Comité des transports
and Council / et au Conseil
16 December 2009 / le 16 décembre 2009
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice
municipale adjointe,
Infrastructure
Services and Community Sustainability/Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité
des collectivités
(613) 580-24242 extension/poste
21877, vivi.chi@ottawa.ca
Ref N°: ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0011 |
That the Transportation Committee recommend Council approve:
1.
The
Environmental Assessment study's recommended plan for the pathway connection
between the Hunt Club community (at Cahill Drive West) and the Southeast
Transitway (at the South Keys Transitway station) as detailed in this report;
and
2.
The
finalization of the Environmental Study Report for the Hunt Club Community
Pathway Connection to the Southeast Transitway project and posting of the
Notice of Study Completion.
Que le Comité des transports recommande au Conseil :
1.
d'approuver le plan
pour un sentier entre le quartier Hunt Club (à la promenade Cahill Ouest) et le
Transitway Sud-Est (à la station South Keys), recommandé dans l'étude
d'évaluation environnementale, comme il est expliqué en détail dans le présent
rapport;
2.
l’achèvement du
rapport d'étude environnementale concernant un sentier entre le quartier Hunt
Club et le Transitway Sud-Est et l’affichage de l'avis d'achèvement d'étude.
Residents of the Hunt Club community located to the west of the Airport Parkway and to the north of Hunt Club Road, desire safe and convenient access to the following facilities situated to the east of their community:
At present pedestrians and cyclists from the Hunt Club Community cannot securely and directly access these nearby transit, recreational, shopping and neighbourhood destinations due to the barriers of the Airport Parkway, rail line for the future North-South LRT and the Southeast Transitway. The only secure east-west connection from the community to these destinations is via a longer route following the busy Hunt Club Road to the south (see Figure 1).
For many years an informal (not City-approved) short cut has existed linking the Hunt Club community to these destinations. This short cut is a well-used dirt path between Cahill Drive West and an underpass of the rail line adjacent to the South Keys Transitway station. This involves a risky crossing of the busy Airport Parkway and yet despite the danger of such an action it is done by people of all ages and at all times of the day and during all seasons of the year. In 2007, a pedestrian fatality occurred at this unsafe crossing location and there have been several non-fatal pedestrian-car collisions. Since its completion, the Sawmill Creek Constructed Wetland and its encircling multi-use pathways have been attracting people not only from the Hunt Club community immediately to the west but also residents and visitors from the South Keys area south of Hunt Club Road and east of Bank Street.
The Official Plan includes a Secondary Plan for the Hunt Club community that shows a planned pedestrian and cycling link eastward across the Airport Parkway and Transitway all the way to Bank Street, thus linking the communities east and west of Bank Street. The Cycling Plan (2008) and the Pedestrian Plan (2009) also show this same connection.
Local residents, community organizations, Councillor Maria McRae and advocacy groups requested in 2008 that the City proceed with an environmental assessment (EA) study to examine the possible implementation of a safe pedestrian connection from the Hunt Club community to the South Keys Transitway station. Transit Committee on 4 June 2008 gave approval for staff to proceed with the EA study, but subject to the additional examination of a potential link from the north of the community to the Greenboro Transitway station.
Based on Committee direction, the study area for the EA is bounded by Hunt Club Road on the south, Bank Street on the east, the Walkley OCR rail corridor on the north and the Hunt Club community on the west (Figure 1). Key central features in this area are the parallel north/south grouping of the Airport Parkway, the recently built Sawmill Creek Constructed Wetland, the rail line for the future North-South LRT and the Southeast Transitway. Also within the study area is the South Keys Shopping Centre and the Greenboro Park and Ride. The National Capital Commission is the owner of the lands north of the Hunt Club community.
The EA recommends that a safe and secure multi-use (pedestrian/cyclist) pathway connection be provided to link the Hunt Club community at Cahill Drive West and the South Keys Transitway station. This would involve a bridge structure over the Airport Parkway, use of a portion of existing multi-use pathway around the southern end of the Sawmill Creek Constructed Wetland (SCCW) and use of the existing underpass of the rail line for the future North-South LRT which then provides the ability to connect to the immediately adjacent South Keys Transitway station (see Document 1 – Recommended Plan). In addition to this Recommended Plan, another multi-use pathway going north-south between Hunt Club and Walkley Roads is being constructed with federal stimulus funding; this will allow yet more access to the pathways around the SCCW.
