Leduc County Transportation Master Plan ERRATA

Edmonton

Red Deer

Calgary

Fort McMurray

Grande Prairie

Whitecourt

Langley, B.C.

Edmonton

Red Deer

Calgary

Fort McMurray

Grande Prairie Whitecourt Transportation Langley, B.C.

Edmonton Red Deer Master Calgary Fort McMurray Plan Grande Prairie

Whitecourt

Langley, B.C.

Edmonton

Red Deer

Calgary

Fort McMurray

Grande Prairie

Whitecourt May 2001 Langley, B.C.

Edmonton

Red Deer Leduc County Transportation Master Plan ERRATA

1. Executive Summary: - page iv: Add the following to the end of the Executive Summary: The projects contained in this plan are provided as a starting point for the next ten years.

The list of projects will undoubtedly be added to, subtracted from and modified in the future with changes in the economy, the growth patterns in the County and the increased information that is collected by the administration. This Transportation Master Plan document may be used to facilitate these changes and to prepare future capital programs by taking the criteria and guidelines provided therein, and using them to help prioritize projects into defendable, credible and logical order based on their functional classification and surfacing requirements.

Roadways that are identified as requiring major upgrading work can be reviewed against the series of criteria that provide details of the functional classification. For example, a major roadway which provides an arterial function, has more than eight kilometers of length and connects primary and/or secondary highways, according to Table 4.1, should be classified as a County Main Road. The functional classification will determine the width of right-of-way required and the cross-sectional requirements of the roadway. Similarly, the surfacing type of a roadway can also be reviewed against objective measures. Existing traffic counts may be used, or alternatively, traffic count information may be collected and converted to Average Daily Traffic to provide a logical basis for the decision of whether a roadway should be paved, oil based or left as gravel surfaced roadway. The surfacing of a roadway should be directly related to the number of vehicles using it. Recommendations are made in the report to continue with a defined program of traffic count, pavement management and bridge management data collection to facilitate these changes.

In conclusion, this document can provide an objective basis for future decisions regarding capital programming of transportation infrastructure in Leduc County for many years to come.

2. Section 2.3.2 Large Farm Traffic - page 2-6: Second bullet should read: There are large hog operations in Section 13 - TWP 50 - RGE 27 - W4M, in Sections 2, 11, 12 and 24 - TWP49 - RGE 3 - W5M, and in Section 18 - TWP 49 - RGE 2 - W5M.

3. Section 2.3.3 Oil and Gas Traffic - page 2-7: Add bullet: Township Road 4820 - Three miles west of Secondary Highway 795

4. Exhibit 5.1- Program Description: West Devon Main Road extents should be Range Road 275 (Highway 39 to Township Road 502) and Township Road 502 (Range Road 275 to Range Road 273) Leduc County

Transportation Master Plan

Final Report

May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Table of Contents

Executive Summary i - v

1 Introduction 1-1 1.1 Transportation Master Plan 1-1 1.2 Rural Roads Study 1-2

2 Existing Data Inventory 2-1 2.1 Existing Roadway System 2-1 2.2 Traffic Counts 2-2 2.3 Traffic Generators and Land Use 2-5 2.4 Road Bans 2-9 2.5 Available Traffic Accident Records 2-10 2.6 Bridge/Culvert Information 2-10 2.7 Budget and Cost Information 2-11

3 Information Review and Analysis 3-1 3.1 Introduction 3-1 3.2 Past Roadway Planning and Traffic Studies 3-1 3.3 Issue Definitions Meeting 3-5 3.3.1 Projects Steering Committee 3-5 3.3.2 Leduc County Council 3-6 3.4 Municipal Development Plan (MDP), Area Structure Plans, Development Plans and Other Land Use Data 3-9 3.5 Field Reviews of Leduc County 3-11 3.6 Input from Other Jurisdictions / Stakeholders 3-11 3.7 Traffic Analyses and Forecasts 3-14 3.8 Public Open Houses 3-17

