative significance of the impact. The rationale for the selection of
the preferred alternative improvement is documented and presented here today.
In areas where property limits and/or physical constraints suggest a shift of the centreline
will reduce impacts, alternative methods of widening will be developed. Depending on
the extent and significance of the constraint, the following alternatives will be considered:
1.) Widening about the existing Highway 400 centreline;
2.) Widening to the east;
3.) Widening to the west; and,
4.) A combination of the above.
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Ministry of Transportation
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
@ Ontario
URS
COle Shi'mmm
Ministry of Transportation
Coie Sherman
o A
~ol
"z
h1ffil
"'0
~ ~ -j!
&~L~
"'0 E E E
~2 o$i~
Q~
1:0
~>-
n .<~=]
C)
I : ... z I-
i= en
w
... en ~
~ ... ~ ~ iii ~ w
~ I- '<~=J ~ J:
!j! :::J I l-
I " 0
~ ... ~ 0 ~- i ... ~
~B - mw ~ - I-
oj; ~ <(z oj;j - ... ~ Z
01:_ z::i ~e ~ w
ClE
~fi1 H ~i ww ;!!;i . ... ~~ CI
CIa:: !2s ~ 3E
!!.!s B ~ _ -I- a ~ :2
~E ~ ~z ~E ... ~
II) !j! .w II) ~ i C'II
... ...
I " T"'(,) "
.... ~ ~ w
w >
~ > ~ ~
I : .... ~ ~ I HI- ~
Z
.... z a::
a:: w
w I-
~ .... ~ ~ .... ..J
<(
I~ c=~~.. I : ....
....
i ....
IL c=;;:~i
~b I I
I
a3; I
i:!~ o I \
iiH1 hi )
Oili
i:!g
fEE E ~"'''il
c:::q~o
~8 .. ~~h_
Q~ f~ E E E
1:0 !8 o~~
8>-
.. Q~
1:01
!"I
,
I
Summary Evaluation of Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives (Highway 89 to Essa Road)
I
en
~
z
c:
~
..
J::.
<n
I~
* RELATIVE ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE WIDEN ABOUT WIDEN TO
THE THE WEST
1 NATURAL Alternative 2 has a lower degree of impact on the fish habitat
ENVIRONMENT crossings and also offers a storm water management system
that results in less impacts to surrounding properties and
natural features. Alternative 2 impacts a groundwater
Moderate Q) 0 discharge area just north of Highway 89. The impact however
is not significant and can be reduced through design
refinements.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS SLIGHTLY
PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social
ENVIRONMENT Q) 0 environment. Alternative 2, however, has fewer aesthetic
Moderate impacts and will not impact adjacent service roads.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Both alternatives result in low impacts to the economic
ENVIRONMENT Q) 0 environment. Alternative 1, however, results in slightly
Moderate greater impacts to agricultural land and operations.
THEREFORE, ALTERANTIVE 2 IS PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the cultural
ENVIRONMENT 0 0 environment.
Moderate THEREFORE,BOTHALTERNATIVESARE
EQUALLY PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION Both alternatives are equal in terms of maintenance, traffic.
& ENGINEERING & operations, consistency and staging. Alternative 2, however,
COST Q) 0 offers more favourable drainage characteristics at a lower
High cost.
THERFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS SLIGHTLY
PREFERRED.
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Although Alternative 2 has greater impacts to environmental features west of the highway, overall the impacts are lower than
Alternative 1, which impacts environmental features on both sides of the highway. Alternative 2 results in lower overall impacts
and is less costly to construct as well as offers similar technical advantages as Alternative 1.
OVERALL, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS SELECTED AS THE PREFERRED.
I
I
I
:E
wOo
>r:r:<(
_u-O
~(/)r:r:
zz<(
r:r:QCf)
wI-(/)
I-(,)w
~~O
0(/)1-
0(/)0:I
~Oco
~r:r:~
3:(,)3:
:J:...J:J:
C)C3C)
3: a::: 3:
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
>-
om
:::Jco
I- >-....
cnco....
:=>-
C!).c:coo
Z.Q):=o
Z :L -5 ab
ZO:E~
~=mg
C.Sc:a.:
o cn 0 .
o +=~
~ E (.) .
>-~5C!)
~....~
:LEoS
C!)e
_LL
:r:
I
I
I
I
i
::!
~
::!
~
w
..
~
..
w
ct
~
~
~
is
w
2:
In
:3
u
~
* Ranking offactors based on consultation and input receivedfrom government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specific! study area
condition. A package detailing the full evaluation of the Mainline Highway 400
Alternatives can be obtained from a Project Team Representative.
I
o Most Preferred
~ Least Preferred
o 5
. i:: 'i
1::
CO&.
.......... ~
CI!!
I-
O~
~I
I
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTI:I OF HIGHWAY 89
TO 1HE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
COle Shem-Ian
W Ontario
URS
I
I
-------------------
ADDITIONAL PROPERTY REQUIRE
r------ TOI\CCOMOOA.TEwu:.!~!t"G. 0
Om(min.)
45m(max..)
30 m (typical)
I I I I I I-r'"
n ~ ~ -" .
~:~::_ '1.. ~./.~ ~ t t t t ~
"":t"
so\.lTl'6OUNO H~r At
l """I em" I ""' ,I.~I ""' re..:":!""," 1
EXISTING ROW
65 m to 80 m (typical)
--
.............
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED SECTION
1KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89 TO ESSA ROAD
ADDITIONAl..
PROPERTY
REQUIRED TO
ACCQMOOA TE
WIDENING-
ADDIT\OIW..
PROPERTY
REQUIRED TO
ACCOMOOATE
WIDENING"
I
o m (mIn.)i
20 m (max.)
5m(lyplcal)
EXISTING ROW
90 m (typical)
--
Om(mIn.)
5 m (max.)
5m(lyplcal}
............
--
.-
.. ... ._... '.. ..... t't' t t t t
~ ---....~".. --. --- ...-.......... -.-- ..~....
l""' 31"",,1 ""' .1."""1 -.\ "",,1,,,01 ........ ~
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED SECTION
ESSA ROAD TO BA YFIELD STREET
ADDITIONAL
PROPERTY
REQUIRED TO
ACCOMOOATE
WIDENING"
EXISTING ROW
90 m (typical)
............
--
Om(mIn.)
5m(max.)
5m(typIcaI)
--
.-
.
~ ~ ~ ~"T' 't't'ft
~-- ......,,'...-....-... . ........--. ~ . ...........- ---..-..-.
.. l_3\-'\-'\.:.4 ""',I-,lvI<..1 '~
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED
BAYFIELD STREET TO HIGHWAY 11
N.T.S.
CDle Sherman
'"EXClUSNE OF INTeRCHANGE PROPERTY flEQUIAEMENTS
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
Mainline Alternatives From Highway 89 to Molson Park Drive
G.W.P.30-95-00
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED
TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
HIGHWAY 400
URS
Widening Alternatives
Widening Through the City of Barrie
To address the projected future capacity deficiencies along Highway 400 through the City of Barrie, as well as
operational and maintenance issues in this urban section, the following alternatives will be examined as part of this study:
to-Lane Cross Section (5 lanes per direction)
7.5 m BARRIER MEDIAN 18 lanes)
\ :--_. I -"":' v,r - W - I . -. I
~
L .~ -=--.
.._ 0 ~~.. ......
12-Lane Express _ Collector System (3 express lanes, 3 collector lanes per direction)
12 - lANE EXPRESS - COllECTOR SYSTEM
.,t_.....'-I<_ '"
t l - ..1
~ "C -,,__~.i.- I I._ I _. I _. I It" t ....
;y-- '" ._ ._ _ I · I
~ _ A.- ._ I _' I
\.Qf .._ ~~ I _~, .._ I
. I -'ct!'
I2J -.....
EX!$TING ROW vAlUES FROM .... TO :z:J$m
"".5 m
"'-~-://
N.TS
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHW A Y 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
@) Ontario
Cole Sherman
Summary Evaluation of Core-Collector vs. Mainline
Widening Highway 400 Alternatives
(North of Molson Park Drive to South of Duckworth Street)
Summary Evaluation of Core-Collector vs. Mainline
Widening Highway 400 Alternatives
(North of Molson Park Drive to South of Duckworth Street) Continued
I
I
FACTOR! Alternative 1 Alternative 2
10 lane 12 lane COMMENT
Indicator widening CID System
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Effect on Both alternatives require the widening of 7 crossings that have fish habitat.
Aquatic Habitat ~ Alternative 2 is wider and therefore results in additional impacts at these
crossings.
Effect on ~ ~ Given the urban nature of the area, both alternatives result in similar low
Terrestrial impacts to terrestrial features.
Habitat
Effect on ~ ~ Both alternatives have the same footprint in the vicinity of the Little Lake
Wetlands Wetland (PSW) and result in similar low impacts to this feature.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
Effect on Noise Alternative 2 results in a maximum increase of approximately 4 dBA in noise
~ to receivers whereas Alternative I results in a maximum increase of 2 dBA.
Sound level change of 3 dBA is perceivable.
Effect on Alternative I results in the displacement of 4 residences whereas Alternative
Residences 2 results in the displacement of 14 residences. It is noted that these impacts
~ could be reduced through the use of retaining walls. Retaining walls would
add to the cost of the alternatives. Alternative 2 would carry higher retaining
wall costs.
Effect on ~ ~ Neither alternative effect community features (Le., school, parks recreation
Community centres etc.).
Features
Effect on Alternative I does not displace businesses whereas Alternative 2 results in the
Businesses displacement of 4 businesses. It is noted that these impacts could be reduced
~ through the use of retaining walls. Retaining walls would add to the cost of
Alternative 2.
Alternative 2 provides limited opportunity for through traffic to exit in Barrie
potentially impacting businesses.
Effect on ~ ~
Agricultural Neither alternative affects agricultural operations.
Operations
Property Additional property is required along approximately 20% of the length of
Impacts ~ Alternative I, whereas Alternative 2 requires additional property along 90%
of the length. It is noted that these percentages generally represent partial
property takings and exclude the property impacts associated with the
. interchanges.
CULTURAL ENVffiONMENT
Effect on ~ ~
Heritage Neither alternative affects heritage features.
Features
Effect on areas
with ~ Alternative I requires slightly less land with a high potential for
Archaeological archaeological resources and is therefore preferred.
Potential
FACTOR! Alternative 1 Alternative 2
10 lane 12 lane COMMENT
Indicator widening CID System
TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Through Traffic With the lO-lane scenario, acceptable level of service achieved during
Operations weekday peak travel periods. Queuing on ramps could reduce operating
speeds; this impact can be reduced through interchange improvements (e.g.
sub-collector) but there may be increased property impacts.
~ Under the CID system, through traffic achieves good level of service.
Queuing on ramps could reduce operating speeds in distributor, but core lanes
would be unaffected.
During weekend peak travel periods, through traffic operations are acceptable
with both alternatives.
Local Traffic With the 10-lane scenario, an acceptable level of service is achieved during
Operations . weekday peak travel periods. Queuing on ramps could reduce operating
speeds; this impact can be reduced through interchange improvements (e.g.
sub-collector) but there may be increased property impacts.
~ ~ Under the CID system, local traffic achieves acceptable level of service.
Queuing on ramps could reduce operating speeds in distributor; interchange
improvements could help reduce the impacts to the distributor lanes but there
may be increased property impacts.
During weekend peak travel periods, the alternatives have similar levels of
traffic operations.
Incident Under the lO-lane scenario, with 3+ lanes closed, major impact to access
Management to/through Barrie. With 1-2 lanes closed, minor impact to access to/through
Barrie.
The CID system can contain major incidents to either core or distributor
lanes; with distributor lanes closed, access to Barrie is reduced; with core
~ ~ lanes closed, distributor lanes available to maintain access to/through Barrie;
also potential for incidents in both core and distributor which could
potentially have major impact to access to/through Barrie. With 1-2 core
lanes closed, distributor lanes available to maintain access to/through Barrie;
with 1-2 distributor lanes closed, access to Barrie is affected.
No noticeable difference since CID system is only better if incident occurs in
core lanes; an incident in the distributor lanes would mean worse operations
than lO-laning and possibly reduced access to some interchanges.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
I
@ Ontario
URS
Cole Sh~~rrnan
@ Ontario
Coie Sherman
I
I
I
I
I
Summary Evaluation of Core-Collector vs. Mainline
Widening Highway 400 Alternatives
(North of Molson Park Drive to South of Duckworth Street) Continued
I
FACTOR! Alternative 1 Alternative 2
10 lane 12 lane COMMENT
Indicator widening cm System
TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS (Continued)
Snow Removal With Alternative 1, all snow is cleared to the right shoulder by snowplows
moving in echelon.
../ With Alternative 2, snow in core lanes requires removal, which is an
additional operation requiring additional equipment to be used and results
in further disruptions to traffic.
Alternative I is strongly preferred.
Highway Under the IO-lane scenario, lane closures/restrictions impact aU traffic in
Rehabilitation the bound being worked on; work on Lane 3 has greatest impact, this may
require a reduction to two lanes. Scheduling such operations during non-
busy periods can reduce the impacts.
../ With the C/D System, lane closures/restrictions impact either core or
distributor, leaving other set oflanes to bypass the operation. Work on
Lane 2 of distributor has greatest iml?act as this may require reduction of
distributor to one lane. Scheduling such operations during non-busy
periods can reduce the impacts. Alternative 2 has less impact to traffic
during rehab operations.
Emergency ../ ../ No significant difference between the alternatives in dealing with
Maintenance
Operations emergency maintenance.
Emergency ../ With the 10-laning scenario, access available to all lanes.
Access
With the C/D system, access to core lanes is restricted somewhat.
Construction Both alternatives have similar staging requirements and impacts. However,
Staging Alternative I provides greater flexibility in staging the improvements in
../ that it provides for staged implementation (i.e. Ability to widen from 6 to 8
lanes, then 8 to 10 lanes) as traffic demand warrants.
No such flexibility with Alternative 2, which, as a result, would generally
be underutilized in the short to medium terms.
Compatibility
with Future ../ Alternative I is more consistent with the long-term vision for the provincial
Transportation road network.
Network
Cost ../ The construction of the CJD system is estimated to cost approximately 25%
more than 10-laning.
Summary Evaluation of Core-Collector vs. Mainline
Widening Highway 400 Alternatives
(North of Molson Park Drive to South of Duckworth Street) Continued
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Alternative 1 results in fewer impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural environments than Alternative 2
primarily because of the smaller footprint associated with the construction of Alternative 1.
I
I
I
I
From a technical considerations perspective, Alternative 2 provides for better operations for through traffic during
weekday PM peak travel periods; however, through traffic makes up only 30% of the total traffic volume during such
times. Although Alternative 2 provides for better operations for through traffic, operations with Alternative 1 are
acceptable during weekday PM peak: travel periods and comparable to Alternative 2 during other times.
Alternative 2 would have less impacts to traffic during rehabilitation operations, but would require more complex
snow removal operations, which would have greater traffic impacts than Alternative 1. Given that snow removal
operations would occur more frequently than rehabilitation (generally required every 15 years), the impacts of snow
removal operations are considered to be of greater significance than those resulting from rehabilitation operations.
In other technical aspects, Alternative 1 is considered to operate equal to or better than Alternative 2. Alternative 1
provides greater flexibility for future expansion of the transportation network and has a lower construction cost
estimate.
I
I
I
The lower impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural environments, as well as the more favourable
technical considerations associated with Alternative 1 are considered to be more important than the advantages
associated with Alternative 2 for through traffic operations and pavement rehabilitation operations.
ALTERNATIVE 1 IS THEREFORE PREFERRED.
Note: This evaluation does not include the impacts associated with interchanges. Interchange impacts will increase the direct natural
social and economic impacts of the alternatives. Alternative 2 will result in higher direct interchange impacts because more
property is required to accommodate the larger cross-section.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
~ Ontario
URS
~lOntario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
Cote Srv;rrnan
Cole Sherman
~
00t AVMHUIH
C\I
W
>
f=
<{
Z
0::
w
t-
-I
<{
~
~
~
~
~
~
-...-.
~
'"
~
Iii
'"
'"
W
"
'"
~
'"
,-"<{
.,0
;:'<:5,
0::'
-''''i:t.,
a.
w
>
f=
<{
Z
0::
w
t-
-I
<{
~I !
- m
J::
(/J
! I~
(
I
Summary Evaluation of Highway 89
Interchange Alternatives
I
C/)
cnw
co>
>--
<{t-
~~
:J:O::
(!}W
-t-
:J:-I
<{
* RELATIVE ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
1 NATURAL Although the number of stream crossings impacted by both
ENVIRONMENT alternatives is high, the impact is of low significance because
the nature of the impacts entails minor culvert extensions for
watercourses, which have already been impacted by adjacent
~ 0 land uses and the highway. Alternative 1 results in slightly
Low higher impacts due to additional coldwater crossings.
Potential opportunities exist with both alternatives to provide
for storm water management within the interchange.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 2 IS SLIGHTLY
PREFERRED.
2' SOCIAL Both alternatives result in the same low impacts to the social
ENVIRONMENT 0 0 environment.
Low THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Both alternatives result in relatively low impacts to the
ENVIRONMENT economic environment. Alternative 2 results in slightly more
Low 0 ~ impacts to agricultural land and more impacts to business
operations.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL Both alternatives have similar low impacts to the cultural
ENVIRONMENT 0 0 environment.
Low THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION Alternative I provides for more favourable traffic operations
& ENGINEERING than Alternative 2. Further, Alternative 1 is equal to Alternative
& COST 0 ~ 2 in the other transportation and engineering factors, and
High carries similar construction costs.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Alternatives 1 and 2 have similar impacts to the social and cultural environments. The measurable differences between
Alternatives I and 2 relate to the number of coldwater stream crossing impacts, the number of businesses displaced, and the
traffic operations provided. Although Alternative 1 impacts more coldwater streams, the overall impacts are of low
significance. The more favourable traffic operations provided by Alternative 1 and the lower business displacement
impacts are considered to be more important than the differences in impacts to coldwater streams.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
...
~
>-
00')
:::::>CX)
I- >......
U) ro......
;!: >.
c:>..c:roo
Z.Q);!: 0
Z I -a,..c
z - .- Q')
<(OIa
...J:61i]C")
a.. 5 c: a.:
o Cf) 0 .
o :;::;~
-.:rEU.
>-~s~
<(.....-,
SEo
:J: .....
c:>e
_LL.
:J:
I
I
I
I
G;
..
I
I
~
~
"
ii!
'"
~
o 5
-i:: ~
cu'8.
+-' ~
t:!:!
f-
Oe
~
~j
* Ranking of factors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specifid study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Highway 89 Interchange Alternatives can be
obtained from a Project Team Representative.
I
I
o Most Preferred
~ Least Preferred
~
"
.,-
~
.:;
~
z
z
(;
~
.,-
g
~
~
~
URS
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOU1H OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Shennan
Ministry of Transportation
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
:I:
c;
r
~
-<,
G
Q
LEGEND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
EXISTING PROPER1Y LINE
en
1:
o
o
m
:0
~
0>
,U)
~
P"\....... _ SCALE I
100m
50m
PATH: ..\SOSK\PROJ\40mNNISfll\OWO\PREUMINARY DESlGN\HWY89 - PARClO A...PDJotTO.DWC REV: 2" ....mE 2002
Cole Sherman
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
HIGHWAY 89
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED PLAN -
ALTERNATIVE 1
URS
Plan reflects proposed inteom improvements.
Including realignment of Industrial Park Road
and relocation of commuter parking lot, to be
under separate contract
Plan reflects proposed interim improvemenls,
Including realignment of Industrial Park Road
and relocation of commuter parking lot, to be
under separale contract.
,~ia,lJIQI~
,l\Of'O$iO~I5>01<
I'p.Qf'O~iO
COl>><'~
,~\.01
PRBIJMl~M~i t Ri \11 '1t t
-N;\ ,Ii ,
',' IV. ,,< ','
B IJMl! Iii '" \ .\
pIt .' ";'00'" .:
..' ......w:
~ 1,2500 " , !:II,'\ <,\ii 1"\ <~ 1,2500 .
1"\- ,
!to'; 100tn ,. - ;;.,___:,.,.. .\._-1; 50'; 0 100m
Cole Sherman
PATH, ,..\SOSK\PROJ\400INNISFJl\OWG\INNISFll BEACH - PARClO A - DlAMONO,OWG REV, OEC 2001
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
INNISFIL BEACH ROAD
ALTERNATIVES
URS
c: Summary Evaluation of Innisfil Beach Road
'"
E
"
.c: Interchange Alternatives
en
I~
* RELATIVE ALT ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 3 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
1 NATURAL There are no significant impacts to the natural environment for any
ENVIRONMENT alternatives. A small loss of forested land is expected for all
alternatives, however Alternatives 2 and 3 will affect less forested
Low Q) ~ 0 area than Alternative l. Alternative 3 has less potential for surface
water impacts since it has a lower increase in pavement area.
ui-o UI E
~~~ g 0 THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3 IS SLIGHTLY
EO:: - (
~j ~ <( PREFERRED.
e a. CI 000
.~~~ er:w 2 SOCIAL All alternatives impact the aesthetic quality of the existing landscape
.s!!:! J:2:
~ '" ~ ~ ENVIRONMENT and result in minor impacts to sensitive viewer groups. All
.." .. 01-
~~~t5 <(<( alternatives result in low noise impacts to residences adjacent to the
iJcE~ wz
~1D8c: mer: highway. The potentially low impacts to the approved
e~o ~ ....JW 0 0 0
~:ge -I- Low commercial/industrial development for all alternatives are considered
! ~g i LI.......J
!~! ~ ~<( minor.
j.g-g-g z THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
a.Sm:J Z
PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Overall, Alternative 3 has the least impact to existing businesses
ENVIRONMENT ~ Q) 0 where as Alternative 2 has the greatest disruption impacts to
Low commercial property.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 31S PREFERRED.
(J)
o
....J
()
cr:
<(
a..
\
,.
\
(")
w
>
i=
<(
z
cr:
W
I-
....J
<(
~
<
~
~
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
N
"
~
...
z
;;
>-
00')
:::JCX>
I- >- """
(J)ttI"""
~ >-
(!)..t::ttlo
Z .2> ~ 0
Z ::r: -5 1.0
z - .- 0')
<!o::r:o
..J=(tjC">
a..::::I .
o ell.
o (J) 0 .
o "S
""" E u .
>-~S(!)
<(........,
SEo
::r: -
(!) e
_LL.
:I:
4 CULTURAL
ENVIRONMENT
All alternatives result in similar low impacts to the cultural
environment.
THEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
I
Low
000
-I
5 TRANSPORTATION
& ENGINEERING
& COST
The benefits of the superior traffic operations offered by Alternative
1 outweigh the lower costs and construction impacts of the other
alternatives. While all alternatives are adequate to serve future traffic
demands, Alternative I is most favourable from an overall traffic
operations perspective as it provides the highest capacity, eliminates
left turns from Innisfil Beach Road and reduces the possibility of
wrong-way moves.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
I
High
o
~
@
1
~
0:
I
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Alternative I ranks highest under transportation and engineering, as it provides better overall traffic operations. The impacts of
Alternative 1 to the natural, social and economic environments are low and can be reduced through refining the design; the
differences in transportation and engineering cannot. The benefit of superior traffic operations outweighs the slightly higher
environmental impacts.
I
"
!
N
~
'"
a
'"
~
I
~
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE lIS PREFERRED.
I
~
iii
z
z
~
.::;
iii
z
~
-<;
"
0:
0-
r
iJi
"
'"
-':
o .~
. i:: 1a
CU8.
+-' ~
c: i:!
I-
O~
~~
* Ranking offactors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specific! study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Innisfil Beach Road Interchange Alternatives can
be obtained from a Project Team Representative.
I
o Most Preferred
<J) Least Preferred
URS
I
(i). Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
I
:i:
~
Coie Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P'I!O>'OUDSVIOMII(JI'
p;lan reflects proposed interim improvements.
iricluding realignment of Industrial Park Road
a~d relocation of commuter parking lot, to be
uf),der separate contract
(')
o
r
r
Z
~
o
g
~
~
~
Q
~
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
-.-
~ _SSAlE 1:2500 I
100m
50m
PATH: ...\SOSK\PROJ\400INNISflL\OWG\PREUMINAR'Y OESIGN\INNISfIL BEACH - PARCLO A_PD_MTO.DWG
REV: 24 JUNE 2002
Cole Sherman
ff) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
INNISFIL BEACH ROAD
TECHNICALLY PREFERRED PLAN -
ALTERNATIVE 1
URS
ALTERNATIVE 1 - EXISTINCr-::r.
r A~~,-~~:'r'
ALTERNATIVE 2 - P1RCLO B,'I
I .
;:
~
~i
h
I
;:
I
Ii
i~
I
I
~
! .
I
., .J>
I
.J>
I
sau:
I
! SCALI:
1-- .
100m
;oam-o
100m
Cole Sherman
ff) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
MOLSON PARK DRIVE
ALTERNATIVES
1JIIS
~
ci
..
c!
~
a
I
~
0
'"
z ...
\~, f- z
0 UJ "
t5 z z ~
UJ ::::;
:iE ~
UJ UJ >-
en a:: f-
a:: 5 a:: ;;
UJ UJ a
l- e c.. if
z UJ 0 1>
II - a:: a::
0 ~
UJ ~ c.. ./
N (!) S
::::; a:: z
UJ z
< c.. i= z
z 0 en ~
(!) a:: X
en c.. UJ ~
..
...
~
. 1
~
Summary Evaluation of Molson Park Drive
Interchange Alternatives
* RElATIVE ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
1 NATURAL Neither alternative results in significant impacts to the natural
ENVIRONMENT environment.
Low 0 0 THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social
ENVIRONMENT environment. Alternative 2 will provide a slight improvement
0 ~ to community mobility from Highway 400 because of the free-
Moderate flow movement provided by the new ramps.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS SLIGHTLY
PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Both alternatives result in relatively low impacts to the
ENVIRONMENT economic environment. Alternative 1 results in the least
Moderate 0 ~ amount of impacts to businesses and commercial property, and
avoids the Molson Park property.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL Neither alternative impacts known cultural resources.
ENVIRONMENT Low 0 0 THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION Alternative 1 provides slightly better traffic operations and can
& ENGINEERING 0 ~ be implemented with less construction impacts and at a lower
& COST High cost.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Alternative 2 provides minimal transportation and engineering benefits and results in greater impacts to developed lands
around the interchange. Alternative 1 provides acceptable traffic operations and has minimum impacts to the interchange
area.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
.
!
!
i5
~~
d
I
uJ
z
:5
z
a:
::>
...
,.~ "......-
-'~i :=
\\'
. /,~
-Jo
* Ranking of factors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specifid study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Molson Park Drive Interchange Alternatives can be
obtained from a Project Team Representative.
o
(l)
Most Prefemd
Least Prefemd
@ Ontario
URS
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Coie Shenm:1r1
~
z
::i
wa.
>0
cr:w....
o~w
~w2:
cr:u..1-
<{W<{
a.cr:z
za.o::::
o>-w
(J)...J~
...J...J<{
o<{
:;a:g
z
::r:
u
w
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
>-
00)
:::>CX)
I- >-.....
Cl)ro.....
3: >-
C)J::roo
Z .2' 3: 0
-::r:J::'
Z 0)10
Z _0 .- 0)
<( ::r:6
...J::-(')
a.. ::J ro .
ooca..
oCJ)g~
-.:tEu.
>-~5C!)
<(........,
SEO
::r: -
C)e
_1.1...
::r:
o .~
. ;:: 15
COg,
...... ~
c: l:!
J-
Oe
~
~I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
il
~o:::
4::
>
o
...J
U
0:::
4::
a:
^..~:?=::iiQ~
~-
.~.
x ^~
)1 ~
~
~
W
>
i=
4::
z
0:::
W
I-
...J
4::
Q{'
,Q:':'
i&
j
,(
II
ill
>
i=
4::
z
0:::
ill
I-
...J
4::
.~
,.,r-~:_-~""
/"~.---#(1~
~ ..
~
~
~
~
Summary Evaluation of Essa Road
Interchange Alternatives
(/)
OW
4::2:
01-
0:::4::
4::Z
(/)0:::
(/)w
wS
4::
* RELATIVE ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
1 NATURAL Both alternatives result in low impacts to two warmwater
ENVIRONMENT aquatic habitats, however the impacts are not considered
Low 0 0 significant.
THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE
EQUALLY PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the social
ENVIRONMENT environment.
Low 0 0 THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE
EQUALLY PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Both alternatives result in the same low impacts to the
ENVIRONMENT economic environment.
Low 0 0 THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE
EQUALLY PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL Neither alternative impacts known cultural resources.
ENVIRONMENT Low 0 0 THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE
EQUALLY PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION Both alternatives are similar from a transportation,
& ENGINEERING engineering and cost perspective. Alternative 1, however,
& COST 0 Q) allows for free flow access to Highway 400 southbound while
High
Alternative 2 does not.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Overall, both alternatives result in relatively the same low impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural
environments. Alternative 2 does not offer as many transportation benefits as Alternative 1 since it requires a left
turn lane for W -5 movement.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
>-
QO)
::JCX>
I- >-~
CJ)co~
3: ::>.
C)..c:coo
Z .2' 3: 0
Z :I: "€>.;,
Z - .- 0)
<(O:I:o
...J:6roC">
a. 5 c: Ii
o CJ) 0 .
o +::S
-.::t E () .
>-:X:s<.9
<(~...,
SEo
::r: -
C)e
_u-
::r:
* Ranking of factors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specifid study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Essa Road Interchange Alternatives can be obtained
from a Project Team Representative.
o
~
Most PTr!ftmd
Least PTr!ftmd
I
I
I.
i
o .~
. s::: co
cai
+-' ~
c:~
O~
C8~
URS
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
COle Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
'~t:5t'HG
c.oI&!uTti>l
.......,'"
{::f
,; D
j 0 ~ Drilc:l!,~~ ~.Jb 0 fh D
0'>'"", " , r--..
_'d"
DO
<>
f4BYN€Q!L'
(,
r
fOfUoWl.II.'JoIJIIiRACliWA,
pMPOSmFORMDP.III.0Pt4""
""""'"
-
'~D
LEGEND
. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
~
~
___S~
50;'" - 0 100m
PATH, ...\SDSK\PROJ\400'NN'SflL\DWG\PREl'U'NARY DESIGH\ESSA - PARCW A_PD_UTD.OWG REV, 24 JUNE 2002
Cole Sherman
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
ESSA ROAD
TECNICALL Y PREFERRED PLAN -
ALTERNATIVE 1
URS
ALTERNATIVE 1 :PARBliF
/ ,\,~::~
((;
4Y
~
&-
~
Q.::J
ALTERNATIVE? -
((;
4Y
~
&-
~"
Q.::J
c'\
';3,
~!
, ,
~\,
10>
\~;
I
c?
rf
(f
10.,
ci;#
0'"
rf
Ji
p~~lJt~;\Ri
'>, ~
')1.
I
'<I,
,:"t..., -a" IJ~n-1;\R i
PlVA" '
,,.. .
I
if
\
\
SCMJ:
,-
1_
__~~-___ _11...._
Cole Sherman
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUNLOP STREET
ALTERNATIVES
1JIIS
-------------------
<::ie,
Z ....
0 LU
(] t= z Z
LU ::::;
() ~
LU LU >- c:
U) ..
a:: .... E
a:: 5 a:: i;;
LU LU
.... a Cl. .<:.
~ LU 0 U)
II CI a:: a:: I~
LU >- Cl.
N .... C!J
a::
::::i LU Z
<( Cl. t=
z 0 U)
C!J a:: X
en Cl. LU
CD
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Summary Evaluation of Dunlop Street
Interchange Alternatives
* RElATIVE ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
1 NATURAL Alternative 2 has greater impacts to fish habitat, upland
ENVIRONMENT forest, surface water impacts to Dyment's Creek, and impacts
Moderate 0 ~ to the tributaries of Bunker's Creek.
THEREFORE, AL TERNA TIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL Alternative 1 results in greater impacts to residences and
ENVIRONMENT results in slightly greater noise impacts to residences and is
High ~ 0 therefore less preferred.
THEREFORE, AL TERNA TIVE 2 IS PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC Overall, Alternative 2 results in higher impacts to the
ENVIRONMENT economic environment because more businesses will be
High 0 ~ displaced, additional property is required to accommodate the
new interchange and business access along Dyment Road will
be reduced.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL Both alternatives result in similar impacts to cultural features.
ENVIRONMENT 0 0 THEREFORE, BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE
Low
EQUALLY PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION Alternative 2 is less disruptive to traffic during construction.
& ENGINEERING The lower cost and greater benefits to traffic operations
& COST associated with Alternative 1 are considered to be more
High 0 ~ important. The benefits of Alternative 1 to traffic operations
include improved traffic flow on Dunlop Street, resulting in
lower potential for ramp traffic queuing onto Highway 400.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
SUMMARY OF Ev ALUA TION:
Both alternatives result in similar low impacts to the natural and cultural environments. Alternative 1 impacts a
number of residences on Henry Street. However, Alternative 1 has less impacts to commercial properties, has more
transportation benefits such as improved traffic flow on Dunlop Street, resulting in lower potential for queuing onto
Highway 400, and lower construction costs. Alternative 1 was considered to have the lowest overall impacts and
provides more transportation benefits.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
Note: Refinements to the technically preferred interchanxe have been made to further reduce impacts to ad;acent land uses.
(")
m
o
)>,
""
,"t},
o
Z,
-I
(1\'
0::1
"
v.rt;.
!!1
~
!}.O/
-'>.~
'" Ranking offactors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specifid study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Dunlop Street Interchange Alternatives can be
obtained from a Project Team Representative.
o
Q)
Most Preftmd
Least Preftmd
Q@... Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Coie Shennan
Ministry of Transportation
rt;
,,#
Cy
#'
,p
<:;
~
"
~
8
e ..
\i~:
e 3
5! ~
10
~
a
g:
i
...
i:!
~
S
j
~
:i1
--:
z
:s
a..
o
f-W.,...
WC1::UJ
UJC1::>
C1::w_
f-u..f-
CJ)w<(
a..C1::Z
oa..c:::
...J)-UJ
Z...Jf-
::J...J...J
0<(<(
S:2
z
:r:
u
w
I-
~
>-
oen
:::JCO
I- >.~
(()co~
3: >.
C>.ccoo
Z .2' 3: 0
-:z:.c'
Z O)lO
Z _0 .- Q')
<( :Z:o
-1:5-(")
Q..::JCD .
Ooca..
(()O.
o +-s
"<:t E () .
>-:x:sC)
<(~...,
S Eo
:z: -
c> e
_ u..
:z:
'!
~
~
'"
~
o .~
-i:: ~
caR
'+-' '"
c:~
I-
O~
~~
,..:
GO
f5
'"
'5
P Rf,lJ}.,tl1'l
\
EM!:
IIIiiiI--oI ,_
p__~~-___U_ _11...._
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
ALTERNATIVE 3 - PARCLO
J..:
CI)
Iff
'"
'5
P Rt:lJ}.,tl1-1
PATH: ...\SDSK\PROJ\400\DWG\BAYfIElO - AlTS SUMMARY PART 2.DwG REV: 13 JUNE 2002
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
ALTERNATIVE 2 - DIAMOND
....:
GO
f5
'"
'5
P Rt:Ll}.,tl1'1
SA YFIELD STREET
ALTERNATIVES
1JIIS
"'~~(8l;
".
Go
~/
~
0,
\
IICAU:
~. loam
~~-~~--~~~~--------
Cole Sherman
"'~€
l81;
""
Go
11/
.>;
.t?
o
\
SCALE
"_ - I
50m 0 100m
SA YFIELD STREET
ALTERNATIVES
URS
Cole Sherman
I
I
Summary Evaluation of Bayfield Street
Interchange Alternatives
I
* RELATIVE ALT ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 3 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
1 NATURAL There are no significant differences between the alternatives.
ENVIRONMENT Low 0 0 0 TIlEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL All alternatives result in relatively low aesthetic impacts to the existing
ENVIRONMENT vegetation cover and to sensitive viewer groups. Alternative 3 has higher
impacts to residences than the other alternatives. All alternatives result in
impacts to community mobility because of the out-of-way travel for local
commuters due to the closure of Rose Street, however Alternative 3 will
High 0 0 ~ have slightly greater impacts because of the additional road improvements
including two cul-de-sacs and realignment of Coulter Street. All alternatives
will have a minor impact on the OPP Station property but will not
significantly affect operations. Alternative 3 will displace the YMCA
facility.
TIlEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 & 2 ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED OVER ALTERNATIVE 3.
3 ECONOMIC Alternative 1 results in less impact to commercial property and fewer
ENVIRONMENT High 0 Q) G) impacts to business access along Bayfield Street.
TIlEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 PREFERRED.
4 CULTURAL All of the alternatives impact a known built heritage feature (bride overpass).
ENVIRONMENT Moderate 0 0 0 TIlEREFORE, ALL ALTERNATIVES ARE EQUALLY
PREFERRED.
5 TRANSPORTATION Although Alternative 2 has the least construction impacts and a lower cost
& ENGINEERING than Alternative 3, Alternative 2 negatively affects traffic operations on
& COST Bayfield Street as it eliminates the free flow loop ramp to Highway 400
southbound. Alternative I maintains the free flow loop ramp to Highway
400 southbound, so Alternative I is preferred over Alternative 2. While
High Q) Q) 0 Alternative 3 is more expensive than Alternative 2, it provides more
favourable traffic operations as this alternative provides three free flow
ramps to Highway 400. The more favourable traffic operations of
Alternative 3 are considered of more importance than the cost advantage of
Alternative 2.
TIlEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 3 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED.
SUMMARY OF Ev ALUA TION:
While Alternative 3 provides more favourable transportation and engineering benefits, Alternative 3 results in the greatest social and economic
impacts. The social and economic environments are considered to have a high level of significance and the impacts of Alternatives 2 and 3 are too
great and cannot be overcome with refinement of design. Although the transportation and engineering benefits are lower for Alternative I, traffic
operations will not be compromised, as this alternative will adequately serve existing and future traffic demands. Alternative I results in the least
impact to commercial property and provides favourable transportation and engineering benefits.
THEREFORE ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o " Most Preferred
Q) Least Preferred
* Ranking offactors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specifid study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Bayfield Street Interchange Alternatives can be
obtained from a Project Team Representative.
I
I
URS
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO mE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
I
1-.:'
t"J)
Q:
/:Y
:5
8
E
0
9
c:
\! '"
E
Q;
.c:
r.n
0 18
E
0
'"
~~
~~
<t
1-.."/
0,
~/
o
~.
~
s
,.
I
'"
..
I
'"
:z
~
'"
I
..
9
"
z r- ~
~ z ~ I
U ~::i 9
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
:;:;; w 0 ;;
~~~I cO::O:: a
'-' i!:j ~ ~ g:
.:i a: z i
<(~i= ...
& O![2 15
(j) 1f t;J ~
DC
..
~
:g
. ~
Z
<
-I
0..
1-0
ww.....
WO:::UJ
0:::0:::>
I-W-
(/)IJ...I-
ow<
-IO:::Z
wo..o:::
_>-UJ
IJ...-II-
>--1-1
<<<
!DO
Z
J:
o
UJ
I-
>-
00'>
:JCX>
I- >-..-
cnctJ..-
== >-
(D.ectJo
Z .2' == 0
-I.e'
Z 0) I()
Z ....0 .- 0)
<( I2,
....J:E.....('f')
a.. ::J ctJ .
