Class Environmental Assessment Addendum Study
City of Toronto
This Environmental Assessment Addendum provides an updated alternative design for the widening of Port Union Road between Lawrence Avenue East and Island Road (the second phase of implementation of the 2004 Port Union Road Environmental Assessment). This process included a public open house meeting in December 2013.
The preferred design, referred to as 'Option 2', includes a second northbound travel lane as well as bicycle lanes in both directions, as well as a section of two-way centre left-turn lane north of Josaly Drive, and a gateway planted median north of Lawrence Avenue to mirror the median to the south.
The design has been modified slightly from the 2004 EA approved design in order to reduce property and other impacts to the community, and the dimensions of various elements of the right-of-way have been updated to reflect current City standards and practices. The new design has been found to be functionally equivalent to the 2004 plan.
Beginning in the 1990s, traffic studies indicated the occurrence of delays at intersections of Port Union Road between Lawrence Avenue East and Island Road and at Kingston Road, particularly in the northbound direction, where only one traffic lane is currently provided. Other problems identified were a lack of continuity in the road system, limited access to Highway 401, and concentrated vehicular departures from the Rouge Hill GO Station.
In response to these identified needs, the City of Toronto completed the Port Union Road Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study in 2004, with endorsement and direction from Council followed by the EA-mandated 30-day public review period. This Municipal Class EA followed a Schedule 'C' and evaluated a variety of solutions for local transportation needs and deficiencies. An Environmental Study Report was produced, which identified a preferred design to be implemented in two phases: The first phase was a series of intersection improvements at Kingston Road and Port Union Road, completed in 2005 as a component of the Transportation Capital Works Program. The second phase was a widening of Port Union Road from Island Road in the north to Lawrence Avenue East in the south.
Following Council direction in 2004 to consult with the public before implementing the second phase of the preferred design, as well as to have the work be coordinated with a planned resurfacing of the roadway, City staff undertook an Environmental Assessment Addendum and presented a modified plan at a public meeting in December 2013.
The Environmental Assessment Addendum process is intended to address outstanding concerns that make an EA-approved design infeasible or undesirable to implement, often because of changes in conditions over a long period of time. The modified plans evaluated and presented for this Addendum consisted of three options all of which eliminated the property requirements of the original EA-approved design, while continuing to fulfill the same general transportation functionality requirements.
1.2 Study Area
The Addendum study area focuses on the Port Union Road corridor, from approximately Island Road in the north to Lawrence Avenue East in the south. Figure 1 below highlights the approximate addendum study area. Note that no changes are currently recommended for the Highway 401 interchange; however, it will be the subject of discussions with the Ministry of Transportation going forward to identify appropriate connections and transitions to Port Union Road north of the study area.
Figure1: Addendum Study Area
2.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT
The Environmental Assessment Act requires that an Addendum be completed when more than 10 years have elapsed without implementation since the completion of an Environmental Assessment, or when conditions have changed such that implementation of the EA preferred alternative is no longer feasible.
While implementation of the EA recommended plan began in 2005 with the Kingston Road intersection improvements, Council direction in 2004 required that conditions be re-evaluated and consultation with the public be held prior to the widening of Port Union Road. The current Addendum was intended to note current conditions, obtain new feedback from the public, and explore modified options that could reduce some of the impacts associated with the EA-approved design, while continuing to meet identified transportation needs. The EA Addendum process was also guided by a Technical Advisory Committee comprising staff from the City's City Planning, Transportation Services, Emergency Medical Services, Engineering & Construction Services, Real Estate Services, and Toronto Water divisions, as well as the Public Consultation Unit, Metrolinx, and the Toronto Transit Commission.
2.2 Municipal Class EA Planning and Design Process
The Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process was developed by the Municipal Engineers Association (MEA 2000, amended 2007 and 2011), to streamline the EA process for recurring municipal projects that are similar in nature, usually limited in scale, and with a predictable range of environmental effects that are responsive to mitigating measures. The Municipal Class EA process is outlined in Figure 2 below.
