1. JOCKVALE ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY (JOCK RIVER TO PRINCE
OF WALES DRIVE ÉTUDE
D’ÉVALUATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE DU CHEMIN JOCKVALE (DE LA RIVIÈRE JOCK À LA
PROMENADE PRINCE OF WALES) |
That Council:
1.
Receive the results
of the Jockvale Road Environmental Assessment as shown in Document 1;
2.
Direct staff to
prepare the Environmental Study Report for the Jockvale Road Environment
Assessment for the 30-day public review, in accordance with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act;
and
3.
Direct staff to
undertake necessary property acquisition for the construction of Jockvale Road,
in line with the timing identified in the Transportation Master Plan and
through the annual Capital Budget Process.
Que le Conseil :
1. de
prendre connaissance des résultats de l’Évaluation environnementale du chemin
Jockvale, tels qu’ils sont présentés dans le Document 1;
2. d’enjoindre
le personnel de rédiger le rapport d’Étude environnementale pour l’Évaluation
environnementale du chemin Jockvale en vue de l’examen public de 30 jours,
conformément à la Loi sur les évaluations environnementales de l’Ontario;
3. d’enjoindre
le personnel de procéder à l’acquisition des terrains nécessaires à la construction
du chemin Jockvale conformément au calendrier déterminé dans le Plan directeur
des transports et par le biais du processus annuel du budget d’immobilisations.
Documentation
1. Deputy
City Manager (ICSC) report dated 28 October 2008 (ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0210).
2. Extract of Draft Minute, 5 November
2008.
Comité des transports
and Council / et au Conseil
28 October 2008 / le 28 octobre 2008
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager
Directrice municipale adjointe,
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability
Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités
Contact
Person/Personne-ressource : Vivi Chi, Manager/Gestionnaire, Transportation and
Infrastructure Planning/Planification, Transport et infrastructure
Planning Branch/Direction de l’urbanisme
(613) 580-2424 x21877, vivi.chi@ottawa.ca
That Transportation Committee recommend Council:
1. Receive the results of the Jockvale Road Environmental
Assessment as shown in Document 1;
2. Direct staff to prepare the Environmental Study Report for
the Jockvale Road Environment Assessment for the 30-day public review, in
accordance with the Ontario Environmental
Assessment Act; and
3. Direct staff to undertake necessary property acquisition for
the construction of Jockvale Road, in line with the timing identified in the
Transportation Master Plan and through the annual Capital Budget Process.
Que le Comité des transports recommande au Conseil :
1.
de prendre connaissance des
résultats de l’Évaluation environnementale du chemin Jockvale, tels qu’ils sont
présentés dans le Document 1;
2.
d’enjoindre le personnel de rédiger
le rapport d’Étude environnementale pour l’Évaluation environnementale du
chemin Jockvale en vue de l’examen public de 30 jours, conformément à la Loi
sur les évaluations environnementales de l’Ontario;
3.
d’enjoindre le personnel de procéder
à l’acquisition des terrains nécessaires à la construction du chemin Jockvale
conformément au calendrier déterminé dans le Plan directeur des transports et
par le biais du processus annuel du budget d’immobilisations.
In 2007,
the City initiated an Environmental Assessment (EA) study for the widening of Jockvale
Road to accommodate future growth in South Nepean and address existing roadway
design deficiencies along the study corridor. An increase of 33 per cent of the city’s population and 23 per cent of new employment
is forecast to occur in the South Urban Community (SUC).
This
growth represents an increase to the SUC population from 64400 to 151500
persons (between 2005 and 2031).
Employment is also forecast to increase from 13000 to 54600 jobs within
the same period. The result of this
growth will be an increase in travel demand within the SUC.
Historically,
and more recently, the pattern of development in the SUC has generally occurred
from the north to the south. The areas
to the north are now fully developed (i.e. Barrhaven) and most of the ongoing
new development is occurring adjacent to and south of Strandherd Drive. As such, increases in travel demand are also
occurring to/from, and within, the southern parts of the SUC.
In addition
to growth and existing design deficiencies, this project was advanced to
account for other influences including the City’s upcoming plans to build the
northern Jockvale-Longfields connection through the Barrhaven Town Centre and
the anticipated growth in Manotick in the south.
This Study follows Ontario’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) process and
is subject to the Federal EA process (screening under the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Act) to ensure that all potential natural,
social/cultural, and economic environments as well as property and land use
effects are considered.
Study
Area – Description of Existing Land Use:
Jockvale
Road, within the study area, is a two-lane rural roadway that runs southerly
from Bren Maur Road to Prince of Wales Drive. Figure 1 provides a
schematic of the study corridor. The
study corridor was divided into three separate segments for evaluation
purposes, as each possesses characteristics specific to the segment.