Ooco..
U) 0 .
o :';::;$
-.:tEu.
>-::c:sC>
<(..-'""")
SEO
I .....
(De
-LL.
I
:<
!;(
..
o "~
os:: ~
cog,
........, (g
c: e:
I-
o~
~~
ALTERNATIVE 1 -
..~-
""""
t
-..:
_. tOlloa
__~~-___t.l~ _11....._
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
ALTERNATIVE 3 - PARCLQ'Afti'1
& REALIGNED DUCKW9fnH[~~.
;,}>'f
~. :"~~A-j
'*' 'OJ"
J j.
;v ,
f
..,,,,,....
.......
t
-..:
1IIiiI- D
,1II:_~_~-___a.- _11....._
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
j}--T"'''-- ./
ALTERNATIVE 2 - PARCLO A, (9B) /
DIAM9ND.'(t\J,~)
,p'
I
f
If
G~OIIG\oil1
COI..\J;:Gf
t
-..:
...-- D
1_
DUCKWORTH STREET
ALTERNATIVES
UIIS
Cole Sherman
ALTERNATIVE 4 PARCL9~i.
& REALIGNED DUCKW9RTI-t~r
fJ" ~";;fh
f
I
t
-..:
1-
1_
..-D
DUCKWORTH STREET
ALTERNATIVES
UIIS
Cole Sherman
~---~--------------
I
Summary Evaluation of Duckworth Street
Interchange Alternatives
I * RELATIVE ALT ALT ALT ALT
FACTOR LEVEL OF 1 2 3 4 COMMENTS
SIGNIFICANCE
r NATURAL All alternatives result in similar low impacts to the natural environment.
ENVIRONMENT All alternatives result in minor impacts to forest cover, but Alternatives
Moderate 0 0 Cl) Q) 3 and 4 will have a slightly greater impact on upland forest cover.
I THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2 ARE SLIGHTLY
PREFERRED.
2 SOCIAL All alternatives have low noise impacts and no impacts to residential
ENVIRONMENT property. Alternatives 3 and 4 have the greatest impact to community
0 Cl) Q) @ features and future land uses. Between Alternatives 1 and 2, Alternative
Low 1 has lower impacts since it does not impact the Georgian College
property.
I THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
3 ECONOMIC All alternatives result in low impacts to the economic environment. All
I ENVIRONMENT alternatives impact the proposed commercial development of the
Moderate 0 0 ~ Cl) "Building Box", although Alternatives 3 and 4 impacts more property.
THEREFORE,ALTERNA~SlAND2AREEQUALLY
I PREFERRED.
I 4 CULTURAL Alternative I results in no impacts to the cultural environment whereas
ENVIRONMENT Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 results in low impacts to land with
Low 0 Cl) ~ ~ archaeological potential.
I THEREFORE, ALTERNA ~ 1 IS PREFERRED.
- 5 TRANSPORTATION Alternative 4 is least preferred in all categories. Alternatives I and 3
& ENGINEERING provide better traffic operations than Alternative 2, and Alternative 1
I & COST has similar construction impacts and costs. Therefore, Alternative 2 is
not preferred. Alternative 3 provides slightly better traffic operations
than Alternative 1; however, Alternative 1 is less complex to implement,
I has less construction costs and requires much less property than
Moderate 0 Q) ~ @ Alternative 3. The difference in traffic operations between Alternatives
1 and 3 pertains to the Cundles/Duckworth traffic flow, which is
I adequately served by both alternatives. Therefore, the differences in
construction staging, cost and property are considered to be more
important than a slight improvement to "through traffic movement".
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS SLIGHTLY PREFERRED
OVER ALTERNATIVE 3.
SUMMARY OF EVALUATION:
Alternative 1 is preferred overall since it results in the least amount of impacts to the natural, social and economic environments, has the
lowest cost and property requirements, and offers acceptable transportation benefits.
THEREFORE, ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
I
Most Preftmd
Least Preftmd
* Ranking of factors based on consultation and input received from government ministries,
agencies, local municipalities and the general public as well as site specifid study area condition.
A package detailing the full evaluation of the Duckworth Street Interchange Alternatives can be
obtainedfrom a Project Team Representative.
o
@
I
I
URS
~... Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTIf OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Coie Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
I
~i;
(..,~~,.
"",t),
.<1 l:::il:,
l f
)\,'
);.'i.
0"
~'
!J'
.:y
'"
f
"'-'
; /
(...,"1
,<5 -' ,/'
.,2," J'
;0
l~
~~
c
'"
E
Q;
""
(J)
I~
z
<(
.....I
I-G.
WD
WW....
a::tr:W
1-0:::>
Cl)W-
:I:LJ..I-
I-W<C
a::O:::Z
o a.. a::
3:>-~
~:::J-'
()<(<C
:::::J()
DZ
J:
()
W
f-
>-
00)
:::::>CX)
I- >- .....
(/) CtI.....
3: >-
C)..c: CtlO
Z .91 3: 0
-:::I:..s:::'
Z C) I.()
Z '0 .- 0)
<( :::I:e
..J:6-('t)
a. :J CtI .
oOC:a..
i o(J)g~
~ E u .
. >-:x::gCJ
~
~ <(...--::1
\ S E 0
\ ~ :::I: -
'~ ~ C)e
~ -L1..
, :::I:
Q
..
.!
g
"
if.
iE
'"
~
z u
I- :;)
0 w 0
i= z z &
w :J
t) ::iE fa
w w ~ 0
(J) a:: ~ 0
a:: 5 a:: c:
w w .2
I- 0 a. :; .- iii
z w 0 iiJ !....
al- a:: a:: &: CO 'I:
Z a ;- 0
w w ~ a. " c..
t!) !::! t!) ~ ..... (J)
a:: z c:
W ...J W ~ c: to
...J <( a. i= ...
z 0 (J) a l-
t!) a:: x &: 0 '0
(ij a. w ~
~ ~
.-: ~~
. ;:
~
MTO Noise Policy
About Noise
Noise Barrier Retrofit Pro2ram
The Ministry realizes that noise levels associated with a highway can be annoying to adjacent
residents. For purposes of analysis, noise levels are measured in dBA (decibels in the A scale).
"Decibels" indicates sound level, while the "A scale" relates to the hearing range of the human
ear.
The Ontario Government released a policy statement on February 8, 1977 regarding
noise associated with major freeways. Subdivisions, located adjacent to freeways, which
were approved prior to this date, are eligible for consideration under MTO's "Retrofit
Noise Barrier Program". After this date developers were required to design new
residential areas in an acoustically sensitive manner in accordance with government
guidelines and in consultation with the affected municipality.
The following chart indicates approximate dBA levels associated with some common
noises/activities.
In the case of the Highway 400 corridor through Barrie, the locations shown on the
adjacent plan have been identified for construction of noise barriers under the Retrofit
Program. These locations were deferred when the Highway 400 project was announced.
Other locations within the Barrie area, which technically qualify under the program but
do not currently meet all criteria for construction, are also shown on the plan. To qualify
for construction sites must be cost effective meaning that a barrier must achieve a
significant level of noise reduction for a reasonable number of qualified residences.
140 AVERAGE HUMAN Shotgun blast, jet plane at takeoff, explodiDg
EAR PAIN
130 THRESHOLD firecrackers
120 UNCOMFORTABLY Rock music (amplified), hockey game crowd, severe
110
100 LOUD thunder, Pneumatic jackhammer
90 EXTREMELY LOUD Power lawn mower, farm tractor, interior of subway
80 train, motorcycle, snowmobile
70 MODERATELY Window air conditioning, crowded restaurant
60 LOUD
50 QUIET Singing birds, normal conversation
40
30 VERY QUIET Rustle of leaves, dripping faucet, light rainfall
20
10 JUST AUDffiLE Whisper
0
Impacts of Hi2hwav Expansion
When highways are expanded the Ministry must determine the expected change in sound
levels attributable to the widening. This is done by comparing future noise conditions
without the highway expansion with future noise conditions with the expansion. Where
the expansion results in a significant increase in sound (greater than 5 decibels) the
Ministry must investigate the feasibility of noise reduction measures such as barriers.
Noise control measures where applicable must be cost effective and achieve a minimum
average sound level reduction of 5 decibels.
Factors in the assessment which determine the noise levels for adjacent homes include
the distance from the highway, highway gradients, local elevations and contours, ground
cover between the highway and the homes, traffic volumes, percentage of trucks and
vehicle speeds.
Traffic noise near a highway varies from approximately 55 dBA to 75 dBA depending on a
number of factors including:
The results of the noise assessment for the Highway 400 project are summarized on
display panels in this presentation.
· Traffic volumes
· Number of trucks
· Road profile
· Distance between highway traffic and noise sensitive receivers (residences)
Gi). Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO 1HE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Co!e Sherman
URS
~.. Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLAl'iNING STUDY
FROM 1 K..\.1 SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO 1HE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 1l
Coie Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Preliminary Noise Assessment
Closure of Service Centres
Background
There are two Service Centres within the Project Limits:
A noise analysis has been carried out for the proposed improvements to Highway 400.
The purpose of this analysis was to detennine the following:
· At the Highway 89 interchange; and
· North of Molson Park Drive (accessible by northbound Highway 400 only)
· Future Noise Conditions without improvements
· Future Noise Conditions with improvements
Both service centres will be closed to accommodate the technically preferred
improvements.
Factors used in the noise assessment include highway grades, local elevations and
contours, ground cover (absorption), traffic volumes (Summer Average Daily Traffic)
and percentage of trucks and vehicle speeds.
Results
1.) Highway 89 Interchange
This service centre will be closed to accommodate the technically preferred alternative
for improvements to the interchange.
Mainline Highway
400
Highway 89
Innisfil Beach
Road
Molson Park Drive
Essa Road
Dunlop Street
Bayfield Street
Duckworth Street
2.) Northbound Service Centre
· 59-75 dBA
· 1-3 dBA
· 66-68 dBA
· 61-63 dBA
This service centre will be closed to avoid traffic operational issues related to the service
centre entrance ramp on Highway 400 to the Essa Road exit ramp.
· 1 dBA
· 1 dBA
· No noise sensitive receivers in the
vicini of the interchan e
· 61-73 dBA
· 64-71 dBA
· 59-74 dBA
· 59-75 dBA
The services provided at these centres are generally available at the areas around the
interchanges along the highway.
· No increase
· IdBA
· 2 dBA
· 4 dBA
· 2 dBA
* A change in noise levels less than 3 dBA is not perceptible to humans.
W Qntario
Ministry ot Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 K.t\1 SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Shennan
@ Ontario
URS
Cole Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Staging of Construction
Proposed Highway Illumination
Construction of the proposed improvements to Highway 400 will be carried out under a
series of contracts. It is anticipated that the duration of the construction will extend over
several seasons.
High mast illumination is proposed along Highway 400 north of Molson Park Drive as
well as at all interchanges. Adjacent to residential areas, appropriate shielding will be
mounted over the luminaries to avoid light trespass outside the highway right-of-way.
Details of this shielding will be determined in detail design.
To accommodate the structural and pavement rehabilitation, the following restrictions
were assumed:
. Night work may be required at certain locations
. Temporary lane closures and temporary road closures at underpasses
. Lane restrictions and temporary lane closures on crossing roads
Temporary Road Closures Complete Road Closures
(e.e;. nightly) (e.g. 1 construction season)
. Highway 89 at Highway 400 . 6th Line at Highway 400
. 4th Line at Highway 400 . 10th Line at Highway 400
. Innisfll Beach Road at Highway 400 . Sunnidale Road at Highway 400
. Essa Road at Highway 400
. Tiffin Street at Highway 400
. Dunlop Street at Highway 400
. Anne Street at Highway 400
. Bayfield Street at Highway 400
. Duckworth Street at Highway 400
It
HIGI-NA'Y
400
Details of Construction Staging will be developed and presented for public review during
later design stages.
. Typical mgh Mast Lighting Installation
(Mainline)
It is anticipated that the series of contracts will be timed in a manner whereby adjacent
contracts are not implemented simultaneously (e.g. Dunlop St. and Anne St.
improvements will not be implemented at the same time). This will provide reasonable
alternate routes to minimize out-of-way travel.
@ Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Co!e Sherman
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY II
URS
~.... Ontario
Cole Sherman
Ministry oj Transportation
Ministry oj Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Commuter Lot OptionsfEvaluation
II
The Ministry of Transportation recognizes the transportation system benefits that can be
achieved through increasing vehicle occupancy. In this regard, opportunities for locating
commuter parking lots in proximity to interchanges were considered in this study.
The Commuter Parking Lots (CPLs) provide a safe opportunity for people to carpool,
thereby reducing the number of vehicles on highways and urban streets. CPLs also
encourage ridesharing, thereby increasing energy efficiency.
Commuter parking lots were considered where:
· An existing commuter parking lot was displaced by proposed improvements at the
interchange;
· An existing commuter parking is known to be inadequate in terms of the number of
spaces it currently provides; or
· There was sufficient vacant/undeveloped land in the vicinity of the interchange with
suitable access to accommodate a commuter parking lot.
Commuter Parking Lot sites were investigated at the following interchanges:
· Highway 89;
· Molson Park Drive; and
· Essa Road.
t?~. ~'"'
;,~, Y//
,,'.... ," -,,'
>:/
r--~~"""'/
iuUlih
,~iUl!:!;,1i
IO"~S:iI'
...----..
The results of this evaluation are summarized at this Information Centre.
Note: The Commuter Parking Lot locations are presented for information
only. MTO is not seeking approval for the right to acquire private property
or construction of any Commuter Parking Lots as part of this study.
~ .....".
~
~.r:::::
"tjl po:r
URS
@.Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF IDGHWA Y 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF IDGHWAY 11
Coie Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
I
.c
<J)
laI
i5
()
l-
e
....I
C)CI)
Q)~W
(Q~>
>-0::-
<<I-
~Q.~
:r:o::a::
C)WW
-1-1-
:r:::>...J
:E<
:E
e
()
>-
00'>
:::JCO
I- >0.....
(J)m.....
C)~>.
Z~~O
-:x:.c:9
Z 010
ZO:f~
i :5.c:_~
I>' a..'Sm.
OOCa..
(J) 0 .
o ;~
J '<tEtJ .
I >-:x: sC)
f. <..... "')
;, 3:E.9
i ~&
J
I
I
~8
i~
ii
t.
~~
:I! 'I
Ii
05
. i:: :;
cal
......, '"
c:~
01-
'0
~
~~
Highway 89 Commuter Lot Evaluation
I
t( I I
.c I
IIJ
I~
I
II I
l- I
II wO
I >...J
6:"(1)
c~w
~~> I
a::a::j::
<~<
a..a::~
Zww
01-1-
(I)::::;)...J I
...J:E<
O:E
:Eo
U
I
>- I
00)
:::>CX)
I- >-..... I
CJ)"'.....
3=>-
".c:"'o
Z.~3=o
z:r:.g,ib
Zo:r:~ I
:5:5a;;$
a. 5 c: a.:
i OCJ) 0 .
o :;:;3:
~ ..;t ~ 0 .
I >- 3" I
I ~.....-,
:r:EJ3
"e
~ _u- I
i :r:
1
.....! c I I
~9~ c, ~i
~" z.
dU~ j t
=< 05
i I
~& . i:: :;
Ii cal
~fI)
~ c:~ I
Ot-
!>H '0
jf.!i ~
!il~ ~~
j~ I
I
ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2 ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
ALTERNATIVE 1 (NORTHEAST OUADRANT) ALTERNATIVE 2 (NORTHWEST QUADRANT)
. Minimal noise impacts . A voids property impacts on businesses
. A voids property impacts to agricultural . Potential for future expansion
operations
. No potential areas of archaeological
significance identified within vicinity of
proposed commuter parking lot
EVALUATION SUMMARY
Although commuter parking lots are generally beneficial to overall traffic operations,
such benefits do not justify the displacement of businesses. Alternative 3 would displace
Motel 400, while the other alternatives do not displace businesses. Alternative 3,
therefore, is not technically preferred.
The viability of Alternative 4 would be contingent on an' agreement between Cookstown
Outlet Mall and the Ministry of Transportation. As such, there is uncertainty with respect
to impacts to property, businesses and capacity. In addition, the location of Alternative 4
is less convenient than the others, as access to and from this location must be made via a
private entrance. Alternative 4, therefore, is not technic~y preferred.
Alternative 2 does not impact any businesses, however, Alternative 2 is located on lands
that are presently used for agricultural operations. This alternative has potential for
expansion, however it is noted that an expansion will increase impacts to agricultural
lands. Alternative 1 results in greater partial property takings, which are not expected to
have significant effect on the operations of those businesses. This alternative does not
have potential for expansion. Alternatives 1 and 2 are considered to have similar impacts.
Note: The Commuter Parking Lot locations are presented for information
only. MTO is not seeking approval for the right to acquire private property
or construction of any Commuter Parking Lots as part of this study.
Co!e Sh€rman
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTIi OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
@Ontario
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Molson Park Drive Commuter Lot Evaluation
",,~"~~r~
,;::,>:;;;:-" /
(
ALTERNATIVE 1 IS PREFERRED.
ALTERNATIVE 1 (FoRMER BEER STORE SITE)
. Does not have property impacts on existing
businesses
. Can provide direct access from Molson Park
Drive
. A voids the intersection at Molson Park
Drive and Barrie View Drive
. Potential for future expansion can be
addressed
EVALUATION SUMMARY
Alternative 1 offers better access from Molson Park Drive as it is located away from the
interchange and the Barrie View Drive intersection, which operates poorly during peak
travel periods. Also, Alternative 1 will not impact businesses, while Alternative 2 may
potentially reduce the number of parking spaces available in the Barrie Power Centre.
The viability of Alternative 2 would be contingent on an agreement between Barrie
Power Centre and the Ministry of Transportation. Without such an agreement there is
uncertainty with respect the extent of impacts to property and businesses as well as
parking capacity.
There is a proposal being generated to redevelop the Molson Park Lands to include
commercial and light industrial uses. Incorporating a Commuter Parking Lot into this
redevelopment will need to be negotiated with the landowner and MTO. Incorporating a
Commuter Parking Lot in a new development is considered to be more advantageous, as
both the MTO and the landowner can better address Commuter Parking Lot requirements
in a new development.
\. ;
\ ,,,'/
.4-'
Note: The Commuter Parking Lot locations are presented for information
only. MTO is not seeking approval for the right to acquire private property
or construction of any Commuter Parking Lots as part of this study.
URS
Ministry of Transportatil)n
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIIE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Sherman
Gf;"Ontario
I-
-- ~
~
U' --
I
1.
w....!
C.;
I
.c
rn
I~
.....
e
...I
"C/)
C~w
<i2~
e<~
a:a.Z
c;ja:a:
C/)ww
w.....!:i
j<
:it
e
u
>-
om
;:)co
..... :>.......
00 co......
~:>.
O..c:coo
Z .!:P ~ Q
-:I:.s::L6
Z _ 0>0)
~O:i:o
-1:S1U'"
a.aca:
000 0 .
0=;:
"It e (;I .
>-::'::30
<......"")
;:e.9
:I: 0
0....
_LL
:I:
Os
.- =
s...~
CC8.
........ I!
ce
O~
i
~~
Essa Road Commuter Lot Evaluation
AL TERNATIVES 2 AND 3 ARE EQUALLY PREFERRED.
'"
rJ':J.
-
==
~
e
~
....
.,...
=
~
~
~ ~
== .C
Q Q
.,... -
- .,...
= ==
.~ Q
;::~
~~
'" ==
~ =
~~
~ ;..
... Q
::~
= (JJ
-==. ;..
~3
~~
Q Q
..........
.,...
~ rJ':J.
==-
~ 5
... e
=......
.,... .,...
i e
- e
Q Q
~u
~
Q
~
....
=
e
e
=
00.
ALTERNATIVE 2 (NORTHEAST QUADRANT) ALTERNATIVE 3 (SOUTHWEST QUADRANT)
. No significant impacts to acquatic and . Access (via private property) located away
terrestrial habitats, groundwater, wetlands and from Essa Road ramp terminal (which operates
has good potential for stormwater poorly during peak: travel periods)
management
. No impacts on community features, . No significant impacts to acquatic and
businesses or agriculural operations terrestrial habitats, groundwater, wetlands and
has good potential for stormwater management
. No noise impacts . No impacts on community features, businesses
or agriculural operations
. No impacts on heritage features or areas of . No noise impacts
archaeological potential
. Direct access to/from Essa Road . No impacts on heritage features or areas of
archaeological potential
. Provides the highest capacity
EVALUATIONS~RY
Alternative 1 will occupy lands with high potential for development (former Barrie
Raceway site), while Alternatives 2 and 3 will be located within the existing Ministry of
Transportation right-of-way, on lands that are unlikely to be developed. Alternative 1 is
least technically preferred.
Alternative 2 has only a slight advantage over Alternative 3 in terms of capacity and
effect on businesses. Alternative 3 may require a partial property taking from Zehrs. The
impacts of both alternatives will require further refmement and investigation during later
design stages.
Note: The Commuter Parking Lot locations are presented for information
only. MTO is not seeking approval for the right to acquire private
property or construction of any Commuter Parking Lots as part of this
study.
@ Ontario
URS
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIoHW A Y 89
TO THE JUNCTION OF HIoHW A Y 11
Cole Sherman
;>-
""j..Q
... Q)
Q) <1.1
= <.':I
~ U
o <.':I
...c:: =
.~ 0
~-o
<1.1 Q)
QJ CiS
r:I).......
~ '0
...c::bO
~ Q)
::s =
Q.,Q)
;>-..Q
t:.. ......
u:=
!5'. ~
... CI}
Q.,;;
Q) 0
'I;; u
..;:: ~
~~
u:-= .
= U <1.1
o =';}
... ~ <.':I
o~..o
E-<...c::~
~-~
.ciOU
Q)
...c::
-0-
= = ;>,.
co 0 t:
?'.'> -0 <1.1 Q)
a Q)''- Q.,
'"' ~ Q) 0
o..Q":: ...
Q., <.':IQ.,
8.23 > ~
QJ-o-;>"
.- = Q) ..0
~:~ ~
.tW _ ~ <.':I
-o1::.ci...c::
Q) Q) U
-0 8 ....
.,.. QJ ;>,. ::s
;>""t:Q.,
o ''- Q).....
... ::s Q., 0
Q.,0"0
o Q) ... ~
..Q "" Q., i::
_ ~ o~.;::
:;: Q)..s 0
;> Q....... ..s -t:
=:.eo...o
.sa Q.. 0 ~ Q.,
'I;;_"::-o~
<I) 5 ~ ~-
= ~ .... ~
o ... <I)
Q., Q) e ''-
e ~... e
~ QJ Q.,
,.q Q) 8 0 Q.,
"" Q., -0 ~
~
....
QJ
c-
o
....
Q.,
=:
o
...
U
<.':I
1"
8
o
<I)
CiS
-0
Q)
CI}
o
Q.,
e
Q..
a
~
<1.1
""
Q)
.~
..Q
Q)
CI}
''-
o
= ""j
<.: S
0''-
t1CiS
~.9
-0
'3 Q)
O...c::
~ -
.....
...c:: 0
u_
:.E'3
~ <1.1
~ ~
..::!3 <.':I
Q) <I)
;) <.':I
- -0
QJ 0
CI}-
''- <.':I
o Q..
=:..-
U
c.::
.... =
~ <.':I
CI} ~
gs <.':I
"" ~
g s
.... .~
-'I;;
a.~
U ...
<':':= .
.... =: bO
51 Q) .5
..-.:: 1::
CI} :::I Q)
o O":g
Z ~ ~
o
CI}
....
o
Z
;>-
<.':I
~
...c::
bO
::E
bO
=
'I:
='
-0
=
.~
CI}
Q)
-0
~
CI)
-0
Q)
-
''-
=
o
-0
~~
t:S
Q) CI}
-g51
:::I';}
o Q)
_-0
o:a
E-<_
::a-8
<.':I
=
....
..... '-- .~
'3.E-o..s
<l.lCI}~"'"
~"'<.':Io
=~at:
.- 8 U <.':I
~Q)=Q..
w.....
~.. Q) ~
~ g...s-o
~~ ~ ~
:.E cd ~ .~
QJ Q) -0 Q)
..s~<.':Io
0_0-0
- =-
CI} Q) - =
C 8 5 ~
8~~~
o=bO>
>Q..=<.':I
o==...c::
"".- :'!! <.':I
S"~i::a
.... <.':I ~ =
-oa--
~g~58
0''- s= >.
Q.. ~ I: QJ -0
,go9;;a
,.....t--CI}Q..CI}
~
~
=
a
::a
""
2d
=
~---
~~
-C'I)
C'I) '-'
<1.1
-
=
~
a
'S
0"
a
'0
""
~51
U ''-
.... <1.1
5-8
.5 :a
-0-
Q) QJ
CI}-o
-0 =
= .-
<.':1-0
= Q)
.sa !5'
CI} -
e ~
Q) Q)
u-o
<.: Q)
'u ..Q
Q)=
~.~
~
o ''-
= ~
.sa -0 -0
- = ?'.'>
e <.':I a
Q) - =
:g ~.:=
tI)...... =
= Q)..-
o...c:: "';j
U Q) '"'
-0 Q.o Q..
=ObO
cd - =
<n CI}'I:
<.':I bO :::I
a.5 -0
<.':I .;:j -0
Q) = Q)
> ''- <.:
....... ....... ."".
::: CI} -=
CI} <.':I QJ
=..c:-o
~ u.-
1:: :::I QJ
oCl}..Q
...... rn......
fll c:-=
e .sa ~
Q)Q..<I.I
~ 0 ~
..Q==
''- bO Q..
CI}..- QJ
~ m Q)
p..-8;;
.....
6
....
m
e
j;IJ
-0
=
<.':I
-
=
88
:.0=
Q) 0
C'l)U
-
.<;
-
Q)
-0
bO
=
'I:
:::I
-0
-0
Q)
0.
o
'0
>
-8
Q)
..0
o
-
<I)
=
<.':I
i5..
Q)
go
u .
~~
=..-
<.':I CI}
...J-8
~
Q)
..c: -d
~ Q)
-
"'0 <.':I
~ 0 . 0.
"a'; ~ :~
oQ)~ '5
'"' 51 <.':I ".
Q) .. "'0 ~
..Q~QJ <.':I
=-0'1;; <I)
.;: Q) 0 ...
.....Q bO ~
CI}_Q) c-
..Q:;:::> e
2 ~ Q) ''-
..;j bO:g ~
= CI} 'I:
-0 'Q.. ~ QJ
ij~e ~
<I.I<nQ) <.:
Q)-ou
~ a a ~
- ...J..c: u
a . 5 ~
U Q) - 'c
<.: -... bl)
..- :9 ~ ......
51 ~ '0 <I)
.... 0 "" 0
C'I) Q., Q.. Z
=
o
''-
'I;;
""
o
-
CI}
Q)
~
-0 =
a 0
c: ".=
oS
''- QJ
- bl)
U Q)
~>
"" .....
p.. 0
'"'
Q)
.. ~ (.) oS
<I) ~ <':'_
S ' .''- ~ s
.- = = ~ =..-
t) ''- .~ Q., 0 ~
'I: gf ~ en': t:
tj ''- -0 ~ S Q)
~ .~ - ..... '3 sg
bl) 8'<; = <n 0
....... - 0 = U
S... = 0..- 0
. .:= -0 'I;; U ~
.... = bO bO = ~
... -0 =..;::.... Z
<I) = 'I: ':::1 -0 ~
~<.':I:::I=Q).ci
13 ,;; -0 .::a .~= 00
:::Ia-o:-:: V
CI}:::I8.uQ)'-'
",;'~,.g8.o~
e Q) Q) <1.1 -0 ''-
E;:;8;);>"ijQ)g
<.':I - -0 ..oQ)
QJe _bO
e _ ~ "":;::: <.':I
=_O~Q)
=0-..... ----
o U :;::: -0 CI}.= ~
.: = ~ ~ gf ~'I:
U 0 ~ =''- 0 0
Q) .- ~ <n ""...c::
'O~~Q)~Q..S
d:: ~ ~~!:) goo<(
'I;;
-
~
::c
..c:
<I)
i:I:
-0
a
<I)
QJ
....
....
QJ
..c:
<n
i:I:
<::
'"
E
Ii;
-<=
U)
!~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
>0-.
Qoo-
~:>o-
E-<<>-
rJ':J.~<
~=~
~::2o
Z:::-
Z~:::
<o~
~~O
~;:JS
=OE:
=rJ)Cj
'''1::1' Z
>~;:J
<-~
~~~
~OO
-&:E-
=
r:::
o .2
-- ~
51:.., 0
CO" !it
+-' r:::
C ~
o ~
.~
@~
------------------
-
Summary of Potential Environmental Effects, Mitigation Requirements,
Commitments to Future Work and Monitoring (Continued)
Potential Interference with
Groundwater / Wells
Relocation of Utilities
Light Trespass from
Highway Illumination
Impact on Commuter
Parking Lots
Effects of Snow Drifting
Where a potential for interference is identified, design
refinements will be developed where appropriate and
monitoring of the water supply during construction
may be necessary.
Some utility relocation will be required as a result of
this project. On-going discussions with utility
companies wilt be maintained to eliminate or reduce
service disruptions during construction.
Incorporate methods to avoid/reduce light trespass
during the ~esign stages.
The proposed design identifies alternative parking lot
locations where existing commuter parking lots are
impacted by ramp improvements. In addition, the
proposed design identifies opportunities for locating
parking lots in the vicinity of interchanges, where
possible,
Measures to reduce the effects of snow drifting may
require additional property at certain areas along
Higl1way 400 c()nid()r~ Tbese areas have been
identified on the plans. pre$ented at this Public
Information Centre,
The potential to cause interference with well water
supply and groundwater recharge/discharge areas
will be assessed during the detail design stage.
Generally, this will only occur where there are major
excavations in close proximity to shallow sources of
groundwater.
MTO to liaise with utility companies through the
design and construction stage, as appropriate.
Methods to reduce light trespass onto adjacent
properties will be identified in the preliminary
design. Possible methods to reduce trespass,
incluqing shielding, will be incorporated in the detail
design.
MTO will continue to identify opportunities for
locating parking lots in the vicinity of interchanges
along the Highway 400 as demand warrants.
MTO will continue to investigate options for
implementing snow drifting countermeasures through
later design stages.
~ OntariQ
Ministl)l of Transportation
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTII OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Sherman
Summary of Potential Environmental Effects, Mitigation Requirements,
Commitments to Future Work and Monitoring (Continued)
Impact on Archaeological
Resources
Impacts to Heritage
Resources (Heritage
Structures over Highway 400)
Impacts to Highway and
Local Traffic
It has been determined that the existing right-of-way
is considered free of archaeological concern. There is
potential for the identification of pre-contact and
historic archaeological resources within the lands
beyond the existing highway right-of-way.
Retaining the Coat of Arms panels for use on the new
structure is the preferred mitigative approach. The
proposed interchange configuration will impact a farm
complex with potential cultural landscape
significance.
Staging and traffic management measures to reduce
impacts to traffic during construction have been
identified.
Lands beyond the existing right-of-way will be
subject to a Stage 2 archaeological assessment.
Additional lands beyond the limits of construction
required for temporary construction will be subject to
archaeological assessment prior to construction. The
appropriate agencies/authorities will be notified in
the event that deeply buried archaeological or human
remains are encountered during construction
activities.
The option to retain the Cost of Arms panels will be
examined during detail design in consultation with
appropriate government agencies. A landscape plan
will be developed during the detail design phase of
this project.
MTO to continue to review and improve traffic
management and construction staging concepts
during design and construction stages.
(j) Ontario
URS
Ministl)l of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM I KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Cole Sherman
What's Next
Freedom of Information and Protection Privacy
Mter this Information Centre, the following will be carried out:
Comments and information regarding this study are being collected to assist the Ministry
of Transportation (MTO) in meeting the requirements of the Provincial Environmental
Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file for use during the study and
may be included in study documentation. With the exception of personal information all
comments will become part of the public record.
. Review the comments received and respond to any questions
. Continue to consult with the public and external agencies for input in the
. refinements to the technically preferred alternatives and proposed mitigation
measures
You are encouraged to contact the MTO Project Team if you have questions or concerns
regarding the above information.
. Prepare the Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR) and place it on the
Public Record for the 30-day review period in Fall 2002. A notice will be published
at that time
Thank vou for attending.
Please feel free to ask questions and fill out a comment sheet before you leave.
GV Ontario
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
URS
@Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
FROM 1 KM SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 89
TO TIlE JUNCTION OF HIGHWAY 11
Gaie Sherman
Gaia Sherman
Ministry of Transportation
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
A
E'...""'..;'..N....,,'., :"'~'~"'"
~..c,_'__"_"..''''' " ': ..
<m.~,W'<".YM,,'9. ,..,~ _,_,
I',.....,X... /
, ,,'/
~A .~_.!:'c ,_,
MAPPING OF NOISE SENSITIVE AREAS
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
,.."
! -
"-
i
;'
--,l
/
i
.~.....
/
.~ '" I
-1'
/
-..
;'
I
I
'-.
1"'.
........ .
........
LEGEND
- GRASSED SWALES
____ ENHANCED DITCHES
I;
KEY PLAN
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
_ TO ESSA ROAD
Ministry of Transportation
URS
"_1_ r""'L..__......
..-.......
.......)<....
I
!
'f' _,
I ,.......
l
/
......_,........",...,!
/ - ,
I
I
'...." /
'~.....
~/'
/
o
6
0:
~
ijJ
0:
o
~
<!J
~
0:
~
SCALE
FIGURE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
25m 0 50m
L J I
HORIZONTAL
3a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-------.--
-
LEGEND
_ GRASSED SWALES
____ ENHANCED DITCHES
~
.ID~
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
I'"". 'AI D ~()_QF\-nn
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
@ Ontario
25m 0 SOm
6 ., I
HORIZONTAL
3b
Ministry of Transportation
...............Dn..n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
. LEGEND
- - GRASSED SWALES
____ ENHANCED DITCHES
~
Cole Sherman
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
25m 0 50m
I I I
HORIZONTAL
_ TO ESSA ROAD
3c
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
LEGEND
- - GRASSED SWALES
---- ENHANCED DITCHES
~
Cole Sherman
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
25m 0 SOm
L I !
HORIZONTAL
_ TO ESSA ROAD
3d
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
.1
RWDI LEGEND:
I
-+
MODELLED NOISE SENSITIVE AREA
LEGEND
- - GRASSED SWALES
---- ENHANCED DITCHES
~
ff) Ontario
Cole Sherman
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
URS
25m 0 SOm
L; I !
HORIZONTAL
3e
Ministry of Transportation
_ TO ESSA ROAD
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
I
!II
)>
;:c
;:c
m
-
/
/
,/
Cole Sherman
" i--
\ '
i \
\ \
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
LEGEND
- GRASSED SWALES
---- ENHANCED DITCHES
@ Ontario
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
URS
25m 0 50m
L I I
HORIZONTAL
Ministry of Transportation
- TO ESSA ROAD
3f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
--- ---- - ------
-u-i
----1- -----\---
\ \
\
I
- ~"" ~",(:. ~-:::'-
. ----\- .
l------ --
\
-~---------
INH1\O \
\
uT--
--I
\
__L--
I
\
\
RWDI LEGEND:
+ MODELLED NOISE SENSITIVE AREA
LEGEND
_ GRASSED SWALES
____ ENHANCED DITCHES
~
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
25m 0 SOm
L.' I
HORIZONTAL
_ TO ESSA ROAD
39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L______L- ----I-~-
_____- i I
-----
-----
------
------
\_____ 1______
------\ \
------
__ __L--
--- --
LEGEND
- GRASSED SWALES
____ ENHANCED DITCHES
Cole Sherman
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
~ Ontario
_ TO ESSA. ROAD
3h
Ministry of Transportation
25m 0 50m
L.. I I
HORIZONTAL
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
......../
t -------------
-----{------ - ---
J 1-
RWDI LEGEND:
+ MODELLED NOISE SENSITIVE AREA
-
LEGEND
- GRASSED SWALES
____ ENHANCED DITCHES
~
@ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
KEY PLAN
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
SCALE
25m 0 50m
L J I
HORIZONTAL
3j
Ministry of Transportation
URS
_ TO fSSA ROAD
......_._ t"t-L..____
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
-
I
-
-
II
-
-
--
.
l
RWDI LEGEND:
4 MODELLED NOISE SENSITIVE AREA
I
+
ESH4
'y
/ '
/ '
/
/,
ESH6
LEGEND
- - GRASSED SWALES
---- ENHANCED DITCHES
~ Ontario
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
25m 0 50m
L J I
HORIZONTAL
3k
Ministry of Transportation
URS
Cole Sherman
_ TO ESSA ROAD
I
I
I
I
,
'~I
..<::::
,
f....
~
"
"
r
LeGeND
- GRASseD SIlVALes
--- eNHANceD DITCHes
\
\
,......"..
..-'
V Ontario
'<:,,-,<:>/
.'.',,-....-/
\">O~Q /\,~",,-,
\ ~G'""
.- " .5'>->.. \
.<!'t'~~, ,
1:.,.""" ,_'
~
~ ""'DOlloD No/so SENsrr",o AR""
ristry of TranSPOrtation
1a.S
Cole Shel1Tlan
Key PLAN
SCALe
~
-"'""""""""
~~
lIORlzONTAL
H/GHVVA y 400 PLAN
FIGURI:
/./.?.
~-1'
<:I
.f;j,
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
'/
I
/
... /"
../
~~""
~""
I
~
~ ,",OOEU-EO NOISE SENS"",E >J'.EA
F\GURE.
H\GH\NAY 400 pLAN
30
SCA\..E
KE'f plJ..N
7.5~
llolUZON'fAL
,\..EGEND
..- ..- GRASSED SWjI.\..ES
__- EN\'\J>.NCED D\TC\'\E.S
\-\\G\-\\NP-Y 400 PLM-lN\NG ~IUDY
~ \(tn souto of \-\igoway 89 to JU!\ctlO!\ at
H\ghway "\ "\
...... ,^, p 30-95-00
_ "(OES5#1.fI.()IID
~ nntaf\O
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
/
-r-...
......
I
/
..~. f
/ '. "
'.
.,....... I
........
.~~.
I
LITTLE LAKE
......
.........
.,'>.....
~
I
MODELLED NOISE SENSITIVE AREA
t
RWDI LEGEND:
LEGEND
- GRASSED SWALES
--- ENHANCED DITCHES
Cole Sherman
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
1 km South of Highway 89 to Junction at
Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
KEY PLAN
SCALE
HIGHWAY 400 PLAN
FIGURE
~ Ontario
URS
25m 0 50m
I I j
HORIZONTAL
TO ESSA ROAD
DESIGN
SCALES
DATE
3p
Ministry of Transportation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 kin South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 kin to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
A
E..;..:..N...... ,.i...
. .:- >
"w.wm.w, . ~.v
I:Xp. E..'
: 'JP' ,
...:.'....... ....._.,.'^.~. ~~
, ,.-- '
_,m) _m'_ _,w.w_',_,.__.'_',^ ~
NATURAL FEATURES MAPPING
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
::.
-i.
.. 0l ~
~~~~~~~~
~ I'~
\ \ \ I
Ps
~
250
I
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant Wetland
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
o
250
.