Figure2: Municipal Class EA Process
The 2004 ESR was completed as a Schedule 'C' project. These projects have potential for significant environmental effects and are subject to the full planning and documentation procedures specified in the Class EA document. An Environmental Study Report must be prepared and submitted for review by the public and relevant review agencies. If all public and agency comments and issues are resolved during the public review period, the project may proceed. These projects generally include construction of new facilities or major expansions to existing facilities.
Upon completion of this ESR Addendum and Notice of Filing of the Addendum, the City of Toronto will place the report with the City Clerk and generally make available for review and allow responses for 30 days. During this period, no work will be undertaken that will adversely affect the matters under review. Only the matters in the Addendum that represent changes from the 2004 ESR are open for review.
3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Field inventories of the natural environment were conducted in two site visits November 2001 and February 2002, as well as a review of background information sources. The full inventory can be found in Appendix E of the Port Union Road Class Environmental Assessment Study environmental study report.
Port Union Road is located in a highly urbanized area and the natural vegetation is primarily limited to roadside trees and some areas of natural regeneration. 55 different plant species were identified during the 2001-2002 field inventories, with 45% being non-native. The field inventories also identified 23 species of trees, with 40% being non- native. The majority of these are planted roadside or landscape trees. An updated tree inventory and arborist report were completed in December 2013 and January 2014, with results summarized in Section 7.2 of this document and in the Appendices.
3.3 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
Wildlife species may include mammals such as raccoons and grey squirrels, and birds adapted to the urbanized environment of the study area. No significant wildlife habitats were identified in the study area.
3.4 Aquatic Features
No permanent watercourses or waterbodies exist in the study area; however, two intermittent drainages are present that cross Port Union Road. A fisheries survey conducted in 2002 for a separate project found that while no physical barriers to fish migration were observed, no fish were identified.
3.5 Drainage and Storm Water Management
Port Union Road currently drains all surface water runoff via catch basins to a storm sewer running along the road's length. The existing storm sewer runs from Island Road in the north and outfalls to Lake Ontario in the south, with no outfall into the two drainages that cross Port Union Road. The existing storm sewer is sized to accommodate any road- widening of Port Union Road to up to six lanes.
3.6 Socio-Economic Environment
The study area of the 2004 EA is contained within the Centennial Community of the former City of Scarborough, now part of Ward 44 Scarborough East in the amalgamated City of Toronto. The majority of the land within the EA study area is designated as low density residential, while industrial and commercial designations account for 10%. Open space and neighbourhood park areas are found adjacent to the EA study area boundaries, but not within. No archaeological sites were identified in the EA study area.
This section summarizes the analysis of the traffic conditions under the following scenarios
A. Existing (2013) Traffic Conditions
In this scenario, the existing intersection lane configuration and existing peak hour traffic volumes were analyzed for existing levels of service. As traffic counts along the Port Union Road corridor have been conducted at different times of the year and in different years, the traffic volumes entering and exiting the intersections within the corridor have been adjusted and 'balanced' upstream and downstream.
B. Future (2020) Traffic Conditions
This scenario includes the analysis of the projected 2020 volumes with the existing intersection lane configuration. The growth rate along Port Union Road was established based on 24 hour counts in 2002, 2005 and 2010. Based on the historical volumes, an annual growth rate of 0.7% for both northbound and southbound directions was calculated (see Appendix C) and applied to all movements along the study area intersections.
C. Recommended Configuration (2020) Traffic Conditions
This scenario involves the analysis of the future (Year 2020) volumes with geometric improvements. The following intersections were evaluated within the study area for each of the three scenarios.
Port Union Road and Lawrence Avenue East (signalized);
Port Union Road and Lawson Road/ Fanfare Avenue (signalized);
Port Union Road and Hwy 2A Off Ramp / Island Road (signalized);
Port Union Road and Rozell Road (unsignalized); and,
Port Union Road and Winter Gardens Trail (unsignalized).
