Capital Region Board Final Report Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction... 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Objectives 1 2.0 Methodology... 2 2.1 Overview of Evaluation Process 2 2.2 Evaluation Criteria 3 2.3 Criteria Weighting 3 2.4 Ten Year List 3 3.0 Prioritization... 8 3.1 Scoring 8 3.2 Prioritization 8 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations... 15 4.1 Conclusions 15 4.2 Action Recommendations 15 4.3 Other Recommendations 16 TABLES Table 2.1 Evaluation Criteria... following page 3 Table 2.2: Evaluation Criteria Weighting (2015)... 3 Table 2.3: Ten Year List... 5 Table 3.1: Priorities for s Ready for Construction... 8 Table 3.2: Priorities for... 9 FIGURES Figure 1: Ten Year Roadway List... following page 4 Figure 2: Ten Year Transit List... following page 4 islengineering.com August 18, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background The Capital Region Board (CRB) approved the Integrated Regional Transportation Master (IRTMP) in September 2011. The defines key elements of the Capital Region s future transportation system over a thirty five year time frame. The IRTMP builds upon and supports the policy framework established in the Capital Region Boards Growth s land use and transit components. The IRTMP also lists the ten=year roadway and transit investment priorities throughout the region. In order to help implement the IRTMP, the Capital Region Board decided in 2013 to develop a shorter term prioritization of the ten year roadway and transit project list. The development of such a regional priority list was to foster coordination of regional transportation initiatives between municipalities, as well as to influence the Province s Three Year Capital towards better alignment with the Region s needs and priorities. The CRB s first such report was completed in mid=2014. This 2015 edition is being completed at a point in time where it can influence the Province s 2016 Three Year Capital. 1.2 Objectives The objectives of the IRTMP Implementation are: To compile a listing of the Capital Region s transportation priorities that would serve to coordinate the actions of member municipalities and the Province over the short (3 year), term towards the longer term objectives of the CRGP. To include provincial transportation staff in the development of regional priorities to achieve better alignment of municipal, regional and provincial capital plans. To develop a set of action recommendations that will focus municipal and provincial attention and action on priority transportation initiatives by municipalities and the province in its Three Year Capital. To enable timely and rolling updates of regional priorities as conditions evolve over time. This document is intended to be a living document which will be changed and improved in the future to meet and reflect changing conditions. islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 1
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s 2.0 Methodology 2.1 Overview of Evaluation Process The project prioritization process was undertaken by a Technical Review Committee with representation from the following jurisdictions: City of Spruce Grove City of St. Albert City of Edmonton City of Fort Saskatchewan Strathcona County Parkland County Leduc County Sturgeon County Alberta Transportation Town of Devon Town of Morinville Following is a summary of the various stages of the regional transportation project prioritization, as utilized in this process: Reviewed and updated the Ten Year Roadway and Transit Priorities Lists must be part of IRTMP Roadway or Transit Network Roadway projects needed to be regionally significant Defined project status Defined Evaluation Criteria Specific criteria that related to the IRTMP and CRGP. Determined Weighting of Evaluation Criteria (Using Pair=wise Analysis) Each project was scored against the agreed upon criteria and their weights Determined project urgency; high, medium or low Adjusted project scoring Assigned numerical value to project urgency Applied project urgency rating to project score to arrive at adjusted score Prioritized Regional s by project status category Sorted project list by adjusted score to arrive at project ranking Page 2 August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s 2.2 Evaluation Criteria The evaluation criteria were originally developed in 2013/14 to help identify project priorities and select a list of projects that would be deemed to be of highest priority for the Region. The criteria defined in Table 2.1 was carried over from 2014 and correlates directly with the Policies and Principles of the IRTMP and are in alignment with the Capital Region Board s Growth. 