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
2. Highway 400 Natural Heritage Features
From 26+700 to 27+545 West
to 1 +800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\\;\..
~',.
. ,
~\ ~
'"
" ,1
~~#
I
\
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Fill Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant Wetland
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
+--@--+
250
I
o
,
250
.
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
!!:!
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Fill Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant Wetland
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Ps
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
~
250
I
o
.
250
,
500
i
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--~
/(\ ~;
\ ,. "
J---
~c::::;....-- 0'0\.$--
" CJ'\
\
. )"~',:: .
~\
Deer
( Wintering)
Habitat ~
i ~\
~ .._,..-\
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Ps
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
~
250
I
o
,
250
.
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
i
Natural Heritage
23+1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Fill Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant Wetland
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Ps
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
~
250
I
o
,
250
,
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
Cole, Sherman & Associates
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Fill Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
~
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
250
I
o
,
250
,
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
Heritage
to 28+500
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Fill Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant Wetland
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Ps
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
+-CD--+
250
I
o
,
250
.
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
9. Highway 400 Heritage
From 28+500 to 29+725 I
1 1 Vespra
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ps
~
250
I
Groundwater Recharge
Discharge Area
Regulated Area
Habitat
ANSI
Significant
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
o
,
250
,
500
I
Scale 1 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
Prepared
F
"'~ 0F'
ECOLOGIC~L
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Type 2 Permanent 18+400 ~
Warmwater Crossing, - --!!!. - 4 . 4 - ~
18+280 4 4 4 4j
-= ~.5 4 -"=' _
~~~.
__ .4-~ IJWI
:iT1,,~229._
~~
a O.A~
~ ~"'~.
~ .,I~
-.....~
i \~
""'\ '.
\'-.4
;po \1Ah..
",' -
. .
~ .""
C\J ,: .
\ L
! )!- t,
1 r,. \} 4 4
-.-;-..... -"=' .._.~-_._'t:... -"=' ..ili..
4 4 4 .J-4b _
4:- 4 4 :-
UUIe lake
229.0
Uttle Lake
230.5
-
~
:J
~r-
LEGEND
Groundwater Recharge Area
Groundwater Discharge Area
Fill Regulated Area
Deer Wintering Habitat
ANSI
Provincially Significant Wetland
Unevaluated Wetland
Forest Community
Ps
Red Pine Plantation
Scots Pine Plantation
Study Corridor
Wildlife Linkage/Corridor
~
250
I-=::
o
.
250
,
500
I
Scale 1 : 10,000
URS Cole, Sherman & Associates
400 Natural Heritage
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway 400 Planning Study and Preliminary Design Study
From 1 km South of Highway 89 Northerly 30 km to the Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
@ Ontario
A
I.'.......X............J"
. "
i ~,
_m.-t h."" '.'-
E"..~N'
" ?
.; , " , - '" -'< " ' ;. , , : :. ~ ." :
~ "
. ""
?, -,
.NN'N...~~ ~N. m.
PLATES - RECOMMENDED PLAN
Transportation Environmental Study Report
April 2004
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
'''I
i
,
i
i
zi
~Q 'I g
~~ ~
:5 ~ j ~ ---------------
,,_::~~:;;;::r~-~~'--~::-~::-n-~~;:~~~~~~::-~::-:-\~~::_:~.::;::.::::==::.=:::-~:::.~:;;::~::~~~::-::~:::::~:~::::.~::::~::.~:-~-:-~::;:::.~-~-~r:=:::-::::::::::::-:::::::_::::_:::_mm_____:---~
'!,tot. Idol,
. ,.cyr_'" -='==="~=~ ---______n~_~._____
-"-'HL}'">--------------------------n-------------n-----------------------------n------------nm-----n--------------------n-4.:::-::~:n:r-----:::-:-n~i\'::::tT-2~~~-~~~~=~~~:~;;,~;::;;:----
~ ~ ~ ,., " \" ~~\I\ ....9... 'i~i RET'';'.~~~ RG...e'iJ^y.,",........~. =;:~.
- )> . ;::>'"- . ......... "",..,.,. ",.-,', ,....', ',.,
vJ ~. ' u~ IiI ,-. r;.--~ T- ~
-0 ~ 1'1,,,,. .... g
::OUl 1\
2g II
rrl ',.
~ LOT 7111
CON 14 '11il
,.'
..1
\.'
.,\
Ii II
\'
..I
I:'
.J
J\
3.0 Shoulder
y>...., ,""
15.0
10.8 Medion
15.0
- - - -
3.0 Shoulder
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
14
7
CON
LOT
CON
LOT
14
7
'"
....
+
o
o
o
- - - - - - - - -
- - -
-----
- - - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
~,<',.... -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - - -
- - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - : 15.0
- - - - - - - -
----------
- - -
... ---............... --...... --......... -_.................. ----". -".... -............ ~......... ------............... --...... ... .....-..-...-- ...--... --... ------............... ... ---... - --... - --... ---... -- -... --......
TOWN OF BRADFORD WEST
GWILLlMBURY
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
,,!~:
. lOT
CON
7
14
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
:t
Q
~
~
~
~ ~~
~ ~~
... ~-
'" n
'" 0
)> ...
n ...
~ :I: Z
:t 15 ~
C 3>' 0
zoo
ffi I I I 1\Il1! 'I
HIGHWAY 400
10m 0 20m
TO TIFFIN STREET -
(T) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 26+550 TO STA. 27+250
URS
-,:In'"
"Z.9~
~~~
~~-
o
~88~
'i'O..qD
I r -t-
~
...
U>
o
z
~ ~
;. "
z g
I~~
~\I
!4
:t
C
Z
'"
[ill
Shoulder
SCL
0.8 Medion
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 ~~gu~E[::.:;..~
10.8 Median
/./ 0-
/~~,<~.:.
I;~',("~",,-,,, ,--" /" .,'"
~[j}~P}~:7t
/~ i'" //!.' 00, ' ,/
If/"'//i/J' "'0/
1I.....t... ' /:j / /\
t~~/ ,.' ,/.f l ,/ ".""
f' /1 .
/: j,g
: !/ ""-'" ,,1'
if i<
/ .' J //' \
/8./ /
l ' i:'vci /'
." . .'0 .-
II. I j f-/
1/' / .' ~/
II / ,/'
o #> <.,.,'" >
9. .,/
b _---4 " /i:'
------------.:;.-d~~.'" /
..._--...----- , _....._...~.-:.;... i~:>
--- ,,- z:;'
---- -..-...--..---"'!"'---..---..""'......- -.,.~~
...----
'-
~
...
......
......
"-
...
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
,
,
'...
,
,
,
,
'''\. ,,:,,>00
~\. OX
~
.."-~,,,..
TOWN OF INNSFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
TOWN OF BRADFORD
WEST GWILLlMBURY
COUNTY OF; SIMCOE
LOT
CON
7
15
1
6
,
,
,
,
,
,
'..............
......., ~
'.
..
,'...
,
"''11",-. ~
, 'V
',,;.,,:...,......1
...... ...............
.............. "'- ""...
............. 0
................ .............. 0
..................:'~..,. ..................-..._ C!;
... , ----.:::
... "'~'.~.::...................-
~
8
~Jf'1n
xc
.;--tr-
/'ji;!ii
//' fl'. ~~
.:o^/L~~~~~~:::::~~:~,,_______ -! -------.
.--- -~.----=~-~=~~~;I-,- - - - --~ -~~... ............... .. ...........m ....... ................... .... mllld.
. 3.0 Shoulder
-----
- -15.0
- - -
-----
- - - -
-----
-. - -
-----
.15.0
- la SK5ulder
- - - -
10.8
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
15.0 -
-
. u. ,..,.,~", "~,,,l"',.i~.'
3.0 Shoulder
-~-~--~....._...
-------......
-----------------,"---- - --
..-------............-.... -----
.............. .....
....~" ....,.... "
\ '........."" '..',;,;.~.~\
...............,j~i, .
~-, ,\
:t.::._",\
~,::-;.._~~~,
.:." ~... '''::"\>''
" .' --" :.', \.
,,_, ",_",.~'c:_~. :'--"'-',_: '; <<>.:}- ~\\
">::>:::.':' ...~ """
'- -'"~ ~~~ \.
":~~~'" "'"
,
,
'. '" -/ " .,
'<,>~ '-'~" .~ ~ . .
"'^ 0"","'''' "'-'<,:-.,
','-.- "-""x -< ""' ",'- .....
'~'t.':\ '\ " "-
/..... ". '~. ....."-,.
, \c;:~:
...... v> ,..-'
'0
+
V'
o
o
CON
LOT
1
7
!'1
:K
~
Z
(')
!:
c:;
Z
n
~
o
~
Z
LOT
\ CON
::0
<
::E
)>
::0
!'1
:J:
o
C
'"
!'1
~
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- Existing Property Limit
__nnn_ Proposed Property Limit
...."'1"1
r=rr1X
I"1~v;
:!J~2
P C>
o
a
ocpo
~ 'f-J'
<"".'0
~ %--:-
~(
@ Ontario KEY MAP ~ ~~ TO TIFFIN STREET - PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY ~ ~~ ;:: ~~~ HIGHWAY 400
r- -<_ 0
'" () r- HOR. SCALE:
m ~ U> ~~~
Ministry of Transportation :I: 11 0 RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 c;; .. r- Z 2
i '" ~ :I: Z " -<~- 1 :2000
:I: 2!, ~ 0
r- :I: '" ~ 0
to Junction at Highway 11 '< z r- b 8 :I: '" ~ss~
URS m Z !: 0 STA. 27+250 TO STA. 10+400
~ OJI ill 1 IqJlI 'I I~~ 10m 0 20m
G.W.P.30-95-00 1 I 'i'OjD
HIGHWAY 400 ] \1 1 r ~$-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'"
+
U>
'"
;oJ
"
/
',~ '
"
, '
\\\\,.
EXISTING
,M,V!'iIr:;IPAi.
DRAIN
LOT
6
II"
-
.:::. II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II \
II I
II I
II
II
".-...",
''\
, '
, ,
TOWN OF INNSFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
q,
, :
i:
KOA Campground
: ~.~.~
CON
..,.~,-~'
'T",~
,1,,f
CON
LOT 7
"
',' x
<0
+
0>
o
o
;:::
~
Vln
",:I:
n
-I'"
6~
ZVl
-I
Z
'"
(71';
1..:1\;
Hi,
i OO!J><\:':
LOT 6
TOWN OF BRADFORD
WEST GWlLLlMBURY
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
CON 15
o
I I I'
I
I II
,1'1
- I I II
-:: I
III
11 II
I I II
,0 I
:t I II
0
0 \~\\ II II
I III
I
I II
I I II
" II
~ ~~
~~~ ;:
c- ~_ ~
'" ()
m ~
?; 0
c- Z
~ :I: Z "
:I: '" G) ~ i
r- 0 :;: :I:
Z 1; 0 c
0 0
0 z a
m <:
m
HIGHWAY 400
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
)
,
,
,
,
-------------,'
INSERT 'A'
II
................ ~
........--...... ~
----~---- ~
---------------------------~------
7
II
CON
15
~
o~~
q.~
c-f:....
va~,,<,,;
0'>
^
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
Legend
Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_uuu__ Proposed Property Limit
---
-
----
----
8'
",'
.,.,.,.,,'
" .-:::
II
COOKSTOWN OUTLET MAlL
II
II
II
II I
PLATE
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
2a
HIGHWAY 89
RECOMMENDED PLAN
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
:I:
15
:I:
:;:
'<
a>
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:I:
c-
Z
m
10m 0 20m
STA. 9+567 TO 10+703
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~'f.o,
TOWN OF INNSFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
8
!j)'lj!<J i I
~i i.....:qq
Q;' : R;
~ ~
~
!#
.1
",.
"
,
,
,~.,""v_"
,"''''0.
~' ~.-----"
,/ //' q,
, .,_., ,,'
,,-,.,,;,,'""""
,
,
,
,
"
"
"
,
"0.
"000
8
~
"" ~
," ~ 1Oq.
,,' ~~"
"" . ~
"" " ~.
" ,..
,.' ",'
" "
"" ",
,II' ,#'"
,,' ",
" "
,#' ,,,,
", ",
", ,,'
", ",'
.......' "'.,,.
" " 0
", ", Jr
" ,,~
",' ", t)_
, " -0
" "
" "
", ,,'
,,' ",
,,' ",
", ,,'
" "
"", "",~
"" "" Jr
"" "" \
" "
", ,,'
" "
" "
,,,' ,,'
"" ",
,,' ,,'
,~' , ........~
","_:'''' ..."" o.)r
" "
'- "", "", ~
">,,,,' ",
, "
" "
"", ""
"", ",~
"....., "" "-
--' ", ~ "'-
""" Jr ""-
" ~ "
"...-" ~
-----------------------------------,,-"'"
'0
+
""
o
o
I
/
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,-
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
~/
~j
;q
9.~!
iJ....
/~;
~i
/~.
/1
'"
"
" '0
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
/
Co IV
'-or 7
:/
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
:J:
i
~
~
z
~~;o
~~~
OJ 0
~ ~
~ :x: Z
~ % ~
ftll I II[)III
HIGHWAY 400
10m D 20m
REIVE ROAD
RECOMMENDED PLAN
ST A. 1 0+000 TO ST A. 10+957
TO TIFFIN STREET-
PLATE
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY~
2b
URS
;: ~oOJ
~ ~~\
~ ~ ~i-
~
1M;!! 1\'0;10 -.-
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
~
~
fill
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I TOWN OF INNSFIL
I COUNTY OF SIMCOE
I
I
I
I
I
I
~B
I
I
8 I 0
t__ I : ~ ,"
---_______j' ~_____ 0 '~'-
-- ,', -------=-------------------------------------------- --:::::.:t
~.-T - " --
3.0 Shoulder
<\;"
15.0 :m
10.8 Median
- - - -
- - -
m .
,...,....._,-,
',',,,
','
'<"^",
""'....,,
\ "
CON
LOT
~~
o eo>
::02:
~~
eo>
zo
1:""
!"Ix
~i5
x
~
'<
1
6
o 1 FIBER
+
8 LOT
B
7
"._.. _,,_ p, ___.,',"'~_....._..._.".,w
,w._.._."".w_.........-
- - - ......,
- - - - - - - - - - : - - - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - -
- - - -
- - -"':'-' - - - -
15.0
3.5 SCL' - - -
3.0 Shoulder
-,I
'->~~:::~-:J:;~_,;>:" ~
LOT
CON
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
URS
7
1
'0
','+
0"
o
o
II
. '~'^~-"~'.~
'--\j<;"c~ ~.
,--,
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
;;
i
~
~
~
:>:
!:
%
!1\
[]I
CON 1
- LOT
- 6
+
m 0
" 0
0
- -'::7--.:::::.:.:::..::::,-.:
'T'I'I
. ..
-------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.'H_'____'_'___""'_'
~ .--- ,,_:,,~=;,::~;~~~.=.:.-:,-:_-:.~
~:.:~=-...,;,.J.;...;;.;;~c:c~;:2::.::::'=:~);7-;::=~ ."~~.,,,,~ ..O":=c~::-:..~~~
+ "","
-..j -'
", ~ _-__~/,-. -~'__::;",",\'~L.. .,__~"..~~,~;
'/A ""
"
"
"
,
,"
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
f?:',\?k'
'i,o,:".,^.:. ~~'"
y:;;-,_:::",.,,:---:;: ~,,,.,..,
. 1 BURRI ED -'
. ,/ .~.,i
-
~,
8-..
I
o
VI
II>
a.
;~::~
.'-,
'\
'i!l
~
me
~
~
~~~
~~~
,.. ..-
.. 0
1J) 12
~ G
~ -
:>: ~ ~
'i ~ 8
ID, I IlqJlIl
HIGHWAY 400
TO TIFFIN STREET-
~
~
~ ."
:>: ~
~ 0
'~]f,
;00"
~~\
:<!:-
~~~
:z
o
~~ g
II~
- _.. .'- -..,
W'~"""V'''W'N,,__,_
. ......, ,Til,
--
-
, B
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
lam 0 20m
- -
3.0 Shoulder
- 15.0
10.8 Median
- - 15.0
~~~.~-.
.:::: ...m.//""~ .." : ~. 3.0 Shoulder
~"~_ ~J'rlt '=__: _
:...........,..,.":...............:....."".,,._..===.....;;:;;:;;:~;;:;;:.:==.::"'''''"'''':;.:;.:;.;.;;.;:...._--....".;.;.-
,-- '"v, " V"_~"_'h """ "
.~-_....X
B
w:'_~~___;--."--.,,
'>~_.v".<_.:,;..-:-:::-.
'C:::::J"
-
@
LOT 7
CON
~
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
--- Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 10+400 TO STA. 11+100
PLATE
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
3.0
\0.8
\5.0
3.0
,.-_,,,~ ,'.\1" ' . <'
c__~.\i \\\~\ 'n/
i \~\\{
'-~ I \1\ "'~
~' III \
"~" I \\J
'\~i! l' '?;\\
j)< \,
f .,
f \',
f ,\'
B f
B~
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
CON 2
LOT 6
<,,0
><c
;;\~
u,:X1
6""
'Z
CON 2
LOT 6 -
-
+
(J>
0
0
B B B
(T) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
'"
c;;
~
~
~
Median
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~
...
'"
,.-
z
'"
QI
~H
~ ~~
,.- <-
OJ "
'" 0
" ,...
~ ~ ~
;. ;;; ~
z ~ 8
\}JI I I IIDIII
HIGHWAY 400
LOT 7
CON 2
LOT 7
2
~
TO TIFFIN STREET -
PLATE
s:
o
';j;
o
z
~ ~
,... "
~ %
I~;i;
~\I
~~;
~~~
<~-
o
S88~.g
Ii'O-4D
I r _.-.
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 11+100 TO STA. 11+800
4
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CON 2
LOT 6
~
1 FIBER
..,......,....
..,..............
~~
................
~~
..~
........)
..~
- - '- - - - - - - - -" - ---=---~'''', ,,---.;::::=---~..-----~
"
Shoulder
3.0
15.0
Medion
10.8
15.0
Shoulder
3.0
~
_B B
.------------------------------------------------i
I
..--------------- -----------
PROPOSED LOCATION
FOR SWM POND
(LAYOUT AND PROPERTY
REQUIREMENT TO BE
DETERMINED
IN DETAIL DESIGN)
Qg~
~'<.+
ZI"\O
tJ):x!0
0"'0
Z
8
8
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~~
~~~
r' -<_
'" ()
m 0
,. r'
() r'
1 ; ~
r' 0 ::;
z 1; g
th I I I IIDI''I
HIGHWAY 400
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
:1:
Q
~
~
~
~
:1:
C
z
m
[\]1
~
U>
o
z
~ ~
;: '"
z ~
I~~
~]\I
LOT 7
CON 2
TO TIFFIN STREET
~g~
~t.~
,.zm
"'%-
o
~88~~
Ii'04D
I r _$-
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20rn
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
ST A. 11 +800 TO ST A. 12+500
PLATE
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
3.0
LOT 7
CON 3
CON 2
CON 3
LOT 6
/
,,;./
,/'"
PROPOSED LOCATlQ"{
/ FOR SWM PaND
(LAYO\jr AND P~ERTY
REPUIRE"'ENT TO BE
i /' DETERMINED
iN" DETAIL DESIGN)
"'~/~~~
/ I
/"" l
I CON 3
I
i LOT 6
i
LOT 6
..IF
I'
F""'''' I
(::5"..<<) v
\. JI!
\\ /' 1
,~_... ,
\
- - - - - ,,;~,+..;--.'-- - --1
,,+~ct ~ II
i:: \1.. ~". ,
+ '5/Q
o "t-
o
o
B
_ B B
Shoulder
.........
..........----- -- - - -- - - - -- - - ---
Shoulder
10.8 Med;on
10.8 Median
15.0
- - - -
3.0
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
().
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
.nnn__ Proposed Property Limit
LOT 7
LOT 7
CON 3
CON 2
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~~
~~~
r -<_
'" ()
m 0
>- r
() r
:I: Z
~ ~
>- 0
o 0
o
PLATE
TO TIFFIN STREET -
~9\
~~~
-<~c
'6
o
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 12+500 TO STA. 13+200
6
5
r
'"
o
z
'"
>-
91.
o
"
;;(
m
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
:I:
Q
~
"<
'"
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
....
:I:
r
Z
m
'!:
:I:
~
Z
~
:I:
~
Z
m
URS
HIGHWAY 400
-.-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CON 3
6
3.0 Shoulder
'"
+
lI'
o
o
15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
LOT 7
CON 3
(Y) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~~
~~~
r -<_
'" (")
In 0
~ F
0') J: Z
1 ~ ~
~ b g
~I I II\UII
HIGHWAY 400
;::
o
r
(j)
o
z
<5 "'0
... ')>
;. ~
~ ~
I~<
~]r,
:J:
i5
:J:
:;0
'<
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
...
...
:J:
r
Z
In
I QI
URS
TO TIFFIN STREET -
~~\
~c.~
')>zm
-<%-
o
~
'i'o"D
I [ _$-
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
lOrn 0 20m
~
B
B
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 13+200 TO STA. 13+900
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CON 3
,
,
,
1
~ :
. i
1 :
, \
, :
I :
. :
, :
009+6 : \
I :
I i
1 :
I :
. \
1 \
~ !
.^,,,..,,,j
1 :
006+:\
~
LOT 6
...
+
o
o
o
HOT 14+166.4 REALIGN EO
HWY 400 TWP INNISFIL
_ HOT 9+988.3 REALIGN
FOURTH LINE
--------------------,
1
1
'9
t___________________________a_
1 FIBER
--"'1'1
_ _ __ _ _ _______ - - ---- - --- - - - - ------ - - ----- ~OFiERf--.
EXTENSION
3.0
- - - -
- - -
- - - - - - -
- - - -
15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
-----
------
3.0 Shaulde
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_nnn__ Proposed Property Limit
LOT 7
CON 3
, \ i
\ : 1
\ ~
\:1
\ 1
: 1
\ ,
\ \ 1
\ ~
\ i 1
: 1
! 1
\ i 1
i 1
: 1
\ i 1
\ 1
: 1
\ \ 1
! 1
i ,
\ i 1
: 1
\./. \ ~
~ ,x, ~ ,
;; \ \ \
>.,\ \
;~\. ~
, ~ ., ,
,.i\ ~
i""V'-'''''','''
:. 1
J..-.\'.....\
/ ~~\:l
r, "\'"
jd i~
\ \ r.
u
CON 4
LOT 6
~
NEW STRUCTURE
(SITE 30-212
- 89-68'" -
- - - -
-----
001.",0\
:,;
G\
~
?<.
'"
i ~~
~~~
r- -<_
'" "
m 0
~ ~
~ ~
b g
o
~
:,;
r-
Z
m
;::
o
'in
o
z
..
;
'"
o
~
m
TO TIFFIN STREET-
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
..
...
:,;
r-
Z
m
~
:,;
r-
Z
9
----------
3.0 Shoulder
- - - - - - - -
-----
15.0
- - -
- - - -
-----
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
- - - - - -
TOWN OF INNISFIL
OF SIMCOE
LOT 7
CON 4
.,,0'"
~9-\
~'iii'
C<.~-
o
o
o
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
PLATE
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
8
HIGHWAY 400
10m 0 20m
STA. 13+900 TO STA. 14+600
-.-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
v
z
a
u
to
I-
a
--.J
HOT 14+185.5 HWY 400 TWP INNISFIL
= HOT 10+000 FOURTH LINE
)Z.
p
NEW STRUCTURE
(SITE 30-212)
_/-_/-----:=-~~~----------------
w:.ct ...-_----
z....
:J\:.
5~
'4.
2~
'"
B
---
---
---
;~:~:=:::::::::::-=:-==-::::::=:.:=::=-:=-:::::::::::=--::::t:t-=-~::=-:::::l~
~ ~ ~:
+ 00,
a 0 ,
ontO !
I
z
a
u
I-
a
--.J
I
.,.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CD I
-----.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 0::
I W
II)
.:;:
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
14+000
INSERT 'A'
--- ........_._._--_._.~..__.._..-::.::..~._...
--------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
-,=,=,,:;:,:::::,::;:::'::;:::"::;::::':"-
~------- ----~-
\~ ~;;;~::-==:=:::::::-;:::~~~:::::~:::=:::=::
2 <D <D +
+ + ~
... '-" 0
g g 0
;:
~w,~
:.."':x:
~~c:
C>Z~
CD
(T) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~i
~~~
r" <_
'" ()
'" 0
J> r"
() r"
~ :r: Z
:t: :;0 G1
r" 0 ~
z ~ g
ID, 1 1 I\DIII
HIGHWAY 400
:t:
G\
:t:
~
?<
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
,.
.;
:t:
r"
Z
'"
Eijl
URS
I I I
I I I
CD q I I
<""
,,) I I
.q I I
I I
I I
I I , I I
I I I I I
I '<<.
'"
I
I II;
I"-
v
".
'".
I-
a
--.J
z
a
u
"".
"'"
"<',,;-
'~
\ "\ ~,.>, \~ \
\ \ <l_\_"'~
,\,'. ", ~.' ""',
"-', ",
',:>
"". -',
" "
-'-, "~~'{;;:", '" ,..u
A,.,.,. ..~.~..~.___
""'"
o
w
a:
0::
::>
II)
ti.1
.....~,,-,----_..
-',,, .....~~Vf)~OAD
""-~y...",.
'<\'.:',' '~
""""'~'"
","
.. ..n _. ..-.....".. ". ..~.."
"..,,,,~,<;,
"
,''-.
, ..
-----====----
...------------
--
,---
--
---
o
+
'"
o
o
o
+
'"
'-"
~
<0
..
o
....
~
: z
:~~
,wz
.~w l"- n
:::>.....
~u~ I II
! I II I- Z
.
, a a
, u
, III --.J
! I II
I II
i I II
. I II
,
,
: I II
,
,
! I II
.
,
, I II
,
,
.
, I II
, I'
,
1\ I II
I II
I II
Legend
Signalized Intersection
- Existing Property Limit
_u_uu_ Proposed Property Limit
I II
e...,
"q"
,,\.~,'>..
I II
I II
TO TIFFIN STREET-
PLATE
REALIGNED FOURTH LINE
RECOMMENDED PLAN
;::
~
II>
o
Z
~ \)
:t: ~
r" "
Z g
I~<
~r,
~~~
'iC~
J>ZfI'
..{~-
g
~88~y
I ( ~__
STA. 9+350 TO STA. 10+290
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
8a
10m 0 20m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROPOSED LOCATION
FOR SWM POND
(LAYOUT AND PROPERTY
REQUIREMENT 1'0 BE
DETERMINED IN \
DETAIL DESIGN) \
"'n~
~~\
z;;j,
6~\
z
------------------------- ------------
~ - -- ---- - ------ - ----- --- - ---~
B
- ---------------
B
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0
RENE ROAD
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
B
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
:1:
Q
1
'<
~
-----
CON 4
LOT 6
1 BURRIED
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
..
...
:1:
.::
z-
'"
1111
~ ~~
~~~
r- -<_
OJ ()
'" 0
'" r-
~ ~ '2
-; ;g ~
z ~ g
tDl I IIDIII
HIGHWAY 400
LOT 7
CON 4
;::
\2
'"
o
Z
."
~
"
.:: '"
Z ;n
I~~
\ I
o
...
:J:
TO TIFFIN STREET -
~~~
~E~
"Z'"
-<%.-
o
~88~
;\>0"'0
I r ~$-
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20m
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 14+600 TO STA. 15+300
9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
:~\)(,~\
.0 > 'Y; \
10 \
, . , ,_ \ fTI ("') f"'\ (')
!/~>("!.; f ~~ ~~
----------------------------------~---l{:~:::-:~t-----:\--~-=------------------------------------------------------------------------~~-------------------------------------~
B 1 FIBER B B" ._...__ __~_ ' I '1'18 _ ----e---------- ---------------------il------- B
",
..
(T) '~~l \ ;
l,t :,
1 ~ \ ~ "
1 \\ \;~ n
\j j, \.
1 ;~r\ } \
'~\ :'A\ /
\
\
\
,
\
\
\
,
,
\
~
\
3,0
10.8 Median
.;>~~-''''''''._;::~:;
~<<""'
- - - -
-----
'''..... -
- - -
3.0 Shoulder
REIVE ROAD
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
:!:
15
~
~
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:!:
...
Z
'"
fill
URS
~
CON 5
LOT 6
-----
-----
- - -
------
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~ ~~
~ ~~
... -<-
<XI 0
'" 0
'" ,..
~ ~ ~
:!: " G>
,.. 0 :;
z E; 8
ID I I I IIDII 'I
HIGHWAY 400
LOT 7
CON 5
TO TIFFIN STREET -
;::
$1
(f>
o
z
~ ~
... "
~ ~
I~'"
~]\I
~~~
~~~
:.<~-
o
~88~~
I E: ~...
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 15+300 TO STA. 16+000
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20m
0>
+
o
o
o
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(11
+
o
o
o
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
- - - -
- - - -
- - -
10.8 Medion
15.0
- - - -
- - -
- - - -
3.0 Shoulder
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
- - -
- - - - - -
-" - -
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
URS
::t
Q
~
'<
~
~
::t
'i
'"
UJI
- - -
CON 5
LOT 6
-----
- - -
.- - - - ......'.. - - - - - - -
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~ ~~
~~~
,.. -<-
01 a
~ ~
~ ~ ~
::t ~ ~
~ E; 8
r:U:J, I I IW!I 'I
HIGHWAY 400
LOT 7
CON 5
~
o
,...
<f>
o
Z
;5 ."
.... )>
::t "
c: -;
z "
I~.~
~\'
TO TIFFIN STREET -
"aG>
~~~
~~~
-<~-
'6
~88~
'i'o1D
I { ~__
-----
- - - -
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20m
~
(11
+
<.I'
o
o
- - -
- - - -
- - -
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
ST A. 16+000 TO ST A. 16+700
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Medion
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0
Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Medio
I
15.0
3.0
Shoulder
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.....0
xc
~-<
z.....
'g~
, Z
r-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_______________________
.
.
. ,
..J
,
I
.
.
,
.
.
.
1
I
1
I
I.
,(.
I'
I
1
I
.
.
.
.
~~ LOT 6 ~
,/ . i.'\....~......... ~
\."'p:~.-/.,, -,' .
\.; ; \ ~(.
:,"j~.. -'. . "
Ie'
\ . '.' <'~.~~.~ t~ \:
/ ~~ .
. ''''', ":'~ ~r'% ::c,
r ", _~_l~________~~~.:~___~~-----I ~'"
-----------------------------,~~,A--m- -- ---~~;~it( ',\!) ! ,!r
","'." \'..<'i>, CULVERT 'Y-._._ .\ . -----------------------------.......
',EXTENSION '.'~;' ___ ;
----." s - _€I. '1'1'1' /'1 .
~----------
009+6
,,,,,).,,
\,<)
5
CON
~.,,-..<:,
/ -,^'
i,/
n
-"'"
/
/
- - -
.
- - - -
-,>; -
- ...'" - '!'i"> - C.:;- -
- - '-, -
- - - -
- - -
HOT 16+913.4 REALIGNED
HWY 400 TWP INNISFIL
= HOT 9+988.2 SIXTH LINE
HOT HWY 400 TWP INNISFIL
- HO q 0+000 SIXTH LINE
LOT 7
CON 5
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
__u_u_, Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~~
~ ~~
..- -<-
'" 0
'" 0
" ..-
o ..-
d) :r: z
:t "XI (j')
..- 0 '"
z ~ g
~I I I IIDIII
HIGHWAY 400
:t
Q
l
~
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
=<
:t
co
Z
'"
[iJ1
URS
NEW STRUCTURE
(SITE 30-211)
"
+
o
o
o
-B ______u__u__u____
~
CON
6
LOT 6
-8-
___u_____ 1 FIBERs
'1'1'1
9
--- - -- --- - ------ - - - --
_.e._
-
- - -,...--.'-
,.0- ',._'., "...,. P, .' ~ _ .
;:'h~"~,..""-,~j'!)"'_?'"""-"~,_:~
3.0
"- Shoulder
-. 15.0
_ ._r
- - . .:....-~;r:,,,,2,L;.,~ :..~:_: _:,. .__\.",<_'~'__, .~__w..
OOl+Ol
OOC:+Ol
;;:
o
..-
U>
o
z
~ i
..- "-
z ~
I~_~
~J\I
- - - -
;~'..,-" ~...-.,,~... ._~,.......,-
._....;;0,0.. .....
~".,' _.__.,__~".~,~'''', MA
- - -
,..~........"..,-,.. ..-
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
.i"i;,:~>.'i"~-'
-------
0.8 Medio
..............
15.0
-------
3.0
Shoulder
- - - -
- - -
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
LOT 7
CON 6
TO TIFFIN STREET-
",0'"
-pO;
~E.?!
"Z<"
-<%-
o
~~S~
I ~__
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
PLATE
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
12
10m 0 20m
STA. 16+600 TO STA. 17+350
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
1;\
II
! 'I
I
I
F11
;, I
\v \
iH
, : vi (I
l' .1
,;"", II
',j,
'-.:._~\ -
: H'8;~; I t
, 1\ ~ g -------------~------------
, , : II 0 -------..-----------------------
'!;i'= ~~
: : iLj------------:~, . .. u':~
I I I I
I I
I I
I I
TOWN OF INNISFIL I
I
COUNlY OF SIMCOE I
<D I
I
<D I
I
I I I
Z I
l- I .;
a a I I I
I
U ...J I
I
I
I
I
:"
.;
! \
17+000
o
+
'"
o
o
! I
! i
~ i
, i
f'-.
<D
I-
a
...J
z
a
u
I I
I I
CULVERT
EXTENSION
'"
+
....
o
o
'"
,
I I
I 'i'
I I
~,.-~
'"
+
~
o
---
f'-. l!)
II I I Z
I- a
a
II I 1;- ...J U
l!) II I I
<D
Z I-
a a
u ...J
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEYMAP
- "".
~ ~~
~ ~~
'" 0
m 0
11 r:
~ :r. Z
~ ~ ~
z E5 g
III I I IIDII'I
HIGHWAY 400
20m
TO TIFFIN STREET-
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
SIXTH LINE
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 9+792 TO STA. 10+312
;<>0'"
-:poO~
~~'8.
"zm
~%-
o
o
~88~
Ii'O"D
I r _.-.
;::
o
r
'"
o
Z
~ iJ
:I: ~
!: 0
z "
I~~
~]\I
'"
15
i
~
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
URS
~
'"
r
Z
m
(]I
,c;;, 0
PLATE
12a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CON 6
LOT 6
3.0
1 F"lBER
10.8
Median
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - -
3.0
LOT 7
CON 6
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
URS
....r
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
:I:
i5
!
:><
~
B
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
=<
:I:
C
Z
'"
[ijl
~ ~~
~~~
.... <-
'" ()
'" 0
(J) ~ ~
~ ~ ~
z ~ 8
UJr I I IIDI' ~
HIGHWAY 400
CON 6
LOT 6
~
Q)
+
o
o
o
B B
------- --------- - - - - --- - ---- -- ---- - - ----- -- - ------
B
1(1111
--
B _
- - - - - - - - - - -
LOT 7
CON 6
;::
o
In
o
z
~ ~
c: 6
z "
I~~
~\I
TO TIFFIN STREET-
~g~
~~~
~~-
o
~&8~
I ~~
Shldr.
15.0
15.0
Shldr.
PLATE
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 17+350 TO STA. 18+100
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20m
13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.3.0 Shoulder
10.8
15.0 _
.3.0 Shoulder
PROPOSED LOCATION
FOR SWM POND
(LAYOUT AND PROPERTY
REQUIREMENT TO BE
DETERMINED
IN DETAIL DESIGN)
-----.
1______----------------------
a
15.0
- - - - - - -
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
'"
<5
~
'<
~
!:i
:r:.
..-
Z
'"
[ij,
;:<'~ ii:':'::C\'\j
PROPOSED LOCATION
FClR SWM POND
(LAYOUT ~D PRQPERTY
REQUIREMENT, TO BE
, DETERMINED
IN DE1TAlL D~SIGN)
82:;
fTJ'-'
z<'
!!.1g
0....
z
(XI
+
\J'
o
o
------..
a
f'.-.....-.........-.'..........""'.---__________ ____ _....____ ____ __________.. ______ ____________.. _______
I
I
L._____________________I
1 FIBER a
- ....--- ....-- ..-.--.......--..-----.....u_____u____..........._
'fT
- - -
- - -
-------
~ ~~
~~~
..- -<-
OJ 0
'" 0
:P ..-
~ 2
~ :xl G)
;. 0 ::;
z ~ g
ID I I I I'[jJl 'I
HIGHWAY 400
;::
o
G
o
z
;5 "
-< :P
'" 9\
c 0
Z ;n
I~~
~1\'
- - -
'\~I' I
II '1'1'1
B
~," "-"".~,"
- - -
- - -
- - - - - -
TO TIFFIN STREET -
;nO'"
~~~
~~~
-<~-
o
~SS4~
I ~ ~...
.3.0 Shoulder
.3.5 SCL
- : 15.0
10.8 Medio"
15.0
.3.0 Shoulder
~
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
URS
10m 0 20m
STA. 18+100 TO STA. 18+800
PLATE
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
t
L
I'
~ '
l
1 \ \
\
<<_ A"_""_~'''N',~V~'~_''~
'"
+
o
o
o
;
"
\
o
o
'"
+
o
o
o
'"
+
o
~;.;.;;.;1~;.;;.;;.;------- __________..___________________~_J___________ - -------------------- ---- --------------------:.. --------------- ------------------------ -- ----~~.~~~.~~.
I ' I ' I ' I ' I ........-........ ..., .....................-.....-..............-.-....--.......-......
B '1'1'1 ", B B ....-...
3.0 Shoulder
3.5 SCL
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
3.5 SCL
- - - - - - - - - - -
15.0
10.8 Medion
10.8 Medion
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
- - - - - ..- -
-' -
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - -
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
------~
PLATE
~ ~i
~ ~~
C' -<_
co 0
'" 0
~ ~
~ ::n G>
;: 0 ::<
z ~ g
tB1 1 (IIDI'I
HIGHWAY 400
TO TIFFIN STREET -
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 18+800 TO STA. 19+300
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
;110'"
~~~
~~~
-<'r
o
~88~
'i'O"'D
I r _
;;:
o
C'
'"
o
z
~ ~
;: "
I~\
~\I
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
15
:I:
(5
l
?<
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
!;
:I:
C'
Z
'"
QI
10m 0 20m
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
15.0
<~"'^' "" "
"'~~'" "',/ >~;~.~~". to ----.'}
"~-'-" j%'
.____ .__..J \7""0
/
-----...-
'o~
eX
"
i/
/
./
,
i
\
\
"
f'/"'~"'1. rl
( \ \~,~-"'"'^'\
\ " ,/" ",j
d~:-)
\
CON 8
LOT 6 0
0
..
+ '"
0 0
+
0
0
0
6
TOWN OF INNISFIL\
COUN1Y OF SIMCO~".,_.~'
"
~
o
o
..
+
o
------------------------
....::::~_.~__n...#~_~~#-..~.#....--....--
3.0 Shoulder
3.5 SCL __'--_
^~,_m~..,~ __.~.._m
- - - -
-
-,. -""",,"_.,,,~
1 0.8 Medion
- - - -
- - - -
15.0 -., ,-'.'"
