DETAILED DESIGN REPORT - Parkland County€¦ · Detailed Design Report WSP Parkland County No...

DETAILED DESIGN REPORT TOWNSHIP ROAD 510, FROM RANGE ROAD 45 TO RANGE ROAD 51 RECONSTRUCTION

DECEMBER 2016

DRAFT

DRAFT Project no: 161-14623-00 Date: December 2016

WSP Canada Inc. 11446 Winterburn Road Edmonton, Alberta T5S 2C4 Canada Phone: 780-452-5453 Fax: 780-452-6873 www.wspgroup.com

DETAILED DESIGN REPORT TOWNSHIP ROAD 510 (FROM RANGE ROAD 45 TO RANGE ROAD 51) Parkland County

i

Detailed Design Report WSP Parkland County No 121-22005-00 February 20156

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1

DESIGN CRITERIA ......................................................................... 1

ROAD ALIGNMENT ....................................................................... 3

3.1 PROJECT LIMITS ................................................................................................. 3

3.2 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT ................................................................................. 3

3.3 VERTICAL PROFILE ............................................................................................ 3

3.3.1 VERTICAL PROFILE IN RELATION TO INTERSECTIONS AND ACCESSES ... 3

3.3.2 UTILITIES .............................................................................................................. 3

3.3.3 THE TYPICAL DESIGN CROSS-SECTION .......................................................... 3

INTERSECTIONS ........................................................................... 3

ACCESS MANAGEMENT .............................................................. 4

GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES ............................................................. 4

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SURFACE DRAINAGE .......................... 5

HISTORICAL RESOURCES ........................................................... 5

TRAFFIC AND SURFACING STRATEGY ..................................... 5

ROADSIDE HAZARDS AND CLEAR ZONE .................................. 6

ROADSIDE BARRIERS .................................................................. 6

CULVERTS ..................................................................................... 6

UTILITIES ....................................................................................... 6

RIGHT-OF-WAY ............................................................................. 8

CLOSURE ....................................................................................... 8

ii


T A B L E S TABLE 1 DESIGN CRITERION FOR TR 510 ........................................................ 2

TABLE 2 UTILITY COMPANIES PRESENT ON TOWNSIP ROAD 510 ............... 7

A P P E N D I C E S APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE

APPENDIX B DRAWINGS

APPENDIX C ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX D HISTORICAL RESOURCES

APPENDIX E TYPICAL SURFACING CROSS SECTIONS

APPENDIX F UTILITY PLANS

APPENDIX G RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS

1


INTRODUCTION WSP Canada Inc. (WSP) was retained by Parkland County to provide Engineering Consulting Services for the Design of Township Road (TR) 510 from Range Road (RR) 45 to RR 51. The tasks specified in the Terms of Reference (TOR) include preliminary engineering, a Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for geotechnical repair alternatives, detailed design including surfacing and a “C” estimate (Appendix A).

The project section of TR 510 is a local gravel road that runs east to west and lies within an old glacial lake bed area. TR 510 presently collects local traffic in the southwest corner of Parkland County and connects to Hwy 759 to the west which connects into Brazeau County (to the south) and to Hwy 16 to the north. The east end of TR 510 connects with RR 43 which is a paved County road that continues north to Hwy 627 and to the balance of the County to the north and east. Accordingly TR 510 is intended to be upgraded to serve as a Rural Major Collector Roadway due to the significance of its geographic connectivity.

Additionally there are two distinct areas of localized settlement of the TR 510 road grade between RR 51 and RR 50. These areas are the subject of the CBA which has been provided to Parkland County Engineering Services as a prior deliverable under this assignment.

The Project TOR indicates that the desired design standard is to be RCU-208.5-90, with a Granular Base Course/Asphalt Concrete Pavement (GBC/ACP) structure. WSP has addressed all items pertaining to the design of the roadway improvements as per the TOR. The details of these improvements are described in subsequent sections.

WSP has utilized preliminary topographic survey that was provided by Parkland County for the preparation of the detailed design. TR 510 is commonly referred to as a “correction line” in the Township Survey System and in this instance intersecting range roads are not opposite one another. For the sake of this assignment the references to RR 51, RR 50, and RR 45 all refer to the range roads that intersect TR 510 along its south side.

The Alberta Transportation (AT) Highway Geometric Design Guide (HGDG) and Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads was used throughout the design process.

DESIGN CRITERIA The design of TR 510 is based on the TOR and guidelines established by Parkland County Roadway Design Standards Table 7.1, AT and TAC. WSP used Table A-7 of the Highway Geometric Design Guide to establish horizontal and vertical alignment, and cross-section.

Table 1, on the following page, outlines the design criteria used in the design.

2


Table 1 Design Criterion for TR 510

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATIONS

Design Design Classification RCU-208.5

Design Speed (km/hr) 90

Design Vehicle WB-21

(Semi-Trailer Combination)

Horizontal Alignment

Min Horizontal Curve Radius (m) 340

Max. Superelevation (%) 6

Vertical Alignment

K(min) Crest 55

K(min) Sag N/A

Max Grade (%) 6

Min. Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) (m)

235

Min. Decision Sight Distance (DSD) (m)

280

Min. Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) (m)

175 (car) 350 (Truck)

Cross Section No. of Lanes 2

Lane width 3.7

Shoulder Width (m) 1.5

Crown on tangent (%) 2

Sideslopes (H/V) 4:1

2:1 Maximum

Ditch bottom 3.0 m (Min. 1.5 m)

Backslope (H/V) 3:1 (Max 2.5:1)

3


ROAD ALIGNMENT 3.1 PROJECT LIMITS

The project was proposed, awarded and partially designed with the west project limit just to the west of RR 51 with a grade tie-in at Sta. 1+250. The east project limit was to be east of the ravine that contains Bridge File Culvert (BF 70230) at RR45 at Sta 4+600. The detailed design was not to include a section 50m both east and west of the BF and through deliberation with the County regarding grade line alternatives it was determined that the east project limit would be adjusted to Sta. 3+770 thus eliminating approximately 830m from the project length. A set of mosaic plan and profile drawings are included in Appendix B.