2.3 Criteria Weighting Since the project selection criteria have differing levels of importance, a criteria weighting exercise was undertaken. To determine the weight of each criterion, a pairwise comparison of the criteria was carried out with the participation of the Technical Review Committee members, and resulted in a set of weighted criteria that reflect regional, municipal and provincial interests. For 2015, the evaluation criteria weighting was modified slightly to incorporate feedback from the Land Use Committee in 2014 to increase the importance of the criterion related to supporting the region s economy. Table 2.2 below identifies the weighting of each criterion/sub=criterion. And reflects the previous feedback from the Land Use Committee concerning the importance of support for the economy. Table 2.2: Evaluation Criteria Weighting (2015) Criterion % Weight * Rank Supports the Region s Economy 26 1 Maximize Use of Existing Infrastructure 24 2 Provides Viable Alternatives to the Private Automobile 17 3 Supports Growth in Priority Growth Areas (PGA's) 15 4 Supports Multi=Modal Transportation Facilities 11 5 Coordination Between Jurisdictions=Agreement in Place 6 6 Reduces Environmental Degradation 4 7 2.4 Ten Year List Regional projects that have been included on the Ten Year Priority List reflect transportation infrastructure that is regionally significant. The IRTMP defines regionally significant roads as any arterial or higher order roadway that, regardless of jurisdiction, serves to connect CRB municipalities with each other and with other regions in Alberta and Canada. In the case of transit projects included on the list, they are projects of regional significance that support intermunicipal transit and a regional shift to transit. islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 3
Table 2.1 Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criteria Category Scoring Scoring Rationalization 1. Integration with the Capital Region's Growth (First Guiding Policy Theme of the IRTMP) How well does the project support the CRB Growth with imminent growth and development in Priority Growth Areas (PGAs)? i) Supports Growth in Priority Growth Areas (PGA's) (Supports Principle 1) * Provides Access to a PGA (as shown in IRTMP) 0 or 1 If located within or alongside a PGA as shown in IRTMP Figure 1, score 1. * The is a New Link or Adds Redundancy to the Regional Network 0 or 1 Score 1 if project is a new link or improves redundancy in the network. * The Supports Intensification 0 or 1 If supports access to known major infill area (i.e. City Centre Airport Redevelopment), score 1. * Number of PGAs Served (One point per PGA, as shown in IRTMP) Scores 1 Score 1 for each PGA the project is in or PGA boundary it approaches. per PGA ii) Maximize Use of Existing Infrastructure (Supports Principle 2) * The Improves an Existing Link 0 or 1 Score 1 if link exists currently. * The Increases Efficiencies in Person Carrying Capacity (i.e. HOV Lane/Transit 0 or 1 Score 1 if HOV/Transit Priority lane, LRT or Park & Ride. Priority, etc) iii) Supports the Regions Economy (Supports Principle 3) * Improves a Major Goods Movement Route 0 or 1 Scores 1 if project improves a major goods movement route. HOV/Transit Priority, Park & Ride and LRT is rated 0 even if on corridor. * Connects or Provides Direct Access to a Major Employment Area (as depicted in IRTMP) 0 or 1 Score 1 if road provides necessary connection or direct access to major employment area(s), as shown on IRTMP Figure 4. * Improves a Major Commuter Route 0 or 1 Scores 1 if on major commuter route. * Improves a High Load Corridor (as depicted in IRTMP) 0 or 1 If existing or potential future HLC/LCV as shown on IRTMP Figure 4, the project scores 1. * Connects to Major External Economic Corridors (i.e. to Fort McMurray, Hwy 2 south, etc) 0 or 1 Scores 1 if project along Hwy 2 south to Calgary/US or Hwy 28/28A/830/15 to the north. Hwy 21 also connection to north. HOV/Transit Priority, Park & Ride and LRT is rated 0 even if on corridor. 2. Increased Transportation Choices (Second Guiding Policy Theme of the IRTMP) How well does the project improve transportation choices for travellers by strengthening the transit and active transportation system? How well does the project improve connections to multi-modal facilites for goods movement? i) Provide Viable Alternatives to the Private Automobile (Supports Principle 1) * Provides a Viable Alternative to the Private Automobile 0 or 1 Scores 1 if HOV/Transit lane, Park & Ride or LRT. * Improves a Transit Priority Corridor or is a Park and Ride on a Transit Priority Corridor (as depicted in IRTMP) 0 or 1 Scores 1 if along a transit priority (including LRT) corridor shown on IRTMP Figure 5. ii) Supports Active Transportation (Supports Principle 2) Score 1 if active transportation will clearly be incorporated in project (i.e. in * Supports Active Transportation 0 or 1 planning study or design, or along TransCanada Trail). iii) Supports Multi-Modal Transportation Facilities (Supports Principle 3) * Improves Connections Between Modes (Road/Rail/Air/Transit/Active) 0 or 1 Score 1 if project is a MAJOR connection to multi<modal areas (i.e. EIA, Rail to Road yards, Park & Ride, etc) 3. Reduction of Environmental Degredation (Third Guiding Policy Theme of the IRTMP) Does the project reduce environmental degredation associated with the Region's transportation system? i) Reduces Environmental Degredation 0 or 1 All projects to meet environmental regulations and guidelines. Score 1 if will unequivocally reduce environmental degredation (i.e. HOV/Transit Lane, Park & Ride, LRT, or some other design concept, LEED, etc.) 4. Effective Coordination of Infrastructure Between All Jurisdictions (Fourth Guiding Policy Theme of the IRTMP) Is the project supported by multiple jurisdictions? i) A definitive agreement is in place between jurisdictions to complete the project 0 or 1 Score 1 if an agreement has been defined between two or more jurisdictions to complete the project (i.e. between municipalities and/or Alberta Transportation).
