TFD E Study V1.S4

".
'''\\I\\~ '\I\\I\I\I\\I\~~.

DILLON

CONSULTl:-.JC

I.~ ~ .. J.L.Ricbards & ABsociates Limited "l .. co,,,".,,,E""""""._II.,,,,.PI,""'~

-_ .'~

y onawa-Carleton

~ C1TY OFKANATA

Terry Fox Drive Environmental Study Report Eagleson Road to March Road

SECTION 7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

I

,-

{ [ ( [ [ (

r c

Terry Fox Drive Environmental Assessment Study March Road to Eagleson Road

Environmental Study Report

7.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

7.1 SELECTED DESIGN

7.1.1 Preferred Alignment

The functional design of the Preferred Alignment is presented in Section 8.0. Table 7.1 presents a detailed description of the proposed design for Terry Fox Drive from Eagleson Road to March Road.

Generally, the design proposed for Terry Fox Drive is as follows:

Eagleson Road to Palladium Drive

o

Palladium Drive to Campeau Drive

Campeau Drive to (New) Richardson Side Road

(New) Richardson Side Road to Goulboum Forced Road

Goulboum Forced Road to March Road

Terry Fox Drive will have a four lane urban cross-section with bicycle lanes in both directions and sidewalks on both sides.

The design of this section of Terry Fox Drive has not been completely defmed due to on-going initiatives by MTO and development in the Kanata Town Centre lands. As a minimum, Terry Fox Drive will have 4 through lanes, 2 bicycle lanes and sidewalks on both sides through this section.


Terry Fox Drive will have a two lane rural cross-section with bicycle lanes in both directions and a sidewalk on the east/south side.


7.1.2 Drainage and Stormwater Management

Assumptions

The following is a brief overview of the rationale and assumptions used to carry out the preliminary sizing of the proposed stormwater management facilities (SWMF):

• It was assumed that the proposed SWMF would provide water quality and water quantity treatment for the Terry Fox Drive widening/extension only.

• An imperviousness of 0.70 was used for the 40 m or 45 m ROW

• It was assumed that stormwater runoff generated from the upstream lands would not be conveyed to the proposed end-of-pipe facilities since upstream land development plans and land use is not yet determined. Proper grading and provision of a separate conveyance system will be required to divert upstream runoff from the facilities.

• The water quality storage requirements was obtained from Table 4.1 of the Stormwater Management Practices Planning and Design Manual (MOEE, June 1994) based on various levels of fish habitat protection as presented in the table.

[I

[

Dillon Consulting Limited

J.L. Richards & Associates Limited

October, 2000 Page 7-1



TABLE 7.1- PROPOSED CROSS-SECTIO~S FOR TERRY FOX DRIVE EXTENSIONIWIDENING

Section Start of Section

End of Section

Cross-

Sidewalk Road Width

ROW Width

Section Location

Eagleson Road Fembank Road 4UAD both sides 18.5 mpaved 45m
Hope Side Road 5.0 mmedian
2 F embank Road Hazeldean Road 4UAD both sides 18.5 mpaved 40m
5.0 m median
3 Hazeldean Road Palladium Drive 4UAD both sides 18.5 mpaved 40 m (exist)
5.0 mmedian
3 Palladium Drive Campeau Drive n/a n/a n/a nJa
4 Richardson Side 4UAD both sides 18.5 mpaved 45 m(new)
Campeau Drive Road (New) 5.0 mmedian
4 Goulboum Forced 2RAU-M south 12.0 mpaved 45 m(new)
Richardson Side Road/Terry Fox side! east
Road (New) Drive side
5 Goulboum Forced March Road 4UAD both sides 18.5 mpaved 45m
Road/Terry Fox 5.0 mmedian
Drive • The water quantity storage requirement was based on the control of the post-development flows below the pre-development levels to ensure that flooding is mitigated for design events ranging from a 1:2 year to 1: 100 year recurrence. The OTTHYMO (InterHyrno 1989) model was used to determine the water quantity storage requirements.

• A wet retention pond was selected as the type of end-of-pipe facility for each section of the extension.

The following describes, by road section, the proposed stormwater management practices for Terry Fox Drive.

Eagleson RoadIHope Side Road to Fembank Road

A fish habitat protection Level No.1 is appropriate since this section of Terry Fox Drive discharges to Monahan Drain, which eventually outlets to the Rideau River where the following water quality targets and guidelines are to be achieved:

• Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration in stormwater effluent to be below 25 mgIL between May 15 and September 15 and below 80 mgIL during all other times.

• Escherichia coli (E-coli) concentration in stormwater effluent to be below 100 countsllOO ml from May 15 to September 15 with an average of four exceedances being permitted during the same period.




[ n

c

[ [

c

c

c

l

[

L

o c

[

[

o

l



However, since the sizing of the Monahan Drain Constructed Wetlands has already accounted for the development of the lands between Eagleson Road and Fembank Road, no SWMF is required for this entire section of Terry Fox Drive.

Fembank Road to Hazeldean Road

In regards to this section of roadway, the 1991 ESR included the following specific mitigation measures which includes a crossing of a Carp River Tributary and a crossing of Monahan Creek:

• Rear lot and roadside drainage will be picked up by ditches draining into the Carp River and Monahan Creek. Drainage will be improved over the existing conditions;

• The culvert placement for the crossing of the Carp River must not take place between March 15 and June 30 of any year;

• Water velocity through the culverts must be no greater than 0.6 m/s;

• The river bed must be kept at its natural elevation;

• Siltation control measures will be implemented during construction; and,

•

Large boulders are also to be placed in the culvert bottoms to allow fish to pass through the culverts.

No further consideration was given to SWMF in this section of the Terry Fox Drive.

Hazeldean Road to Palladium Drive

A fish habitat protection Level No.2 was used since this section of Terry Fox Drive discharges to the Carp River where no specific water quality targets and guidelines are to be achieved. Based on this two SWMF are required for the widening of Terry Fox Drive.

SWMFNo.l

Based on discussions with City of Kanata staff, it was determined that this facility should be located along Hazeldean Road between Terry Fox Drive and the Carp River. Considering the widening of Terry Fox Drive alone, it was determined that a permanent pool of 60 m' and a water quality component of 200 m' is required. A block of land approximately 650 rrf should be allocated for stormwater management.

