lampman place extension municipal class … are very good and lampman only provides a circuitous...

Wednesday September 2 2015

7:00pm Presentation

7:15-8:00 Question Period

Lampman Place Extension

Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Schedule B

PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE 2

LAMPMAN PLACE

EXTENSION


7:00pm Presentation




PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE 2 W

eig

hti

ng

Option 1 - Do

Nothing

Option 2 -

Straight

Through

Option 3 -

Cul-de-Sac

(South End)

Option 4 -

Cul-de-sac

(North End)

1 Ranked 1 8 4 3 9

2 Ranked 2 4 2 5 9

3 Ranked 3 2 2 3 3

4 Ranked 4 4 4 1 0

4 Unranked 6 12 12 3 Score

Rank

62

2

78

4

74

3

48

1

GENERAL COMMENTS FROM PIC 1 •Maintain the existing subdivision feel.

•There is enough traffic travelling up and down these streets.

•Safety of the residents.

•Speed of traffic.

•Turning left onto Juliana Drive would be problematic.

•Concern with cars using Lampman Place as a short cut to avoid Norwich Avenue and Juliana Drive

•Originally in the design of the subdivision Lampman Place was to extend to Juliana Drive since 1976-1980

•A Lampman Place connection would make reaching the hospital, high school, arena, shopping center, Highway 401 &

Mill Street quicker and easier.

•EMS access from Juliana Drive.


7:00pm Presentation


2015 Background Traffic Data

• On July 16th, 2015, existing traffic counts were obtained along Juliana Drive at the Norwich Ave and Bruin Blvd intersections.

• On July 20th, 2015, existing traffic counts were obtained along Salter Ave at the Lampman Place & Norwich Ave

intersections.

• Existing traffic data has been projected 10 years, to the year 2025.

• Proposed Development traffic added based on current Official Plan designation of Medium Density to High Density

Residential and considered conservative for operations.

Option 2 Through Street

• provides multiple development and emergency connections to the local road network; 1 new & 3 existing (Odium, Powell,

Salter) accesses

• no signals or dedicated turning lanes required

• no significant impact on present or future traffic operations along Juliana at Bruin Blvd or Norwich Ave

• no practical benefit for drivers to circumvent Norwich Ave by detouring along Lampman, since the operations at

Juliana/Norwich are very good and Lampman only provides a circuitous route to Parkinson Road and Norwich Ave

Option 3 Cul-de-Sac South End

• acceptable operations, with no additional roadwork or traffic control improvements required

• traffic volume increase (22 vph to 67 vph) may not sit well with local residents,

• high level of operations is sustainable.

• possible problem with alternate emergency access for development site at south end of Lampman.

Option 4 Cul-de-Sac North End

• provides a single, direct connection to an arterial thoroughfare with no significant impact on present or future traffic

operations along Juliana Drive.

• no significant impact specific to the close proximity of Bruin Blvd

• no signals or dedicated turning lanes required

• allows present Lampman neighbourhood to maintain status quo

• no significant impact on present or future traffic operations along Juliana at Bruin Blvd or Norwich Ave • possible problem with alternate emergency access.





7:00pm Presentation





OPTION 1

Do Nothing

• Does not address the problem statement of allowing development of the abutting properties.

• As there already exists storm and sanitary services within the road allowance any

archaeological or environmental features that may have been preserved have already been

disturbed or removed.

• City of Woodstock would be required to return the land for this extension to the previous

owner and will need to get easements over the existing infrastructure.


7:00pm Presentation





OPTION 2

Through Street

• Objective would be met allowing for the development of the abutting properties.

• Provides for additional connections to the overall City of Woodstock road network and allow

for easier and quicker access and egress from the existing residential neighborhood as well

as any future developments in the area.

• Does not have sufficient traffic flows to warrant additional turn lanes at Juliana Drive.

• Signal lights not required.

• No practical benefit for drivers on Juliana Drive to use a possible connection to avoid the

Juliana Drive and Norwich Avenue intersection.

• Construction cost for this option is estimated at $201,528.


