development & heritage standing committee additional ......june 8, 2020 item 7.1 additional...

/bt 1:00 p.m., Monday June 8, 2020

Development & Heritage Standing Committee ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Item 7.1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 4100 7th Con. Rd.;

Applicant: MAA AshaPuri Enterprises Inc.; File No. Z-020/19, ZNG/5980; Ward 9 a) The following area residents have submitted written

submissions (attached): a. Jason and Angie LaMarre b. Steve Takacs c. Ray Lesperance d. Graham Miller e. Phil and Char Knuckle f. Barry and Judy Dunbar g. Barinder and Barinderjeet Bhangu h. Angela Drouillard i. Rob and Kristy Roy (2 submissions) j. Josh and Anita Trudeau k. Hardeep Singh Jhattu

b) Nikki van Oirschot, representing Caldwell First Nation submitting the attached email as additional information.

Item 7.2 OPA & Rezoning – Responsive Group – 3175-3215 Banwell - OPA

131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 -Ward 7 a) Greg Bowman, Responsive Group Inc. submitting attached

letter from Rajan Philips, Senior Transportation Consultant, Paradigm dated June 2, 2020

DELEGATIONS: Item 7.1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 4100 7th Con. Rd.;

Applicant: MAA AshaPuri Enterprises Inc.; File No. Z-020/19, ZNG/5980; Ward 9 a) Justina Nwaesei, Planner III (powerpoint) b) Paul Bezaire, representing Applicant (powerpoint) c) Angie LaMarre, area resident d) Monica & Randall Smith, area residents e) Hardeep Singh Jhattu, area resident

Item 7.2 OPA & Rezoning – Responsive Group – 3175-3215 Banwell - OPA

131 OPA/6047 Z-004/20 ZNG/6046 -Ward 7 a) Adam Szymczak, Planner III (powerpoint) b) Matt Campbell, Zelinka Priamo Ltd.

c) Greg Bowman, Responsive Group Inc. d) Rajan Philips, Paradigm Transportation Solutions Ltd. e) Matt Galvin, G Architects f) Miranda George, G Architects g) Pat Soulliere, owner of building at SE corner of Banwell &

Tecumseh Road East h) Dan Tolmie, building tenant i) Richard Paliani, building tenant

Jason & Angie LaMarre

June 2, 2020

City Clerk’s Office [email protected]

Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19

I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18

- Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes on the homeowners privacy into their yards.

- A proposed 4 lane roundabout that will increase traffic significantly on the class B tar road withditches, no street lights and no sidewalks for residents and families to safely walk along.

- Where will the hotel’s storm sewer be located and where does it discharge? Will the currentstorm water system be able to receive additional water without causing flooding?

- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the costof a new sewer and hookup?

- Many residents have been affected economically by the impact of Covid-19 and adding thissignificant cost to families will pose a major financial challenge.

Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes then when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure?

At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date.

We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as tax payers.

Thank you, Jason & Angie LaMarre

Cc: Councillor McKenzie – [email protected]

Item 7.1-additional informationJune 8, 2020 Development & Heritage Standing Committee Meeting

mailto:[email protected]

June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional information

June 2, 2020







- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the costof a new sewer and hookup?





Thank you, Steve Takacs


June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional information June 2, 2020 City Clerk’s Office [email protected] Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19 I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18 Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes on the homeowners privacy into their yards. A proposed 4 lane roundabout that will increase traffic significantly on the class B tar road with ditches, no street lights and no sidewalks for residents and families to safely walk along. Where will the hotel’s storm sewer be located and where does it discharge? Will the current storm water system be able to receive additional water without causing flooding? Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the cost of a new sewer and hookup? Many residents have been affected economically by the impact of Covid-19 and adding this significant cost to families will pose a major financial challenge. Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes then when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure? At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date. We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as tax payers. Thank you, Ray Lesperance Cc: Councillor McKenzie – [email protected]



June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional Information GRAHAM MILLER June 2, 2020 City Clerk’s Office [email protected] Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19 I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18


- A proposed 4 lane roundabout that will increase traffic significantly on the class B tar road with ditches, no street lights and no sidewalks for residents and families to safely walk along.