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s The original Ten Year project list from the IRTMP has been updated to include projects that are emerging as being required within a ten year time=frame. The updated list is presented in Table 2.3. s that have been implemented or commenced since the completion of the IRTMP have been excluded. In an addition to project type, Table 2.3 has assigned a status designation to each of the projects. The three status designations are: Strategic,, and. s that are at the strategic planning stage have typically been defined in a longer range strategic plan such as a transportation master plan; they have typically not undergone any type of engineering to confirm feasibility, alignment or specific configuration. These projects require significant planning and engineering work before they can be implemented. s that are at the functional plan stage (or concept plan in Edmonton) have undergone the initial stage of planning and engineering which establishes basic feasibility, alignment, configuration, property requirements and planning level construction cost estimate. s that have undergone design are the closest to being ready for implementation. This stage of planning and engineering entails considerable investigation and detail including geotechnical, hydro=technical, structural and the preparation of construction contract packages that include drawings and specifications. In some instances, some projects were in several stages of planning and engineering. To streamline and simplify the project prioritization, these projects were split into separate pieces that correspond to a unique project status. The Ten Year Roadway and Transit s are depicted in Figures 1 and 2. Page 4 August 20, 2015
Wabamun WABAMUN I.R. 133A/B Duffield Keephills 770 43 Carvel 627 16 ALEXANDER I.R. 134 Pine Sands 779 633 Stony Plain P A R K L A N D C O U N T Y Calahoo 37 Villeneuve Airport 44 Villeneuve Spruce Grove 16A 628 Alcomdale 642 Riviere Qui Barre 44 Mearns STONY PLAIN I.R. 135 60 Devon 19 2 E.I.A. Legal 216 651 S T U R G E O N C O U N T Y 803 Bon Accord Morinville Cardiff Carbondale 28 CFB/ASU Edmonton St. Albert 216 Edmonton Nisku Namao Twp Rd 510 Gibbons 37 15 Beaumont 28A 825 41 Ave SW/Twp Rd 512 Rge Rd 235 Lamoureux 625 628 21 Sherwood 216 Park 28 644 643 Fort Saskatchewan Rge Rd 222 Ardrossan Looma Redwater 824 Twp Rd 540 630 830 14 829 38 Half Moon Lake 629 15 16 830 Bruderheim 45 Alberta's Industrial Heartland S T R A T H C O N A C O U N T Y South Cooking Lake Josephburg Antler Lake Collingwood Cove North Cooking Lake Hastings Lake 831 831 855 Star Lamont 834 45 St. Michael 29 L A M O N T C O U N T Y 15 Wostok Hilliard INTEGRATED REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN (to 2044) Existing Roadway Roadway - Ten Year List* Upgraded Roadway* Railway International Airport Other Airport Priority Growth Area 16 855 622 Telfordville Thorsby 39 Buford Calmar 65 Ave Leduc 814 Rolly View 21 623 New Sarepta Major Employment Area Future Major Employment Area Federal Jurisdiction 39 Warburg Sunnybrook L E D U C C O U N T Y 778 795 2 2A Kavanagh 0 5 10 20 30 40 KI LOM ETR ES *NOTE: All roadway alignments are conceptual and subject to further engineering and technical review.