4 Development of Guidelines/Standards 4-1 4.1 Introduction 4-1 4.2 Proposed Guidelines 4-1 4.3 Proposed Geometric Design Guidelines 4-3 4.4 Network Options 4-5

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. Table of Contents May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

5 Capital and Rehabilitation Programs 5-1 5.1 Program Description 5-1 5.2 Program Costs 5-14 5.3 Program Prioritization 5-14

6 Recommendations 6-1 6.1 Transportation System Policies 6-1 6.2 Roadway Functional Service Classifications 6-3 6.3 Surfacing Guidelines 6-3 6.4 Design Guidelines 6-4 6.5 Capital / Rehabilitation Program and Priorities 6-4

Appendices Appendix A Cost Estimate Breakdown Appendix B Intersection Traffic Count Locations Appendix C Examples of Traffic Count Calculations Appendix D Accident Locations Appendix E Details of Leduc Area Transportation Study - May 1981 Appendix F Bridge Information System Output Appendix G Public Open House Materials and Feedback

Tables Table 2.1 Roadways Within Leduc County Table 2.2 Automatic Traffic Recorders Table 2.3 2001 Bridge Plan - General Information Table 2.4 2001 Bridge Plan - Condition and Cost Information Table 2.5 2002 Bridge Plan - General Information Table 2.6 2002 Bridge Plan - Condition and Cost Information Table 3.1 Automatic Traffic Recorder Locations Table 3.2 Annual Growth Rate Factors Table 4.1 Functional Classification Guidelines Table 4.2 Surfacing Guidelines Table 5.1 Leduc County - 2000 Transportation Master Plan Preliminary Program Costs Table 5.2 Leduc County Capital Construction Program

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. Table of Contents May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Exhibits Exhibit 2.1 Existing Roadway System Exhibit 2.2 Road Surface Types Exhibit 2.3 Traffic Count Stations Exhibit 2.4 Major Truck Traffic Origins and Destinations Exhibit 3.1 Flow Chart for Conversion of Traffic Count Data Exhibit 3.2 Year 2000 Traffic Volumes (AADT) Exhibit 3.3 Year 2003 Projected Traffic Counts (AADT) Exhibit 3.4 Year 2010 Projected Traffic Counts (AADT) Exhibit 4.1 Proposed Cross-Section - County Main Road Exhibit 4.2 Proposed Cross-Section - Special Purpose Road Exhibit 4.3 Proposed Cross-Section - Local Road Exhibit 4.4 Functional Classification Exhibit 5.1 Proposed Program

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. Table of Contents May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Executive Summary

Leduc County has over 2400 kilometers of roads having a wide range of geometric standards, service functions, surface types and administrative classifications ranging from primary highways to local farm access roads. The County requires improved tools to plan, design, operate and manage the roadways under their jurisdiction. The last Transportation Master Plan was completed in 1981 and focused on the then Town of Leduc, the Nisku Industrial Business Park and the Edmonton International Airport region. Since then, the Leduc County population has grown to approximately 13,000 (1999) and is poised for significant growth due to the robust local economy. The County’s Municipal Development Plan was completed in 1998 and will provide direction on the County’s future development and growth. As a result, the development of a Transportation Master Plan for the entire County is timely.

With the recent County Business Plan’s objective of a high level of customer service, this Transportation Master Plan combined with a Rural Roads Study component has been completed to provide a current, systematic and cost effective plan for major transportation improvements in the County. Specifically, the detailed objectives of the Transportation Master Plan are to provide a logical, credible and defendable system of:

• transportation system policies • roadway functional service classifications • surfacing guidelines • access control and right-of-way dedication • roadway project priorities and a rating system for budget and capital plan preparation.

This report also fulfils the requirements of the Rural Road Study Initiative Guidelines and therefore is eligible for funding under the Municipal 2000 Sponsorship Program. A rural roads study provides an inventory of the roadways and bridges in the County and their condition, as well as proposed maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction projects and cost estimates. The inventory portion of this report consists of traffic count data, traffic generators and existing and projected land uses, road ban information and bridges.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. i Errata - June, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

As part of the Transportation Master Plan study, the past roadway planning and traffic studies were also reviewed and issue definition meetings were held with the project Steering Committee, Leduc County Council, and Maintenance Supervisors and Grader Operators. Input was gathered from other jurisdictions and stakeholders as well, including the surrounding municipalities, and developers and industries with major traffic generators.

