HomeMy WebLinkAboutPW Report January 19 1978..................
R E P O R T January 19; 1978,
To: Mayor G.B. Rickard & Members of Council.
From: J. Dunham, Director of Public Works.
Subject: Future North-South Arterial Road in
East Bowmanville.
Further to a Meeting with the Region Planning Department,
attended by Members of the Town of Newcastle Council, and
two public meetings held in Bowmanville, Council, on
November 21, 1977, by Resolution # C-77-1597, recommended
Alternative # 4 to the Regional Planning & Development
Committee.
The following are my comments in regard to the subject
future arterial road: -
Alternatives Nos. 3 and 4 were under consideration by the
Region Planning & Development and Works Committees and, as
a result, Alternative # 3 was recommended to Regional
Council. On January 4, 1978, the Regional Council tabled
the matter for one month pending further comments from the
Town of Newcastle.
The estimated cost (as prepared by the Region) is $3.7
million for either Alternative 3 or 41 this figure being
exclusive of land acquisition; however, land acquisition
is a vital factor and should have been taken into consid-
eration when comparative cost estimates for both alter-
natives were being prepared.
I fail to see land acquisition costs being identical for
each alternative, and it is a fair assumption that such
costs would be considerably less for Alternative it 4.
Concerns relating to improving Highway No. 2. were express-
ed, as a result of which the Region of Durham responded by
saying that improvements to Highway No. 2 were not req-
uired to accommodate the growth in Bowmanville ( as shown
in the Official Plan) if Alternative # 3 were to be im-
plemented, although such improvements may be required
after the 'planning horizon'. If this is the case, I
would then question why improvements to Highway No. 2
are recommended in Alternative # 4?
January 19, 1978. - 2 -
In my opinion it is quite evident that improvements will
be required to Highway No. 2, regardless of where the
proposed arterial road is located, and it is equally poss-
ible that they will be necessary prior to the so-called
'planning horizon'.
Concerns were also expressed in relation to the 'barrier
effect' of the arterial road through a residential area.
As proposed in Alternative # 3, the new arterial road would
be designed to a lower urban design speed of 50-60 km/hr
(30-40 m.p.h); apart from this, north of Highway No. 2
Alternative # 3 still results in a division of a resident-
ial community.
Disruption to the Bowmanville Cemetery and the Maranatha
Christian Reformed Church is a concern; as commented by
the Region : "If alternative # 3 were selected, no land
would be required from the Cemetery and it is expected
that the parking facilities for the Maranatha Christian
Reformed Church would be relocated south-east of the
Church with the associated costs borne by the implementing
agency". Unless there are some improvements to Highway No.
2, congestion would occur where Alternative # 3 intersects,
and correcting this would probably involve further disrupt-
ion to the existing Church setting. Also, south of this
the land is industrial, and if the proposed arterial road
is to be a controlled access road, then additional land
would be lost in acquiring access to any industrial dev-
elopment.
Without preliminary engineering I cannot support the comment
that "no land would be required from the Cemetery". The
existing pavement between the Cemetery and the Church is
approximately eighteen (18) feet, and the total width
between the Church parking lot and the Cemetery is approx-
imately thirty-eight (38) feet; from this it would appear
that additional land would be required from both properties
in order to obtain an eighty-six (86) foot right-of-way.
Environmental and Social impacts are determined by the
number of properties affected, regardless as to which
alternative is adopted. However, from Highway No. 401 to
Highway No. 2 the impact would most definitely be greatly
reduced if Alternative # 4 was accepted and implemented.
North of Highway No. 2, Alternative # 3 would have a con-
siderable detrimental environmental impact on stream
crossings and woodlots. Alternative # 4 greatly reduces
the environmental distortion.
January 19, 1978. - 3 -
Based on the foregoing evaluation, and unlike the other
comments that neither Alternative # 3 nor # 4 "clearly
stands out as a preferred choice" I recommend Alternative
# 4 be adopted from Highway No. 401 to Highway No. 2.
Costs associated with the construction of the proposed
arterial road have not been defined but, rather, have
been referred to as "being borne by the implementing
agency". Consideration should be given to the Town of
Newcastle being the "implementing agency" as this would
result in the arterial road being located to the optimum
advantage of the Town.
I do not agree with the comments that "the Training School
Road, north of Highway No. 2, Mearns Avenue and Concession
Street would have to be improved" as the timing and design
will be the decision of the Town of Newcastle.
Finally I would state that, in my opinion, the action
taken by Council in Resolution # C-77-1597 should be
upheld, and recommended, in the strongest terms, to the
Regional Municipality of Durham.
cc: Mr. A. Guiler,
Town Manager.