7:00pm Presentation





OPTION 3

Cul-De-Sac

(South End)

• The objective would be met allowing the development of the abutting properties.

• Routes all the traffic through the existing residential development significantly increasing traffic

on Lampman Place from a present 22 vehicles per hour to an estimated 67 vehicles per hour.

• No improvement to Emergency Vehicle access time to the existing residential neighborhood.

• Snow removal ,general maintenance and garbage pick up more difficult.

• No improvement to the egress to the south and west from the existing residential development.

• The cul-de-sac bulb would require additional land than what is presently owned by the City.



7:00pm Presentation





OPTION 4

Cul-De-Sac

(North End)

• The objective would be met allowing the development of the abutting properties.

• This option would provide a single, direct connection to Juliana Drive.

• No significant impacts on Bruin Drive or intersection of Juliana Drive and Norwich Ave.

• Turn lanes and signals not warranted.

• Maintains the existing conditions for the existing Lampman Neighborhood.

• No improved access for existing residents.

• No improvement to Emergency Vehicle access time to the existing residential neighborhood.

• Snow removal, maintenance operations and garbage collection more difficult.

• Requires additional land than what is presently owned by the City for this extension.



7:00pm Presentation





Good Poor

10 7.5 5.0 2.5 0

● ◕ ◑ ◔ ○

EVALUATION n 1

No

ing

th

n 2

Str

aig

ht

rog

hu

n 3

Cu

l-d

e-S

ac

En

d)

n 4

Cu

l-d

e-S

ac

(No

rth

En

d)

CRITERIA CRITERIA INDICATORS

Op

tio

Op

tio

Th

Op

tio

(So

uth

Op

tio

Maintains or improves traffic from existing

neighborhood ●

Do

◕ ○ ●

Allows for improved emergency access ○ ● ◑ ◑

Traffic Minimizes movement from new development

through existing residential neighborhood ● ◑ ○ ●

Allows for improved egress from existing residential

neighborhood ○ ● ○ ○

Summary 20 32.5 5 25

Property Impact Does not require additional property to carry out

solution. ● ● ○ ○

Cost 10 for zero cost, loss of 1 point per $50,000 $0 $201,528 $211,371 $214,542

10 6.0 5.8 5.7

Landscape/ Meets standard design criteria for roadways ● ● ○ ◑

Aesthetics Meets recommended minimum population on a

dead end or cul-de-sac ● ● ○ ◑

Environmental Minimizes environmental impact or allows for

reinstatement of environmental features ◑ ○ ○ ○

Archaeological Does not affect Archaeological Significant features. ● ● ● ● Allows for provision of required services. ● ● ● ●

Utilities/Services Allows for access to existing services/ utilities. ◑ ● ● ●

Public Input Ranked solutions at PIC1 ◕ ◔ ◑ ●

Meets Objective Meets target statement allowing for development of

properties in the study area. ○ ● ● ●

Ranking 97.5 111.0 55.8 90.7




• Meets the objective allowing for development.

• Improves egress from existing neighborhood.

• Improves access for emergency services.

• No practical benefit for drivers to circumvent Norwich Ave

by detouring along Lampman.

• No negative impacts to Norwich & Juliana.

• Lowest cost alternative meeting the objective.

A project file is required for Schedule B

projects which documents the EA

process carried out. In order to complete

the Schedule B process a notice of

completion will be submitted to review

agencies, stakeholders and the public for

a period of at least 30 days for comment

and input.

If concerns are raised that cannot be

resolved through discussions with the

City as the EA proponent, the Part II

order appeal process may be initiated. If

no appeals are brought forward by the

expiry of the appeal period, the project is

considered to have met the requirements

of the Class EA process.


7:00pm Presentation





Next Steps: • Comments from PIC 2 to be submitted by 4:30pm Wednesday, September 16.

• Final reports completed Friday, Sept. 25.

• City Council meeting on October 15.

• ‘Notice of Completion’ and start 30 day comment period: October 22.

• Report to City Council re. completion of EA December 3.

• Detailed Design & Construction.

Questions? Comment Sheets

Available.

lampman place extension municipal class … are very good and lampman only provides a circuitous...

Documents