- Where will the hotel’s storm sewer be located and where does it discharge? Will the current storm water system be able to receive additional water without causing flooding?

- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the cost

of a new sewer and hookup?

- Many residents have been affected economically by the impact of Covid-19 and adding this significant cost to families will pose a major financial challenge.

Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes then when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure? At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date. We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as tax payers. Thank you, Graham Miller Cc: Councillor McKenzie – [email protected]

June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional information Phil and Char Knuckle June 3, 2020 City Clerk’s Office [email protected] Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19 I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18

- Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes the homeowners privacy into their yards. - A proposed 4 lane roundabout that will increase traffic significantly on the class B tar road with ditches, no street lights and no sidewalks for residents and families to safely walk along. - Where will the hotel’s storm sewer be located and where does it discharge? Will the current storm water system be able to receive additional water without causing flooding?

- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the cost of a new sewer and hookup? - Many residents have been affected economically by the impact of Covid-19 and adding this significant cost to families will pose a major financial challenge.

Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes than when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure? At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date. We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as taxpayers. Thank you, Phil and Char Knuckle




June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional Information From: Judy Dunbar Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 11:10 AM To: clerks <[email protected]>; Mckenzie, Kieran <[email protected]> Subject: Baseline Road letter

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments

unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

P. Barry Dunbar Judith Dunbar

June 4, 2020.

City Clerk’s Office

[email protected]

Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee

Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18

File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19





- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the cost of a new sewer and hookup?








Thank you, Barry and Judy Dunbar


PS...We are long time residents of Baseline Road and we take pride in our property. For 36 years, we have taken care of City property known as Fairburn Ave which joins our property line. This has been at our expense. Grass cut and trees planted. We moved into Sandwich South, got sold to Tecumseh and then sacrificial lambs to Windsor. We have received NOTHING from the City of Windsor except for higher taxes. It is beyond time that the City does something for this street. We live close to a large commercial area and yet we receive nothing....internet has to be through Bell Canada, no alternatives.


June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional Information From: barinder bhangu Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 3:32 PM To: clerks <[email protected]> Cc: Mckenzie, Kieran <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19



Barinder Bhangu & Barinderjeet Bhangu June 04, 2020 Greetings, I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18 I am not in favor of hotel construction at the proposed site due to following reasons



Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes than when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure? At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date. We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as taxpayers. Thank you, Barinder Bhangu & Barinderjeet Bhangu



June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional Information Angela Drouillard June 5, 2020 City Clerk’s Office [email protected] Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19 I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18




- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear the cost

of a new sewer and hookup?


Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes then when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure? At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date. We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as tax payers. Thank you Angela Drouillard Cc: Councillor McKenzie – [email protected]

June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional information From: Rob Roy Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 12:03 AM To: clerks <[email protected]> Subject: Baseline Development



June 3, 2020 City Clerk’s Office [email protected] Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee Amendment to zoning by-law 8600 and by-law 85-18 File # ZNG/5980 Z-020-19 I am resident on Baseline Road. The neighbourhood and homeowners have concerns regarding the proposed amendment to zoning bylaw 8600 and bylaw 85-18



Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes than when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure? At the April 4, 2020 meeting, the chair stated that because of the large volume of calls and emails regarding this proposed amendment that Councillor McKenzie should meet to discuss concerns with the residents and planners. This agenda item was then motioned to defer by Councillor Sleiman and seconded by Councillor Holt. The entire roll call supported the deferral. Councillor McKenzie has not reached out to the residents of his ward as a whole to date. We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as taxpayers. Thank you, Rob an Kristy Roy





June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Petition Email From: Rob Roy Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 12:55 AM To: clerks <[email protected]> Cc: Mckenzie, Kieran <[email protected]> Subject: Baseline



Hello,

I am reaching out at this time to verify to the City of Windsor, and to City Council, that we, the

residents of Baseline Road almost unanimously oppose the proposed zoning change, the

proposed roundabout, and the sewer project. The cost of the sewer project will drive some

residents out of their homes as many, simply, cannot afford this massive financial burden. CoVid

19 has put financial strain on many households and the financial forecast is unknown for many of

us at this point. There are retired pensioners that will not be able to afford their homes any

longer with the cost of this sewer We feel the unfair push to install the sewer is to

ultimately serve the proposed hotel. Maybe the applicant for zoning change should be taking the

bulk of the cost of the entire sewer to have his business connected to a municipal sewer.