- - - -
3.0 Shoulder
LOT 7
CON
8
ooz+o~
z
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
........
(O~
\ ,...."
\ '\
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~~
~~~
r" -<_
'" 0
'; $2
o r"
~ :t: Z
:1: ~ ~
!:. ):> 0
zoo
o
STA. 19+300 TO STA. 20+000
TO TIFFIN STREET-
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
:>>0'"
yO~
~~~
~~-
o
o
o
;::
o
r'
"'
o
z
"
~
"-
o
:>>
<:
'"
:1:
Q
~
'<
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:1:
c:
Z
'"
~
:1:
r'
Z
'"
10m 0 20m
URS
HIGHWAY 400
-$-
o
3.0 Shoulder
3.5 SCL
- : 15.0
10.8 Median
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
16
I
. I
"
7
LOT
INSERT 'A'
CON 8
8
INDUSTRIAL PARK DRIVE
CON
I
..... ........ -"'_..~.."
"""-
LOT 6
'\
'" C)0.p
" .
0",
I
,
,
,
,
"
"
,
,
,
,.
,,,!~'~~.,? :..::'
\ ' .... .{...
){(:........>'.,.
" <,--.,:....
, ,
" .....
" ..,.,
, ..-
,I' ,...~'"
, .'
, ..
, /
I l
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
r~.';C...-,,--">"l--'
^' I
,
,
,
,
,
,
, ,
---------...---~_.
COMMUTER PARKING lOT
I
---------------..
I
~ '----------'"'
!.~ -, ~~!J~~~E-~~"Arr2;
~ \
~j
./~.~.
I
oo~
~Ol
I
INC
INDUSTRIAL PARK DRIVE
"'''''" _~""m.____,______"""_""""___
I
o
+
'"
o
o
I
o
o
---------------~--------------
I
INNISFll HEIGHTS CRESCENT
'<
......
Zo-
""'0:,
.....
IV>
UZ
....... --,~_.
<.....
::;.....
V>
I
,..,
X;::
Vi~
::in
~I
---_.--------
I
.t:
1<::::/ ....
./" '..... ..-
',-, ~~--~
o
+
o
o
o
I
o
+
c;..
o
o
oD
+
"
o
o
o
+
'"
o
o
oD
+
'"
o
o
MUNRO'S
FURNISHINGS
o
...
8
I
I
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
I
/
/
/
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
I
PLATE
~ ~i
~ ~~
.... -<-
'" 0
IT1 0
.. ....
~ ~ ~
:t: ~ ~
~ ~ g
UJI I III1II
HIGHWAY 400
TO TIFFIN STREET-
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEYMAP
(Y) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
INNISFIL BEACH ROAD
RECOMMENDED PLAN
~~\
~2.~
~~-
o
~88~
I _~
;:
o
....
U>
o
z
~ "t)
:I: ~
C '"
m ~
I~<
---=:t::::C] r I
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
I
16a
:t:
Gi
~
'<
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
..
....
:t:
....
Z
IT1
[]I
10m 0 20m
STA. 9+565.1 TO STA. 10+423
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\:;U,I~ I
\'> ):>i"',.!...~.i.. ............. .~r'
r~ 1\1m '\)
~';~ .
\ J:>vfii I 1"\
" g \-<:~ \1 : ; \
~ 7 ~ . \~J
g ~ .'!It \< (>
o ,~ \ .
----------------~~\:-- -- ------------------------- -------~ ~'\ ~ rT-~_~-~_=:_:_~:=~:~_~~~~~:__~~-::::::~~~~----+..;;;.-----____
N '.. U!> I -E>--------...___. .w,\ -----
1; .. :, $. ~ ~'i:--------f::::-==-::==:==::::-====-=:.::::.=:-:=_~:::::-------:::-~______________ ;______m__________m_
8 8 "',;'''; . ... :3'. i., "',)\ -.-.----.-.:.,..,i:Z,:~::--:;;:-- -----:
_....Jb='_
3.0 Shoulder
- - - -
-----
. .<."~.,,,,.,,,,,,.,, ,~__'.'_^" ~,.", -;~"".",;:".w',.......,':::'m~.",::,,,,,,~~=,~.m"'::"""" ~,.,_.~~,y::' - :. -"c.-::-
. :'+t":~:: ...~ - -',.:--
- - - - - - - -
15.0 "~,"~
1 0.8 Medion
"'-""'-", ,-,:;'-
15.0 ;;;.:::.;;
""'_OC'-"";,_.....__..._
_.',;..,,,-_;,'_00",,-
- ,;.;. - -
3.5 SCL - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
3.0 Shoulder
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
-- - --
-- -- --
-- -- --
- - - -
-----
-- - -
- - - -
-- -- -
"."., .
~";..",~,-,,.;:;:;,_.. -
" '-'~:y - -
- - --
: _ - _ -_ : _- _ -_ g '.;.1.-,'_._ -- :: - - - - -
400 MARKET
CON
8
LOT
6
'"
o
+
{}\
o
o
-- -- -
- - - -
--------
~
:I
~
-----
---"-y,,7.':':~-,.-- -
.-",_. - -
- - - -
- - -
- - - -
-----
- - - -
-----
- -- --
- - .... - -
- ..... -
------
-----
CON 8
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNlY OF SIMCOE
:J:
G\
~
~
~
~ ~i
~~~
.... -<-
'" 0
m 0
'" ....
o ....
~ :t Z
:I: " Q
.... 0 ~
z E; 8
~ I I IIDIl~
HIGHWAY 400
;::
o
In
o
z
~ ~
c: ~
I~~
~\I
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:t
....
Z
m
fill
TO TIFFIN STREET-
_ 'H'__'-''''''' _.
~m_.... _..... _..__._ ____ _w__._ ....-
I.!.!,
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 20+000 TO STA. 20+700
-;nO'"
J> 0 '"
~E~
",zm
-<%, -
o
'~
"'0"'0
I (. ~
10m 0 20m
3.0 Shoulder
- 3.5 SCL
: 15.0
10.8 Medion
15_0
3.5 SCL
3.0 Shoulder
PLATE
17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\ ~
<'10 \ ,., g
~~. \. 1 ' 0 I I .
J:==-=-::-:-:~------::---~-::~~::-~,AJ-----------------___________________;_::~-~-::::~---Li '--::c:r-\'-===:---------J___________________~_=,==,~"''''==-;:_-L-_~~____
B IN BELL EASEMENT 8 ___________________ --------------.11---- ------- --_______':..
":}., ----------
nn
;0'"
",!I::-
!I::"'Z
>>~
-1;0(/1
~-<:2
c~r-
!I:: 0
/Jcm,..',,::;--'-
3.0 Shoulder
......................~.~.~===-;._._...;_.....:~;::.....}.~.'"::..~~ -=-
,"~"h""',
" \/' ';>'
~~~~,-. '"'
- - - -
15.0
10.8
15.0 .
_ ,,- .-.- .-..,-..... ,_.. ..- "..--.." -.-. "".-..".. -", ..- ..-
3.0
_.~
"',
.>...:..... ..... '.
)~
~
."
"(
'"
'"
.~.
>
ZO
00
;0
;0>
"'.
n;c::
i!1>
>;0
:;jz
0",
Z
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~
3.0 Shoulder
,'''-- - -
, --." -,'"
- ' --- -'
- - - -
15.0
10.8 Median
- ....... -'''....-.-..".-.- -""""-
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
CT) Ontario - "", TO TIFFIN STREET-
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP ~ ~~ HIGHWAY 400 PLATE
~ ~m ~ ~~~
r -<_
'" " r HOR. SCALE:
m ~ (f> ~'i~
Ministry of Transportation J: fi 0 RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 i5 ~ z ~~- 18
~ J: Z " 1 :2000
~ J: ~ ~ 0 ~
r J: .... 0
to Junction at Highway 11 '< z r .,. 0 J: l' ~88~
Z t:
URS ~ m m o 0 z 0 'Om 0 20m
[jJ1 IIDIII "
G.W.P.30-95-00 II I I I I~~ STA. 20+700 TO STA. 21+400
HIGHWAY 400 ] \ I I _.-.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
"1-
------_______ -..:::.~...~ 8 ~8
-__..... "i,C' -~-~- ~---
:---:-----------------~~=::_:::_:::::_~:-~:-:-:-----~--~~ "'","" ~ .
- - ' - ~" -...... ' -
-" - ,~,~ \~~~""- -..----.-....
'~'''' ~--..;;;:=.~
~--=:'Jc.~~
~
-'. ""~"
~
"1-
(J1
o
o
TOWN OF INNISFIL
;COUNTY OF SIMCOE
CON 9
LOT 6
3,0 Shoulder
10,8 Medion
~
'-0
f5i7i
15,0
-
3,0 Shoulder
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
--- Existing Property Limit
___u_u_ Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- :n OJ
i ~~
~~~
r -<-
OJ n
m 0
J> r
n c:
:!. z
:n Q
o ::;;
J> 0
o 0
o
TO TIFFIN STREET -
~g;
r::'r=-:n
zzm
~~-
o
o
o
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 21+400 TO STA. 22+100
:!.
\
'<
<;g
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:!.
r
Z
m
::.
:!.
r
~
~
:!.
r
Z
m
10m 0
20m
URS
HIGHWAY 400
~...
PLATE
19
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 Shoulder
. ,
'\ ,
. ,
\\~
...... BLOCK \\ .
25 ,~\
PLAN (43T-89014) 009..or'O \\\
. ,
\\
CO N 9.....:~ \~)
LOT 6 \~~;~..
e"""--""'"'''---'~'''-'''--'''~~- ,2\\ \
.' .~., ,. ",\ \ '."""'.
"""",_,~_......,,~-,,,,""'--"'"' -'"" l \ \
.... ..w..'--' /..\.\\\\\\
LOT 7 'i \ \~\. .
,0J"-r"){;.v;_,::Ji'.;""~"''}.'i';:';'; /".~., \ \\.S\\
f'~-' ." BLOCK 26 ....J ..~.>> ..
~,\,~,"" ~. ..\! " .
....:.:=:.. 3 CABLES/1 CONDUITJ"') .or '0 ~\{\\
qlr-..n+BE:u...usEUEbl1.____-___n___nn_n__nn_~__.:::::_ 00'0 \o. \\ \ \ \
. .(Z..:TRENCHES):............ .f ..' w' ---------------------------..'\\ \, .
~.....:.!~. .. /...... . ':... . ~.i.:..f:ili; .. /''1>''''/ \ \ .. .
-+-
CON 10
7
'-'-.)
"
3.0 Shoulder
- - -
~
, )}"',,{~,,,;>
,'7=11.
- - -
-----
15.0
.. ..",. .--....
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Medion
15.0
"c)".!....... -...-....- .. --... _.....~,_.>.,.
10.8 Median
. .~- '''::''': '-'^~ - ...._,- -.... .._,.... .-
_ .m.._"_,,_,_
15.0
3.0
""
y':
'''''
HOT 22+412.5 HWY 400 TWP INNISFIL
_ HOT 10+000 TENTH LINE
00\ .orO\
7
LOT
LOT 7
CON
CON 10
LOT 7
9
CON 10
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNlY OF SIMCOE
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_n___n_ Proposed Property Limit
...orO\
00<-
~\':.Sl1-3
') tI')':.'<IV'
TO TIFFIN STREET-
PLATE
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~ ~~
~~~
r '<-
'" (1
m 0
J> r
() r
:r Z
~ ~
e; g
o
STA. 22+100 TO STA. 22+800
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
~'6~
~~~
~~-
o
o
o
~
r
(J>
o
z
"
~
'"
o
^'
Z
m
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
20
:r
G>
~
~
'"
"'
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:r
r
Z
m
::.
:r
r
Z
m
~
:I:
r
Z
m
10m 0 20m
URS
HIGHWAY 400
-~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
15.0
CON 10
LOT 7
'"
'"
+
(Jo
o
o
-----
-----
-------
2 TRENCHES
B IN EASEMENT
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
-----
-----
10.8 Medion
10.8 Medion
15.0
15.0
3.0 Shoulder
- - - -
- - - -
3.0 Shoulder
----
TOWN OF INNISFIL
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
LOT 7
CON 10
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_________ Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario KEY MAP ~~~ TO TIFFIN STREET- PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY ~~~ ;:: ~g't HIGHWAY 400
r <- 0 HOR. SCALE:
'" () In r~?J
Ministry of Transportation '" 0 """-Iii RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 ~ ~ 0 21
~ -z ~%-
;::. ~ -0 1 :2000
1 :< " G> ~ ~ 0
to Junction at Highway 11 ,... :< o :E :< '" '6
URS '< "- c: EJ 8 ,... " 10m 0 20m
'" '" ~ " *' ~ STA. 22+800 TO STA. 23+500
G.W.P.30-95-00 '"
HIGHWAY 400 -...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;:;:;--------
'"
+
lJI
o
o
\
1.
c:.
G-
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
CON 10
LOT 7
---------
--------
3.0 Shoulder
15.0
10.8 Medion
15.0 -
-,,, .,- ..._ .._c
i':";C
3.0 Shoulder
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
______n_ Proposed Property Limit
-------
- - -
- - -
-.--
- - - -
/\
'\
t
c:.
c.
3.0 Shoulder
-..: .: 15.00
10.10 Medion
- - - -
3.0 Shoulder
CT) Ontario KEY MAP - """ TO TIFFIN STREET - PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY ~~~ HIGHWAY 400
~~~ ;:: ~g;
r C(- 0 HOR. SCALE:
OJ C) 1ft ~~~
Ministry of Transportation m 0 0 RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 f) ~ z ~~- 22
~ ~ :x: Z ~ " 1 :2000
:x: ~ ~ ~ 0
:x: 0
to Junction at Highway 11 r r E; 8 :x: 0
URS z ~ ~ 0 'Om 0 20m
m 0 m ~ STA. 23+500 TO STA. 24+200
G.W.P.30-95-00 m
HIGHWAY 400
-----
._--- ;:,,- ...-:....
,_.. -< .,-","'"
------'.;,;;
- - - - -0'''-
- - - -
LOT 7
CON 1 0
---'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~/ "~,<,,
-,,/' \ M"').,"
//' ""z
//
,r//// i,:>f::'>
3.0 Shoulder
S"ou1der
3.0
1.5 Media"
GOOD !.IFE:
FITNESS"
O s"aulder
3.
15,00
10,10 Medion
15.00
3.0 Shoulder
----
CITY OF BARRIE ________ <)
COUNTY OF SIMCOE /(\ 11\"\6-
________ <)/(\ 11\"16-
____ <)/(\ 11\"11\.
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
o_____n_ Proposed Property Limit
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
KEY MAP ~n TO TIFFIN STREET - PLATE
~~~ ;: ~~\ HIGHWAY 400
.... <- 0
'" " .... P~:D HOR. SCALE:
m 0 U> ~';i;i\
I; .... 0 RECOMMENDED PLAN 23
J: .... Z ~~-
G> .. ~ I Z ~ ." 1 :2000
""' " ~ ~ 0
1 J:
!: J: 0 I '6
....
?<. z ';i E; 0 .... "
0 ';i 10... 0 20m
'" m m " m " ST A. 24+200 TO ST A. 24+900
<.
m
HIGHWAY 400 -$-
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G. W. P. 30-95-00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 Shoulder
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
m.,
"'c,~''''''~
'-:./:}::: ;:;.
CtJJ:i~:;
m~
'.~
.,,_..~
"
/ ./
/ /
; ,
, -;.,~:';<--(
OJ
~
:0
j'i\
t
f ;'
,
"":,
,
\
\
\
~ ~... . ":
V,~,~~,?~F,/
; p,,---
I
\ ...-
,>~.','<'
<Q:. Ji ,~::_1----- ,
...........:." ~ ~~~~~-
o ~~
----~---------~-~------~--~------:::--~-
/~~
.<.i./
g. '" ....
,,,,,,h''..,'-.. ~ -"""~_''''" l z
..~ "'. '1i-5;
~,;~~:~.;-~_L_"-----______~Ig -l.
--....---=-::.-....
I!!--
3.0 Shoulder
14.75
7.5 Medion
14.75
7.5 Median
3.0 Shoulder
14.75
3.0 Shoulder
-
~~-~
i....=.~~=r?~;~:)-
-
1.1
/
i
i
i
i
i
r
..(
i
i
i
i
i
i
[
()
o
':Do
()
o
~
:x:
o
r-
\fi
f;,
Legend
. Signalized Intersection LOT 8
- - - Existing Property Limit CON 1 1
--------- Proposed Property Limit
I
--"" ....----\
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
~ ~~
~~~
,... -<-
.. (')
m 0
)> ,...
~ ~ ~
:I: ::0 G)
,... 0 "
~ E; g
1\ I I I IIDIII
HIGHWAY 400
STA. 24+900 TO STA. 25+600
TO TIFFIN STREET -
PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
::0(')"
~~~
~~~
"'~-
o
~88~~
I r _..-
;;:
o
,...
U>
o
z
'" "
1 ~
1:: 0
Z ::0
I~_~
~1\'
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
:I:
i5
l
~
~
24
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
~
:I:
,...
Z
m
QI
10m 0 20m
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~
CON
12
LOT
7
... . 1 TRENCH . . em
8
8
3.0 Shoulder
IV
at
+
o
o
o
:<?
....0
{5iJi
;;s:<?
.....~
;:'""
U'"
- - - - - - - - - -
----------..
..."
-
- 14.75
7.5 Median
7.5 Median
HI
w",ww,w_ww,_ww',n_.
14.75
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
SCL
Shoulder
LOT 8
CON 12
LOT 8
CON 12
Legend
. Signalized Intersection MOLSON PARK
- - - Existing Property Limit
__uuu_ Proposed Property Limit
~
:I:
..-
Z
'"
QI
~ ~i
~~~
..- -(-
OJ (")
'" 0
". ..-
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ E; g
1\ I I I IIDI'I
HIGHWAY 400
TO TIFFIN STREET -
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
ST A. 25+600 TO ST A. 26+300
PLATE
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
:I:
Q
I
'<
~
5
\n
o
z
~ ;
:I: ~
C 0
Z "
I~~
~]\r
~9~
~~~
-(~-
o
~88~~.g
I { ~.-.
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
CON 12
'1'1'1
~
8
'~0)\\-\
r)
"t,~
"8 "
-~~~
, " " "-'
~;~~~~-~~~-~~~~ ~--
~
'" \, "
'.
'v _ '
- --",,-- _..<
vM-_~~, r -"
~,._~-" ,'-
- -
- - -
- ~".
'"""""-"'"''''''''
_ ....... _..__......__. ,.....,_ m
HI
7.5 Median
14.75''':;
-----
- - - -
3.5 SCL::: -
3.0 Shoulder:
- - - - -
~(
1\
ii
Legend LOT 8
. Signalized Intersection CON 13
- - - Existing Property Limit
__uu___ Proposed Property Limit
ff) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
:t
(5
1
~
~
URS
-'\'"
<><~:'
~U~T STRUCTUR~
- - - -
- ';...' - - - -
,,,.......... -.
~
:t
co
Z
'"
QI
i ~i
~ ~~
,... -<-
'" C1
~ ?2
~ ~ 'i
:t: ~ ~
c: 3>' 0
ffi 0 0
1\ I I I\DJI'I
HIGHWAY 400
CON 13
LOT 8
LOT 7
CON 1 1
'.s
""" ,~
'''-''r-.J
....
,,- "-.
-... \ ~,-:'w=-":7 ~~:--'-',-",::f~.c~'--\i' "f
".'"'A'''''--''' - -
- - -
',",,"*' ",:..;.;,<, -';;""" -
- - - -
-
- - - -
- - -
- - - -
- - - -
--,-------,
i
i
i
i
\
\
\
\
t:: \
s
~~\
. =O~\"" ~<.) \
\ c. \
\ \
\. \
\\ \
\ \
i \
\
~ \
~
'"
r-----
LOT 8
CON 13
-------
3.0 Shoulder
.::: 14.75
7.5 Median
14.5
3.0 Shoulder
~
TO TIFFIN STREET-
;:
o
,...
U>
o
z
<> ."
1 ~
co 0
~ ~
I~<
~J\I
::nO'"
~<r2~
~~~
~~-
o
€.s~
l?o-qD
f. I _$-
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 26+300 TO STA. 27+000
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
10m 0 20m
PLATE
26
I
I
------===:"" """
CAs ~--._, -.iD<'-'~";;;;;:;":;;;:'
~'CAs
I
I
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
--------- Proposed Property Limit
J.O Si)
I
I
I
I
------.
_~BOUCT STRU<;TURE
___ 8___
I
'1'1'1
'1'1'1
-~
't'r
I
- - -
~:95 S~~~lder
_ 3.75 SCL
-" '- . "'"
14.75
-----
------
- - -
- - - -
7.5 Median
_ _ _ _:-:-::::::~"-:14.75
I
- - -
- - -
- - -
-----
3.75 SCL
3.0 Shoulder
;:t'i""".......
I
I
I
I
..[9
:1
Ji.
~
~
~
I
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
I
!'4
:I:
r'
Z
rn
[ijl
~ ~~
~ ~~
r' -<_
'" 0
rn 0
". r'
~ ~ ~
;. ~ ~
~ E; 8
1\ I I I IIDIII
HIGHWAY 400
TO TIFFIN STREET ~
I
:I:
Q
~
"'<
~
s:
o
r'
fJ)
o
Z
~ ~
;. '"
z g
I~~
~1\1
;nO'"
}"o~
~E.-a
".zrn
"'~-
o
~&&~~
I\!_
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
PLATE
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
27
10m 0 20m
STA. 27+000 TO STA. 27+700
7.5 Median
GAS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
It'
/:7;
i~ (1/
1 C: / 'Pel
1:>. ~ .j Boott.
i, 7H :
,-'
;=:'/ ". '. . '"
41:; f~
. {~
\r
GAS
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
--
B
~78
3.0 3:9gul:!i<![_.
3.7'5 SCL -
'4.75"'-':;" ...
..._m_..._=-..-._..._m_"-:'
- -
'4.75'
3 75 SCL .-.'-:.
3.0 $haufder ....."......-...
....Ct
.t'8
~
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
___u_u_ Proposed Property Limit
~
<;
w'
/ 1~
..~
URS
'"
~
?<
~
~ ~~
~~~
r <_
'" ()
m 0
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ;. ~ ~
~ ~ ~ g
\]1 II, I I 1[1 I I
HIGHWAY 400
TO TIFFIN STREET-
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P. 30-95-00
;:
o
Iii
o
'Z
~ ~
r '"
~ %
I~;i\
~\I
~g\
~E-a
,,'ZI1'
"'~-
o
~
I I _...
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
PLATE
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
28
10m 0 20m
STA. 27+700 TO STA. 28+200
1
1
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
\~
't:i
~ ^
~ ' ' \
/ 7
/ C....
/:JCC"
i-o
\ "
~~~~$T~UCTURE _ 0..[ . \~_
."C:tj(~\ '<~f"~:;~----~~-"
-'
, "':_'''':~:;7':'<'':'''<<<'''",,
3,0 Shoulder ~
- - -
_ ?-;(?:;~u. ~f:~....:, _ CA~:L. _
- - -
------
_ _ - - - ~~.D(- -
- - -
- - - -
7,5 Media
........_ ....h...........
....... .......................... .".......
- - - - - - - - - - - -
3.0 Shoulder
#",'
CITY"AGF",!3ARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
'~
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
~ ~~
~~~
r- -<_
'" ()
!J) 12
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ E; g
I \ I I I IIDII I
HIGHWAY 400
10m 0 20m
STA. 28+200 TO STA. 28+900
TO TIFFIN STREET-
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
CON
14
LOT
!.
6
o
o
':;""":"~'<:"4:::=",:",""";"~:',~",o/,,,,.--,
C..,
......;,;;. - -
.~t~~.,
- - - - 14,75
7.5 Median
14.75
...=-....-,......_._~....._.
- ..=~..,:=_,,:-:::._.~... 3.75 SCL
3.0 Shoulder
LS
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
___uu__ Proposed Property Limit
PLATE
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
29
~~\
~~~
-<'r
o
~8~~
I ~ _...
;:
o
In
o
z
~ ~
~ '"
~ ~
I~fl
:xc
Gi
~
~
~
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
..
'"
:xc
0::
z
m
011
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!f
'"
E
co
I
1"0 <..
'<I' ...........
~<i .......................
" ''''.......... /
...........
..............J
14.75
CON 14
LOT 6
.)..
3.0 Shoulder
- ~"",,", -
- - -
18.5
.-....',:',- -
- - - - - - - - _:'~' >....i~'_,_b_ ;~-A (~ - - -
- - - - ;....",-,- -
- - -
7.5 Median
- - -
18.5 -
- - -
,.........................m...
3.0 Shoulder
).,./;1
!z>.,
'.
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_nnn__ Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
- - - -
------
- -.(:8,';"~
- - - - '-'''~ - - - - - - - - - - -
- - -
7.5 Median
- ~..:;.,-- - -
- - - - - - -
-+.",-/-
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - -
- - -
18.5
- - -
- - -
~ - - - - - - - -
- -',-; - - - -
- - - - '~,;~~
-------
~;:,.;,\- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
3.0 Shoulder
/"~'--:'''''''''''''''''''''''''''
/",,' ..,.'.....
/" .y,::"
;/' ."
hi\
.I' '\
/ /"." \
I> / .".,\
/" >" \
/ ;/.' ."."..... 1
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
PROPOSED LOCATION
FOR SMA POND
(LAYOUT AND PROPERTY
REOUIREMENT TO BE
DETERMINED
IN DETAIL DESIGN)
\
\'
'\
\
\
j
i
LOT 6
CON 14
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
"
Q
~
'<
~
~ ~~
~~~
.... -<-
'" (')
m 0
)> ....
(') ....
(]'I :t. z
~ ~ ~
~ b 8
1\ I I IIDIII
HIGHWAY 400
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 28+900 TO STA. 29+600
30
TO TIFFIN STREET -
PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
URS
.,,(')'"
')>0)>
~~~
)>"1<'
-<%-
o
~ssy........g..
Ii'O;ro ,
I r _....
;::
o
In
o
"
~ ~
:1: ~
'2 0
I~~
~\I
~
"
....
Z
m
U]I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
uuu_ Proposed Property Limit
~
!J...f')
qliq
'"
1
{"
.,)
~~
'J (
"--..
<::.\.
~~"",~"""",,;~-"'"
w~""""'"'
"';8cJRRI~H'si~~CIWREFI?R5E CAe.' L~
. . . "r; rrr" DEep
OOo~o/
~
" :-:--.
- ~
''>...>'...,.
_, --====--.0.-."
----:':'~;IIII!<
3.0 Shoulder
- - -
18.5 =.w;;;;;
- - -
-+-".~ ;';J _._.,~.(
7.5 Median
- - -
- ~.-',,-, - -
- - -
18.5
3.0 Shoulder
or-
t:fJ;.. ' ~ .,.
'" .....Nr.'.j...,
~.~~0/.~,f:1. "
"er l:1>.... '., i l!! 9..
.........~....".~...........................;,0~
............ '. .:-::.y.....;~
.... I '. '."' . 'I:::
!:!;
I-.::.
CllY OF BARRIE
COUNlY OF SIMCOE
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- TO ESSA ROAD
u.I
.-;t
ti; 9
w z Sl
z Z 0
~ ~(!.
}...:
C/)
Q
ijf
i<:
.>.;
J
}.:
C/)
/-..
o
(J
if
:>:
/-...
C/)
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 29+600 TO STA. 10+300
31
URS
o
~~ ; /fff
'l-~O ~
o,p x-<c--I. :c
",-I.~ Q L.
:c 'Y/Q
'Yt-v,,/J-
"
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUtvl.
oPs
lt~ r:
81'/?,"'J,..
~<O1'
10m 0 20m
3.00 Shoulder
_ 18.5
9.0 Median
18.5
HB S~~ulder
PLATE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
------- Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
"
CON 6
LOT 25
--
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
---------------'"' ",<
'01-\1) \JIG
\ ~
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- TO ESSA ROAD
~.
CJ)
Q
ii/
Ii:
~
J
k
CJ)
~
$
()
~
.::,;
~.
CJ)
32
URS
PLATE
10rn 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 10+300 TO STA. 10+800
o
~:<..'0 ~ / ff'
"f.~O ~
o'P >:-'i;:<" :I:
",-<"~ 52 L.
:I: 'T/Q
1t~ }-
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DU^,(
oPs.,.
lj~ .
.$'7"~~/;OY
<:/:'7"
I
A:
~S~ 51 IP
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 Shoudler
3.5 SCL
I
-
. 18.5
7.5 Median
I
- 18.5
3.0 Shoudler
I
I
I
I
I
LOT 24
CON 6
I
')
I
~~~".... .
~ i HOT 11 +1";'; ^HWY 400 CIiY OF BARRIE
- HOT 10+000 DUNLOP STREET
Legend . CIlY OF BARRIE
. Signalized Intersection ~,yb u....C' COUNTY OF SIMCOE
- - - Existing Property Limit ~.
_u____ Proposed Property Limit " ~
I
I
(j) Ontario KEY MAP t...:
10.: c:, PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY c:, 10. HIGHWAY 400
.~ () $
-TO ESSA ROAD fjf ~ 0 HOR. SCALE:
Ii; 9 0 /
Ministry of Transportation ~ ~ RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 w "% 12. ,);; s: ~~>- 33
z "% 0 if 10." 1 :2000
oUIVL ~ ~o: c:, #.0 ~
URS to Junction at Highway 11 oPs]' o~c; (i::~ $ 10m 0 20m
~~ .. 'E>~ :r -'qQ ST A. 10+800 TO ST A. 11 +500
G.W.P.30-95-00 ~)-I?'I>t~
~~ ~~J-
77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\,h
'boD~
~
;<
Ii;:
w
(I)
;!;
1n
Ii;:
~EN~
'" JE;!;
, SALESw
'- .o...rncEt:!
......
w
z
:J
:J:
(.)
~
INSERT 'A'
INSERT 'B'
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
------- Proposed Property Limit
HOME
UFE
::JD.I.J"ILOD
-=-U\JI'I~VJ ^
:r
I'q
~
(')
:J:
I::
Z
f"1
DUNLOP STREET
w
(I)
co
+
(Jt
o
o
o
+
(Jt
o
o
o
+
OJ
o
o
co
+
OJ
8
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
J....
'"
J...
$
~
!:
J....
'"
33a
PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
DUNLOP STREET
RECOMMENDED PLAN
o
o
~y..-:'
#o~ ~
Q'o)CJ ~'<;.'\ 5
'O~ :E
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
--TO ESSA ROAD
/
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DV^,/.
oPs.,.
Jf~ .
~~~'l'yJV
~~
10m 0 20m
URS
ST A. 9+500 TO ST A. 10+530
ItIQ
i't~.I-
"
I
18.5
f:::>
'::.:.J
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 Shoulde,
Vories SCL
~" ~ ~ '<~A.". M'"
3.0 Shoulder
- 18.5
-
..... ~~.~v _.~
-
I
7.5 Medio
7.5 Medion
..u...........,"'_.,.._.,.....
~~ (:.':'-
.. -_.,...._~. ..........
_,~-.:;i', '_
-'
- 18.5
o,.,~__~.,,"
I
3.0 Shoulde
3.0 Shoulder
I
I
I
CON 5
LOT 23
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
n___n Proposed Property Limit
':~
'~\'
" '.... ./
,,~ . , ".
'. "', f
";'" "~","',<), ,,'
, '
, , .
.' .
~ " ,
, .
. ,
. .,
9_1) ,
q~~
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
I
I
I
I
(i) Ontario KEY MAP '-'
'" PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY '- HIGHWAY 400
$ 0
- TO ESSA ROAD ~ 0 rtf HOR. SCALE:
Ministry of Transportation ..,. RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 s: ~,\'?o >- 34
DUtyl /..: -tlO ~ / 1 :2000
'"
URS to Junction at Highway 11 oPs-,. Q",ci'::<e;.<e;.'\ :z:
s'\~ ~ 'Om 0 20m
li"" . ,<qQ STA. 11+500 TO STA. 12+100
G.W.P.30-95-00 &,."r,~ftv
~~,. ~~}-
77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 ShOulder
OF BARRIE
CITY OF SIMCOE
COUNTY
7.5 Medion
18.5 -
3.0 ShOulder
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
------- Proposed Property Limit
(j) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
~.
<%>
~
$
u
~
.;,;
~.
<%>
o
~.... ; /r:(
~o ~
o\.)v~~~, :r:
",,'?< 52 <.
:r: '7/Q
'.'t~r
"
~.
~ ~
~g i:if
LU -Z'2. F
Z 50 J
~ (/)0:.
- TO ESSA ROAD
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUNl
OPs.,.
li.t:: .
Sl'/?,I.:i",
~~l'
009"1-6 i'
CON 5
LOT 23
...... ~..~
'.-[}.......:.............. r[..
~) i...:: ~~~-"_.,-./t;, ,~
~"...' . .......... ~.~.'::"..... ............... -.f
':';).~' l "::::
fJ..... . '''co::.:::
C ;' .:' .'
-~~ ->--. ~:
. "'.~. ..... .... ...
,." ,_ ' i
..... .l3........... .-
,"., .) F>.".'
,.,'w" 0
.~~::::.~~' "._~,,'.~":,
3.0 Shoulder
3.75 SCL
14.75
7.5 Medion
/
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 12+100 TO STA. 12+700
PLATE
35
10m D 20m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
Existing Property Limit
uu_n Proposed Property Limit
~ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
01)
....:j
3.0
- - -
7.5
- - - - - - - -
3.0
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- TO ESSA ROAD
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUN(
oPs.,.
Ji"" .
&l-/i',"""/tv
~(~:'l-
CON 5
LOT 23
~'ft~;~'i""'"
. ,.>.-.. .........'.r-.. .. _-"<....
/"'", 't~- J 'td.) ''';~../ -
t,\." \ ' "
~f:~
'('")" .-
~e~ulder
- ~-:~'<<':::' -,:;",...,,- -
- - -
14.75
""':'.../<;.;,Z:::'_.,'><,,-c,~,:-; - -
- - - - - - -
----------
Median
14.75
Shoulder
CON 5
LOT 23
/
J...'
<%J
C
iif
Ii:
.>;
J
J...'
<%J
J...
$
~
.s:
J...'
<%J
36
PLATE
10m 0 20M
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 12+700 TO STA. 13+200
o
o
~-<,y.. ;. /rJf
~o ~
\)0(j~<(;.<(;.-<' ::r:
s-<'~ ~..
::r: '7/Q
;YJ.z,.q Y
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
14.75
----'.
>!
'(::~'<.~;..'~~~
-",
.""",
3.0 :shgu~<!L...,.mm' ... >
. - .",- - -
7.5 Median
14.75
3.0 Shoulder
7.5 Median
- 14.75
3.0 ShoUlder
o.
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
nn___ Proposed Property Limit
I
b'"4~ Y
J>!;
(i) Ontario KEY MAP I...:
I...: '" PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY '" J.... HIGHWAY 400
Q $
- TO ESSA ROAD {if ~ 0 HOR. SCALE:
0
Ministry of Transportation ii: ..,. r:f RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 .>; s; ~y..>- 37
J I...: /' 1 :2000
DUtv( '" ~o ~
URS to Junction at Highway 11 oPs.,. ov(j~<i:-<i:-' :r:
It,,,, . s'~ ~ 'Om 0 20m
G.W.P.30-95-00 s/'~/:'Itv "t/Q ST A. 13+200 TO ST A. 13+900
~~/' """v..,y
77
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY-
o
o
"'I
+
:f\~'^...... '.
'/ -"'"
I.:)
"-
:J
Q
:r:
CD
o
o
N
+
o
]
r{
u
.-SV$- .
I1D U/G -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CJ'\~""".'
'<:<'"" ;;
.. '''',-,;,,''''''
i,~~~,~'_~-'
'- :....-.-..,""""
"
"
"
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
( ,
I~i;~= .
t~~?~~r~:\"7
,.. c..C\.\..,
~O" "\c
\O"~: \
\
\
\
\
\
lj
"
:J
""'--,^
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
0+ 0
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
n_____ Proposed Property Limit
J...: PLATE
CT) Ontario KEY MAP C%>
}...
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY $ 0 REALIGNED BAYFIELD ST
- TO ESSA ROAD J! 0 /rff HOR. SCALE:
... 37a
Ministry of Transportation From 1 Km South of Highway 89 ~ ~y..>- RECOMMENDED PLAN
}.... 1 :2000
DUNL C%> 'f.~o ~
URS to Junction at Highway 11 oPs.,. o-:p ,:;;.<(.:<;, a 10m 0 20m
1i~ . s....~ J: ~Q STA. 10+217 TO STA. 10+715
G.W.P.30-95-00 &7'Ir,J::-~ 'Y"t:qy
<!"~7' 77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7,5
PARK LOT 16
,.
Shoulder
- - 14,75
- ~~\~ - - - - - - - -
_ _ _ _ _ -"'r>'<'- - - _ _ _ _
3o'":::'~~~~~i=E~:~E~~~~_~:=-~~~.~~:~-s~~t~~=~~~:~~_.~:~~~~-:_.~~~::::_,~:~=~~~~~~-
.... t PARK LOT 17 PARK LOT 19 ~"."..~,~~~.
:'1"..':0;'- 'N" CO, " "., CO, 20 .
t(;y~EJ~Q ['7 ,~, .:
p t!I ,Gj.. GJ, I . >
"{>~,' ,.' 2 Sr IP .. .... il, ..../y,'fjfil '/,'~ f'.', '"D'?~....-.....'...""'"
~,\)~.. [;;;;;:; 7...... ';:./(.;."'~ "....C[/.uip:(.:
~ " ~ .... ., . -, :'i;';dd...~/~1 , ..--
7.5 Medion
-
:: 14,75
-::3.0 ShOulder
111,11
,;;j;
.~. .
~ n'V'_""_" .'
~ ~ -=--~=---
..
o DOt'..
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_u_u_ Proposed Property Limit
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
@ Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
t-.'
'"
t-.
$
u
~
.s
t-.'
'"
38
PLATE
t-.'
'"
Q
{if
q:
.).;
J
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 13+900 TO STA. 14+500
o
rt-0- ~ /fif
':f-~O ~
<)'.)(; ~~:" a
s-<"~ - <.
J: . 7/Q
'ft~r
7,
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
- TO ESSA ROAD
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUIy,-
OPs.,.
lfl>; ,
&1'/i]~1V
~~l'
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 Shoulder
14.75 -
7.5 Median"
- - - - - -
14.75 -
3.0 Shoulder
1,1,1,
<;,.';n"j
( ~",
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
------- Proposed Property Limit
:.:.:.
- - - -
",'<'
- - - -
- - -
;~":;,;;,,
- - -
- :"~
U EXTENSION ,",
\.<.' ':."'}-,.\",-;
......
7.5 Median
- 14,75
J.O ShoUlder
d. <;(~:\ r;
I
i,'~,~ \
;Lt-
,
I
~:1 \
I
\
I
\
",":._~-~~----::,~-..~..:,~;~~~~-:;.~..,...-
--~~-
HOT 14+879 HWY 400 CITY OF BARRIE
=HOT"TO+OOCJ;()""OtICKWORTH-,$TREEL___
,
,C~:-:::~-:-
J~ BC~t<rG
~ LOT 21
!A/
J
LOT 21
CON 4
y;
------
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
NOTE:
REHABILITATION OF ST. VINCENT
STREET STRUCTURE TO BE
PROVIDED ONLY UNDER
SEPERATE MUNICIPAL INITIATIVE.
