Perth East Comments on HWY 7 Corridor Update April 2012 - Follow-Up to Special Meeting (1)

7/31/2019 Perth East Comments on HWY 7 Corridor Update April 2012 - Follow-Up to Special Meeting (1)

1/4

Integrity Teamwork Service Continuous Improvement Fiscally Responsible

Page 1 of4

Township of Perth East

Glenn Schwendinger, Chief Administrative OfficerP.O. Box 455, 25 Mill Street East Phone- (519) 595-2800

Milverton, Ontario N0K 1M0 Fax- (519) 595-2801

Email: [email protected]

April 23, 2012

Ms. Brenda Jamison, P. Eng.Consultant Project ManagerAECOM300 Water StreetWhitby, ON L1N 9J2

Charles Organ C.E.T.MTO South Western RegionProject ManagerPlanning and Design Section659 Exeter RoadLondon ON N6E 1L3

VIA EMAIL

Re: Provincial Highway 7 & 8 Transportation and Corridor Planning and Class EA Study Follow-up to April 4th Meeting with Perth East Council

_____________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to meet with Perth East Council on April 4th to review theconcerns that have been raised by members of Council and the Township of Perth East(Township) to this point in the Study. The purpose of this letter is to summarize thecomments / concerns raised by Perth East Councilors on April 4th. If you require anyclarification or additional information regarding any of these points please feel free to contactour office.

a. "The northern bypass has not been carried forward, largely because the southernbypass has scored better in the weighting process." Some respectfully disagree, largelybecause of too many assumptions being made in some key Factors and Criteria

b. It is belived that there were flaws in rejecting the northern bypass around Shakespeareand the discounting of the land already owned by the MTO between Stratford andShakespeare previously obtained for Highway 7 & 8.

c. 1.3.1 & 1.3.2 Ground water recharge and source/wellhead protection.....facts stated areincorrect and based on assumptions. It is the Townships understanding that there isminimal concern associated with placing a highway in a wellhead recharge area this

distance away from the wellhead, with this type and thickness of overburden.d. According to the Thames Sydenham Source Protection Area the wellhead protection

zones are already in the built up areas. The 25 year time of travel is not a significantthreat and can therefore be built over...no restrictions needed

e. The Upper Thames River Conservation Authority has 120m of regulated area on eitherside of the Avon municipal drain... so there is at least 200m to build the new highwayhere with no concern from the UTRCA.


2/4


Page 2 of4

f. OR move the well as was suggested in 2009 if the municipal water supply is stillsomehow a problem

g. 1.3.2 Potential development objectives of private landowners has been identified as afactor in discounting the northern bypass route. These lands are not designated forgrowth areas in Perth Easts Official Plan. Perth East (and the province, based oncurrent planning legislation) would not wish to see these properties to grow as muchas assumed in the criteria used by the MTO in evaluating this option.

h.

PPS probably won't allow Shakespeare to grow. There are about 250 lots available inMilverton (our only fully serviced area) plus some assumed/designated land inShakespeare for future residential development. Perth East does not want to seeShakespeare become a larger bedroom community. The Township has no intention ofpumping sewage uphill to service lands north of Shakespeare.

i. 2.2.3 Urban/Rural Residential The evaluation of these options is unclear in thesesections as the same justifications which are used to determine if the alternative isMost Preferred, Moderately Preferred, or Least Preferred are used in all threealternatives. This does not seem logical or defensible.

j. 2.2.4 Commercial/industrial same comment as 2.2.3 above.k.

2.2.5 Tourist areas

i. Come as close to Shakespeare as possible(impact 4-6 farms maximum) thusminimizes damage to farmland and businesses

ii. BUT also keep the potential tourist traffic within sight of the hamlet and thusthe economic development potentially still viable

l. 2.2.6 Community Facilities - fail to see the explanation having merit, does not seemlogical

m. 2.2.7 Municipal Infrastructure - see Fire department access being improved innorthern route

n.

2.4.3 Agricultural operations - it would appear that 4 to 6 farms in northern routeversus 15 to 20 farms in selected route and as such is unclear how the southern route ispreferred as it has been deemed to have less impact. Coming as close to Shakespeareas possible minimizes the impacts. The reality is that these 4-6 farms are not presentlyfarmed as intensively as the southern properties are, and are not likely to ever againdue to the restrictions and proximity. It would appear that there are no nutrientmanagement problems, no MDS concerns, no significant activity on these farms now.It is understood that two of these farms may be currently for sale, one has been used asa land source for a new phase of a subdivision every 10 years or so, and another isessentially operated as a hobby farm. In the view of some, none of these farms wouldexperience serious impacts as compared to elsewhere, particularly the large scalefarming operations which will be impacted by the southern route.

o. 2.4.4 Agricultural Transportation Linkages The Township has significantquestions/concerns with regards to transportation across the 7 & 8 corridor. It wouldseem that there would be more impacts with the selected route as it increases thenumber of crossings required. It is unclear how is it can be made to be safe crossingfour lanes of traffic and two railroad tracks multiple times with associated farmequipment.


