Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2008/07/21
CONBIV~`U[VI~Y SEF~VIGES COMNEIT~EE AGENDA F®URTEENTFI IVBEETIN(; NI®nday, Ja~ly 2~, 2003 5e30 p.r~. Cety Na9i, C®m~attee Roocx~ #2A & ~ '~) Approval of the July 7, 2008, 2008 Community Services Minutes. 2) PRESENTAT~®Ne a) Steve Tokos Prey Nightclub, 5890 Main Street 3) REPORTS: a) BBS-2008-02 Niagara Falls Optimist Club, Dorchester Road Sign By-law Variance b) c) 4) 5) MW-2008-40 Rail Grade Separation Status Report MW-2008-45 Morrison Street Rail Grade Separation Alternative NEVI/ ~IJSSNESSe A®J®~JRNMENTe STAFF C®NTACT: John Castrilli Geoff Holman Ed Dujlovic A N ~CASVI E RA a) Resolution to go into Closed Meeting. MINUTES OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, July 7, 2008, CITY HALL, ROOM 2 AT 4:30 P.M. PRESENT: Chair Councillor Carolynn loannoni -, Mayor Ted Salci, Councillors: Jim Diodati, Vince Kerrio, Victor Pietrangelo, Bart Maves, Wayne Thomson, Janice Wing and Shirley Fisher STAFF: John MacDonald, Ed Dujlovic, Ken Beaman, Todd Harrison, Alex Herlovitch, Jim Jessop, Geoff Holman, Denyse Morrissey, Dean lorfida, Karl Dren, Serge Felicetti, Marianne Tikky -Steno. GUEST• Mark DeMarco - 4602 Victoria Avenue, Ray Vuksan - 7959 Oakridge Drive, Dennis Sunstrum - 4063 Longhurst Avenue, Rebecca Peters - MartinSheppard Fraser, 4701 St. ClairAvenue, Ulrike Gross -Downtown BIA. PRESS: Niagara Falls Review, Niagara This Week MINUTES It was ORDERED on the motion of Mayor Salci seconded by Councillor Fisher, that the June 23, 2008 minutes be approved. REP®RTS Itwas ORDERED on the motion of CouncillorThomsonsnd seconded by Councillor Maves that report TS-2008-42 be addressed first to allow for a ten minute presentation by Transportation Services staff. Motion: Carried a) TS-2008-42 City of Niagara Falls Speed Control Policy • Marzenna Carrick, Manager of Transportation Services gave a ten minute presentation to Committee on the City's Speed Control Program The six step process being considered is as follows; Step 1 -Initiate Step 2 -Public Petition Process Step 3 -Agency Comments Solicited Step 4 -Technical Review Completed Step 5 -Public Meeting Step 6 -Implementation Plan • Alternative traffic calming measures such as, portable speed humps for temporary or trail measures and traffic circles (smaller than a roundabout) was discussed. It was ORDERED on the motion of Mayor Salci and seconded by Councillor Wing that the documented titled "Policy and Procedure for Initiating, Reviewing and -2- Implementing Speed Control Program" be adopted. Motion Carried Action. Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008 b) TS-2008-38 Request to Park on Boulevard Councillor Thomson advised Committee that he has been speaking with Mr. DeMarco and the parking situation is not a new one. Mr DeMarco has been parking on the area for years and in the past paved the boulevard at his own expense. Mr. DeMarco already suffered loss of business due to the lengthy construction on Victoria Avenue in an already depressed area of the City. The matter should have been handled through an encroachment agreement and not before Committee tonight. Karl Dren, Director of Transportation Services advised that the parking restriction was at the request of Municipal Works staff during the total road reconstruction as it was noted sensitive infrastructure ran under the boulevard area. Constant vehicles on the boulevard could damage the infrastructure as well as the recently paved boulevard Transportation Services noted from a safety point of view that vehicles could only access the boulevard from two locations without jumping the curb, one from the driveway access by the rear bay door and the second from driving overthe depressed sidewalk ramp on the southeast corner. Vehicles would have to back out across the sidewalk and into traffic on Victoria Avenue. Mr. DeMarco provided additional photos of the area to Committee during his deputation. The pictures depicted the construction at the time and photos of the paved boulevard at different times of the day. Mr DeMarco gave a brief history of the building and that the boulevard has been paid for many, many years Mr. DeMarco stated that City staff advised him there were sensitive pipes running under the boulevard and he could no longer park his vehicle there. He found this odd as the City parked a large Euclid over a long weekend on the road next to boulevard in question. Mr. DeMarco advised that this property was sold with three parking spaces. Mr. DeMarco purchased and renovated 4593 Victoria Avenue, 4581 Victoria Avenue and 4774 Park Street. Prior to purchasing 4602 Victoria Avenue Mr. DeMarco stated he spoke with Ray Kallio the former City Solicitor about parking on the boulevard and was advised the City had no problem with it as there were no complaints on file for 4602 Victoria Avenue. Mr. DeMarco feels the report is misleading as parking on the boulevard has not been "since" the boulevard was re- paved but since and before he purchased the building. After a lively discussion by Committee on the land owners rights and public safety, the following motion was made; It was ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wing and seconded by Mayor Salci that staff work out a lease with the property owner to allow parking 15 meters from the corner and staff investigate the installation of a safety barrier to prevent parking within 15 meters of the corner -3- Motion Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. c) PD-2008-53 Request for an Additional Access Ray's Auto Sale - 4874 Bridge Street Councillor Thomson advised that he was actively involved with this matter prior to the Site Plan. Mr. Vuksan was opposed to the site plan at the time but complied in order to open his business There have always been cars parked at this location and car sales since the 1970's. Mr. Vuksan has upgraded and improved his property and as a result is paying the penalty by not having the former use of the property which has now been re-zoned and the site plan put in place. The four corners around this property are paved to the curb and the business owners have full access to City property Around the City, every car lot has vehicles parked on the City right-of-way. This process should be fair and equitable and Mr. Vuksan should not be penalized for improving his property Mr. Vuksan advised Committee that his family has resided in Niagara Falls since 1976. In 1977 he purchased 4874 Bridge Street, a corner lot at First Avenue and Bridge Street. This property was zoned general commercial and he opened Ray's Auto Sales. In 2000 he approached the City to construct a 2,000 square foot four bay service garage. The site plan has placed Mr. Vuksan's business at a great disadvantage with his competitors along Bridge Street. The assessment on the new building increased his property taxes by approximately $10,000 which is more than the two car lots across the street combined which are double in size. Mr. Vuksan is requesting an additional access off of First Avenue to allow for easier access to the garage bays closets to Bridge Street. Mr. Vuksan stated that the site plan arrangement has destroyed his ability to make a living Mr. Vuksan is requesting a fair and equal opportunity to make a living. Councillor Wing questioned if staff were ticketing every car lot in Niagara Falls to have them remove their vehicles off City property. All residents/business owners should be treated fairly and equally. Staff advised that in 2000 staff, at the direction of Council, distributed a letter to automotive dealers new and used to request the removal of all vehicles off City property. Staff continues to visit dealerships and request the vehicles be moved. To date no fines have been used as you can not ticket an unplated vehicle. The next step in the process is to contact By-law service to pursue the matter under By- law 89-2000 to tow the vehicle or through the Encumbrance By-law. Further discussion ensued and the following motion was made, Itwas ORDERED on the motion of CouncillorThomsonsnd seconded by Councillor Wing that staff investigate an additional access on First Avenue and how to accommodate the display of vehicles on the property. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. -4- d) MW-2008-39 Stamford Town & Country Florist - 6339 Crawford Street It was ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Diodati and seconded by Councillor Thomson that Committee recommend that Council rescind its original direction and allow the property to remain paved. Motion: Carried Action Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. e) PD-2008-60 Planning for Employment -Background Paper from Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal It was ORDERED on the motion of Mayor Salci and seconded by Councillor Diodati that Committee forward this report to the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Region of Niagara and Area Municipalities. Motion• Carried Action Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. f) MW-2008-35 Fernwood Estates -External Servicing Itwas ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Thomson and seconded by Councillor Fisher; 1) That the City enter into an agreement with the developer of Fernwood Estates to carry-out the external servicing required for the subdivision 2) That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement. Motion: Carried Action Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. g) R-2008-26 Smart Centres -Allocation to Bike Lane Millennium Trail Councillor Pietrangelo had concerns that incorporating bike lanes along Oakwood Drive would be dead ending and therefore not creating connectivity to an arterial road. Councillor Pietrangleo is very supportive of having bike lanes on arterial roads but feels funding an extension of the Millennium Trail over the Hydro Canal would connect an entire subdivision to the proposed Smart Centre Development. It was ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Diodati and seconded by Mayor Salci; 1) That staff pursue a bike lane on Oakwood Drive and the Millennium Trail. 2) That staff investigate the applicability of Development Charges for development of the Millennium Trail. -5- Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. h) PD-2008-65 Request by the Downtown BIA to Allow For Activities along Queen Street Itwas ORDERED on the motion of CouncillorThomsonsnd seconded by Councillor Diodati; 1) That the use on sidewalks and parking spaces along Queen Street for various activities from April 1St to October 31St be approved, subject to the proposed guidelines that form part of this report and a review of the activities be carried out at the conclusion of the season; and 2) That the placement of new signage and street banners at strategic corners in the Downtown area to help promote and direct people to the Downtown be approved, subject to satisfying the City's Region's and Niagara Parks Commission's sign requirements 3) Plus the revised sandwich board sizes as requested by the BIA Motion: Carried Action Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. i) BDD-2008-04 OPG Contingency Fund for Downtown Events It was ORDERED on the motion of CouncillorThomson and seconded by Councillor Diodati that up to $50,000 from the OPG tourism and promotion contingency fund be allocated for the promotion of downtown events being held throughout this summer. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council July 7, 2008. 4) A®~9®~RNIIAEI~T: It was ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Fisher and seconded by Councillor Maves that the regular meeting of the Community Services Committee be adjourned at 6:28 p.m. and enter into an In-Camera Session. Motion Carried Overview For The Concept Of Prey Ultra Lounge & Shibuki Sushi Prey is born of a fundamental need for an entertainment complex outside of the downtown core of Niagara Falls. Prey was designed and created to be an anchor for the redevelopment and support of the growth of main and fairy. Prey is a multi faceted entertainment facility which will allow the building to be used as a restaurant, bar and live entertainment hub, creating a launching pad for world-class performers. The venue will also be used to host trade shows, product launches and charity events. Esthetically, we are in a rezoning process to construct a wrap around, street side patio. The patio allows not just an undeniable street side presence for the community, but embedding our extended vision of being a premium eatery, open from 3pm. The weekly program will consist of live Jazz every Wednesday, Thursdays and Sundays will be special event planned with live bands, comedy acts, and premium gala nights, all anchored around an upscale weekend of dancing and dj's. Prey is designed to attract the twenty-five plus demographic, to ensure this pinnacle quality, we cover benchmarks of higher prices, exclusivity, comfort ability and overall great service. "T"his venue will be a pinnacle anchor for our neighborhood bringing day and evening business and strong, quality clientele. This is the first of many ideas of restaurant/bar concepts to bring to the main and f ery area. T am also in negotiations with the Quality Tnn to lease the restaurant space to bring an Trish pub concept, again having a venue that is open day and night to drive traffic to our neighborhood. As you can see having two strong anchors in our area will continue to help drive growth and excitement to our area. Judy 21 ~fll~~ ~__ ~ ~.'~ - a ~~~~~~°~~~~~1~ f.a:S:\ 9~:9 Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Glair and Members of the Community services Committee Ci#y of ~7iagara 1=ails, Ontario Members l~e~ BBS-20~D8-02 lVlagara Falls fl~#imis# Club Dor~hes#er l:toacl m ;sign 8y-law i~arlan~ce l~e~uest REC~iVliVIEi~D,4TlOi~, BBS-2a~~8-U2 That the Committee recommend approval to Council the sign by-lave variance reguest. $ADl(URO1~l~D: In gate 2007, the Optimist Club approached City staff for special consideration to allow the placement of advertising signs on their property W itl~ the review of the new sign by-law ongoing, staff met with the Club's representatives to see what accommodation Yves passible to allow some signage to benefit this service club, As a result of discussions and meetings, staff feels it is appropriate fo .allow the variance subject to the following conditions. > Allow the installation of six ~8) .advertising spaces on the internal fences ~i e , 'the fence that faces onto the Club's parl~ing lot) to the Optimist Club property > Allow advertising on each of the eight ~8) baseball t~acl~stops, which also face internally into the par#~. if allowed this internal slgnage, the Club will limit signage on fences facing the public roadways to temporary signage advertising events within thee- building and property for not-for-profit groups ~i e ,Rotary l~ibfest, the annual Railroad ~l~ovv etc ) > sign permits will be applied for all signs marking 7'ogethsr to Servo fur ~C'~mmt~nlty ~ Community Services Ceparkment Building & By-law Services=. ~1J1~ ~~, 2fl~9 - l _ DDv7"~V4JL3~Vi ~i/~~~~~~~~ ~ The pity's current sign by-la~v would allow two (2) ground sages on C~ptirn~st Club property In light of the fact that the signage proposed would face internally, staff feel that the proposed signage will not have an adverse affect on the property, will not be disruptive to passing traffic and will not add visual clutter In addition the compromise arrived at avill ailo~,v the ser~aice club a means of raising money to continue with their charitable work Recommended by° >~pproved by° ' _ ,_ ;~ i~ Bohn ~astrilli:,; ~i ~'•~',~' ~- of Building & By-law Services Ed l~ujoivic, Ex~er~~itive Director of community Services /~~ aZ' Respectfully submitted ' ~~ l r~r~ ~v~ac:uur~a~ca, ~..r~~~~ tlcar~~~n~5~r~~3ve v~~~~e~ i +~ d u gds a _. cz ~e si .,vvo a7a~.~H~ZIUIJ I I 'b `~~' ' _ _-__ .. ' ~.. 1 ~~ ~a ~ q W Fes- v' ~~ s .