ALEXANDER I.R. 134 Pine Sands 779 Calahoo 633 37 Villeneuve Airport 44 Villeneuve Alcomdale 642 Riviere Qui Barre 44 Mearns 2 St. Albert Morinville Legal 651 S T U R G E O N C O U N T Y 803 Bon Accord Cardiff Carbondale 28 Namao CFB/ASU Edmonton 216 Edmonton 37 Gibbons 44 15 28A 825 Lamoureux 39 21 28 644 643 Redwater 830 829 38 830 45 Alberta's Industrial Heartland Fort Saskatchewan Bruderheim 15 Josephburg S T R A T H C O N A C O U N T Y 831 831 855 Star Lamont 834 45 St. Michael 29 15 Wostok L A M O N T C O U N T Y Hilliard 855 Wabamun WABAMUN I.R. 133A/B Duffield Keephills 770 622 43 Carvel 627 16 Thorsby Stony Plain P A R K L A N D C O U N T Y Telfordville Spruce Grove 39 W8 Buford 628 16A STONY PLAIN I.R. 135 60 Devon Calmar A1 19 C13 216 E.I.A. 9 29 12 Nisku 30 Leduc 10 Beaumont 814 37 38 216 Sherwood Park 625 20B 628 Rolly View Ardrossan Looma 21 623 824 630 Half Moon Lake 629 South Cooking Lake New Sarepta 14 16 Antler Lake Collingwood Cove North Cooking Lake Hastings Lake IRTMP IMPLEMENTATION for discussion purposes (March 2014) Figure 82 Ten-Year Transit Priorities Existing LRT LRT Extension Transit Priority Corridor Park & Ride Transit Number Existing Roadway Railway International Airport Other Airport Priority Growth Area Major Employment Area 16 39 Warburg Sunnybrook L E D U C C O U N T Y 778 795 2 2A 0 5 10 20 30 40 Kavanagh KI LOM ETR ES Future Major Employment Area Federal Jurisdiction
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Table 2.3: Ten Year List Number / Name Type Status Central Sector C1 Heritage Valley Regional Park and Ride Park & Ride Prelim. Eng. C2 Campbell Regional Park N Ride (on Edmonton New Park n Ride lands) C3 75 Street (Argyll Road to Whitemud Dr) Widening to 6 lanes C4 Yellowhead Trail (156 Street to St Albert Trail) Upgrade to Free Flow C5 Yellowhead Trail (50 Street to 97 Street) Upgrade to Free Flow C6 Yellowhead Trail (Victoria Trail to 50 Street) Widening Concept C7 Yellowhead Trail (97 Street to St Albert Trail) Upgrade to Free Flow Strategic C8 Manning Drive (137 Avenue = Anthony Henday Dr.) Widening C9 Ray Gibbon Drive (Anthony Henday to Villeneuve Twinning Rd) C10 NE LRT (Clareview to Gorman) LRT Extension C11 NW LRT (NAIT to Campbell Rd TC.) LRT Extension C12 S=LRT (Century Park = Ellerslie) LRT Extension Prelim. Eng. C13 W=LRT (Downtown = Lewis Estates) LRT Extension Prelim. Eng. C14 170 Street (Ambleside Dr to 41 Avenue SW) Widen to four lanes C15 170 Street CN Grade Separation Grade Separation C16 Fort Road (Yellowhead Trail to 66 St) Widening/Intersection Concept upgrades C17 Terwillegar Dr. (Whitemud to Anthony Henday ) Upgrade to Free Flow C18 Anthony Henday Drive (Overpass) 50 St. Overpass (Northeast) C19 Anthony Henday Drive (Overpass) 135 St Overpass C20 Anthony Henday Dr. (SW River Xing to QE2) Widening to 6 C21 Anthony Henday Drive (Overpass) 109/111Ave Overpass C22 Anthony Henday Drive (Interchange) Add 137 Ave Ramps C23 97 Street (167 Avenue = Anthony Henday Drive) Widening Strategic C24 127 Street (Anthony Henday Dr. to Edm. City Limit) New Roadway Link Strategic C25 91 Street (Ellerslie Road to 41 Avenue SW) Widen Northwest Sector NW1 Highway 2 at Cardiff Rd Interchange NW2 Ray Gibbon Drive (Hwy 37 to Hwy 2) Extend=first 2 lanes NW3 Ray Gibbon Drive (Villeneuve Road to Hwy 37) Extend=first 2 lanes NW4 127 Street ( Edmonton City Limit to Hwy 2) New Roadway Link NW5 North St. Albert Regional Park n Ride Park n Ride Strategic Northeast Sector NE1 Highway 15/37/825 Intersection improvement d NE1A Highway 15/37/825 New Interchange Strategic NE2 Highway 28 (Highway 28A to Highway 63) Upgrades (Grade widening, Ongoing curve and intersection improvements) NE3 Highway 28A (Highway 15 to Highway 28) Twinning NE4 New Northeast River Crossing and Connecting New Roadway Link Strategic Roads from Twp. Rd 540 to Highway 28A) NE5 Fort Saskatchewan Regional Park and Ride Park & Ride Strategic islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 5