3.2 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT

The existing alignment is centered within the existing 20.12m (66ft) statutory road allowance. The most westerly 500m of the project has a current road widening to the north side of the existing right of way to accommodate a 40m right of way. No widening has however been acquired on the balance of the project. The design alignment will follow the existing alignment.

3.3 VERTICAL PROFILE

The existing profile follows the smooth terrain adjacent to the road. The existing grades range from -0.07% to +0.43%, and meet the standards in provided in Table 1. The design profile closely follows the existing gradeline.

3.3.1 VERTICAL PROFILE IN RELATION TO INTERSECTIONS AND ACCESSES

The design profile throughout is in a “fill condition” and follows that of the existing centreline profile in order to minimize disruptions to the existing intersecting road and entrances while maintaining acceptable design standards. The west end of the design grade ties into existing just to the west

3.3.2 UTILITIES

The design profile in the vicinity of pipeline crossings is set to ensure that more than the minimum depth of cover is maintained in the ditches and on the road grade. This will avoid the possibility of lowering the pipelines which can prove to be a costly undertaking.

3.3.3 THE TYPICAL DESIGN CROSS-SECTION

As stated earlier, the TOR for the project requires the design standard TR 510 to be Rural Collector Undivided RCU-208.5, or commonly referred to as a “Major Collector” as per Parkland County Standards. The typical cross section shown on the plan and profile drawing (Appendix B) will be predominantly in a “fill” condition for this project as the majority of the project crosses the former glacial lake bed area. The design cross section will accommodate either of the two suggested surfacing typical cross sections.

INTERSECTIONS The design profile in the vicinity of intersection of RR 51(south) closely follows that of the existing centreline profile in order to minimize disruptions to the existing intersection while maintaining acceptable design standards. The gradeline to the east of RR 51 from Sta 1+700 to 3+400 raises from ~0.6m to 1.9m to provide for a uniform grade above the areas of settlement through the former glacial lake bed area.

4


The intersection approach of RR 50 with TR 510 exists only as a driveway standard as RR 50 to the south has not been developed to a local road standard. RR 45 south road right of way is undeveloped and now exists outside of the adjusted project limits.

No statutory road allowance intersections are developed to the north side of TR 510 within the limits of this project.

ACCESS MANAGEMENT There are two (2) residential entrances, and six (6) field/oilfield entrances within the project limits. The number of accesses is compliant with AT’s Guidelines for Access Management for a local collector road. Due to petroleum well site development along the extent of the project, consolidation of the field and oilfield entrances is unlikely.

GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES As referenced in the introductory paragraph, this project has specifically two defined areas of subgrade settlement located respectively 450m east and 850m east of RR 51, each approximately 175m in length.

WSP’s task was to review and analyze the different options for the remediation of the areas to minimize the effects that further settlement may have over the design life of the road considering that surfacing construction would follow soon after the grading construction. The two areas were the key focus of a Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) which has been provided to Parkland County Engineering Services as a prior deliverable under this assignment.

WSP’s result of the CBA to address the two settlement sections of Township Road 510 is a recommendation that Alternative 3 – Free Draining Gravel (Designation 6 Class 80) and Bi-axial Geogrid Combination (FDG), is recommended as the preferred option. A typical cross section for Typical 1 and Alternative 3 is included in Appendix E. Specific details and references to the typical cross sections are contained within the CBA.

With regard to the balance of the project, the existing underlying soils have a high moisture content and varying layers of organics (peat/top soil) are evident throughout indicative of grading construction over an old glacial lake bed area.

Based upon the ground conditions adjacent to the existing road from 1+500 to 3+450 we are considering that the existing sod/vegetation layer from the existing road shoulder to the toe of the new fill should not be removed and that a non-woven geotextile should be placed prior to any fill material being placed for the construction of the new embankment. The quantities will be shown as provisional in the estimate and for considerations by the County.

It is anticipated that this project will be constructed with earth borrow materials that will need to be hauled from local sources within 2km of the project as there is no good opportunity within the project limits to source or utilize suitable common or borrow materials.

Additional provisional quantities for granular fill and woven geotextile have been included in the detailed design, to address problematic areas that could be encountered during construction.

5


ENVIRONMENTAL AND SURFACE DRAINAGE An Environmental Risk Assessment was prepared for the project and is included in Appendix C. No wetlands were identified on the project. In reviewing the existing alignment for potentially environmental sensitive locations, we have identified several minor drainage courses that cross the project from south to north. Positive surface drainage on this project is critical to the integrity of the final road grade to minimize saturation of the road grade. Care should be taken to ensure that the grades for drainage allow the surface water to exit the road right of way into the receiving drainage channels on private land to the north of the project. Prior to Construction, the contractor will be required to coordinate his operations in accordance will all applicable guidelines and legislation. Temporary measures for erosion protection will be required to protect water courses and sensitive areas.

HISTORICAL RESOURCES As part of the preliminary engineering WSP prepared a Historical Resources Application for a letter of clearance more commonly referred to as an HRO. The HRO was requested for the entire project length of the original assignment and a site of historical significance was located as FiPp-8 as a campsite at Sta. 4+215 located along the south road allowance boundary. The information specific to this is contained within the document titled “Historical Resources Act Approval with Conditions” and is located in Appendix D. With the change to the project limits this location is no longer within the present project limits.