~_= - _ -V!` ' , ~a , ~n O N ,~ ~\ 1\ `J w z w = "1 ~ °~ al- z a ~J H `" o x z w a (~'`'~~ ~_ \J I O _ry /y~ w tJ J V ry ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~. ~~ n. ~- k d ~ ~~ F- o J ~ '~ ~ >- r ~ ~ !L ~ o Q c ~ W W ~ ~ - ~ ~Q w ~ J ~ a d ~~ vVi O U7 CY. O wL N v >°o ¢~ 11 "' ~ ~ 48 ~ G Z IJ~ ~ ~ k' LL X 30 wzo Z 4 P f 1 1 ~;::: -- f ~ III / ~ \ /~ ~~ ~~ /~~ I ,C~~ j ~~ - ~ ~, ,; _., ~ .1 .. ~,;:: t ,,~:. , i /.' /' r ; I Q tt{ ;~ r a':' ~ - , (i~ ~ t'l ,f~ ~ ~,1'_'7 ~i ~ I \ i ~: \~ L_ ~, __._ ,~ 'y ~ 9 L ~~ ~~ ~ 1 4aa s~ ~» N~PGARA FgL~S ~I4 ® OPTIMISTS ~'~~ o~'l~ag~ar;a malls :~agart~ ~'u~ls , (~r~tario ~ec~e,~she:r ~l:st,':0~7 ~~ttn; .Tohn Castrlli C°he~`' ~u;lding (~~~cial ~ullding ~ ~~-:~~~ ~'ervic.es slahn; have enclosed ~a drawing 1?f'the 1'v-as~g~rr~ Falls ~~tirn~sl ~'1~xZ~s set u~ w~t~ .t~se ~ :all .d~~~on~i's ~ sign ~osztions. ~'lae ~ dull diem®~ds, only the~`ront diaartond(#2 on the drawing) has a sz~n drat ,caps be see~t from -o.rchest~er coati. 'his sign x~e crzn ~sove say it is only visa~le~`ra Oft%nsist prr~~erty. ~h.e ether 7 diamonds the signs on the back stop is o,~ly visi~5le~rosn ~~ti~ist,pro~erty. I'3~e 6 .signs on eur f~r~ce ~y the ~luygrflnn~ ~~ttnonly lie seen by ~eo~le ,assng the p~r,~. wring our #allt, we talked about gro.n~s lauttang trdvertise~eent r7n .our~'ence sic cit,;v ~o~alevards. ~IZe •fl~timist is not res~o.nsible~or mobile signs ~.& ~Qnners t~tat ;~ar~ ~:n .t~ur~ence. l~li hall boolCi~sgs are done ~y nse. ~ l~now roost o~°th~e grr,~ups that ~lt~~c.e sig.~zs. If' llsad a copy a~ 2lie permit that :the ~'ity uses, ~ could include with ;the mall ~'ontra.~.t ~ ex~~:~aln that tls ey 3save to go :and get a ~errnit at testy ~~al~ ~1,~' ~s-ras e,-r~lai,~ed gat r~ur yrzeeting, ta'aese :~ig~s generate re~e~sz~e fo,r our ,cl~z,b, .I~IZn i~~an,7~~yo~~"©ryyour time. Yours in Optaxnism _.t :Fred s~~artirr S.e.cre;t.~ary Tub (1PTIfiA1CT ('I I IR C1F IV1a(.'ARA X01 I C ~: a-' 6' ~ti ~ 2 NIAGARA Fq~~s J~~o it, ~ ®~~,~ ~~ ~ Q~ ~~~ OPT1M15T5 OC.> ~ y 8 G ~ October 2, 2007 Mayor Ted Salci & City Council THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS 4310 Queen Street P. O. Box 1023 Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Fellow Citizens: We, the Optimist Club of Niagara Falls would like special consideration to allow the placement of advertising signs on our property Some of these signs allow us to general revenue to offset our costs these would include Falls Chev Olds, One stop Fire Place, Hamblets Roofing, Cataract Savings Credit Union, Orange Hot Tubs and Hu-Ero Heating and Air Conditioning For the following clubs and organizations we offer, at no cost, the placement of there signs -the United Way, Rotary Ciub, Boy Scouts, City of Niagara Falls and numerous others. Every city election the candidates put up there signs. We trust that you will give this your careful consideration Thanking you in advance The Optimist Clu of Niagal i THE OPTIMIST CLUB OF NIAGARA FALLS ^- ,~,-~- - , ~~ ~~~ ot,,,,,o. an~_~~A_nn~~ Fax 905-358-9661 Judy 21, 2008 MW-2008-40 _ , 1~~Q~~~Q~~-°e~lls Cauncillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair and dVlembers of the Community Services Committee City of Ndagara Falls, Ontario Nlembers Re: ~IW-2008-h0 Raiff Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessmera# Status Report RECON11ViENDATIONS: 1 That this report be received for information ,-Y,Ur~~~~'' 2 That Council direct staff to continue to e~~lore potential funding opportune#ies• or alter-Kati-v-e=ft~-nd"i~rrg-s"t~a#eg+es~to-implement this projector-w,2 r~tocc~-I-ion o-~ +he C'a ~ l 1 ~ rye ~hrpu.~~4, -1-1r>~ ~ ~ ~ A BACKGROUND: ~vJ Previous Reports At its meeting on November 26th, 2007, City Council approved the recommendations contained in Report MW-2007-131 (copy attached) regarding the Raiff Grade Separation Nlunicipai Class Environmental Assessment final Study Report. The report, completed by Ulatrix Innovations Inc , vvas approved and filed, With the Notice of Study Completion advertised on December 8`h, 2007 in accordance With the requirements of the Class Environmental Assessment process The Environmental Study Report (ESR) Was made available for public review from December 10`h, 2007 to January 22~`t, 2008 During the Public Review pereod, the Class EA process includes provision for a project s#akeholder or member of the public to peace a Part 11 Order Request (appeal) to the ~ilinistry of the Environment. If the request is granted by the iVlinister, the protect ,oroponent musk undertake an lnddvdduai Environmental Assessment before 'the proaect is approved Purpose of ASR ar~d Reoornrnendations The existing Ci~1R Stamford Subdivision rail line cuts through the urban area of the City of Niagara Falls and all the current roadway crossings are level or "at-grade " As such, train movements along this rail lens contribute to delays en emergency ser`iice response tomes, increased traffic congestion and safety concerns The primary purpose of the Environmental Study Report eves to~,examine ail the at-grade roadway crossings of the s~ Stamford Subdivesion tees line and; or;~vestigate possible solutions to address the problems Y~;~ yn raised _""E i ~ry` ~~ommunity Services Department Wflrkirtg Together 1o Serve Darr C~»tniar~zit~ fvlunicipal Works t, ~r5 ,~i ]'~~v 4 1 i•'ifs~ e ~ ~~T`.iF~,,J ^~,y~C Tj+'!~e i. n,y = ~_f-7 1 t~. .?'a~'ia~. ~b3R`.]EN•t?: ill''. 24,~'r,.t.'~SENS~' +lSl~':~n+.. sic, :~".;_IlaRF _.n.tvc..-.~.. _ ~_E a 9. .a[~.J July 21, 2007 - 2 - MW-2008-40 Through consultation and investigation, it was determined that the proposed solution should include the implementation of at least one or more grade separations (roadway overpass or underpass) at existing at-grade railway crossings within the City. The ranking process involved the recommended advancement of two preferred alternatives, that being the implementation of a grade separation (overpass structure) at the existing Morrison Street and Portage Road railway crossings This would provide both an east-west and north-south traffic movement and an emergency services access corridor over the Stamford Subdivision rail line. Of the two preferred alternatives, the Morrison Street Grade Separation was deemed to provide the greatest overall benefit in terms of overall transportation network efficiency and emergency services response time improvements. It was therefore recommended that the Morrison Street overpass be implemented first, the schedule subject to budgetary considerations. The estimated cost of the Morrison Street Overpass is $11,000,000 which was to be financed from Development Charges and from Debentures. It was anticipated that detailed design of the preferred alternative would be undertaken in 2008, with construction taking place in 2009 or later, subject to budgetary considerations. Public Feedback Shortly after approval of the ESR document by Gouncil, members of staff and Council began fielding questions and concerns from concerned residents from the area of the proposed Morrison Street Overpass. A number of residents expressed opposition to the preferred alternative, with the two primary representatives of the concerned group being Mr. Mark Stirtzinger and Mr. John Lamb, both of whom reside on Petit Avenue, north of the proposed Overpass on Morrison Street. Extensive consultation took place during the public review period with the concerned residents, City staff and members of Council in an effort to address their comments and concerns. However, Mr Stirtzinger filed a Part II Order Request with the Minister dated January 20t", 2008 (copy attached). A chronology of the various stakeholder contacts is attached for reference, which included a deputation by Mr. Stirtzinger before Community Services Committee on January 14t", 2008. An additional Public meeting was held at City Hall on February 6t", 2008 with all concerned residents and project stakeholders invited as a further effort to address the issues raised A copy of the minutes of the Public meeting are attached, for reference. Mr. Stirtzinger decided not to withdraw the Part II Order Request and, as per the requirements of the Ministry of the Environment, the proponent (the City) was required to provide a response to the issues raised in the Part I I Order request. The proponent (City) response, on a form prescribed by the MOE, was completed and submitted to the Ministry on February 28`" 2008 (copy attached). Current Project Status Following a lengthy review process, a ruling has now been received from the Minister. The Part II Order request has been denied. A copy of the correspondence from the Ministry is attached. This being the case, the project is now approved to proceed However, during recent deliberations regarding the Capital Budget for 2008, the money budgeted for the detailed design and construction of this project was deferred to 2009 and 2010, respectively. J~~1~ ~~ y ~LRI~ .7 !YI '/Y'2~V V'Y~ Earlier this year, staff made inquiries to both Transport Canada {through the Railuvay safety Act) and CN Railways regarding potential sources of funding for this project t7iscussions ~,!~ith Transport Canada indicated that a Financial Assistance Program for Grade Crossing improvements is ~n place, but that a proposed Grade Separation does not qualify as the program is intended for much smaller scale crossing improvements There is currently no program in place through Transport Canada forfunding of Grade'Separation >>Vorks Correspondence with CN Railways indicates that they also have no funding program ~n place for such a proposed Grade Separation and have no inclination to become involved in contributing to such a project. Their current policy in regard to the level of their financial involvement would be limited to any present responsibility for maintenance at current structures and crossings There may be other potential sources of funding available, but would require additional research by staff to investigate ~~3~~~.~5lO~IS; The Municipal Class EA process forthis project has now been completed., and the City has approval to proceed to detailed design of the preferred alternative The City has made certain commitmen#s to consult concerned stakeholders during the design process in an effort to address their concerns These requirements for continued stakeholder involvement during the design process have been reiterated by the Ministny of the Environment in their response to the Part i I Order request filed against the Project These requirements will be included in the Terms of Reference for the design of the Project. With the proposed budgeting of this project bung deferred by one year, staff are not in a position to proceed with the retention of an Engineering Consultant to complete the design and secure the necessary approvals until early in 2009 Recommended by~ Geoff Hblman Approved by' Respectfully submitted Ed Dujlovic, erector of Municipal V,/orks ecutive O~rector cf Communrk,; ~eniice ~rn cz ~~i~acOonald, Chief Admini~trat~ve Officer Attach 't. Schachc~n~skpj S \RE°ORTS\2008 Reports\VIVI/-2008-40 Rail Grade Separation Class EA Status Report.vvpd Ministry of the Envtranment Office at the Minister 435 St..C~air Ave. West "12th ~1oar ` 7argnto ON _M$V 1P5 lei" X446) 344-6790 fax (41&) 344-6748 ° JUI:. ~- 4 20i1~ Mlnlst+~r•® de i'~nvironnement Bureau du rrsinistae 433, avenue St.-Cleirouest 12' Stage Tarontc~ OtJ. M4V ! R5 Tai (446} 314.6790 TAt+#c (4t6j 314-6748; Mr, Get~#~:Hulmaii;; C,E,"T. ,- Director t3f Municipal "Works City of Niagara Falls 43 i 0 !Queen Street Niagara Falls +ON L2E fiX5 Dear R~irr:.I~olman: _~. Clnraria ENV 1283MC-Z~E18-1438 f)n. January 21, 2008 I received tw® requests and,a, petition from rnezn~ers of the public requesting"that ~Ze City of Niagara Fall"s be required to prepare an iindivdual Envirc~nmeittal .Assessrnent.(EA~ ft~r tl~eproposed grade separated overpass=structures at the existing Moiriscyn Street and .Portage Road raili~vay crossiangs (Project):. I, ann.talcing~tliis oppcartunity.to inforrrm yc~u that a decision has been made'that an indiviclual;EA: is i~flt requixed. This dectsia~n was made after. glv;irtg`careful consadexation to.~he-"issues raised in the requesters'~submissions; the Environmental Study Report- (ESR), the provisions rzfthe 1vlutiicipal"Engineers Association's ~M~A) tlrlunicipal Class Envirenmental.A.ssessent, arlii.the~City's Fert.~ary 28, ~tltl8 respr~nse.to requesters' t , ,. c~rices;have-also ct~nsidereri.i~tl~er reievar>"t matters required to be ecinsiiiered under subsection; l:f (4} of the Envircineritirl ~#s~essment ,~lct. - F e~~ ,. ~ 54 Aitt>iugh: the ^pr~paration of an individual: EA is not required, I noted that the-City h~cisted ar`i" aciditional~pu6lic if~ieeting after.the'completion of the ESR. on lFebruary 6; 20tJ8 .and t;oinrr;~itted.ti~iiavolve the local community_cluring the:detailed design process of the ,undertaking:.,I ani pleased that`the City attemptedto.resiilve the requesters'concerns and comt2iitted tordevelop. a Landscape I"lan,~engage`ihe c~zrimunity in "tlie development of pedestrian.access controls during the design ofthe proposed grade separated overpass stracfizres'aniiassess the benefits of a preµwarmng systerit as part of its overall solutir~n during the °detailed design process. - ~ >..2 ;.£ aYp. " OT3it3(63ttiy ~.. Y Mr. Geoff Holman, C.E.T. Page 2. V~ith,this decisian having Been matte; the City may r#c~w proceed with the Project, subject to any-other permits or approvals-that may be regaiired: `I`he City dust iixxptexnent the Project in:ihe manner it wic~Z it was planned :lnd designed; a~ set out in the Railway Grade Separation Mass Environmental Assessment ESR hated Noverrmber 20(17; including all additional mitigatian.measures and environmental and- other provisions cQm~riitted to in the City's correspondence-dated February 28, 2Ct08. Lastly, I woutd like to ensure that the~City understands that .failure to comply with the Envirvnr~rental-Assessment Acf;-the provisions of'tha Class EA,. anti failure to itnp'leinent the Project iri the znannerdescritied in the ESR,°are contraventions ~f the ~r~vir~nmentaX. As.~es.