A review of information such as bridges, traffic generators and land use, road ban information and extensive analysis of existing traffic count data provided a baseline condition of the County’s roadway system as it stands today. This baseline provides the work necessary to maintain and rehabilitate the existing roadway network in a serviceable condition.

The recommendations section of this report reflects the objectives of the Transportation Master Plan. In order to provide a transportation network to serve Leduc County into the 21st century, criteria were developed, based on a number of different factors, by which a functional roadway classification hierarchy could be provided. These factors included continuity, connectivity, adjacent land uses and spacing of roadways. A total of four functional classes of road were developed. Primary and Secondary Highways are under the jurisdiction of Alberta Infrastructure and although these roadways are not directly under the control of the County, they impact very widely on its transportation network. County Main Roads provide a high quality, usually surfaced roadway for major traffic movements throughout the County. Special Purpose Roads provide access to and from residential subdivisions, areas of high industrial and/or commercial use as well as internal roadways around and within the Nisku Industrial Business Park. Local roads make up the remainder of the roadways within the County.

Criteria were also developed for surfacing of the various roadways based upon the amount of traffic, and particularly, truck traffic using that roadway. Cross-sections were then developed for each of the functional classifications of roadway, based upon existing roadway cross-sections and the types of traffic using them. A network was then developed based upon these criteria and the existing baseline to provide a system of roadways that provided the best level of service to the County taking into account each of the functional classification criteria.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. ii Errata - June, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Each of the identified new roadway cross-sections and surfaces identified in this network were cost estimated based upon the cross-sections and unit prices gathered from similar work around the Province to develop a program of work which allows construction of a road network that will serve the County for the next few decades. Each of the new capital projects was then combined with the existing maintenance and rehabilitation projects to develop an overall program for the next ten years. The program was presented to the public at two open houses on April 18th and 19th, 2001, in Nisku and Thorsby.

This report summarizes the analysis conducted for the above noted decisions and provides recommendations on projects to be completed over the next ten years. The list of projects was then developed as a program for each of the next ten years based upon an annual expenditure of approximately $1 - $2 million per year on capital projects.

The recommended capital program includes the following new projects:

• Airport Road Widening from 5th Street to 9th Street • West Devon Main Road Paving • Range Road 244/250 Township Road 502 to 512 (Nisku Spine Road) • St. Francis West Main Road • Township Road 510 from SH 814 to Range Road 243 & Range Road 243 from Township Road 504 to 512 • Range Road 253/254 from Township Road 504 to 512 • Collectors in Nisku Industrial Business Park • Range Road 233 from Secondary Highway 623 to Secondary Highway 625 • Township Road 500 from Range Road 221 to 223 • Fruitland Road (Range Road 11) from Hwy 39 to Township Road 502

The recommended rehabilitation program includes the following projects, from studies conducted by others:

Road Rehabilitation • Airport Road from SH 814 to Highway 21 • Glen Park Road from Highway 2A to Secondary Highway 814 • Joseph Lake Road from Secondary Highway 623 to Township Road 510 • Looking Back Lake Road Highway 21 to Joseph Lake Road

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. iii Errata - June, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Bridge Rehabilitation

• 2001 Bridge Plan Bridge File #73211 INW 8-50-24-4 Bridge File # 75574 WSW 24-48-25-4 Bridge File # 76923 SSW 18-48-24-4 Bridge File # 07067 SSE 17-49-2-5 Bridge File # 08150 SSE 13-49-27-4 Bridge File # 02099 SSW 33-49-1-5 Bridge File # 01090 SNW 24-50-26-4 Bridge File # 76777 WSW 10-49-24-4 Bridge File # 07747 WSW 4-50-2-5 Bridge File # 01726 WSW 16-50-23-4 Bridge File # 74928 INE 2-49-4-5 Bridge File # 13921 WSW 17-50-23-4 Bridge File # 08492 SSE 1-48-27-4 Bridge File # 79676 WNW 18-50-1-5 Bridge File # 71689 WNW 13-48-3-5 Bridge File # 01748 SSW 32-49-1-5 Bridge File # 78007 WNW 8-49-3-5 Bridge File # 07541 WSW 29-49-1-5 Bridge File # 81485 INE 6-51-24-4