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Number / Name Type Status NE6 Highway 831/Heavy Haul Road (Hwy 15 to Hwy 28) Widening & Intersection Improvements NE7 Highway 15 (East of Fort Saskatchewan to Lamont) Twinning & Intersection Upgrades at Hwy 830, 45 & 29 Strategic NE8 Highway 28 (195 Avenue to Highway 28A) Twinning Strategic NE9 Highway 643 (Hwy 28A to Agrium) Signals and Intersection upgrades Analysis/ NE10 Highway 15 (Manning Dr.) near Meridian Street New Interchange East Sector E1 Highway 16 (Interchange at 830) Build Interchange E2 Highway 16 (Highway 824 to Elk island Park) Access Management E3 Highway 21 (Highway 14 to Highway 628) Twinning (Hwy 14 to S. of Hwy 628) E4 Highway 21 (Highway 16 to Ft Sask.) Upgrade to Fwy. (add Strategic interchanges) E5 Highway 16 (Sherwood Drive to Highway 824) Widen to 6 lanes, add Strategic interchanges E6 Highway 628 (Anthony Henday Dr. to Highway 21) Twinning Ongoing E7 Twp. Rd 534 (Anthony Henday Dr. to Highway 21) New link plus Interchange on Strategic Hwy 21 E8 Highway 834/Heavy Haul Road (Hwy 16 to Hwy 15) Widen and Improve Intersections Strategic E9 Highway 21 (Highway 625 to Highway 14 ) Twin (Hwy 14 to Hwy 625) Strategic E10 Highway 830 (Highway 16 to Highway 15) Widening Strategic E11 Highway 21 (Highway 628 to Highway 16 ) Upgrade to Fwy; build Strategic interchanges E12 Strathcona County High=Speed Transit (LRT) LRT Extension Study Strategic South Sector S1 Highway 19 (QE2 Highway to Highway 60) Twinning S2 41 Ave (127 St to 91 St ) Build First 2 lanes S3 Nisku Spine Road (Airport Rd to 65 Ave) Upgrade Existing Road S4 QE2 65 Avenue (Leduc) Interchange & Arterial New Interchange S5 Nisku Spine Road (Twp. Rd 510 to Highway 625) New Roadway Link S6 50 Street (Ellerslie Road to 41 Avenue SW) Widening S7 Highway 625 (Nisku to Highway 814 Beaumont) Twinning S8 QE2 Highway = Ellerslie Road Interchange Upgrade Existing Upgrading Interchange S9 Nisku Spine Road (Highway 625 to Airport Road) Upgrade existing road S10 Nisku Spine Rd (65 Ave to Hwy 623 (Rollyview Rd.) New Roadway Link S11 QE2 Highway/Highway 2A Interchange New Interchange S12 Highway 625 (Highway 814 to Highway 21) Twinning S13 170 Street Extension (Highway 19 to Highway 39) New Roadway Link Strategic S14 170 Street (41 Avenue SW to Highway 19) New Roadway Link Strategic Extension S15 Hwy 2A extension from QE2 to 170 St /Hwy 39 New Roadway Link Strategic S16 QE2 Hwy Widening on SBD Direction to Hwy 19 Widening; Add SBD lane Strategic S17 EIA/City of Leduc/Leduc County Transit Study Transit Service Study Strategic Page 6 August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Number / Name Type Status S18 Nisku Spine Road (Hwy 623 to Hwy 2A/QE2) New Roadway Link Strategic West Sector W1 Highway 60 (Highway 16A to Highway 16) Twinning W2 Hwy 779 (Hwy 628 to 47 th Ave in Stony Plain) Upgrades W3 Highway 628 (Hwy 60 to Hwy 779) Reconstruct and Surface Strategic W4 Highway 628 (231 St to Hwy 60) Twinning W5 Whitemud Drive (Anthony Henday Drive to 231 St.) Upgrading W6 Highway 627 (Anthony Henday Drive = 199 St) New Roadway Link W7 Spruce Grove Regional Park and Ride Park & Ride Strategic W8 Highway 16 ( Anthony Henday Drive to Hwy 779) Widening Strategic W9 Highway 627 (199 St to Highway 60) Twinning Strategic W10 Acheson Industrial Area Transit plus Park & Ride New Service and Park n Ride Study All Sectors A1 Regional HOV Transit Priority Study ( Hwy 16, HOV Lane/ Transit Priority Baseline Rd./98 Ave, Wye Rd./ Sherwood Pk. Fwy./ QE2 Hwy to Leduc) Strategic Strategic islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 7
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s 3.0 Prioritization 3.1 Scoring The initial phase of project prioritization involved the scoring of each project against the evaluation criteria outlined in Table 2.1, together with the criteria weights outlined in Table 2.2. 