Figure 1 – Study Area
Section 1 (1 km) - Bren Maur Road to Cambrian Road/Golflinks
Drive:
Travelling south along Jockvale Road, Half Moon Bay Woods is located on the south shoreline of the Jock River (west of Jockvale Road), and the Stonebridge Recreational Trail and Park is located south of the Jock River (east of Jockvale Road). The Stonebridge residential community is found along the east side of Jockvale Road from Riverstone Drive to Golflinks Drive, while rural/agricultural land is found along the west side. One residential dwelling unit is located along the west side of Jockvale Road, north of the Riverstone Drive/Jockvale Road intersection. This land is currently being developed into a residential community (Tamarack Homes). In terms of other existing land use, the following is present:
o two residential dwelling units are found in the northeast quadrant of the Jock River Bridge crossing; o one commercial business (Gambles Nursery) and one residential dwelling unit are located in the northwest quadrant of the Jock River Bridge crossing; |
o one single residential dwelling unit is located in the southeast quadrant of the Jock River Bridge crossing; o one abandoned residential dwelling unit (City owned) is located in the southwest quadrant of the Jock River Bridge crossing; it is scheduled for demolition (3420 Jockvale Road). |
Section
2 (1 km) - Cambrian Road/Golf Links Drive to approximately 0.5km north
of Prince of Wales Drive:
The Stonebridge residential community is located along the east side of Jockvale Road to Golflinks Drive and along the west side of Jockvale Road to Blackleaf Drive. The following are the existing land uses with access directly onto Jockvale Road in Section 2:
o one residential dwelling unit is located along the east side of Jockvale Road, north of the Golflinks South/Jockvale Road intersection; o one commercial business (non-conforming land use) and one residential dwelling unit are located south of Blackleaf Drive/Jockvale Road intersection; |
o one residential dwelling unit and one business (apple orchard) is located along the east side of Jockvale; o one residential dwelling unit is located along the west side of Jockvale Road, south of the Golflinks Drive South/Jockvale Road intersection. |
Section 3 (1 km) - Segment that
includes the Prince of Wales Drive/Jockvale Road intersection:
Jockvale Road Woods is
located along the east side of Jockvale Road.
The following are existing land uses with direct access onto Jockvale
Road:
o three residential dwelling units are located along the east side of Jockvale Road in the northeast quadrant of the Prince of Wales Drive/Jockvale Road intersection as well as one commercial business, the Cornerstone Montessori Day Care; |
o two residential dwelling units and barns are found in the northwest quadrant of the Prince of Wales Drive/Jockvale Road intersection; o one institutional building, the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, is located in the southeast quadrant of the Prince of Wales Drive/Jockvale Road intersection. |
In addition, the Stonebridge
Golf Course is located along the west side of Jockvale Road and
rural/agricultural land is found in the southwest quadrant of the Prince of
Wales Drive/Jockvale Road intersection.
Alternative Planning Solutions:
The analysis and evaluation of alternatives was
undertaken as a two-step process. Initially,
alternative planning solutions were developed.
These alternative planning solutions were analyzed by a hierarchical
methodology to scope the higher level solutions that should be carried forward,
then a detailed analysis was provided of various alternative designs. The planning level alternative solutions
tested the assumption that a roadway is needed. Options including Do Nothing, Limit/Defer Growth, Moodie Drive
Roadway Improvements, Highway 416 Roadway Improvements, Cedarview Drive Roadway
Improvments were not carried forward as they do not address the mobility needs
of the growing South Urban Community.
Land Use Intensification, Transit,
Transportation System Management, Transportation Demand Management, Greenbank
Road, Prince of Wales Drive, and Jockvale Road improvements were all
recommended to be carried forward to address growth and mobility needs for the
South Urban Community. Hence, the City
has recently approved a long-term Rapid Transit Plan, has completed an EA Study
for the widening of Greenbank Road (from Malvern to Cambrian) and is
undertaking an EA Study for the widening of Prince of Wales Drive (Fisher to
Woodroffe). This EA focuses on the Jockvale Road improvements planning
solution.
Jockvale Road Improvements – Alternative
Alignments and Evaluation:
Generally,
alignment options included widening the roadway from the existing centreline,
to the east, to the west, widening within dedicated lands, and realignment of
roads at intersections.
An evaluation of the alternative alignments was undertaken
for each Section to determine the technically preferred alternatives for each
segment. Document 2 contains a detailed
description of the analysis and evaluation process, including drawings of the
different alternatives. The technically
preferred alignments are described as follow:
o
Section 1 - Bren Maur Road to Cambrian
Road/Golflinks Drive:
Roadway widening to the west at the Jock River Structure and widening on
centre along Jockvale Road was selected as the technically preferred
alternative. This alternative requires
the least residential property and has the least residential out-of-way travel.
o
Section 2 - Cambrian Road/Golf Links Drive to
approximately 0.5km north of Prince of Wales Drive: Widening
the roadway within land designated by the City and developers for Jockvale Road
had minimal impact to the surrounding
environment. This alternative
eliminates the back-to-back curves that currently exist while maintaining the
widening within the dedicated property.
The
recommended cross section varies with a right-of-way from 37.5 metres to 40.0
metres and includes a four-lane divided roadway with bicycle lanes, sidewalks,
median, multi-use pathway, and landscaping.
This cross section is typical and contains all elements specified in the
City’s Arterial Roadway Design Guidelines.
Refinements
Based on
comments received from the public and agencies following Public Open House No.