SWMFNo.2

The water quality and quantity requirements of this facility are approximately 200 m' and 850 m', respectively for the widening alone of this section of Terry Fox Drive. Based on discussions with City of Kanata staff, the above water quality and water quantity volumes should be provided in the existing stormwater management facilities located in Walter Baker Park near chainage 8+800 m.

Costs for these facilities have been estimated at $150,000.

Campeau Road to Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive






A fish habitat protection Level No.2 was used for most of Terry Fox Drive, with the exception of one facility which will discharge to Shirley's Brook where a fish habitat protection Level No.1 was defined as part of the Watts Creek/Shirley's Brook Subwatershed Study (Summary Document, June 1999, Dillon Consulting).

Five SWMF are required for this section of Terry Fox Drive. General locations for the facilities have been suggested, however, these will need to be confirmed during detailed design. Preferably, these SWMF should be combined with facilities proposed for future developments in the area.

c c o

SWMFNo.l

The water quality and water quantity requirements of this facility are approximately 225 m 3 and 1,010 m', respectively. Based on discussions with City of Kanata staff, the above water quality and water quantity volumes should be accommodated in the existing stormwater management facility located south of Terry Fox Drive at chainage 11 + 1 00 m.

[

SWMFNo.2

A permanent pool of 600 m" and a water quantity component of 3,150 m' are required. A block of land of approximately 2,800 rrf should be allocated for stormwater management.

c c

SWMFNo.3

This facility should be located west of Terry Fox Drive at chainage 13+350 m. A permanent pool of 725 m' and a water quantity component of 3,850 rrr' are required. A block of land of approximately 3,000 m 2 should be allocated for stormwater management.

SWMFNo.4

This facility should be located east of Terry Fox Drive and north of the Nepean-Arnprior railway at chainage 14+900 m. A permanent pool of 1,200 m" (fish habitat protection Level No.1) and a water quantity component of 3,100 m' are required. A block of land of approximately 3,000 rrr' are required. A block of land of approximately 2,800 rrr' should be allocated for stormwater management.

c

SWMFNo.5

This facility should be located along the Ontario Hydro Easement north of the Terry Fox Drive at chainage 16+500 m. A permanent pool of 600 rrf and a water quantity component of 3,150 m 2 are required. A block of land of approximately 2,800 rrf should be allocated for stormwater management.

Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive to March Road

o c

The total costs of these five SWMF, if constructed independent of SWMF for the adjacent developments, are estimated at $695,000. These costs could be significantly less, if combined with adjacent facilities.

One SWMF is required for this portion of Terry Fox Drive. This facility should provide water quality and water quantity treatment for only the widening of Terry Fox Drive between the Ontario Hydro Easement and March Road. A permanent pool of 180 m- and a water quantity component of710 m' are required for the widening alone. However, since this area is fully developed, a cash contribution towards the implementation of stormwater management works for Shirley's Brook is anticipated to be appropriate.




L [

[

c



7.1.3 Watercourse Crossings

[

The construction of the proposed Terry Fox Drive extension will require that existing drainage paths be crossed. The proposed drainage structures along the proposed Terry Fox Drive extension were sized to convey the 1 :50 year flows for the pre-development conditions (under free flow conditions). Tributary areas for each watercourse crossing were estimated and, the 1 :50 year peak flow rates were calculated using the OTTHYMO (InterHymo 1989) model.

The following text describes, by road section, the proposed watercourse crossings.

Eagleson RoadIHope Side Road to Fembank Road

For this section of the Terry Fox Drive extension, two watercourse crossings will be required. The 1 :50 pre-development flows for these two crossings are 2.8 m3/s and 3.5 mvs and, it was estimated that two 1,600 mm corrugated steel pipe (CSP) culverts were required.


All structure required to cross watercourses in this section of Terry Fox Drive were determined by the previous EA study.

Hazeldean Road to Palladium Drive

For this section of the Terry Fox Drive e~tension, there is two existing drainage structures: a 600 CSP culvert and a 900 mm CSP culvert. Since this section of the Terry Fox Drive extension presently has a two lane cross-section, an allowance was made for the extension of both drainage structures and an allowance for other minor crossings.

Campeau Drive to Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

For this section of the Terry Fox Drive extension, a total of seven major road crossings was inventoried. The 1:50 year pre-development flows for these crossings ranged from 0.9 mvs to 2.6 m3/s while the size of the proposed crossings ranged from a 1,000 mm to 1,400 mm CSP culvert.

Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive to March Road

There are no watercourse crossings in this section of Terry Fox Drive.

7.1.4 Construction Staging/Timing

[

All four lane road sections will be built initially as two lane roads. Consistent with construction to date, four lane sections will be staged by building the northbound/eastbound lanes first, as two lane rural roads. Two lane stages will provide bicycle lanes in both directions and at least one sidewalk.

The timing of construction for Terry Fox Drive extensions/widenings will be dependent on the pace of development. The first stage of the section from Winchester Drive to Michael Cowpland Drive is currently under construction (August 2000). The detailed design for the 300 m north of Campeau Drive has been completed.


JL. Richards & Associates Limited




[ r

7.1.5 Project Cost

• Section 1 - $3.3 M;

• Section 2 - $8.5 M;

• Section 3 - $3.3 M (not including modifications to the Highway 417 interchange or any modifications to the auxiliary lanes for Kanata Centrum);

• Section 4 - $13.5 M; and

• Section 5 - $1.8 M;

c [

[

The following are the estimated roadway construction costs by road section:

The costs indicated above do not include costs for SWMF and/or any property requirements. If constructed in isolation of adjacent development, the total costs for SWMF have been estimated at $845,000. These costs can be reduced if the SWMF for Terry Fox Drive are combined with those of the adjacent developments.

• natural environment (including terrestrial and aquatic habitat and surface water quality/quantity);

• agriculture;

• social (including noise impacts to residents, community/recreational features, and community

character);

• planned land use and future communities;

• cultural resources (including heritage and archaeological resources); and

• businesses.

c c [

c [ [,

ROW for the existing sections of Terry Fox Drive has already been acquired by the City of Kanata and/or the Region of Ottawa-Carleton. There would be no property costs for these sections. Property for the new sections of Terry Fox Drive would be acquired through Plan of Subdivision, for the portions adjacent to lands slated for future development. Property values for those sections that run through lands that will not be developed (i.e. Section 4) were not estimated given the outstanding question of their ultimate land use designation.