TRAFFIC AND SURFACING STRATEGY Raw traffic data was provided from Parkland County for this road for WSP to consider in the development of a surfacing structure. WSP had the raw data converted to Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) values and it is summarized as follows;

Location 1: Township Road 510, 200 m East of Hwy 759 AADT: 200 vehicles per day (vpd) Truck: 16 vpd 8.0% Long: 1 vpd 0.5% Location 2: Township Road 510, 200 m East of Range Road 51 AADT: 80 vpd Truck: 11 vpd 13.8% Long: 2 vpd 2.5% Location 3: Township Road 510, 200 m East of Range Road 54 AADT: 140 vpd Truck: 17 vpd 12.1% Long: 4 vpd 2.9%

Upon review of the AADT the volumes are somewhat low and typically a road with volumes this low would not warrant surfacing under AT guidelines however in this case TR 510 serves as an important link between a Provincial Highway and the existing County paved network. TR 510 will serve the oil industry’s numerous well sites and facilities, local agricultural movements, and the ever important aggregate resources that are present along the North Saskatchewan River valley which are hauled to projects in all directions.

WSP has provided the following 2 options for surfacing structures in accordance with AT’s Pavement Design Manual that would provide for a structure that would serve for the low traffic volumes but would still require a seasonal road ban. Typical Surfacing Cross Sections can be found in Appendix E.

6


Option 1

• 110 mm ACP Mix Type L1 with PG 52-34 • 300 mm GBC Des 2.25

Option 2 • 130 mm ACP Mix Type L1 with PG 52-34 • 250 mm GBC Des 2.25

Given the regional importance of the road it should be considered that the sub grade be constructed wider than recommended so that either a thicker structure can be accommodated either with the GBC layer at time of construction or later with an additional ACP overlay.

ROADSIDE HAZARDS AND CLEAR ZONE Presently the roadside hazards that exist along the project are non-typical cross section features such as the depressed ditches and heaved backslopes in the two geotech sections as well as other typical obstacles such as approach culvert ends. Once the repair to the two areas of settlement takes place and the widening to a 30m right of way takes place there should be no road side hazards within the clear zone of the road way.

ROADSIDE BARRIERS Currently there are no roadside barriers within the project limits on TR 510. Following construction, there will be no other hazards within the clear zone, and no other conditions that would warrant the installation of guardrail, or other types of barriers.

CULVERTS The Parkland County survey data revealed that three centerline culverts exist, under shallow fill sections of less than 1.0 m. The survey data states that the culverts are 500mm diameter but from our initial field visits it was evident that possibly two of the culverts have been upgraded since the survey by Parkland County. We presently indicate on the design drawings to remove and replace the centre line culverts with new CSP’s 600mm diameter. WSP will verify the current culvert diameters so that the final design drawings and C Estimate reflect the correct culvert dimensions. The design drawings further indicate that all approach culverts will be removed and replaced with 500mm diameter culverts. WSP will further review this with the County Engineering group as a formal hydrological analysis was not performed as part of this project. Quantities for all culverts have been included in the C Estimate.

UTILITIES We have identified all visible utilities within the project area. The utility owners are summarized in the following table:

7


Table 2 Utility Companies Present on TR 510

UTILITY COMPANY DETAILS

Evergreen Gas Coop One low pressure gas line crossings

New Star Energy Ltd. Two petroleum product line crossings

TELUS Communications Ltd. Phone lines at westerly 600m of project within the road right-of-way

FORTIS Alberta Power line throughout the project, within and out of the road right-of-way

As noted in the table the utilities present on this project are; Evergreen Gas Co-op, New Star Energy Ltd TELUS (phone), and FORTIS (overhead electrical).

Evergreen Gas Co-op has a rural low pressure distribution line present in the NW-36-50-5-W5 which is to the south of TR 510 at the west end of the project. The gas line crosses TR 510 at approximately Sta. 1+760 to the property to the north side of the road. WSP has hydrovac located the Evergreen gas line and the depth below existing ditch bottom on the south side is 1.25m and on the north side is 1.20m. WSP will endeavour to design the road grade so that the ground disturbance would be minimal.

New Star Energy Ltd. operates a number of oil/gas lease sites in the neighbourhood of TR 510 and has active leases and facilities along TR 510. New Star has a number of petroleum lines along the project and two lines cross TR 510 at Sta. 3+698 and Sta. 3+708. WSP has hydrovac located the south ditch locations of the two crossings and found the west line at a depth of 3.3m and the east line at a depth of 2.3m. Due to the considerable depth of the south ditch crossings as compared to the draft grade line ( anticipated undercut of the existing road surface of 0.6m), the presence of overhead powerlines in the north ditch, and discussion with the New Star Energy representative, it was decided that the crossings in the north ditch line would not be practical to hydrovac at this time.

TELUS has a buried phone line in the south ditch of the current right of way from RR 51 east for approximately 600m and which crosses to the north side of the road to a residence on the north side.

FORTIS Alberta Inc. has an overhead line within the existing right of way along the north boundary of the entire project with a few service crossings to the south side of the road. The clearance of the overhead power crossings may not be adequate and may need to be increased as a result of the raise of the gradeline to the ultimate design. From Sta. 1+250 to Sta. 2+000 the pole alignment should not cause an issue as it appears the poles are on a widening that should accommodate the acquisition to a 30m right of way (ROW). In the vicinity of Sta. 2+000 to 2+600, six FORTIS poles have guy wires that are perpendicular to the power line alignment to maintain pole stability likely due to soft soils. These guy wires extend toward the road shoulder and the new power line alignment should consider that if this type of anchor system is required that it be installed outside of the clear zone of the roadway design. Further; where additional ROW is required for the project, the powerline will need to be relocated and additional clearing will be necessary to the north of the new powerline alignment to accommodate the relocation.