The study intersections were analyzed using the Synchro Version 8 software per the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 standards. Current timing plans for the study signalized intersections were obtained from the City's Traffic Management Centre. A summary of the Synchro analysis as well as detailed Synchro reports for the intersection capacity analysis are documented in the Environmental Study Report Addendum in Appendix C.
Results of the Synchro analysis show that the recommended improvements, including the additional northbound lane and provision of a centre two-way left-turn lane at the Rozell Road intersection will, result in significant improvements to the shared eastbound left/right-turn movement. The level of service for this movement will improve from LOS 'F' to LOS 'C' and significantly reduce the delays experienced at this movement.
Similarly, the geometric improvements at the Winter Gardens Trail intersection, including the provision of an exclusive southbound left-turn lane in addition to the second northbound lane, will significantly reduce delays experienced at the intersection and overall traffic operations at this intersection.
Based on the foregoing, the recommended improvement will result in overall improved levels of service and reduced delays.
A. Existing (2013) Traffic Conditions
Under existing traffic conditions, the signalized intersections at Lawrence Avenue East and Lawson Road/Fanfare Avenue are currently operating at acceptable levels of service during the weekday AM and PM peak hour. However, the intersection at Hwy 2A Off Ramp / Island Road is currently experiencing capacity constraints during the weekday PM peak hour specifically at the southbound left movement where the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio is greater than 1.0. It is noted that the delays experienced at the southbound left movement during the weekday PM peak hour represent a worst case scenario subject to the limitations of the Synchro model assumptions and traffic and signal timing inputs. Due to these model limitations, the modelled delay times are not reflective of actual delay times experienced and signal timing adjustments may provide better levels of service.However, delays requiring infrastructure improvements would remain in some locations despite these operational changes.Under existing traffic conditions, the unsignalized intersection at Winter Gardens Trail is operating at acceptable level of service and residual capacity. However at Rozell Road, the intersection is currently experiencing capacity constraints and significant delays at the shared eastbound left/right-turn lane as a result of high north-south through traffic limiting the available gap for eastbound traffic to make left turns.
B. Future (2020) Traffic Conditions
Under the future (2020) traffic conditions, the signalized intersections at Lawrence Avenue East and Lawson Road/Fanfare Avenue will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service during the weekday AM and PM peak hour. Similar to existing conditions, the southbound left movement at the intersection at Hwy 2A Off Ramp / Island Road will continue to experience capacity constraints during the weekday PM peak hour. It is noted that optimization of the signal timing plans would be sufficient to provide reasonable LOS and residual capacity at this movement.The unsignalized intersection at Winter Gardens Trail is expected to continue to operate at acceptable level of service and residual capacity. It is however noted that the shared eastbound left/right-turn is expected to experience significant delays during the AM peak hour. Similar to existing conditions, the shared eastbound left/right-turn lane at the Rozell Road intersection will continue to experience capacity constraints and significant delays due to increased north-south traffic volumes. Geometric improvements are required to provide reasonable capacity and minimize delays.
C. Recommended Configuration (2020) Traffic Conditions
At the aforementioned study area intersections, recommended geometric improvements include widening of Port Union Road to include a four-lane cross-section as well as a centre two-way left-turn lane north of Josaly Drive and an exclusive southbound left-turn lane at the Winter Gardens Trail intersection.Under the recommended configuration (2020) traffic conditions, the signalized intersections at Lawrence Avenue East and Lawson Road/Fanfare Avenue will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service during the weekday AM and PM peak hour.
Signal Timing Sensitivity Analysis
While the intersection at the intersection at Hwy 2A Off Ramp / Island Road is expected to operate with capacity constraints at the southbound left movement, as previously mentioned, adjustments to the signal timing plan would provide residual capacity. A sensitivity analysis was undertaken to simulate traffic operations at this intersection under optimized signal timing plan conditions during the weekday PM peak hour. The detailed sensitivity analysis output summary is also included in the appendices.