- TO ESSA ROAD
/-..'
C<)
Q
ii/
ii:
A
J
/-.."
C<)
/-..
$
(J
~
..::,,;
/...:
C<)
39
PLATE
ff) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
rtf
/
URS
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 14+500 TO STA. 15+200
o
o
.,.
ff5-~ >-
~o ~
00c,~",,,,"\ :r:
c;,"\<(i. 52 <.
:r: 'l/Q
"t~J-
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G. W. P. 30-95-00
DUtvt
oPs-,.
Jf", "
87'If',"lflv
~l::7'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
_uu__ Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
~
CON 3
LOT 21
CON 3
LOT 21
"""
=.
,'.~-, -
Shoulder
- = 14.75
;'.'",,'-",
7.5 Medion
14.75
lOT 21
CON 3
_______BHD
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
~
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- TO ESSA ROAD
J.....
<%)
Q
i:ii
;;:
.>.;
II
J.....
<%)
'-
$
~
.s:
J.....
<%)
40
PLATE
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 15+200 TO STA. 15+800
o
o
rt.:<- -:. /rtf
~o ~
'V\)0-t::<i:-<i:-~ J:
s~'?' Q~.
J: '7/Q
"Y~y
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUtv(O
'Ps.,.
li"" .
&"1"I?"Y",
~~"1"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. \
(/.
;,':'.1
HOT 16+173,9 HWY 400 CITY OF BARRIE
-HOT 10+000,0 DUCKWORTH STREE
,~
..;;.."'> <..,
,,;:", ". ,,;'~''^''
"'~::::Q::;:~:;:r:~\.
'.--- -"~
',",," 0"
,'-, '<;
<-:,- _ 'c!"
~','
"'- -', ~
' , "-
'- "-/'
~ '~
-'~
<~::'~
'," .."~
,', "
", ".,
':::';:--~
'- ':
""''-.''e,
,",'X'
"',(),"-..'-
, "--"'-" ",.,
'. 'c" "
..00
D('~0',Sf&
~o (('
~ f:'&
It( ('ill 1'1'&--9('
-1--9(:
-1
'";,,,
--~-~
'-, "'~' I,'
""v...",->,,,,,,, /~
.;
"h""r~,Jv'
POSSIBL( fU~U~~(A
O(V(LOPM(N
CON3
LOT 21
CON3
LOT 21
CON 1
LOT 5
o
o
~
:>'-',~ [5
, '>:~,:,~
" ~""""""-""",',',',',',,;',',,".
""'."...~
,.........~
" :::-- ""'=
o
o
'"
o +
~ 0
+ ---------~------
o ______---
__or;:..------
~8
ON
8';
----~--------
-------
-------
-------
'\,,--'"
~"<,:~~':,\ :.-:, ~~;:i~>:::.:~~~ ," .:~)-~, J
Ot
+
'"
o
o
- - - -
- q~
- - - -
- - - -
- - ~~~ -
- - - - - - -
- - - -~--
- - - -
- - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - -
- .......,,:;',-
.'\~" - -
- - - - - -
-/'0 -
- - -
- ";:~
- - -
..,'....
- - - -
"
LOT 5
CON 1 WPR
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
n_____ Proposed Property Limit
LOT 22
CON 3
GEORGIAN
COLLEGE
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
I
DUly!
OPs-,-
li"" '
&rl?,f:'/I\t
~~r
;..:
'"
c
iJ:/
iJ:
~
J
J.-'
'"
J.-
$
f!
s:
J.-'
'"
o
o
~0 -; /ttf
'i-~O ~
0\)0 <i:-~-<" :t:
s-<"~ S2 <,
:t: '7/Q
"t~)--
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
PLATE
(Y) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- TO ESSA ROAD
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
41
10m 0 20m
ST A. 15+800 TO ST A. 16+600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
u__u_ Proposed Property Limit
GO~) '}., '\
\,0\
/ f
!
Ii
If
1/
Ii
/ll
~
if
00.4.............'...
l t
/(1 u
"i'; \
l {:"~ ~^
}\~~: ;
't_ :z.
\'.'
p
/ ,/~!
i .,,1
~ir'...-...."'''''''r'/.f ,~1
~~::<~"".'""""'-""'~,!'.#"'/
<(
kJkJ
0:::0:::
::><(
1-1-
::>.2
kkJ
kJ~
-JQ
0)0
i/}-J
UJ!5!
OI..t.J
Qa
CllY OF BARRIE
COUNlY OF SIMCOE
GEORGIAN
COLLEGE
~?\<-
~
!!:
If
".
(/)
Q.
Z
J:~
~~
w
\0
0>
o
o
9/n aHa
+
\0
o
o
GO~) '}.,'"
\,0\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
,,\)~\
\)\)\ \
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
,,~
"V \
\)\)1., o\) \
1>,,0 \
\ \
\
\
\
o
+
...
o
o
~
(j) Ontario KEY MAP /-.'
/-." <%> PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY <%> /-. DUCKWORTH STREET
c $
- TO ESSA ROAD {if f! 0 HOR. SCALE:
0 rtf
Ministry of Transportation iJ: ". RECOMMENDED PLAN
From 1 Km South of Highway 89 A .s; ~~>- 41a
DUN,- J /-." ~o ~ /' 1 :2000
<%>
URS to Junction at Highway 11 oPs.,. <;)\:F'~<i:-<i:-'\ J:
li"" " <:>'\~ ~ 10m 0 20m
SI'I?,~/tv Iy/Q STA. 9+728 TO STA. 10+371
G.W.P. 30-95-00 ~~}' Iy~y
77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~... <'.. ]""
~
"-
blyb
u....(I
?
3.0 Shoulder
-: 1 4.75
10.1 Medion
0/ iii,' ,'C::U <::v .~'~" .0:j' /
'n:: ' ."" - ''''Yo:, /
;- ~ ".->:~-,- / ".., - - " :-
~""" ~"<)~'-"""'''"". ----.'" ~ ~
i ". /)<\ ~}:::<'.) . t/
~$
3.0 Shoulder
. . . .un _,_~,_,
-------------
-----------
---
. .'''''''~VM_'__~'."._,,___ _ _
14.75-
,;<;:-
- - - - -
- - - -
- - - -
7.5 Medion
-,'i 14.75
3.0 ShOulder
14.75-
'-""-"
- ~ - -
- .,;..". ?:~>t'+.-. ~~~; ~;,':.- -
- - - -
- - -
- - -
- - - - - -
- - -
- - - - -
.-
- - - - - - -
- - - -
- - -
...,-:!",",~ . ,.~. =
- - -
.~""-,,- ... ..
- - -
,.......... ............
3.0 Shoulder
-';,,'
GEORGIAN DR.
.,WM
"',.WM.
GAS.::::'
"'-WM
" .. ..... .. '8NPS8P[G~
LOT 5
CON 1 WPR
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - Existing Property Limit
_uu__ Proposed Property Limit
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
ff) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
'...:
~
/-..
$
(j
~
/-..'
~
42
PLATE
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
/-..'
~
Q
(jj
;;:
.);;
J
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 16+600 TO STA. 17+300
o
~-<,'<' ; /fif
~o ~
Q\)0~<(;.<(;.-<' J:
",-<'~ !2 L.
J: '7/Q
.yt-z,.-</ J-
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
- TO ESSA ROAD
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUly!
OPS,/
If,,,, .
,so)'!?,""4\.-
~~l"
URS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,f'/
CON 7
WPR
Lor 7
CITY OF BARRIE
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
TOWNSHIP OF SPRINGWATER
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
'-..
'-..
'-..
...........
...........
...........
---
--.'
---
---
~
~
o
'6
--- ---
-
snou\oef
~.o
. \4.1'=>
snou\oef
1.'=>
- \4.1'=>
snou\oef
~.o
13.8m Medion (Mox)
.- ~_..-~--~_.~-~-_.
................................. /----</-//:~
- /.~'-~'
.---
---'---
---~..
.-:- ~.
~-
.~.._~...~~.............~--~~_.._~
~
;;;:,;;.--"
-
--
---
--
----
LOT 6
CON i WPR
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
___u__ Proposed Property Limit
URS
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUIVl
oPs.,.
?if:: .
Sl'/?,/:'/I!;
~~l"
J......
'"
c
[if
iZ
.>:
J
J......
'"
J.....
$
u
~
..:,;
J......
'"
o
o
~,\y.. -; /rtf
~o ~
ov(j~<i:-<i:-'\ :r:
'S'\~ Q..
:r: "/Q
><t~r
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
43
IQm 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 17+300 TO STA. 18+000
PLATE
(T) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
- TO ESSA ROAD
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0
TOWNSHIP OF SPRINGWATER
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
CON 1 WPR
LOT 8
14.75-
Shoulder
-".;:".h_ _ - - - - 7.25
7.5 Medion
,~.'.~~'
11.0
3.0 Shoulder
3.0 Shoulder.
/,', ,~:'. '0>
--_._------~:'\~~"?"-------------
~...
::-,i.-L::',:",
, _n
~~p
,--'-'"
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - - Existing Property Limit
------- Proposed Property Limit
(T) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
URS
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
/-..'
'"
/-..
$
~
s;
/-..'
'"
44
PLATE
/-..'
'"
Q
[if
it
x
J
10m 0 20m
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
STA. 18+000 TO STA. 18+600
o
(?--<..0 ! /r:{
~o ~
o\>G~<(;.<(;.-<" :z:
s-<"~ Q L.
:z: 'Y/Q
'lyt-z.,A/y
77
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
- TO ESSA ROAD
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DlIAtl
OPs
7';/:: r.
S}-/i'.I:'/1I.;
~~}-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
+" ,//
/> /j
/~./- ,.<>"..
/' //
/~/ /;/
// j/
/<~//
/ /~"'i".//
/.---'~>/"
/<::,:=:(~~~;;;/
,.~"?-/..,
<'::</'0/>/'
/.~G./
/.,:<~~;>;,/
/'6~ /;/
.//;:~~t~;;;;;;/
//;.:'J~:;/
/~j/"
.,o'''';?'"
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
....~/
,/A5'
;/
3.0 Shoulder
7.25
GORf
l..Or
77
/j'
7.5
- - - - -
11
3.0 Shoulder
-'
(X) ~'--- - - -
~ ~1~:f"';'
.~..~..""':
:;;~..
./ ':::j
/' (j)
/
/.....
----.--./ .
L01 9
CON i WPR
Legend
. Signalized Intersection
- - Existing Property Limit
_____u Proposed Property Limit
(i) Ontario
Ministry of Transportation
'..:
<<>
/...
$
~
s:
/....
<<>
o
f<.~Y'}. /Cif
'f..~O ~
\).,p ~<;;..~ J:
'S~~ Q L.
J: '7/Q
;Y~r
77
HIGHWAY 400 PLANNING STUDY KEY MAP
/....
~ ~
liig iif
UJ z'i ~
Z 50 J
~ (j)a:
- TO ESSA ROAD
From 1 Km South of Highway 89
to Junction at Highway 11
G.W.P.30-95-00
DUIyL
OPs.,.
If.t:c .
.s'1',,{/'1r
~~l'
URS
TOWNSHIP OF SPRINGWATER
COUNTY OF SIMCOE
LOT 10
--
----
COtv
7
l..Or
70
Wfsr
OF" p
ftvA, rA,tvG
U/Sf-tc-
~^'f
HOR. SCALE:
1 :2000
HIGHWAY 400
RECOMMENDED PLAN
ST A. 18+600 TO ST A. 19+300
PLATE
45
10m 0 20m
~......:s:;:;i.::~&..~
~~'Oi OIlO-~.
0" ~,,"'---"---,-'lf~~,
1fr.t'c' --,~V-,
{j~ -- o'\>:'
~j5 !.~
~f- ~~
\tr .
~G-\
Dept. Report No. TR2004-13 To: Committee of the Whole Prepared By: Paul Gravelle
Subject: Tax Ratios Department: Treasury
Council
C.ofW. Date: April 30, 2004
Motion # R.M. File #: F05 -13609
Date: Roll #:
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
CKGROUND:
In 1998, with the introduction of property tax reform, transition tax ratios were established that when
applied, would result in the distribution of the tax burden between tax classes being the same as prior
to tax reform. These ratios were:
Multi-residential
Commercial
Industrial
Pipelines
2.5575
1.1877
2.1840
1.1464
Municipalities were allowed to lower these transition ratios towards the range of fairness being the
residential ratio of 1.0000 but municipalities were not allowed to increase the tax ratios.
'"
In 2001, the County of Simcoe established a policy of lowering the tax ratio for the multi-residential
and industrial tax class annually over five years to 1.5385 being the point where vacant industrial
" property would pay similar taxes as a residential vacant lot.
On March 15,2004, the Minister of Finance tabled Regulation 66/04 which allows municipalities to
apply to the Minister to have new transition ratios prescribed for 2004 in an effort to mitigate
reassessment related municipal tax shifts onto the residential class. The intention is that anyone
class does not pay more than they paid last year as a result of reassessment.
~C\-~
t ANALYSIS:
I
Please find attached analysis of the reassessment related levy shift for the Township of Oro-Medonte
and County of Simcoe for the following scenarios:
current tax ratios
revenue neutral tax ratios
revenue neutral tax ratios with blended tax ratio reduction for the multi-residential and
industrial class
It is my understanding that County staff will be recommending the blended tax ratio option to County
Council. Most of the Municipal Treasurers were in favour of this option. I believe I am the only one in "'_
favour of maintaining the current tax ratio policy. My reasons are as follows:
with reassessment, there will be a shift of the tax burden between classes and within classes
the shift of the tax burden to the residential class in 2004 is not significant
the class with the largest shift in tax burden, being managed forest, does not receive any relief
from the change in tax ratio policy
it will be difficult to reduce the tax ratios for the non-residential classes in future years as doing
so will result in a shift in tax burden to the residential class. Politicians tend to be very reluctant
to increase taxes for the residential tax class.
There should be some correlation between tax ratios and level of service or demand for
service for each class in relation to the residential class
It should be noted that the tax increase for the Township of Oro-Medonte will be 3.98% rather than
4.43% if the blended option is implemented.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
Ii
1. THAT Report No.TR2004-13 be received.
Respectfully submitted,
~.
to^-- ~
~~ cf\~0
...
Paul Gravelle
Treasurer
- 2-
..
,0WNSI-\\P Of O~~:~~~E.OPI\ONS
COMPP--R\SON 0 2004
2004
2003 2004 RE.\lE.N\JE. BLE.NDE.D
'{IE. NOI\ONP--L NE.\JIRP--L
6,336,945 2,046 6,346,446 ~ ~ ,547
6,363,956 29,057
RE.S\DE.NI\P--L 6,334,899 9,088 -98~
2~7 ~O,052 -H
~ 0 ,286
M\JL 1\_RE.S\OE.NI\P--L ~0,069 86,~65 _~58
86,036 _287
86,323 86,403 80
fP--RMLP--ND 9,4 ~4 4,297 9,428 4,3~~
5,~~7 9,454 4,337
MP--NP--GE.O fORE.SI 85,67~ _769
75,956 - ~0,484 85,543 _897
86,440 _2,479
p\PE.L\NE.S 289,~25 -H ,3H 303,509 _2,933 303,963
306,442 ~00,078 -~ ~ ,47~
COMME.RC\P--L ~09,340 _2,209
~05,659 _5,890
~ ~ ~ ,549
\NO\JSIR\P--L o 6,940,839 0
6,940,839 6,940,839 0 6,940,839
1
V
'-
2004 TAX POLICY
Using the two tools provided by the Ministries, the following
"starting" reassessment related tax shifts are illustrated:
Property Class 2003 Year End 2003 Year End Reassessment
County Levy County Levy Related Levy
{2003 Year End (2004 Starting Shift
Assessment) Assessment))
Residential $57,296,195 $57,578,836 $282,641
.
.
Multi-Residential $997,348 $1,022,162 $24,814
Commercial $5,326,003 $5,081,645 -$244,359
Industrial $2,106,240 $2,030,600 -$75,641
Pipeline $412,554 $366,892 -$45,662
Farm $896,990 $936,689 $39,699
Managed Forest $31,039 $49,547 $18,508
--..------------------- ----------------------- ---------------------
Totals $67,066,371 $67,066,371 $0
-
April 2004
7
II
.
,
..
.
-
....
2004 TAX POLICY
The results of applying the Revenue Neutral Ratios mitigate
the reassessment shifts as illustrated below:
2003 2003 2003 2003 2003
Tax Annualized Revenue Revenue Revenue
Property Class Ratios Year-End Neutral Neutral Difference
County Levy Ratios Cou nty Levy
Residential 1.0000 $57,296,195 1.0000 $57,243,722 -$52,473
Multi-Res 1.9461 $997,348 1.9100 $997,348 $0
Commercial 1 .1877 $5,326,003 1.2521 $5,326,003 $0
Industrial 1 .7967 $2,106,240 1.8745 $2,106,240 $0
Pipeline 1 .1464 $412,554 1.2966 $412,554 $0
Farm .2500 $896,990 .2500 $931 ,243 $34,253
Man Forest .2500 $31,039 .2500 $49,259 $18,220
-------- -------- 1---------
Totals $67,066,371 $67,066,371 $0
)
8
"
2004 TAX POLICY.
The outcome of applying the Revenue Neutral Ratios, adjusted
for the Multi Residential and Industrial blending, influence the
2003 year end taxes as illustrated below:
2003 2003
Tax Annualized
Property Class
Ratios
Residential
Multi-Res
Commercial
Industrial
Pipeline
Farm
Man Forest
Totals
1 .0000
1.9461
1 .1877
1 .7967
1 .1464
.2500
.2500
April 2004
,
Year-End
County Levy
$57,296,195
$997,348
$5,326,003
$2,106,240
$412,554
$896,990
$31,039
--------
$67,066,371
2003 2003 2003
Revenue Revenue Revenue
Neutral Neutral Difference
Ratios Cou nty Levy
Blended Blended
1.0000 $57,488,673 $192,478
1 .7243 $904,246 -$93,102
1.2521 $5,348,794 $22,791
1.7065 $1,925,639 -$180,601
1 .2966 $414,319 $1,765
.2500 $935,228 $38,238
.2500 $49,470 $18,431
--------- --------
$67,066,371 $0
13
.."
~ b - \
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
TR 2004-14 Committee of the Whole Bonnie McPhee
Subject: Department:
Council Treasury
Statement of Accounts
C.ofW. Date:
April May 05, 2004
Motion # R.M. File #:
Date: Roll #:
Following is the statement of accounts for the month of April 2004.
Batch No.
Date Amount
April 01,2004 $ 924.24
April 07, 2004 218,888.51
April 14, 2004 237,503.27
April 16, 2004 2,425.25
April 21 , 2004 337,493.73
April 28, 2004 118,813.50
April 29, 2004 75.00
$ 916,123.50
April 03, 2004 $ 72,937.95
April 17, 2004 69,538.79
142,476.74
Total $ 1,058,600.24
A000257
AC00264
AC00265
A000258
AC00266
AC00267
A000259
. PR00128
I;
PR00129
f ~E~OMMENDATION(S):
Ii
1. THAT Report No. TR 2004 - 14 be received.
2. The accounts for the month of April 2004 totaling $1,058,600.24 are received.
Respectfully submitted,
~b-d
Bonnie McPhee
Accounting Clerk
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
!iku /f-D Lj
()
f.-D v'0.JJ-l~
J
C.A.O.
Dept. Head
...
- 2-
~
The Township of Oro-Medonte
Policy
Employee Policy/Procedure Awareness
\ \
\ad, ~
Subject Page 1 of 2 I Policy/Procedure
Section Employee Policy/Procedure # POL-HR-01
Human Resources Awareness Enacted By Council:
PURPOSE
To establish a Policy for Township employees to ensure awareness of
policies/procedures during the performance of duties with the Township of Oro-
Medonte.
PROCEDURE
It shall be the responsibility of all employees of the Township of Oro-Medonte to ensure
that they are aware of the policies of the Township of Oro-Medonte by completing POL-
HR-01-Form1 where required.
POL-HR-Ol Page 2
POL-HR-01 FORM 1
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
POLICY/PROCEDURE AWARENESS
The following policy and/or procedure(s) have been explained and
understood:
Policy No.
Procedure No.
Employee's Name (print)
Date
Employee's Signature
Supervisor's Signature
Note: Return original form, once signed, to
Human Resources Officer.
..
.1
':J
The Township of Oro-Medonte
Policy
Employee Injury Reporting
~J -)
Page 1 of 2 I Policy/Procedure
Section Subject # POL-HR-02
Human Resources Employee Injury Reporting Enacted By Council:
PURPOSE
To establish a Policy for Township employees, for reporting all employee injuries during the
performance of their duties with the Township of Oro-Medonte.
SCOPE
Definition
Minor Injury: when a worker receives first aid treatment (i.e. cleaning and dressing minor
cuts etc).
Major Injury: when a worker requires the professional help of a health care practitioner
(i.e. doctor,hospital).
PROCEDURE
NOTE: Follow the 1, 2, 3, 4 WSIB Form (POL-HR-02-Form 1) and then the following
procedure:
a) if an injury occurs, the worker shall get the proper attention as soon as possible (first
aid, 911 etc.), if required, and notify the Supervisor. If required, the Supervisor will
accompany the employee to the hospital.
b) the worker or witness shall notify their Supervisor, and Union Representative of the
injury immediately, so it can be recorded on an Employee Injury Report, (POL-HR-02
- Form 2).
c) the supervisor shall complete an Employee Injury Report and advise the Health and
Safety Representative and the Chief Administrative Officer.
, ,
"
. POL-HR-02 Page.2
d) the Health and Safety Representative shall complete their portion of the Employee
Injury Report, complete with the worker's comments, re-enactment on site, and then
submit the Employee Injury Report to all the Joint Health and Safety Committee
(JHSC) members for review within 1 - 2 days.
e) the JHSC will review the Employee Injury Report and forward a copy of the Employee
Injury Report to the Human Resources Department and the Chief Administrative
Officer.
RESPONSIBILITY
a) It shall be the responsibility of all employees of the Township of Oro-Medonte to report
all Injuries in accordance with this Policy.
b) It shall be the responsibility of the immediate Supervisor to report all Employee Injuries
by completing the WSIB Form 7 (POL-HR-02-Form 3) within 3 working days, from the
time of the Injury (if applicable).
c) It shall be the responsibility of all employees of the Township of Oro-Medonte to
ensure that they are aware of this policy by completing POL-HR-01-Form 1.
"
.r
"
POL-HR-02-FORM 1
. ,
POL-HR-02-FORM 2
(Page 1 of 2)
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
EMPLOYEE INJURY REPORT
DATE
TIME
DEPARTMENT
EMPLOYEE NAME
POSITION
DATE & TIME OF INJURY
YEARS OF SERVICE
WITNESS(S)
ACCIDENT LOCATION
REPORTED TO
DATE & TIME REPORTED
NATURE OF INJURY
Fractures
Inflammation
Infectious Disease
Frostbite, Cold Exposure
Pinched Nerve, Ruptured Disk
Electric Shock
Chemical Injury
o Multiple Injury
o Recurrence
o Strain, Sprain, Torn Ligament
o Cuts, Lacerations, Punctures
o Inhalation, Fumes
o Inhalation, Smoke
o Heat Exhaustion, Fatigue
o Abrasions, Contusions, Bruises
o Heart Malfunction
o Eye Injury
o Burns
o Other
Multiple Parts
Head
Eye(s)
Ear(s)
Neck
Shoulder
Chest
Lungs
PARTS OF BODY AFFECTED
o Abdomen
o Back
o Heart
o Groin
o Arm
o Hand
o Finger
o Legs
o Knee (s)
o Ankle (s)
o Foot / Feet
o Ribs
o Hip
o Other
o Fall
o Weather-Describe
o Making Safety Devices Inoperative
o Using Defective Equipment
o Using Equipment Improperly
o Failure to Use Personal Protection
o Struck by Object
CAUSE OF INJURY
o Improper Lifting
o Horseplay
o Structural Collapse
o Inadequate Guards/Protection
o Back Draft
o Improper Placement
o Civil Disturbance
o Inadequate Illumination
o Inadequate Ventilation
o Lack of Knowledge or Skill
o Irrational Civilian
o Communication
o Abuse or Misuse
o Other
, ,
. .
POL-HR-02-FORM.2
(Page 2 of 2)
EMPLOYEE INJURY REPORT
Thoroughly describe accident (what, how, where, equipment or materials used, and size of objects
being handled, re-enactment on site)
Was medical! health care administered
Dyes
o no
If yes, by whom and describe (hospital, first aid etc.)
Health & Safety Representative Report
Name
Date
Workers Comments
Witness (s) Signature
Workers Signature
Form Completed By:
Print
Signature
iNSlS ~~="
~'I" Commission de la_II
.ftX""H'U ~~~-::~I'i'"
'e formu/a;re est disponible en fran~ais sur demande.
Pl.... r..d the In.tructlon. on th.r.verse of the Employer'. Copy (yellow copy).
Pl.... type or print firmly In d.rk Ink.
Do. not fold p.g. 2 under p.ge 1 when completing the form.
~. Worker Identification - Please complete In full
Mail to: 200 Front Street West
Toronto ON MSV 3J1
FAX: (416) 344-4684
1-88&-313-7373
POL-HR-02-FORM 3 (Page 1)
Employer's Report of Injury/Disease
Form 7 (Page 1)
WSIB use onl
Claim Number
La.t Name
First Name
Years Experience
in Occupation
Worker Reference Number
Miner's Certificate Number
dd.....
," -.-
Ity rrriwn
rovlnce
Postal Code
Fold
~Id
Is the injured person a (sub) contractor, independent operator, owner, executive
of the business or spouse or relative of the employer?
Telephone Number
:i. Em 10 er Identification
:mployer Name '.
Firm Number
Rate Number
Iddress
City /Town
Province
Postal Code
Irea Code Telephone Number Area Code
( . )
epartment
FAX Number Description of Business Activity
)0 you have an early retum to work,
:o-operative Retum to Work program or an
~ccommodation program in your workplace?
Is the injured worker represented
by a trade union?
no
C. Temporary Disability
Following the day that the Injury/awareness of disease occurred, will the
Injured worker be absent from work because of the Injury/disease? 0 unknown 0 yes 0 no
If you answered wnow to the above, will the Injured worker as a result of the Injury/disease:
. assume other work duties because the injury/disease prevents them from performing their regular duties? O. yes 0 no
. eam less than their regular wages because of the injury/disease? 0 yes 0 no
Note: If your .nswer
I. WnoW to Jill of the.e
questions ~
complete Section F.
WEarnlng. Informatlonw.
Normal Working Hours on Last Day
a.m. Worked
p.m from to
Do you have any information that the worker could have returned
to work earlier? If so, provide details.
1. What happened to cause the injury/disease? If known, describe injury, part of body involved and specify left or right side.
2. Who was the injury/disease reported to? If injury/disease was not reported immediately, provide reason for delay.
3. Describe the worker's activities at the time of the injury/disease. Include details of equipment or materials used and the size and weights of objects being handled,
4. Where was the worker when the injury/awareness of disease occurred? If the injury/disease occurred outside of Ontario, specify province, state or country.
5. Is there anyone else who may have witnessed or who may know about the injury/onset of disease? If so, provide details below.
Name(s) Address(es) and phone number(s) if available
0007A (01/98)
WSIB Copy - White Worker Copy - Pink Employer Copy - Yellow
Please read and complete page 2
Worker's Name
POL-HR-02-FORM 3 (Page 2)
Employer's Report of Injury/Disease
Form 7 (Page 2)
WSIB use onl
Claim Number
. -
J I .. .,
WSIB ~ . SaIet It
m...rllfl":: ....':1
CSPAAT Ccmmission de Ia "'ri~
~~~~-=r"
ea tare
Did' the worker receive health care? Initial or emergency health care: if known, provide the name and address of practitioner/facility.
, ~ don't know
Current or continuing health care: if known, provide the name, address and telephone number of practitioner/facility, if different than above.
F. Earnln s Information- Do not complete this section if ou answered wNow to all questions in Section C on pa e 1.
_ .' Rate of Pay (before tax) [J hourly Total Weekly Pay Hours If weekly pay hours are irregular, please state Does the worker's work schedule change from
. average weekly hours. week to week? .
dall . yes no
From Revenue Canada I Net Claim for Exemption I Net Claim Code Enter Worker's Usual Work Days SloAT W T F S
T01 provide: . (F = full day, H. = halt day)
. Are Benefit Plan (Health Care, Life Insurance, DO 0 not
Pension) contributions continuing? yes no . II bl
. . app ca e
o yes 0 no
The worker also receives the following earnings in addition Will this benefit continue while the worker
to the Rate of Pay as reported above. (Check all that apply.) is absent from work due to this injury/disease?
[J Vacation Pay Dyes Dno . [J dally
[J weekly
[J Production Bonuses .0 yes Dno . ,,..... [J dally
. [J weekly
[J Profit sh~ng Dyes Dno . [J dally
[J weekly
[J Room and board and/or benefit from the worker's Dyes Dno . [J dally
personal use of an employer's vehicle. . [J weekly
[J Cost of living allowance, shift differential. Dyes Dno . [J dally
lead hand premium [J weekly
[J Tips and Gratuitles Dyes Dno . [J dally
[J weekly
\ [J Unemployment insurance benefits paid in a Dyes Dno . [J dally
job creation or work-sharing program [J weekly
If "no", please state value
if known
. !
.
.
Ir'\
~
~
Other
.
.
It
. ,
. !
I
"
~
e
If the worker worked after the first absence. please enter dates.
..1'1'1
p.rr
G Advances If you have advanced or will be advancing anything to cover
. period of disability, give particulars including dates covered.
no
Was any individual who does not work for you totally or partially responsible for the injury/disease?
Dyes 0 no If yes, please explain.
If machinery, equipment or a motor vehicle was totally or partially responsible for the injury/disease. refer to the instructions on the reverse of the Employer's Copy
and provide particulars.
Do you have any reason to doubt that the injury/disease is work-related? 0 yes 0 no If yes. please explain.
Letter of explanation attached? D yes D no
Who is responsible for arranging the worker's retum to work? (Name and telephone number)
I. It Is an offence to deliberately make false statements to the WSIB. I declare that all of the Information provided on pages 1
and 2 of this report Is true,
Name of Person Completing this Report
e
,gnature
Date
+
.
The Workplace Safety and Insurance Act requires you to give a copy of this form to your worker.
The Township of Oro-Medonte
Policy
Incidentl Accident Reporting
Page 1 of 9 I Policy/Procedure
Section Subject # POL-HR-03
Human Resources Incident/Accident Reporting Enacted By Council:
PURPOSE
To establish a Policy for Township employees, for reporting all incidents/accidents during the
performance of duties with the Township of Oro-Medonte.
SCOPE
Definitions
Incident: an unusual occurrence in the workplace that could have resulted in harm to people
and/or property (if the circumstances had been slightly different - sometimes called a
near miss).
Accident: an unplanned event that causes harm to people and/or damage to Property.
Minor: when the accident causes minor damage to property only,
Major: when the accident involves major damage to property and / or harm to people.
PROCEDURE
NOTE: If personal injury to an employee has occurred, refer to POL-HR-2 and complete
the required information.
Motor Vehicle Accident
F:"~~I:
1 . Stop immediately;
2. Turn off all ignition sources;
3. DO NOT move your vehicle until the Police or Supervisor arrives;
4. Protect the scene with warning devices and establish traffic control;
5. Help the injured and get emergency medical aid promptly, if necessary.
POL-HR-03 Page 2
~E~~~J:};
1. Notify your Supervisor. Identify the exact location and emergency services required.
TJ1~RP:
1. Exchange information with Police and persons involved;
~. Carefully obtain all facts necessary for completing the report;
"3. Obtain names and addresses of witnesses. Use the Witness Courtesy Disclosure Form (POL-
HR-03-Form 1);
4. Do not argue about the accident and do not make any statements to anyone except Police or
Township authorities,
1. Complete the Driver/Operator Statement (POL-HR-03-Form 2) and the Incident/Accident
Report (POL-HR-03-Form 3) and return the completed package to the Supervisor;
2. If personal injury to an employee has occurred, refer to POL-HR-02 and complete the
required information.
Incident
a) if an incident occurs, the worker(s) involved shall notify their Supervisor as soon as possible.
b) the Supervisor shall complete an Incident /Accident Report and notify the Chief Administrative
Officer.
Accident
a) if an accident occurs, the worker(s) shall receive the appropriate attention (first aid, OPP,
ambulance etc.) if required.
b) the worker(s) shall notify their Supervisor of the accident as soon as possible and the
Supervisor shall notify the Chief Administrative Officer and the O.P.P. if required in the case of
personal or property damage.
NOTE: All major accidents are required to be investigated by a certified member. This
person shall be notified of any and all major accidents as soon as possible.
POL-HR-03 Page 3
-RESPONSIBILITY
a) It shall be the responsibility of all employees of the Township of Oro-Medonte to report all
Incidents/Accidents in accordance with this Policy.
b) It shall be the responsibility of the Supervisor to notify the Chief Administrative Officer and
copy the required forms to the CAO and Treasury.
c) It shall be the responsibility of all employees of the Township of Oro-Medonte to ensure that
they are aware of this policy by completing POL-HR-01-Form 1.
POL-HR-03 Page 4
POL-HR-03 FORM 1
\'06-
WITNESS COURTESY DISCLOSURE
OUR DRIVER IS REQUIRED TO MAKE A FUll REPORT. WOULD YOU KINDLY ASSIST THE DRIVER
BY COMPLETING THIS COURTESY DISCLOSURE.
Driver's Name:
Name:
Address:
Phone # (Home):
(Work):
Accident Location:
Date of Accident:
( ) a.m. ( ) p.m.
Time of Accident:
Did you see the Accident? .( ) Yes () No
Were you riding in a Vehicle Involved? ( ) Yes () No
Township-Owned Vehicle:
Other Vehicle:
PLEASE RETURN THIS DISCLOSURE TO THE DRIVER
Thank you for your co-operation
POL-HR-03 Page 5
POL-HR-03 FORM 1
WITNESS COURTESY DISCLOSURE
lo
OUR DRIVER IS REQUIRED TO MAKE A FUll REPORT. WOULD YOU KINDLY ASSIST THE DRIVER
BY COMPLETING THIS COURTESY DISCLOSURE.
Driver's Name:
Name:
Address:
Phone # (Home):
(Work):
Accident Location:
Date of Accident:
Time of Accident:
( ) a.m. ( ) p.m.
Did you see the Accident? ( ) Yes () No
Were you riding in a Vehicle Involved? ( ) Yes () No
Township-Owned Vehicle:
Other Vehicle:
PLEASE RETURN THIS DISCLOSURE TO THE DRIVER
Thank you for your co-operation
POL-HR-03 Page 6
POL-HR-03 FORM 2
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
DRIVER/OPERATOR STATEMENT
NAME:
DEPARTMENT:
.DATE:
PERMIT NO.:
INVESTIGATING SUPERVISOR:
DATE OF ACCIDENT:
UNIT NO.:
In your own words, describe how this accident occurred:
Signature of Employee:
- ,Date:
POL-HR-03 Page 7
POL-HR-03 FORM 3
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
INCIDENT/ACCIDENT REPORT
Date of Incident/Accident:
Time of Incident/Accident:
Location:
Claim#:
Pictures Taken: YES D NO D
THIS INCIDENT/ACCIDENT INVOLVES: Motor Vehicle D Vandalism 0 Other
Injury/Illness D Break & Enter D
DESCRIBE INCIDENT/ACCIDENT:
Exact Site of Incident/Accident:
Name of Contact at Site:
Corporation Authorities Notified - Name:
Telephone #: (
Position:
Police 0
Other 0
Fire Department 0
Ambulance 0 Insurance Adjuster 0
Investigating Police Officer:
Name:
Badge #:
OCC.#:
PROPERTY LOSS OR DAMAGE
Owner......................... ......... ........ .......................
Add ress .........................................................
.......................................................................
Telephone # ......................................... ..........
Describe Property ...........................................
........................................................................
Estimated Damage .........................................
Company Vehicle # .........................................
Licence Plate # ..............................................
Year/MakelType .............................................
Operator Name..............................................
Add ress ........................................................
Telephone # ..................................................
Driver's Licence # ...........................................
Insurance Co./Policy # .................. ........... ........
Other Vehicle
State
Telephone #: ( )
Township of Oro-Medonte Vehicle
Owner ....................................................................
Address ................................................... ......
.......................................................................
Telephone # ...................................................
Describe Property ...........................................
......................................................................
Estimated Damage .........................................
Company Vehicle # .........................................
Licence Plate # ..............................................
Year/MakelType .............................................
Operator Name ..............................................
Address ........................................................
Telephone # ..................................................
Driver's Licence # ............................. ...... ........
Insurance Co./Policy # .....................................
POL-HR-03 Page 8
NITNESSES:
THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE COMPLETED FOR EACH MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT:
Indicate on the diagram following this page what happened. Use the outline to sketch the scene of
your accident, writing in street or highway names, or numbers.
1. Number each vehicle and show direction of travel by arrow. Township vehicle is number one.
2. Show pedestrian by: 0
3. Show railroad by:
-+++++
4. Show distance and direction to landmarks
Identify landmarks by name or number
5. Indicate "NORTH" byaITow
6. At what distance was danger noticed?
feet
7. Approximate speed of your vehicle
kph
8. Lights on: YES 0
NO 0
9. Road conditions
10. Weather conditions
_ 11. Daylight 0
Darkness 0
Dawn/Dusk 0
What human factor(s) and physical condition(s) contributed most directly to this incident/accident?
.t~cc\deot
POl.-rlR-03 page 9
The Township of Oro-Medonte
Policy
Appropriate Internet & Email Usage
Subject Page 1 of 2 I Policy/Procedure
Section Appropriate Internet # POL-HR- 04
Human Resources & Email Usage Enacted By Council:
Purpose of this Procedure
The purpose of the following procedures is to delineate acceptable uses of e-mail and
the Internet by employees and other authorized users of the Township of Oro-Medonte
Computer Network.
Disciplinary Action:
Any breach of these procedures will be dealt with according to the severity of the breach,
up to and including termination.
Internet Procedures:
The Internet is to be used as a business tool for reasons that are necessary for the
accomplishment of an employee's job assignments.
a. Consultation with technical staff should occur before downloading or installing any
files from the Internet.
b. Files downloaded from the Internet must be thoroughly scanned by the Corporation's
anti-viral software. This anti-viral software is not to be disabled by the user.
c. Accessing, sending, storing, or displaying sensitive materials including, but not
limited to, gambling or other inappropriate activities, sexually explicit materials, or
materials that include profane, obscene, or discriminatory content is prohibited.
d. Data and files on the Internet must be considered copyrighted material and may not
be distributed or published in any form without the written permission of the
originator.
e. In addition to work-related access, employees may briefly visit non-sensitive Internet
sites during non-work time, such as break, lunch, or before or after work hours.
Examples of acceptable sites are those dealing with health matters, weather, news,
business topics, community activities, career advancement, and personal
enrichment. It is imperative that common sense be used in viewing non-work related
sites and they must not result in any additional cost to the Corporation.
