HomeMy WebLinkAboutWD-24-88 + � �
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
t REPORT File #6
a Res. #
By-Law #
MEETING: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION MEETING
DATE: APRIL 5, 1988
REPORT #: WD-24-88 FILE #:
SUB,JECT: URBAN Vs RURAL ROAD CROSS SECTION FOR THE
SERVICING OF THE SOUTH BOWMANVILLE
INDUSTRIAL PARK
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following:
That this report be received; and,
1. THAT the urban road cross-section be used for the servicing of the
South Bowmanville Industrial Park; and
2. THAT the Director of Public Works, the Director of Planning and
the Treasurer meet with the owners of the South Bowmanville
Industrial Park to discuss the financing of the servicing of
the Park by means local improvements and any other matters
related to the draft conditions of approval; and
i
i
E 3. THAT a report be submitted to the General Purpose and Administration
i
Committee at the earliest possible date advising the Committee
of the results of the discussions; and
4. THAT a copy of this report be forwarded to Mr. Dennis Szechy.
. . .2
Lit
PAGE 2
REPORT NO. WD-24-88
I
REPORT:
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 At the meeting of Council held on Monday, January 25, 1988,
the following resolution was passed:
"THAT report PD-31-88 be referred to the Director of
Public Works with a request to examine the storm
drainage needs of the area in question and report
back."
2.0 THE ISSUE
2.1 The issue is that the cost of servicing the South Bowmanville
Industrial Park using an urban cross-section is greater than
servicing the Park using a rural cross-section.
2.2 The purpose of this report is to review the costs and pros and
cons of the two alternatives and to make a recommendation as to
which of the two alternatives should be used.
3.0 MEETING HELD WITH INDUCON
3.1 Two meetings have been held with Mr. Dennis Szechy, vice-President,
Urban Development from inducon Consultants to discuss the details
of the servicing of the South Bowmanville Industrial Park. It
was agreed that a report would be submitted to the General
Purposes and Administration Committee by the Director of Public
Works and that this report would include a report from Inducon.
A copy of Inducon's report is included in this agenda under
separate cover.
i
. . .3
PAGE 3
REPORT N0. WD-24-88
4.0 ADVANTAGES OF THE URBAN CROSS-SECTION
II
4,1 The details of the rural section and urban
d section are follows
shown on the "Typical Road Cross Sect ion"
page 5 of the Inducon report.
4.2 The advantages of the urban cross-section over the rural
cross-section are:
1
1. Better aesthetics
2. Wider pavement
3. Easier maintenance
4. Much better drainage
4.3 Aesthetics
ownership point of view, the responsibility of
4.3.1 From a purely
intaining the ditches on the road
cutting the grass and ma
allowance lies with the municipality.
4.3.2 toy experience has been that in most cases,
the owners of
industrial land located in subdivisions which are the municipal
by means of open ditches, do not cut the gr
property.
4.3.3 If this part of the roadway
is to be kept looking aesthetically
pleasing, the grass must be cut about once per week during
the summer months.
4.3.4 I know of no municipality that provides this level of service
with regard to cutting
the grass on municipal property.
Therefore, unless the property owner cuts the grass on the
4
it will not be done on a frequent enough
municipal property,
basis. . . .4
Ii
PAGE 4
REPORT NO. WD-24-88
4.3.5 On the other hand, it has been my experience, that the owners
of industrial property in subdivisions which are serviced
with the urban cross-section almost always cut the grass up
to the curb and gutter as part of their regular maintenance
of their property.
4.4 Wider Pavement
The pavement on the urban cross-section is 10.70 metres
wide (35 feet) while the pavement on the rural cross-section
is 7.0 metres (23 feet) wide.
In the case of the rural cross-section, parking occurs on
the granular shoulders. In the case of the urban cross-section,
parking occurs on the pavement.
4.5 Easier Maintenance
4.5.1 An urban cross-section requires very little maintenance other
than the regular maintenance operations such as snow plowing,
street sweeping and periodic cleaning of the storm sewers
and catch-basins.
4.5.2 A rural cross-section requires snow plowing, street sweeping
plus periodic grading and gravelling of the shoulders, removal
of gravel from intersections, cleaning of ditches, thawing
of culverts during the spring months and very often repair
of the ends of the culverts which very often are damaged by
trucks running over the ends.
On page 3 of his report, Mr. Szechy gives maintenance costs
for rural and urban cross-sections obtained from the Ministry
of Transportation and the Region of Durham.
. . .5
PAGE 5
REPORT NO. WD-24-88
I do not dispute the accuracy of the cost information, but I have
concern that the cost comparisons are meaningless for the following
reasons:
1. The maintenance requirements for the rural cross-section
in the rural environment is far different than the
maintenance requirements in the urban environment. For
example, the distance between entrance culverts and
intersections is far less in the rural environment than in
the urban environment.