7.2 PROJECT BENEFITS, IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURES

The following outlines the anticipated benefits and impacts of Terry Fox Drive, as well as the mitigation measures proposed to minimize or eliminate anticipated impacts (see Table 7.2 for a summary of project effects and mitigation). The impacts are based on the area of impact for each section of Terry Fox Drive as lands within the entire right-of-way are likely to be disturbed during construction. Both operation and construction impacts are examined for the following environmental components:

For each of these environmental components, the discussion is organized by road section.

o

It should be noted that for Section 2 (Fembank Road to Hazeldean Road), an Environmental Study Report, Terry Fox Drive, Fernbank Road to Hazeldean Road was completed in January 1991. Some construction on this section of Terry Fox Drive has already been initiated (in particular the construction of culverts for the Carp River crossing). Given the level of detail in the ESR, it is unclear whether the assessment of effects was based on the proposed 40 metre ROW or on the proposed 20 metre pavement width. Thus, to be conservative, it has been assumed that the January 1991 ESR reflects the 20 m pavement width only. The following discussion includes any potential impacts and appropriate mitigation associated with extending this zone of impact by 20 m to reflect the full 40 m ROW.

L [




L l

Impact on Significant Natural Areas and Terrestrial Habitat

Area (ha) of wetlands designated for environmental protection removed

Area (ha) of woodlands designatedfor environmental protection removed

Area (ha) of wildlife habitat (including woodlands and wetlands) designated for future development removed

Impact:

• Impacts on the terntion 2 does not environment in this'ironmental significant

MitigationlFuture Work

• No mitigation is pn section

Impact on Aquatic Habitat

Amount and quality of aquatic habitat displaced

Amount and quality of aquatic habitat disrupted

o

Impact:

).

• There is no aquatic,lVer a wa.rm

section uhan Dram. uh habitat

MitigationlFuture Worl

• No mitigation is re

, rock check

fork to July 1- ling season :.:ts

u appropriately i')FO during

i~ potential for

Impact:

• Impacts on the terrestrial environment in this section are not significant.


• No mitigation is proposed for this section

Impact:

• There is no aquatic habitat in this section


• No mitigation is required

[

Impact on Surface Water Quality/Quantity

Potential for alteration of watercourse flows

[

Potential for change in surface water quality

Impact:

• No watercourse cnt~rcourse

• Storm water runof

and discharged intre collected and

management facihvater

impacts are anticiplUs, no impacts

Mitigation/Future Worl • No mitigation is re d

Impact:

• 2 watercourse crossings

• Storm water runoff will be collected and discharged into a storm water management facility. Thus, no impacts are anticipated



c o o [

[J

o

o o c c o [

[

c C L l:

Consistency with land use designations and approved development plans

Consistency with local and regional Official Plan policies

equipment to minimize noise

• No mitigation is proposed for operational noise impacts

Limit construction to the times allowed within local noise by-laws and maintain

. . .. . I

equipment to rmmmize noise

Construction of2.5 metre or[higher noise berrn/barrier

•

Impact:

• No impacts on planned land uses are anticipated

Impact:

• The alignment does not conform with what is presented in the Kanata Official Plan

• The alignment is beyond the current urban boundary and thus may result in pressure to expand the urban area

Mitigation/Future Work

• These issues will need to be addressed by the Region and City within a reasonable time frame

Impact:

• No impacts on planned land uses are anticipated



Impact:

• The Jan 1991 ESR does not indicate any effects on Planned Land US!: therefore no additional impacts in this section are anticipated as a result of a 40 m ROW



Impact:

• Terry Fox Drive is not anticipated to have a negative impact on the Kanata South Business Park

• Roadway extension will improve access to the business park



: Impacts on Future Communities

Future residential areas disrupted as a : result of noise impacts associated with

I traffic operations



Impact:

• The undeveloped land in this section is not designated as General Urban Area. Thus, future residential development is not anticipated



Impact:

• Some of the undeveloped land in this section is designated as General Urban Area in the Official Plan.


• Depending on the proximity of future residences a noise barrier may have to be considered

Impact:

• The undeveloped land in this section is not designated as General Urban Area. Thus, future residential development is not anticipated



Impact:

• The undeveloped land in ~ section is not designated as General Urban Area. Thus, future residential development is not anticipated



Impact:

• The undeveloped land in this section is not designated for residential development. Thus, future residential development is not anticipated



Area of medium and high archaeological potential affected

Proximity to known archaeological

Impact:

• Impact on medium to high archeological potential along the ROW on the south side of the existing Terry Fox Dr., for approx. 620m


• Archeological assessment required during detail design

Impact:

• Impact on medium to high archeological potential along the ROW on a 3000 m section



Impact:

• No areas of medium to high archeological potential will be impacted


• ]\[0 mitigation is required

Impact:

• Impact on medium to high archeological potential within the ROW firm Castlefrank Rd. to Fembank Rd.

Mitigation/Future Work I


Impact:

• Impact on medium to high archeological potential along approx. 1100 m of ROW through the agricultural fields between Eagleson Rd. and F embank Rd.



r. Loss or disruption to heritage features J Change in cultural landscapes

o

Impact:

• There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage features in this section and minimal change is expected to the cultural heritage landscape as an existing roadway is simply being expanded


• No

Impact:

• The main bam complex and architecturally significant stone farmhouse will not be impacted

• Built heritage features will be separated from the riverscape by ROW


• No mitigation is proposed for this section

Impact:

• There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage features in this section and minimal change is expected to the cultural heritage landscape as an existing roadway is simply being expanded



Impact:

• There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage in this secion



Impact:

• Potential for disruption to the Fernbank Road Streetscape


• No mitigation is proposed for this cultural landscape impact

C Q o [

c

c

[ [

G C

c C L L [

Area (ha) of prime agricultural land designated for long term agricultural use removed

Impact:

• No impacts on agricultural land are anticipated in this section



During detail design a detailed plan for mitigating surface water impacts will need to be prepared. Consideration should be given to storm water quality control measures such as grasses swales, filter strips, flat bottom ditches, buffer strips, rip rap at pipe outlets, etc.