2, at which the technically preferred plan was presented, several refinements
were made. The refinements included:
o
Section 1 - Bren Maur Road to Cambrian
Road/Golflinks Drive: Bridge
staging; a multi-use recreational pathway; and South Nepean Town Centre roadway
network integration.
o
Section 2 - Cambrian Road/Golf Links Drive to
approximately 0.5km north of Prince of Wales Drive: A commercial/residential property southeast
of Blackleaf Drive has two existing entrances. The entrance nearest to
Blackleaf Drive is recommended to be closed and a right-in/right-out access to
the remaining entrance will be provided to improve safety and reduce conflicts
with the adjacent bus bay and intersection.
o
Section 3 - 1 km segment that includes the
Prince of Wales/Jockvale Road intersection:
South of the Jockvale
Road/Golflinks Drive South intersection, a potential access to a planned future
subdivision was identified; Smart Channel design is to be incorporated at the
Prince of Wales intersection to conform to City standards and act as a traffic
calming measure; reconstruction of a Golf Course landing area was recommended
to satisfy the needs of the adjacent Stonebridge Golf Course; Landowners of a
property located on the northwest corner of the Prince of Wales Drive/Jockvale
Road intersection indicated concerns regarding development potential of their
property and the preservation of a structure with heritage value (the revised
Plan considered these matters.); addition of a cul-de-sac at the south end of
the proposed service road to accommodate winter snow clearing vehicles.
These
recommendations were presented at the Public Open House No. 3 and are included
in the final Recommended Plan.
Recommended
Plan
The
Recommended Plan and Cross Section are illustrated in Document 1.
To accommodate growth in the SUC, Jockvale Road will ultimately consist of a four-lane cross section within a 37.5-metre right-of-way throughout the study corridor. The right-of-way width will be expanded as necessary for auxiliary lanes, grading, etc., and maximum speed will be posted at 60 km/h. This will include a five-metre median with lighting, dedicated two-metre bicycle lanes, a two-metre sidewalk along the east side, and a three-metre multi- use pathway along the west side.
Safety
along the corridor will be improved through consolidating/modifying private
accesses where required, improving sight distances through partial realignments
and roadway profile modifications, and providing pedestrian and cycling
facilities.
This widened roadway could be constructed in stages to appropriately implement the full widening (when required and as funding is available) as follow:
Each of these stages can be built as individual projects, however Stages A and B must be built prior to Stage C. Each stage is described in detail in Document 3.
The Recommended Plan cross-section includes four paved vehicle lanes, two cycling lanes, a sidewalk, a multi-use pathway, and a centre median. Street lighting will be provided along the centre median and landscaping along either side of the roadway.
Consultation with Traffic and Parking Operations indicated that the existing intersections along the study corridor at Riverstone Drive, Cambrian Road, Blackleaf Drive, and Golflinks Drive South can potentially operate under both traffic signals and roundabout configurations. These roadways currently provide access to new development within the Stonebridge community on both sides of the roadway and will continue to serve additional planned residential uses as build‑out continues in the area. The determination of which type of control will ultimately be used at these locations will be based on requirements outlined in future Traffic Impact Assessments for new development in the area and supporting plans developed at the detail design stage.
The future Jockvale Road / Prince of Wales Drive (Old Highway 16) intersection will ensure current design/safety standards are met and movements for all modes are provided while maintaining access to lands on all sides of the intersection (the residential lands in the Stonebridge Community will be connected with Beryl Gaffney Park on the east side and through to Manotick via Rideau Valley Drive). This future intersection will require a smaller footprint than that of a comparable roundabout. A signalized intersection with smart channel turn provisions was found to be preferred over a roundabout configuration at this location as the requirements associated with private land acquisition, pedestrian crossings and cyclists were significantly more favourable under the signalized provision.
The following subsections describe the
mitigation that will be considered during the implementation phase of the
project that relate to the natural environment, social and cultural
environment, land use and property, and construction management.
Natural
Environment
Surface
Water
A new storm sewer
system will be constructed to accommodate stormwater run-off with connection to
an existing trunk line located in the vicinity of Blackleaf Drive. During the construction phase, short-term
interim solutions will be required to deal with surface water run-off and
related effects such as erosion and sedimentation.
Fisheries
and Aquatic Habitat
The Jock River is habitat for warm water
sport and forage fish. The
implementation of the new Jockvale Road bridge will include two clear span
bridge structures. The new structures
will be designed and implemented in a manner that will not directly impact this
fish habitat as per the Ontario Operational Statement for Clear Span
Bridges. Construction works associated
with the bridge will require appropriate mitigation to ensure Harmful
Alteration, Disruption, or Destruction (HADD) of fish habitat along the Jock
River is minimized. Proposed mitigation
measures will require approval from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans
(DFO), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), and the Rideau Valley Conservation
Authority (RVCA). Approval would require further design details, which is
typically carried out at the detailed design stage of the project.
This plan will be prepared to manage the flow
of sediment into storm sewers and surface water and will be based on best
control management practices including the Guideline on Erosion and Sediment
Control at Urban Construction Sites.
The design elements associated with the control plan will be identified
in the detail design process and construction specifications. To mitigate any unforeseen areas predisposed
to erosion or sedimentation, the contractor will be required to prepare an
erosion and sedimentation control plan prior to commencing work on the site.
Existing wells
adjacent to the future roadway will be surveyed and assessed during the detail
design stage. Any impacts to wells will
be determined and the appropriate mitigation measures developed. Borehole samples will be obtained and
analyzed to determine the subsurface soil composition. This will not only provide the necessary
information to design the roadway foundation, but will also provide information
regarding groundwater flow. Where
required, construction activities (as described in the following sections) will
incorporate measures to mitigate impacts to the groundwater.