2. The level of maintenance of a road, be it urban or rural
cross-section, is much higher in the urban environment than
in the rural environment.
4.5.3 For these reasons, it is my argument that the cost comparisons
given by Mr. Szechy are not valid and cannot be used as a
justification for using the rural cross-section in an industrial
park.
4.6 Much Better Drainage
4.6.1 Good drainage of the area is of prime importance as it relates
the aesthetics of the industrial park.
4.6.2 To put this concern in proper perspective, the following should
be considered.
1. The slope on the pavement of roads is normally 2% (that
is the cross-fall from the centreline of the pavement
to the shoulder) .
2. The slope on the gravel shoulders in 60.
. . .6
PAGE 6
REPORT NO. WD-24-88
3. These two slopes are shown on the cross-section which
follows page 5 of Mr. Szechy's report.
4. THE SLOPE FOR MANY OF THE DITCHES IN THE OPEN DITCH
(rural cross-section) WILL BE ABOUT 0.40.
WATER WILL LAY IN THE DITCHES AND THE DITCHES WILL ICE UP
DURING THE WINTER MONTHS. DURING FREQUENT FREEZE-THAW
CYCLES, THE CULVERTS WILL ICE-UP AND WILL REQUIRE THAWING
WITH A STEAM JENNY.
5.0 SERVICING COSTS
5.1 On page 2 of his report Mr. Szechy provides cost estimates
for the urban and rural cross-sections and for sanitary sewers
and watermains.
These are as follow:
COST/ACRE
RURAL URBAN RURAL URBAN
Roadwork $1,037,00 $1,413,000 $7,391 $10,071
Storm Sewers 0 938,000 0 6,686
Sub Total 1,037,000 2,351,000 7,391 16,757
Sanitary Sewers
& Watermains 2,649,000 2,649,000 18,881 18,881
Sub Total 3,686,000 5,000,000 26,272 35,638
External Roads 312,000 531,000 2,224 3,785
(Lake Road)
Total $3,998,000 5,531,000 28,496 39,423
*Based on 140.3 net acres
. . .7
PAGE 7
REPORT NO
5.2 ANALYSIS OF THE SERVICING COSTS
5.2.1 The cost of the sanitary sewers and watermains was financed
by Durham Region under Section 218 of the Municipal Act.
These costs will be recovered by the Region by means of an
annual charge on the tax bill and these costs "run with land".
5.2.2 The conditions of draft plan approved specify that the Developer
will be required to make a contribution to the Town towards
the cost of upgrading external roads. The amount of the
contribution has not been determined.
5.2.3 Therefore, it can be concluded, based on the information
available, the cost to date to the Developers for the development
of the South Bowmanville Industrial Park are:
1. The initial cost of the land plus carrying costs.
2. Planning costs.
3. The annual charges for the cost of the construction
of the sanitary sewers and watermains.
5.2.4 Based on the above, the cost to the Developers for the servicing
will be as follows:
COST/ACRE
RURAL URBAN RURAL URBAN
Roadwork $1,037,000 $1,413,000 $7,391 $10,071
Storm Sewers 0 938,000 0 6,686
TOTAL $1,037,000 $2,351,000 $7,391 $16,757
. . .8
PAGE 8
REPORT NO. WD-24-88
5.2.5 The asking price for the land in the South Bowmanville Industrial
Park is $75,000/acre upwards.
6.0 OPINION
6.1 The South Bowmanville Industrial Park is a very important
development to the Town of Newcastle. It is important that
the servicing of the Park does not, in the long term, create
a problem to the Town or a constraint to the attraction of
industry to the Park.
6.2 Servicing of the Park should be by urban cross-section. Rural
cross-section is not appropriate in this case.
6.3 The costs presented by Mr. Szechy for the maintenance of urban
and rural cross-sections do not give an accurate picture
of the true costs to the Town and should not be considered
in making a decision on the selection of the preferred
alternative.
r
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
7.1 The servicing of the South Bowmanville Industrial Park by
means or rural cross-section is not appropriate.
7.2 The servicing of the South Bowmanville Industrial Park by
means of an urban cross-section is affordable.
i
i
. . .9
i
PAGE 9
REPORT NO. WD-24-88
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 That the servicing of the South Bowmanville Industrial Park
be by means of the urban cross-section.
8.2 That staff meet with the Developers to discuss this matter
further and that the discussions include, but not be restricted
to, the following:
( 1. Financing of all or part of the cost of the construction
of the roads by means of the Local Improvement Act.
2. Determination of the contribution by the Developer towards
the cost of reconstruction of external roads.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee,
i
Walter A. Evans, P. Eng., Lawrence 'tseff,
Director of Public Works. Chief Admini trative Officer.
:llv
25 March 1988
I