• Consideration to be given to the Region's Official Plan Policy 5.2.2

• Further discussions with MVCA during detail design are necessary for Richardson Side Road area to confirm impacts,

determine . and obtain

Impact:

• No impacts on agricultural land are anticipated in this section



Impact:

• Agricultural impacts are anticipated to be

minimal I

MitigationlFuture Work (

.. No mitigation is proposed for this section

Impact:

.. Removal of approx. 4.4 ha ofland designated for long term agricultural use (Note: although designated as Agricultural Resource Area this land is not particularly suited to agriculture due to the bedrock close to the surface)



Impact:

.. Agricultural impacts are anticipated to be minimal



Impact on Agricultural Operations

Area (ha) of designated agricultural land within 30 m of the new roadway that may be impacted by nuisance effects

Potential for farmland fragmentation

Impact:

.. All construction will be within the existing ROWand lands are designated for future development. Thus, impacts on agricultural operations as a result of roadway are not anticipated


.. No mitigation is required

Impact:

.. Potential for disturbance to approx. 7.8 ha of agricultural operations due to salt spray and dust

.. Fragmentation of approx. 18 ha ofland from a contiguous farmed area

.. Disturbance to Richardson family's farm buildings and operations


.. No mitigation is necessary for the fragmented area due to its small size.

.. The roadway has been moved slightly west just north of Richardson Side Rd. to minimize effects on the Richardson family

Impact:

.. All construction will be within the existing right-of-way and lands are designated for future development. Thus, impacts on agricultural operations as a result of roadway are not anticipated


.. No mitigation is required

Impact:

.. As indicated in the Jan 1991 ESR, lands to the west are designated Agricultural Resource Area. However, since these lands represent the fringe of urban/rural lands and the ROW is estalilished in the current OP, impacts are no~ considered to

be significant I



[

Number of Residences Displaced

[

Number of existing residences disrupted as a result of noise impacts associated with construction and/or operation

Potential for negative impact on community/recreational features

L

Change in community character

Impact:

.. Potential for disruption impacts during construction (noise and dust) to Morgan's Grant Corrununity


.. Use of dust suppressants during construction

.. Limit construction to the times allowed within local noise by-laws and maintain equipment to minimize noise

Impact:

.. Potential of reducing aesthetic value of recreational trails (Note: in some cases, these trails may be on lands designated for future development)

.. Potential for disruption impacts during construction (noise, dust) on Richardson farmhouse and buildings


.. No mitigation is available for the impact on the trails


.. Limit construction to the times allowed

within local noise

laws and maintain

Impact:

.. Potential for disruption impacts during construction (noise, dust) for residents to the east of the existing Terry Fox Drive

.. May improve access to Walter Baker Park and the Kanata Recreational Complex




Impact:

.. Crossing of the

.. Potential for disruption during

construction (noise, dust) ~or existing residents to the east

.. Potential for noise impacts during operation at 60 homes backing onto Terry Fox Drive between Hazeldean Road and

Castlefrank Road I


.. Options for minimizing impacts at the trail crossing should be investigated during detail design

.. Use of dust suppressants construction

Impact:

.. Crops in this area are relatively tolerant of nuisance effects. Thus, impacts to agricultural operations are anticipated to be minimal



Impact:

.. Potential for disruption impacts during construction (noise, dust) at Fernbank Road




[ c c [

c

[ c [

[ [ [

o

G L [

[

l

[

[

o

C D

c

[

c c

o

0'

L

[_



7.2.1 Terrestrial Environment

Section 1 - Eagleson Road/Hope Side Road to Fernbank Road

For Section 1, the impacts to terrestrial vegetation will be low as the area is currently in agricultural production. Only portions of hedgerows will be removed.

Section 2 - Fernbank Road to Hazeldean Road

The January 1991 ESR for Section 2 does not indicate any significant environmental features in the area. No additional impacts are anticipated as a result of extending the potential impact from that assumed in the January 1991, ESR.

Section 3 - Hazeldean Road to Campeau Drive and

Section 5 - Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive to March Road

In Sections 5 and 3 of Terry Fox Drive, there are no significant wetlands or woodlands. Lands within these sections of Terry Fox Drive are designated as Business Park or General Urban Area and most areas are developed or experiencing development pressure. Thus, the minimal habitat that exists within the right-of-way will likely not remain regardless of whether or not Terry Fox Drive is widened. The impacts on the terrestrial environment in this section are not significant and no mitigation is proposed for this section.

Section 4 - Campeau Drive to Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

Section 4, results in the removal of 0.5 ha of wetland designated for protection, 9.6 ha of woodland designated for protection and approximately 4.2 ha of wildlife habitat (including woodlands and wetlands) that is designated for future development. Much of the impact of this section of the proposed Terry Fox Drive will be on the South March Highlands and Kanata Lakes Area. It is also noted that the Shirley's Brook/Watts Creek Subwatershed Study identifies a wildlife corridor that extends from Section 4 study area and continues in a north-east direction to the Ottawa River. This wildlife corridor is not continuous and is broken-up by roads, development and agricultural land. Alternative 4-1 passes through the southern limits of this corridor. It can be expected that there will be some road kills of wildlife from the development of this roadway including some of the species previously listed in Appendix C. Eliminating the impact is not feasible, however, to minimize corridor impacts on wildlife and movements within this corridor, the following mitigation measures are proposed:

•

replant right-of-way with salt tolerant species; .

provide oversized culverts to allow crossing of ROW by animals; provide signing to reduce the potential of animal deaths;

reduce the maintenance within the ROW to allow vegetation to return to a more wild state.

•

•

•

A detailed mitigation plan for both roadway corridor construction and operation will need to be prepared during detail design. As much as possible, environmental enhancement measures should be incorporated into the design of the facility. The detailed mitigation plan should include consideration of the following Official Plan policies:

•

5.2.1, Protection of Vegetative Cover - suggests relandscaping/planting; identification of priority trees; outline protection measures for trees or stands of trees being retained; use of native species; and






•

5.2.3 Design With Nature - suggests incorporating methods to design with nature, use of the natural characteristics of the site including retaining as much natural vegetation as possible and maintaining natural contours through road design.

7.2.2 Aquatic Environment

In Section 1, an urban cross section is proposed (curb and gutter). Since stormwater runoff from the road will be directed to a stormwater management facility prior to release into a watercourse, impacts on the nearby Jock River are anticipated to be minimal.