• 2002 Bridge Plan Bridge File # 00588 WNW 12-50-24-4 Bridge File # 71293 WSW 8-51-23-4 Bridge File # 06888 SSW 16-49-26-4 Bridge File # 00138 SSW 1-50-27-4 Bridge File # 6982 SSE 31-49-1-5 Bridge File # 13993 SSW 15-48-2-5

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. iv Errata - June, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

The projects contained in this plan are provided as a starting point for the next ten years. The list of projects will undoubtedly be added to, subtracted from and modified in the future with changes in the economy, the growth patterns in the County and the increased information that is collected by the administration. This Transportation Master Plan document may be used to facilitate these changes and to prepare future capital programs by taking the criteria and guidelines provided therein, and using them to help prioritize projects into defendable, credible and logical order based on their functional classification and surfacing requirements.

In conclusion, this document can provide an objective basis for future decisions regarding capital programming of transportation infrastructure in Leduc County for many years to come.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. v Errata - June, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report 1

Introduction

Leduc County has over 2100 kilometers of roads under its jurisdiction having a wide range of geometric standards, service functions, surface types and administrative classifications ranging from paved County Main Roads to local farm access roads. The County requires improved tools to plan, design, operate and manage the roadways under their jurisdiction. The last Transportation Master Plan was completed in 1981 and focused on the then Town of Leduc, the Nisku Industrial Business Park and the Edmonton International Airport region. Since then, the Leduc County population has grown to approximately 12,400 (1999) and is poised for significant growth due to the robust local economy. The County’s Municipal Development Plan was completed in 1998 and will provide direction to the County’s future development and growth. As a result, the development of a Transportation Master Plan for the entire County is timely.

With the recent County Business Plan’s objective of a high level of customer service, this Transportation Master Plan has been completed to provide a current, systematic and cost effective plan for major transportation improvements in the County. The resultant document also fulfils the requirements of a Rural Roads Study as defined in the Rural Roads Study Terms of Reference. This component of the report is funded under the Municipal 2000 Sponsorship Program and must satisfy the terms of reference of the Rural Roads Study Initiative.

1.1 Transportation Master Plan

The Transportation Master Plan takes a broad and long term view of the County’s road network, preparing and prioritizing programs over the next ten years, as well as suggesting improvements to existing transportation system policies. Specifically, the objectives of the Transportation Master Plan are to:

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 1-1 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• provide a useful transportation information system which can be easily incorporated in the County’s future geographic information system (GIS) • be flexible to meet a wide range of economic activity and growth in the County • provide a logical, credible and defendable system of: • transportation system policies • roadway functional service classifications including guidelines for these classifications • surfacing guidelines • design guidelines including management tools for access control and right of way dedication or protection • roadway project priority rating system for budget and capital plan preparation.

1.2 Rural Roads Study

The primary end products of the Rural Roads Study will be to provide the technical priority for projects in the County’s three year business plan for transportation improvements, flexible priorities for their multi-year business plan, and the necessary policies, procedures and guidelines to manage the transportation system into the future. The Rural Roads Study must be flexible to accommodate changes in economic and related population and employment growth, modifications to budgets and assistance programs for transportation projects, and react efficiently and effectively to the evolving demands of the traveling public. The key tasks associated with the Rural Roads Study were to collect and prepare an inventory of data relating to existing traffic conditions, road and bridge conditions standards and costs.