Based on the analysis, during the weekday PM peak our, a cycle length of 110 seconds would significantly reduce the delays experienced at the southbound left movement from213.0 seconds to 48.7 seconds. Additionally, the sensitivity analysis shows that under the optimized timing plan, no critical movements will be experienced.
4.1 DESIGN ALTERNATIVES
4.2 2004 Preferred Design
The Class Environmental Assessment completed in 2004 considered eight alternative solutions, listed below:
'Do Nothing' (Base Alternative)
Extend Centennial Road over Highway 2A to connect to the signalized Ellesmere/Kingston Intersection
Widen Port Union Road south of Island Road
Connect Lawson Road directly with Military Trail with an overpass of Highway 2A
Extend Lawrence Avenue easterly across the Rouge River
Extend East Avenue northerly across Highway 401
Connect Meadowvale Road across Highway 2A (either with an at-grade signalized intersection or an overpass)
Improve public transit service by increasing the frequency of both the Highland Creek and Sheppard routes to 10-12 buses per hour during weekday peak periods
An initial screening showed alternatives 3 and 7 as best able to address the needs, and they were presented at a public information centre on February 27, 2002. A review based on the public feedback found alternative 3 (Widen Port Union Road south of Island Road) to be the preferred alternative, based on:
Greater transportation service benefits to the problems identified primarily on Port Union Road with alternative 3
Uncertainty about the physical feasibility of changes to Meadowvale Road and Highway 2A with alternative 7
Greater negative effects on the social and natural environments with alternative 7
Several design options were developed including alternate lane configurations and intersection improvements only. Ultimately, the preferred design included improvements to the intersection at Kingston Road, and a widening of Port Union Road from Lawrence Avenue to Island Road to add a second northbound travel lane, bicycle lanes, sidewalks (filling in gaps where they do not currently exist), a two-way centre left-turn lane north of Winter Gardens Trail, and a landscaped median south of Winter Gardens Trail. It was found to have superior transportation performance and to require only small amounts of additional right-of-way. New tree plantings were proposed to replace removed trees.
This design was selected as the preferred solution for the following reasons:
It provides the best overall level of service to traffic for both directions of travel, as opposed to only northbound direction.
It improves the best level of safety along the roadway for both vehicular traffic in both directions and for pedestrian traffic south of Winter Garden Trail.
It provides "Gateway" urban design features leading into the community and waterfront park.
Following Council direction in 2004 and implementation in 2005 of the first phase (intersection improvements), the current EA Addendum revisited the recommended design for the preferred solution for the second phase (widening of Port Union Road). The intent was to identify whether traffic patterns or other conditions had changed, as well as to modify the design to reduce property and other community impacts while still providing the necessary transportation functionality of the original preferred design.The full development, analysis, and review history of the preferred design is included in the Port Union Road Environmental Study Report, section 6.0.
4.3 Alternative Design Options
To address community concerns raised during the EA, three options were developed that modified the original EA-approved design. The alternative options remove all property impacts while still maintaining the originally planned transportation functionality. Each of the three options adds a new northbound traffic lane and a two-way centre left-turn lane north of Josaly Drive. However, key differences between the options exist and are listed below in Table 2:
Table1: Comparison of EA-Approved and Addendum Design Alternatives
|Number of Lanes Southbound||Number of Lanes Northbound||Bicycle Lanes?||Properties Impacted?||Two-Way Centre Left-Turn Lanes?||Landscaped Median?|
|EA Preffered Design||2||2||Yes||6 *||Yes (1)||Yes (2)|
|Option 1||2||2||No||No||Yes (3)||No|
|Option 2||2||2||Yes||No||Yes (3)||Yes (4)|
|Option 3||2||2||Yes||No||Yes (3)||Yes (2)|
1 North of Winter Gardens Trail
2 South of Winter Gardens Trail
3 North of Josaly Drive4 Between Lawrence Avenue East and Clappison Boulevard
4 Between Lawrence Avenue East and Clappison Boulevard
* Note that two properties have since been acquired by the City (Site and Area Specific Policy 250 in the Official Plan identified property requirements from 449 Lawson Road, 261 Port Union Road, 305 Port Union Road, 313-353 Port Union Road, 355-367 Port Union Road, and 28 Rozell Road). Detailed plans and cross-sections are shown in Appendix E.