~metzt pct arid.xriay result in prosecution under section 38 of the.Act. T ant coiafdent that the City "recognizes .the impcirtance and value of the ~'nvir, anm~ntal AssQSSrtaent Act and will ensure that its "requirements and those of the Class EA are satisfied: Sincerely, ,,», ~,--~ Sohn Ge Minister .t c: "the Environment -... (7/9/2008) Kent Schachowskoa Re Railway Grade Separation ESR - Mornson StrPPt City ofi ~Nia ara Faris _ Page 1 From: <John Mactaggart@cn ca> To "Kent Schachowskoj" <kschachowskoj@niagarafalls ca> Date: 3/31 /2008 11 57 AM Subject: Re Railway Grade Separation ESR -Morrison Street, City of Niagara Falls Attachments: Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Comments from CN Rail Jan 15 2008 pdf As stated in our letter of Jan 15, 2008, it did not appear that all options had been investigated regarding impacts to emergency response times Has this been addressed any further? We are also concerned with the trespassing issues that will probably arise once the grade separation is in place Since school children presently cross both, our tracks and Morrison Street, there will be a higher level of effort required by pedestrian traffic to utilize the grade separation instead of crossing the tracks and railway property at grade The Railway does not have a funding program to cover this protect nor does it wish to contribute financially The reason that the Railway contributed towards the Merritt St. project is that it already had a financial responsibility towards a portion of the maintenance on the previous structure Replacing the structure with one that met current day standards was more cost effective for the long term than continuing to repair the old structure "Kent Schachowskoj" <kschachowskoj@niagarafalls ca> 2008/03/14 09:23 To <john.mactaggart@cn ca> cc Subject Railway Grade Separation ESR -Morrison Street, City of Niagara Falls Dear John MacTaggart, We recently received your comments (dated January 15, 2008) regarding the above noted study -copy attached In regard to your question regarding anticipated Construction schedule, it had been originally planned to undertake the Morrison Street Overpass crossing in 2009 However, as you may already be aware, a Part II Order Request has been filed with the MOE by one of the nearby residents The MOE is reviewing the request at this time As such, the schedule for construction is now unknown One of the other major issues is the associated cost of implementing the recommended Railway Overpass structure We are now in the process of seeking potential sources of funding for this project. It has come to our attention that CN participated in the funding of the reconstruction of the Merritt Street Overpass in the City of St. Catharines (currently under construction) I am inquiring on behalf of the City of Niagara Falls if any opportunities exists for CN to contribute to the funding of the (7/9/2008) Kent Schachowsko~ Re Railway Grade Separa4ion ESR - M~rnson Street ('ity of~Ni_agaraFalls _ J Page 2, ~' construction of the proposed Morrison Street Overpass As you are aware from reviewing the ESR document, the primary issues being addressed by the proposed Railway Overpass implementation are 1 Reduce/Eliminate impacts to Emergency Services Response times due to train movements through the existing level crossings 2 A reduction in Traffic congestion 3 An overall improvement in Crossing Safety If there are any such programs or funding opportunities that the City can apply for from CN, I would appreciate a reply in this regard My contact information is attached below We would be pleased to submit any other supporting documentation you require for any sort of application Thank you Kent Schachowskoj, P Eng Project Manager, Municipal Works City of Niagara Falls Ph 905-356-7521 Ext. 4336 Fax 905-356-2354 kschachowskoj@niagarafalls.ca _..~ ~.. ~, .W -._ .~ ,~ (7/9/2i~Ofi~ Kent Schachnwsknj Morrison Street Rail Grade Separation Funding Page ; From: Kent Schachowskoj ~o: Dujlovic, Ed ®ate: 2/29/2008 3:34 PM Subject: Morrison Street Rail Grade Separation -Funding CC: Holman, Geoff Ed, As requested, I contacted Transport Canada to inquire about potential Financial Assistance/Grant/Cost Apportionment Programs, specifically as they would relate to the above noted project. On February 29th, I spoke to a Mr Luciano Martin, Manager of Engineering Services out of the Ontario Regional Office of Transport Canada in North York (Phone 416-973-2326). He was very helpful but indicated to me that although the Minister has the ability (through the Railway Safety Act) to create a program for funding of Railway Grade Separation Projects - there is no such program in place. He also indicated that in his experience he was not aware of any grade separation projects having ever been funded through their office. He noted that there is a Financial Assistance Program in place for Grade Crossing Improvements, but the construction of a Grade Separation would not qualify It is intended for much smaller scale Safety related at-grade crossing improvements like flashing lights, bells, gates, etc. He said that they are only allocated about $3 million per year for all of Ontario under this program. He also noted there is a program for Grade Crossing closing. I have a copy of the Grade Crossing ' 1, Improvement Program information Pamphlet, if you would like to see it, as well as an Overview of the Railway Safety Act. This program still may be of use if we look at any smaller scale improvements at one of our Level Grade Crossings in the future. He directed me to look into the Building Canada Fund, which is run through Infrastructure Canada There is a dedicated website for it and I have downloaded the Information Brochure and have it in my office. After talking. with Geoff, I will research this avenue a little further and see what opportunities are there. I will give you an update on that next week. Thank you Kent Schachowskoj, P. Eng. Project Manager, Municipal Works City of Niagara Falls Ph. 905-356-7521 Ext. 4336 Fax 905-356-2354 kschachowskoj@niagarafalls.ca Novetn~~r 26, 2fl07 M~tU-20(77=13 ~ ,~ ~] ~~{{ Councillor Carolynn loanrtoni, Chair and Nfiernbers of the Community Services Corr~m[ttee City of i~iagara Pa4is, Ontario N1 em b.ers: F2e; ~ll~-2417-'i 3~ Rai3rvay Grade ~eparat~~ i~lunictpa] Class Envfronrn~~ta1 Assessrner~t f=inal Report and Rsc4rrime~datior~s RECO~1ENDaTI'fl~: The recommendation(s) contained in this report were adopted in committee and ratified by City ~auncdl ~) Than the Environmental Study Report, fortf~e Railway Grade Separafian ~lunrcipai Glass Enviro.nrn.entai l~ssessmerit (E,~}, ire received and apprq~red and; 2} that staff be directed to File tlie Environmental Study Report and advertise the Notice of Study completion ~tait~i the impiementatifln of the capital ~i~rorks in accordance ~aiith the requirements of the Eta process, BAGK~ROIJ`I~D; ~t its meeting on September 2~"', 2QQ~~, Ginty Council approved the recommendation to engage the-services of iU(atrix innovations inc. to complete the Rail~~~iay Grad"e Separatio~i Environmental Study Report in accordance ~vi-th trie provisions of the itflunici'laai Giass L~, process. The existing C'~!R Stamford Subdivisran rail line cuts through th:e urban area o;f the-City of ~liagara Faits and ai4 the current road~~~~~ys crossings are level or "at-grade" 1~s such, train. movements along this rail fine contribute to delays 'rn erriergerr~y service respgnse times, in~,reased tiarTi~~ congest!on ar?d safeky concerns The primary purpose of the Environrnentai Study Report <<<tas to e,~amine all the at-grade road~~~ay crossings of the Stamford Subdirisiora rail line and to investigate possible solutions to address tl~e p;rablems raised The Nlunrcigal Class EA process requires Project 'Stakeholder (g~r}eral public, property owners., community representatives, interest groups, and reveyki agencies} consultation to provide input and feedl3ack on the development and an.aiysis of potential aiternat'tve sol`utiorrs Public information Centres yvere 'held on June 16t`~, anal December 15`h, 2Q05 at which time the project team presented information ancE findings to date:,. and received valuable input anel feedback from those who attended in additron, the project team conducted two focus group meetings with representative of Emergency Services to solicit and receive input and feecYback. This vas deemed particularly im;portarlt; as irrrpacts to ;/Yarking Together to Serve Qtir Community CQmmurrity Services Elepartment Municipal Works .. f' ~i:'~t5" y k. .. ~ .._ Fy. yy) F ~~ .. .._ .::a?r7t~.'~„rX~~'r~ :~ii:r. •~w ,Ei . .:1t~:7ut. flail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II ®rder lElequest NYr. li4ark Stirtzmger - 4687 Petit Avenue (>llequestor) NIEr. John )Lamb - 4659 Petit Avenue The following is an approximate chronological sicmmary of any meetings, telephone discussions, correspondence anti emails with Mr Stirtzanger and Mr Lamb Note. Mr Lamb has worked closely with and on behalf of Mr Stirtzmger an numerous of the City's dealings with the concerned area residents in regard to this project. Has name also appears on the petition endorsing the Part .II Order Request to the MOE (sent February 1 S`, 2008) November 26`", 2007 -The recommendations contained m Report MW-2007-1:31 (copy attached} were adopted by the Community Services Committee and ratif ed by City Council. The recommendations were that ESR document for the Rail Grade Separation Class EA be approved and that staff be directed to proceed with publishing of the Notice of Filing of the ESR. November 27`", 2007 - An article is published in the local newspaper (The Niagara Falls Review} m regard to the approval of the ESR document at the previous Council Meeting. December 5`", 2007 (voicemail) and December 6`", 2007 -Telephone conversation with Mr. Stirtzmger regarding the article in the newspaper..He indicated that he was not aware of this protect prior to seeing the newspaper article. December SC", 2007 -email from Mr Stirtzmger to City Councillor Ioannom and City Staff (copy attached} citing questions and concerns regarding the proposed overpass on Morn.son Street, and the study notification process. December 8`", 2007 -Notice of Filing of .ESR document first published. Copies of the ESR document made available for review at City Hall, the Victoria Avenue Library and on the City of Niagara Falls Website. December 9`", 2007 -email from Mr. Stirtzmger to the Mayor, City Council, City Staff and local 1VIPP (copy attached} elaborating on concerns from previous email including notification process and potential impacts to adjacent residents. December 12`", 2007 -email from Rick Hein (Engineering Consultant for City who prepared the ESR) responding to December 9`" email from Mr Stirtzmger (copy attached) This email was forwarded to Mr Stirtzmger on December 14`", 2047. Note aroicnd this timeframe Mr. Stirtzmger requested an opportunity to make a deputation before the Community Services Committee at their next scheduled meeting (January 14`h, 2008) which was granted. December 13`", 2007 -telephone discussion with Mr John Lamb involving numerous questions in regard to this project including funding of the project, delays caused by train crossings, benefit vs. cost assessments and Portage Road overpass being perhaps a better alternative. December 14`", 2007 Mr Lamb called requesting a copy of the ESR document for him to review as he was Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II Order Stakeholder Contacts Page 1 January 21S`, 2008 - emails from 1VIr Lamb and Mr. St~rtzmger (copies attached} ind~catmg that a January 21S` meeting date was not feasible and that some time was needed to co-ordinate an agreeable date. January 21'`, 2008 -fax from Mr. Stirtzinger with copy of Part II Order Request to the MOE 3anuary 28, 2008 -email from Mr. Lamb (copy attached) indicating that a Part II Order Request had been sent to the MOE. A request was made to meet with certain members of City staff and interested members of City Council. Note. this meeting was subsequently arranged for Wednesday February 6`~`, 2008 at S 30 pm at City Hall Notification of the meetang was circulated to an lipdatecl stakeholders list consisting of all stakeholders noted in the ESR document and those included in a list of concernecl residents provided by Mr. Lamb and Mr. Stirtzinger February 6`h, 2008 -Meeting held to discuss the Rail Grade Separatzan ESR document and issues raised by concerned residents Minutes of the meeting discussions were taken and are attached. These minutes also include summanzations of phone calls taken by City staff from notified residents requesting information and clanficat~on, or who would not be able to attend the meeting m person. Numerous additional contacts, m particular telephone conversations have taken place with Mr. Lamb and Mr Stirtzinger, dunng the course of the consultation process, with members of City staff, Council and Emergency Services Staff. In particular Mr Lamb has been telephoning City Hall on a weekly bans to be updated on progress and activities on this project Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II Order Stakeholder Contacts Page 3 Novern~+~~ 2Fi, 2fl'07 N~;A ,,y;~.- - 3,1 3 Counciflor Carofynn loanrtoni, Ghair anal Nl'embers of the Comrrtunty Services Committee City of f~iagara f=a#(s, Ontario iVfiembers:: Re; ~1U~-2U~fl7~~13~ f~aijway Grade 5eparata iblunicipa] Class ~nvfronrner~tai ~sse~srner~t Fr~at 3~ep~rt aid Recomm e nt3atio~s FZECa~~END:aTIa~; MYV-2007-93~ The recommertdatan(s~ corttainec in this report were adopted in committee ar~d raffled by City Cauric~t ~5 } That tlla Environmental Study f~eport, far the Rail~ray Gx'~c~e Se~aratian ~Vlunici~al Glass Enviranmentaf /assessment (E,~}, t1e received and approved and; 2~ th:at staff be directed to file toe Ern~ironmental Stue#y Report and adve~~ise the N:ot#ce of Study completion ~~zith th'~ imp{ernent~fion of th6 capital ~,yflri~s in accordance ~,vtth the requirements of the E~ process. BAGKGRC3Ul~D i~t its meeting on S~ptem.ber 20"', 2'Qt}~~, Gi?ty Gounca# a.pproveci the recomrrie~ci~tion to engaq~e the services of iVlatrix lrinovaticri5 Iri;c to cornpl,~te tf~e f~aiisFvay Crade S~parat~on Environmental Study Report in accordance vv#th r~z provisions of the ~flunrcrpa# Class Eti process. The existing C'~IR Stamford Subciivis~on rail une cuts through the urban area at the City of Niagara Fal}s and aif the current road~niays c+:assings are leve#~ a~ "at-grade". ~s such, train. movements along this ra'i1 lane contribute to dela s in emergency service response times, increased traffic congestion one! safety concerns. The primary purpose of the Environrnenta4 Stud y F~ep~ort ~Etlas to examine a## the at-grade ra~da~~ay crossings of the Stamford Sus~di~iisian rail fino and to in~~estigate posstbie solutions to address file problems ra#sed The ~tunrcipal Class 'EA pt'acass requires Project Stakeholder (,general pub{ic, propertl o4uners, comrrrunity representatives, interest groups, and re ieuk~ agencies.) consultatiion to provide input and feedt~acie tin the deve#opment arrd analysis of potential alternat~re solutions. f'uialic 1rifQrmatian Centres 4vere meld on June ~# 6°1', and December ~ ~"' 2ag5 at uuhieh tirr~e the project team presented information aid findings to date, and received valuable input and feedback from those who attended In addition, the pro~eat team conducted two focus group meetings with representative of Emergency Services to solicit and receive input and feedback_ Tf~r'rs vvas deemed particularly important, as irrty~aets to- ~,,;- _ kYarkang Tog~her to Serve parr Cammrcntty CQmmuntty Services Qepartment ~. Municigai Wo~fcs ,T~.s.~-r,:~r:k~ ~ ~... a ~, r~ ~ Noverriber 26, 207 -Z- VitiV-?007-131 Emergency services access and response times is a key consideration in evaluating alternative solutions Through consultation and investigation, it was determined that the proposed solution should include the implementation of at feast one or more grade separations (roadyvay overpass or underpass) at existing at-grade railway crossings within the City Seven alternati+re roadLVay crossings were short-listed and ana}yzed to determining the preferred alternative(s). The ranking process involved the recommended advancement of two preferred alternatives, that being the implementation of a grade separation (overpass structure) at the existing Morrison Street and Portage Road ra~iway crossings This yvould provide both an east-west and north-south traffic movement and emergency services access corridor over the Stamford Subdivision rail line. The preferred solutions were presented at the second Public Information Centre for revie+/v, comment and feedback. Of the t~/vo preferred alternatives, the Morrison Street Grade Separation is deemed to provide the greatest overact benefiit ~n terms of overai}transportation network efficiency and emergency services response time improvements It is therefore recommended that the Morrison Street overpass be implemented first, file schedule subject to budgetary considerations The schedule to bring the project to the point yvhere a final report could be presented has been extended somewhat due to staffing and workload issues from bath the Consultant's and City's side Matrix Innovations was disbanded for a period of time, but has recently been acquired and merged with Dillon Consulting Limited, v+~ell positioning them to successfully complete this assignment. Staff ~s seeking authorization from City Council to fi{e the Emiironmental Study Report and advertise the i~lotice of Study camp#etian yvhich will initiate a thirty (30) day final revieav period Should there be no appeals to the )•Ainistry of Environment, staff can proceed to the detailed design stage +/vhich ~aiil involve further consultation and approvals from the various revieav agencies as +,vell as discussions ~~iith impacted property o+~+aners A copy of the Executive Summary from the Environmental Study Report i5 attached, and a copy of the full Ernnronrnental Study Report document can be made available upon request. The estimated cost of the preferred design (~ilorrisan Street Overpass) is $11,000,000 avhich will be financed from Deveioprnent Charges and from Debentures under Accouni #`l 2-3-310038-030G00 It is anticipated that detailed design of the preferred alternative ~/~~ill be undertaken ~n 2008, y+iith constrc.sction taking place in 2009 or later, subject to budgetary considerations. Recommended by' Approved by Respectfully submitted Geoff Holman~~Director of t\i(unic~pal v~/or':~s ~:,' - Ed Dujlovic, Executive Director of Community Services '-'~1 ~- ~ ~ ,~, ~" / Joh MacDonald, Chief Administrativeaff'rcer k Crh~rhn~mckni G 1RFPC1RT419nn7 RonnrtclM1AlA/_'JFlll7_4Q1 _ ~n:he~n~i (_`r-~.