GOULBOURN FORCED ROAD AND KANATA AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS
ÉVALUATIONS
ENVIRONNEMENTALES DU CHEMIN GOULBOURN FORCED ET DE L'AVENUE KANATA
ACS2007-PTE-APR-0137 KANATA NORTH (4)
Mr. R. Phillips, C.E.T., Program Manager,
Infrastructure Approvals, Planning, Transit and the Environment, began the
presentation by giving a brief background of both Goulbourn Forced Road and
Kanata Avenue and outlined the study area. He also provided planning solutions
for both areas and the recommended environmental assessment design plans for
each.
Mr. S. Doyle, P.Eng, Project Manager for Dillon Consulting
Limited, continued the presentation providing additional information on the
environmental assessment process, their need and the steps going forward. A copy of the Power Point presentation is
held on file with the City Clerk’s Office.
Written submission received and held on file
· Joubin
Karimi
· Boris
Rubashkin
Debbie Graham, resident on Goulbourn Forced Road, stated
that she would like to see something built in the area that she would be proud
to see in 5 to 10 years. She further stated that her preference would be to
keep as many trees as possible and to consider a pathway for wildlife in the
area. She was concerned regarding the possible loss of her home and the need to
preserve her present status on a well and a septic system as she had been
promised. Her hope is that when construction begins they will put a buffer area
around her property and that it will not be damaged.
Councillor Wilkinson wanted confirmation from
the delegate that she preferred the Alignment C of the proposed locations, the
one furthest west that just touches the corner of her property. Ms. Graham confirmed that this was the only
alternative that she would accept as the other options would leave her without
a home. She reiterated the need for pathways for the wildlife as well.
Mr. Phillips explained that the primary reason
for offering Alignment “B” and not recommending it was due to the impact it
would have on the property. All options
have some level impact on the front of the property but Alignment “C” has a
minimal amount of impact.
Concerning the wildlife crossing, Mr. Phillips
explained that presently there is an existing causeway and the recommendations
retain this feature. He stated that it would be upgraded from its current
gravel/asphalt type road to a major collective but would maintain the existing
linkage that have been identified for the wildlife as well as maintaining the
hydrological areas such as the wetlands. The items have been addressed in the
environmental study.
Mr. Doyle further added that a number of
studies completed by biologists in the area indicated what was required in the
corridor to facilitate movement of animals and environmental issues. The
recommendation has been that no extraordinary measures be taken at these
locations as the pond complexes are sufficient enough to be self sustaining and
the movement of wildlife across the road was not an issue that required further
design approach.
In response to Councillor Legendre’s inquires,
Ms. Graham explained that with reference to Slide 11 in the presentation, the
yellow highlighted sections were on her property (roughly 6.95 acres). She
stated that she had been promised, prior to restoring her home, that not one
square inch would be taken. Regarding the wildlife issue, she stated that the
placement of the crossings is incorrect and she provided the actual crossing.
Ms. Graham also stated that she has asked that signs be posted at these
crossings and this has yet to be done.
In response to Councillor Doucet’s question on
whether Ms. Graham wanted the road or not, she stated that she would like to
see things stay the way they are.
Mary Garvis, Director of Planning with Urbandale
Corporation, explained that they are part owners of the property in question,
800 acres abutting Goulbourn Forced Road. They have been active in the entire
process and they have given general support to Alignment “C”, subject to a few
conditions. One issue in particular is the limited development in the
sub-division referenced in the report and they are opposed to this. They feel
that the limited development should follow the limit as per the Ontario
Municipal Board and the Council approved sub-division plan which would have
been the easterly limit of Alignment “A”, and take the development all the way
to Trillium Woods. As well, Alignment “C” bisects a designated and zoned
high-density residential block and a small commercial block. They would like
staff to address this issue in the official plan amendment that will go forward
in the revised draft conditions for the sub-division. They also object to the
use of the earthen berms or the city protecting four lands to build earthen
berms for the future elevated crossing of Goulbourn Forced Road over the rail
line. They will be active in the coming stages of the report going to the
Ministry of the Environment.
In response to questions from Councillor
Wilkinson, Ms. Garvis stated that due to the changes in the road, all
sub-divisions to the north would have to be modified. These issues will be
dealt with at the time of the revisions for the sub-division, as it is not part
of the road alignment. Concerning the
question of Urbandale paying additional cost should a narrower alignment be
selected, Ms. Garvis stated that they would not be willing to pay for it.
Mikelis Svilans, Vice-president of Environment, Kanata Lakes
Community Association (LKCA), provided a presentation that expressed their
support for some aspects of this plan and to point out some of their concerns.