Detailed plans and cross-sections are shown in Appendix E.
4.4 Recommended Design
Option 2 has emerged as the recommended design, as it contains most elements of the EA recommended option. The key differences are that it eliminates sections of the landscaped median and centre turn lane, which reduces costs and eliminates property requirements while still providing the same general level of transportation functionality.
Public support was almost evenly split among the three options, as well as for most of the components of each option, at the recent consultation event. While not nearly unanimous, a majority of attendees supported bike lanes, and most did not see value in an extended planted median.
The inclusion of bicycle lanes both northbound and southbound provides a link from the Waterfront Trail in the south along Lake Ontario to the Rouge Park trail system and Sheppard Avenue East bike lanes north of Highway 401.
Option 1 would eliminate the bike lanes and a key planned link in the City's cycling network (between the Waterfront Trail, existing bike lanes on Sheppard Avenue, and Rouge Park). Changes to accommodate cyclists through the Highway 401 interchange will be raised and reviewed with the Ministry of Transportation. While there were some questions from the public about whether an off-road (boulevard) bicycle path would be feasible, a continuous facility of this type does not appear to be, given the constraints of the corridor. In addition, given the significant number of trees in the boulevard, there would be greater impacts to existing vegetation with a boulevard bike path option where it is feasible. In order to make the on-road bike lanes more appealing and comfortable than they were in the EA design, they are now planned to be more generous than those to the north on Sheppard Avenue, at 1.8 metres rather than 1.5 metres wide.
Option 3 has a significantly higher cost, primarily due to the long landscaped median, which is provided more as a gateway feature to mirror the median south of Lawrence in Option 2.
An arborist report completed in January 2014 (based on field work in December 2013) concluded that the implementation of Option 2 would require the removal of 130 of the existing 264 street trees. While this impact is significant, it was also identified in the 2004 ESR and considered against other options with more significant environmental impacts. It is also not significantly greater than the impact from Option 1, while including the originally recommended bike lanes and also adding some left turn lanes, and is less than impacts from Option 3, which provides no additional transportation benefits. Tree protection and planting during and after construction would be consistent with the City's street tree by-law, and 45 of the removed trees would be suitable for transplantation.
Following the receipt of public feedback and the completion of the arborist report and related tree impact analysis, Option 2 (which is similar to the EA approved design, with four traffic lanes and bicycle lanes, but with a shorter planted median and shorter section of continuous two-way centre left-turn lane) is now being recommended for implementation.
Following a report to Council and subsequent 30-day public review period, if there are no Part II Order requests, the recommendations of this EA Addendum will proceed to review and further development at the detail design stage. Since no property is required for the proposed works, construction is anticipated in 2016, and would be coordinated with a planned roadway resurfacing. Given the similar overall scope of work to that of the EA approved design, it is expected to take a similar amount of time – approximately six months.
6.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Both the Port Union Road EA and EA Addendum included a thorough public consultation process.
On December 11, 2013 the City of Toronto hosted a Public Open House to gather feedback on the options developed for the Addendum to the 2004 approved Port Union Road Class Environmental Assessment Study. After reviewing display boards and having conversations with City staff about the changes to the original design to reduce property and community impacts, attendees were encouraged to provide written comments during and after the meeting using the comment forms or via email. Overall, the event was well attended and facilitated an exchange of ideas and opinions amongst residents, staff and the local Councillor.