The objectives of the Rural Roads Study are to:

• enable the County to attain maximum cost-effectiveness for their future transportation budgets • address the most immediate roadway priorities as soon as possible • react positively to the needs of a wide range of County road users, interest groups and stakeholders.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 1-2 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

The plan must be coordinated with the plans for neighbouring jurisdictions such as the Cities of Edmonton and Leduc, Edmonton Regional Airport Authority and adjoining municipalities.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 1-3 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report 2

Existing Data Inventory

2.1 Existing Roadway System

Leduc County presently has approximately 2,130 km (1,323 miles) of County Main Roads, Local Roads, Hamlet and Subdivision Roads under its jurisdiction and control. These roadways are broken down by classification and surface type as follows:

Table 2.1 Roadways Under Leduc County Jurisdiction

Gravel Oiled/Cold Paved Total Total (km) Mix (km) (km) (km) (miles) County Main Roads 74.0 3.2 126.7 203.9 126.7 Local Roads 1,731.5 58.7 28.8 1,819.0 1,130.3 Hamlet & Subdivision Roads 106.3 66.0 Total 1,805.5 61.9 155.5 2,129.2 1,323.0

The criteria for each of these functional classes of road and road surface are not presently well defined. Of the acreage, subdivision and hamlet roads, the majority are oiled with a few being paved or gravel.

In addition, there are approximately 118 kilometres (73 miles) of primary and 222 kilometres (138 miles) of secondary highways under the Alberta Infrastructure jurisdiction which are within the County boundaries.

The Secondary Highway and Main Roads Planning and Management Guide completed in 1997 and updated annually provides details of pavement structures of the Secondary Highways and surface roads.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-1 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

An overall map of the County showing the existing roadway classifications can be seen in Exhibit 2.1. Exhibit 2.2 illustrates the existing road surface types throughout the County.

Several different sources of data were identified for inventory and collection for this study. These include:

• Traffic counts • Traffic generators and land use • Road bans • Available traffic accident records • Bridge information • Historic and projected roadways budgets, unit manual maintenance costs for the various classifications of roadways and surface types, and grant programs for the County roads

2.2 Traffic Counts

2.2.1 Introduction Accurate traffic count data is of the utmost importance in this type of study. It allows the reader to see a snapshot of the amounts of traffic on the road network at the time that the report is produced. It also allows projections to be made and used as baselines for the ultimate goal of the report - a ten year program of capital and rehabilitation projects.

Six sources of traffic count data were available for this study:

• Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) Data Collected by the Province • Link Data on Primary and Secondary Highways Collected by the Province • Intersection Counts on Primary and Secondary Highways by the Province • Raw Traffic Counts Collected by the County • Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study - Reid Crowther & Partners Ltd. • Black Gold School District Bus Route Information.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-2 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

In general, there are variations in traffic over each hour of the day, each day of the week and for each month in the year. For example, a peak in the traffic during the morning and evening reflects the movement of commuters to and from their homes. Similarly, a road to a summer resort location would have more vehicles during the months of June, July and August, than at other times during the year. It would be prohibitively expensive to collect data on all roads for twenty four hours a day and three hundred sixty five days a year. Therefore counts are typically taken for one or two days in a year and factored to provide an Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volume.

2.2.2 ATR Traffic Data Alberta Infrastructure collects traffic count data on Primary and Secondary Highways at a number of Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR’s) around the County. ATR’s take traffic counts twenty four hours a day, 365 days a year. This data is used to establish adjustment factors for other single day counts.

ATR counters in the County include:

Table 2.2 Automatic Traffic Recorders Highway ATR No. Location 2 002301 2 Km S of Jct Hwy Old 2A Leduc 2 002321 5.9 Km N of Jct Hwy 19 Nisku 19 019101 3.4 Km W of Jct Hwy 2 Devon 2A 02A261 6.0 Km S of Jct Hwy 2 Leduc 39 039101 3.2 Km W of Jct Hwy 2 Leduc 21 021261 3 Km S of Jct Hwy 14 Sherwood Park 39 039065 0.7 Km E of Jct Hwy 22 Drayton Valley 39 039085 3.6 Km W of Jct Sec Hwy 778 Thorsby 778 778021 9.6 Km S of Jct Hwy 39 Thorsby 625 625026 1.2 Km W of Jct Sec Hwy 814 Beaumont 814 814027 0.8 Km S of Jct Sec Hwy 625 Beaumont