Vegetation
Minimize edge impacts to the woodlot areas
identified by the City as Urban Natural Areas (UNA). This includes Half Moon Bay Woods (UNA 49) and Jockvale Road
Woods (UNA 63). Loss of vegetation
impacts or impacts to regionally significant species will be mitigated by new
plantings, relocation of existing plantings, and minimizing the area to be
disturbed. Within these woodlots, the
areas containing significant plant species that fall within the right-of-way of
the Recommended Plan will be accommodated.
Social and Cultural Environment
Archaeological
The lands under consideration for this
roadway widening require the completion of a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment
prior to detail design.
The cultural and built heritage assessment
identified six heritage features located on Jockvale Road. Archaeological/Heritage mitigation and
monitoring requirements will be identified during design.
Noise
Three Noise Sensitive Areas (NSAs) were identified
as requiring further investigation for mitigation. Those dwelling units located along the east side of Jockvale Road
(north of Cambrian Road) and along the west side (just north of Blackleaf
Drive) will be further assessed at the detail design stage for any ability to
improve upon the existing noise barrier/berm provisions. These receiver sites will benefit from
adjacent sound attenuation to protect development adjacent to Jockvale Road
from noise pollution. Future
development sites will be required to provide mitigation and attenuation for
new housing proposed in close proximity to the arterial road.
Community
The Recommended Plan identifies the need to
provide a sidewalk, multi-use pathway, and closed storm sewer system along
Jockvale Road through the study corridor.
Visual intrusion is a concern where the future four-lane roadway is
located adjacent to existing residences on Jockvale Road. Where possible, it is recommended that
berming and plantings form part of the detail design. A Landscape Plan will document the type, location and best
practices for maintenance of all landscaping within the study area. The landscape plan will guide the species
selection, location and planting details for all proposed plants and other
elements within the corridor.
Prior to construction, property owners along
Jockvale Road will be contacted, informing them of the upcoming construction
activities. In cases where frontage is
required, the contractor will reconfirm with the homeowner the access
configuration. Right-in-right-out
accesses will be provided as per the Recommended Plan.
Three residences along Jockvale Road will
need to be purchased. Landowners of a
property located on the South West corner of the Prince of Wales/Jockvale
intersection indicated concerns regarding development potential of their
property and the preservation of a heritage structure. The landowners and the study team reviewed
the site plan proposal and the heritage documents. It was agreed that the Recommend Plan could accommodate their
plan with modifications to potentially preserve the heritage structure.
A 0.3-kilometre segment of the existing
Jockvale Road corridor will be closed to through traffic north of Prince of
Wales Drive. This segment will be re-designated
as a public lane and will provide access to the adjacent dwellings and business
through a roadway connection to the future realigned corridor. If required, headlight glare from the
existing Rideau Valley Drive alignment will be mitigated with berming and
plantings adjacent to the cul-du-sac.
The
recommendations contained herein directly support the following Strategic
Direction adopted by Council on 11 July 2007:
F4 Ensure that City
infrastructure required for new growth is improved as needed to serve growth
During the
course of the study, regular update meetings were held with the Agency
Consultation Group (ACG) and Public Consultation Group (PCG) to seek input and
concurrence on the study findings and recommendations.
The following is a list of
consultation activities for this study:
§
Public Open
House No. 1 - 26 September 2007. 115
persons registered and 43 written comments were received on the study process
and evaluation criteria. §
Public Open House
No. 2 - 4 March 2008. 69 persons
registered and 24 written comments were received on the evaluation results
and technically preferred plan. |
§
Public Open
House No. 3 - 26 May 2008. 41 persons
registered and 11 written comments were received on the Recommended Plan. §
Agency
Consultation Group - four held throughout the course of the study. §
Public
Consultation Group - four held throughout the course of the study |
Presentations were conducted for the public at
each of the open houses. Details of
the consultation effort are in Document 4.
In addition to these events, a web page for the study was developed and
hosted on the City 's site, within the Public Consultation link.
http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/jockriver_princewales/index_en.html
Various
committees, public associations, agencies and public groups/individuals were
kept informed of the ongoing activities as well as the outcome through the
events listed above. At the conclusion
of the study, the majority of comments received from members of the public were
supportive of the project.
The preliminary cost estimate in 2008 dollars to
acquire property, design, and construct this facility is $39M apportioned as follows:
Funding will be requested through the annual capital
budgeting process as appropriate. This
growth project is eligible for funding through development charges.
Document 1 Jockvale Road -
Recommended Plan
Document 2 Evaluation of
Alternative Alignments
Document 3 Staging of
Recommended Plan
Document 4 Public Consultation (Appendix E of
Document 4 held on file)
Public
Open House 1, Summary Report
Public
Open House 2, Summary Report
Public
Open House 3 Summary Report
The
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability Department will finalize
the Environmental Study Report for Jockvale Road and immediately initiate the
30-day public review period thereafter.
City
Operations Department, Real Property Asset Management Branch will acquire
property needed for the Jockvale Road reconstruction as appropriate – provided
that funding is made available to implement this project.
Jockvale Road - Recommended Plan Document 1
RECOMMENDED
CROSS SECTION (EXAMPLE)
Evaluation of Alternatives Document 2
Alternative Planning Solutions
In accordance
with the Environmental Assessment Act,
as well as good planning principles, several planning and alignment
alternatives were developed. They were
analyzed in a hierarchical methodology to scope the higher level solutions that
should be carried forward, then provide a detailed analysis of various
alternative designs.