[ C

Section 1 - Eagleson RoadIHope Side Road to Fembank Road

Section 2 - Fembank Road to Hazeldean Road

The January 1991 ESR for the Fembank Road to Hazeldean Road section (Section 2) recognizes that this section crosses the Carp River. Since approval of this ESR, culverts for the Carp River have already been constructed. In order to accommodate the wider pavement width and sidewalks currently proposed, an extension of these culverts will be required. The Carp River is a warm water fishery and there is likely fish habitat in this area. Thus, to mitigate impacts to fish habitat in the area of this crossing similar mitigation measures as those discussed below for Section 5 should be put into place. The preparation of a fish compensation plan and Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) authorization are not typically required for the extension of an existing culvert.

c

[

Section 3 - Hazeldean Road to Campeau Drive

[

For Section 3, there are no anticipated impacts on aquatic habitat.

Section 4 - Campeau Drive to Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

[ C

Section 4 of Terry Fox Drive crosses a number of tributaries in the sensitive headwaters of the Shirley's Brook Watershed. The alignment also parallels one of the tributaries for a length of 450 metres. Based on the work of the Shirley's Brook/Watts Creek Subwatershed Plan, these tributaries should be considered as Type 1 habitat. Based on preliminary designs for the roadway, approximately 8100 m2 of aquatic habitat could be displaced as a result of the placement of culverts. Approximately 5400 m' of aquatic habitat may also be disrupted in this section due to the removal of riparian vegetation, and increased runoff following storm events potentially leading to increased erosion and a decrease in water quality.

c

A fish compensation plan and DFO authorization will likely be required to replace the fish habitat displaced as a result of culvert installations. The quantity of displaced aquatic habitat is an estimate only based on conceptual level of detail. During detailed design, a review of the habitat to be displaced should be undertaken and any adjustments in the alignment made where possible to reduce habitat displacement. Once the detail design is available and the exact extent of impact on fish habitat is known, a detailed compensation plan should be prepared and submitted to the Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority and the DFO for approval 1 I.

c

c

In addition to a comprehensive stormwater management plan, the following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce or eliminate disruption to fish habitat:

[

L

II DFO authorization under the Fisheries Act, will trigger the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Sufficient information at an appropriate level of detail must be provided to DFO to allow them to undertake a CEAA screening for this project.




L

c

[ [ [

c

c

[ c c [

[

c

[



• installation of silt fencing, rock check dams, and straw bales where necessary;

• restriction of in-stream work to the period of time between July 1 to March 31 to avoid impacting spawning activities of resident warm water fish species;

• use of open bottom culverts; and

• replanting of areas disturbed during construction with appropriate species of riparian vegetation.

The mitigation for aquatic impacts should also consider the recommended Best Management Practices in the Shirley's Brook/Watts Creek Subwatershed Plan. Of particular importance is Management Strategy #3 - Erosion Management (Section 7.4) and Management Strategy #6 - Urban Stormwater (Section 7.7). It is also noted that for the stream reach affected, a natural process of restoration from agriculture to forest is recommended. Restoration planning should be consistent with the planned direction for this area. Also to be considered is the Region's Official Plan (OP) Policies including the consideration of natural channel design and the protection of fish habitat. More specifically, the following OP policies should be recognized:

• . 5.2.2 Protection of Water Resources and Erosion Prevention - require that any alteration of a

natural watercourse be consistent with an approved subwatershed plan or a site management plan prepared in accordance with Section 5.3.2 and/or 5.3.3. Where no such plan exists, in undertaking bridge construction for example, the alteration of the natural stream course will be kept to a minimum. Watercourse alterations will also be required to meet any other applicable regulations and may require written approval from the Conservation Authority under the Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Regulation; and

• 5.2.5 Protection of Fish Habitat - ensure that development does not alter, disrupt or destroy fish habitat, and that there will be no net loss of productive capacity of fish habitat as required in the Fisheries Act. Fish habitat refers to those areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly to carry out their life processes, such as spawning grounds, nursery and rearing areas, and those areas that supply food to allow migration. Development proposals shall be required to demonstrate that they will not have an adverse impact when fish habitat is on or in the vicinity of the site.

Section 5 - Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive to March Road

For Section 5, there are no anticipated impacts on aquatic habitat.

7.2.3 Surface Water

Section 7.1.2 and 7.1.3 have described SWMF and watercourse crossing requirements for the roadway.

During detail design, a detailed plan for the mitigation of potential surface water impacts will need to be prepared, particularly for the rural cross sections of the roadway much of which will be located in the SB-3 catchment area of the Shirley'S Brook Subwatershed as identified the Shirley's Brook/Watts Creek Subwatershed Plan. Within this catchment area, Levell protection will be required. The Subwatershed Plan identifies grassed swales, filter strips and buffer strips as suitable Stormwater Management Practices for this catchment area. In addition to the previously recommended SWMFs, the following stormwater quality control measures are proposed for Terry Fox Drive:

• the use of 1.0 m wide flat-bottomed ditches to accept sheet flow and piped flow from impervious surfaces. For sections of the extension where road side ditches are recommended, the design of the open ditches should incorporate rock flow check dams (every 100 m - 200 m) for the removal of particulates;






[

• the use of rip rap at all pipe outlets to prevent erosion;

r u

• the use of vegetated filter strips should also be investigated for the rural road cross-section of the Terry Fox Drive extension;

• maintaining existing drainage patterns where the existing road drains to wetland areas in lieu of direct discharge to a watercourse. It is important to note that total suspended solid loadings may result in the degradation of a wetland. Furthermore, the MNR would not allow any stormwater discharge to any provincially significant wetland since heavy metals and other pollutants are attached to TSS. Prior to discharging in a wetland, pre-treatment (i.e. removal of coarse particles) may be mandatory.

[ o o c c

• the use of deep sump manholes for the urban road cross-section of the Terry Fox Drive extension should also be investigated. However, the use of these would necessitate frequent cleaning of the sumps;

Other SWMFs such as infiltration techniques (infiltration trenches or infiltration basins) for rural road cross-section of the Terry Fox Drive extension, ex filtration/infiltration trenches using a dual pipe system (e.g. City of Etobicoke) in urban road cross-section of the Terry Fox Drive extension may also be investigated based on the infiltration capabilities of native soils.

[ [ [

C

In the vicinity of Richardson Side Road, the alignment is situated within the "Fill Regulated" area of the Carp River and in some places appears to be within the 100 year flood plain (see Figure 7.1). In the flood plain and fill regulated areas, the Conservation Authority is typically concerned with construction or placement of fill that could restrict the flow of water, increase the extent of the flood line, increase erosion and/or increase sedimentation effects. Through discussions with the Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority (MVCA), significant concerns are not anticipated. Further discussions with the MVCA during detailed design will be necessary to confirm the extent of impacts, determine necessary mitigation and obtain appropriate permits. Existing flood plain mapping for the area ends approximately 850 metres north of Richardson Side Road. The roadway in this area will have to be designed such that the elevation accommodates the 100 year flood.