The Recommended Plan was arrived at following the Municipal Class EA (Schedule C) process starting with problem identification and determination of the need and justification for the project. Following that an analysis was done for four alternative planning solutions: do nothing, prohibit crossing of the Airport Parkway (e.g. fence it off), modify local transit to improve service to the South Keys/Greenboro Stations or provide a new multi-use pathway connection over/under/across the Airport Parkway to link to the Transitway. The fourth solution was considered the best at responding to the identified need.
A review was subsequently done of eight possible alternative alignments to connect between the Hunt Club Community and the South Keys and Greenboro Transitway stations (see Document 2). Seven of the crossing locations were variations of routes at the north end leading to the Greenboro Transitway station. The most northern alternative, using in part the shoulder of the Transitway, was dropped as it conflicted with Transpo Services operational safety policy for the Transitway. The other seven alternatives were analysed using a set of evaluation criteria that included factors related to: transportation, cultural environment, natural environment, socio-economic, property and costs (see Document 3). Based on the analysis, the Cahill Drive West to South Keys Transit station route was ranked the highest/best location.
A further review of the best location was undertaken. Several options for the crossing of the Airport Parkway – under (tunnel), over (bridge) and at grade (crosswalk with traffic light) – were analysed using criteria such as: queuing and time loss for cars/cyclists/pedestrians if at grade level with lights, potential for not obeying traffic signal, causal surveillance, avoiding entrapment areas, having natural light, not creating areas for vandalism, waterproofing requirements, avoiding piped services under the Airport Parkway, cost of grade adjustment to the Airport Parkway (raise or lower it), etc. (see Documents 4 and 5). The highest ranked and preferred option is that of a bridge structure.
The technically preferred plan is a pre-stressed concrete bridge with substantially sized embankments on each side to allow for the pathway to rise to the bridge elevation. The span of the bridge structure is to be wide enough to accommodate the planned eventual widening from two to four lanes of the Airport Parkway.
The sections below set out main issues and comments related to the pathway proposed by the Recommended Plan. Many of these are design related items that would be addressed more fully in the later stage of detailed design.
Safety and security – pedestrians and cyclists need a pathway
connection that: has clear sight lines
for maximum visibility of one’s surroundings, is well lit and is designed to
ensure the safety and security of users.
To respond to this need the principles of CPTED (crime prevention
through environmental design) have been applied with special attention given to
maximizing the visual openness at the underpass of the rail line and its
connection to the South Keys Transitway station. Safety concerns will also require fencing of
the existing rail line as the pathway is planned immediately adjacent to it for
a short distance to the Transitway station.
In the long term when the South Keys station is reconfigured to
incorporate the future twinning and extension of the North-South LRT project,
its redesign could provide for improved and more direct access when approached
from the west.
Aesthetics and entrance to the Nation’s Capital – members of the public, the National Capital Commission (NCC) and the Ottawa McDonald-Cartier International Airport Authority expressed a keen interest that the bridge structure over the Airport Parkway be designed as a gateway feature befitting of the main route from the airport into the Nation’s Capital. This means that at the design stage, effort should be directed at making this happen so that the bridge is one that the local residents are proud of, that visitors to Ottawa will comment on its attractiveness and that the whole of the City can admire. Comparison was made with the success and beauty of the Corktown Bridge over the Rideau Canal and how the same should and could happen at this crossing of the Airport Parkway. This issue will be dealt with at the design stage but the EA cost estimates have included a provision for this desired innovation and excellence in design. This project would be constructed on lands owned by the City however as part of the transfer agreement of the Airport Parkway from the NCC to the former Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, the NCC has maintained a right of review of projects on such lands. This occurred for the construction of the Sawmill Creek Constructed Wetland and would also occur for this project.
Details of design – several comments from the public suggested that design details and design flexibility should be left to the detail design exercise and not be tied down in this EA study. For example such matters as the height, design and spacing of pathway lampposts should be dealt with only at the detail design stage. Of particular concern was the issue of whether the bridge overpass should be covered to prevent persons tossing objects onto the roadway below. An example cited of a solution was the use in other cities of railings that include tall attractively designed Plexiglas panels that extend well above head level providing a barrier but also an openness and lightness in their design. While tall railing barriers has not been specified in the EA, the detailed design would examine use of various methods to address this security problem.
Access to the South Keys Station – walkers, mobility impaired persons and cyclists would have both east and west at-grade access to the lower or entrance level of the Transitway station. This would be via doors at the existing east entrance and at a new door entrance recommended by this EA at the back western wall of the existing station. There were concerns expressed about the re-occurring elevator problems at the station and the need for a back up ramp as an alternative for use by both mobility challenged persons and cyclists using Rack and Roll to enable them to reach the west side bus platform. The EA is recommending that the detailed design include a ramp or both a ramp and stairs to provide alternative access to the west side bus platform.