As a normal practice WSP if involved in the Construction Administration phase of the project would send a “Construction Notification” package to each of the affected utilities advising of the pending construction schedule. WSP as part of this Detailed Design Package has included in Appendix F draft crossing plans that could be used with notification letters to New Star Energy and to Evergreen Gas Coop.

8


RIGHT-OF-WAY The existing ROW has one variation along the project. The ROW width from 1+250 to 1+800 was previously widened by ~10m along the north side but not along the south side which is consistent with widenings further to the west of the project limits.

For the balance of the project the right of way exists as the original 201.12m (66ft). road allowance.

The minimum ROW width for this standard of road as per the Parkland County road classifications is 30 m; therefore general ROW widening is required. The flat topography of the project area means that there are no large cuts or fills. A review of the grade line and cross-section show that through the geotech repair sections that widening beyond the 30m will be required. For the balance of the project the side slope/back slope limits may require minor modifications to stay within ROW limits. Road slope agreements may be beneficial in certain areas, to allow for topsoil storage during construction.

The proposed ROW limits, and work limits have been identified on the plan drawings in Appendix G. Intent of Purchase (IOP) Plans were not included in the original terms of reference as a deliverable but were added near the completion of the detailed design phase.

CLOSURE We trust that the information presented in this Detailed Design Report meets the requirements of the Terms of Reference and other agreements governing this Project. Please contact our Edmonton office at 780-452-5453 at your earliest convenience, should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

WSP Canada Inc.

Prepared by:

Doug Lunde, P.L. Eng.

Technical Review by:

Corporate Review by:

Third Party Disclaimer

The assessments presented in this report have been prepared by WSP for the benefit of Parkland County. The information and data contained herein represents WSP’s best professional judgment in light of the knowledge and information available at the time of preparation. Except as required by law, this report and the information and data contained herein are to be treated as confidential and may be used and relied upon only by Parkland County, its officers and employees. WSP denies any liability whatsoever to other parties who may obtain access to this report, for any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their use of, or reliance upon, this report or any of its contents without the express written consent of WSP or Parkland County.

Appendix A

COST ESTIMATE

Job No. 161-14623-00Project :

From:From km:

To:To km:

Estimate Type: "C" Subgrade Width: 12.0m

CEB Bid Item Description * Unit Estimated Unit Estimated Spec RemarksCode # Quantity Price Cost No.s (Plan No.)

X100 Mobilization lump sum 1.0 10% $211,780 1.2.13 0

X004 Site Occupancy days $0 1.2.21 0

A805 Supply of Aggregate - No Option t 26,850.0 0.27 $7,250 5.2.5 0

B152 Granular Fill t 15,300.0 23.96 $366,588 3.8.5 5.2.5

B180 Preparing Subgrade Surface (FirstLayer) m2 32,000.0 1.05 $33,600 3.1.3 0

B282 Granular Base Course t 20,800.0 23.52 $489,216 3.6.8 5.2.5

D100 Culverts - Remove and Dispose(C.S.P.) (up to 700 mm dia.) m 165.0 25.89 $4,272 2.4.4 0

D405 Culverts - Supply and Install (500 mmdia. C.S.P.) m 90.0 238.35 $21,452 2.4.4 5.23.4


E452 Non-Woven Geotextile - Supply andInstall (Type ?) m2 18,000.0 3.95 $71,100 5.31.4 0

E456 Geotextile for Stabilization - Supplyand Install (Class ?) m2 32,000.0 1.36 $43,520 5.31.4 0

E608 Broad-Cast Seeding ha 3.7 2650.00 $9,805 2.20.4 0

G101 Clearing and Mulching ha 0.5 3545.00 $1,737 2.1.4 0G220 Channel Excavation m3 1,300.0 5.18 $6,734 2.3.6 0G225 Common Excavation m3 23,570.0 3.66 $86,266 2.3.6 0

G236 Borrow Excavation - ContractorSupplied m3 42,610.0 6.99 $297,844 2.3.6 0

G300 Topsoil Placement m2 36,600.0 0.58 $21,228 2.6.4 0

G452 Remove and Dispose of ExistingFence km 3.0 1596.00 $4,788 2.12.5 0

G475 New Fence - Supply and Install -Class B km 3.0 9205.70 $27,617 2.12.5 5.14.4

S830 Flexible Guide Post/Delineators -Round - Supply and Install posts 10.0 17.70 $177 2.19.4 5.28.3

Q993 Asphalt Concrete Pavement - EPSMix Type L1 ( ) t 6,050.0 98.95 $598,648 3.50.7 5.2.5

$2,329,578Total

Total Estimated Contract Cost

Total

1+2501.250

3.770

2016 Parkland County Prices

ACP, GBC, Grading, and Other WorkDesign Designation: RCU-208.5-90

Description of Work

3+770

Township Road 510 (Option 1 Surfacing)

Contingencies @ 10%

Surfacing Estimate Summary

$2,329,578

$2,330,000

$233,000

$2,563,000Total Estimated Contract Cost + Contingency

1 of 72 19/12/2016161-14623-00 Surfacing Option 1 C Estimate.xls


From:From km:

To:To km:



1+2501.250

3.770



Description of Work

3+770



Date : Prepared By :

Date : Checked By :

Utilities

Right of Way

$0

$0

Glyn Evans

Doug L

19/12/2016

19/12/2016

$2,563,000

Estimated Engineering Cost $0

Total Estimated Cost (Rounded To Nearest 100 Dollars)



From:From km:

To:To km:



X100 Mobilization lump sum 1.0 10% $218,296 1.2.13 0

X004 Site Occupancy days $0 1.2.21 0

A805 Supply of Aggregate - No Option t 25,150.0 0.27 $6,791 5.2.5 0

B152 Granular Fill t 15,300.0 23.96 $366,588 3.8.5 5.2.5

B180 Preparing Subgrade Surface (FirstLayer) m2 32,000.0 1.05 $33,600 3.1.3 0

B282 Granular Base Course t 17,700.0 23.52 $416,304 3.6.8 5.2.5

D100 Culverts - Remove and Dispose(C.S.P.) (up to 700 mm dia.) m 165.0 25.89 $4,272 2.4.4 0



E452 Non-Woven Geotextile - Supply andInstall (Type ?) m2 18,000.0 3.95 $71,100 5.31.4 0

E456 Geotextile for Stabilization - Supplyand Install (Class ?) m2 32,000.0 1.36 $43,520 5.31.4 0

E608 Broad-Cast Seeding ha 3.7 2650.00 $9,805 2.20.4 0

G101 Clearing and Mulching ha 0.5 3545.00 $1,737 2.1.4 0G220 Channel Excavation m3 1,300.0 5.18 $6,734 2.3.6 0G225 Common Excavation m3 23,570.0 3.66 $86,266 2.3.6 0

G236 Borrow Excavation - ContractorSupplied m3 42,610.0 6.99 $297,844 2.3.6 0

G300 Topsoil Placement m2 36,600.0 0.58 $21,228 2.6.4 0

G452 Remove and Dispose of ExistingFence km 3.0 1596.00 $4,788 2.12.5 0

G475 New Fence - Supply and Install -Class B km 3.0 9205.70 $27,617 2.12.5 5.14.4

S830 Flexible Guide Post/Delineators -Round - Supply and Install posts 10.0 17.70 $177 2.19.4 5.28.3

Q993 Asphalt Concrete Pavement - EPSMix Type L1 ( ) t 7,450.0 98.95 $737,178 3.50.7 5.2.5

$2,641,100Total Estimated Contract Cost + Contingency

Contingencies @ 10%


$2,401,252

$2,401,000

$240,100

Total

1+2501.250

3.770



Description of Work

3+770


$2,401,252Total

Total Estimated Contract Cost



From:From km:

To:To km:




1+2501.250

3.770



Description of Work

3+770


Date : Prepared By :

Date : Checked By :

$2,641,100

Estimated Engineering Cost $0

Total Estimated Cost (Rounded To Nearest 100 Dollars)

Glyn Evans

Doug L

19/12/2016

19/12/2016

Utilities

Right of Way

$0

$0


Appendix B

DRAWINGS

SU

RVE

YED

DAT

EBY

CONSULTANT

JOB No.

DESIGNER

SHEET

DATE

PH

OTO

DES

CR

IPTI

ON

OFF

ICE

CO

NTR

ACT

DR

AW

ING

DRAWING

REV DATE BYREVISION

DATE OFFICE

2016

-12-

15R

:\HIG

HW

AY

S\P

RO

JEC

TS\R

OA

DS

\161

-146

23-0

0TO

WN

SH

IPR

OAD

510\

_DR

AFTI

NG

\161

-146

23-A

.DW

GD

RA

WN

:

of

PARKLAND COUNTY

161-14623-01

161-

1462

3-01

0 mHORIZONTAL

VERTICAL

0 m CONTRACT

50 100

1.0 2.0

PRELIMINARY

Appendix C

ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT

WSP File #: 161-14623-01

Environmental Risk Assessment

TOWNSHIP ROAD 510 ROAD RECONSTRUCTION

November 2016

Environmental Risk Assessment Job # 161-14623-01 Township Road 510 Road Reconstruction November 2016

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 SITE OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... 1

2 HISTORICAL RESOURCES .................................................................................. 1

3 WATER RESOURCES ........................................................................................... 1

4 SOILS ..................................................................................................................... 2

5 TOPSOIL HANDLING ............................................................................................ 2

6 VEGETATION ........................................................................................................ 3

7 WILDLIFE ............................................................................................................... 4

8 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................... 4

9 PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................................ 5

10 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 7

11 CLOSURE .............................................................................................................. 8

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: HISTORICAL RESOURCE AREAS ................................................... 1

TABLE 2: WATERCOURSES ............................................................................ 2

TABLE 3: VEGETATION OF THE DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION ............... 3

TABLE 4: PROVINCIALLY RECOGNIZED SPECIES OF CONCERN ............... 4

TABLE 5: FWMIS FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES ........................................... 4

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: PROJECT AREA ........................................................................ 9

APPENDIX B: HISTORIC RESOURCES...........................................................10

APPENDIX C: WATERBODIES ........................................................................11


1

1 SITE OVERVIEW

Parkland County retained WSP Canada Inc. (WSP) to undertake an Environmental Risk Assessment

for Township Road 510 (the project). The project is located 13 km southeast of Tomahawk, Alberta

(Appendix A). The proposed project is the reconstruction of a 3.4 km section of Township Road 510

between Range Road 45 and Range Road 51.

The project is situated in the Dry Mixedwood Subregion of the Boreal Natural Region of Alberta. A

search of Abacus Datagraphics on November 28, 2016 showed no First Nation Reserves or

Environmentally Significant Areas within the construction boundaries (Abacus Datagraphics, 2008).