Consideration should also be given to the Region's Official Plan Policy 5.2.2, Protection of Water Resources and Erosion Prevention (see above).

7.2.4 Agriculture

Section 1 - Eagleson RoadIHope Side Road to Fernbank Road

For Section 1, the lands to the east of the road are designated as Business Park and the lands to the west as Agricultural Resource Area. Any impacts on agriculture in this section relate to potential disturbance only. At present, common field crops are grown in this area and these crops are relatively tolerant to nuisance impacts (i.e. road salt and dust). Thus, agricultural impacts in this section are anticipated to be minimal. No mitigation is required.

l

l




[
ci
a
a
[ N
N
f--'
u
0
[ ~
II
b
_j
[]_
[ {5
:;:
C!
'I
r-,
o
G:
[ [

c

[

L,

,-" ~. _. \I ~

l~{;tfJ,~~J\;~1< <:

i;:~~,~

.' c

OJ

E .--. c "- 01 OJ

~ ~

, '

.-.J ..•.

--'·';-"'0

. ... :.::- .. '

;:~fl~",\11

• " <'-'-"ii!,:b; ,_,_

. ""1/\1

'O>"f~S",'!1

........

_ _;'

.. ~ .....

,-,-:~ .s- : " • ..-- "".j

I-
a::
0
W Q. I-
0 W z
> <:( [t W
0 :E Z
0:: Z -
~ I >- [!) j
- Q.
0 U 0 _j 0
~ :J <t 0
<:( I- o 0
x L W _j
0 OJ ~LL
~
0 I- W ~
.J u, W
lL. 0 <t W >
<:( ~ -
0 I- 0.0::
>- 0:: Z u, Q.
Z W o ~
~ <:(
0 L [II(J
~ [II
W z b Z
w _j W 0
o 0 u,
r- <:( a:: u,
W W
>
Z
W o o o (\l

W lI- [J

<:( 0 o

o o If1

W t-_j

<:(

o

m

o z

wV~ " ::II:' [!)

Ii,

c [

~ [

[

o [

[ [ [ [ [

o o [

G [,

[ L

c

[ [

[

[

c

[

c

c c

c c

l [

l [




For Section 2, the January 1991 ESR identifies lands to the south of the abandoned CPR right-of-way as lands recently used for agriculture (it should be noted that for Section 2 of Terry Fox Drive, lands to the west of the road are designated as Agricultural Resource Area in the Regional Official Plan and lands to the east are General Urban Area and Business Park). It suggests however, that this land represents the fringe of urban/rural lands and that since the ROW is an established ROW (i.e. identified in the Kanata and Regional Official Plans), the impacts on agricultural land are not significant and no mitigation is proposed.


No impacts on agricultural land are anticipated in this section as all construction will be within an existing right-of-way and the land in this area is designated for future development. Thus, mitigation is not required.


Section 4 results in the removal of approximately 4.4 ha of land designated for long term agricultural use and has the potential to disturb approximately 7.8 ha of agricultural operations due to salt spray and dust. It should be noted that although designated as Agricultural Resource Area this land (in the vicinity of Richardson Side Road and First Line Road) is not particularly suited to agriculture due to the bedrock close to the surface. This section of Terry Fox Drive will also result in the fragmentation of approximately 18 ha of agricultural land from a contiguous farmed area. Given the relatively small size of the fragmented area this is considered to be a low impact and no mitigation is considered necessary.

As well, to reduce the impact on the Richardson family, the roadway has been moved slightly west just north of Richardson Side Road to minimize effects on their farm buildings and farm operations.

Section 5 - Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

No impacts on agricultural land are anticipated in this section as all construction will be within an existing right-of-way and the land in this area is designated for future development. Thus, mitigation is not required.

7.2.5 Social

There are no residents displaced from the planned roadway improvements/extension.

Section 1 - Eagleson RoadIHope Side Road to Fembank Road

Social impacts associated with Section 1 are limited to the potential for some disruption effects to residents located near the point where the roadway intersects with Fembank Road. Construction related effects can be mitigated through construction practices.


1.L. Richards & Associates Limited




[


n c c [

For Section 2, the January 1991 ESR, indicates that approximately 60 homes back onto Terry Fox Drive between Hazeldean Road and Castlefrank Road. There will be no property impacts in this section however, noise impacts are potentially a concern (noise impacts are discussed separately). This section of Terry Fox Drive will cross the abandoned CPR corridor, which is now part of the TransCanada Trail Network. This will result in another road crossing on this well used trail. During detail design, options for minimizing impacts at this crossing should be investigated. The proposed change in pavement width from that principally anticipated in the 1991 ESR, is not anticipated to result in any additional social effects in this section of Terry Fox Drive.


In Section 3, Walter Baker Park and the Kanata Recreational Complex are on the west side of Terry Fox Drive just north of Hazeldean Road. Included in or adjacent to these facilities are baseball diamonds, soccer fields, a toboggan hill and the Ron Maslin Playhouse Theatre. No negative impacts to this facility are anticipated. The completion of Terry Fox Drive from Eagleson Road to March Road may result in easier access to this facility by residents to the north and south. There are no other recreational or community features along Terry Fox Drive. Residents to the east of the existing road in this section may experience some disruption affects (i.e. noise and dust) during construction. Dust suppressants will be used during construction to mitigate dust impacts.


[ [

In Section 4, Terry Fox Drive crosses or meets with existing recreational pathways at Goulbourn Forced Road, at the unopened road allowance for Second Line Road and First Line Road. The alignment also parallels a future recreational pathway designated along the Carp River. With the exception of the pathway at Goulbourn Forced Road, these trails currently are relatively free of roadway disruption effects. Thus, Terry Fox Drive has the potential to reduce the aesthetic value of these trails. It should also be noted that in some cases, these trails may be on lands designated for future development. No mitigation is available for this impact.

c [

A realignment of the proposed route avoids impacts on the Richardson farmhouse and buildings, however, there is still likely to be some disruption affects during construction.