The following
planning level alternative solutions were tested and demonstrated that roadway
improvements are needed:
The project
was divided into three sections for evaluation purposes. The three sections were:
Section 1:
A total of
three alternatives were developed and carried forward for a quantitative
analysis for this section. They
included:
The alternative which widens to the west at the Jock River Structure and widens on centre along Jockvale Road (Alternative 4) was selected as the technically preferred alternative. This alternative required the least residential property and provided for the least residential out-of-way travel.
Section 2:
Four alignment alternatives were initially considered for coarse
screening for Section 2:
The Coarse Screening exercise indicated that while Alternatives 1 through 3 had high impacts to land use and property, Alternative 4 had minimal impact and was selected as the technically preferred alternative. As a result of previous functional plans, the City of Ottawa has already protected the required right-of-way required to implement Alternative 4. This alternative eliminates the back to back curves that currently exist while maintaining the widening within the dedicated property.
In short, Section 2 was found not to require any further detailed analysis and evaluation, as Alternative 4 was clearly demonstrated to have the least impacts of the alignment alternatives.
This result
was presented and reviewed by the PCG, who endorsed this conclusion.
Section 3:
A total of
four alternatives were developed and carried forward for a quantitative
analysis for this section. They
included:
The
alternative which improved the Prince of Wales/Jockvale Road intersection skew
and realigned Jockvale Road to the west of Prince of Wales Drive and
implemented a service road (Alternative 4) was selected as the technically
preferred alternative. This alternative
provided the most desirable results under several sub-factor criteria including
residential out-of-way travel, visual intrusion, commercial and residential
buyouts, required residential and RVCA property, and life cycle cost.
Cross Section
Eight (8) cross section alternatives were carried forward
for evaluation for Sections 1, 2 and 3.
They included:
A qualitative
analysis and evaluation of cross section alternatives was undertaken based on
the Technically Preferred Alignment Alternatives for Sections 1, 2 and 3.
Following the
Qualitative Analysis, the four-lane urban divided cross section alternative was
selected as the Technically Preferred Alternative.
Staging of Recommended Plan Document 3
This new roadway will be constructed in Stages as follows:
Each of these Stages can be built as individual projects. Stage A and B must be built prior to Stage C (each are described in detail in below.
STAGE A – Jock River Bridge Staging
The implementation of the new Jock River Bridge (Stage A) will be staged 2-fold. The first stage will commence by constructing the southbound lanes of the future 4-lane Jockvale Road corridor between Paul Metivier Drive and the Jock River. These lanes will allow for 2-way traffic in the interim until the 4-lane cross-section is implemented. This will include the construction of the first of two (2) new Jock River bridge structures. The first bridge structure will be constructed west of the existing bridge (which will be able to accommodate 2 vehicle lanes, a bicycle lane, and a sidewalk). South of the first new bridge, a new segment of the southbound lanes will be constructed extending from the new bridge and connecting to the existing Jockvale Road alignment, approximately 0.2 kilometres from the Jock River.
The second stage will consist of opening the first new bridge to traffic and closing the existing bridge structure. The existing Jockvale Road corridor between Greenbank Road and the Jock River will be closed after the new Jockvale-Longfields roadway is opened and appropriate access arrangements / linkage is provided to the remaining lots along Jockvale Road north of the Jock River. While the first new bridge will ultimately accommodate 2 southbound traffic lanes, it will be used in the interim to accommodate two-way traffic (1 lane per direction). The existing bridge structure will remain open to pedestrians and cyclists to cross the river. A temporary bike lane will be created on either side of the existing bridge to align with the existing and newly constructed roadways.
STAGE B – Reconstruction of the Prince of Wales / Jockvale
Road Intersection
Reconstructing the Prince of Wales Drive / Jockvale Road intersection involves a number of components.
While Jockvale Road will ultimately be widened, for the most part, from the existing centreline between the Jock River and approximately 0.3 kilometres south of Prince of Wales Drive, the roadway will be realigned west of the existing facility in the vicinity of Prince of Wales Drive, thus forming a new intersection. The realignment of Jockvale Road along with the new intersection configuration will improve safety by increasing motorists’ sight distance and improve upon safety issues associated with the existing roadway. Currently, Jockvale Road consists of sharp curves and slopes approaching 10% within the vicinity of Prince of Wales Drive – the realigned roadway will provide a much safer 4% grade. The new alignment will not only provide greater safety for roadway users but will also have minimal impacts to private properties located on the east side of Jockvale Road.
The main components of the reconstruction are described below:
STAGE C –
Future Construction and Widening of Jockvale Road
While the Jockvale Road Recommended Plan consists of a 4-lane road cross-section, widening will only be considered when traffic demand warrants an increase in capacity along the corridor. As such, the future construction and ultimate widening of Jockvale Road will involve the following components:
STAGE A - Jock River Bridge Staging
STAGE B – Prince of Wales / Jockvale
Intersection
Consultation Document 4
Public Open
Houses were held at key milestones during the course of the study. All Public Open Houses were held within the
Study Area at the Stonebridge Golf and Country Club.
Announcements were placed in local and regional newspapers
prior to the Open Houses. All adjacent
landowners and residents within the study area were invited to the Open Houses through
individual notices and hand delivery of flyers to all dwellings in the Study
Area. The following sections outline
the results of the three (3) Public Open Houses.