-~.. c.~..~~'+tfn.. Cn o.....r..-~ .•--. flail Grade Separation Class IJA -Part 1FI ®rder Request 1Vgr. lVliark Startzinger - 4687 Petit Avenue (Requestor) 1VIr. John I.amlb - 4659 Petit Avenue The following as an approximate chronologacccl summary of any meetings, telephone discussions, correspondence and emails with Nfr. Startzinger and Mr Lamb Note. Mr Lamb has worked closely with and on behalf ofMr Stirtzinger an numerous of the City s dealings with the concerned area residents in regard to this project. His name also appears on the petction endorsing the Part II Order Request to the MOE (sent February IS`, 2008) November 26`", 2007 -The recommendations contained m Report MW-2007-131 (copy attached) were adopted by the Community Services Committee and ratified by City Council The recommendations were that ESR document for the Rail Grade Separation Class EA be approved and that staff be directed to proceed with publishing o f the Notice of Filing of the ESR. November 27`", 2007 - An article is published in the local newspaper (The Niagara Falls Review} m regard to the approval of the ESR document at the previous Council Meeting. December 5`", 2007 (voicemail) and December 6`", 2007 -Telephone conversation with Mr. Startzinger regarding the article in the newspaper He indicated that he was not aware of this protect pnor to seeing the newspaper article December 5`", 2007 -email from Mr Startzinger to City Councillor loannona and City Staff (copy attached} citing questions and concerns regarding the proposed overpass on Momson Street, and the study notification process. December 8`", 2007 -Notice of Filing of ESR document first published. Copies of the ESR document made available for review at Crty Hall, the Victona Avenue Library and on the City of Niagara Falls Websate. December 9`", 2047 -email from Mr. Startzinger to the Mayor, City Council, City Staff and local MPP (copy attached} elaborating on concerns from previous email including notification process and potential Impacts to adjacent residents. December 12`", 2007 -email from Rick Hem (Engineering Consuhant for City who prepared the ESR) .responding to December 9`" email from Mr Startzinger (copy attached) Thas email was forwarded to Mr Startzinger on December 14`", 2007. Note around this timeframe Mr. Startzinger requested an opportunity to make a deputation before the Community Services Commcttee cat their next scheduled meeting (January 14`h, 2008) which was granted. December 13`", 2007 -telephone discussion with Mr John Lamb involving numerous questions in regard to this project including funding of the project, delays caused by tram crossings, benefit vs. cost assessments and Portage Road overpass being perhaps a better alternative. December 14`", 2007 Mr Lamb called requesting a copy of the ESR document for hrm to review as he was Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II Order Stakeholder Contacts Page 1 having difficulty downloading rt from the Ctty Website. A digital copy on CD was subsequently provided for his review. December 18`", 2007 -email from Mr. Sttrtzmger (copy attached} indicating that his concerns have not been addressed to his satisfaction. He requested a copy of the 2004 Dorchester Road and iVlomson Street ESR document and copies of Cotmctl reports m relation to that study He also raised additional issues and questions. December 19`", 2007 -telephone conversation with Mr. Sttrtztnger Confirmed that a response from the Ctty to his December 18`" email was forthcoming and made arrangements for him to pick up the requested material from Ctty Hall between Christmas Eve and New Years Day December 2IS`, 2007 -letter from the Ctty to Mr. Sttrtzmger attempting to address all the questions and tssues raised m his email of December 18`h (copy attached}. Included was a CD with copies of the Dorchester Road and Morrison Street ESR and related Coltncll Reports. January 4`", 2008 -telephone conversation between Mr Sttrtztnger and Fire Chief Lee Smith of the Ctty of Niagara Falls Ftre Services. Mr Sttrtzmger re-Iterated many of his previously stated concerns and questions January 7`", 2008 -Letter from MOE -Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch to NIr Sttrtzmger, issued m response to a letter sent to the MOE dated January 2"`~, 2008 (copses attached} January I2"', 2008 -email from Mr Sttrtzmger to the Mayor and Ctty Council wsfh a summary of ten reasons why the Momson Street Overpass should not be implemented (copy attached). January 14`", 2008 -1VIr Stirtzin.ger, Mr Lamb and a group of concerned residents from the area were present at the Community Services Committee meeting. Mr Sttrtztnger made a presentation to Committee, re-Iterating the ten reasons against Implementation of the Overpass on Momson Street. City staff, the Flre Chief and the Engineering Consultant (Rick Hetn} were present to provide clarification and additional Information to members of Committee on the issues. Committee directed that Ctty staff arrange to meet with Mr Sttrtzmger and other concerned residents in an effort to discuss and attempt to address their various Issues and concerns January I5`", 2008 -letter sent to Mr Sttrtzmger (copy attached) requesting a meeting to discuss the tssues raised. A date of January 2Is` (evening} was offered as a possibility. January l7t", 2048 -telephone conversation with Mr. Sttrtzmger with additional questions regarding the initial formulation of the public consultation plan for the EA. A follow up phone call was made to Mr. Sttrtztnger on January I8`" with answers to his questions. There was also discussion regarding the January 1S`" letter from the Clty and the potential January 2IS` meeting date A summarization of the conversation is attached (inter-department memo to the Director of Nluntclpal Works dated January 18`", 2008} Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II Order Stakeholder Contacts Page 2 3anuary Z 1 S`, 2008 - emasls from 1VIr Lamb and Mr. Stirtzinger (copses attached} indccatcng that a January 21S` meeting date was nit feasible and that some time was needed to co-ordinate an agreeable date January 21S`, 200$ -fax from Mr. Stirtzinger with copy of Part II Order Request to the MOE. January 28, 2008 -email from Mr. Lamb (copy attached) indicating that a Part II Order Request had been sent to the MOE A. request was made to meet with certain members of Ccty staff and interested members of Csty Council Note this meetcg was subsegziently arranged for Wednesday February 6`i`, 20D8 at 5 30 pm at Ccty .Hall. Not f cation of the meeting was circulated to an ccpdated stakeholders last consisting of all stakeholders noted in the ESR document and those included in a lest of concerned residents provided by Mr Lamb and Mr Stirtzinger February 6`h, 2008 -Meeting held to dcscuss the Rail Grade Separatcon ESR document and issues raised by concerned rescdents. Minutes of the meeting dsscussions were taken and are attached. These minutes also include summanzations of phone calls taken by City staff from notsfied rescdents requesting information and clanfication, or who would not be able to attend the meeting m person. Numerous additional contacts, m particular telephone conversatsons have taken place with Mr. Lamb and Mr Stirtzinger, dunng the course of the consultation process, with members of City staff, Council and Emergency Services Staff. In particular Mr Lamb has been telephoning City Hall on a weekly basis to be updated on progress and activcties on this project Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II Order Stakeholder Contacts Page 3 A~„ Municipal Works •~P Scanned GVflflNU~'ES ®F 6~AflL G@~Afl~E ~EPA~tA~°i®N fltIEEE~"flM1IG F1fe: - - VlVednesday, ~ebc~ua~y 6, 200 ~fl'fl`V FBALL, RC3®41A Z AT 5:30 P.flllb. PRESENT: Mayor Ted Salci, Councillor Wayne Thomson, Councillor Shirley Fisher STAFF: Geoff Holman, Kent Schachowskoj, Lee Smith, Marianne Tikky- Steno GUEST. Dan Naisbitt, Charlene Spinosa - 4686 Pettit Avenue, Gary Fisher - 6252 Carolyn Avenue, Patrick Craw - 6240 Carolyn Avenue, John Conlin -Avalon Consulting, Fort Erie, Doreen McLean - 6281 Burdette Drive, Mrs. Ball - 6269 Burdette Drive, Hans Sontag - 8026 Woodsview Crescent, Linda Rix & Rick Gay - 6578 Doreen Drive, Hal Brown - 6561 Burdette Drive, Robert Findtater - 4690 Pettit Avenue, Ken Mitchell - 6361 McLeod Road, Ken & Karen Jones - 6521 Burdette Drive, Shirley Ede - 6571 Burdette Drive, Jirn Dickenson - 6477 Burdette Drive, Roy Cote - 6709 Cherrygrove Road, Mark & Diane Stirtzinger - 4687 Pettit Avenue, Lois McCabe - 6511 Burdette Drive, Peter Gigliotti Pierino - 4984 Pettit Road, John Lamb - 4659 Pettit Drive. PRESS: Niagara Falls Review introductions: Mayor Ted Salci Councillors: Wayne Thomson and Shir{ey Fisher Mr. Geoff Holman - Director of Municipal Works Mr Kent Schachowskoj -Project Manager Mrs. Marianne Tikky -Executive Coordinator (Steno} flVflflNUTES Mr. Kent Schachowskoj provided a brief overview as follows; The project history goes back to 2001!2002 with the Dorchester Road Environmental Assessment (EA} Project that was initiated to address operational concerns from a traffic perspective along Dorchester Road A number of Public Information Centre (P{C} were held and part way through that process it was decided to add a section of Morrison Street between Dorchester and Drummond Road to that study. One conclusion of the EA was that, from a traffic operations perspective only, the benefit of constructing a Rait Grade Separation overpasslunderpass atboth Dorchester Road and Harrison Street was outweighed by the associated cost. A separate study was recommended to took at level grade crossings throughout the City to not only address traffic issues but emergency response times and safety. -2- In late 2004 the Rait Grade Separation EA study was initiated. Two PtC's were held and moderately attended. The crossings were short Listed down to seven (7) locations and an in-depth analysis Looking at various factors including emergency responsetimes, improvementstotrafficoperations,environmental impacts, property impacts and safety issues. The seven (7} locations were ranked from highest to lowest. Morrison Street ranked first and Portage Road ranked second The report was submitted to Council and adopted in November 2007. As part of the EA process it was put on public record (newspaper) for 45 days and during that time a number of concerns were brought to the City's attention and prompted this meeting tonight. 2. Mr. Geoff Holman clarified that when a study is conducted they have a specific focus The solution whatever selected will have to meet the problem statement, "Existing railway lines presently bisecting the City of Niagara Falls resulting in train movements that contribute to ... • Delays in emergency response times • increased traffic congestion, and • safety concerns" There are a number of alternatives that may meet some but not all of the above criteria. If an alternative does not meet alt the above criteria when presented it is evaluated much lower or discarded very early in the process. Through the public input process the City has heard of additional concerns that should have been considered more heavily such as aesthetics and pedestrian safety. The solution for this particular project must meet the problems stated and address public concerns. The project has been put on hold and a Part 11 Order Request or "Bump Up" has been filed. This Order must go to the Minister of Environment's office where they review the documentation and follow the logic of the process to ensure all the steps have been met. The Ministry wilt make a determination as to whether the Municipality has to go back and took at alternatives that may have been missed or go into more depth on some issues that have been raised by the public. Council has directed staff to meet with the public bringing us here tonight. Staff will try to resolve the outstanding issues and/or review additional facts brought forward tonight. 3. Mr. John Lamb 4659 Pettit Avenue Resident at the above address since 1971. Provided a brief description of the Environment Protection Act. "Environment means the Air, Land and Water, Plant and Animal fife including human life. The social, economic and cultural conditions that influence the life of humans or a community. Any build-ng, structure, machine or other device or other thing made by humans. Any solid, liquid, gas, odor, heat, sound, vibration or radiation resulting directly or indirectly from human activities or any part or combination of the foregoing and the interrelation of any two or more of them in or of Ontario." -3- Obligation to Consult, section 5.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, 1999, "When preparing proposed terms of reference and an environmental assessment, the proponent shat! consultant with such persons} as may be interested." Mr. Lamb provided a list of concerns by the area residents as follows; 1. /esthetics The coca{ residents have to look at a monstrous concrete structure in their front/back yards. 2. Property Values (Loss} Once the bridge is constructed residents are concerned the value of their property will decrease due to its location. 3. Pedestrian Traffic/Safety 30 - 4d children crossing daily to attend Schools in the area Crossing guard used to ensure the safety of the children crossing. Children will use the quickest way across not necessarily the safest. 4. NoiseNibration Wil! the noise increase due to the elevated bridge? Will the vibrationlnoise of the train increase when traveling under the bridge? 5. Pollution/Dust DuringiAfter construction of the bridge. 6. Notification Does not feel that the residents in the area were properly notified 7. Fiscal Responsibility The City can not afford to build an $11 million bridge. Where is the money coming from? 8. Use of technology -Cameras Place cameras along Morrison Street and CN tracks to alert the Fire Station on Morrison Street on tram traffic. Mr Lamb advised that he and Mr Stirtzinger spoke with former Fire Chief Peter Co~eld and Niagara Emergency Medical Services -Kevin Smith who both are in favour of building a bridge over Portage Road. Mr. Mark Stirtzinger questioned why the Dorchester Road EA advised the neighbouring residents of the potential road widening and the Rail Grade Separation EA did not. Mr. Geoff Holman advised that the Raii Grade Separation EA looked at 21 level crossings throughout the City of Niagara Falls and dEd not focus on the Morrison Street crossing until short listed, then becoming one of two preferred locations to build a rail grade separation. 4. Mrs Shirley Ede 6571 Burdette Drive Mrs Ede knew of the rail grade separation over a year ago and advised that she spoke with the Engineer on the project who noted that the grade was too steep at the Morrison Street location to construct a bridge and only the road would be widened. Mrs. Ede pursued the matter no further until today. Concerned over the -4- amount of pollution/debris, increased noise during and after construction, delinquents partying under the bridge and privacy when using her backyard. 