2 HISTORICAL RESOURCES

According to Abacus Datagraphics land with assigned historic resource values (HRV) are located

within the construction boundaries. Table 1 lists the locations, HRV and Class (Appendix B). The HRV

4 “a” is for an area that contains a historical resource of archaeological significance that may require

avoidance. However, it must be noted that information can be incomplete and historical resources

may exist in the project limits

TABLE 1: Historical Resource Areas

Legal Location HRV Class Comments

NE-35-50-05-W5M

NW-36-50-05-W5M

NW-31-50-04-W5M

SE-36-51-04-W5M

SW-05-51-04-W5M

5 a Areas that is believed to contain a historical resource of

archaeological significance

SE-36-51-04-W5M

SW-05-51-04-W5M

NE-31-50-04-W5M

NW-32-50-04-W5M

4 A Area that contains a historical resource of archaeological

significance that may require avoidance

3 WATER RESOURCES

Desktop review showed three unnamed tributaries crossing Township Road 510 (Table 2; and shown

on the drawing in Appendix C). The three unnamed tributaries are unmapped Class C watercourse

with a restricted activity period between April 16 and June 30 of any year. No in-stream activity will be

permitted within the waterbodies unless approvals from Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) and the

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) are obtained.


2

TABLE 2: WATERCOURSES

Waterbody Number Type Class Restricted Activity Period

1 Shoal Lake Creek C September 16 to July 31

2 Stream C September 16 to July 31

3 Stream C September 16 to July 31

Care must be taken during culvert work to avoid ditch erosion, sediment transportation and associated

hazards. Well maintained temporary erosion and sediment controls will be implemented. The

Contractor will assure run-on water is diverted around the active construction location, lay down sites

and storage area. No water shall be released from the construction site unless it is of equal or better

quality in relation to the receiving water body. The Consultant shall approve any and all dewatering

operations prior to release to the waterbody. The care of water plan will be incorporated into the ECO

Plan for the work as a separate appendix. The plan should include all locations where water

management will be implemented, a rough description of the measures to be implemented and the

Contractors monitoring plan to assure the quality of water leaving the site at any location.

A 100 m buffer is required between refueling, tack oil storage, laydown and maintenance areas and

any water body adjacent to the project site.

4 SOILS

Site specific project soils are unknown as a soils investigation was not undertaken. Soils in the region

are typical of Typic Mesisol on Fen Peat to Rego Humic Gleysol on moderately fine textured

sediments.

Temporary erosion and sediment control measures for the site shall be designed and presented in a

Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. The Plan will be developed as per the requirements in

the Erosion and Sediment Control Manual (Alberta Transportation [AT] 2011). This plan shall be

included in the ECO Plan and shall include site diagram(s) indicating the type and progression of

sediment and erosion control with the progression of work during all stages of construction. Measures

must be consistent with containment of sediments from flowing water and ensure the well sorted, non-

colloidal materials can be prevented from eroding into any waterbody.

The Contractor is responsible for the supply, installation and maintenance of temporary sediment and

erosion control on the site. Protection of any waterbody will be deemed as a priority in placement and

selection of control measures.

5 TOPSOIL HANDLING

A site specific soils assessment has not been completed. Soil stripping will be guided by colour

change. All soil should be stripped and stockpiled separately. Mineral and organic soils shall be


3

stockpiled separately with a 5 m buffer maintained between the soil types and ensure that all

stockpiles are at least 10 m from any water conducting areas or the edge of any waterbody.

Topsoil will be stockpiled using the guide “like on like” with topsoil stockpiled on topsoil and subsoil

stockpiled on subsoil. Wet or water influenced soils will be stripped and stored separately. These wet

soils shall be used on the areas adjacent to water to increase the establishment of wet species.

The Contractor shall contact the local municipal Agricultural Fieldmen to ascertain if there is Club

Root or other weed control practices which need to be implemented. The Agricultural Fieldmen for

Parkland County is James Leskiw at 780-968-8467.

6 VEGETATION

The Alberta Conservation Information Management System (ACIMS) has a database of vascular and

non-vascular plants and invertebrate species of special conservation concern. Non-Sensitive

Elemental Occurences are rare species or communities which are of conservation concern. A search

of the ACIMS database on November 28, 2016 showed no elements of concern in the project area

(Alberta Environment and Parks [AEP], 2016a); however it must be noted that information can be

incomplete and species of special concern may exist in the project limits.

From Downing and Pettapiece (2006), common vegetation in the Dry Mixedwood of the Boreal

Natural Region is presented in Table 3.

TABLE 3: VEGETATION OF THE DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION

Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name

Bunchberry Cornus canadensis Beaked hazelnut Corylus cornuta

Wild sarsaparilla Aralia nudicaulis Wild lily-of-the-valley

Maianthemum canadense

June grass Koeleria macrantha Western porcupine grass

Hesperostipa spartea

Pasture sagewort Artemisia frigida Prickly rose Rosa acicularis

Saskatoon Amelanchier alnifolia Northern wheatgrass

Trembling aspen Populus tremuloides

The Contractor must be aware that weed species may exist on the site and proper sanitation and

control methods should be employed to reduce chance spreading via soil borne seed or the

transportation of plant materials on equipment.

All equipment must be cleaned of dirt, vegetation or organic materials prior to arriving at the site.


4

7 WILDLIFE

A search of AEP’s designated species of special concern was completed to locate habitat in the

project area. A total of nine species (Table 4) had habitat range in the project area.

TABLE 4: PROVINCIALLY RECOGNIZED SPECIES OF CONCERN

Common Name Scientific Name

Western grebe Aechmophorus occidentalis

Black-throated green warbler Dendroica virens

Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus

White-winged scoter Melanitta fusca deglandi

Barred owl Strix varia

Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus

Lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens

Northern leopard frog Rana pipiens

Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos

A search of AEP’s Fish and Wildlife Management Information System (FWMIS) was undertaken for

the project area within a 3 km radius on November 28, 2016. The search found three species that

have been observed within 3 km of the project area (Table 5; AEP, 2016b).