Cycling access to/from the Airport Parkway – the Airport Parkway is
a spine cycling route and cyclists access it from Cahill Drive West. The use of the Airport Parkway is preferred
by many cyclists due to its directness and continuation northward versus the
use of the multi-use pathway around the Sawmill Creek stormwater ponds that
only extends for a relatively short distance northward. To accommodate cyclists, the recommended plan
shows a potential Airport Parkway southbound off ramp/pathway for cyclists
permitting them to then travel west to enter the Hunt Club Community at Cahill
Drive West. This short segment of
pathway joins the main pathway at the base of the western ramp up to the bridge
(see Document 1). To leave the community
and head north one cannot use this same ramp as it would involve an unsafe need
to cross the Parkway traffic to head north.
Instead, cyclists would cross the Parkway via the new bridge and then
loop back down to the Parkway to head north.
Two options are suggested to lead back to the Parkway be it either north
or south of the bridge structure. At the
detailed design stage a decision will be made as to which (or both) could
potentially be incorporated in the design.
Notwithstanding the intended one
direction only use of these cycling on-off access ramps to the Airport Parkway,
there is concern that cyclists and also pedestrians may still desire to cross
the Parkway, as a short cut, at these locations. A road safety audit should be done as part of
the detailed design process to review all measures of safety including the
possibility of a lengthy median barrier/fence to prevent the potential of such
crossing movement.
Committee directed staff to also examine a possible pathway connection from the north end of the Hunt Club community to the Greenboro Transitway and O-Train station. The EA recommends one crossing only between the community and the Southeast Transitway. The alternative alignments at the north end leading to the Greenboro station are far less desirable. Reasons for not selecting the northern alternative alignments include: fewer potential users of the pathway compared to the southern route; need to secure access to National Capital Commission lands; safety/security concerns due to isolation of the pathway on the west side of parkway; problems of greater cost to access the O-Train/Transitway station as this requires a new passage under/over the O-Train, etc.
Other issues/considerations to be addressed outside of the EA
· Some members of the public suggested a small parking lot along the east side of the Airport Parkway to allow better access to the multi-use pathways along the SCCW. This issue is being referred to traffic operations as it has implications for the safe operation of motor vehicles along the Airport Parkway, where there have been previous problems of persons parking unsafely on the side of the parkway.
· There was also interest in a secondary connection from the Greenboro station to the SCCW. This would allow residents east of Bank Street along Johnson Road easy access to the multi-use pathways around the SCCW and, importantly, it would allow O-Train commuters to exit and walk along the pathways southward to the bridge overpass at Cahill Drive West without having to transfer to Transitway buses. However due to the elevations and placement of the existing rail line and O-Train platform there is no simple, easy and reasonably priced solution to cross westward under/over the rail to the multi-use pathways.
The affected area has already been extensively modified with the recent construction of the SCCW and the existence of the Airport Parkway, the north-south rail line and the Southeast Transitway. The main environmental impact would be the loss of a number of trees and bushes (non-distinctive sized) on the west side of the Airport Parkway where the western embankment for the bridge structure would be constructed. As mitigation measures, both the west and east embankments would be landscaped, to include new shrubs and trees in the design. The bridge and new pathway segments would have minimal drainage impact, which could be mitigated in the existing stormwater management ponds. The pathway embankment would have a positive impact since it would act as a noise berm thereby lessening noise from the existing Airport Parkway traffic on houses immediately adjacent. For those same houses, lighting on the pathway would be positioned to minimize light spill over.
N/A
The consultation program for this EA involved: two Public Open Houses (POH), several meetings of both a Public Working Group and an Agency Consultation Group, and presentations to the Pedestrian and Transit Advisory Committee and to the Accessibility Advisory Committee. The Public Working Group included long time local residents, representatives from local community associations and a member of the Pedestrian and Transit Advisory Committee. Notification of the Open Houses was given by way of English and French newspaper notices, by flyer delivery to households in the immediate area, and by e-mail/mail to those on the City’s notification list of community and special interest groups for the area, City Advisory Committees, etc. First Nations were notified of this study and no comments have been received. A City web site also provided information on the study.
Public Open House #1 – June 23, 2009
The goal of the POH was to: describe the Environmental Assessment process; present the draft study design; identify the issues of the project; present a preliminary assessment of alternative planning solutions; and obtain public comments. Total attendance at the first POH was 88 people. A total of 44 comment sheets were submitted.