5. Mr. Patrick Crow 6240 Carolyn Avenue (Resident for over 40 years} Mr. Crow took exception to the statements made earlier as he and his neighbours have a difficult time accessing Morrison Street off of LaMarsh (only access onto Morrison} Fees that the City needs to resolve the traffic issue on Morrison not only for emergency services but for loco! traffic. The trains causes huge traffic backlogs making it next to impossible to make a left turn onto Morrison Street. Mr. Crow would like an opportunity to poll his neighbours to obtain signatures in support of the rail grade separation or any other solution to the traffic problem. 6 Charlene Spinosa 4686 Pettit Avenue Spoke with the Project Manager, Fire Chief Lee Smith and Council members. Through her conversations discovered if the Dorchester Road Fire Station were to increase their complement it would cost approximately $1 million to renovate and approximately $2 million per year per vehicle to operate. Would recommend constructing afour-lane bridge on Portage Road and widening the road to four lanes down Portage to the five corners on Thorold Stone Road. $11 million to build the bridge, if the City had cash in hand, with all additional works it would accumulate up to $25 million. Believes this bridge is not a viable cost to the City. Number one concern is the safety of the children crossing what would be a four-lane road. Children will take the shortest route possible which would mean going under the bridge or cutting across traffic. (Mrs Spinosa's full comments were submitted and attached) 7 Linda Rix 6578 Doreen Drive Questioned if CN has any responsibility in this situation. Ms Rix counted 132 cars on one particular passing. Can CN not reduce the wait times by reducing the number of cars per train. 8 Doreen McLean 6281 Burdette Drive Advised her concern is for the safety of the children. Why can't the Portage Road Bridge be constructed which would resolve the Emergency Services issue. 9. Gary Fisher 6252 Carolyn Avenue Concerned as his grandson attends Cherrywoad Acres School. Questioned where the pedestrian crossing currently on Burdette crossing Morrison to Pettit would be located with the construction of this bridge. Agrees with Mr. Crow that something -5- needs to be done on Morrison to resolve the traffic congestion far the safety of pedestrians as well as motorists. 10. Ken Janes 6521 Burdette Drive Questioned how wi11 seniors and children navigate the bridge coming off of Burdette Drive. Would a stairwell be constructed from the ground up to the walkway on the bridge and if so this would cause a hardship to many of those who have trouble walking. 11 Mrs. Ball 6269 Burdette Drive Concerned that if the road is widened to four lanes with sidewalks it wilt be sitting next to her window as she is currently 17 feet from Morrison Street. Mrs. Ball finds the poi(ution a problem now. How wilt it be when it is right outside her door. 12. Comments from residents unable to attend tonight's meeting is aftaehed. Mayor Ted Sacli thanked the residents for the attendance tonight. Assured them that the engineers report had been accepted but there has been not monies allocated for this project at this time. Staff will take the comments from tonight's meeting and bring a report back to Council. Councillor Fisher stated that the comments brought to the table tonight will be addressed by staff and thanked the residents from coming out on an icy night. Councillor Thomson thanked the residents for their comments, it gave him cause for concern. Also from the comments made noted we have a problem at LaMarsh and Morrison and now has him looking at Portage Road. Serious other afternatwes may have to be considered to alleviate the traffic congestion Funds are not currently available and Councillor Thomson noted he is a great believer of not incurring debt that the next generation will have to pay off ADJ~~1R[VN{ENT - 7:10 p.m -6- February 6t" 2008 ate: Rai6~ay Grate Separatioan (i~4orriscst StlC~Y overpass pra;~ect} 1Ntunicipai! ~fa-ss Ea~vironeetent~i Assesscne~t ~ityof Niagara 1Fail'~ TO. CounciFior Caroiynea IIoartlniaetii, Chair and Meaxtbers of fhe Comctnunit}f Services Cartne~it#ea City of Niagara Faiis, ®N, And my feiimu~e Neighb6rs cif Ntorcisan's St area. I would Pike to thank all the Gouncil'for Members, Kent Schachowskoj fn the Engineering Debt., and Lee Smith of the dire Services Dept. far mak}ng themselves available and helping me gain a fuller perspective. During the past few days I took the initiative to aisa.investfgate some of the comments and ideas that my fellow neighbors brought to my anentton regarding this proposal, and their viability. 7h'rs endeavor has taken me to lvtr Nicholsan's office as weft as Mr Kim Craitor's office for infoemation grid a number of Counciilacs in particular wayheThamson acrd Iance Wing. I would like to address same of those comments and misguided infarmatlon not only I had assumed but, my neighbors as welt. I am sure that everyone incfud'ing Council would Like to see the tracks removed- from the City of Niagara Falls but, reality is, the cost and the. time factor are not feasible to alleviate the current situation. The. cost fs to a tune of approx. 80 million doNars and taking approximately 15 to 20 years or more to relocate tracks, buy tand etc... as I said, this-is not a viabte course of action at this tune. I also know that people are misguided in believing that the tracks in the Victoria Area were removed by the City, when in fact, the Casino picked up a great deaf of that cost and this also took approx. Z'0 years if I understand correctly, to -have them removed. S:o this is not an option for a solution at this time; People fnciuding myself have been quick to assume that the Casino f~as only been "beautifying" what directly affects them, this 1s not the case. I understand-they pay taxes, just tifie the rest of us and also have a contract to contribute a set amount of dollars per year to the City of Niagara Fatis. There have been no "free rides" for the Casino. -7- I understand we are meeting tonight based an the Appeal regarding the Envirdnr~entdi Study that was dame on the proposed two sites of Harrison Street and Portage Rd leacattons. I understand why these two locations where specifically chosen over all the other locations that CN trains cross through the city. But, the study has some major flaws in regards to safety that were not addressed in the EA Study. There has been one fatality at these tracks on Morison St in the past LO Mears and that is one too many but, T believe, if we were .to go ahead and build a bridge at M}.orrison St right now' based on thts particular study, then more fives wifi be lost. I arr- not a lawyer but, I waui.d think that because the residents have brought this major flaw in particuPar to Counsel's attention, injuryJdeaths co.wid .also equal lawsuits in the future for the City. YAte do not lire in an "idealistic world" where everyone does what is safe or right. As a mother of four children and I can lei! you, they took for ehaileng.es and shortcuts, in particuiar, when they are late for school. Children da not see the same dangers that parents do, they have a "it cari`t happen to irte'" mentality a.nd are oblvi.aus to their safety most times. I assure you, they wi11 not crass at Lamarshe Street, walk over an overpass and down to Zellers to. cross at the lights td ,gEt back to Pettit A.ve, they won't do it. This assessment is absent From. the EA Study and to verbally try to insert a solution to a flawed Impact Study is: gross error En my opinion. There are also the children who are bused and dropped off at the Lamarche St location at approximately 3:15pm. Several children cross over Morrison Street and walk back and down Pettit Ave Montt. So this does not just extend to the children of Gherrywood Acres Public School,rtapp~ies to the bused children as we1i.. I have lied at 468'6 Pettit Ave for app.roxirrrately 8 years and last summer, there were three rear-end type ear accidents that I can specifically reeall~ on the West side of Marriscan St just over the tracks; ~/eattter dial not seem to be a factor and this is at a leve4 grade crossing. I understand the design is just a "conceptual" design and not the quaranteeci Resign that th.e City plans to move ahead with either. But, there is nothin..g based on the EA Study, to consider what is going to happen to traffic that is moving over this proposed Overpass. Considering the steepness and shortness of the grade required. -8- How many accidents wilt occur because of these restraints and the limited view as vehicles came dawn either side of the overpass? And I speciFicaliy am speaking on the paint thaE it wl-4 either increase or decrease the amount or frequency of these "rear-end style" accidents taking place. The rnst is another factor, it is un.derstoad that the "estimate" to build this particular bridge at Morrlsorr Street crossing is approximately I I million dollars. From what I have understood, this est'- .mate only takes into conssderation of the building materials aril labor. I believe that estimate to be far too law based on the reality of the amoctiaation of payments and the purchasing of Land from .landowners along Burdette Drive who back onto Morrison Street. Vrlhen in truth, this one bridge would cost the tax. payers of Niagara Fails an estimated 25 million doilar5 when it is alt said and done. ° Rs I stated, I have spoken to marry people in the past few days who have helped me to understand, from their perspective, the need for access over these tracks eha-t run through the city and the .flow of Traffic at the Dorchester/i~forrisorr Intersection. I fully appreciate that and understand that if my house was on fire, ar I needed an airtbulance or police officer, I would v~tant them. there in the least amount of time. And I fully appreciate and understand the need to widen .roads due to the fncrease of traffic uae have on the main streets and intercessions of this growtng city. The congestion at Dorchester and Morrison is the secondary consideration .after emergency response vehicie5. UUe have traffic being funneled into a dead end street and no where tC1 go but, back out to the same intercession. Wai-mart and ~ehrs seem to tse ttse largest overall draw to that end of the street, as well as seasonal situatlans with slow pitch tournaments in the Pali at Optimist Park. Wal-mart is relocating to the Mcleod Road/N.iagara Square area and Zeh.rs to th:e old Acres area on Dorchester at the 42d, T do not know how much this wii1 lesson traffic, as I am sure, something else wilt take up residence in these vacant lauiidings eventually, -9- However,. I dv agree that widening of the roads., retain roads sash as Dorchester and Morrison wilt help ease traffic constraints. Eventually alt main roadways such as Drummond, Stanley,. Montrose etc... Witt also need to be widened as the C(tg of Niagara Falls continues to grow. I' am atso aware that there are plans to add another Fire statipn t0 ttre vuest End 4F the City in the near future. And after listening to the Counsel's session on bal$ncing the Budget earner this year, there is a struggle regarding funding With this in mind, I asked Mr Lee Smith in his opinion, approximately what would be needed to upgrade the .Dorchester Fire Dept, to bring it uts tQ standards similar to that of the Morrison St location. - In his best guestimate,. 1 mtllic~n dollars For upgrades and 4 mltliost per year in salaries and expenses. I haue s.pc>tEen to a number of Counsel and different departments over the past few days and I would like to extend a proposal to Caunset far the'sr consideration artd investigation. f} The widening of Dorchester Road to Mountain Road and Morrison Street to trummond Road to four lanes to deal with traffic. ~} Replaying the bridge that was at F-©rta,ge Road and bringing it up tci :code and standards of four lanes for emergency vehicle safety: Portage Raad Bridge Is also the least in cost and time to imtrtenterrt. And understandably, Portage Road would need to be upgraded to four !arras not only older the bridge but, to Th©raidstorie Road because.Qf the increased traffic fi4w. Which would only be an asset to move traffte :along. 3') Instead of building another fire department for the West End of the City, pint money into th.e infrastructure that already exists by upgrading Dorchester Fire Station, then we would have three Stations with access to the major sections of the City The current EA Study is under appeal at the ministry level, this can go either way, in favor of the Residents or the Cry Counsel at this paitt.t. V+i am urposing is that Counsel agree to have a New EA Stud: ; ' From a Neva o ame one that did ,with the appealed paints factored in for c this new this study to include both the Porto location a:nd the Morrison re the view that Bo i her would be suitable. -10- ~ F ew EA a paragraph above, Mi• Mark - sag"ree e A ea! tQ the Min" °_` 1"hank you Sineerefy Charlene Spincasa 4686 Pettit Ave Niagara EaNs QN 1_2E 6L5 905-372-$.8b8 -l I- Rail Grade Separation Comments Dave hues 6541 Burdette Dave The rail work would be right in his backyard. He believes this protect will he great for the community for the following reasons. • Faster access for emergency/rnedzcal services especially for large events like Canada Day which is held at Optimist Park. He believes it will create a sound barrier improving the noise level. He is upset with the newspaper article that was m the paper today. He said Mark S came to his house and spoke with him in the Fall. Dave told Mark that he approves, however Mark only mentioned in the article the negative opinions. Dave feels he zs one of the people who is most impacted because it is so close to his house and yet he greatly supports the overpass and believes that the article should have spoken for him as well. 2. Carol James 4664 Pettit Avenue Just moved to this area in October 2007 and was not made aware such a protect was taking place • Feels widening the street to four lanes is suffcient to move the congested traffic therefore increasing response times for Emergency Vehicles. • With today s technology the City and CNN should work together to improve communication of train schedules, etc • Pedestrian traffic a big concern especially children who will take the shortest route possible even though a safer one is provided. 3. B. Weaver Drummond Road In favour of the project. Just wowed during construction how will pedestrians traffic be detoured as numerous seniors use this route to go to the medical centre and Zellars Plaza_ 4 Judy Koczula 4655 Pettit Avenue Opposed to the construction due to safety of pedestrians especially children using the walkway off of Burdette and crossing Mornson to Pettit. Noted that she supports comments made by Mark Stirtzinger. 5. Ken Robinson 4593 ParkIane Tunnel possible as there is on Thorold Stone Road? 6. Debbie Kenyeres 6551 Burdette Drive Several concerns as to the height of retaining wall, pathway location, noise, increase -12- traff e and if property taxes would tnerease to cover the costs of bridge. 7. Pete Corfield 3806 Stnnicks Avenue 905-988-3473 {cell) See "Letter to the Editor" Should extend Morrison Street over the QEW as the most important. 8 Diane Denson 6476 Burdette Drive The safety of children was not mentioned in the EA study. Increased traffic congestion -will not be a concern as Walmart and Zehrs wilt be moving. Response times for Fire Services/Ambulance - do the Portage Road bridge frst. Do not wish see a huge concrete wall behind her 9 Bzuce Dale 4700 Pettit Avenue He would like to suggest putting m a noise bamer (like what zs on the QEW} to deflect the noise. As the trains pass under the budge the noise will be pushed out towards the residential homes. 