Highlights of the public consultation effort follow:
Project web page (www.toronto.ca/portunionroad) live – November 27
11,500 flyers delivered by Canada Post to all mail boxes in the study area (north: Hwy 401, south: Lake Ontario, east: Rouge Hills Drive, west: Highland Creek) – November 25
Interviews and conversations with area Councillor, agencies, Centennial Community and Recreation Association, and West Rouge Community Association
Notice of public event advertised in Scarborough Mirror East – November 28, December 5
All public materials are available for download on the project web page.
Support split almost equally amongst all three options presented
Majority support bike lanes on Port Union Road
Strong concerns over potential increase to traffic congestion caused by accommodating more GO Train commuters with an extra lane for northbound traffic
Various views on a landscaped median, including concerns about maintenance and support for additional community enhancement
Concerns that widening road to two lanes in both directions will result in increased speeds of motor vehicle traffic and more aggressive driving behaviour
Different opinions on the need for centre 2 way left turn lanes presented in options 2 and 3
Details on the public consultation comments and correspondence, as well as agency and stakeholder contact, can be found in Appendix A.
7.1 IMPACT ANALYSIS
The 2004 EA identified six properties that would need to be partially acquired in order to implement the preferred design. These properties are listed under the City's Official Plan Site and Area Specific Policy 250 and shown in Appendix E. The City has since acquired two of these properties (313-353 and 355-367 Port Union Road). However, given that the new preferred design has eliminated the need to acquire any property, no more of the properties previously identified are currently required.
While it is acknowledged that the widening of Port Union Road will physically and visually impact the width of the boulevard and length of some driveways, standard sidewalk widths and setbacks to properties are accounted for in the recommended plan.
As a result of the removal of part of the two-way centre left-turn lane (as compared to the 2004 EA recommended plan) near the Ravine Park Plaza property at 275 Port Union Road, options have preliminarily been investigated to relocate the driveway and/or to add a southbound left-turn lane to access the plaza.
Following a meeting between City staff and the property owner, it has been decided that a relocation of the driveway to align with Tilley Drive with an associated extended left-turn lane will be further investigated and incorporated into the plan in the detail design phase following the Environmental Assessment Addendum. An initial evaluation shows the relocated access and extended left-turn lane as the preliminary preferred option, due to the proximity of the existing access to the Fanfare/Lawson intersection. The relocated access would potentially result in a net loss of 6 parking spaces, but the total parking supply at the plaza would still be in excess of the prevailing by-law requirements by 5 spaces.
Further investigation will lead to a detailed plan associated with widening the roadway to the west to accommodate the southbound left-turn lane and relocated access. This option is preferable due to the lower cost and localized impact to property and boulevard space.
A consultant arborist, Urban Forest Innovations Inc. (UFI), was retained by Transportation Services to prepare a report reviewing tree conditions along the Port Union Road corridor and identifying potential impacts to existing trees in implementing the staff recommended option (Option 2). A total of 264 trees were assessed in December of 2013, and it was concluded that 130 would need to be removed for Option 2. Of those trees marked for removal, 45 had trunk diameters of less than 10 cm and were judged suitable for transplant to alternate locations. The arborist report is included in this document as Appendix D.
The arborist report was used by City staff to inform a further tree impact analysis which compared the possible impacts to trees for each of the three road-widening options. It was found that Option 1 required the removal of the fewest trees at approximately 19 fewer than Option 2, while Option 3 required the removal of the most trees at approximately 17 more. The findings of this report are summarized in Table 3 below with detailed impact mapping in Appendix E:
Table2: Comparison of Approximate Tree Removals by Option
|Option 1||Option 2||Option 3|
* 38 trees in Option 1 and 45 trees in both Option 2 and Option 3 would be candidates for transplant.
Responding to public concern about potential impacts to the largest trees along the corridor, City staff identified 13 trees with a trunk diameter of at least 60 cm and found that for Option 1 approximately 6 of those trees would be removed, while for Option 2 and 3 approximately 11 would be removed. While these impacts are significant, they have been previously identified in the 2004 ESR and compared favourably to other options with more significant environmental impacts. It is anticipated that these impacts can be lessened at the detailed design stage to avoid removal of some trees and potential utility conflicts.