Public Open House #2 – December 1, 2009
The purpose of the second and final POH was to present: a summary of existing conditions; the final study design/process; consideration of alternative solutions/alternative projects; analysis and evaluation of alternatives and technically preferred alternatives; alternative design concepts for preferred solutions; Recommended Plan; effects and mitigation measures; and steps to complete the project. The second POH had a signed in attendance of 80. More than 50 comments sheets were submitted.
Prominent among the comments received at both open houses was a strong support for this project and a desire to see this pedestrian/cycling link built now, as the current informal crossing of the Airport Parkway is not safe. Members of the Public Working Group also expressed comments very similar to those received from the public at the open houses. The Agency Consultation Group (ACG) included representatives of City departments and external bodies with an interest in this EA such as the National Capital Commission and the Ottawa McDonald-Cartier International Airport Authority.
A presentation was made to the Accessibility Advisory Committee at the start of this study. The Pedestrian and Transit Advisory Committee received a presentation on the study at its December 17th meeting and passed a motion supporting and endorsing the recommendations in the staff report on the EA study. The Committee also indicated that it wishes to be involved should the project go forward to the detailed design stage.
Ward 10 Councillor Diane Deans has requested that the new pedestrian link to the South Keys Southeast Transitway station be fully accessible and that it accommodate cyclists.
Ward 16 Councillor Maria McRae
has indicated that she “supports the staff recommendation and acknowledges the
strong community backing for this project”.
There are no legal/risk management impediments to the implementation of
this Report's recommendations.
This EA study is supportive of the following City Strategic Plan objectives:
§ A1 – Improve the City’s transportation network to afford ease of mobility, keep pace with growth, reduce congestion and work towards modal split targets,
§ B1 – Achieve a 30 per cent modal split by 2021 and
§ D3 – Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 20 per cent by 2021.
N/A
A preliminary cost estimate to construct the Hunt Club Community pathway connection to the Southeast Transitway is approximately $5 million in 2010 dollars. This includes costs for the design and construction of: the bridge structure over the Airport Parkway; pathway embankments on either side of the bridge and pathway connections to it; the connecting works under the future North-South LRT rail line; and pathway/ramp and stair connections to the existing South Keys Transitway Station. The 2010 draft transportation budget includes as a capital project this Hunt Club Community pathway connection project (905604).
Document 1 – Recommended Plan
Document 2 – Alternative Alignments
Document 3 – Evaluation of Alternative Alignments
Document 4 – Crossing Alternatives
Document 5 – Evaluation of Crossing
Alternatives
Following Committee and Council approval, the EA Report for this study will be finalized and then submitted to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment for approval, in accordance with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act (this includes posting of a ‘Notice of Study Completion’ appearing in French and English daily papers). A Draft Federal EA Screening Report will be prepared and forwarded to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency for review.
RECOMMENDED PLAN DOCUMENT 1
ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS DOCUMENT 2
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS DOCUMENT 3
= poor in comparison; = neutral in comparison; = good in comparison
CROSSING ALTERNATIVES DOCUMENT
4
EVALUATION OF CROSSING ALTERNATIVES DOCUMENT
5
Alternative C1 (At Grade Crossing) NOT CARRIED FORWARD û
Airport Parkway / Hunt Club Road queuing impact; driver / pedestrian / cyclist conflict; Airport Parkway form and function impact; pedestrian / cycling travel delay / potential for disobedience
Alternative C2 (Pathway over Airport Parkway) CARRIED FORWARD ü
Separates pedestrian / cycling crossing traffic from vehicles; maximizes casual surveillance; reduced potential for creating entrapment locations; no modifications to Airport Parkway
Alternative C3 (Airport Parkway over Pathway) NOT CARRIED FORWARD û
Significant adjustment to the vertical profile of the roadway; unfavourable from Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) perspective - entrapment areas, vandalism, natural lighting
Alternative C4 (Pathway under Airport Parkway) NOT CARRIED FORWARD û
Presents challenges from a CPTED perspective - entrapment areas, vandalism, natural lighting ability; waterproofing requirement; potential Impact on the water distribution main under Airport Parkway
Alternative C5 (Airport Parkway under Pathway) NOT CARRIED FORWARD û
Similar to option C3, this option is not recommended as it presents potentially significant investment to modify the Airport Parkway profile.
Alternative C6 (Split grade over Pathway) NOT CARRIED FORWARD û
Similar to the discussion regarding option C4, this option is not recommended to be carried forward.
Alternative C7 (Split grade over Airport Parkway) NOT CARRIED FORWARD û
Similar to the discussion regarding option C2, this option presents a number of similar benefits, however the effort of adjusting the grade of the Airport Parkway has a high potential for significant modifications.