'T'able A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Proponent: City of Niagara Falls Project Title: Razlway Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment Project Location: Various Locations -City of Niagara Falls Prepared By: Phone/Email: Kent Schachowsko~, P Eng , Project Manager, Municipal Works Department, City of Niagara Falls Phone 905-356-7521, ext. 4336 Email kschachowsko~@,ntagarafalls.ca Issues and C'oncea-ns ~ Proponent Response ~ Status Issues -from Requestor 1. Aesthetics -negative mlpact towards have been addressed during the Class EA process -Visual Aesthetic Impacts are dealt with to the Will be compatibility with surroundings along ESR document m Section 6.2 4 (page 130) and extensively m Appendix I (Vegetation and Aesthetics addressed with adjacent residents being exposed to Inventory) It is noted that an overpass has a greater visual impact than an underpass, regardless of in later a new view location. The report notes "A well designed landscape planting plan will assist in mitigating any project negative impacts associated with the new structure. The new design should include tree planting and stages landscaping wherever feasible..A tree planting/landscape/streetscape plan should be prepared as part of the overpass detailed design phase The intent of this plan will be to compensate for loss of existing vegetation related to the construction activities, mitigate impacts on tl2e surrounding land uses, and improve the overall aesthetics of the area surrounding the structures " It is also of note that on Page 14 of Appendtx I, that the Morrison Street Overpass option was given an average Visual/Aesthetic Impact rating of low/mediurra (the lowest rating of the overpass options examined), while the Portage Road overpass was given an average rating of high Figure 6.5 (page 122) of the ESR also shows prehmmary design cross-sections of the elevated sections of the road and boulevard treatments both with and without retazmng walls m place. Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project - As noted above, Aesthetics, Landscaping, and attempting to mitigate the visual impact of the proposed structure will form an integral part of the detailed design process Rail Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment February 28`h, 20Q8 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 1 Issues and Concerns Proponent Response Statas 2. )Financial (]Loss) -concern that Will be assessed during the Implementation of the Project -The potential of any negative Impact Will be property values of residences in vicinity on surrounding property values by the construction is difficult to quantify An expert opinion addressed will decrease regarding property valuation could be sought during the design phase of the project, However, rt is in later doubtful that anything beyond generalized comments would be produced on this issue There are so project many diverse factors that impact property values and the implementation of this project may have stages little, if any, bearing on those factors 3. Pedestrian Safety -pedestrian traffic, Have been addressed during the Class EA process -The existing pedestrian facilities are addressed Will be m particular approximately 40 children, m Section 3 4 5 m the ESR document. On page 58 rt notes that there is only a sidewalk on the north addressed cross Morrison Street and the Railway side of Morrison Street at the CN crossing. There is a crosswalk on the east side of the crossing in later Tracks at the Level Crossing. connecting to a sidewalk on Petit Avenue heading south to Burdette Drive In section 3 4 6 (page 60) project rt also notes that there have been two recent collision incidents with trains and pedestrians (m 1998 stages and 1999), including one fatality The orientation of the crosswalk and the existing sidewalk on the north side of Morrison Street currently direct pedestrian traffic across the CN railway tracks when heading either west towards the commercial areas or north to Petit Avenue and the existing school zone A school crossing guard currently provides assistance to children crossing bath Morrison Street and the Railway tracks, but would only be on duty on school days when children would be expected to be traveling to or from school The remaining times there is no other form of Pedestrian control m place The proposed overpass structure on Mon-ison Street will constantly provide sidewalks on both the north and south side of the roadway, neither of which would directly expose pedestrians to train movements. Hence, the overpass is providing a safer method of crossing over the railway tracks than what currently exists. Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -Based on feedback received from various parties since the Filing of the ESR document, rt is clearly understood that the safety of pedestrians (in particular school children) crossing Morrison Street at Petit Avenue and CN Railway is of Prunary Importance Access to the safe means provided of crossing the tracks at Morrison via the sidewalks on either side of the proposed overpass structure will then become a key consideration during the detail design phase of the project. Also, methods of discouraging and preventing the use of the bridge opening along the tracks under the road for pedestrian crossing means will be considered and implemented. Pedestrian refuge and escape routes will be investigated and miplemented as appropriate Agencies with strong experience in Railway Safety Issues and Pedestrian Focused Solutions (such as Transport Canada and the Railway Authorities themselves) will be consulted during the design process to obtain insight and feedback on possible solutions Working group sessions with concerned residents will be held during the design development process to solicit input and feedback regarding pedestrian safety and access issues Also, consultation with the local school officials and parent councils will be initiated to muolve them in the design development process. Education and awareness programs can be developed through the schools regarding pedestrian crossing safety Rail Grade Separation Class Enviromnental Assessment February 28"', 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 2 Issues aid Co~icc rns ~~Proponent Response ~ ,~. Status 4. Noise/Vibration -the proposed raised Have been addressed during the Class EA process - Noise issues are addressed m the ESR Will be and widened roadway overpass will document m Sections 32 1 (page 37) and 6.2.5 (page 130) and in Appendix J A noise assessment addressed impact noise and vibration levels was conducted by specialists m the field as part of the EA process. Their documented conclusions in later predict an overall reduction m current noise levels, based largely on the elimination of tram whistles project due to the level crossing elimination. Correspondence from CN Rail (m Appendix D) indicates that stages the whistling practice has already been eliminated at the Momson Street crossing. The Noise Assessment goes on to conclude that the overpass will generate an increase of 0.5 dBA now and 0 9 dBA accounting for future traffic growth, which well are below criteria (5 dBA) for noise mitigation measures to be implemented. Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project - As a result of the issues raised m regard to noise and vibration, additional testing and study will be implemented during the detailed design phase, specifically accounting for the orientation and proposed layout of the overpass structure, any "tunnel" effects produced, and focusing specifically on those residences adjacent to Morrison Street on both sides of the crossing Follow up monitoring of noise levels post-construction can also be undertaken 5. PollutionlDust -the project will have been addressed during the Class EA process -Section 6.2.2 (page 126) of the ESR document Will be impact Pollution and Dust levels both covers Erosion and Sediment Control Issues during Construction and proposes methods to mitigate addressed during and after Construction. them. As well, Section 6 3.2 (page 137) proposes Environmental Momtpring during Construction to in later "ensure best managenae~at practices are instituted and in compliance with current legislation, project regz.~lations, standards and policies are being adhered to during construction and that construction. stages activities comply with the project permits and the City's environmental policies " It also notes on page 138 that "z-sport completion of construction, a final clean-up of the site will be completed and a post-construction inspection will be undertaken to confirm that disturbed areas have been restored to their original condition " Following construction, air quality should generally improve with the easing of the some of the traffic congestion resulting in less vehicle standing and idling, exposing the area to less exhaust fumes. As well, dust levels should generally decrease with the elmZmation of the existing gravel shoulders on Morrison Street and the widening to four lanes and an "urban style" cross-section with curbs and grassed boulevards Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -Erosion and Sediment control measures will be mcoiporated into detailed design for the project as well as the Construction Specifications An environmental monitoring program, as described above will also be unplemented dtu-u~g the construction phase. Rail Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment February 28`x', 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Fage 3 Issues and<Concerns ~~ ~ • ; _. ~ Proponent I~esp~onse ~ ~ ~~ ~~ Status 6. Emergency Services -current Have been addressed during the Class EA process -Due to the key nature of Emergency Services Will be negative unpacts on Emergency Services Response tune mipacts noted in the Problem Statement for this EA, specific focus group meetings addressed are overstated. Police and Ambulance were held with Emergency Services (Fire, Police, Ambulance) The ESR document details these in later services have no concern. Tram discussions in Section 2 ~ 1 (pages 16 to 19) and in Appendix C. As well, as part of the Agency project movement delays are minor and other Contact process as detailed in Section 2 5.2 and Appendix D, Fn-e Servtces also responded as is noted stages routes are available Suggest use of on pages 19 and 20 The noted issues and concerns expressed by the Requestor were also forwarded alternate technologies, such as video to Fire Servtces for their response A written response was prepared for presentation at the Public camera along track, to provide advance Meeting held on February 6`~, 2008 by Fire Services, however was not presented due to the number of warning and tracking of tram movements issues raised by residents in attendance. It is attached as part of the supplemental supporting so response route can be planned to information package, and can be summarized as follows• avoid delays. 1 Police and Ambulance Services, due to their mobile nature, are not affected by the location of a future grade separation. However, both services indicate support for the need to implement a Grade Separation. The preferred location should therefore be m line with what would be of most benefit to Fire Service response issues, due to then- need to respond from fixed locations. 2 The issue of fire response delays due to tram crossing movements has been a concern for a number of years, becoming problematic since the removal of the old Portage Road rail bridge m or around 1994 The initiation of this Class EA has provided the opportunity for their concerns to be addressed. 3. While there is not extensive documentation available, tt appears that tram movement delays to Fire responses, when they occur, typically range from 4 to 6 minutes and sometimes over ten minutes. This becomes a significant impact considering the target response time goals (see ESR page 19) 4 The benefit to Fire response times derived by the implementation of the Morrison Street railway overpass would be for responses heading north and west from the central station at 5815 Mon-ison Street 5 In response to questions of providing additional support at the existing Station on Dorchester Road, rt is noted that capital cost would be approxnnately $1,500,00 plus approximately $2,000,000 annually m operating and staffing costs per vehicle It is also noted that all structure fire responses draw from multiple stations in every case 6 Apre-warning camera system tracking tram movements could provide some benefit in planning response routes. However, these alternate routes may also delay response times and therefore does not provide a complete solution. Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -The potential partial solution of the installation of pre-warning system will be further investigated with CN during the detail design phase of the project. A benefit-cost assessment regarding its implementation would be undertaken to detei-mme the feasibility of including this work as >l art of the overall solution. Rail Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment February 28`h, 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part lI Order Requests Page ~+ Issues~and Concerns- ,: .. Proponent Response , Status 7. Inadequate Ilave been addressed during the Class EA process -The public and agency consultation process is Ilas been Notification/Consultation -were not well documented m the ESR document m Section 2.5 (pages 16 to 29) and m Appendix C (Emergency addressed aware of project until notice of filing of Services Meetings), Appendtx D (Technical Agency Contacts), Appendix E (PIC No. 1), and ESR document seen in the newspaper A Appendix F (PIC No 2) Notifications regarding the scheduled Public Information Centres (PIC) previous EA for Dorchester Road and were published m the local newspaper, along with the Notice of Study Commencement and the Notice Morrison Street, completed in 2004, used of Filing of the ESR. Together these four points of public contact satisfy the mandatory requirements direct mail notice. Also for a Schedule "C" Class Environmental Assessment. There was no intent to exclude anyone from the recommendations mprevious EA seem notification process. It should be noted that the scope of the investigation did include all at-grade to contradict what is presented in the railwa~crossmgs cit wide. The Dorchester Road and Morrison Street ESR (filed m September 2004) Rail Grade Separation ESR. included as one of its key recommendation that a separate Class EA be initiated studying all level grade railway crossings within the City Reference to this previous EA is included in Section 1 5 (page 8) of the ESR document. The problem statement for the previous EA focused on Traffic operational issues and a deterioration m the level of service along the Dorchester Road corridor From a traffic operations improvement standpoint, the implementation of Grade Separations at the Dorchester Road and Momson Street railway crossings could not be~ustified. However, considering the negative impacts to Emergency Service response times caused by tram movements, it was recommended that the second EA be conducted to focus strictly on the level grade railway crossings. All level grade railway crossings citywide were to be included m the scope of this study (not~ust Dorchester Road and Morrison Street), m order to determine the optimal location for improvement works that best benefit the City as a whole. As such, the recommendations in the two ESR documents do not contradict each other They differ due to the focus and problem statements associated with each of them. Will be (has been) addressed through new commitments made in addition to those set out in the project documentation prepared under the Class EA -Since the requestor first contacted the City to regard to this project (on or