POL-HR-04 Page 2
E-mail Procedures:
E-mail is to be used for official township business which includes communications with
other township departments, governmental entities, private sector entities, and
taxpayers. Although the Corporation does not prohibit all personal use of e-mail, a
common sense approach should be applied.
a. Acceptable personal use of e-mail is where the communication is brief, does not
interfere with work, does not subject the Corporation to any additional cost, and is
consistent with the requirements contained in this policy.
b. Prohibited uses of e-mail include:
1. Non-Corporation sponsored solicitations, including, but not limited to such things
as advertising the sale of property or other commercial activities.
2. Sending copies of documents in violation of copyright laws or licensing
agreements.
3. Messages which may reflect unfavorably on the Corporation, or which may be
perceived as representing the Corporation's official position on any matter when
authority to disseminate such information has not been expressly granted.
4. Sending confidential or proprietary information or data to persons not authorized
to receive it, either within or outside the Corporation.
5. Sending content that may constitute harassment or be considered discriminatory,
obscene, profane, derogatory or excessively personal, whether intended to be
serious or humorous.
6. Sending communications reflecting or containing chain letters, illegal activity,
sensitive information, inappropriate language, or racial, ethnic or other
discriminatory content.
7. Sending material promoting political positions or actions.
c. The Corporation does not intend to routinely monitor the contents of e-mail
messages. However, users should expect that electronic mail messages may be
accessed by authorized supervisors or System Administrators with or without the
permission of the employee.
d. It shall be the responsibility of all employees of the Township of Oro-Medonte to
ensure that they are aware of this policy by completing POL-HR-01-Form 1.
FACILITY PURPOSE REQUESTED DISBURSEMENT CARRIED!
ORGANIZATION AMOUNT ACCOUNT DEFEATED
Ora Minor Hockev ora-Medonl<> COf1\f1\unitv Arena BanoUet Hall year E.nd eanQuet $190.00 1~91~601~111~531
A
E.ast Oro Home & schOol Association Old i 0"'10 Hall 2 or3 MeetinQS $150.00 1_91-62,\-,\ 11-500
e
oro-MedOnla COf1\f1\unltv Arena Ice Pad 24)(1hr for the whole school $2,040.00 1_91_601~111~530
C W. R eest public schOol PIus 6hrs {or the \-lackey T earn
.
.
Note.. It is recOf1\f1\ended io council tl1at tl1a listed organaauons be requested to subfOit tl1e appropriate applicable fee.
REQUES110 W!>.IVE REN1 M. fEES
~iJ .. /jt/f
~ ~.)
6
rt>
\
~
" "
G~'l,ncj l
r \..l1C \-
("" ,V 1_.
, L' ,-" ' t r:j ,
,il "\"Jr'i' I '1\.." fri U
J \ .. '!'_' .
.
r,
THE CORPORATION Of THE
~
:'''':;-- ",'::~l:."~t.."":-:':::',:,:,~: ....... ~"~.""".~' ::.' . ...~._;J~ ",
148 line 7 5.. Box 100
Ora. Ontario LOL 2XO
TOWNSliIP
&/v-Of~~d8
Phone (705) 487-1171
Fax (705) 467 -0133
www.oro-medonte,c~,
LDe-Q
APPLICA TION FOR GRANT/SUBSIDY
NOTE: GRs\NTS/SUBSJDJES ARE NOT A UTOM A T)CALL Y RENEWED EVERY YEAR.
NOTE: ORGANJZA nONS MAY BE REQUIRED TO SUBMJT FJNANCJAL STATEMENTS.
NOTE: If additional space is required to complete your information, pJease use tbe a1tacbed
sheet.
GrantlSubsid)' Request Amount
$
i CJ(~' C'<.'
P ARTA- Orf!oJtiZQlilHl Nome Dnd Address lnfo;mD,ion
Organizat i on
Name
ORC
I'. )/'...()
'-'t I f\j L' i,
f-.!()C Key
1:::. R .2-#-
Address
0-
....'it"
q d 1....0 k e.S 1,0 I~, R c}
City
r- ,'''' r-, ."..- "\-<:7.- '"\
\....' .'-........ ..:.; 1 .111C::-\.J1-ov.
Or...)
Postal Code tL~ L de=- (:.,
TeJephone LIE -r - 1 ;;).t/5
Fax Lp '? '1- ,$ 'Z 8 2
Contact
Oarc',- 'ilit)sc) Y"}
E-mail
~~"A
PART B..:.. Oif,?,Dl1iZalion Genera/information
Number of
Members
~3o
Out of Town
Residents
tJJA-
Membership Fee
]f Applicable J I _
j.~ =1
~
.......
t<:..
10 ~A ,
Geographic Area
Served
Date
ORC: QE~~\ DE ~, S Fanned
OU1l~ne the mjssion, purpose and objectives of your organization.
, ",. -rz
'~r, : :--,-,_,.", .... _. - -. .'!' . .:"
'_-' ..111.._. \.,rl~_ D. -,:>Q-( c '1 LL.\ ~\ I, \
;.'\ "re, Cu,c\ -fCti)o1tlies of 'OQ.G..~
E.lr~ E i. ,(' ;,4 -ki t-
f....U ,.,,:'c.c?....H:c<_ I<'C""'v.
v.d
~8~S-L8v-SOl.
~I~we.:J uosqoa
d80:~1 VO 80 ...IdtJ
loe-3
~
\ \
#
Other Sources of Revenue (include amounts that have been received or that are anticipated - other
grants/subsidies, private funding, etc.).
0,
.( ~_ c .::;.
.(."C' II:
, .
Purpose for which the current grant/subsidy, if approved, would be used. Give complete details - (i.e.
project or event description, time frame, community benefits).
t \.- c
'_A f" r'\.. r'- L. ,C ....)C"..... +
~-'\ ~~
, ~l<'
~;7.::;C);
...I _
........
=< C-'!")
Do you currently receive other grants or subsidies from the Township (faci1ity subsidization,
photocopying, secretarial, etc.)...
-\.J..'~ J I y> .-c- c c- -' \ '" c ,
C.r"i.... Ie 0 J ",p, P?"L ;::;",CUC'&
Previous grants/subsidies from the Township?
~ " . r
. _. l ~ ("I <:, \ t".\ ( ~
Year of Request:
Year of Approval:
Amount Requested: $
Amount Approved: $
PART C":" SiQnature of Authorized Omcial(sJ
", , ~,. "'\ .t.
'.1'J"--\'l,~1"r:'~"""("'.~ ,J - ", ',\~/I.)' ,....- "c
- '~ "-_. '" Name & Position
.1.....,,,, ,",
Date::-.- (.7\ ;."-.'-->..'
-:: Ii I' li
,,~' \
Date:
Name & Position
For Office Use Only
Approved'
Amount $
, "
Denied
Date'
, '
'"
Comments:
....,
'" ,"'
, '
..- .. ".", - ."
. . .' .
" .:::-: ~. ':. ...... .
. .. . . ':"'''' ;,.,,:: ,..~ ~ .
Note:
Personal information contained on this form is conected pursuant to the Municipal Freedom of
information and ProJection oJPrivacy Act, and wiJ1 be used for the purpose of determining eligibility for
grants. Queslions aboul this coHection should be directed 10 the Freedom of Information Coordinator,
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte, 148 Line 7 South, Box JOO, Oro, Ontario, LOL 2XO.
'c: . d
\.
2B2S-l.Bv-SOl..
r:;l~W~.::! uosqoa
dBO:21 VO BO ~d~
MAR-~t-2a04 0~:10 PM
MAR-26-~04 12;al
WHITMORE MEAT PACKERS LT 70~ ~2~ 8~11
P.0~
CRO MEOONTE ThP
1 71135 467 al33
P.e2
IOf~
:6J TOW N & II I P
. ~~~~~
1/,f.!9 ~ """,7/J'$'/-.pI( . .
THE CORPORATION Of THE
148 Line 7 S.. Sol'l 100 ~ ~ - y
Oro. On;.,;a LOL z.xo
rhone (70s) ~7.~ I 71
fe (705) 487.0 13~
WWW.Ol.O-m80OI.Iti.!. C-II
APPLICATION FOR GRANT/SUBSIDY
NOTE~ ORCANlZ.AT10NS MAY BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT FJNANClAL STAnMENTS_
NOTE I If addltio..] .plce is rrquiJ"ed to complete your infqrmlltiv1l, piase use OlE lt1aehN
.....L
".-
GrmrlSua.rid)> R~.." Amould
s USE.. OF /6f.DN HALL FOR.
a (f1 !:> mc::c /1 N 6$
'fAil" A - o.:..,;&.loriN."W,.'""i lfihl_~.. iJqi",~..
~~:j2atiOJl FA5 r DR D HD/YJ&';- .:SCHOOL Ass Q(! I All 0 N
Address E:f1.ST OR-a Pu 6L.11!.- .::5f../-Ioo I.-
City Prov. Postal Codt
Contact t.HRI'S1>tJe:.; WH ITn1CJJ2.f:.'TelephoDC ,~--Iq / t
E-mail C1Wh,f(no~ OJ-cnc04e. CDmFu ,3a5 - gS11
PAB:t iJ:.::;.Or-mu....G.1wI'~:l.../,j,.,,;.6-
Nun1W (If
Members
4l,
Out of Town
R.esidems
"B-
Membership Fee , ~OOI' _
Jf AppHcabJe /-.-1 ~A/Y) I;'" Y - Pb -'-0
':-e:o~rIDAJ
GeographIC Ar~ _' Date - FOR. UR8IU'1V
S.twd . t;::H:::>1 Oi!.o SCHDOt.- Formed MAY 2002. I/lJSt-oeANCC of
C. 0 m I()t.HJ i r \.j /YI{fflJ I:3EJesJ.lIR .
Oul1inC; tile tni5.SJQn, DUl'J'OSe and, objectives oJ)'o\U OI'gaJ)j,tAtion, , ' /:. '
-.-JD AfPVlbE:':JiY~:S'r ctROPllI3LU:.'''S6{OO/,,;.' wrrti . E"UNAS --rF!A1.5Ef:J
-rHRo..u 6H ~;.k:t)L.. ) , 0R... ' EN HAAJcEn o.fi2:s , -SAlAC Ie. P1206J2 AI 'f)S ..
..sUI6SIDY FoK .::se.HDoJ...... r~IIJs r:;re.. ~ AL.:5O P.KOVIJ.::;JE.
VAWAt:3tC /iJFOk./nAIIQN RJk ;.--J~kt:N1:5 10111-1 INFDRmPJ7101\1
ON NU/RJIIDAJ; PARCAJTI1JG E1::i.A.t!ft'nDN )SSUC:S AND &:;.57
PKlt!:fI(!LS. AT 1HE. PRDIIIAJ&f1L. ~VE:I.-. rbrnc:. ANi:J S{?HODL /Yls'/nSCJf'5
,AbVCX:ATE Fole.. It WELL FUNbLD; WELL 13ALAIVCEb pualc~
.seHOOL SY.5IElY1 TI-IRT 'PI?OVIDE.-::' f'HE II BlEST ~L)JZ. .:;A CI--l
f!i'(U lEAJ T II
MAR-~r-2004 0~:09 PM WHITMORE MEAT PACKERS LT 70~ ~2~ a~ll
-.-'---'~'.'--' ---- ".--..
_n_ ,_,...
."-- ._.._--,._..-.~-...:.-~.~ -..-. - _. .--
~-26-2004 12; 01
000 I1EDCJ'o4TE Tt.P
1 7e5 487 13133
P.03
'.,. , AO_
Type ofOrganizfttion (i.e. Registered Charity, Non-Profit Organization, DD stat\J., n:. ) aDd ftW'lltratiorl
number if appliub1e,
NDN PR.oFi, - EVtCJJ:5,Ot-J OF a...>1'AR,o t:E.Dc:ieAiION
() F H5rr lE -7 ce HCOt-S, - __
Other Sources of Revenue (include amounts that hive been received or that are anticipated - orhe:r
eranulsub&idies, private fundmg, etc.).
ND/\J~
Purpose for which the cum:nt grant/subsidy, ifapproved, would be used. Givc comp]ete detaib - (i.e.
project or even~ de~rjpti!?,nl tirfK, fnr>>e, oommunity benefits).
1Hf3 11613. OF Irl€ fll-JLL WOtJLJ.) evN3t..c. Ot.iK. 6.RCXjf> rO
HOLl::> m;;;'EI/N65 7b ~'RAN ;::erI/lITIS;5 ANb HAve ~AL
INFaeJnATIOIJ /YJEE71N6S. . - ....... -" . - - .
Do >,OU currtl1tly r<:cejv~ othcr jliWts or $ubsidics from the T()wnship (faoility tlUbs1~i.zatio~
pbOtocop)'ing, secretarial. otc.).
NO
Previous grlmta/SI.Ibaidie.s from the TOWD5hip?
Amount Requested: s--'..l.lil
Amount ApprOved: S I\J ( f"1
YC1lIofRequ:a: \J /-IJ
Year of Approval: - I In
( ~
Mix ",~'.!iiRllf'llu,.e of d'Jltirori<ft'~GIf5j
~ -f!~ Date:'-fYLt(;t 8t!04
Name" Position
Pate:
Name &: Position
JrflV...e"l}$B q~
. , 'Approved
, '.. ' . AtnO\lnt $
~:
.. .:
Denied
Date
"
:
-
Note;
Peasonal 1nformation contained 01'1 this form b collccted pursuant to the Munictpcl Frtt~om of
lnft>rmatibn QNd Prf)l~crtOH tJ,f PriWlCy A~, and WiD be used for tbe purpose of determlnins ejigi~ility for
il'ants, OuC3tion~ about this t;oJ]ectiOTJ shoUld b= direCted to the FI'~dom oflnfonnlltion CoordinalDr,
Thv CorporatiDn of1hc Township ofOro-MedOnte, 148 Line 7 SC>Utn, Box 100, Oro, Ontario, LOL Z.xO.
P.02
....- .-.-....-
~e-5
THE CORPORATION OFTHE
~~ -\0
CC---
.
- - - -- - "'~ --~. - - -- w -
~~;:-~;:~~~:::::.>.,""":,:. ~~, ~ ~ ~- .~ ~ :'-
148 Line 7 S., Box 100
Ore. Ontario LOL lXO
TOWN8tlIP
(!!J/V-Of J16~
Phone (705) 487-2171
Fax (705) 487-0133
1
i
I
f
NOTE: GRANTS/SUBSIDIES ARE NOT A UTOMA TICALL Y RENEWED EVERY YEAR.
NOTE: ORGANIZATIONS MAY BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
NOTE: If additional space is required to complete your information, please use the attached
sheet.
Grant/Subsidy Request Amount $
Lf'. . . (I""')'
- 2"1 iCe. +, "1es a:t-
G~+h'-:e lJ.reI.c< dc.u-1"1q
'--H.e... d~_.fer ;.i)hclc~c.h.ot. i
u.s.e + ~ hrs - '+0.- ou.r he.c1.ft!-t +€<:t~
, ';:'/': ,-"":"",',:,, :.''').: .~O":" ':> ",~ ::"<: :' :,:, -c.: ':. '" '}'-:' '-",.,-- <;<:','~:"':"'::""!"'/" .':' :>'~,:": ,,' ;'.. :~':_ ":.:;' '\.:,'"', ::': :.:'::,'<: <,~.., ';.::-::I.:": :,",":::-::" '~',:,':(,"""V:~'_':~_"';;,:,.:::~,~::?..,: ~:"::':::'-:'
l'l'JRT.A ....""Qr/lonizfltio.nNameai,Jl:Addliess.]hf,oimalitm
Organization
Name
E-mail
\~. 'K. Oes-\.
12. . l<- f=f 2.,
3.bJ~ ~ti~
An (\ €. ,L\ ""' L & (~I
Qa.--ks@y@..gccL,b, Ofl
f\. s .
Address
City
Provo
()^i.
Posta! Code 1- 0 J..... .2L.- 0
Contact
TeJephone 7;). f""- 9.5 q J
f"c..
Fax
pARTB;;'.01-f?uiiii:dtIon!;(j;iFnitiill1i.i:i/iintiii"'fl
Number of
Members
_1 D'C)
Out of Town
Residents
Membership Fee
If Applicable
Geographic Area
Served
Date
Fonned
Outline the mission, purpose and objectiv.es of your organization.
-r;:, plJ'\J:rlr_ J.-il 0/;+'( erluro-/,o'-t ~r all ~dc.<.d@........+s
~~
Type of Organization (i.e. Registered Charity, Non-Profit Organization, no status, etc. ) and registration
number if applicable.
Sr h~,,'
Other Sources of Revenue (inc1ude amounts that have been received or that are anticipated - other
grants/subsidies, private funding, etc.).
purpose for which the current grant/subsidy, if approved, would be used. Give complete details - (i.e.
project or event description, time frame, community benefits).
Oei-. '.(.c, He-.r. We." o...iot grv""f DIA.-l s.kdera:b. ~ ui~ :.vC\;...loI need ,
i-j I~e +itVles ~ mcn~ rCr\e hctt.. t?c....ch \. An ft,<-kli.ttot'\C\1 b h.OL,t'S hi"
Do you currently recelve other grants or Subsldles from the Townshlp (faci'hty SUbsldlzatlOn, ko~ prnc:Hc;e.J.: ",)cru-kl
photocopying, secretarial, etc.). also be c'''-~freciC\.ft?-{.
N.....
Previous grants/subsidies from the Township?
Amount Requested: $
Amount Approved: $
PAiJ;;li;.,..sii?nailifi~./iJt"A1itifiJ~it~dYrftJj~io.lf:S)'
~. (j;J~~:i fJ}u;"p~~Ad
Name & ositi ' ,
Year of Request:
Year of Approval:
~ DO t./ - .
Date:
~ II.h. j c7 fu c;)l'1f) i-
f '
Date:
Name & Position
Note:
Personal infonnation contained on this fonn is collected pursuant to the Municipal Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act, and will be used for the purpose of detennining eligibility for
grants. Questions about this collection should be directed to the Freedom of Information Coordinator,
The Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte, 148 Line 7 South, Box 100, Oro, Ontario, LDL 2XO.
, .
Please use this additional sheet (and attach more if required) to complete the information
requested on the Grant/Subsidy Application Form.
~. e -<6
Outline the mission, purpose and objectives of your organization.
Type of Organization (i.e. Registered Charity, Non-Profit Organization, no status, etc. ) and registration
number if applicable.
Other Sources of Revenue (include amounts that have been received or that are anticipated - other
grants/subsidies, private funding, etc.).
Purpose for which the current grant/subsidy, if approved, would be used. Give complete details - (i.e.
project or event description, time frame, community benefits).
Do you currently receive other grants or subsidies from the Township (facility subsidization,
photocopying, secretarial, etc.).
Previous grants/subsidies from the Township?
Amount Requested:
Amount Approved:
Year of Request:
Year of Approval:
~{--I
,
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. TR2004-15 To: Committee of the Whole Prepared By: Paul Gravelle
Subject: Insurance Coverage Department: Treasury
Council
C. of W. Date: May 10, 2004
Motion # R.M. File #: L06 -
Date: Roll #:
BACKGROUND:
Our present insurance coverage expires on July 1, 2004.
~I ANALYSIS:
II
Our insurance broker has informed us that preliminary indications from the underwriters are that the
municipality's insurance premiums could increase by 60%. The likely increase will be in the 35% to
50% range.
It is my understanding that this possible increase is consistent with increases being experienced by
other municipalities. The large increases are being experienced by clients of both the providers of
insurance to Ontario municipalities, OME Jardine & Frank Cowan Co. Ltd.
The Township of Oro-Medonte requested proposals for insurance coverage in 2002. At that time
Frank Cowan's proposed premiums were significantly higher than OME Jardine ($154,552 compared
to $136,029).
Another option available to the municipality is OMEX, the Ontario Municipal Insurance Exchange. It is
a not-for-profit reciprocal insurance organization owned by Ontario municipalities. The reciprocal
consists of two separate groups, OMEX representing the larger more urban municipalities and
ROMA, the smaller rural municipalities. A review of the ROMA members list indicates the following
Simcoe County municipalities are members:
Town of New T ecu mseth
Town of Innisfil
Township of Springwater
lDt-~
The main concern municipalities have had with reciprocals is the possibility of retro assessments. A
retro assessment is basically a supplemental premium used to raise additional funds if annual
premiums forecast by the actuary are insufficient to cover the cost of claims. The use of retro
assessments have become more remote as the reciprocal has become more established.
Faced with the said significant increases in premiums, we recommend requesting a proposal from
OMEX as well as OME Jardine and Frank Cowan. The risk of retro assessments can be taken into
consideration when assessing the proposals.
RECOMMENDATION S :
1 . THAT Report No. TR2004-15 be received.
2. THAT the Treasurer is hereby directed to invite proposals for insurance coverage as
recommended in Report # TR2004-15.
Respectfully submitted,
fJ-~
Paul Gravelle
Treasurer
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
C.A.O.
~~
J
Dept. Head
-2-
()
"Dq-
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: COMMITTEE OF THE Prepared By:
WHOLE
EES2004-28 Keith Mathieson
Subject: Department:
Council
Mr. Sam Raseta - Request to Engineering and
Connect to the Warminster Environmental Services
C. of W. Municipal Water System Date:
April 28, 2004
Motion # A.M. File #:
L04-13645
Date: Roll #:
4346-020-004-17701-0000
KGROUND:
Mr. Raseta is proposing to construct a new home at 9935 Hwy. #12 and is requesting connection to
the existing watermain located on Hwy. #12.
Mr. Fred MacGregor, Environmental Services Foreman for the Township, has no concerns with Mr.
Raseta connecting to this watermain, as it will not have any adverse affects on the Warminster
system.
Mr. Raseta is aware that he will be required to pay the $1,000.00 fee for the cost of upgrades, paid
by all existing homes, and that all connection costs will be his responsibility and must be constructed
as per Township Standards OM-W1 and OM-W4.
Prior to any works being performed on the Hwy. right-of-way, Mr. Raseta must receive M.T.O.
approval.
~C\~
COMMENDATION S :
1. THAT Report No. EES2004-28 be received and adopted.
2. THAT Mr. Raseta be authorized to connect to the Warminster municipal water system.
3. THAT the Township enters into a Water Service Connection Agreement with Mr. Raseta.
4. THAT the Clerk prepares the appropriate By-law to enter into an agreement with Mr. Raseta for
Council's consideration.
5. AND THAT Mr. Raseta be notified of Council's decision.
Keith athieson
Director of Engineering and Environmental Services
/lJi'dVSJ-;j- (jJ.1:J
~ 6 )u~
~~\
- 2 -
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION AGREEMENT
THIS Agreement made, in duplicate, this
day of
BETWEEN:
SAM RASET A
Hereinafter referred to as the "Registered Owner"
. .
- and-
.. Cj
,2004.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
Hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality"
A description of the land affected by this Agreement is as follows:
9935 Hwy. #12
Part West Half of Lot 7, Concession 14
Township of Oro-Medonte
Roll #: 4346-020-004-17701-0000
The Municipality has entered into this Agreement on the day of
.2004.
The Registered Owner agrees to comply with all the terms and conditions as set out in
the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte By-law No. 2004-024, being a By-law
to amend By-law No. 2003-025 (a By-law to regulate Municipal Water Systems within
the Township of Oro-Medonte); By-law No. 2004-32, being a By-Law to establish water
charges for the year 2004; and Schedule "A" Water Rates and Fee Schedule, attached
hereto.
The Registered Owner acknowledges and agrees that the Township of Oro-Medonte
does not guarantee water pressure and that either now or in the future, the Registered
Owner may be required to install and maintain equipment to satisfy pressure.
~D=.~
Sam Raseta, Owner
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
J. Neil Craig, Mayor
Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
I
,1
~G ~y
CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
BY-LAW NO. 2004-024
Being a By-law to Amend By-law No. 2003-O2!$. a By-law to Regulate Municipal
Water Systems within the Township of Oro-Medonte
WHEREAS Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte did, on the 18th day of June, 2003, ....
enact By-law No. 2003-025 to regulate municipal water systems within the Township of
Oro-Medonte;
AND WHEREAS Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte deems it
desirable and necessary to amend By-law No. 2003-025;
AND WHEREAS By-law No. 2003-025 deems that watering of lawns or gardens, or the
filling of swimming pools, are not deemed to be domestic uses under the terms of the
By-law;
AND WHEREAS By-law No. 2003-025 authorizes the Director of Engineering and
Environmental Services to take all such action. as may be necessary. to immediately
terminate the supply of water to any property served by the Municipal Water System;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte enacts as follows:
1. THAT Section 4 of By-law No. 2003-025 be amended by adding the following:
"4.5 No person shall, from a Municipal Water System, water or sprinkle. or
cause or permit the watering or sprinkling of any lawn, garden, tree. shrub
or other outdoor plant, or fill swimming pools, in the Township of Oro-
Medonte through a hose or other attachment except between the hours of
7:00 p.m. - 11 :00 p.m. subject to the following:
Owners or tenants of properties with a municipal address with an
even number are permitted to water lawns and gardens, or fill
swimming pools within the designated times, on even-numbered
days of the month;
Owners or tenants of properties with a municipal address with an
odd number are permitted to water lawns and gardens, or fill
swimming pools within the designated times, on odd-numbered
days of the month;
Owners of newly seeded and/or sodded lawns, upon proof of
installation and subject to the approval of the Director of
Engineering and Environmental Services or his designate, may be
permitted to water their lawn for fourteen (14) consecutive days
regardless of the day designated under these water restrictions;
Owners of properties which have been sprayed for insects, upon
proof of such spraying and subject to the approval of the Director of
Engineering and Environmental Services or his designate, may be
permitted to water their lawn for seven (7) consecutive days
regardless of the day designated under these water restrictions.
4.6 No person shall use water for lawn watering or any other similar purpose
when a total water ban order is in effect.
a)
b)
c)
d)
4.7 A total water ban order issued by the Township to suspend lawn watering
or other similar purpose shall remain in effect until it has been revoked by
the Director of Engineering and Environmental Services or his designate."
''.I
~q-t)
2. THAT this By-law shall come into force and take effect on its final passing thereof.
By-law read a first and second time this 17th day of March 2004.
By-law read a third time and finally passed this 17th day of March 2004.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
;/),-lI~ ~
Ma 'r, J. eil Craig
"6c-,
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
BY-LAW NO. 2004-32
BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH WATER CHARGES
FOR THE YEAR 2004
WHEREAS Section 11 ofthe Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended, provides
that a municipality may pass by-laws respecting water production, treatment and storage;
AND WHEREAS Section 391 ofthe Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended,
provides that a municipality may pass by-laws imposing charges on any class of person for
services or activities provided or done by or on behalf of it;
AND WHEREAS Section 398 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended,
provides the Treasurer of a local municipality may add charges imposed by the municipality
under Part XII of the said Act to the tax roll for the property to which the public utility was
supplied and collect them in the same manner as municipal taxes;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation ofthe Township ofOro-Medonte deems
it necessary to pass a by-law to establish water charges for the year 2004;
NOW THEREFORE the Council ofthe Corporation of The Township ofOro-Medonte
enacts as follows:
1. DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this by-law,
1.1."Municipal Water Area" shall mean a subdivision within The Corporation ofthe
Township ofOro-Medonte.
1.2."Municipal Water Systems" shall include all water works established within the
present Township of Oro-Medonte, and shall further include any present or future
extensions to the water works under any Act or under an agreement between the
Township or its predecessors, but shall not include any private water works which
have not been acquired, established, maintained or operated by the Township or its
predecessors;
1.3."Owner" shall mean the assessed owner(s) as identified on the Assessment Roll for
taxation purposes during the current year, as amended.
lA."Treasurer" shall mean the Treasurer of The Corporation of the Township ofOro-
Medonte.
1.5."Unit" shall mean an assessed or assessable unit within a residential, commercial or
industrial building, and shall include an apartment located within a single family
dwelling which is serviced by the Township Water System, as permitted under the
applicable Zoning By-law.
1.6."Water Works" means any works for the collection, production, treatment, storage,
supply and distribution of water, or any part of such works, but does not include
plumbing or other works to which the Ontario Building Code Act and its regulations
apply.
BY-LAW NO. 2004-32 (cont'd.)
~q-l
2. WATER CHARGES, BILLING AND COLLECTION
2.1.As soon as the water connection installation is approved by the Township Inspector,
he shall forthwith turn the water on for owner. The owner will then be charged at the
appropriate water rate, as per Schedule "A".
2.2. At the end of September each year, the duly authorized employee shall read, or cause
to be read, all meters connected to the Municipal Water System to detennine the
amount of water used during the year.
2.3.The Treasurer shall calculate water charges to be assessed against each unit in a
Municipal Water Area, in accordance with the minimum quarterly charge and rates
per cubic meter as set out in Schedule "A" of this by-law.
2.4.The Treasurer shall, for each calendar quarter, issue biJJs to each unit based on the
applicable water charges. Water bills shall be due and payable not less that twenty-
one (21) days from the date of mailing.
2.S.Water payments shall be payable to The Corporation ofthe Township ofOro-
Medonte and may be paid during office hours in person or by mail at the Oro-
Medonte Administration Office, 148 Line 7 South, Box 100, Oro, On LOL 2XO,
or at most financial institutions. Water payments made at a financial institution
shall deemed to be paid on the date shown by the Teller's stamp on the bill stub.
The Township shall not be responsible for any applicable service charge payable
to the bank. Cheques only can be dropped at the drop boxes located at me
Administration Office and Moonstone Fire Hall.
2.6.The Treasurer shall impose a ten (10) percent late charge on all unpaid accounts on
the day after the due date.
2.7.1f an account remains unpaid, the Township may collect amounts payable pursuant
to Section 398 of the Municipal Act, 2001, c. 25, as amended.
3. That this By-law shall take force and effect on January I, 2004.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 21st DAY OF APRIL, 2004.
READ ATHIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 21 st DAY OF APRIL, 2004.
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
it- ~~
MA ~, 1. NEIL CRAIG
~ g~1 ~
CLERK,MA~PENNY~OOK
2
SCHEDULE "A"
o
O~-
WATER RATES AND FEE SCHEDULE
BY-LAW NO. 2004-32
WATER RATES:
METERED: RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL
SHANTY BAY - M-66, M-71, M-696
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
HARBOURWOOD - M-118
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Months
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Months
SUGARBUSH -M-8, M-9,M-30, M-31, M-367, M-368
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
CEDARBROOK - M-157
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
CANTERBURY - M-343
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Months
$600.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
$150.00/Unit for three (3) Months
$600.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
$150.00/Unit for three (3) Months
3
BY-LA W NO. 2004-32 (cont'd.)
MAPLEWOOD
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
$575,00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
$ I 43.75/Unit for three (3) Months
HORSESHOE HIGHLANDS - M-391, M-447, M-456
ZONE II
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Months
CRAIGHURST - M-510
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
$ 143.75/Unit for three (3) Months
W ARMINSTER - 309, M-I04, M-92
Based on twelve (12) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 365 Cubic Meters
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on a three (3) month period
Minimum Rate
Up to 90 Cubic Meters
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Month Period
SURCHARGE BASED ON TWELVE (12) MONTH PERIOD FOR ALL METERED
SYSTEMS EXCEPT CANTERBURY & CEDARBROOK
366-545 Cubic Meters
546 + Cubic Meters
$1.811Cubic Meter
$1.97/Cubic Meter
SURCHARGE BASED ON TWELVE (12) MONTH PERIOD FOR CANTERBURY
& CEDARBROOK
366-545 Cubic Meters
546 + Cubic Meters
$ I. 891Cubic Meter
$2.05/Cubic Meter
4
iq - \ 0
BY-LAW NO. 2004-32 (cont'd.)
FLA T RATE: RESIDENTIAL
MEDONTE HILLS -1650, M-29, M-174
Based on twelve (12) month period
Flat Rate
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on three (3) month period
Flat Rate
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Month Period
ROBIN CREST - M-123, M-I0l, BACHLY, MOONSTONE PER SCHEDULE "A"
BY-LAW 2002-132
Based on twelve (I 2) month period
Flat Rate
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on three (3) month period
Flat Rate
$1 43.75/Unit for three (3) Month Period
SCHOOLS
Flat Rate
$ 18.00/Classroom/Month for twelve (12)
Months
HORSESHOE - ORO 1587
Based on twelve (12) month period
Flat Rate
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on three (3) month period
Flat Rate
$143.75/Unit for three (3) Month Period
HORSESHOE - Medonte 1531, M-I0, M-ll, M-23
Flat Rate
$575.00/Unit for twelve (12) Months
Based on three (3) month period
Flat Rate
$ I 43.75/Unit for three (3) Month Period
PINE RIDGE SKI CLUB
Flat Rate (6 units)
$3,450.00 for twelve (12) Months
Flat Rate Commercial
$ 862.50 for three (3) Month Period
MISCELLANEOUS FEES:
CONNECTION FEE INSPECTION
$200.00
DISCONNECTION AND
RECONNECTION CHARGE
$ 50.00 Each
5
qc\ -- \
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
. PD 2004-18 Committee of the Whole Nick McDonald, RPP
Subject: Water Taking as a Department:
Land Use
Council Planning
C. of W. Date:
May 3, 2004
Motion # A.M. File #:
Date: Roll #:
ACKGROUND:
The intent of this report is to provide Council with an update on the water taking issue in Oro-Medonte and
generally, across the Province of Ontario. As Council is aware, there has long been a concern about the
process followed in both reviewing and granting Permits To Take Water (PTTW). These concerns include:
1. The absence of a meaningful public process at which public comments are obtained before decisions are
made.
2. The absence of appropriate supporting information to determine whether the granting of the permit is
appropriate.
. . 3. The apparent absence of any consideration of the cumulative impacts of water taking by the MOE on a
watershed.
In response to these concerns, a policy was included within OPA17 to provide the municipality with the basis
. to require rezoning applications to permit major water takings. This policy is reproduced below.
Water Taking
"It has long been Council's goal to be more involved in the process of approving and
considering applications that involve the extraction of more than 50,000 litres of ground or
surface water per day, on average. It is also Council's goal to ensure that a process is
established whereby landowners in the vicinity of a proposed water taking are informed of a
proposed water taking and given an opportunity to comment on the proposal.
Cj -;t
It is recognized that, at the time of the adoption of this Plan, the approval of all applications for
water taking rests with the Ministry of Environment, in accordance with the Ontario Water
Resources Act, as amended. However, appeals through the court system at the time this Plan
was adopted may lead to the establishment of water taking as a land use in accordance with
the Planning Act. If this decision is made, and is not appealed, it is a policy of this Plan that the
taking of more than 50,000 litres of ground or surface water per day is deemed to be a land use
in accordance with the Planning Act.
The implementation of this policy can only occur if it is implemented in the Township's Zoning
By-law. On this basis, a comprehensive amendment to the zoning by-law to include water
taking as a land use will be required, but only after it has been determined that water taking is a
land use in accordance with the Planning Act.
In considering such an Amendment, Council shall determine which type of water taking will
require a rezoning and under what conditions such a zoning change could be granted. If a
water taking does require a rezoning, Council shall be satisfied that at a minimum:
a) the quality of groundwater and surface water in the area will be maintained and, where
possible, improved or restored; and,
b) the quantity of water available for other uses in the area and as base flow for rivers and
streams in the sub-watershed will not be affected.
As a condition of approval, Council may also require the proponent to enter into a monitoring
agreement to ensure that Council has the ability to ensure that neighbouring drinking water
supplies are not affected by the extraction. If it is deemed that the extraction is having a
negative impact on the quality and/or overall quantity of water available in the area, Council will
have the ability, pursuant to the monitoring agreement, to require the water extraction to
cease. "
The above policy was written before it was determined that the appeal of a Divisional Court decision on a
water taking operation in the County of Grey was withdrawn. This occurred in December, 2003. On the basis
of this withdrawal, the decision of the Divisional Court now stands. This means that water taking, at least in
accordance with the court decision, is considered to be a use of land pursuant to The Planning Act.
On the basis of the above, a comprehensive Discussion Paper on the water taking issue has been prepared
and is attached to this report. The Discussion Paper reviews the water taking issue in some detail and
recommends that the Township initiate an amendment to its comprehensive zoning by-law to require the
submission of zoning applications to permit water taking uses in the Township.
As Council is aware, a PTTW is currently issued under the provisions of The Ontario Water Resources Act
(OWRA). It is not recommended that the process under the OWRA be changed. However, it is being
recommended that a parallel process pursuant to The Planning Act be established to ensure that the impacts
of the proposed water taking are appropriately considered not only by Council, but by landowners who may
also be affected. The process could be likened to the one established for the approval of gravel pits. In that
case, licenses to extract gravel are issued by the Ministry of Natural Resources under The Aggregate
Resources Act. However, no license can be issued unless the municipality supports the zoning of the lands for
the gravel pit use. It is recommended that similar process be established for water taking permits.
2
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
II
The attached Discussion Paper has been prepared to solicit public input on water taking in the Township of
Oro-Medonte. Once it has been released, it is suggested that residents and other stakeholders be given 30
days to provide comments on the Discussion Paper. Following that time period, it is further suggested that a
presentation/open house be held to further obtain input. Following this consultation, a further report with a
draft zoning by-law amendment will be prepared for Council's consideration and a recommendation will be
sought to hold a formal public meeting under Section 34 of The Planning Act.
On the basis of the above, it is recommended:
1. That Report PD 2004-18 be received and adopted;
2. That the Discussion Paper entitled (Water Taking as a Land Use) be received for information purposes;
3. That Council authorize the release of the Discussion Paper to the public; and
4. Khat Council authorize the holding of a public information meeting to obtain public input on the Discussion
Paper.
Respectfully Submitted,
--1J ~~
Nick McDonald, MCIP, RPP
Partner
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
(L;l~ ~ [ 0 '-f
\ .
C.A.O.
j:J:) V'--~
J
Dept. Head
3
q~-~
The Walkerton Well
WATER TAKING AS A LAND USE:
OPTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES
Prepared for the Township of Oro-Medonte
May 3, 2004
MERIDIAN
PLANNING CONSULTANTS INC.
-s
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
1 .0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1
2.0 THE EMERGENCE OF WATER TAKING AS AN ISSUE .................................................2
2.1 Water Issues Over Time......... ......................... ........................................... ............... 2
2.2 Emergence as a Major Issue: Walkerton ................................................................... 3
2.3 Recent OMB and ERT Decisions on Water Taking ................................................... 4
2.3.1 Grey Association for Better Planning v. Artemesia Waters Ltd. .........................4
2.3.2 Gold Mountain Springs Inc. v. Township of Oro-Medonte.................................. 5
2.3.3 Connor v. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Trent Hills) ...................... 5
2.3.4 Dillon et al. v. Director, MOE (OMYA Permit to Take Water) ............................. 6
2.4 Moratorium on New and Expanded Permits .............................................................. 7
3.0 THE PERMITTING PROCESS .........................................................................................7
3.1 How the Process Works................................ ............................................................. 7
3.2 Shortcomings of the Process................................ ............................................ ......... 8
3.3 Recent Water Protection Initiatives.................. .......................................................... 9
3.3.1 Groundwater Studies and the Provincial Water Protection Fund ....................,.. 9
3.3.2 Bill 79................................................................................................................. 10
3.3.3 Impact Assessment Review .................................i............ ....................;........... 10
3.4 White Paper on Watershed-based Source Protection Planning .............................. 11
3.4.1 Source Protection Planning .............................................................................. 11
3.4.2 Permit to Take Water Program ManagemenL................................................. 11
3.4.3 Water Taking Charges.................... ................................................ .................. 12
4.0 CURRENT THOUGHTS ON WATER TAKING ............................................................... 12
4.1 Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) ...................................................... 12
4.2 Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) ........................................................ 13
4.3 Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA) .................................................. 14
4.4 Conservation Ontario ................................................... ................ ............................ 15
5.0 SHOULD W ATER TAKING BE CONSIDERED A LAND USE? ...................................... 16
5.1 Yes, it Should..................................................... ...................................................... 16
5.2 How to Establish Local ..Control.............................................................................. 16
5.2.1 Official Plan Policies ................................... ...................................................... 16
5.2.2 Zoning By-law Provisions...............................,..............,. ................ ....... ........... 17
5.2.3 Water Monitoring Agreements ................ .......................................................... 17
6.0 THE ORO-MEDONTE CONTEXT .......................................... ..........,....... ..,.................... 18
6.1 Types of Water Takings in Oro-Medonte .................................................................18
6.2 Pros of Regulation..................................... ........ ....................................................... 19
6.3 Cons of Regulation .................................................................... ............ ................... 19
6.4 Which Water Takings Should the Township Consider as Land Uses?................... 20
7.0 CONCLUSiON.................................................................................................................... 20
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
May 3, 2004
MERIDIAN
~NING CONSULTANTSINC
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This paper recommends that water taking be confirmed as a land
use pursuant to the Township of Oro-Medonte Official Plan and
Zoning By-law.