First
Public Open House
The first
Public Open House was held on September 26th, 2007 at the Stonebridge Golf and
Country Club. City of Ottawa and
consultant representatives were available to respond to any inquiries.
The purpose
of the first Public Open House was to introduce the study, present preliminary
inventories and the assessment of the Alternative Planning Solutions.
In total, one
hundred fifteen (115) persons registered at Public Open House No. 1 and
forty-three (43) comment sheets/letters/e-mails were returned during the Open
House and the subsequent 2-week response period. A summary of the first Public Open House is found in Appendix E,
Public Open House Reports.
Second
Public Open House
The second
Public Open House was held on March 4th, 2008 at the Stonebridge Golf and
Country Club. The purpose of the second
public Open House was to present the design alternatives, evaluation
methodology, and results of the technical evaluation. A presentation was also made by the consultant during the Open
House and a question and answer session followed.
In total,
sixty-nine (69) persons registered at the second Public Open House and
twenty-four (24) comment sheets/letters/e-mails were returned during the Open
House and the subsequent 2-week response period. A summary of the 2nd Public Open House is found in Appendix E,
Public Open House Reports.
Third
Public Open House
The third
Public Open House was held on May 26th, 2008 at the Stonebridge Golf and
Country Club. The purpose of the third
public open house was to present the Recommended Plan and preliminary
mitigation measures. A presentation was
also made by the consultant during the Open House and a question and answer
session followed.
In total,
forty-one (41) persons registered at the third Public Open House and eleven
(11) comment sheets/letters/e-mails were returned during the Open House and the
subsequent 2-week response period. A
summary of the 3rd Public Open House is found in Appendix E, Public Open House
Reports.
Summary of Public Consultation
One of the key objectives of any Environmental Assessment is to provide the public, interested parties and affected agencies with the opportunity for meaningful input. In order to ensure this objective is met, a public and agency notification program was undertaken for the Jockvale Road EA. The program included several communication mechanisms as described in succeeding sections.
Individual Property Owner Contacts
All property owners within the Study Area were included on a study mailing list and mailed individual notices inviting them to attend the three (3) Public Open Houses that were held during the course of the project as well as the opportunity to participate on the Public Consultation Group (PCG). Individual notices were also hand delivered to residents within the Study Area prior to the Public Open Houses to ensure that all residents were aware of the upcoming meetings. In addition, all members of the public who participated in the study and are included on the mailing list received notification of the public 30-day review period.
Newspaper Notices
Notices of the Public Open Houses were placed in the Ottawa Citizen and Le Droit prior to the scheduled date of the Open Houses. The newspaper notices can be found in Appendix E, Public Open House Reports.
City of Ottawa Website
Project notices (Study Commencement, Public Open Houses and Study Completion) and Public Open House presentation boards were made available on the City’s website found at:
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/jockriver_princewales/index_en.html
In addition, letters were sent to the following external agencies and interest groups to solicit their interest or non-interest in the study:
In addition, representatives from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Ministry of Natural Resources participated in the Agency Consultation Group meetings.
First
Nations Contacts
A notification program was undertaken to contact First Nations Groups and organizations for the Jockvale Road EA. Letters were sent to the following First Nations Groups and organizations at the study commencement, public open houses and study completion to solicit their interest or non-interest in the study:
JOCKVALE ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY (JOCK RIVER TO PRINCE OF WALES DRIVE
ÉTUDE D’ÉVALUATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE DU CHEMIN JOCKVALE (DE LA RIVIÈRE
JOCK À LA PROMENAE PRINCE OF WALES)
ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0210
BARRHAVEN(3), gLOUCESTER-sOUTH nEPEAN/gLOUCESTER nEPEAN-sUD (22)
Vivi Chi, Manager, Transportation and Infrastructure Planning introduced Valerie Bouillant, Senior Project Engineer and Chris Gordon, Genivar Consulting, who gave a detailed overview of the report. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is held on file. Ms. Chi advised that Appendix E of Document 4 was inadvertently omitted from the printing of the agenda, but that copies would be distributed following the meeting.
The following public delegations were received:
Klaus Beltzner stated that in the public consultations, the rural communities south of Jockvale/Prince of Wales intersection, who have traditionally used this road, have not been invited to participate in this exercise and were not informed of the realignment of Jockvale Road. He believed the City was spending more money on roads and felt more attention should be directed to improving transit. Mr. Beltzner acknowledged that the safety issue at the intersection of Prince of Wales and Jockvale needs to be addressed whether or not this project goes ahead. His previously-circulated comments are held on file.
Patty O’Brien, resident, Jockvale Road advised that her property will be severely impacted, but the City was not going to expropriate. The project will result in her losing her entire front yard, and her well will be paved over. She was concerned about having to be hooked up to City water, because she cannot drink that water for health reasons. She stated that her property is unsellable although it was once worth $500,000 and she has not been offered any other option. Mrs. O’Brien also suggested that there appeared to be some confusion about ownership of her property because the report seems to indicate it is owned by Tamarack Homes and will be developed, and at one of the open houses, City staff advised that they owned it and she was renting it from the municipality. The land registry office proves she owns the property and has for almost 40 years.