around December 5`'', 2007), si~riificant efforts have been made through consultation to understand, provide information and clarfication, and attempt to address his issues and concerns Through the requestor's efforts to raise awareness of the project m the surrounding neighbourhood, consultation with numerous other residents has also been undertaken. Numerous telephone conversations, email and letter conlrriunications, and two formal meetings have taken place between City staff, Councillors, Emergency services staff and the requestor or his neighbours. A chronology of the significant communications, along with copses of the significant written correspondence, is attached to document the level and content of consultation that has taken place This listing is not inclusive of all consultation, as numerous additional phone discussion m particular have taken place dunng the penod since the filing of the ESR and the date of this document. In addition, commitments have been made to continue to include these concerned residents m the implementation process of this project, as is detailed m the attached supporting documentation. Rail Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment Febiuaiy 28`h, 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 5 ISSUeS and Cga~cerns Yi-opQpent ltes[~onse Status 8. Fiscal Responsibility -the estimated Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -The estimated costs tncluded m the Will be cost to tmplement the preferred ESR document (Section 6 1.8, page 123) have made allowance for all foreseeable costs assoctated addressed alternative is too high given the City with tmplementatton of the preferred alternatives, based on the prelunmary design concept, mcludtng• in later average annual operating budget. Construction, tittltty Relocation, Engtneermg, Property Acquisition and a Contingency amount. As is project Concerned that taxes will be impacted as noted m Section 6.1 9 (page 126) "the anticipated tinning for the construction of the railway grade stages a result. separatiarns will be subject tc the City's bi-~dget process "Considerations regarding timing of tmplementarion, funding methodologies, and property tax tmphcattons are ultimately under the control of Ctty Council As noted above, all costs associated with the preferred alternative have been mcluded m the ESR document, with the exception of any funding costs As such, the issues and concerns noted will all be taken into account by Ctty Counctl during their deliberations regarding ttmmg and funding of this protect, and its unphcattons to the residents ctt~ All possible avenues of obtamtng alternative funding, or opportunities to defray a portion of the expected cost from other levels of government or agencies will be investigated as the project moves forward. Other Issues raised by attendees at or in response to notice of the Public 1Vleeting February 6`h, 2008 9. Privacy -concerned about privacy Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -Concerns regarding privacy issues Will be issues and use of backyard can be addressed during the detailed design phase of the project. Both hard (wall, fence, ban-tcade, addressed guardrail) and/or soft (vegetative -trees, shrubs) screening can be considered and implemented to in later address privacy issues. They may also serve to assist mitigating visual in3pact and noise/vibration project concerns as well Refer to the response to Issue # 1 (Aesthetics) as the two issues are related. stages 10. Traffic Impacts -left turns onto have been addressed during (prior to) the Class EA process -This issue was reviewed during the Will be Morrison Street from LaMarsh Street Class F,A process for Dorchesier Road and Morrison Street, which the City completed in September of addressed difficult under normal cu-cumstances If 2004 Based on an assessment of future traffic volumes for the proposed widening of Morrison Street in later there is a tram crossing at Morrison, tt is to four lanes, rt was determined that the provision of traffic signals at the intersection of Morrison project impossible to exit. This is only access to Street at LaMarsh Street were not warranted. This traffic warrant analysts was carved out according stages north from large neighbourhood m the to MTO (Mmtstty of Transportation Ontario) standards. southeast area from Dorchester Road and Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project - An updated analysts of the traffic Morrison Street. Traffic issues on signal warrants at Morrison Street and LaMarsh Street will be undertaken, during the detailed design Motrtson Street needs to be resolved. phase, considering the impacts of implementing the Ratl Grade Separation on Morrison Street and Rail Grade separation on Morrison Street updated future traffic volumes Thts re-assessment also nes into the potentral driveway relocation for will help, but may also need Traffic the medical centre on Morrison Street, as is detailed m Issue #15, below If the new analysts warrants Lights at Momson and LaMarsh. some improvements to the subject mtersecrion, these works would be implemented either as part of the Overpass construction project, or some future Capital protect undertaken by the Ctty Rail Grade Separation Class 1~,nvtrorunental Assessment Febniary 28`h, 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 6 ;Issues and Concerts 1'roponeut Response Status 11. Traffic Safety -the Rail Grade Have been addressed during the Class EA process - It should be noted that through the Will be Separation will cause more traffic miplementation (some of which is currently ongoing) of the proposed improvements at the addressed hazards than rt will solve. Increased intersection of Dorchester Road and Morrison Street and along Momson Street, the current traffic in later amount of traffic and vehicles congestion problems will be greatly unproved. With respect to Fire Service vehicles, it should also be project "speeding" west into a bottleneck at noted that the improved intersection at Dorchester and Morrison includes implementation of traffic stages i Dorchester Road and Morrison Street controllers responding to fire services. Typically, any Fire response vehicles heading westbound on intersection will cause more rear end Morrison street and over the proposed new Rail Grade separation would be then turning right (north) type collisions, mcludmg Fire response onto Dorchester Road. Also, firefighting staff are competently trained with appropriate Ministry vehicles. licencmg to safely operate Fire response vehicles (see attached response from Fire Services dates February 6"', 2008) Existing vehicle collision history (as detailed m Section 3 4 6, page 60, of the ESR) indicates that typically they are rear-end type and have been attributed to "driver inattention, ~ speeding too fast for conditions, and following tao close. " Section 5.3 (page 92 and 94) of the ESR indicates that improved traffic operations and safety will be a benefit derived from implementing the Rail Grade separation on Mon-ison Street as rt will allow unimpeded traffic flow along the roadway when a tram is occupying the crossing. It will also "generally improve east-west traffic flow across the City for drivers wishing to avoid delays dt~e to crossing trains " It does also note that "the overpass would need to be integrated with future widening plans for Morrison Street " Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -The detailed design process will closely consider traffic movement safety m the configuration of the overpass structure Minimum sight distances when cresting the overpass, minimum sight stopping distances and design speed are all considerations during the design process. As is noted on Table 5.2 -Design Criteria m the ESR (page 86, 87) the design speed considered is actually 10 kph higher than the posted speed limit of 50 kph. 12. Cost Estimate too Low -actual cost Have been addressed during the Class EA process - As is noted m the response to Issue # 8 - "The Has been to taxpayers will be higher than the estimated costs included in the ESR document (Section (1 8, page 123) have made allowance for all addressed stated $11,000,000. It will be more in foreseeable costs associated with implementation of the preferred alternatives, based on the the order of $2S million after preliminary design concept, mcludmg: Construction, Utility Relocation, Engineering, Property consideration of land purchasing and Acquisition and a Contingency amount." As is noted in Section 6 1 5 (page 113) of the ESR, little or borrowing costs. no additional property will be required for the proposed Morrison Street overpass. Again referring to the response to Issue # 8, City council will deliberate the merits, timing and financial implications of the mlplementation of this project. 13. Pedestrian Use of New Overpass - Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project - As is noted in the response to Issue # Will be how will children and seniors use the 3, pedestrian crossing safety and access will be an important component of the detailed design process addressed new overpass to navigate the crossing, for the proposed overpass. It also notes, that Working group sessions with concerned residents will be in later and how will it be accessed? held during the design development process to solicit input and feedback regarding pedestrian safety project and access issues stages Rail Grade Separation Class Envu-omnental Assessment Febniary 28`h, 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 7 Issues'~~~tid Co~mcea-ns ; : Proponent Response ~ Status ~` 14. Pedestrian Detouring during Ilave been addressed during the Class EA process -Section 6 1.6 (page 116 and 117) of the ESR Will be Construction -how will pedestrian document considers construction staging issues. Figure 6 6 (page 125) also illustrates a proposed addressed movements be dealt with during temporary two lane detour to be constructed to the north of the existing crossing dunng construction, in later construction`? including the provision of a temporary sidewalk for pedestrians project Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project - As is noted on page 117 of the ESR stages "the arnplernentatiora of this concept will depend on the benefit-cost analysis of the detour concept ". This would be undertaken dunng the detailed design stage and prior to tendering for construction. If other areas detours were provided for vehicular traffic, as an alternative, temporary pedestrian crossing accommodation would still be provided during the construction stage and incorporated into the Construction contract. 1S. Negative Access Impacts -owner Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project - As is noted m the response to Issue # Will be of Medical Centre on Morrison Street 10, this matter will be re-investigated dunng the detailed design phase If the new analysis warrants addressed east of Railway Crossing concerned that some m~provements to the subJect intersection, these works would be implemented either as part of in later proposed overpass will impact access to the Overpass construction project, or some future Capital project undertaken by the City A copy of project and from the Medical Centre Move the email con-imumcation undertaken with the Medical Centre owner is attached. It should be noted stages driveways and install Traffic Lights at that dunng the Dorchester Road EA process, the City offered to construct the signalized intersection at LaMarsh Street intersection? Morrison Street and LaMarsh Street, including relocation of the Medical Centre driveway access The City also offered to cover SU% of the estiniated $150,00 cost to undertake this work. The owner opted not to accept the City's proposal 16. CN Rail Comments -The City Will be addressed during the Implementation of the Project -The option of installation of pre- Will be received a letter from CN dated January warning system technology will be pursued with CN, as is detailed m the response to Issue # 6, above addressed 15`i', 2008 in response to the Notice of However, as is also noted, this alternative only partially addresses the problem statement and cannot in later Filing of the ESR (copy attached) Two be pursued as the sole solution m isolation. project items of note m the letter are as follows stages 1 The railway does not have the resources to advise all Road Authorities of train movement over at grade crossings 2 The installation ofpre-waiving systems is a possibility Rail Grade Separation Class Enviromnental Assessment Febniary 28`'', 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 8 ~~I's~ue'sandCaitcerns ~roponentl2esponse ~ Status 17. Other Solutions -other alternatives Have been addressed during the Class EA process -All of the alternative solutions presented have lrlas been may be more viable• been considered or addressed as part of the Class EA process to date addressed A. Relocating the railway tracks outside A. The relocation of the tracks was included in the preliminary screening of alternatives (Section 4.2 of urban area of City to west end. , page 79) in the ESR document and detailed m Appendix O The high infrastructure and land costs B. Implementing Portage Road Rail dictated that this alternative be only carried forward as a long-term planning consideration by the City Grade Separation instead of at Momson B The implementation of the Portage Road Rail Grade Separation instead of at Morrison Street is a Street. valid consideration. However, based on the Evaluation Matrix (Figure 5 8, page 103) in the ESR, this C Increasing the size, equipment and rs the clear second preferred alternative Based on the established criteria, the Portage Road staff complement at the Dorchester Road alternative had higher (less desirable) property, land acquisition, access and natural environment Fire Station. impacts Only m ternzs of Capital Cost was the Portage Road alternative rated higher than the D. Have CN reduce the length of trams Morrison Street alternative The implementation of an Overpass at Portage Road will be carried to reduced wait Mmes at crossings, forward (as is recommended in the ESR) as the second location for potential future implementation, E. The proposed widening of Morrison subject to the City's budgetary considerations. Street to four lanes will alleviate traffic C This alternative is not specifically addressed m the ESR. However, based on supplemental congestion and increase emergency infornlation provided by Fu•e Services, there will be significant capital costs involved as well as a vehicle response times sufficiently that significant ongoing annual operating expense Over the expected life cycle of an Overpass Structure, Rail Grade Separation not necessary the costs of this alternative are significantly higher As well, this alternative does not fully address the F. Implementation of an underpass entirety of the problem statement, only the issue with respect to emergency service response times instead of an overpass at Morrison Street D This alternative is not specifically dealt with m the ESR. However, rt will only partially address crossing will have less impacts. the problem statement as rt only provides a limited partial mitigation of the issues raised by tram G. Build overpass over QEW extending movements across the City Reducing the length of tram may result in an increase in the number of Morrison Street to Montrose Road. tram crossing events, thus negating much of the benefit. E The proposed widening of Morrison Street will provide a benefit m tern7s of alleviating some of the cun-ent traffic congestion issues, but does not fully address the problem statement and provides little or no benefit m regard to Emergency Services response times F The option of an underpass at Morrison Street is addressed m the ESR m Section 6 1 7 (page 119 and 120) and in Appendix P There are a number of factors that make an underpass less desirable than an overpass, most notably increased "throw away" costs during construction (provision of temporary rail lines), and "tie-m" points on the existing roadway being moved further east and west increasing the impacted area. G The "flyover" badge on Morrison Street over the QEW was reviewed during the Dorchester Road Class EA as a potential planning alternative, but was discarded m favour of improving the Dorchester Road corridor as a more effective means of improving overall traffic operations This alternative would involve significant capital costs to unplement and can be carried forward as a long-term planning consideration. Rail Grade Separation Class Environmental Assessment February 28`h, 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 9 - Issuesa~ndCorcerns_~ ~ Prupone~ntresponse Status ': Additional Supporting Documentation Attached l Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Response from Fn-e Services Feb 6 2008 2 Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Part II Order Cotntnumcations Summary 3 Ratl Grade Separation Class EA - Part II Order Stakeholder Communications 4 Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Minutes of February 6 2008 PublTC Meeting 5 Ratl Grade Separation Class EA -Communications with Medical Centre Owner Jan 23 2008 b. Rail Grade Separation Class EA -Comments from CN Ratl Jan 15 2008 Rail Grade Separation Class Envu-orunental Assessment February 28`h, 2008 Table A -Proponent Response To Part II Order Requests Page 10 01/21/2008 49 32 FR3i 903 945 5010 TOwN QF GRItASBY .