Section 5 - Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

There will be no residents displaced from the planned roadway improvements/extension. Residents to the north of the existing road in Section 5 (Morgan's Grant Community) are likely to experience some disruption effects (i.e. noise and dust) during construction. Dust suppressant will be used during construction to mitigate dust impacts.

7.2.6 Noise

Appendix E contains the complete Noise Assessment Report. The report details out the Noise Level Impacts which are summarized below, and also reviewed the previous subdivision mitigative measure and the existing noise barrier integrity.

L

The potential for noise impacts during construction exist as with all construction projects. To reduce construction noise impacts, construction will be limited to the times allowed within local noise by-laws and equipment will be maintained to minimize noise as best as possible.

L




[

[ c

c

c

[

[

[



The Region of Ottawa-Carleton has determined that, for the purpose of measuring the noise impacts for the widening of a Regional Road, noise level predictions for the Official Plan design horizon should be examined. For this reason, the year 2021 projected traffic volumes were used.

Two criteria are used to evaluate the increase in noise levels associated with the road widening from existing to 2021 traffic volumes. The first is the MOEEIMTO Protocol adopted by the Region' for the widening of Regional roads mentioned previously. The second is the Region's noise control standards currently in place.

The predicted noise levels affecting the selected receivers for each scenario are summarized in Table 7.2. Section 3 and 5 are reviewed. Section 1 will not have any residential development along the corridor. Section 4 has residential development adjacent to the future Terry Fox Drive. The noise analyses undertaken by the developer reviewed higher AADT volumes then are currently predicted in this EA and therefore, the noise attenuation measures will be sufficient for 2021.

Along Section 3 the increase in noise levels is less than 5 dBA for each of the three options reviewed if a posted speed of 60 kmIhr is maintained. It is therefore concluded that the predicted change in noise levels is insignificant and that no further mitigation is required as a result of roadway improvements. This is the case for both the Gesner Court and Jarlan Terrace lots.

Should the posted speed limit be increased along Section 3 to 80 kmIhr, then the noise level increase will exceed 5 dBA. Furthermore, the free field noise level will require noise barrier mitigation to reduce outdoor sound levels to an acceptable level. It is concluded that the Gesner Court privacy fence should be replaced with a noise barrier if the posted speed is increased to 80 kmIhr. It is recommended that the Jarlan Terrace lots noise barrier be examined to assess and implement a potential retrofit design to achieve a minimum surface density of 20 kg/m'. Should this not be possible it is recommended that the existing noise barrier be reconstructed to meet present design criteria.

Along Section 5, the increase in noise levels is greater than 5 dBA. As noted previously, all of these lots were subject to a Noise Impact Study. Furthermore, each of these lots had been mitigated by the implementation of noise control measures such as noise barriers, central home ventilation and notice on title. The existing measures are satisfactory for mitigating the noise levels which are predicted for the year 2021 for posted speeds up to 80 kmIhr. It is therefore concluded that the predicted change in noise






[ n

levels is compatible with the noise mitigation measure implemented by the original developer and that no further mitigation is required as a result of roadway modifications.

Section 1 - Eagleson RoadIHope Side Road to Fernbank Road

D [

[

7.2.7 Planned Land Use and Future Communities

Section 1, from Fernbank Road to Eagleson Road is designated as Business Park on the east side of the road and Agricultural Resource Area on the west side. The alignment of Terry Fox Drive in this area will determine the exact boundary for the Business Park.

The major development planned in the area is the Kanata South Business Park. Terry Fox Drive is not anticipated to have a negative impact on the development thus no mitigation is necessary; in fact, the new roadway will improve access to the business park and provide a benefit to future tenants.


c c

The January 1991 ESR does not indicate any effects on Planned Land Use or need for mitigation in Section 2 of Terry Fox Drive from Fernbank Road to Hazeldean Road. The land use designation to the east of the roadway in this section is General Urban Area. To the west the designations are Business Park at the north end and Agricultural Resource Area at the south end. No additional impacts in this section are anticipated as a result of a 40 m right-of-way.

[


[

All works in this section will be within the existing right-of-way. Land use designations from the Region's Official Plan in these two sections are General Urban Area and Business Park. The widening of Terry Fox Drive in these sections is not anticipated to result in any negative impacts on future land uses.


[ [

The land use designations through Section 4 are a mix of General Urban Area, Natural Environment Area (AJ and (BJ, and Agricultural Resource Area. The alignment within this section does not conform with what is presented in former Kanata Official Plan. It is also beyond the current urban boundary and thus may result in pressure to expand the urban area. This issue of whether the urban boundary should be extended out to the preferred Alternative 4-1 will need to be addressed by the Region and City within a reasonable time frame.

c

Section 5 - Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

[

All works in this section will be within the existing right-of-way. Land Use designations from the Region's Official Plan in these two sections are General Urban Area and Business Park. The widening of Terry Fox Drive in these sections is not anticipated to result in any negative impacts on future land uses.

l




L L

[ ~

[

[

[ [

[

[

L.

L

[



7.2.8 Cultural Resources

Section 1 - Eagleson Road to Fembank Road

There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage features in this section. There is the potential for minimal disruption to the agricultural features along the Fembank Road Streetscape. There is no mitigation proposed for this cultural landscape impact.

Section 1 impacts medium to high archaeological potential along approximately 1100 metres of ROW through the agricultural fields between Eagleson Road and Fembank Road. An archaeological survey will need to be undertaken during the detailed design stage.


There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage features in this section. The January 1991 ESR for Section 2 does not include a reference to the potential for archaeological impacts. In this section of the Terry Fox Drive alignment, there is the potential for impacts on areas of medium to high archaeological potential within the ROW from Castlefrank Road to Fembank Road. The presence of any features will need to be confirmed in detailed design.

Sections 3 - Hazeldean Road to Campeau Drive

There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage features in this section and minimal change is expected to the cultural heritage landscape as an existing roadway is simply being expanded.

No areas of medium to high archaeological potential will be impacted for Section 3.


In Section 4, the preferred alignment passes just west of the Richardson farm complex, north of Richardson Side Road. The main bam complex and architecturally significant stone farmhouse will not be impacted, and access shall be maintained via an existing easterly laneway off Richardson Side Road. Access to this section of Richardson Side Road will be provided from Terry Fox Drive. The farmhouse is situated atop a notable rise which will enhance its visual separation from the Terry Fox Drive alignment on the lower flood plain. Figure 7.2 illustrates the effects of the preferred alignment on the Richardson farm complex.