The Chair requested clarification on the ownership issue and Bruce Stansfield, Program Manager, Real Estate Services confirmed that it is owned by June O’Brien. Mr. Gordon added that during the course of the EA (environmental assessment) the home to the north was purchased by Tamarack Homes (it is that property which is referred to in the study report) and he confirmed it is not the address of Mrs. O’Brien’s home. He explained that the City was not expropriating because only a strip at the front of her property would be required and the house would still be deemed to be habitable. Responding to her concerns about access to drinking water, they would examine her well before and after construction to ensure there are opportunities to ensure she has safe drinking water.
With respect to the loss of propety value, Mr. Stansfield explained that she would be compensated for any loss, including injurious affection which would be the loss of the value as a result of proximity to the new road. They would also take into account if the residual property is still useable. But staff have not yet looked at this property in such detail to determine that status.
The Chair was concerned that the Committee is being asked to recommend undertaking necessary property acquisition (Recommendation 3), but without all the facts pertaining to this particular delegation’s property being known at this time. Mr. Stansfield clarified staff would have to conduct a detailed investigation of the property to see what the impacts are. He added that they can get the approval to buy and analyze all the properties to see what the impact is, but they cannot do anything until the EA is approved and the funding is in place.
Bob Ray, resident, Jockvale Road spoke in support of the study, noting that there was good consultation and he believed it addresses 98% of the concerns raised. He too agreed there are safety issues at the intersection of Jockvale and Prince of Wales Drive, as well as a safety issue at the bridge crossing the Jock River. He suggested that the Committee should approve the EA because it provides a framework for future activities to be undertaken, i.e., safety; improvements to the road and what the traffic will be like in the future, transit through the area, et cetera.
Richard Rankin, resident of Stonebridge objected to the proposal for the following reasons:
· felt it would cause more safety issues than resolve them and will turn a rural road into a four-laned road through what is a heavily populated area
· traffic will be funnelled through Stonebridge and alternatives should be examined to look at getting traffic going away from that community
· it will provide a quick and easy route to Barrhaven for those living in or south of Manotick
· while he recognized the problems at Jockvale and Prince of Wales Drive, he posited that those have been there for years and there has not been any interest on the part of the City to alleviate them; he agreed that a left-turning lane onto Prince of Wales Drive would be helpful
· every resident of Jockvale Road will have some kind of affect to their property by this plan, whether it is going to be increased noise levels or having part of their property adversely affected such that they cannot have proper access onto the road.
When asked to suggest what other options might be considered, Mr. Rankin offered Bankfield Road up to Cedarview Road or improving Prince of Wales by aligning it at the intersection of Woodroffe Avenue. He suggested the former involves almost no residences in the area, so there will be less safety concerns and impacts to properties. In response to questions posed by Councillor Harder, Mr. Rankin confirmed that he has lived in Stonebridge for nearly five years and he was not aware that the widening of Jockvale Road had been contemplated as far back as by the former City of Nepean. He was also not aware that when Strandherd is extended to Prince of Wales, there is plan to close the Woodroffe access to Prince of Wales.
Councillor Harder asked whether the Committee has the right to stop an environmental assessment and John Moser, Director, Planning Branch and City Planner advised that Recommendation 1 is worded such that Committee and Council receive the results of the EA because it is the Minister of Environment who gives final approval. When asked what timelines are being considered for property acquisition (Recommendation 3), he explained that there would be no property acquisition done until it was in the capital budget and coincided with the timing from the TMP (Phase II project, 2016-2022). He further confirmed that there are no immediate implications for this project on the budget.
From the information provided by staff, Councillor Harder mentioned that of the land necessary for this chosen route, nearly 85% of it has been deeded to the City by Monarch. Further, having an approved EA gives the City the ability to acquire land for free when a piece of property is to be subdivided. And according to the plan, there are few properties that would even be considered for appropriation.
In closing, the councillor advised that she and Councillor Desroches have been looking at deferring some projects in Barrhaven, in order to bring forward the bridge (referred to previously) which has no cycling lane or sidewalk, but which is used by young children in Stonebridge attending St. Joseph’s High School. She emphasized there are serious safety issues that must be addressed and she urged the Committee to support the staff recommendations.
Chair McRae requested legal clarification of the recommendations. She inquired if the City has to receive the results of the EA, by law, and if so, why is the recommendation even here? Rick O’Connor, City Solicitor explained that the Committee would be required to receive this as a result of the fact there is no other way for this matter to ultimately be before Council. And, should the Committee vote against receiving this, the report would still rise to Council with ‘no committee recommendation’. He further confirmed that provincial legislation compels the City to submit the results of the EA for 30 days for public review.
Councillor Cullen indicated his support for the staff report, stating that receiving the EA will begin the process of protecting property along this alignment. This, he clarified, does not mean he has voted for the construction of the road, because that is not before the Committee at this time and would not be for several years. He did not see this project competing with transit because it is an east-west arterial.
With respect to Recommendation 3, the Chair wondered why there is a rush to approve moving on property acquisition, when the road is not due to be built until 2016. This was of particular interest to her given the concerns raised by Mrs. O’Brien. Mr. Moser explained that while there is no rush, approval of Recommendation 3 would allow that to be presented early in the process. He suggested that the recommendation could be removed without doing any damage.
Councillor Doucet would not support Recommendations 2 or 3 because he was concerned that the City cannot maintain roads it already has and it will only get more difficult to sustain the road system. Rather than building or widening roads to solve bottleneck issues, he preferred designing the city differently and posited that rejecting these two recommendations would send that message.