~~~ +fl' ~, o y. ._ ,~~~,~. ~~''/ ~Et'~iVED ~`~~ ~~ - - - °~.~ OAK 2 i 2~t~ ~, ~Pl~l~1E~AiNG r ~ ~ _ h ~j001/004 '~ ~i;rriC~{"'' ~'lotks ~+ , t ' .~ The Honourable John Gerretsen IFS ~~ ~~~, ' Minister of the Environment 12th Froor, t 35 St. Glair Avenu® blast +1687 Pettit Avenue Toront~~, Ontario Niagara Falls, Ontario !2E 8t_4 M4V 1,5 F~a (416) X14-7337 rPa~sab ~~~ (4tB) 3r14B7S0 D~~e t/~ppg Part II ~~rder request ~ Raihnraw Grade Separation Glass Envirwirnental Assessment ~lleypn! For ~evlayv D Ptos~ra aCoflre~eeet ~IPO D P8 ~8asysl~ Please find attached a Part 1! order request asking That the Minister of the Environment require the City of Niagara Falls to prepare an indivdual enviromentat assessment for the Railway Grade Separation (project). If the Minister requires further details, please contact me. Thank you for yc+ur time on Yhis important matter. Yours truly, ~ ~ ~~;~~ Mark stlrtzinger Cc: Agatha Garcia-1MrigM, A/Dlrector, >rrtvironmentalAasessment and Approvals Branch cc: Mr. Kean Scluaccoj, P. Eng. Project Manager, City of Niagara Falls ~~x (Qo5,~356 -235 Olr'21l2008 09 33 FAX 905 945 5010 TOwN OF GRIMSBY Mark Stirtzinger 4687 Pettit. Avenue Niagara Falls, Orttarfo LZE 81_4 January Z0, 20G8 Ministry of the E;nvlronment Fite: l=t~IV1283MC-2008-5 135 St Clair Avenue West Toronto, ON M4V 1 PS Te I: 41 Pr325-4 r64 1-B00-Sfir,-4923 eisque~a for a Mmrt It Crdera Railway Grade ro QPrn~eat} Minniici~ C6asa t_rtv6ronmentmf Assessment (EA}Study City ot` Niagara Falls Dear Minister On Monday January 14, 2006, I abng with a number of neighbours attended the Community Service Committee mereting to address our concerns ttwugh my deputation. Therlr were ten (10) points of contention that I w~i condense to the following: 1 _ Nei~bouttulod Imp~QS:, An overpass strudvre (grgde separation) would have the following adverse effects: a) Ae.~ttreeics negative towards cosnpaGbility with surroundings along with adjacent residents bei~rtg ee~psed to a new view. The proponent affer+ed no resolve. b) Property foss (finanaai} being residential homes falling in value, Muniapal Works Director, Geoff f~olrnan replied that it was'purety conjecture". c) Pedestrian traffic. The EA eorttains no plan solution to deal with this very important concern. There u currently a creasing guard assisting apprommately 40 public school children together with a number of local folks, who are walPting #o and from a med'~cal clinic arui other commeraal areas on Aorrison Street_ The proponent offered no resole@. d) Noise, dilxation and dust. The EA study does not deal with the fact that a raised widened rosdwray and a raiMray underpass at Morrison Street would greatly amplify current conditions. The proponent offert~ no resolve. Ride 1-lein, prime corrsulEant stalled theta would be a negligible 0.5 dba increase in noise but offered nothing in r+espact to dust and/or vibration. 2. Emergency Services In the t..A study they addressed Police, Ambulance and Fire Services. The Police arxt' Ambulance Services show little or no gym. The Fire Chief Lee Smith stated, °over a two year period there appeared to be twelve inadents of delay, but he could not state for how long or at which crossing. ~~ ~ The Fre trucks have level crvssinps on Morrison Street, Drummond Road, Portage Road and Thorohl Store Road. to the event they are aU blocked they could use the Glt~1/1/ spur as an altern8tive_ ~ 002/004 01~21~2008 09 33 FAX 905 945 5014 TOwN OF GRIIASBY ~dj003/004 • Pie 2 3. Notittcat(on January 20, 2008 The notification procedures for this EA are somewhat confusing. Area residents have been mandated w+th reports, newspaper notices and other media for over ten years of pending change. A previous i=A study done by Deican in 2004, on the same subjed gave direct notice to residents on Dorchester Road. This previous report suggests no grade separation 81 either Morrison Stt+eet or Dorchester Road over the rail line, but if anything was done at 1Vlorrlson Street in the future i4 should be that of an underpass not an elevated roadway, which would stilt greatly BTrpac# the neighbourhood. The prpportRrrt says that they have given proper notice in accordance to the EA. Why is it that rrty neighbours and I didn't hear anything until December 7, 2007 by notl+ce in the Niagara Fads Review newspaper? 4. Fiscal responsibility. this bridge ~vjec# corrres with an estimated price tag of eleven million dollars. AS a peroe~ of the total anneal operating budget a~f eighty two million it becomes very axp®nsive. ryYoyu~rs truly, Mark D_ Stiatvnlger cc: AAr. Kent SGradzoMrslcoj, P. ~. C'rojed Manager, City of Niagara Falls '~~...~ 01~21f2008 09 33 FAX 905 945 5010 TOWN OF GRIMSBY 0(0041004 - -- CANhOA , C1TV OF lVlAf;:A62A C=ALLS ' N~71CE QF FlA,9td6 OE EIdVlRO1VMSlVTAL STUDY ftS~FiT - Railway GPad® saptiratlon ~Iaass Envif'~siillleflfial A,sseaslnent study The City of NlaQarti Falls Fran serried out a Class EnvtrOnm6nCa1 A,ssasarnerrt (FA) W provkte a comprehenalve rowlew of the need for a ,fade separation (overpass or underpass) et one or more of Ore e~dat{n9 raver rettway crossing mcetwns along ttx~ raAway Imes that preeantljr bisect ills City d Niagara F®Ns. The Study Area For the C18S5 Envknnrhental Assessment fndUdeS aP atgrsde rerFwey rXOSSt1Qs WlthSfl the Nrhen area Gi ale City Of Niagara Felts (see map beloe»}. ~ TTIe sludv was amduceed In aTmpltarlce with sr~redWe C of the MurNape! Class EirwJronmertl Assessment (June 2000}, whrctl is npprovad under Use Orttarlo Envtrnrrrrenla! Asseaatrtent Act Fo1lowlcrE the second Publ~ Information Centre, tl1e preferted altemattve was revieMad n lighk of Comments rsCetved and muddied ae required. TstWng onto cortefderadon the txmments that were recelve0 front regulatory agenGas and the pupOC, 1te feCOrtunended allernallve IM:IUdea' a iuttxs grade saperaGan at Me AAwtlsor+ Street and Portage,R0a0 Canadlar Natio+Ml RBihvey croealrr8e. Thu AntlClpatbd tlming for th0 GOnetrttt;VOn aF Ure ralhvay grade Eep;lyd6on(9) will be aubled to the C(grs budget process. The EmrrOnrnenta{ Study Repai (E5FZ3 fsY'i taaaft ~xap8red to dOtxrment the ptannln8 8114 dedston making process undenekNn for Ih~s Study By Otis Notion, a+e ESft ie being placed on the public record fora 4rrrWry review permed In accordaix:e vnth Ina rEWltretneflt8 0! the fr4unlC{pat Class t"sA. SumJeet to coRrnents rseelved as a result of Utls Notrce and the ~CCEiFt of r°eceesery aPDroVail, the City of NteQers Falta intentls to proceed vdlfl pie data! de4ign end construction tie documelraed fn acs ESR. ~ Ttte E9R Is aviiNAWe Tor review front Monday Cacember 10"', 2pn7 to Tt>oadey January 2200, 2tN18 aE tMe fpllanvlRQ IO~gt{ona: EnQinearing Depaitrrlerlt ylGWfiA Avenue Library www.nitgeraialle,ca Chy Ot Niagara FaNS 4849 Vldplla Avenue city or rliagars Fella at Gty Msn N1agL+rd Falls ~ d3t 0 Queen Street, Niagara Falt6 Tel. (905? 3$8.7621 Mon.-Frt. 8 30 e.m, lb 4:50 p.m. ' Further infarmeLOn Ir1ay As Oetelned frOfil ARP. Kent sctrachoweMol. P.Eh{T„ Protect Mian~eP, CIQr o1 Nisgaca Felts, (gp3) 19F-7¢21 f~, 4936. Please pravlde arty writtetl c+oi(araanta ra Tile Gily of Niagara Fads by January 22'+. 2008 (wm-el a: Jaya from me sate of wls NotlOa). >P mrmams r~>s this project txrlnot ae ryeolved m disCUaelon with tna City of Nisgera FaYa, a pereorl or pargf may request that sftm Mlnlebar of Environment make an order for the prn}+ect to oempty wlal t'8R II pf Ore Envttwvnentdt Psseaement Act (tefefred to as a Pmt II e]rder). Re+aussts for a Pert III Order moat be received qy the MlnMter, at the address betovr'by J9nuery 22nd 217E18. A txlpy of tt>e request must ales be event to the Ctty's.Ptloject Mmtagef ff ff0 rsauest ~tecenad by January 22"°, 2009, lf+b Gly of Niagara Fella wilt tie authorized to proceed vrigz detailed design end conabuitlon as ouutned h thb £SR. Minlsnrvf fheEPVtronmene ~ ~ ~ y35 St. rlalr Avenue Went 12°i Floc r, ~ 9 ~! Toronto.Ontano t6! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ M4V 1Pti ° , rrar ~ ~ '~.r rw.n 1~Tiagara,~alls .,~,,,.......r„m.... r.~...~..~~,.~.~~.... TAis Notice flrst issued on Deoentder 8", 2007, saeotlo July 2'1, 2008 MW-2008-4~ e I~~~~~~~altl~ Councillor Carolynn Ioannonl, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Nlagara Falls, Ontario Members Re: i~/i11J1/-~Ot38-4~ iVlorrison Street Rai! ~rac9e Separation Alterna#ive RECOlUI1~lEtVt3AT14N: That the Mayor contact the Federal Member of Parliament appraising him of the City's <ha~ the-Sity-pu-rsue-the-rer-auting_of_the-CN-traln> concerns regarding the length and number of trains traversing the City. SACi~CGROUi~©. 2. That the City pursue the rerouting of the CN trains and staff come back with a terms of reference for an ad hoc committee on the matter. As per Community Services Committee's direction, City staff met with CauncillorThornson and Mr Red lsepon to discuss the rerouting of the CN trains Mr lsepon has done considerable research on the Issue and has made a number of submissions during the Morrison Street Rail Grade Separation EA Currently the CN trains enter the Clty from north (see exhibit 7) and proceed southwesterly through the Clty and towards Welland (see exhibit 2) and then easterly toyvards Fort Erie where it crosses the Niagara River Into Buffalo Mr lsepon purposes that instead of the trains going southwesterly through the City, that the train should go easterly crossing the Niagara Riveron the upper porton of the ~1/h~rlpool Bridge The trains would #hen proceed southerly to Buffalo using the Conrad Line (see exhibit 3) During discussions vvlth ~ilr lsepon It was recognized that there were a number of challenges that needed 'to be addressed in order to accomplish the rerouting of the train These Issues Include A CN vvillingness to changes its operations, getting an agreement from the owners of the Conrail tracl~ for Ci`~l to use 'the line, dealing Uvith American customs with respect to inspections of the train and the possibility of opposition from residents on the•Arnerican side as a result of the increased train traffic The Province through the MTO Is undertaicirig an Environmental Assessment for the Nlagara to GTA Corridor As part of the study the Province is looking at aH aspects of transportation including rail Accordingly, City staff has requested that the EA loo3c at consolidating raid freight onto the#'C~PR lisle {see exhibit 2) and using the CN line for assen ertrains B movie ~ reI'~httraffic schedulin of assen er trains such as GO, that P g Y 9 9' 9 p g ;GYorking Together to Serve Dur Community Community Services Department ; Municipal Works 'T~I'`<5`k*. 'i6~'~it-~'r. s>:'.i ~t~°a,{'•~i..~'~"$r`.ur~('1..~; +.s~.~ra.,.~. t. ,J~ly 2~, 2t30$ -2- the Clty and Region are pursuing, can more easliy be accommodated T;~is option also presents itself with a number of challenges ~~vhich include MY~'-2£3D8-~5 CN's vviiiingness to change its operations 9 Getting an agreement ~Nlth CPR to use its tracks Possibility of opposition from residents along the CPR life due to the increase in train traffic As rail Is under the jurisdiction of the 1=ederal government, assistance from the Honorable Nir Rob Nicholson, MI' will be required In moving these options forward accordingly, it is recommended that the Nlayor contact the Honorable Ulr Rob Nicholson requesting leis assistance In pursuing these options Recommended by° Respectfully submitted Attach Ed Du~iovic, Executive Director of Community Ser\nces ~~i , ~~2 ~ Jc~r,'n MacDonald, Chie2f Adr>linistrative Officer S'\REPORTS\2008 Reports\iVIVV-2008-45 - Nlarrison St Rail Grade Sep. Altenative ~rapd Exhibit 1 RAILWAY GRADE SEPARATION . Class Environmental Assessment `~, "' - C M ~~ ~` S y it .. ~ .-. .,. 1 v.1.<y ~ a'~i.. 1 ~ ~~ j ~ -ehghr Road' ~ s,^ M r•'2 ~ ~ ~ Crosaitp ~ ^-• ti • ...., t t w ~s~.~ f _ rr- ~' ~ rchbLaMCrosal • '/ Y DRwCross g i - ~* F r ~ .r ~ -. r. _ ~. ~-r.F Th r Id ltnric •~ ~ .. Road :;fosamc~ ~ ~ ~'y ntar /WaflHF~ _. - `~ • Orumrncnd .Road ~ t }a ,~ , - ...~': 7a ~ ~~r' ~ I. ' y Caos 4. , - , r f r , .. Br,arver 3 Roads 'J , s~ ~ - ~ ~ a _. • C a3 ~ ~ ~^M ~ .. ..~ ti ..... ..,. .. ~ ,..:i, q f r ~ r " - ~ ~ qe oad Crolsh ~ ' CorcheslerRoad f '( • '~~~/V. f-. Crossing _ ~,• 4, °r.. "Kf~~ee. 1r•+R -.. .. .. 1 r _~„~`"^'~ f q ft ., t r ~. '' F 1lcrrunn alrcul ~ T 7+Jn /' _ t F • f _ t • • Montrose Road ~ r r _ .. ,!I r+ r r.! r ~ f :-- ` i lundy's LaM Craiakq; -., ~ ~ ., ,/~~ _ ~ ~ , Crosaing i' ~"~~K r a y. t ~~'a~ _..~ ~~ ~.~r^'t I =^ !p Y.` r,t, i ':~ .f~.t ~Tjl~ _ i~.~. •. ~~~f^, .. _ ~ ^~ :.. T.«. `=X.. 7W . `f r ~ ~ .yam. ~ .?, t'. ~..w ti'•.... t y .yy+ G r Road Crossing '~ ~ '~ 5 ~ • y' rte- -° ~ f ~, Beachwood 7o.td ~,,~_ ,~+'~ ~„ P • ~` *~~ ~ ~.- 1r .... Crosaing ~ ~ t :~ t !!! ~". ~-...~..,..... ~i' r,' ~ L ' .,a" 'Q. Sri ,~ r`_'n v-- i~'S ~ ~ i.-, `.. +.. !r4 ... rltJti t~' ~n Thoroid'ownlgina - ._•'.t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J •.',•~•`1..: S ~1,. ,~ ~'~...: r ';` , ,.~• ...,,-, ... Road Cross.n - ^ "r"" ~ - ~ _ t - -- r~J ye. """ j ~ s~~ .,. h tin ~>„'~, a r ~ ,'` ~1y~ t 4.~ • ~: `•.w r NIAGAfRA fAL.~~j ~~"~ °,.f~~ t;rassyBrook ~ ~ /y~ ~~ - OorchestarRoad K..~..~.d ,~ ~ `t .Road Crosslrg ~ ~ I ~` ~ iossing ~ +4''~ f mot'` ~' j , r',, ~ , , {,/ ~ I• _ .w ~' t ' .... f r^ ~1._.. T •~ ~~~ •'' •••.. •,.• the Clrv rfl ~~aee a~ A ^ ~ 1 ~ ~" ..,.~ ~ v''~ I Nalfrfd kYls'`~J,/ eee. a ;. ~.~ k Cnry,rln INNOVA rIONB INC. ~ ... •"/~/^ ~r~~ ~ .F ~ ^ Exhibit 2 t r ~~~ R , ~`4 [r5 F ~, .~ *S •I 11~~ _ ..v-~ CN ~'~ ~~o ,~ j. ~ D<~ .,~ ~3ri' i96c ^-mil O •'• Shaw ~• E~~~ -. B'he City o$' Niagara JH'alls, ®ntario Resolution No. 1Vloved by Seconded by WIIEREAS all meetings of Council are to be open to the public; and WIIEREAS the only time a meeting or part of a meeting maybe closed to the public if the subject matter falls under one of the exceptions under s. 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001. 'I'IIERE>FORE DE I~' RES®I.VED TIIAT on July 21, 2008 Niagara Falls Council will go into a closed meeting to consider a matter that falls under the subject matter of 239(2)(c) of the Municipal Act, 2001, a proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, and a matter that falls under the subject matter of 239(2)(e) litigation or potential litigation and 239(2)(b) personal matters about an identifiable individual. AND The Seal off the Corporation be hereto affixed. DEAN IOR~'IDA CITY CLEl~ R. ~. ('I'UD) SAI.,C'I MAY®R