Currently, the Planning Act permits a municipality to control and
regulate uses on the land through Official Plans and Zoning By-
laws. Some of these land uses can impact on the quantity of water
available to other users or have an impact on the quality of both
surface and groundwater. The consideration of these potential
impacts is currently an integral part of the planning approval
process.
However, the taking of groundwater has historically not been a
municipal responsibility, until now. It is our opinion that the taking
of groundwater can have a profound impact on the use of land,
particularly if the use of land relies upon groundwater. It is for this
reason that this paper recommends that both the use of land and
the use of groundwater be subject to approval processes under the
Planning Act. This will result in a much more effective relationship
between land use controls and groundwater protection and will
assist in ensuring that informed land use decisions are made in the
future.
The basis for our recommendation is the recent ruling by The
Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court (Grey Association for
Better Planning v. Artemesia Waters Ltd.). On whether the taking
of water is considered to be a land use, the Divisional Court ruled
that:
" the taking of water as proposed by the present
respondents was a use of land within the meaning of
the Planning Act and properly the subject matter of
the appeal hearing ... the Board was to hold. The
entire operation constituted a single use of land and
the question before the Board was whether the entire
operation, including the taking of water, should be a
permitted use. In deciding that the taking of water was
not a use of land and in confining the subsequent
hearing to issues relating to the storage and loading
of water... it denied those opposed to the appeal the
right to adduce evidence and argument relevant to the
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
May 3, 2004
MERIDIAN
PLANNING CONSUlTANTS INC.
question of whether the proposed operation should be
a permitted use under the official plan and zoning by-
la w. "
Currently, Permits to Take Water (PTTW) are regulated by the
Ministry of Environment (MOE) pursuant to the Ontario Water
Resources Act (OWRA). The application is submitted to a MOE
Regional Office, checked for completeness and posted on the
Environmental Registry, in most cases. No further notice on the
application is provided unless any parties make such a request.
After a 30-day public comment period, a Decision Notice is posted
on the Environmental Registry and any resident of Ontario has 15
days to provide written intent to appeal the decision. The appeal is
heard before the Environmental Review Tribunal, whose decision
can be appealed to the Minister of the Environment.
The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) reviewed this
system as part of their testimony at the Walkerton Inquiry and
identified many problems with the current system. The ECO
indicated that there was inaccurate or ambiguous water source and
quantity information, inconsistent use of measurement systems,
regional variations in evaluating applications, insufficient accounting
or available water quantities in particular watersheds and a lack of
definite assurance that permit evaluation was completed using an
ecosystem approach.
Consequently, the ECO stated that the PTTW process could not be
relied upon to provide for informed public comments on
applications, develop historical water taking trends, determine exact
amounts of water taken and water still available in any given area
and corroborate that the PTTW program was at all following an
ecosystem approach to implementation.
In February 2004, the MOE released the White Paper on
Watershed-based Source Protection Planning. This document
discussed the implementation of Source Protection Plans for each
watershed in Ontario. These Plans would identify water supplies
and create management actions for protecting those sources from
potential risks. The document also discusses PTTW system reform
that includes early and regular notification to interested parties and
increased applicant responsibility to address public concerns.
Many prominent stakeholders in water takings have called for
measures similar to those proposed in the White Paper. However,
the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO), the Association
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
May 3, 2004
MERIDIAN
Pl--'NNlNG CONSULTANTS INC.
of Municipalities of Ontario, Canadian Environmental Law
Association and Conservation Ontario have lobbied for greater
municipal control over water taking, something which is not
proposed in the White Paper.
Land use regulation pursuant to the Planning Act has been an
integral part in mitigating the impacts of daily life and environmental
protection has become an important component of municipal policy.
The Planning Act provides municipalities with the power to restrict
the size and location of all land uses on the land. Given the recent
decision of the Divisional Court, Oro-Medonte now has the ability to
control water takings as well.
It is not suggested by this paper that the PTTW process pursuant to
the OWRA be abandoned. Instead, it is suggested that a parallel
process pursuant to the Planning Act be established to work in
concert with the OWRA process. Specifically, the use of land for a
water taking would not be permitted unless the lands were properly
zoned. This is the same process that is currently in effect for
aggregate extraction operations, where the Ministry of Natural
Resources has the authority to issue a license to extract pursuant
to the Aggregate Resources Act, provided the lands are
appropriately zoned pursuant to the Planning Act.
The Township has conducted several studies and positioned itself
to improve the quality of life for its citizens. Regulating water
takings at the local level would ensure sufficient information is
provided about the proposed use, provide neighbours with an
opportunity to comment and permit the legal restriction of water
takings in the event of detrimental impact upon other users or the
environment.
May 3, 2004
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSULTANTS INC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report, Water Taking as a Land Use: Options for Municipalities, has been prepared to assist
the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte in addressing long-standing
concerns over water takings in the Township. With recent developments in the courts and many
years pf policy and regulatory development at both the Provincial and Township levels, water
taking has now become an important land use issue.
This report is intended to provide residents, business owners and the Council of the Township of
Oro-Medonte with some background on the issue and a foundation for a public
presentation/Open House session to be held in early 2004. Following that session, a report with
recommendations will b~ prepared and a formal public meeting under Section 34 of the Planning
Act held to discuss options on how to proceed with regulating water takings in the Township.
The basis for this report is the inclusion of a policy in the Official Plan, through the adoption of
Official Plan Amendment#17 (OPA #17) which identified water taking as a use of land that is to
be regulated through zoning. This policy is reproduced below:
WATER TAKING
"It has long been Council's goal to be more involved in the process of approving
and considering applications that involve the extraction of more than 50,000 litres
of ground or surface water per day, on average. It is also Council's goal to
ensure that a process is established whereby landowners in the vicinity of a
proposed water taking are informed of a proposed water taking and given an
opportunity to comment on the proposal.
It is recognized that, at the time of the adoption of this Plan, the approval of all
applications for water taking rests with the Ministry of Environment, in
accordance with the Ontario Water Resources Act, as amended. However,
appeals through the court system at the time this Plan was adopted may lead to
the establishment of water taking as a land use in accordance with the Planning
Act. If this decision is made, and is not appealed, it is a policy of this Plan that
the taking of more than 50,000 litres of ground or surface water per day is
deemed to be a land use in accordance with the Planning Act.
The implementation of this policy can only occur if it is implemented in the
Township's Zoning By-law. On this basis, a comprehensive amendment to the
zoning by-law to include water taking as a land use will be required, but only after
it has been determined that water taking is a land use in accordance with the
Planning Act.
In considering such an Amendment, Council shall determine which type of water
taking will require a rezoning and under what conditions such a zoning change
could be granted. If a water taking does require a rezoning, Council shall be
satisfied that at a minimum:
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PLANNING CONSUlTANTS INC.
1
May 3, 2004
a) the quality of groundwater and surface water in the area will be
maintained and, where possible, improved or restored; and,
b) the quantity of water available for other uses in the area and as base
flow for rivers and streams in the sub-watershed will not be affected.
As a condition of approval, Council may also require the proponent to enter into a
monitoring agreement to ensure that Council has the ability to ensure that
neighbouring drinking water supplies are not affected by the extraction. If it is
deemed that the extraction is having a negative impact on the quality and/or
overall quantity of water available in the area, Council will have the ability,
pursuant to the monitoring agreement, to require the water extraction to cease. "
The above policy was written before it was determined that the appeal of a Divisional Court
decision on a water taking operation in the County of Grey was withdrawn. This occurred in
December, 2003. On the basis of this withdrawal, the decision of the Divisional Court now stands.
This means that water taking, at least in accordance with the court decision, is considered to be a
use of land pursuant to The Planning Act.
2.0 THE EMERGENCE OF WATER TAKING AS AN ISSUE
2.1 Water Issues Over Time
Ontario and Oro-Medonte are believed to have high quality groundwater supplies. With
environmental awareness having increased over the last twenty years, water protection has
become a forefront issue in Ontario. As monitoring technology has evolved, the impacts of land
use on water have become more understood. While contamination discoveries in the 1970s
altered scientific thoughts on contaminant transport, the 1980s unearthed the many potential
causes of groundwater contamination: waste disposal sites, underground storage tanks,
pipelines, septic systems and sewage sludge disposal, road de-icing, dry cleaning operations,
mining and aggregate tailings, urban runoff and excessive nutrient or chemical application on
lands.
Water pollution is difficult to track and halt. While easier to address in surface water processes,
the groundwater regime is much slower and a pollutant can linger for many years without being
detected. Ultimately, the water source can be compromised and become unusable.
Groundwater remediation is more expensive than for surface sources and may not necessarily
solve the problem, especially in fractured bedrock systems. Supplies in Smithville, on the
Niagara Peninsula, and Elmira, north of Kitchener-Waterloo, were all destroyed due to waste
disposal or chemical handling practices. The contamination of the Wood Street well in Barrie is
due to similar practices.
According to a Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA) fact sheet, the maximum
pumping volumes for Permits to Take Water (PTTWs) in 1999 allowed 1800 billion litres of water
to be pumped from water bodies or aquifers for a variety of uses. The Ministry of the
Environment (MOE) based PTTW volume on the maximum instantaneous volume over the
permitted hours of use for one year. Actual pumping has tended to be between 1.0% and fifteen
percent of the PTTW volume. These figures do not include takings less than the 50,000 litres per
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CQNSUlTAN1'51NC,
2
May 3, 2004
day threshold and those for emergencies, domestic use or livestock watering. Uses requiring
less than the 50,000 litres per day threshold, equivalent to a kitchen tap running 24 hours a day,
typically amount to three to five percent of all takings and are not required to obtain a PTTW.
While most water is used and returned to the environment (some of it in a degraded condition),
one percent of all takings is not returned and used for food and drink manufacturing. There is no
comprehensive inventory of all takings in the Province and no definite amount on how much
water is actually taken for all uses annually.
The use of the land can lead to difficult water problems for both residents and businesses. Urban
pollutants such as pesticides and automobile fluids may run off into streams and shallow aquifers
during a storm. Agricultural irrigation can dry up streams if the practice goes unchecked. Water
table levels may be drawn down when new wells are dug, resulting in the need to drill more and
deeper wells. Lowering surface water levels can also impair ecosystem functions and can
destroy the use, functionality and enjoyment of both water bodies and abutting lands. It is very
clear that actions upon the land impact the water sources we rely upon.
Riparian rights guarantee the "full flow of the stream through [a] property, undiminished in quality
and quantity except by 'natural' uses such as domestic consumption, watering stock and minor
gardening". Although surface water and groundwater resources are intrinsically linked, no such
'right' exists for groundwater.
Land use regulation has been an integral part in mitigating the impacts of daily life and
environmental protection has become an important component of municipal policy. The Planning
Act provides municipalities with the power to restrict the size and location of all land uses.
However, municipalities have historically lacked the ability to adequately protect its water sources
from being exhausted or stressed by Permit to Take Water (PTTW) holders. As this report
indicates, water taking has now been confirmed as a 'use of land' by the courts and on this basis,
municipalities now have the option of regulating the use.
A use of land affects groundwater quality and quantity, just as the use of groundwater and
changes in the quality of groundwater affect the use of land. It is our opinion that there needs to
be much more of an effective relationship between land use controls and groundwater protection
to ensure that effective and informed land use decisions can be made.
2.2 Emergence as a Major Issue: Walkerton
In May 2000, an E.coli outbreak in the Walkerton municipal supply killed seven people. The
bacteria entered a municipal well through a wetland that was contaminated by farm runoff. The
well had malfunctioning treatment and monitoring equipment and was operated by officials who
were clearly negligent in their duties.
In January 2001, the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) prepared a brief to the
Walkerton Inquiry. The ECO presented comments on the history and present strains on the
PTTW system. These comments stemmed from their 1999 review of the PTTW system. For the
Inquiry, the ECO reviewed 183 PTTW Applications for the accuracy, quality and quantity of
information in the Environmental Registry notices, trends in PTTW length and the provision of
links to relevant information. As a follow-up assessment in 2000, the ECO reviewed 255 new
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSl/lTAN"tS 1Ne.
3
May 3, 2004
PTTW Applications to see if identified problems were continuing. Three major concerns with the
program were raised as a result:
· Public accountability is threatened because of inaccuracies, omissions or
misrepresentations of crucial information in Registry notices;
. Ecosystem protection is compromised as new PTTWs are issued without access to
complete information on existing water takings; and,
. Increased conflicts and leave to appeal applications to the Environmental Review
Tribunal (ERT) over PTTWs may be promoted because of these problems.
Many land use initiatives came out of the Walkerton tragedy. A new Nutrient Management Act
was proclaimed into force in September 2003, placing new regulations on the size and operations
of both crop-based and livestock-based agricultural operations. Source Protection Plans will
become reality within the next five years in Ontario. Tougher standards for operation and
protection have been created, in order to provide a better supply for users. PTTW Notices are
increasingly thorough and consistent. Both the Inquiry and the Government have realized that no
matter how much technology is available, a source at risk of being contaminated cannot be
protected if that potential contaminant remains.
2.3 Recent OMB and ERT Decisions on Water Taking
2.3.1 Grey Association for Better Planning v. Artemesia Waters Ltd.
In this case, the applicant applied for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments after
assembling some parcels designated Agricultural in the Grey County Official Plan. The
applicants hoped to re-designate the subject lands to permit the use of the property for a "water
loading facility". A PTTW had already been granted for the site. Grey County refused to adopt
the amendments and Artemesia Waters Limited appealed the applications to the OMB.
At the hearing, the OMB ruled that water taking was not a land use under the Planning Act and,
therefore, not a consideration at the hearing (Order #0454, March 27, 2001). On this basis, the
OMB allowed the appeal and amended the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit a "water
loading facility" (Order #1177, July 24, 2001). The Grey Association for Better Planning, a
ratepayers association, appealed this decision to Divisional Court.
The Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court ruled that the OMS erred by interpreting "use of
land" as an issue of fact to be decided on the basis of the evidence of a planner. Determining
"use of land", according to the Court, is a question of law under the Planning Act, meaning the
OMS refused an essential aspect of the appeal by not considering the PTTW. Consequently,
those opposed to the application lost the right to argue whether the proposed operation should be
permitted and a new OMS Hearing ordered (Court File 504/02, November 21, 2002). Artemesia
Waters appealed the decision, but dropped the appeal in October 2003.
On whether the taking of water is considered to be a land use, the Divisional Court ruled that:
". .. the taking of water as proposed by the present respondents was a use of
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS INC
4
May 3, 2004
C\ r,
\c\ - ~
land within the meaning of the Planning Act and properly the subject matter of
the appeal hearing .,. the Board was to hold. The entire operation constituted a
single use of land and the question before the Board was whether the entire
operation, including the taking of water, should be a permitted use. In deciding
that the taking of water was not a use of land and in confining the subsequent
hearing to issues relating to the storage and loading of water '" it denied those
opposed to the appeal the right to adduce evidence and argument relevant to the
question of whether the proposed operation should be a permitted use under the
official plan and zoning by-law."
The ruling further discussed the "use of land";
"We are satisfied... that the installation of piping and pumps and other apparatus
on land for the purpose of extracting water is a "use of land" not only in common
parlance but under the Planning Act as well."
The Court also ruled that there is no conflict between the Ontario Water Resources Act and the
Planning Act in municipalities or the OMS applying relevant water taking policies. While both the
Acts are relevant to such applications, each pertains for different purposes and perspectives.
2.3.2 Gold Mountain Springs Inc. v. Township of Oro-Medonte
In this case, an existing water taking operator sought to build a bottling plant on the subject lands.
The Township Official Plan included policies requiring the quantity of water in the groundwater
table to be protected. Through a Site Plan Agreement and/or Development Agreement, the
Township also required the establishment of a long-term monitoring program to assess those
impacts.
In this hearing, the OMS affirmed the need to consider the impacts of water taking in making land
use decisions:
"When considering applications under the Planning Act ... this Board has a
positive obligation to examine the environmental and ecological impact of the
proposed land use and its associated water taking. Section 2 of the Planning Act
states "...the Municipal Board, in carrying out [its] responsibilities under this Act,
shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of Provincial interest such as,
(a) the protection of ecological systems, including natural areas, features and
functions; (b) the protection of the agricultural resources of the Province; (e) ...
the supply, efficient use and conservation of ... water." The Provincial Policy
Statement [PPS] provides a further elaboration of the Provincial interest and, at
section 2.4. 1, states: "The quality and quantity of ground water and surface water
and the function of sensitive ground water recharge/discharge areas, aquifers
and headwaters will be protected or enhanced. "
2.3.3 Connor v. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Trent Hills)
As a result of municipal amalgamation, the Municipality of Trent Hills conducted Official Plan
Reviews for the Plans of the Former Township of Seymour, Town of Campbellford, Township of
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANMNG CONSULTANTS INC.
5
May 3, 2004
Percy and Village of Hastings. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Amended the
Campbellford-Seymour Plan, which has subsequently appealed to the OMS by J.R. Connor
Properties Limited.
Many issues were raised in the hearing, one of which was a request by Mr. Connor for municipal
permits to be issued for water taking. In its Order, the Board commented and ruled on this
request:
"Mr. Connor sought further amendment to require municipal permits for water
taking. The Province confirmed this to be a Provincial responsibility and that the
Plan as now drafted, could go no further than to request the Province to consult
with the Municipality. The Board adopts this position and notes that a Divisional
Court decision in the Municipality of Grey Highlands has indicated that the taking
of water under circumstances may be a use of land. That decision is now before
the Ontario Court of Appeal. All parties herein agree that while Official Plans And
Zoning By-laws may regulate the taking of water in the future, it is premature to
do so now before a ruling from the Ontario Court of Appeal."
2.3.4 Dillon et al. v. Director, MOE (OMY A Permit to Take Water)
The Tay River, having a catchment area of about 865 squarekilometres and an overall length of
about 95 kilometres, is the largest tributary of the Rideau River. The Tay River was identified by
the Perth Community Strategic Plan of 1995 as one of the important economic and social
features of the region.
In February 2002, a citizens group sought leave to appeal on an application for a PTTW by
OMYA, a Swiss aggregate company. OMYA had asked for up to 4.5 million litres of water per
day for the manufacturing of calcium carbonate slurry used in the manufacturing of other products
such as paper, paint, toothpaste and antacids. The Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) ruled
in June 2002 that there was not enough evidence presented or enough knowledge of the
watershed available to ensure no harmful impacts would occur. ERT limited the PTTW to one-
third of the request - 1.5 million litres per day.
OMY A followed that ruling with a threat to warn international investors against conducting
business in Ontario unless the full permit was granted, and both Ministerial and judicial reviews of
the ERT decision were undertaken. In February 2003, then-Environment Minister Chris Stockwell
overruled the ERT, stating the increase in water taking "will not cause harm to the Tay River
watershed." The Minister then allowed the PTTW to extract water at its requested volume under
the conditions that all water taken had to be used for permitted uses under the Permit, none could
be wasted and that annual public meetings be held in the community about the PTTW. The
OMY A Permit would have taken effect January 1, 2004.
The current one-year moratorium on new and expanded permits (Section 2.4 below) put that
decision on hold. One month later, a local MOE Director cancelled the PTTW issued by Minister
Stockwell and replaced it with a new PTTW allowing the 1.5 million litres per day over six years.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PLANNING CONSULTANTSINC.
6
May 3, 2004
2.4 Moratorium on New and Expanded Permits
In December 2003, the Provincial Government established a one-year moratorium on new and
expanded water taking permits for bottling and certain other commercial takings. The moratorium
is in effect until December 31, 2004 and ensures that no PTrw is issued until new PTrw and
source protection rules are developed. The new rules would be in effect before the moratorium is
lifted in order to ensure the new playing field is used. The moratorium prohibits new or expanded
Water Takings for the following purposes:
. Beverage manufacturing, including bottled water and other drinks;
. Fruit or vegetable canning or pickling;
. Ready-mix concrete manufacturing;
. Aggregate processing where the aggregate and water are incorporated into a slurry; and,
. The manufacturing or production of products where more than 50,000 litres of water is
taken daily to be incorporated into them.
The moratorium does not apply to agriculture, aquaculture, golf courses, nurseries, pit
dewatering, tree or sod farms, municipal water supplies and sewage treatment plants. Permits
that expanded established takings, such as the aMY A Permit, have been revoked and replaced
with permits that freeze the amount of water at the current rate.
3.0 THE PERMITTING PROCESS
3.1 How the Process Works
Section 34 of the Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) requires that a Permit to Take Water be
issued for any water taking in excess of 50,000 litres per day. A property can have only one
PTTW and it must reflect the total use from all combined sources in use. The PTTW is required
whether the source is ground water or surface water.
In considering an application, the MaE Director in charge of the application is bound to consider
the protection of natural ecosystem function and any groundwater or surface water sources that
may be affected by another taking as per Regulation 285/99, the Water Taking and Transfer
Regulation. Applications must include accurate information on the location and the proposed
quantity of the taking and if applicable, any information about the water storage, use of ponds,
pumping tests or existing problems.
Applications are submitted to an MaE Regional Office, with the exception being the Barrie District
Office. Here, applications are directly reviewed without posting to the Environmental Registry in a
grandfathered approach from when the Barrie Office had an in-house hydrogeologist. The four
main Regional Offices review the application for completeness and then posts the application on
the Environmental Registry under the Province's Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR). Anyone with
Internet access has access to the Environmental Registry. No other notice is provided unless
any party makes a request to be notified. It should be noted that some municipal water takings,
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlT!<Nn INC.
7
May 3, 2004
takings for the irrigation of crops and takings of less than one year in length are not posted on the
Environmental Registry.
All PTrw proposals are posted on the Environmental Registry for public comments for at least 30
days. After the 30-day period has passed, the MOE posts a Decision Notice on the
Environmental Registry. The Decision Notice indicates whether or not a permit has been issued
and why. When a decision is made, any resident of Ontario may seek leave to appeal the
decision, by serving written notice within 15 days of the decision date. The appeal must be
served upon the Environmental Commissioner, the MOE and the proponent, and is heard by the
Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT). The leave for appeal must demonstrate that
a) there is a good reason to believe that no reasonable person, having
regard to the relevant law and any Government policies developed to
guide a decision of that kind, could have made the decision; and,
b) a decision in respect of which an appeal is sought could result in
significant harm to the environment.
In recent years, a number of PTTW applications have been appealed and dealt with by the ERT.
ERT decisions can also be appealed to the Minister of the Environment, as was the case with the
OMY A application.
3.2 Shortcomings of the Process
On the basis of their review of the PTTW process submitted to the Walkerton Inquiry, the ECO
found a number of inconsistencies and deficiencies with the process:
. Some registry notices included inadequate or inaccurate descriptions of PTrw proposals
and permits, included ambiguously or incorrectly reported sources of water and
inaccurately or inconsistently reported water quantities;
. MOE staff does not use metric and imperial measurements consistently in proposal and
decision notices. This makes tracking, assessing and managing water resources more
difficult, although Applications are now beginning to use both measurement systems to
report volumes;
. There is evidence of regional differences in PTTW evaluation by MOE staff, resulting in
regional variations in PTrw administration;
. Takings were permitted which did not appear to take into account the quantity of water
available in particular watersheds;
. There is no clear evidence that MOE consistently applies an ecosystem approach to
assessing PTrw applications and issuing permits.
According to the Standard Development Branch of the MOE:
"an ecosystem approach to land use planning would provide early and
systematic guidance on the inter-relationships between existing and potential
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS INC.
8
May 3, 2004
land uses and the health of ecosystem over time. This approach is based on the
recognition that ecosystems have limits, especially in terms of the stresses that
they can absorb. There is growing evidence that too much stress can irreversibly
degrade or destroy ecosystems. "
The ECO concluded that information generated by the PTTW process could not be relied upon to:
· Enable the public to make informed comments on PTTW applications;
· Enable MaE, Conservation Authorities, municipalities, members of the public and other
stakeholders to develop regional and historical overviews of water taking trends;
· Allow stakeholders and water users to know how much water is actually being taken
and/or how much water is available to take in any given area; and,
· Permit the verification that the PTTW program is operated in accordance with Ontario
Regulation 285/99 (Water Taking and Transfer Regulations). For example, it is nearly
impossible for the ECO to determine whether or not protection of the natural functions of
the ecosystem is being achieved.
The lone public notification required for a PTTW application is a posting on the Environmental
Registry. A municipality is only notified if the MaE Director chooses )d08idC~ to, at their
discretion, or if the municipality declares an interest.
3.3 Recent Water Protection Initiatives
With increasing pressure on Government to ensure safety and restore trust in the drinking supply,
several initiatives have been undertaken in recent years and months:
3.3.1 Groundwater Studies and the Provincial Water Protection Fund
In August 1997, MaE created the Provincial Water Protection Fund. Originally set up to assist
municipalities with capital projects to improve water- and sewage-related infrastructure costs, the
fund was later opened up to include groundwater studies for municipalities in order to deal
proactively with increasing environmental, health and cost concerns. Provincial assistance was
gauged through a three-step process:
· The first step was to identify what issues and conditions a municipality faced with its
groundwater supply. If a municipality was concerned about potential contamination,
expansion or remediation costs, quantity, quantity and competing demands and reliance
upon groundwater sources, it was hoped that they would consider undertaking a
groundwater study.
· The second step was to decide which study would be ideal for the situation. Depending
upon what level of knowledge a municipality possessed about their groundwater supply,
they could select from five eligible study types: groundwater resource assessment,
contamination assessment, current groundwater use analysis, cost efficiency evaluation
of protection alternatives and a final groundwater management and protection plan.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
Pl.ANNlNG CONSUlTANTS INC,
9
May 3, 2004
· The third and final step was the determination of funding based upon a sliding scale. All
municipalities were required to finance some portion of any study.
The objective of the fund was to promote innovation and action on groundwater protection. By
encouraging and assisting municipalities through studies and implementation, it was expected
that an information base would be created to comprehend groundwater systems. From that,
action plans and best management practices would emerge over time.
The fund was originally intended to be a three-year program, but has been extended twice for
2002 and 2003 projects.
3.3.2 Bill 79
Bill 79 was introduced to the Ontario Legislature in June 2001 by then-Opposition Member Leona
Dombrowsky. A private member's bill, it would have mandated municipal notification ofa PTTW
application if it would or likely would affect "the water source or supply ota municipality or
Conservation Authority." Both the municipality and Conservation Authority would then be allowed
30 days to comment on the application. Bill 79 would have also required decisions on PTTW
Applications to be consistent with the Statement of Environmental Values of the MOE.
Bill 79 failed to pass Second Reading, two weeks after its introduction.
3.3.3 Impact Assessment Review
Historically, PTTWs have been granted on a first-come, first-serve basis considering the
sustainability of the source and its potential non-interference with other water users. There is the
uncertainty as to the number of takings under the 50,000 litres per day threshold, and no central
database compiling all permits and volumes approved exists. The 2001 ECO investigation of the
PTTW system at Walkerton found inconsistency between approvals at the four regional MOE
offices. This inconsistency may be reduced through centralizing some steps in the approval
process, although nothing is currently happening between MOE regions.
All of the above factors, coupled with an increased number of applications has created situations
where approved demand theoretically exceeds supply. In 1999, the Credit Valley Conservation
Authority calculated that they could not meet the demand of all permitted takings if all of the
permitted takings were added together and simultaneously accessed.
MOE began reviewing best practices for permit assessment in late 2001. The review included
both scientific assessment methods and public consultation in an attempt to find an
interdisciplinary, ecosystem-based process. The MOE may yet decide to set stricter terms and
conditions in permits, and increase enforcement to ensure compliance amongst permit holders.
The report, titled Good and Acceptable Practices for Assessinq Water Takinq Proposals and
written by Gartner Lee, was submitted to the Ministry in July 2002.
MOE has since acted by initiating two pilot projects that test some of the practices discussed in
the Gartner Lee Report. The first is a monitoring and reporting project currently underway under
the auspices of the Quinte and Long Point Conservation Authorities. There, PTTW Holders are
monitoring and reporting their water taking data to their respective Conservation Authority (CA).
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
I'lANNlNG CONSUlTANTS INC,
10
May 3, 2004
a
\c, ~
The CAs involved will then be reporting back to MOE with recommendations on assistance and
program measures that will be required to bring monitoring and reporting to full capability
Province-wide. The data collection phase is being completed in Spring 2004.
The second pilot project is evaluating testing measures for minimum in-stream flow thresholds.
Measures involved in this pilot are in use in other jurisdictions as a means to determine protective
water levels for aquatic ecosystems. Final recommendations are expected in Autumn 2004.
3.4 White Paper on Watershed-based Source Protection Planning
The White Paper was released February 12, 2004. It seeks comment on current MOE policy
thoughts regarding Source Protection Planning and the PTTW system.
3.4.1 Source Protection Planning
The first "barrier" in the multi-barrier approach recommended at the Walkerton Inquiry, Source
Protection Planning is a series of localized and broad measures that are intended to protect
individual or larger water sources and bodies. Other barriers include water treatment, distribution
system security, early warning monitoring and response to adverse conditions. The practice can
apply to both surface and groundwater sources. It is best applied at a watershed level as impacts
upon water are felt across political boundaries, although research has not exactly determined
how "groundwatersheds" can be delineated.
The Government intends to require Source Protection Plans for each watershed region in the
Province. To create these plans, a Source Protection Planning Board, comprised of the Board of
Directors of the lead Conservation Authority (CA), would appoint a Source Protection Planning
Committee (SPPC) and coordinate all development, work and expertise available in the
watershed region for a Plan to be created. The SPPC is intended to consist of representation
from municipalities, the Province, CAs and other potential stakeholders. This Committee will
establish working groups in the watershed region to undertake Plan development. Such
committees would also include municipalities that do not participate in Conservation Authority
activities today.
With the organizational structure established, the Plan would enter its creation mode. Technical
assessments and interim management strategies would be needed in order to take stock of
existing and potential water supplies, as well as immediate threats and appropriate interim
responses. Based on the hazards identified, management actions can be evaluated and
eventually selected as source protection methods. The drafted Plan would require municipal
resolutions in support of the plan from all municipalities in the watershed region while the Minister
considers it for approval as well. The Plan would also be subject to EBR requirements, including
public review on the Environmental Registry. Monitoring and updating of Source Protection Plans
would be expected, as is the trend with similar plans in existence. Public consultation would be
required at all stages.
3.4.2 Permit to Take Water Program Management
Instead of Director discretion or local agency request triggering notification, the MOE is proposing
to ensure that early and regular Ministry notification is provided to interested parties and to
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PLANNING CONSUlTANTI INC.
11
May 3, 2004
C\o,
increase the responsibility of applicants to address public concerns where there is satisfactory
interest in the application.
MOE also hopes to commission more research on water taking impacts. Water budgets will be a
prime focus of such research, with an expectation that rules would be established to determine
how a water budget handles the features of the watershed, the scope of its reach and the amount
and type of water taking. Further research is also being done to evaluate relationships between
stream flow and aquatic ecosystems.
Monitoring and reporting the volumes of water taken have long been an issue with stakeholder
groups. A pilot project has been underway in the Belleville and Long Point areas to review the
many issues in establishing a dependable, consistent, comprehensive and accessible monitoring
and reporting system. So far, MOE has identified varying levels of capability across all
stakeholders in monitoring and reporting, meaning that MOE would have to provide education to
improve monitoring systems.
MOE also hopes to update the "Permits to Take Water: Guideline and Procedures Manuaf' to
provide the applicant with appropriate guidance through the new system. An improved process is
also hoped to foster water conservation, which may be further achieved to voluntary
commitments by permit holders, third party certification of conservation measures and education.
3.4.3 Water Taking Charges
In conjunction with the one-year moratorium on new and expanded PTTWs, the Government
declared their interest in applying royalty charges to commercial takings that result in the export
of water from a watershed. It would be implemented along with any potential changes to the
PTTW program. Such royalty charges, which would be the first such duties ever applied to water
in Ontario, have been recognized by the MOE as a potential trade issue and hindrance upon the
competitiveness of the Ontario economy. This will be implemented in the short term for water
bottlers and possibly expanded in the future for golf courses and other users.
4.0 CURRENT THOUGHTS ON WATER TAKING
MOE began the long process of updating the PTTW system in Ontario in April 2003 by consulting
with many groups representing Provincial interests. Below are the opinions of some of the
groups active in lobbying for improved water taking legislation and regulation.
4.1 Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO)
The ECO is the office devoted to enforcing the provisions of the EBR. It strives to involve the
people of Ontario in Government decisions and bring environmental accountability to Government
decisions.
In its 2002-2003 Annual Report, the ECO touches upon many of its previous recommendations,
including those arising from their submission to the Walkerton Inquiry. For example, the Ministry
of Health and Long Term Care responded to the need for updated Drinking Water Advisory
Protocols and was noted by the ECO for reflecting legislation enacted in the wake of the tragedy.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS INC,
12
May 3, 2004
Progress on PTTW program administration merited one page of discussion in the 2002-2003
Annual Report. The ECO is awaiting recommendations on alternatives developed out of the
Gartner Lee Good and Acceptable Practices report, which are anticipated to be ready in Autumn
2004. One needed improvement is improved notice of applications on the EBR. The ECO has
noted a history of poor and inappropriate descriptions of the application with an observation that
they might have been the original writings submitted by the proponent.
The ECO also calls for "report cards" on takings performance. These would be submitted by the
Permit holder and would indicate how they have followed the conditions of their PTTW, as well as
the volume of water taken. The annual "report cards" would have significant merit as to whether
or not permission to use the water would continue. Such a report card would be considered
similar to the annual compliance reports required for aggregate extraction operations pursuant to
the Aggregate Resources Act.
The ECO also advocates the creation of a groundwater use inventory and ecological impact
measurements for water takings. A groundwater inventory would track volumes of water
removed and volumes replaced. Such a database - which has been sought after since 1996 by
the ECO - could also become a benchmark for establishing a value to water used. Considering
the ecological impacts of water takings appears to be in the scope and objectives of future
Source Protection Plans.
4.2 Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)
AMO struck a task force to respond to municipal concerns over the PTTW process in December
2001. They returned one year later with a report assessing local and cumulative impacts, the
importance of information gathering and sharing, the integration of the PTTW Application process
into the municipal planning function and compensation for the impact of commercial water taking
operations, especially upon rural roads.
AMO is concerned that there is no rigourous guide to local impact assessment in the Province of
Ontario. The general practice is running a single 72-hour pump test to determine if the well is a
sustainable source and to measure any potential lowering of groundwater or surface water levels.
Local assessment does not necessarily require consideration of Official Plan or Watershed Plan
provisions, although this trend is reversing. AMO encourages new criteria and standards for local
impact assessment, a definition of interference warranting permit reductions, randomly auditing
applicant impact testing, utilizing local information sources such as Official Plans and amending
Regulation 285/99 to include existing and planned uses of water as a consideration in reviewing a
PTTW Application.
Progressive environmental policy has resulted in a broad range of data on water quality and
quantity, with groundwater studies adding more knowledge to that base. However, there is
neither a standard methodology nor any agreements on data sharing, collection and maintenance
for Cumulative Impact Assessment. AMO recommends that information gathering and sharing
between all agencies become a higher priority with an agreement on cost-sharing between those
parties, that responsibility for cumulative impact assessment rest ultimately with the Province and
municipalities and conservation authorities assisting, that there be a standard cumulative impact
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS INC,
13
May 3, 2004
'"'
assessment methodology and that a Provincial policy be drafted to designate sensitive water
bodies as requiring stringent protection, much like the policy that exists for wetlands.
Similarly to other stakeholders, AMO recommends that municipal notification be mandatory, and
also that public notice be served through local newspapers and, if necessary, a public meeting.
AMO believes that Provincial water policies have already laid the groundwork for municipal
regulation. Section 2 of the Planning Act mandates that land use decisions shall have regard to
water supply and use and ecological systems in all decisions. The Provincial Policy Statement
(1997) strives to enhance or protect quality and quantity of water sources. They also recognize
the significance of Gold Mountain Springs Inc. v. Township of Oro-Medonte in establishing
Planning Act superior to Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) provisions. AMO recommends
that the MOE amend their practices to consider municipal policy in assessing PTTW Applications
and including an amendment to the OWRA ensuring that no PTTW would be issued if a zoning
by-law prohibited "the making, establishment, or operation of water taking."
Commercial takings have become part of the Ontario economy. For example, water taking for
bottling employs as many at 1500 people directly and 3500 indirectly. Exports to the United
States alone value almost $350 million per year. The volumes taken amount to less than 1 % of
all permitted takings in Ontario - in this case, 690 million lit res in 2000.. However, the hauling of
water can wear down roads and be detrimental to rural character - as established in Gold
Mountain Springs Inc. v. Township of Oro-Medonte. AMO recommends that a fee collection
system, similar to those established for aggregate users, be established to reimburse
municipalities for road maintenance and source protection measures, so long as international
trade agreements and business vitality are not impacted.
4.3 Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA)
CELA is a non-profit, public interest organization established in 1970 to use existing laws to
protect the environment and advocate for environmental law reforms. It is also a free legal
advisory clinic for the public, and will act at hearings and in courts on behalf of citizens or citizens'
groups who are otherwise unable to afford legal assistance.
CELA has issued several documents on water and the law. Their most recent document on
source protection is "Protecting Ontario's Drinking Water - Watershed-Based Source Protection
Planning: Q's and A's and an Implementation Check List", a thirteen point checklist being
weighed against Government commitments to implement Justice O'Connor's recommendations.
CELA is lobbying for this process to be undertaken:
. Agree upon a threat assessment process, including definitions of "vulnerable area" and
"sensitive water resource" (a working group was created in November 2003);
. Make drinking water source protection binding law through new and amended legislation,
including the Municipal Act and the Planning Act;
. Provide for interim source protection measures to protect water from high risk activities
and uses, including a model Source Protection Plan;
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS INC
14
May 3, 2004
. Provide for municipal regulatory powers and stable, sustainable funding for source water
protection;
. Establish a working relationship with First Nations on source protection;
. Delineate watershed boundaries, designate lead conservation authorities and name
committee chairs for Source Protection Planning committees;
. Peer review Provincial Water Quality Objectives to ensure the best source protection
standards are applicable;
. Make information available to the public;
. Work with stakeholders to identify indicators of progress under Source Protection Plans;
and,
. Establish and/or fund ongoing research into source protection sciences.