3.2 Prioritization Following completion of project scoring, the list of projects was subjected to an additional round of scoring to reflect the urgency of each project; high, medium or low. The project urgency rating was assigned a numerical value: high = 3; medium = 2; low = 1. Each project s weighted score was then multiplied by the project urgency rating to arrive at an adjusted score for each project. The project list was then refined to reflect only the three main project status categories; strategic, functional plan and prelim engineering/design. The list was then organized into three sections corresponding to project status and sorted by the adjusted score from highest to lowest. The resulting lists by project status are depicted in tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 below. Table 3.1: Priorities for s Ready for Construction Rank Adjusted Score 1 166 C1 2 143 S1 3 126 S2 No. 3 115 NE1 4 112 NE9 5 111 NE2 6 96 C3 Type Rationale Heritage Valley Regional Park and Ride Highway 19 (QE2 Highway to Highway 60) 41 Avenue SW (127 St to 91 St Highway 15/37/825 Hwy 643 (Hwy 28A to Agrium) Highway 28 (Highway 28A to Highway 63) 75 Street (Argyll Road to Whitemud Dr) Park & Ride Twinning Build 1st two lanes Intersection Improvement Signals and intersection upgrades Highway Upgrading Widen to 6 lanes Lease at Century Park Expiring Safety/ Congestion/ / Redundancy Connect to QE 2 Interchange Congestion Safety and Congestion Congestion/ Safety Congestion Next Steps/ Actions, Construct Construct / Construct Construct Construct / Construct Construct Page 8 August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Rank Adjusted Score 6 96 W1 7 81 E6 8 36 S3 No. Type Rationale Highway 60 (Highway 16A to Highway 16) Highway 628 (Anthony Henday Dr. to Highway 21) Nisku Spine Road (Airport Rd to 65 Ave) Twinning Congestion/ Next Steps/ Actions Land Acquisition/ Construct Twinning Congestion / Construct Upgrade existing Road Road Condition Construct 9 22 NW1 10 12 W2 Hwy 2 at Cardiff Rd Interchange Congestion Relief Hwy 779 (Hwy 628 to 47 th Roadway Road Ave in Stony Plain) Upgrades Condition Construction Construct Table 3.2: Priorities for Rank Adjusted Score No. Type Rationale Next Steps/ Actions 1 159 S4 QE2 65 Avenue (Leduc) Interchange & Arterial west of QE2 Hwy. New Interchange Relieve Access constraints for City of Leduc and Edm. Int. Airport 2 158 S5 Nisku Spine Road (Twp Rd 510 to Highway 625) New Link Congestion/ / Redundancy 3 144 C2 Campbell Rd Regional Park & Ride Park & Ride Overloads at Village Transit Centre 4 136 C6 Yellowhead Trail (50 St to Victoria Trail) Widening Congestion/ 4 136 C5 Yellowhead Trail (97 St to 50 Street) Upgrade to Free Flow Congestion/ 4 136 C4 Yellowhead Trail (156 Street to St Albert Trail) Upgrade to Free Flow Congestion/ / Goods Movement 5 128 C9 Ray Gibbon Drive (Anthony Henday to Villeneuve Road) Twinning Congestion islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 9
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Rank Adjusted Score No. Type Rationale Next Steps/ Actions 6 115 C10 Anthony Henday Drive (Widening) SW River Xing to QE2 Widen to 6 lanes Congestion 7 109 S6 50 Street (Ellerslie Road to 41 Avenue SW) Widening Congestion 8 108 C10 NE LRT (Clareview to Gorman) LRT Support growth and promote mode shift 8 108 C11 NW LRT (NAIT to Campbell Rd TC.) LRT Support growth and promote mode shift 8 108 C12 S=LRT (Century Park = Ellerslie) LRT Support growth and promote mode shift 8 108 C13 W=LRT (Downtown = Lewis Estates) LRT Support growth and promote mode shift 9 106 C14 170 Street (Ambleside Drive to 41 Avenue SW) Widening to 4 lanes 10 96 C16 Fort Rd (Yellowhead Trail to 66 St) Widening Congestion, development pressure 10 96 NE3 Highway 28A (Highway 15 to Highway 28) Twinning 11 84 S7 Highway 625 (Nisku to Highway 814 Beaumont) Twinning Congestion/ / Goods Movement 11 84 NE10 Highway 15 (Manning Drive near Meridian St.) New Interchange Support growth in EETP 12 81 C17 Terwilllegar Drive (Whitemud Drive to Anthony Henday Drive) Upgrade to Free Flow Congestion/ 13 76 C18 Anthony Henday Drive Overpass Overpass at 50 St NE Access/ 13 76 C19 Anthony Henday Drive Overpass Overpass at 135 St SW Access/ Page 10 August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Rank Adjusted Score No. Type Rationale Next Steps/ Actions 14 74 C15 14 74 W3 15 66 W4 170 St/CN Grade Separation Highway 628 (Hwy 60 to Hwy 779) Whitemud Drive / Highway 628 (231 Street to Highway 60) Rail Overpass Reconstruct and Surface Upgrade on new alignment to correct road condition 15 66 E1 Highway 16 at Hwy 830 Interchange 16 64 W5 Whitemud Drive / Highway 628 (Anthony Henday Drive to 231 Street) Upgrade on new alignment to correct road condition Poor Road Condition/ Growth and Access / Regional Link Growth, Access, Safety / Regional Link 16 64 E2 Highway 16 (Highway 824 