We feel we shouldn't be connected to a proposed roundabout to allow unimpeded traffic to be

directed down our residential road. It's a safety issue with many having young children. There is

no sidewalks, no parks, no community centers, for all of our young ones to enjoy. It's not

ideal. In fact, it's completely unacceptable.

We feel not enough has been done to keep our taxpaying residents satisfied while trying to force

these changes which have a major impact on our neighbourhood. It's unacceptable.

We, collectively, would like to have our concerns addressed. Actions must be taken to prevent

the loss of our privacy, our safety, and our faith in the City of Windsor's integrity. The City of

Windsor should do what is right and allow County Road 42 to be developed commercially but

leave the residential neighbourhood on Baseline be.

Please see the attached petition which displays the support, in solidarity, for keeping our road

safe, affordable and free from commercialization.

Thank you

Rob Roy



Item 7.1 Petition submitted by Rob Roy for the June 8, 2020 Development and Heritage Standing Committee

June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional Information From: Anita Liburdi Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 9:41 PM To: clerks <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Development & Heritage Standing Committee



Josh & Anita Trudeau

June 4, 2020




- Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes the homeowners privacy into their yards.



- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear thecost of a new sewer and hookup?


Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes than when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure?


We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as taxpayers.

Thank you, Josh & Anita Trudeau




June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional information From: Hardeep Singh Jhattu Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 8:50 AM To: clerks <[email protected]> Cc: Mckenzie, Kieran <[email protected]> Subject: Develiment & Heritage standing committee Amendment to Zoning by-law 8600 and by -law85-18



Hardeep s Jhattu



- Residential privacy - A four story hotel impedes the homeowners privacy into their yards.



- Why does a private, commercial development require the 58 homes on one block to bear thecost of a new sewer and hookup?


Since 2003, when our area was amalgamated, our taxes increased with nothing gained. We do not have sidewalks, street lights, a library, a community centre or a park to utilize close to our neighbourhood. For 17 years we have paid more taxes than when we were part of Tecumseh and no additional services in return. Why wasn’t that “extra money” from new city taxpayers set aside for local improvements to infrastructure?


We would like an opportunity to be heard and listened to as taxpayers.

Thanks You Hardeep Jhattu



June 8, 2020 Item 7.1

Additional Information

From: Nikki van Oirschot Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 4:51 PM To: Nwaesei, Justina <[email protected]> Cc: Robyn Perkins <[email protected]>; Councillor Stan Scott <[email protected]>; Councillor Steve Simpson Sr <[email protected]>; Councillor James Peters <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Tammy Jolicoeur <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Invitation to Engage and Consult with Caldwell First Nation Community on a Planning Act matter



Hi Justina,

Pursuant to our telephone call yesterday, I wish to advise you that Caldwell First Nation Council does not, at this time, have any concerns with the proposed project. They would request, however, that there be consideration for Caldwell Archaeological Monitors to be utilized in the event that arch excavation is required and that any artifacts be returned to Caldwell following any lab work/testing. Should there be more than one First Nation requesting same, we would be ok with discussing with them how it would transpire such that all parties are satisfied with the outcome.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Miigwech (Thank you),

Nikki van Oirschot “Mashkawizii Nendamowin Kwe” (she/her)

Director of Operations Caldwell First Nation








5A-150 Pinebush Road Cambridge ON N1R 8J8

p: 519.896.3163 905.381.2229 416.479.9684

www.ptsl.com 02 June 2020 Project: 200275/190554

Greg Bowman Vice President, Development Responsive Group Inc. 3760 14th Avenue, Suite 402 Markham ON N3R 3T7

Dear Mr. Bowman:

RE: LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY, 3175 BANWELL ROAD, WINDSOR ACCESS REVIEW & JUSTIFICATION

Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited completed a Transportation Impact Study (TIS), in January 2020, for a proposed long-term care facility at 3175 Banwell Road, Windsor. The TIS supported the proposed facility having two driveways as part of the site design to separate service vehicle movements from the main entrance operations.