A CELA representative has been appointed to Minister Dombrowsky's Source Protection
Implementation Committee overseeing the creation of these plans.
4.4 Conservation Ontario
Conservation Ontario is the central body of Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities (CAs). Created
in 1946 by an Act of the Provincial Legislature, CAs are mandated to promote conservation,
restoration and responsible management of Ontario's water, land and natural habitats through
programs that balance human, environmental and economic needs.
In their 2003 report, Conservation Ontario Discussion Paper: Recommendations for Monitoring
Ontario's Water Quality, Conservation Ontario made a series of recommendations as to testing
methods and criteria for both surface and groundwater. Similar to the other groups, Conservation
Ontario recommends a consistent approach across watershed and information sharing and
reporting, but further add that individual CAs need the ability to address specific and unique water
quality concerns within their watershed. Testing criteria would measure water chemistry, benthic
invertebrates and toxic contaminants in all water sources, as well as bacterial content (especially
E.coli) in surface water bodies. All of these results would be published often and critically
analyzed in "State of the Watershed" reports published every five years.
Conservation Ontario has also been a long-time proponent of Watershed Plans, an idea the
Provincial Government has suggested in their White Paper. Their recommendation is to
implement Watershed Plans through a variety of mechanisms administered by agencies at the
Provincial and local level, including land use planning. Water budget modeling, aquifer
vulnerability studies and assimilation studies are believed to be the chief tools for directing such
policies. In any case, Conservation Ontario feels Conservation Authority-driven Watershed
Planning needs to be consistently integrated with drinking water supply planning typically led by
municipalities.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS INC.
15
May 3, 2004
5.0 SHOULD WATER TAKING BE CONSIDERED A LAND USE?
5.1 Yes, it Should
No reliable public process exists for PTTW Applications, nor is an all-inclusive process assured in
the White Paper. The Planning Act already provides for a mandated public process that is
designed to ensure that a Municipal Council makes an informed decision on the application
before it. A public meeting is held to hear comments on the application for Council to decide
upon. Notice of Passing is issued to interested parties with details of the land use and when the
By-law, or in this case, when the water taking, comes into effect. The Right to Appeal is available
(as it is with an EBR posting) to those who feel so compelled. The planning process has worked
for several years and will continue to do so. It is more than ready to handle a new land use in the
system.
Such a circumstance occurred in 1983, when aggregate extraction became a land use under
Section 34 of the Planning Act. Before then, quarries needed only a Pit License to operate. The
1983 legislation reversed the original precedents in Uxbridge (Township) v. Timber Brothers Sand
& Gravel Ltd. and Pickering Township v. Godfrey, where pit and quarry establishments were
found not uses of land under the law. In Grey Association for Better Planning v. Artemesia
Waters, Ltd., the trial judge agreed that the impacts of water taking warrant its consideration has
a use of land.
Thorough and consistent consultation is an essential component of the Planning Act, providing
citizens with opportunities to comment on applications. Today, the EBR does not provide every
person interested in speaking on a PTTW Application the opportunity to do so. Notice is only
served to those who are mobilized and understand how the system works well enough to seek
out applications. When an application is made under the Planning Act, consultation between the
applicant and the public is required at nearly every step through public meetings, deputations to
Council and the appeal process.
5.2 How to Establish Local Control
5.2.1 Official Plan Policies
Increasingly, municipalities are including Water Taking Policies into their Official Plans. The
Township of Oro-Medonte added Section D4 - Water Taking to its Official Plan by OPA 17, which
has not yet been approved by the County of Simcoe. OPA 17 is structured so that a
comprehensive Zoning By-law Amendment is required to add water taking as a land use. Certain
water takings, therefore, would require a rezoning that would need to satisfy quality and quantity
issues. A monitoring agreement would also be required. All of these measures would ensure
that no significant negative impacts are felt and, if a problem arises, provide Council with the
power to cease extraction until the problem is solved.
Several other municipalities are considering adding Water Taking Policies in their Official Plan
Reviews. Halton Region is looking at including policies that would require monitoring the amount
of extraction granted through PTTWs in conjunction with the Province and Conservation
Authorities. The intent is to promote a sustainable limit on water taking in the Region. The
Region is also proposing to require an Amendment to the Official Plan to permit any PTTW
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTI\NTS INC.
16
May 3, 2004
issued after the date that Policy is approved. Durham Region has proposed similar provisions.
As well as requiring an Official Plan Amendment for any application under the Planning Act that
involves a PTTW or potential impacts on water quality, an application in Durham shall need to
reflect the water budget for the appropriate subwatershed or ensure ecological integrity is not
compromised. Watershed Plans, which would be developed for each subwatershed, shall also
be prepared, and developments must account for several water-based criteria in the Plan,
including groundwater studies and environmental monitoring plans.
5.2.2 Zoning By-law Provisions
Once policies on water taking are incorporated into an Official Plan, municipalities are
empowered to, under the Planning Act, enact Zoning By-laws to incorporate those provisions into
applicable law. No Zoning By-laws have been passed yet to test the legislative force of the Grey
Association for Better Planning v. Artemesia Waters, Ltd. ruling.
The OMB Order in Trent Hills also leaves the door open for such a By-law to eventually be
created as the OMB has now recognized the legitimacy of water taking as a land use. Oro-
Medonte has already created a zoning window through which water taking can be permitted as a
land use, however that Policy has not yet been approved by the County.
5.2.3 Water Monitoring Agreements
Enacting a Water Monitoring Agreement enables a municipality to place conditions on the use
and monitoring of water taking.
In Neil Anderson v. County of Brant, Mr. Anderson appealed several provisions of Official Plan
Amendment #12 to the Official Plan of the former Township of Oakland, which permitted a golf
course across the road from his dairy operation. One of Mr. Anderson's many concerns with the
proposal was the potential for the proposed well to negatively impact his established well. The
applicant's hydrogeologist noted that there were some impacts upon drilled bedrock wells, but not
dug wells. It was recommended that the applicant enter into a Well Monitoring Agreement to
enable remedial measures to protect the groundwater supply if need be. Mr. Anderson was
willing to have his well monitored for this purpose.
Similar concerns were put forward in Andrew J. Smith, et al. and South River Developments. In
this matter, the redevelopment of an old mill in the City of Cambridge worried neighbours that
their wells would be impacted by a new well drilled on the property. Again, all parties agreed
upon a Well Monitoring Agreement that mandated a secondary pump test for the new well:
".. .. if this secondary testing indicates that there will be any significant adverse
impact on the quantity of the Homeowner's Water Supply, development of the Inn
shall not proceed."
It is our opinion that such an agreement could be routinely required as a condition of are-zoning
process (through the lifting of a Holding Provision) and incorporated within a Site Plan
Agreement. However, the intent of the monitoring would be to supplement the conditions set out
by the MOE as part of the PTTW process. It is anticipated that the primary enforcement agency
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNING CONSUlTANTS tNC
17
May 3, 2004
~C\ - J\o
would continue to the MOE. However, the municipality, through the zoning process could deem a
water taking to not be in compliance if the use is not operating in accordance with the by-law.
6.0 THE ORO-MEDONTE CONTEXT
It has long been the goal of the Council of the Township of Oro-Medonte to be more involved in
the process of approving and considering applications that involve a PTTW. Official Plan
Amendment #17 added policies to guide Council on the implementation of water taking as a land
use, but it has yet to be approved by the County of Simcoe.
6.1 Types of Water Takings in Oro-Medonte
MOE identifies several general purposes of Water Takings. Agricultural takings are primarily for
irrigation of crops and stocks for sale. Commercial takings are primarily for any retail sales or
service activities, including water bottling. Some road construction projects require over 50,000
litres per day of water. The washing of aggregate to remove finer granules from saleable product
always requires a PTTW. Industrial and Institutional uses may require a PTTW. Recreational
takings are primarily for golf courses and snow-making. Takings for remediation allow for the
replenishment of a surface or groundwater source. Municipalities primarily hold takings for the
provision of a potable water supply for human consumption, but campgrounds and communal
well users also hold these permits. Other general purposes include reservoir uses, draw-down
and pumping tests, heat pump uses and wildlife conservation.
There is no central database of water takings in the Township. However, a search of PTlW
Decision and Proposal Notices indicates how many PTTWs have been applied for in the
Township since May 15,1994.
There are at least thirty-one large-scale water takings in the Township of Oro-Medonte. Of these
thirty-one, the bulk of PTTWs are for golf courses, aggregate washing and artificial wetlands.
Three known PTlWs are for communal or municipal supplies, and one is for the Coldwater Fish
Hatchery. Horseshoe Resort holds one PTTW for the ski hill and golf course and a second
PTTW for the golf course, resort, times hares and nearby subdivisions. There is also one PTTW
for a geothermal energy system on a residential property.
Most of the permits apply for only part of the year. These permits are applicable largely to the
golf courses, which use the water for irrigation during the summer season. Mount S1. Louis
Moonstone holds a PTTW for winter snowmaking. Aggregate permits appear to be divided fairly
evenly between year-long and seasonal PTTWs. Most residential and commercial PTTWs apply
24 hours a day, with varying hours for the remaining PTTWs.
In accordance with MOE practice, surface water takings are five years in length while
groundwater takings are ten years. There are exceptions based on potential risk or where there
is less available data to evaluate, however inconsistencies do occur in the Township. The Hillway
operation PTTW (Pit #5), for example, has no expiry date.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
I'I.ANNlNG CONSUlTANTS INC.
18
May 3, 2004
c, ~
6.2 Pros of Regulation
As a result of the many studies undertaken by the Township of Oro~Medonte, it is our opinion that
water taking should be dealt with as a land use pursuant to the Official Plan. It is also our opinion
that the Township has a stake in improving the quality of life in the Township for its residents and
businesses by regulating water taking as a land use, since:
· The Township would be able to set the minimum information requirements to support an
application, in conjunction with a Conservation Authority;
· Neighbours in the vicinity of the application receive a chance to comment on the
application; and,
· A By-law that regulates water takings would be enforceable by the Township. For
example, a water taking is only approved if the proponent can satisfactorily demonstrate
to the MOE that any negative impacts are negligible. However if a water taking has
serious impacts upon other users or environmental processes, the Township could be
allowed to intervene and restrict the operation until such a time when it would not detract
from the ability of others to enjoy the use of their properties.
· Including these provisions now will make implementation of Watershed and Source
Protection Plans easier. When such plans are completed within a few years, Oro-
Medonte could have lands involved in or being vulnerable to water taking already
designated, restricting certain uses and requiring special studies to permit development.
This would be a significant new tool for the Township and would attach significant responsibilities
to it.
6.3 Cons of Regulation
With additional regulation, there are some drawbacks that the Township must be prepared to
handle:
· There will be additional work required by Township staff and consultants in order to
process applications involving water taking;
· Initial confusion over the new land use may lead to strained emotions between residents,
businesses and the Township. Applicants or individuals who wish to test the viability of
the Township's water taking zoning may appeal early decisions on the issue to the OMB;
and,
· Proof of impact would be required and it cannot be based on simple complaints. There
would have to be a scientific evaluation to substantiate any impacts.
While additional work is part and parcel with emerging issues, we are confident that the Township
would stand to gain a net benefit for all.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PlANNlNQ CONSUlTANTS INC.
19
May 3, 2004
6.4 Which Water Takings Should the Township Consider as Land Uses?
Many factors affect the perception of water takings. The issue of bottling, for example, has been
subject of much media attention in recent years. However, CELA reports that water taking for
bottling and export out of a watershed comprises less than one percent of all water use in
Ontario. The volume and magnitude of other PTTW uses, such as those for golf courses or
aggregates, are an issue due to the nature of their operations.
We recommend that the following PTTW uses be considered for implementation into municipal
regulation:
.
All commercial and recreational uses, such as bottling, bulk sale, golf course irrigation
and snowmaking;
. .
· All industrial uses, such as aggregate washing;
· All uses that export water outside of the boundaries of the Township and/or applicable
Conservation Authority;
Large-scale agricultural takings for the purpose of irrigating crops; and,
pota~ater for any user, including the Township, private subdivision and condominium
develo ment.
Should Council desire that water takings be regulated through Zoning, OPA 17 states that a
comprehensive amendment will be required to permit water taking as a land use.
.
.
7.0 CONCLUSION
The course of events over the last five years has seen Ontario municipalities gain incredible
knowledge about their water resources and the impacts of water taking on land use. Through
existing powers and resources made available on the issue, municipalities and similar bodies
have taken steps towards regulating water-related issues:
· The Walkerton Inquiry called for reforms in both source protection and water taking
management. More municipal involvement was a key recommendation in both fields;
· The Divisional Court ruled, "the taking of water is a use of land within the meaning of the
Planning Act" in Grey Association for Better Planning v. Artemesia Waters Ltd.;
· The Planning Act overrides the Ontario Water Resources Act, as ruled in Gold Mountain
Springs Inc. v. Township of Oro-Medonte. The importance of land use was reaffirmed in
the context of water resource management;
· The inability to become fully informed about PTrw Applications does not provide an
avenue to reconcile community concerns. The experience of the OMY A Application
show that there are issues with the current system;
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
Pl..ANNlNG CONSUlTA.NTS INC.
20
May 3, 2004
C\q_2'\
. The Province has spent considerable time, money and attention on enabling
municipalities to understand both their water resources and their responsibilities
surrounding them;
. Stakeholder groups have been advocating similar goals for several years now on water
protection. ECO, AMO, CELA and Conservation Ontario have all stated that land use
planning is an integral part of water protection.
With the release of the White Paper on Watershed-based Source Protection Planning, it appears
likely that change shall soon come to the legislative and regulatory framework surrounding water
taking in Ontario. The Planning Act should be a part of that change as well, providing the
opportunity for municipalities to regulate water taking in their own jurisdictions through the trusted
and established land use planning process. The Township of Oro-Medonte should be prepared
for such a change.
Water Taking as a Land Use:
Options for Municipalities
Prepared by
MERIDIAN
PLANNING CONSUlT....NTS \NC
21
May 3, 2004
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2004-19 Committee of the Whole Nick McDonald, RPP
Subject: Department:
Council Planning
Georgian North Lands
C.ofW. Limited Property Date:
Mav 5, 2004
Motion # A.M. File #:
D12 013409
Date: Roll #:
010-004-04000-0000
GROUND:
This report has been prepared to address an issue that has arisen with respect to OPA 16 and the application submitted
by Georgian North Lands. On the basis of my understanding of the proponent's position with respect to the processing of
the application, the proponent is of the view that:
. Current and commonly accepted practices regarding the protection of wetlands and their function and the
identification and protection of significant woodland areas should not be applied or considered with respect to the
development;
. The planning approvals in place were obtained in 1994 after a significant amount of information and evidence was
provided to the OMB on the environmental impact of the proposed development; and,
. The development fully conforms to OPA16, since OPA16, in its adopted form, continues to designate the property
for residential development under the policies contained within Section C14.4.1.4 (Buffalo Springs - Special
Development Policies).
As the intent of OPA #16 was to develop a comprehensive land use plan for the Oro Moraine that would provide the basis
for considering future development applications, existing development approvals were not reviewed.
However, if the subject lands were not considered as residentially designated lands as part of the OPA #16 process, the
western portion of the property would have been located within the Oro-Moraine Core/Corridor area designation primarily
because of the location of a wetland on the property and a number of upland forest areas which provide habitat for wetland
species in the area. It is my opinion that the decision of Council with respect to OPA #16 and the subject
property needs to be revisited. However, the extent to which the designation should be revised is unknown at
this time.
, On-this basis, it is recommended that Council request the County of Simcoe to not make a decision with
respect to the designation of the entire property as Residential. In addition, it is further recommended that the
policies contained within Section C14.4.1.4 (Buffalo Springs - Special Development Policies) of the Official
Plan (as re-numbered by OPA #16) be the subject of a Non-Decision as well. This Non-Decision is not
appealable by the landowner and would mean that the policies in the existing Official Plan would remain in
effect on the property until they are changed in the future.
On the basis of the above, it is recommended to Council:
. That Report PO 2004-19 be received and adopted;
. That the Township request that the County of Simcoe not make a decision with respect to the
designation of the Georgian North Lands Limited property for residential purposes in Official Plan
Amendment 16; and,
. "t-That the Township request that the County of Simcoe not make a decision with respect to the policies
contained within Section C14.4.1 of the Official Plan.
Respectfully Submitted,
--1~-t-uL
Nick McDonald, MCIP, RPP
Partner
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
MfJ ~ f \j ~
~CJ..Jv1....J
C.A.O.
J
Dept. Head
2
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Prepared By:
PD 2004-20 Committee of the Whole Nick McDonald, RPP
Subject: Department:
Council Modifications to OPA #17 Planning
C.ofW. Date: May 5,2004
Motion # R.M. File #:
DOB 11937
Date: Roll #:
BACKGROUND:
Official Plan Amendments #16 and #17 were adopted by Council on August 21S\ 2003. Since that time, both
Amendments have been under review by the County of Simcoe and in circulation for comments to various
Provincial Ministries.
Two meetings with County of Simcoe staff have been held and a third meeting was held with County staff and
staff from both the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
(MMAH) on May 4th, 2004. This latter meeting was held to determine whether the MMAH was satisfied with the
policy direction proposed to be taken by the Township of Oro-Medonte, particularly within OPA#16. Both MMAH
and MNR indicated that they wished to have more time to review OPA #16. This additional review may take up to
six weeks to complete.
However, on the basis of discussions with the County of Simcoe, the MMAH and the MNR, there is no reason to
delay the approval of OPA #17 by the County of Simcoe. In addition, there are a number of landowners waiting
for the new policies to take effect so that they can submit their applications. It is for these reasons that this report
has been prepared.
On the basis of the review of OPA #17 by staff at the County of Simcoe and a further review of OPA #17 by
Township staff and Meridian, a number of relatively minor modifications are proposed to OPA #17. Some of
these modifications are recommended by the County and others are recommended by Meridian, in consultation
with Township staff. The intent of these modifications is to primarily ensure that the policy direction in OPA #17 is
as clear and concise as possible. A description of each of the proposed modifications is provided below, along
with an explanation of the intent of each, as required.
OSED MODIFICATIONS TO OPA#17:
1. Section C1.3.2 (The Creation of New Lots for Non-Agricultural Purposes) is modified by adding in the
following sentence at the beginning of the Section "In accordance with the intent of this Plan to protect
land suitable for agriculture and to maintain the rural character of the Township, the creation of new lots
in the agricultural designation for non-residential purposes is not permitted."
This modification is proposed to re-include a policy that was inadvertently deleted through the
adoption of OPA#17.
2. Section C1.3.2.2 (Infilling Lots) is modified by deleting the word "generally"from Subsection a).
This modification is proposed to ensure that the policy regarding Infilling Lots in the Agricultural
designation is consistent with the policies in both the Provincial Policy Statement and the County
of Simcoe Official Plan.
3. Section C2.3.1 (The Creation of New Lots for Residential Purposes) is modified by replacing "2.0
hectares" with "1.0 hectares" in Subsection b) and by adding the following sentence at the end of the
second paragraph "notwithstanding the above, a larger lot size may be considered for environmental,
topographical or character reasons. "
This modification is proposed to ensure that the maximum lot size considered for new residential
lots in the rural designation is 1 hectare instead of 2 hectares, in accordance with County of
Simcoe policy.
4. Section C5.3.4 (Limits of Shoreline Development) is modified by adding the following sentence after the
fourth sentence "In cases where such development is proposed, the minimum lot size shall generally be
0.6 hectares".
This modification is proposed to provide some guidance for new lots in the Shoreline
Designation.
5. Section C14.4 (Sugarbush and Buffalo Springs nodes) is modified by adding the words "Bed and
Breakfast establishments subject to Section C1.3. 10" after the words "private recreational facilities".
This modification is proposed to ensure that Bed and Breakfast establishments are permitted
within the Sugarbush and Buffalo Springs nodes. Such uses are currently permitted in every
other land use designation where residential uses are permitted.
6. Section C14.5.4.1 (Permitted Uses-Horseshoe Valley Low-Density Residential Designation) is modified
by adding the following "Bed and Breakfast establishments subject to Section C1.3.10 of this Plan" after
the words "home occupations".
This modification is proposed to ensure that Bed and Breakfast establishments are permitted
within the low-density residential designation in Horseshoe Valley.
7. Section 02.2.1 (General Criteria) is modified by deleting the word "an" in Subsection i) and replacing that
word with the following words "a negative".
This modification is proposed to provide some clarity on how new lots will be assessed,
particularly as it relates to its potential impact on natural heritage features and functions.
2
I" -
""-'
8. Section D2.2.3 (Technical Severances) is modified by adding a new Subsection h). "Subject to the
access policies of the relevant road authority."
This modification is proposed to ensure that the policies of the County of Simcoe are considered
when re-creating lots that have merged.
9. Section D4 (Water Taking) is modified by:
a) Deleting the second paragraph;
b) By adding the following sentence at the end of the first paragraph which reads as follows: "It is a
policy of this Plan that the taking of more than 50,000 litres of ground or surface water per day is
deemed to be a land use in accordance with The Planning Act."
c) All of the words following the words "will be required" are deleted from the former third
paragraph; and,
d) By adding the followin paragraph after Subsection b) "In cases where the proposed water taking
may have implications on the quantity of water available to water users outside of the Township
of Oro-Medonte, an 0 icial Plan Amendment may be required. The determination of whether an
Official Plan Amendm nt is required will be made at the time the application is submitted, in
consultation with the C unty of Simcoe and neighbouring municipalities".
This modification is proposed as a result of the decision by Artemesia Springs to not appeal the
decision of the Divisional Court with respect to Artemesia Springs v. the County of Grey. The
intent of this modification is to entrench water taking as a land use within the Official Plan and to
require the preparation of a comprehensive Amendment to the Zoning By-law to further regulate
the use. In addition, the modification recognizes the possible impacts of large scale Water
Taking's on users outside of the Township of Oro-Medonte, and in cases such as these, requires
that an Official Plan Amendment be considered rather than a rezoning.
10. Section E1.9 (Existing Draft Plan Approved Residential Subdivisions) is modified by deleting the words
"ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, or the appropriate approval authority by resolution"
from the second paragraph".
This modification is proposed since the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is no longer
the approval authority.
11. Section E1.10 (Official Plan Review) is modified by adding the words "or County-wide" after the words
"Province-wide"in Subsection h).
This modification is proposed to ensure that County-wide initiatives are taken into account at the
time of the next Official Plan Review.
12. Schedule A is modified by placing the Recreational, Environmental Protection One and Environmental
Protection Two designations on lands within Lots 1 0 and D in Concession 2, as per Official Plan
Amendment 10.
This modification is proposed to ensure that the lands (Heritage Hills Golf Course) are
appropriately designated as per a previous approval.
13. Item #35 of OP A #17 is deleted and replaced with the following: "Schedules A1 to A24 are deleted and
replaced with a new Schedule A, but only in so far as it affects lands that are not subject to OPA #16."
This modification is required to ensure that the land use designations and applicable planning
policies in the approved Official Plan continue to apply to lands that are subject to OPA #16, until
OPA #16 is approved.
3
,
9
t
14.
Item #36 of OPA #17 is deleted and replaced with the following: "Schedule S is deleted and replaced
with a new Schedule S, but only in so far as it affects lands that are not subject to OPA#16."
This modification is required to ensure that the land use designations and applicable planning
policies in the approved Official Plan continue to apply to lands that are subject to OPA #16, until
OPA #16 is approved.
The above modifications are considered to be relatively minor and do not in any way change the intent of the
Official Plan. On this basis, it is recommended that Council support the above modifications.
PROPOSED NON-DECISION I
In addition to the above, it is recommend d that the County of Simcoe not make a decision with respect to the
designation of four areas that are curre Iy designated Mineral Aggregate Resources in the approved Official
Plan. These areas are located just to the outh of the Oro Moraine Planning Area boundary in Concessions 12,
13 and 14. These areas have a land area f approximately 89 hectares (220 acres)
No active pits are located in this area at t e present time, although a former pit is located on the west side of the
14th Line in Lot 13, Concession 14. These areas are not located on existing haul routes and with the exception of
the former pit on the 14th Line, have not b en used for aggregate extraction. It should be noted that a former pit
is also located on the Evans property in L t 12, Concession 13, however, these lands are not subject to OPA #17
and are subject to OPA #16 instead.
OPA #17 as adopted by Council change the designation of the 89 hectares of land from Mineral Aggregate
Resources to Agricultural primarily becau e the lands are not located on existing haul routes, are not the site of
active operations, are primarily in agricult ral use and are of a small size. It continues to be my opinion that the
redesignation of these lands is appropria for the above reasons. However, the issue of aggregate extraction
and the conditions under which it can 0 cur was dealt with by OP A #16, not OP A #17. On this basis, it is
recommended that the decision on the 9 hectares be left to the OPA #16 decision-making process, which
should occur through the Spring and sumter.
RECOMMENDATION S :
On the basis of the above, it is recommended to Council:
(a) That Report PO 2004-20 be received and adopted;
(b) That Council support the proposed modifications to OP A #17 and the proposed non-decision in OP A#17;
and
(c) That the County of Simcoe be so advised.
Respectfully Submitted,
----1~ -t:~
Nick McDonald, MCIP, RPP
Partner
~-/
j .~.
cPO /\0\
~'>
4
G' \ '
\0 - \
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. Bd2004-04 To: Council Prepared By: Ronald M Kolbe
Subject: Department:
Building Report
Council April 2004 Building
C.ofW. Date: May 5, 2004
Motion # A.M. File #:
Date: Roll #:
BACKGROUND:
BuildinQ Permit Update
April To Date
Number of Permits 86 171
Number of Permits Previous Year 78 155
Construction Value $ 8,036,870,00 $ 14,059,483,00
Construction Value Previous Year $ 5,043,895,00 $ 9,789,545,00
Permit Fees $ 60,949,00 $109,037,00
Permit Fees Previous Year $ 50,388,00 $ 96,1 72,00
Part 8 Permit Fees $ 10,600,00 $ 28,500,00
Part 8 Permit Fees previous year $ 1 4, 1 60,00 $ 31,660,00
q~~
ANAL YSIS:
29 Single Family Dwellings bring the total to 48 To-date.
1. THAT Report No. Bd2004-04 be received,
Respectfully submitted,
f~Ha
Ronald M. Kolbe, CBCO, AscT, MAATO
Director of Building/Planning Development
C.A.O. Comments:
Date:
...
C.A.O.
- 2 -
BuildinQ Definitions
ACCADD
ACCBLDG
ACCDEM
AGR
AGRADD
AGRREN
ChangeUse
COM
COMADD
COMDEM
COMREN
DECK
DEMOLITION
FIREPLACE
GARAGE
INDADD
MISC
MRES
POOL
PORCHCOV Covered Porch
PUB Public Building
SEPTIC New Septic System
SFD Single Family Dwelling
SFDADD Single Family Dwelling Addition
SFDDEM Single Family Dwelling Demolition
SFDREN Single Family Dwelling Renovation
SHED
SIGNS
SUNROOM
Accessory Building Addition
Accessory Building
Accessory Building Demolition
Agricultural Building
Agricultural Building Addition
Agricultural Building Renovation
Septic - Change of Use
Commercial Building
Commercial Building Addition
Commercial Building Demolition
Commercial Building Renovation
Industrial Addition
Miscellaneous
Multi-Residential
Permit Summary Township of Oro-Medonte
From 2003/04/01 to 2003/04/30 Totals
Construction Type Outstanding Complete Deficient Cancelled Permits Value Fees
ACCADD 0 0 0 $0.00 $392.00
ACCBLDG 1 1 0 0 2 $19,500.00 $250.00
AGR 0 2 0 0 2 $20,000.00 $627.00
ChangeUse 2 0 0 0 2 $0.00 $0.00
COMREN 1 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00
DECK 5 3 0 0 8 $1,000.00 $5,475.00
DEMOLITION 0 2 0 0 2 $0.00 $0.00
GARAGE 3 0 0 0 3 $29,696.00 $200.00
MISC 1 0 0 2 $0.00 $100.00
POOL 3 0 0 4 $15,000.00 $225.00
SEPTIC 21 0 23 $0.00 $3,350.00
SFD 18 1 4 0 23 $4,499,202.00 $33,545.00
SFDADD 3 1 0 0 4 $379,497.00 $3,655.00
SFDREN 0 0 0 $80,000.00 $657.00
60 13 4 78 $5,043,895.00 $48,476.00
Monday, May 03, 2004
Page 1 of 1
Permit Summary Township of Oro-Medonte
From 2003/01101 to 2003/04/30 Totals
~.~ ]%: %W~
Construction Type Outstanding Complete Deficient Cancelled Permits Value Fees
ACCADD 1 0 0 0 $0.00 $392.00
ACCBLDG 3 1 0 0 4 $42,300.00 $325.00
ACCDEM 3 0 0 4 $0.00 $50.00
AGR 1 2 0 0 3 $62,000.00 $627 .00 . .
ChangeUse 2 0 0 0 2 $0.00 $0.00
COM 1 0 0 0 $2,000.00 $150.00
COMREN 1 0 0 2 $0.00 $150.00
DECK 7 3 0 0 10 $8,000.00 $5,550.00
DEMOLITION 0 2 0 1 3 $0.00 $0.00
FIREPLACE 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00
GARAGE 3 0 0 4 $54,696.00 $300.00
MISC 2 0 0 3 $0.00 $100.00
POOL 5 0 0 6 $15,000.00 $450.00
SEPTIC 48 3 0 1 52 $0.00 $11,500.00
SFD 36 3 9 0 48 $8,811,052.00 $64,646.00
SFDADD 4 3 0 0 7 $714,497.00 $4,632.00
SFDDEM 0 2 0 0 2 $0.00 $50.00
SFDREN 1 0 0 2 $80,000.00 $757.00
117 27 9 2 155 $9,789,545.00 $89,679.00
Monday, May 03, 2004
Page 1 of 1
~d -lv
Permit Summary Township of Oro-Medonte
From 2004/01101 to 2004/04/30 Totals
Construction Type Outstanding Complete Deficient Cancelled Permits Value Fees
ACCBLDG 6 0 0 0 6 $394,000.00 $3,341.00
ACCDEM 0 0 0 1 $0.00 $50.00
AGR 0 0 2 $43,000.00 $407.00
AGRDEM 0 0 2 $0.00 $50.00
ChangeUse 11 0 0 0 11 $0.00 $300.00
COM 2 0 0 0 2 $43,500.00 $337.00
COMREN 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00
DECK 5 0 0 0 5 $37,800.00 $619.00
DEMOLITION 1 1 0 0 2 $0.00 $100.00
GARAGE 0 0 0 1 $15,000.00 $100.00
MISC 2 0 0 0 2 $0.00 $50.00
POOL 4 0 0 0 4 $20,000.00 $200.00
RENOVATION 4 0 0 0 4 $47,500.00 $375.00
SEPTIC 63 0 0 0 63 $173,098.00 $12,350.00
SFD 49 0 0 0 49 $12,839,091.00 $98,276.00
SFDADD 7 0 0 0 7 $259,000.00 $2,325.00
SFDDEM 3 0 0 4 $0.00 $1,967.00
SFDREN 5 0 0 0 5 $187,494.00 $1,784.00
166 4 0 1 171 $14,059,483.00 $122,631.00
Monday, May 03, 2004
Page 1 of 1
. C\d -l
Permit Summary Township of Oro-Medonte
From 2004/04/01 to 2004/04/30 Totals
Construction Type Outstanding Complete Deficient Cancelled Permits Value Fees
ACCBLDG 5 0 0 0 5 $376,000.00 $3,191.00
ChangeUse 4 0 0 0 4 $0.00 $200.00
DECK 4 0 0 0 4 $36,800.00 $519.00
DEMOLITION 0 0 0 $0.00 $50.00
MISC 0 0 0 $0.00 $0.00
POOL 2 0 0 0 2 $0.00 $50.00
RENOVATION 2 0 0 0 2 $12,500.00 $275.00
SEPTIC 29 0 0 0 29 $0.00 $5,700.00
SFD 29 0 0 0 29 $7,342,870.00 $53,924.00
SFDADD 6 0 0 0 6 $229,000.00 $2,068.00
SFDREN 3 0 0 0 3 $39,700.00 $507.00
..................-.............. .................................................... .................................................................m...m"".. ........................................................
86 0 0 0 86 $8,036,870.00 $66,484.00
Monday, May 03, 2004
Page 1 of 1
..
-*
~-e-\
~
.
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. BD 2004-05 To: Council Prepared By:
Ronald M Kolbe
Subject: Department:
Council Howard Request to Building
Temporarily Have Two
C. of W. Residence on Property Date: May 7,2004
97 Brambel Road
Motion # concession 4 being more A.M. File #:
particularly described as
Plan 819 lot 11 Oro-
Date: Medonte Roll #:
A request was received from Janet Howard to temporarilv reside in their existing residence for 9
months while the new residence is being constructed. (see attachment #1 Request Letter)
(Attachment #2 -Agreement).
Previous requests:
Randall & Elizabeth McFadyen located at Part Lot 75 RP 51 R8744 Part 1, Concession 2,
(Medonte) was granted subject to a Letter of Credit in the amount of $20,000 for a nine month
period or until completion of the proposed new dwelling, whichever is the lesser period of time.
Ian and Lori Webb located at North Part of Lot 3, Concession 11 (Medonte) was granted
subject to a $25,000 Letter of Credit for a period of nine months.
II RECOMMENDATION(S):
II
1, THAT Report bd. No 2004-05 be received and adopted.
2. That Council approve the request of Janet Howard to reside in their existing residence for nine
months while a new residence is being constructed and further that a $20,000 security be
deposited with the Corporation.
Respectfully submitted,
;f~ 1'1.a--
Ronald M. Kolbe, CBCO, AScT, MAATO
Director of Building/Planning Development
C.A.O. Comments:
C.A.O.
Date:
Dept. Head
~~
(jf\. 0 .~/.
o ~ '
~\ Y
- 2 -
9"€ -d
\ 0"-"
O~
ORO
T0
9~-3 '
M"J 5'\o~
, c\:' \5 \d..
.
\c....u.... """" "'V_
'\~
---
1 tlECEIVEDI.
MAY 5 S' \
i
~~~"
-K--- -
)..-l~ "'--~V <--- ~ ~ t \, ~ +" 6~ \ c\ ~ "'->e- ---.> 'ooc.-*~...s
~ ~lO I o~~~ ~ ~~c--.J~ f __C~~+-) ~
~ l~~ *= "'--'-'''--~-\--~\'-jh,"-, \d- C-- '''''Hv ~~
'''''I -r..-.,-+ ~~ -+L..-. <<--><,s~''::1 k",,-,,- ,,""-'"' 5' ,~~~
\...0r- '-"--'0_\ d. \, \~ -To ~v"--' ~ ~ e-~'s-\-~~.J ~~e..
. <"">-1' \ G c ~s --\- .. '---<.-+ 'O~ "" , ~ "'"'"-'""-C ~ '-""-- ,$ Go;C l~
\ .~~.s.\-c-~ --t==;::~ S',,~..-:-~ '-.) ~..lc-L S~-:-,.,~ " tr-e..
~I'-'-"\\ ~V"-- +0 ~ ~ ,~~ =-- =-l,~' J-
'-'-"~~ ~ 4--~-...o~sC:-~ ~----d ~e~ ~..A' ,,~~
"'-' ~+-~ <> ~ . -t:;;:-,- c~~~c.-, \ s =-H <--<>v ~ \ . K"".+L-.. .
v"-'\.c::...-~ c:.,,_ '\ S <V'V\. =- \ · c...~' \.c>~ ~ r S' '-\-'C.-
t\
\C-V"- =- V-~V.c--\ C<- ~~ ~~
,~ ~+~""":"~::J +-d ~c ~~\-L Go~-~, \ \:'1'~ '-'~~
~\\o,.t.:). c.-~~'~~~ ~'~ ~~ l4 \o~ 0 ~=~
~ ,.i'~'''-5. L ~ C-c- G~~~~ ~t~ \G~,~ ~ b~,-'--)
..), 1\ '\ '
b~ ~s b~~~ C-c;-~0" \ C)o...+~ 5~*-L__..
-J ::+~ c- s "-:tt:~-:-'~- ~--r ~ ~\.~<o <-;-5\-) do, ~ k- +- , ~ 6-~
~_ . ~ C'-'~ ~, ~ '~<>~. . 1- -+ ~='- ~'" "'~~CI ~ \,.> C/,,-,$ $ ~ ~ 'C.-~s -<--
c--\f ~ ~~'. \~~ l4~~=-:p-u_'tLfg ~
j
'i
'I
I
i
I
i
S1 ·
I
1 _,
-e.-c..... r -
:
-::r-:~ Cc.-o \ ~ (:> -..-)cY c\.
~=..___~,~\ ~.,. ,""; S ~
~~, Co'-:s. +-)-'~ \'0 V'-. 4- c-----t ~ ~"-II'" ~ \~
\ -c=...-<--...; .~ -- '" ~;x \. s- + "--j h." ............ S "<-." -
)
~O'-Jc.-~d
AGREEMENT/AFFIDAVIT
In consideration of receiving a building permit from the Township of Oro-Medonte, I,
Janet Howard, of the Township of Oro-Medonte (formerly Township of Oro) in the
County of Simcoe, covenant and agree as follows:
1. That I am the registered owner of Concession 4, Plan 819, Lot 11 (formerly Oro),
Township of Oro-Medonte;
2. That I have applied to the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro-
Medonte for permission to locate reside/maintain the existing dweIling..on the
above-mentioned lands, at the same time as a new dwelling is under construction
on those same lands, wherein such procedure is not provided for under the
provisions of the Township of Oro-Medonte's Zoning By-law as amended.
3. That I hereby acknowledge that permission has been given by the Council of the
Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte subject to the following provisions:
a) That such permission is granted for the nine month period from
permit issuance or until completion of the proposed new dwelling,
whichever is the lesser period of time; and/or
b) That on completion of the new dwelling, as evidenced by a
Certificate of Occupancy, the existing building is to be removed
within one month; and/or
c) That application to the Township of Oro-Medonte for a temporary
use permit will be made forthwith (Fee $100.00).
4. That the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte retain a Letter of Credit in
the amount of $20,000.00 until the above-mentioned agreement is fulfilled to the
sole satisfaction of the Township.
a) Failure to comply with the aforementioned agreement will result in
the Corporation of the Township of Oro-Medonte redeeming the
Letter of Credit at its sole discretion.
5. That I hereby agree to the terms and conditions set out above.
6. It is understood that after the nine month period from permit issuance, that the
Township may remove the cottage for which permission was granted at the time
this agreement was signed, with all cost for so doing to be assumed by the
property owner being Janet Howard.
7. It is understood that failure to comply with the terms and conditions as set out
herein, shall release and save harmless the Corporation of the Township of Oro-
Medonte from pursuing such litigation, as may be necessary to secure compliance
or conformity with any applicable Municipal By-law or provincial Regulation as
may be provided for.
9~-5
8. We hereby covenant and agree to indemnify and save harmless the Township of
Oro-Medonte from all costs, claims, liability and actions which may result or arise
from the issuance of the building permit or the entering into of this agreement.
Date Janet Howard - Owner
Witness
J Neil Craig - Mayor
Marilyn Pennycook - Clerk