to Elk island Park) Access Management Safety 16 64 S8 QE2 Highway = Ellerslie Road Interchange Upgrading Upgrade Existing Interchange Congestion 17 54 S9 Nisku Spine Road (Highway 625 to Airport Road) Upgrade existing road 18 48 S10 Nisku Spine Road (65 Ave to Highway 623 (Rollyview rd.)) New Link 19 44 W6 Highway 627 (Anthony Henday Drive = 199 St) New Link 20 38 NW2 Ray Gibbon Drive (Hwy 37 to Hwy 2) Extend=first 2 lanes Growth, Redundancy 20 38 NW3 Ray Gibbon Drive (Villeneuve Road to Hwy 37) Extend=first 2 lanes Growth, Redundancy 21 37 C8 Manning Drive (137 Avenue = Anthony Henday Drive) Widening 21 37 C21 Anthony Henday Drive (Interchanges and Overpasses) 109/111Ave Overpass Growth / Access islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 11
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Rank Adjusted Score No. Type Rationale Next Steps/ Actions 21 37 C22 Anthony Henday Drive (Interchanges and Overpasses) Add 137 Ave Ramps Growth / Access 21 37 S11 QE2 Highway/Highway 2A Interchange New Interchange; replaces existing when bridge reaches end of life Growth/ Access 22 33 C25 91 Street (Ellerslie Road = 41 Avenue SW) 4 Lane Widening Widen Growth/ Capacity 23 32 S12 Highway 625 (Highway 814 to Highway 21) Twinning as needed Growth/ Capacity 24 27 NW4 127 Street (Edm City Limit Highway 2) New Link Table 3.3: Priorities for ning or Study Rank Adjusted Score 1 209 A1 No. 2 142 NE4 3 137 W10 4 136 C7 5 123 S14 Type Rationale Regional HOV Transit Priority Study ( Hwy 16, Baseline Rd./98 Ave, Wye Rd./ Sherwood Pk. Fwy./ QE2 Hwy to Leduc) River Xing; Hwy 21 to15 and connecting roads: Hwy 21(Hwy 16 to Twp. 540); Twp. 540 (Hwy 830 to Hwy 21) Acheson Industrial Area Transit plus Park & Ride Yellowhead Trail (St. Albert Trail to 97 Street) 170 Street (41 Avenue SW to Highway 19) Extension HOV Lane/ Transit Priority New Roadway Link New Transit Service and Park & Ride Upgrade to Free Flow New Roadway Link Congested highway sections impede transit effectiveness and reliability; CRGP mode shift policy implementation Congestion and lack of river crossing capacity Alternative transportation Congestion/ /Goo ds Movement Support Growth/ Create parallel route Next Steps/ Actions Undertake Regional HOV/Transit Priority Study Undertake Transit Study Corridor Study to define Page 12 August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Rank Adjusted Score No. 5 123 S13 6 120 NE5 7 118 W7 8 97 NE6 19 96 E3 10 90 C23 11 89 E4 12 84 E5 12 84 E7 13 81 E8 14 76 S16 14 76 NE1A 14 76 W8 Type Rationale 170 Street Extension (Highway 19 to Highway 39) Fort Saskatchewan Regional Park and Ride Spruce Grove Regional Park and Ride Highway 831/Heavy Haul Road (Hwy 15 to Hwy 28) Highway 21 (Highway 14 to Highway 628) 97 Street (167 Avenue = Anthony Henday Drive) Highway 21 (Highway 16 to Ft Sask.) Highway 16 (Sherwood Drive to Highway 824) Twp. Rd 534 (Anthony Henday Dr. to Highway 21) Highway 834/Heavy Haul Road (Hwy 16 to Hwy 15) QE2 Highway Widening on Southbound Dir to Hwy 19 New Roadway Link Park & Ride Park & Ride Widening & Intersection Improvements to QE2 Hwy to EIA, Support Growth/ Create parallel route to QE2 Hwy to EIA, Support Increased travel choice and mode shift Support Increased travel choice and mode shift Congestion and safety Next Steps/ Actions alignment and configuration Corridor Study to define alignment and configuration Twinning Growth Review/ Update Widening Add Interchanges Widen to 6 lanes,add interchanges New Roadway Link Widening & Intersection Improvements pressure Future Growth Future Growth Future Growth pressures Add SBD Lane Congestion Hwy37/15/825 Interchange Congestion Highway 16 ( Anthony Henday Drive to Hwy 779) Widening Congestion islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 13