A noise impact assessment was undertaken in 2002 and is documented in Appendix F of the Port Union Road Class Environmental Assessment Study environmental study report. found that the acoustic changes from the project would be insignificant (less than 0.5 dB) and that noise mitigation measures would not be considered necessary, following the Ministry of the Environment's and the Ministry of Transportation's sound level criteria.
This analysis was based on projected traffic volumes for the year 2015. Given that area traffic patterns and volumes have remained fairly consistent since 2002 and that none of the road-widening options significantly change the alignment from the original recommended design, the findings of the original noise impact remain valid.
The City of Toronto has completed an Addendum to the 2004 Port Union Road Environmental Assessment, which recommended intersection improvements at Kingston Road, as well as widening of Port Union Road to address identified transportation deficiencies. Following Council direction, the intersection improvements were carried out in 2005, while the widening was deferred, both in order to coordinate the work with planned roadway resurfacing, and to consult one more time with the public to take into account new conditions and to investigate whether impacts to the community could be reduced, while maintaining the transportation functionality of the 2004 plan.
Following an analysis of three newly developed options based on the EA approved design, extensive public and stakeholder consultation consisting of flyer distribution, a new project website, and a public open house in December 2013, and an updated arborist report and subsequent tree impact analysis, a new preferred design has been selected that will provide essentially the same transportation functionality as the 2004 design, while eliminating property impacts and thereby simplifying implementation.
The widening and turn lanes were recommended to address traffic capacity deficiencies, particularly northbound and at specific intersections. The bicycle lanes – widened from 1.5 to 1.8 metres from the EA approved design to the current preferred design – would link the Sheppard Avenue, Rouge Park, and Waterfront bike corridors (with future discussions with the Ministry of Transportation planned regarding the Highway 401 interchange configuration), and improve safety for cyclists on Port Union Road.
To reduce costs and disruption, the existing west curb location is being maintained from Clappison Avenue to Conference Boulevard. In other sections, widening of the road is to occur on both sides. Implementation is to be coordinated with a planned resurfacing of the roadway. Since the scope of the construction work is similar to the EA design, construction work, likely in 2016 following detail design, is estimated to take a similar amount of time, approximately 6 months. No extra time is required in advance for property acquisition, since all property requirements have now been eliminated.
9.1 REVISIONS AND ADDENDA
The Environmental Study Report Addendum will be placed on the public record with the City of Toronto for a 30-day review period. A person or party with concern regarding the Addendum may make a written request to the Minister of the Environment for a “Part II Order” within this 30-day review period, responding to changes to the recommended undertaking since the original Environmental Study Report. Provided that no Part II Orders are received, the City of Toronto may proceed to Phase 5 of the Class EA process, design and construction.
9.2 Change in Project or Environment
Subsequent to the filing of the Environmental Study Report Addendum, any modification to the project or change in the environmental setting for the project shall be reviewed by the proponent. Should the change be considered significant, it should be documented as an addendum to the Environmental Study Report detailing the circumstances necessitating the change, the environmental implications of the change, and the mitigating measures. Minor change to the undertaking can proceed without an addendum.
9.3 Lapse of Time
According to the MCEA process, “If the period of time from the filing of the Notice of Completion of Environmental Study Report in the public record or the MOE’s denial of a Part II Order request(s), to the proposed commencement of construction for the project exceeds ten (10) years, the proponent shall review the planning and design process and the current environmental setting to ensure that the project and the mitigation measures are still valid given the current planning context. The review shall be recorded in an addendum to the Environmental Study Report which shall be placed on the public record.”
Notice of Filing of Addendum shall be placed on the public record with the Environmental Study Report, and shall be given to the public and review agencies, for a 30-day public review period. The notice shall include the public’s right to request a “Part II Order” during the 30-day addendum review period. If no “Part II Order” request is received, the proponent is free to proceed with implementation and construction.