TABLE 5: FWMIS FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES

Common Name Scientific Name

Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni

Northern pike Esox lucius

White sucker Catostomus commersoni

8 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

1. The Water Act. Works must comply with the Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings for

work in creeks, rivers and other watercourses. Any work in wetlands, inside or outside the

right-of-way, will require an approval.

2. The Fisheries Act. Requires that projects avoid causing serious harm to fish unless authorized

by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Work within a watercourse may require a

review by DFO.

3. The Migratory Birds Convention Act. Screening of the site by a qualified biologist may be

required to ensure protected bird habitat is not damaged or destroyed. The general migratory

bird’s closure period is mid-April to the end of August.

4. The Weed Control Act. No one is allowed to move, or allow the movement, of noxious and

prohibited noxious weeds.

5. The Public Lands Act. All activities on Public Lands need to be approved under a disposition.

Public land includes the bed and shore of all naturally occurring water bodies. Those water


5

bodies inside the existing legally surveyed road right-of-way are not considered part of the

Public Land.

9 PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENT

Based on the information provided, the following considerations should be used in the planning,

construction and reclamation of the project:

1. The Contractor shall not commence in-stream or near water works until all permits, approvals

and notifications are complete and available to the Contractor. Copies of all approvals must be

included in the Contractors ECO Plan. The Contractor must follow all conditions included in

the approvals at all times.

2. The Contractor’s ECO Plan must include a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as

described in the Erosion and Sediment Control Manual from Alberta Transportation (June

2011). This shall include drawings and diagrams showing the progression of controls with the

changes in the work site. These shall be included in the ECO Plan document.

3. No rare, provincially or federally recognized vascular or non-vascular plants of special concern

were noted in the project area. Any clearing activities, including those for lay-down,

maintenance areas and borrow sites, may require a biologist on-site to ensure no wildlife

habitat is damaged or destroyed.

4. As designated species of special concern occur close to the project area, Contractors will

adhere to all restriction periods to ensure that wildlife habitat is not disturbed or destroyed. A

qualified biologist may need to assess potential habitat within the project prior to clearing and

soil disturbance activities. Prior to any clearing activities, the Contractor must be assured and

provide such assurance to the Consultant that the operations are compliant with both the

Migratory Birds Convention Act and the Raptor closure windows as found in the Wildlife Act.

5. Any borrow sources will need to be assessed according to Alberta Transportation’s Pre-

Disturbance Assessment Procedures for Borrow Excavations for Road Construction (2013)

and Post-Disturbance Assessment Procedures for Borrow Excavations for Road Construction

(2013). The Contractor attention is drawn to the new version for this document as

requirements have changed for the pre and post site assessments.

6. An ECO Plan must be submitted to the Consultant for review and accepted before

construction begins. Effective measures to reduce spills or releases of harmful substances into

adjacent water bodies needs to be discussed in the ECO Plan. The ECO Plan Framework,

2016 is the most up-to-date version and needs to be consulted to ensure all sections of the

ECO Plan are included.

7. No work shall be undertaken until the ECO Plan and all of its components are reviewed and

accepted. The process for review takes a minimum of two weeks and as such the Contractor

shall have no claim for delays if plans / documents are not presented at least two weeks prior

to the preconstruction meeting.


6

8. Pursuant to Section 31 of the Historical Resources Act, at the discovery of archeological or

historical resources during construction, the Consultant will be immediately informed and work

will be halted until a decision is reached.

9. All equipment shall be clean prior to arrival on site.

10. The Contractor shall contact the local Agricultural Fieldmen regarding weeds and Club Root.

11. Reclamation activities will follow the Alberta Transportation and Alberta Environment and

Parks guidelines.


7

10 REFERENCES

Abacus Datagraphics. 2008. AbaData. Accessed November 28, 2016.

http://www.abacusdatagraphics.com/abadata/mgFrames.asp

Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, 2001. Agrigultural Region of Alberta Soil Inventory

Database (AGRASID) Version 3.0 [Online].

http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sag3249 Accessed November 28,

2016.

Alberta Environment and Parks, 2016a. Alberta Conservation and Management System (ACIMS).

Alberta Tourism Parks and Recreation, Edmonton, Alberta. [Online]

http://www.albertaparks.ca/acims-data#. Accessed November 28, 2016.

Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP). 2016b. Fish and Wildlife Management Information System.

http://esrd.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/fwmis/access-fwmis-data.aspx Accessed on November 28,

2016.

Alberta Transportation, 2011. Alberta Transportation Erosion and Sediment Control Manual. [Online].

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType372/Production/ErosionControlManual.p

df

Downing, D.J. and W.W. Pettapiece (compilers), 2006. Natural Regions and Subregions of Alberta.

Natural Regions Committee, Government of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. Pub. No. T/852. 254 p.


8

11 CLOSURE

We trust that the information presented in this report satisfies the requirements of Parkland County.

Please contact our Red Deer office at your earliest convenience, should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

WSP Canada Inc.

Written by:

Reviewed by:

Mark Visser, B.App.Sc, QAES, R.T. Biol.

Project Scientist, Environment

Rola Hogan, B.Sc., CPESC

Manager Environment, Civil and Transportation

Third Party Disclaimer

The assessments presented in this report have been prepared by WSP for the benefit of Parkland County. The information and data contained herein represents WSP’s best professional judgment in light of the knowledge and information available at the time of preparation. Except as required by law, this report and the information and data contained herein are to be treated as confidential and may be used and relied upon only by Parkland County, its officers and employees. WSP denies any liability whatsoever to other parties who may obtain access to this report, for any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their use of, or reliance upon, this report or any of its contents without the express written consent of WSP or Parkland County.