A copy of this presentation is held on file with the City Clerk’s Office. The
KLCA has participated in all of the consultations and given comments. They were happy to have been consulted and
found this to have been a very fruitful exercise. Their concerns pertain to the encroachment on the natural
environment of Trillium Woods, Watt’s Creek crossing, their completion of Terry
Fox Drive and the junction at Kanata Avenue.
They support alignment “C” as this does not encroach Trillium Woods. They
feel it is important to maintain the woods in its present state as it was
planned and that the limited development follows Snake Road.
Regarding Watt’s Creek crossing, he explained
that the residents in this area are very active, cycling and walking, and
skiing in the winter. Goulbourn Forced Road can be very busy at times making
crossing dangerous and with 10, 000 units being built in this area it will get
even busier. They would like to see an underpass at this point and a culvert
has been suggested as the optimal solution, but they believe that a modified
culvert in the form of an underpass would be the preferred solution.
Councillor Legendre had several questions about
the underpass. His understanding from the report was that this type of underpass
was for animal movement, but the presentation emphasized the need for people
movement as well. Mr. Svilans explained that it has been shown that animals do
use these types of underpasses as do humans and that perhaps with time they can
be encouraged to use these. The underpass is a means to cross the busy section
above safely.
Councillor Legendre raised the issue of what
the city calls, Local Area Levee, a fee for any additional costs to
infrastructure. If the community desires having an underpass, have they
canvassed the community regarding the addition to their taxes? Mr. Svilans
explained that at this point, they have not gone to this level but they have
discussed this extensively in their community meetings.
In response to inquiries from Councillor
Wilkinson, Mr. Svilans stated that they have looked at providing a walkway for
pedestrians and possibly wildlife.
Councillor Wilkinson also pointed out that the association stated that
they wanted Snake Road to be part of the development, which is contrary to what
Urbandale has stated. Mr. Svilans stated that Trillium Woods has been well
defined in all plans; there is not a very strong argument that can be made as
to why you would need to take lands out of the Trillium Woods for development.
He feels that there is very little justification for encroaching into these
woods. With respect to the environmental assessment, Mr. Svilans explained that
normally an EA would be one of the first things that would be done, but this is
not the case with in this situation. He felt that this was very unfortunate and
would have preferred that it took place first as it would have saved many
complications at the high school. As a parent and a user of Kanata Avenue on a
daily basis, it would be preferable that the junction be simplified as much as
possible. One junction corresponding to an entrance to the school would be a
positive thing.
Upon reconvening the meeting, the
committee proceeded with questions to staff.
Councillor Wilkinson asked some
questions about the concern expressed by Mr. Svilans on the community’s desire
for a separate pedestrian underpass.
Her first inquiry was to the design of the crossing and could it not be
easier to install with the causeway instead of the need for a bridge. Mr. Doyle indicated that the structure would
need to be substantial enough to allow maintenance vehicles to pass and may
still fall under bridge design requirements and may not just be a culvert type
crossing. The design would also need to
consider the need to be above the flood elevation, which would result in the
total height of the causeway to be such that access issues would be encountered
for the existing private road access for the Rockeries development.
The Councillor asked if the
pedestrian crossing with the causeway was investigated through the EA
process. Mr. Doyle's response was that
it was and that it was discounted through the process due to the design issues
that it presented and that the two alternatives worth considering were the
causeway with an at grade pedestrian crossing and the bridge structure with the
pedestrian crossing under the bridge.
The point was raised that the practice at the City was not install
underpass pedestrian crossing and that generally all crossing are at grade for
all classifications of roads. It was
noted that there are many concerns with underpass pedestrian crossings that are
not related to construction elements such as security concerns from the public
relating to lighting, lack of visibility for intruders, length of crossings,
vandalism, etc...
The Councillor acknowledged these
points and then asked if an at grade crossing is decided then could the ESR
please indicate the need for ducts to be installed in the roadway for the
possibility of a future signalized pedestrian crossing or control lights and we
indicated that we would make sure this happened.
Her final suggestion was that staff looks into the process of changing the name from the Goulbourn Forced Road, as this road will not exist any more. This will be directed to the appropriate staff to facilitate.
That Transportation Committee recommend
Council:
1. Receive
the results of the Goulbourn Forced Road and Kanata Avenue Environmental
Assessments, as shown in Documents 2 and 6, that were developed in accordance
with the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act and Municipal
Class Environmental Assessment.
2. Request staff prepare the Environmental Study Report for the Goulbourn Forced Road and Kanata Avenue Environmental Assessments for the 30-day public review, in accordance with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.
CARRIED