3/4


Page 3 of4

p. 2.5.3 Aggregatea. according to the MNR, no potential aggregate resource has been identified in

this location to the County. Nothing is listed or designated on any planningdocuments that the Township is aware of.

i. if an aggregate source did exist, It would seem logical for the MTO to use it andremove it in the highway construction process.

ii. What is visual today is an unpermitted dumping of subsoil from thesubdivision homes and road building

iii. OPA for 9 hole golf course has lapsed and may explain some of the stockpilingof material

q. 5.5.2 Flexibility for Future Expansion new alignment could be seen as shortsightedby being built next to the tracks and a municipal drain as the potential for futureexpansion will be significantly limited.

Additional Points for Consideration

1. It is the Townships understanding that the traffic volumes utilized for the basis ofprojections for this undertaking were taken some time ago. The Township has noticed

considerable changes in traffic volumes and traffic patterns in the area based on anumber of contributing factors (including fuel cost) and would like to see the MTOconfirm the current traffic numbers and resultant projections.

2. As stated previously to the MTO, traffic patterns and access throughout the area forEmergency Services is critical. The Township would like to reiterate that closing offaccess to any existing roads at intersections not be considered.

3. Farmland The use of the existing right of way is the most obvious and logical locationto place the highway outside of the hamlet of Shakespeare. It is view of many thatmaking this decision will minimize impacts in the area. The reality is that those wholive along the existing corridor (particularly west of Shakespeare) fully expect thehighway to be built in this location and over the past several decades have planned

and operated their properties with this in mind. It is the Townships view that theselected route will introduce far too many new impacts to active farms which isneedless and destructive.

4. The current plan will create a significant unnecessary redundancy within a very smallarea. This will result in 3 larger scale road all running parallel within a few kilometers.This duplication creates a significant waste of farmland and significant amountunnecessary asphalt.

5. It is the Townships understanding that the primary objective for the project overall isto create a safe, efficient highway with the least number of negative impacts on thelocal farms, residents, and businesses. By working co-operatively, the Township

firmly believes that we can improve upon this route

6. Phasing Construction Timing of actual construction coming out of this undertaking isan uncertainty at best, and based on the information available is not anticipated anytime soon. One point that came out through the discussions with the MTO was thatthe potential does exist to stage or phase this project. The Township fully supports thisapproach as this will allow the immediate concerns associated primarily with theportion between Shakespeare and New Hamburg to be resolved soon, and the


4/4


Page 4 of4

remaining portions to be built when actually required and when funds are available.This would appear to be a win-win situation which the Township would fully supportand which the Township would recommend the MTO strongly considers.

7. Access from existing/new corridor to Line 33. The Township understands that thedecision to have traffic access the south end of Stratford is one of the objectives of thisundertaking. The result of this has a significant impact on the lands immediately eastof Stratford. The current plan shows two large sweeping curves apparently designedto convey higher speed, larger volumes of traffic through this area. The Township

would much prefer to see the existing road right of ways used for this purpose, andnot active farmland. Based on the information provided by the MTO, projected trafficvolumes in the Study area are projected to be high in the New Hamburg area, with afairly significant decrease in the volumes the further west one travels as traffic leavesthe corridor at a number of locations heading south and north. As such, it is theTownships strong view that in light of that, and based on the MTOs own trafficnumbers, it would be much more appropriate to install traffic lights at the intersectionsof 7 & 8 and Road 111. If traffic lights are acceptable to the MTO in the high volumeHew Hamburg area, they should be acceptable east of Stratford where traffic volumeare and will be much lower.

SUMMARY

The Township of Perth East is supportive of the EA process and fully supports a reasonedapproach to making informed decisions. The decisions being made today will have a lastingand permanent impact on the local residents, farms, businesses and environment. TheTownship fully believes that it is imperative that good decisions are made in this regard basedon the best information available. In the current form, it is the Townships position that someof the decisions that have been made to this point are not as good as they could have been. Itis the Townships desire and intent to provide the necessary information and assistance to theMTO which will enable the MTO to improve these decisions to get a better final result, whichis definitely achievable.

Respectfully submitted,

Glenn SchwendingerChief Administrative Officercc Perth East Council

Perth East Comments on HWY 7 Corridor Update April 2012 - Follow-Up to Special Meeting (1)

Documents

Transcript of Perth East Comments on HWY 7 Corridor Update April 2012 - Follow-Up to Special Meeting (1)