8

APPENDIX A: PROJECT AREA


8

APPENDIX B: HISTORIC RESOURCES


8

APPENDIX C: WATERBODIES

Appendix D

HISTORICAL RESOURCES

4715-16-0037-001HRA Number:

November 22, 2016

Proponent: Parkland County

Contact:

53109A Hwy 779, Stony Plain, AB T7Z 1R1

Mr. Malcom Kirchmayer

Historical Resources Act

Agent:

Contact:

WSP

Lisa Hein

Approval with Conditions

Proposed Township Road 510 Upgrade ProjectProject Name:

Municipal RoadProject Components:

Requesting HRA Approval / RequirementsApplication Purpose:

Historical Resources Act approval is granted for the activities described in this application and itsattached plan(s)/sketch(es) subject to the following conditions.

David Link

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS

Historical Resources Act approval is granted in relation to archaeological resources, subject to theconditions outlined below.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. All development activities that cross through HRV4 site FiPp-8 must be restricted to the currently proposed project footprint.

A map of the site location is attached to facilitate site avoidance. This file contain sensitive information about historic resources that are protected under the provisions of the Alberta Historical Resources Act. This information is provided to your organization to be used in planning the proposed project only. It is not to be shared for any other purpose without permission from the Historic Resources Management Branch, Alberta Culture and Tourism.

SITE DESCRIPTION CONDITIONS/APPROVALSITE HRV

FiPp-8 campsite4 All development activities in the vicinity of this site must be restricted to the proposed development area. Adjacent portions of the site are not to be used for laydown or equipment storage.

009838898OPaC HR Application # Page 1 of 2

HRM Project # 4715-16-0037

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS (continued)

November 22, 2016

HRA Number: 4715-16-0037-001Approval with ConditionsHistorical Resources Act

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with palaeontological resources; however, the proponent must comply with standard conditions under the Historical Resources Act, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

PALAEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with Aboriginal traditional use sites of a historic resource nature; however, the proponent must comply with standard conditions under the Historical Resources Act, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

ABORIGINAL TRADITIONAL USE SITES

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with historic structures; however, the proponent must comply with standard conditions under the Historical Resources Act, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC RESOURCES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with Provincially Designated Historic Resources; however, the proponent must comply with standard conditions under the Historical Resources Act, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

MER TWPRGE SEC LSD List

Proposed Development Area:

Lands Affected: All New Lands

5 5 51 1 1, 2, 3, 4

5 5 50 36 13, 14, 15, 16

5 4 51 6 1, 2, 3, 4

5 4 50 31 13, 14, 15, 16

5 4 51 5 4

5 5 50 35 16

Document TypeDocument Name

Documents Attached:

Location of Site FiPp-8 Miscellaneous

Project Plan Illustrative Material

009838898OPaC HR Application # Page 2 of 2

HRM Project # 4715-16-0037

STANDARD REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE HISTORICAL RESOURCES ACT:

REPORTING THE DISCOVERY OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ______________________________________________________________________ If development proponents and/or their agents become aware of historic resources during the course of development activities, they are required, under Section 31 of the Historical Resources Act, to report these discoveries to the Heritage Division of Alberta Culture and Tourism. This requirement applies to all activities in the Province of Alberta. 1.0 REPORTING THE DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES The discovery of archaeological resources is to be reported to Eric Damkjar, Head, Archaeology, at 780-431-2346 (toll-free by first dialing 310-0000) or eric. [email protected]. 2.0 REPORTING THE DISCOVERY OF PALAEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES The discovery of palaeontological resources is to be reported to Dan Spivak, Head, Resource Management, Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology, at 403-820-6210 (toll-free by first dialing 310-0000) or [email protected]. 3.0 REPORTING THE DISCOVERY OF HISTORIC PERIOD SITES The discovery of historic structures to be reported to Brenda Manweiler, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation Program, at 780-431-2309 (toll-free by first dialing 310-0000) or [email protected]. Please note that some historic structure sites may also be considered Aboriginal traditional use sites. 4.0 REPORTING THE DISCOVERY OF ABORIGINAL TRADITIONAL USE SITES The discovery of any Aboriginal traditional use site that is of a type listed below is to be reported to Valerie Knaga, Director, Aboriginal Heritage Section, at 780-431-2371 (toll-free by first dialing 310-0000) or [email protected]. Aboriginal Traditional Use sites considered by Alberta Culture and Tourism to be historic resources under the Historical Resources Act include: Historic cabin remains; Historic cabins (unoccupied); Cultural or historical community camp sites;

Page 1 of 2

mailto:eric.%[email protected]

mailto:eric.%[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



STANDARD REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE HISTORICAL RESOURCES ACT:

REPORTING THE DISCOVERY OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ______________________________________________________________________ Ceremonial sites/Spiritual sites; Gravesites; Historic settlements/Homesteads; Historic sites; Oral history sites; Ceremonial plant or mineral gathering sites; Historical Trail Features; and, Sweat/Thirst/Fasting Lodge sites 5.0 FURTHER SALVAGE, PRESERVATIVE OR PROTECTIVE MEASURES If previously unrecorded historic resources are discovered, proponents may be ordered to undertake further salvage, preservative or protective measures or take any other actions that the Minister of Alberta Culture and Tourism considers necessary.

Page 2 of 2

Appendix E

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

Appendix F

UTILITY PLANS

Appendix G RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS

DETAILED DESIGN REPORT - Parkland County€¦ · Detailed Design Report WSP Parkland County No...

Documents

Transcript of DETAILED DESIGN REPORT - Parkland County€¦ · Detailed Design Report WSP Parkland County No...