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s Rank Adjusted Score 15 74 E9 No. 16 72 NE7 17 54 E10 19 48 NW5 20 48 S18 21 42 E11 22 37 NE8 23 27 C24 24 17 W9 Type Rationale Highway 21 (Highway 625 to Highway 14 ) Highway 15 (East of Fort Saskatchewan to Lamont) including Intersection Improvements at Highways 830, 45 and 29 Hwy 830 (Hwy 16 to Hwy 15) North St. Albert Regional Park n Ride at the north end of St. Albert Trail Nisku Spine Road (Highway 623 to Highway 2A/QE2) Highway 21 (Highway 16 to Highway 628) Highway 28 (195 Avenue to Highway 28A) 127 Street (Anthony Henday Drive to Edm City Limit) Highway 627 (199 St to Highway 60) Twinning Twinning and Intersection Improvements Widening Park & Ride New Roadway Link Upgrade to Free Flow Congestion, safety Congestion, safety / alternate route to Industrial Heartland Support Increased travel choice and mode shift Growth, access to major employment area in Leduc and Nisku pressure Next Steps/ Actions Review/ Update Twinning Congestion New Roadway Link Twinning pressures pressures Page 14 August 20, 2015
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations 4.1 Conclusions The Ten Year Roadway and Transit project lists have been updated and successfully prioritized in a manner that reflects both the policy goals of the Capital Region Growth, as well as on=the=ground challenges and imperatives. Implementing any long term strategic such as the IRTMP and The Growth, requires an ongoing commitment to planning, design and construction that is reasonably true to the underlying policy objectives. As such, the process for arriving at regional transportation priorities identified priorities in three categories: construction, design and functional planning. The regional project priorities listed in Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 include a mixture of project types that respond to urgencies throughout the Capital Region. More importantly, the priorities were arrived at collaboratively between a mix of municipal and provincial representatives. It is recognized that while completion of planning and design activities are crucial elements of project implementation, other activities such as land acquisition and funding harmonization that may also need to be completed to effect project construction. Nevertheless, the prioritized lists should serve to inform municipal and provincial priorities over the next three years and help the region coordinate and align its infrastructure investments with a better understanding and respect for differing interests. 4.2 Action Recommendations The following recommendations are made to advance the implementation of regionally important transportation projects: R1 That the recommended regional transportation priorities reflected in Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 be approved by the CRB. R2 That the CRB approve a motion to encourage its members to work to align their local capital programs with regional priorities to the greatest extent possible. R3 That the CRB forward the regional priorities expressed in this report to the Government of Alberta for active consideration in their 2016 Three Year Capital islengineering.com August 20, 2015 Page 15
Integrated Regional Transportation Master Prioritization of Regional Transportation s 4.3 Other Recommendations The project priority lists contain several projects where the CRB should take a coordinating or lead role. These projects are: R4 A Regional HOV/Transit Priority Study= this study would explore the type and extent of transit priority improvements that should be implemented on approach highways to Edmonton along Highway 15, Highway 16, QE2 Highway and along Baseline Road/98 Avenue and Wye Road/ Sherwood Park Freeway. This project should include representation from the province and the municipalities who operate transit service on the roadways in question. Funding for such a project could be shared amongst these municipalities, the province and CRB, or in some other mutually agreeable manner. R5 The LRT network within Edmonton has been substantially planned out within the City s current boundaries. With a funding strategy for the Downtown to Southeast LRT line now largely in place, attention needs to turn towards the next LRT extension priorities. To this end it is recommended that detailed analysis be completed to determine where the next LRT extension should be. Since LRT alignments and sequencing have regional implications, it is recommended that the CRB be consulted through this sequencing and priority setting process. R7 That that this report on regional transportation priorities be updated annually to reflect changing and emerging priorities. Page 16 August 20, 2015