The purpose of this present Letter-Report is to further review the second access that is proposed for the subject development and provide justification based on the following considerations:

Long-Term Care Facility Operations and Site Design Access Arrangement and Traffic Operations Banwell Road Widening and Intersection Improvements

Long-Term Care Facility Operations and Site Design

Responsive Group Inc., the proponent of the Long-Term Care Facility on Banwell Road, has been developing and operating Long-Term Care Facilities in Ontario for nearly three decades. The Group currently operates 14 long term care homes and 18 retirement communities in Ontario, which in turn provide services for more than 2,300 long term care beds and over 1,000 retirement suites. The proposed new facility on Banwell Road will provide 192 long term care beds and will add to long-term care capacity within the City of Windsor and the broader Windsor Essex Community.

Responsive Group is a recognized leader in creating and managing senior living environments, a great part of which is achieved by appropriate facility design conducive to providing a higher

Item 7.2--written submission by Rajan Philips June 8, 2020 Development and Heritage Standing Committee Meeting

Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited | Page 2

quality of life to seniors living in long-term care facilities. The Provincial Government’s Long-Term Care Home Design Manual1, outlines the design standards appropriate for long-term care facilities. Chapter 10 of the Manual includes the following guidelines for Reception/Entrance Space and for Receiving/Service Space in Long-Term Care Home facilities:

Reception/Entrance Space:• A welcoming introduction to the long-term care home.• Located close to an outside, protected vehicle pick-up and drop-off area for

residents. Receiving/Service Space:

• Located away from the main entrance and from all other resident and public areasso as not to expose residents and the public to noise, vehicle exhaust and safetyhazards.

• The receiving service space must be large enough to separately accommodate: Garbage storage and pick-up Convenient access to the dietary service space Isolated connection to food preparation areas Temporary storage space Year round receiving of supply deliveries Separate area with floor drains for cleaning and disinfecting service equipment

The proposed site design for the subject facility aims to satisfy these requirements by providing two separate entrances: an all-movement access on the west leg of the intersection of Banwell Road and Palmetto Street; and an all-movement access at the north end of the property, approximately 148 metres from Palmetto Street. Figure 1 (attached) illustrates the proposed Site Plan and the access locations.

The two access points will facilitate the accommodation of separate Reception/Entrance and Receiving/Service spaces in accordance with the Provincial design guidelines.

As can be seen in Figure 1, the site configuration is not amenable to achieving the functional separation with the main access located on the west leg of the intersection of Banwell Road and Palmetto Street.

It is also noted the proposed second access is the only access located along the 175-metre frontage of the subject site on Banwell Road.

1 Long-Term Care Home Design Manual 2015, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care


Access Arrangement and Traffic Operations

The results of the traffic impact analysis undertaken in the January 2020 TIS for the proposed facility confirmed that the AM/PM peak hour development traffic generated by the site can be satisfactorily accommodated by any of the three access combinations that were analyzed:

Access only via connection to the intersection of Banwell Road and Palmetto Street. A second RIRO access on Banwell Road in addition to the access connection to the

Banwell Road & Palmetto Street intersection. A second full access on Banwell Road in addition to the access connection to the

Banwell Road & Palmetto Street intersection.

Although the development traffic can be accommodated by the access connection to the Banwell Road and Palmetto intersection, the single access connection cannot accommodate the site design requirement for providing separate main entrance and service entrance spaces.

In addition, the second service entrance will also separate the facility service traffic from the Royal Timbers commercial development traffic at the Palmetto Street intersection.

While either a RIRO or all-movement second access to the facility can be accommodated on Banwell Road, the all-movement access is suggested as the preferred option based on the advantages for the facility and the implications for traffic flow on Banwell Road, as outlined below.

Banwell Road Widening and Intersection Improvements

Based on the 2016 Banwell Road Environmental Assessment recommendations, the City is proceeding with the widening of Banwell Road from two-three lanes to four lanes and intersection improvements including SB and NB left-turn lanes and centre medians at Palmetto Street.