Responding to a question posed by Councillor Bloess, Mr. Moser explained that rejecting staff Recommendation 3 (and assuming the EA is approved by the Minister), when someone comes in for a subdivision or site plan, the City can take the land they need, but in 2016, when it comes time to do the capital budget, Council would have to deal with the land acquisition money required to proceed. The councillor urged the Committee to approve the recommendations because it is good planning and would put the foundation in place for this project. It also provides clarity for residents who have concerns about their property, rather than leaving them in limbo, which would be the result of rejecting Recommendation 3.
Conversely, Councillor Wilkinson did not believe it was necessary to approve Recommendation 3 because these properties are fairly sizeable and it is not an issue of a single family home being unsellable because of a future widening. Instead, any required property could be acquired at the time the project is approved. Responding to comments made about designing the City differently, she was of the opinion that being anti-road is not the answer, but being careful about where the roads are put and when they are built and widened, is important.
Responding to questions posed by Councillor Legendre, Ernest McArthur, Legal Counsel confirmed that both Recommendations 1 and 2 have to rise to Council, if it is the will of this Committee that the EA be done. Alternatively, the Committee could also vote against it, if it does not want anything to be done now. The councillor suggested that if the Committee has no intention of moving forward on the project, why would it approve Recommendation 2? Mr. McArthur explained that it does not have to be done now, but if the Committee wants the study report to proceed, then Council must direct staff to do it. He added that if the Committee decides they do not want to proceed with this project, it would vote against Recommendation 2.
Chair McRae asked what happens to the environmental assessment if the Committee does not direct staff to begin the 30-day public review (Recommendation 2). Mr. Moser explained that it sits there. When asked for how long it is valid, he explained that in some ways it would have no validity because it would not have been approved by the Minister. When asked how long the City has to give it to the Minister before having to start all over again, Mr. Gordon explained that the TMP identifies of the infrastructure required to accommodate the growth Council approved in the Official Plan. By approving the TMP, Council essentially provides staff with the opportunity to do the necessary EAs. The results of the EAs must be made public within a reasonable timeframe because if it is left to sit for too long, the consultation, examination of the environment and all the background work that is done as part of an EA, would have to be re-visited. He added that as the community continues to grow and the environment in that area changes, there will be a requirement to revisit all of the inputs to the study and go through an entire evaluation process again to see whether or not if this result is appropriate. Ms. Bouillant added that the City would also have no means of protecting the corridor.
Councillor Harder reminded Committee members that in June 2006, Council unanimously supported the South Nepean Urban Design Plan (Barrhaven South Community Design Plan), where approximately 35,000 people would be living. This is now being built and all of the development that has occurred as a result, has been predicated on plans that go back to the early 1990’s. She emphasized that this community is going to grow to 153,000 people in the timeframe of the second stage of the TMP and this road project is part of that plan. She reiterated the fact there are no budget pressures at this time for this project. She remarked that the people who spoke today in opposition to the project are going to be marginally impacted and she was confident Mrs. O’Brien would be able to sell her land. She stated that rejecting the staff recommendations would not be in the best interest of the people she represents, nor the City and that by not approving this, the City is tying the hands of those affected by this project and who want to do things with their property.
The Chair stated that if the Committee moves forward with these recommendations, there will be an opportunity to talk about priorities during consideration of the TMP. She believed that this project speaks to addressing safety concerns. With respect to Mrs. Brien’s property, she asked whether staff have had an opportunity to discuss how they can help her situation. Mr. Stansfield advised that they have not looked at any of the properties in close detail, but for this piece of land in particular, he reminded members that before the City can buy, Council approval is required. When staff decide whose properties (and how much) are required, they will bring forward a report regarding property acquisition to the appropriate Committee and then to Council. He added that approval today would give staff the authority to go out and negotiate with Mrs. O’Brien and to obtain appraisals.
In her closing remarks, Chair McRae commented that based on the debate and discussion of this item, it was clear that there were many things in the staff report that were very difficult for the Committee to understand, and she suggested that future reports of this nature include a clear explanation of the issues.
Councillor Wilkinson wanted it clear that until the Minister approves the EA, the City cannot guarantee the protection of the corridor. Mr. Moser confirmed this fact. Based on this, the councillor suggested that to do anything at all, the Committee has to recommend to Council, approval of Recommendation 2. She was also not concerned about approving Recommendation 3 now either since it would still be subject to budget approval later on.
That Transportation Committee recommend
Council:
1. Receive
the results of the Jockvale Road Environmental Assessment as shown in Document
1.
RECEIVED
2. Direct
staff to prepare the Environmental Study Report for the Jockvale Road
Environment Assessment for the 30-day public review, in accordance with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.
CARRIED
YEAS
(5): R.
Bloess, M. Wilkinson, D. Thompson, C. Leadman, M. McRae
NAYS (3): G.
Bédard, J. Legendre, C. Doucet
3. Direct
staff to undertake necessary property acquisition for the construction of
Jockvale Road, in line with the timing identified in the Transportation Master
Plan and through the annual Capital Budget Process.
CARRIED
YEAS
(5): R.
Bloess, M. Wilkinson, D. Thompson, C. Leadman, M. McRae
NAYS (3): G.
Bédard, J. Legendre, C. Doucet
[PS1]I’m confused. In previous references, and on the “project north” on the figures, Jockvale appears to go N-S. We need to state a convention at the beginning and stick to it. Check all direction references to Jockvale Road.