[ r n

C l L U

[~r-------,.-r--dl

II

§

n,

[

[

[

[

L

.'.-.(

,., ..... ,

---- ---- .. ------- '

• _ • 'iii- --' •• -,~ • • ~-.

, , ,,,,, ' --- -- -,,' " ,'- -' - ,

/'

-------------

R.O. W. Limits for Preferred Alignment

.- .. - .. - .. - .. ---~ .. -

o o o t\l

W ~ ~ (J o 0

(

I~

o

W 0 D.

> <t W o ~ -I!

~ I >-

O r.J 0

~ :J 2: I(JJ

x o lL.

o I-

o ...J <t «

>-~~ ~6W ~~L W-lZ

I- ~ 0

w ~

>

Z

W

o l!1 t\l

IZ w 2: z

~ 2: -l It <! <t ow. w Z It 0 It en w 0 lJ. It W <t It I 0.. c lJ. - ol!

en Z I- 0 o

W

u,

u,

W

C Q

o

[

C 8 C o l [

C [

D C C L [

l C

[

c

[

[ [

c

[

c

L

[

L



The agricultural outbuildings comprise two small barns (one of log construction; one of frame construction) and five small, mid-twentieth century frame sheds. The sheds are considered to be of minimal heritage significance. The late nineteenth century frame bam is in poor condition, and also considered to be of minimal heritage significance. The log bam likely dates to the mid-nineteenth century, and is of somewhat greater interest due to its age, construction material and salvage potential. It is noted that while the Richardson farmhouse is identified on the City's list of properties of historical interest, it is not designated under the Heritage Act.

The change in cultural heritage landscape for Section 4 is moderate as the ROW transects an agricultural landscape, dividing associated built heritage features from the riverscape. There is no mitigation proposed for these cultural landscape impacts.

For Section 4, there is a length of approximately 3,000 metres where there may be impacts within the ROW on areas of medium to high archaeological potential. This area is in the vicinity of the ArnpriorNepean Railroad crossing and along the Carp River floodplain west of First Line Road.

To mitigate the potential for archaeological impacts, a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment of the identified areas should be undertaken prior to construction to determine the presence of archaeological resources. The results of this assessment must be reviewed with the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for archaeological clearance of the site or to determine the nature of further archaeological mitigation of identified resources.

Section 5 - Goulboum Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

There will be no loss or disruption to cultural heritage features in this section and minimal change is expected to the cultural heritage landscape as an existing roadway is simply being expanded.

Section 5 has the potential to impact medium to high archaeological potential along the right-of-way, on the south side of the existing Terry Fox Drive, for approximately 620 metres. An archaeological assessment will be required.

7.2.9 Businesses

Eagleson Road/Hope Side Road to Fembank Road

There are currently no businesses along Terry Fox Drive in Section 1.


The January 1991 ESR does not indicate any effects on businesses or need for mitigation in Section 2 of Terry Fox Drive from Fembank Road to Hazeldean Road (with the exception of noise effects discussed below). No additional impacts on businesses are anticipated as a result of the proposed extension of the pavement width through this section.






c r

Hazeldean Road to Campeau Drive

In Section 3, the following businesses are adjacent to the Terry Fox Drive ROW:

c

• Kanata Corporate Business Park;

• Swiss Chalet;

• East Side Mario's;

• Nickel's;

• Suny's (retail petroleum);

• Esso;

• Kanata Hydro; and

• Toromont Cat (commercial/industrial).

These businesses may experience some disruption effects during construction such as noise, dust and disruption to access patterns. During construction and environmentally safe dust suppressant will be used where necessary to minimize dust impacts and construction will be staged to ensure an access to businesses throughout the construction period (noise effects and mitigation are discussed separately). Following the construction period, increased road traffic volumes will be beneficial to these businesses.

[

Campeau Drive to Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive

[ [

In Section 4 there is an auto dealership on the northwest comer of Campeau Drive and Terry Fox Drive (Kanata Ford). Significant impacts on the dealership were not anticipated. Access to the dealership will not be impacted during the construction period.

Goulbourn Forced Road/Terry Fox Drive to March Road

7.3 APPROVALS REQUIRED

l [

There are currently no businesses along Terry Fox Drive in this section.

During the detailed design stage, information about construction of stream crossings will need to be sent to the Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority (MVCA). The MVCA will work with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to review the project details and determine whether approval will be granted. A Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) screening will need to be carried out by the consultants during detailed design or in house by DFO as a result of the water crossings. All relevant information will have to be provided to the MVCA and DFO to ensure DFO approval and CEAA clearance.

A Stage 2 Archaeological assessment will need to be undertaken during detailed design to determine the presence of archaeological resources. The results of this assessment must be reviewed by the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for archaeological clearance of the site or to determine the nature of further archaeological mitigation should resources be identified.

[

During detailed design, site specific discussions will have to take place with the MVCA to obtain appropriate permits to construct the portion of the Terry Fox Drive alignment that falls within the flood plain and fill regulated areas. (Figure 7.1 shows Effects of the Preferred Alignment on Carp River Floodplain.) Permits will also be required for all water crossings.

L [




[ [

[ c

c

[ G

c [

[

[

[

C L l

[

l



It is also recommended that an Environmental Management Plan be prepared for the proposed Terry Fox Drive as prescribed by the Shirley's Brook/Watts Creek Subwatershed Plan. This plan would be prepared as part of the detail design phase as a means to demonstrate that the management measures of the Subwatershed Plan are being met for this specific project.

7.4 APPROVALS OBTAINED

The City of Kanata Council reviewed and approved the report entitled "Acceptance of Terry Fox Drive Environmental Assessment (EA) Study and Proposed Road Alignments"; on February 22, 2000. The Transportation Committee of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton considered the Terry Fox Drive Environmental Assessment Study on March 1, 2000. At that meeting, Committee deferred approval of the report until the Planning Department reviewed the planning and development implications of the various alignments. A report was then brought to Transportation Committee on April 17, 2000 which essentially recommended approval of the alignment of Terry Fox Drive. These Committee and Council reports are contained in Appendix F.




[ r

r

[ c

c [

[ [

. c

u

[ L

l

[ [

'.

TFD E Study V1.S4

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TFD E Study V1.S4

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

".

Potrebbero piacerti anche

TFD E Study V1.S4

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TFD E Study V1.S4

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

﻿".

Potrebbero piacerti anche

".