Chapter A - Introduction - City of Pickering

More documents

Recommendations

Info

urban growth. This MESPA addresses the non-regional arterial and collector road requirements within Seaton 5 . The relevant transportation goals of the City of Pickering Conformity Official Plan Amendment No. 22 as set out in Section 4.3 of the Pickering Official Plan include ensuring that transportation, land use and community design plans and actions complement each other. To this end, the City of Pickering Conformity Official Plan Aamendment No. 22 revises the Type A, B and C arterial roads and adds a collector road pattern in Seaton. The arterial and collector roads shown on the City of Pickering Conformity Official Plan Schedule II - Transportation System reflect the proposed arterial and collector roads as outlined in this MESPA. In addition, the Conformity Official Plan AamendmentPickering OPA No. 22 establishes that the Seaton Neighbourhood Plans, Draft Plans of Subdivision and Site Plans are to be designed so as to encourage and maximize public transit usage in the Seaton Urban Area from the earliest stage of development through: (a) the accommodation of dedicated transit lanes on Type A arterial roads as the arterial roads are rebuilt or widened; (b) the efficient arrangement of collector roads and Type B and Type C arterial roads to maximize the integration of transit through the neighbourhoods; (c) a system of streets as per section 11.10; (d) the creation of safe and comfortable streets for pedestrians on their walk to the transit corridors; (e) the incorporation of park and ride and carpooling facilities at each of the Highway 407/ETR transitway stations; (f) the location of transit stop pads in accessible, safe and comfortable locations, which maximize pedestrian accessibility from surrounding residential neighbourhoods, and the identification of such locations on the engineering drawings as a condition of draft plan approval in consultation with Durham Transit; and (g) the arrangement of higher density housing in the vicinity of arterial roads and collector roads that also serve as the transit spines as shown on Schedule II. Therefore, the problem/opportunity to be addressed in this MESPA is to provide a recommended City arterial and collector road network for the Seaton area that: • Addresses the goals and policies of the CPDP, City of Pickering Official Plan, Seaton Conformity Official Plan amendment, Neighbourhood Plans and plans of subdivision; • Satisfies the requirements of Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (2000, amended 2007); • Provides for appropriate levels of service on City roads within Seaton; • Ensures residents mobility and safety whether on the road or as pedestrians and prevent negative social impacts for area residents; and, 5 In considering recommending a City arterial and collector road network for the Seaton area, this MESPA has been prepared in consultation with the Region of Durham study team preparing the CPDP Class Environmental Assessment for Regional Services which is currently underway. The Sernas Group Inc., Stonybrook Consulting Inc. December 2011, Revised February 2013 Master Environmental Servicing Plan Amendment SPL Beatty, Bird and Hale Limited, Earthfx Inc. 07161 Seaton Community, City of Pickering AMEC Earth & Environmental, R.J. Burnside A-20 Amos Environment + Planning
• Takes into account externally planned roads and transit to ensure future network operational flexibility and cost effectiveness of capital expenditures. This MESPA has been completed in concert with and should be read in conjunction with the City of Pickering Official Plan and the Seaton Conformity Official Plan amendmentPickering OPA No. 22, endorsed Seaton Neighbourhood Plans and, to a limited extent, the plans of subdivision for developments within Seaton. This Phase 2 MESPA therefore addresses Phase 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA relating to City of Pickering arterial and collector roads. As described in more detail in Chapter J, Future Study Requirements, many of these arterial and collector roads are potentially the subject of further Class EA processing. 9.4 ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS AND EVALUATION PROCESS – DO NOTHING The Class EA planning process requires that proponents consider only reasonable and feasible solutions to the identified problem. The Class EA planning process, anticipates that proponents will include as one of these alternatives the option of “Do Nothing”. In the case of Seaton, the issuance by the Provincial government of the CPDP was the first step in the evaluation of alternatives stage, involving a province-initiated “Seaton Planning and Design Exercise” to identify and evaluate alternatives for the structural elements of the Seaton Community. This planning and design process was carried out in close consultation with the City, the Regional Municipality of Durham, and the TRCA. A preferred plan for the structural elements was identified, and the process culminated with an international design competition for the new urban community (Seaton). Based on the work completed prior to the initiation of the MESP and the extensive consideration of alternatives to development in Seaton, as well as the study of the form of urban development within Seaton, this MESP does not specifically addressing the “Do Nothing” alternative for each of the arterial and collector roads proposed. The information collected during the preparation of the MESPA was used to refine the location and design principles for the transportation systems and to evaluate potential impacts on the Natural Heritage System. Chapter C, Transportation presents findings of the transportation system analyses, alternatives, potential impacts to the environment as defined in the Environmental Assessment Act and mitigation measures which are to be undertaken to safeguard the environment when a crossing of the NHS lands is required. The Sernas Group Inc., Stonybrook Consulting Inc. December 2011, Revised February 2013 Master Environmental Servicing Plan Amendment SPL Beatty, Bird and Hale Limited, Earthfx Inc. 07161 Seaton Community, City of Pickering AMEC Earth & Environmental, R.J. Burnside A-21 Amos Environment + Planning
Page 1 and 2: CHAPTER A - INTRODUCTION 1.0 STUDY
Page 3 and 4: of alternatives for the arterial an
Page 5 and 6: These MESP study requirements were
Page 7 and 8: ownership of the Province. Lands ou
Page 9 and 10: Within the MESP Study Area, Ganatse
Page 11 and 12: hydrology for erosion and flood con
Page 13 and 14: It is important to note that the ME
Page 15 and 16: projects are considered pre-approve
Page 17 and 18: Table A9.2 provides a summary of th
Page 19: the Environment for Part II Order r
Page 23 and 24: YORK DURHAM LINE SIDELINE 32 NORTH
Page 25 and 26: COMMENT MESPA RESPONSE (December 20
Page 33 and 34: Area Parks over 4 hectares Parks 4
Page 41 and 42: COMMENT It is noted that the first
Page 43 and 44: COMMENT dispersed in terms of date.
Page 45 and 46: COMMENT Staff agrees with this reco
Page 47 and 48: species.” COMMENT GHD should furt
Page 49 and 50: COMMENT RESPONSE REPORT CHAPTER AND
Page 51 and 52: COMMENT was endorsed by City Counci
Page 53 and 54: COMMENT 3. Highway 7 Widening - Thi
Page 55 and 56: COMMENT 4. Section 4.0 - Phase 2 Re
Page 57 and 58: COMMENT • Section 3.0, last sente
Page 59 and 60: COMMENT Reg”, should be removed.
Page 61 and 62: RESPONSE TO CITY COMMENTS SWMF LOCA
Page 67 and 68: Comments in white are satisfied. Co
Page 69 and 70: Comments in white are satisfied. Co
Page 71 and 72:
Comments in white are satisfied. Co
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103:
show all

Chapter A - Introduction - City of Pickering

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?