The subject facility is located on the west side of Banwell Road between Palmetto Street and Tecumseh Road, with the proposed second access located approximately 148 metres north of Palmetto Street, and 218 metres south of Tecumseh Road.

For approximately 225 metres north of Palmetto Street, there are no existing driveways on the west side of Banwell Road. On the east side of Banwell Road, and across from the subject site, there are two existing driveways to the property at 3000 Banwell Road, which are located approximately 72 metres and 179 metres north from Palmetto Street.

Further north, there are two driveways on either side of Banwell Road, approximately 80 metres and 134 metres south of the intersection at Tecumseh Road.

Figure 2 (attached) illustrates the existing driveway locations on the east side and west side of Banwell Road (numbered E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4, W-1 and W-2), and the proposed new access location on the west side. The new access will have adequate separation distances from


Palmetto Street to the south (148 metres) and from W-1, the driveway to the north on the west side (84 metres). It will also be offset by approximately 30 metres from driveway E-2 on the east side.

All of the existing driveways on Banwell Road between Palmetto Street and Tecumseh Road are currently operating as all-movement access points. With the construction of a centre median on the north leg of the intersection at Palmetto Street, driveway E-1, on the east side, will be restricted to RIRO.

However, driveway E-2 to will remain an all movement access, and the proposed lane configuration for this section of Banwell Road includes a two-way left turn lane (between the SB/NB left-turn lanes at Palmetto Street and Tecumseh Road) to accommodate turning movements to driveway E-2 and driveway W-1.

The new driveway on the west side is currently proposed to be located, approximately 30 metres offset from driveway E-2 and 84 metres south of driveway W-1, within the section of Banwell Road where the new two-way left-turn lane will be located.

The lane configuration changes on Banwell Road including the addition of a two-way left-turn lane (between driveways E-2 and W-1), can potentially accommodate an all-movement access on Banwell Road to the subject long-term care home facility, in addition to the access at the intersection of Palmetto Street and Banwell Road.

Providing an-all movement second access, instead of a RIRO access, will also eliminate the potential for vehicles exiting south from the facility and making U-turns on Banwell Road to travel north.

Conclusions

In summary, providing an all-movement driveway on Banwell Road as an additional access for the proposed long-term care home facility is feasible and justifiable based on the following considerations:

It addresses the facility design requirement for separating the Reception/Entrance andReceiving/Service spaces.

The proposed access will be the only access to the facility on the Banwell Roadfrontage.

The driveway can be located with adequate access/intersection separation distances onthe west side, and with adequate offset distance from the driveway on the east side.

The driveway traffic volumes are low, the AM/PM peak hour operations will be atsatisfactory levels of service, and there will be no impact on the traffic flow on BanwellRoad.

The proposed midblock addition of a two-way left-turn lane on Banwell Road canaccommodate northbound left-turns to the new facility.


The exact location of the driveway on Banwell Road can be finalized in co-ordinationwith the detailed design for Banwell Road improvements.

Based on these considerations, an all-movement access on Banwell Road to the proposed long-term care home facility is a justifiable and feasible arrangement that can be submitted to the City of Windsor for consideration and approval.

We trust the foregoing addresses your requirements for finalizing the Site Plan for the proposed long-term care facility. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need additional information or clarifications.

Yours very truly,

PARADIGM TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS LIMITED

Rajan Philips M.SC, P.Eng.Senior Transportation Consultant


Attachments


Figure 1 – Proposed Site Plan

Prop

osed

Site

Pla

nFi

gure

131

75 B

anw

ellR

oad,

Win

dsor

Acc

ess

Rev

iew

& J

ustif

icat

ion

2002

75


Figure 2 – Banwell Road Access Locations

Figure 23175 Banwell Road, Windsor Access Review & Justification200275

Banwell Road Access Locations

Subject Site

Proposed Access

Future Two-Way Left-Turn Lane

NTSImage Source: mappmycity.ca

Proposed Main Access

development & heritage standing committee additional ......june 8, 2020 item 7.1 additional...

Documents