Municipal Class EA To Address Traffic Congestion On The Ontario Street Corridor (Grand Bend) Public Information Meeting June 4, 2018

Transcription

1 Municipal Class EA To Address Traffic Congestion On The Ontario Street Corridor (Grand Bend) Public Information Meeting June 4, 2018

2 Background Agenda Traffic Study Update Class EA Alternatives Bridge Options Corridor Options Preliminary Preferred Options Consultation MTO, Public, Agencies Next Steps Questions

3 Project Timelines Project Initiated (March 2015) Preliminary Engineering/1 st Traffic Study(Winter 2015/16) 1 st Presentation to Council (June 28, 2016) Class EA Initiated/PIC #1 (Summer 2016) 2 nd Traffic Study/Additional Engineering Review (2017) Additional Consultation with MTO (2017/2018) 2 nd Presentation to Council (March 27, 2018) 2 nd Public Meeting (June 4, 2018) Finalize Class EA (Summer 2018)

4 Revised Project Study Limits Original Traffic Study Scope focused on the Main Street Intersection and bridge site bmoss

5 Class EA Investigation Study Purpose: To identify alternatives to address current traffic congestion issues affecting the Ontario Street corridor Examine condition of Bridge on Hwy. 21, and adjacent properties, in order to evaluate options associated with possible widening of the structure to accommodate more traffic lanes, and address bridge rehabilitation needs. Consider options for the corridor including lane configurations/ widening/bike lanes, etc. Define any potential impacts with the proposed alternatives and evaluate measures to mitigate any identified concerns; and Select a preferred alternative (including defining any required mitigation measures).

6 Traffic Study Update Paradigm Transportation Solutions

7 Traffic Study - Paradigm Study determined the first priority is to upgrade the capacity of the Main St. Intersection. It is backing up traffic through the Lake St. Intersection. Cross walks appear to be functioning well. Saw no evidence to suggest they should be relocated. Lake St. Intersection would perform similarly without the left turning lanes as with the left turning lanes. Given there is only one northbound through lane at Main St. the two-way left turning lanes help to keep northbound traffic in a single lane for traffic safety

8 Traffic Study Recommendations Main Street Intersection Upgrades Add another northbound through lane and keep the shared through/ right turn lane (5 lanes in total) Immediately north of Intersection Converting the two-way left turn lane to a north bound lane would accommodate the improvements for Main St. Intersection and minimize ROW widening requirements. Lake Road Intersection Proposed Improvements Remove the north and south bound left turning lanes at Lake Road Intersection. Conversion of the two-way left turn should not occur until after the bridge and Main St intersection is widened. BMROSS

9 Preferred lane configuration at Main Street Intersection BMROSS

10 Bridge Improvement Alternatives

11 Bridge Cross-Section - Existing

12 Alternate #1: New Bridge

13 Alternate #2: Widen Bridge with New Deck

14 Anticipated Costs Alternative 1 New Bridge* Alternative 2 New Bridge Deck* $ 6.7 m $ 5.1 m * Construction cost includes work from River Road to approximately 40 metres north of Main Street intersection, including 5 lanes north of intersection merging in at Municipal Drive. An additional $900,000 to reconstruct road to north limits of Town. **Preliminary Costs include an allowance for engineering and approvals but not for property acquisition or utility company relocation costs.

15 Review of Bridge Options Bridge Options New Bridge Widen Bridge Do Nothing Economic Most Expensive $1.6 million less Ongoing Impacts to Community Social Environment Transportation Property Difficult & costly to maintain traffic during construction River would need to be realigned New bridge would provide 5 traffic lanes Some property impacts north of bridge Will need to be constructed over 2 construction seasons Less disruptive to environment Wider bridge deck would provide 5 lanes Some property impacts north of bridge Ongoing traffic impacts to community No impacts Continued traffic back-ups

16 Bridge Improvement Alternatives Alternative 1: Replace bridge with a new structure capable of conveying greater traffic volumes Alternative 2: Widen the bridge to accommodate greater volumes of traffic Preferred Alternative 3: Do Nothing Bridge Deck Cross-section to match corridor section

17 Preferred Bridge Cross-Section Option 1 Multi Use Path on Both Sides

18 Corridor Alternatives

19 Class EA Study Alternatives Corridor Alternatives to Accommodate Vehicle Traffic: Alternative 1 Add Another Northbound Lane (5 lanes total) Alternative 2 Switch the Two Way Turning Lane to a Northbound Lane (4 lanes total) Alternative 3 Construct a By-Pass around Grand Bend to divert through Traffic around the Community. Alternative 4: Do Nothing, keep lane configuration the same *Note: All options above included consideration of bicycle and pedestrian traffic Preferred

20 Detailed Design Alternatives Corridor Alternatives Alternative 1 Add a multi-use path separate from the roadway on both sides Alternative 2 Add bicycle lanes at the edge of the travelled roadway, or Alternative 3 Add bicycle lanes behind the curb separate from sidewalks, or Alternative 4 - Add a multi-use path separate from the roadway on one side Alternative 5: Do Nothing, keep lane configuration the same

21 Corridor Property Limits ROW width varies from 20.1m to 30.5m wide

22 Option #1 Multi-use Lane on Both Sides Existing x-section width 18.3 m Option #1 x-section width 20.7 m

23 Option #2 Bike Lanes at Edge of Road Existing x-section width 18.3 m Option #2 x-section width 22.3 m

24 Option #3 Separate Bike and Pedestrian Lanes Existing x-section width 18.3 m Option #3 x-section width 22.5 m

25 Option #4 Multi Use path on one Side Only Existing x-section width 18.3 m Option #4 x-section width 20. m

26 Anticipated Costs Alternative 1 Multi-Use path both sides Alternative 2 Bike lines in road Alternative 3 Separate bike lanes Alternative 4 Multi-Use path on one side $ 4.4 m $ 4.8 m $ 4.5 m $4.8 m * Preliminary Costs include an allowance for engineering and approvals but not for property acquisition or utility company relocation costs.

27 Comparison of Options Option #1 Multi-use Lane both sides Narrower Option, Will still require some land, Has continuity with trail to the south, splits up bike traffic Option #2 Bike Lanes at Edge of Road Safety Issue, Most Expensive, No continuity north or south Option #3 Separate Bike and Pedestrian Lanes Safest Option, Widest Option May not be feasible based on current corridor limitations Option #4 Multi-use Lane on one side only Provides some continuity with trail to the south, narrowest option, more expensive than 2 & 3, forces bikes to one side Preferred

28 Consultation Agencies & Aboriginal Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Must consider potential Impact to Cultural Heritage Features Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Aboriginal Consultation/Source Water Protection Ministry of Transportation (project partner) In General Agreement with the Recommendations Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority Hydraulic Impacts at Bridge Opening Consultation with Aboriginal Communities ongoing

29 Next Steps Need input from Residents and Project Stakeholders on the Preferred Alternatives Continue discussions with MTO on Funding Options for the proposed upgrades Consult with Provincial/Federal Review Agencies, First Nation Communities and Adjacent Property Owners Finalize the Environmental Study Report (ESR) documenting the Class EA Process Move forward with Implementation

30 Questions?