2.2.3 Link Traffic Counts The Province (Alberta Infrastructure) annually publishes a report of traffic data for links on the Primary and Secondary Highway systems. This link data provides information on the link location (start, end and length) the AADT data and breakdowns by vehicle

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-3 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

classification. This information on Provincial Highway links is at a higher level than what is required for this study. The highway traffic patterns are essentially different than the local traffic movements within the County. However, this information provides a mechanism whereby the data collected at a more local level may be checked. This data is available from the Alberta Infrastructure website, on the Internet.

2.2.4 Intersection Counts The Province (Alberta Infrastructure) also collects a series of intersection counts which provides the AADT traffic volumes, vehicle classification and turning movements for the intersections with Primary and Secondary Highways. This information is available from the Alberta Infrastructure website on the Internet, but again is at too high a level to be of much use in this study. It does provide a check on the existing data however. Data is available for the intersections listed in Appendix B from the Alberta Infrastructure website.

2.2.5 Raw Traffic Data Traffic count data has been collected by the County since 1990 using portable hose counters and these counts are typically of 24 hour duration. A hose traffic counter functions by counting one vehicle every two times a hose laying across the roadway is depressed. These counters provide dependable traffic counts on paved surfaces, where the traffic stream is typically higher in volume and uniform in speed. However, on gravel surfaces, the counts are subject to variation due to the uneven road surface and lower traffic volumes. These type of counters are also typically unmanned and therefore subject to abuse by the public, which can result in inaccurate count numbers being provided. Anomalous traffic counts at locations where hose counters were used were discarded. This data has been manually entered annually onto County maps and stored on a single paper copy. Each of these maps was reviewed and the data extracted and put into an electronic database table for further processing. Exhibit 2.3 illustrates the traffic count station locations used over the past ten years.

2.2.6 Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study The Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study completed in 1997 by Reid Crowther and Partners Ltd. provides existing AADT and peak hour traffic volumes on

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-4 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

roadways within the Nisku Industrial Business Park. This existing AADT information was included in the database.

2.2.7 Black Gold Regional Schools Division School Bus Routes The Black Gold Regional School Division was contacted in the fall of 1999 to obtain the school bus routes within the County. The bus routes change from year to year depending upon where students require pick-up and drop-off. Therefore almost every route within the County either is or will be a school bus route at some time during life and consequently no special provisions were made for these counts.

2.3 Traffic Generators and Land Use

2.3.1 Introduction Major traffic generators contribute the most trucks to the Leduc County network. Truck traffic is extremely important from a pavement structural strength perspective because it is the trucks on any roadway network that cause the majority of the damage. The amount of damage caused by trucks is measured in Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL’s) and grossly overloaded trucks cause a much greater proportion of damage than legally loaded trucks. An overall rule of thumb is that the greater the number of axles a truck has, the better distributed the load will be and the less damage the truck will do to the road. Overall, the major truck use on the roadways around Leduc County may be broken into the following categories:

• Trucks traveling to and from origins and destinations such as large farms; oil and gas activity, gravel pits, the landfill site and fertilizer and seed cleaning plants. The locations of the origins and destinations are illustrated in Exhibit 2.4. • Trucks attempting to bypass the Highway 2 weigh scale operation at Leduc and shortcut to the Edmonton Bypass route at Highway 60. • Heavy trucks in and out of the Nisku Industrial Business Park.

Truck route and truck use data (where truck traffic is continuous on sustained hauls) was provided by the County Maintenance personnel at their meetings with the project team. These were marked down as lists of potential truck users and their origins and

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-5 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

destinations. The truck uses may be broken down by types of commodity hauled:

• Large farm traffic • Oil and gas traffic • Landfill traffic • Fertilizer and/or seed plant traffic • Nisku Industrial Business Park traffic.

2.3.2 Large Farm Traffic Several large farming operations were identified in the County:

• The Hutterite Bretheren of Warburg has the majority of its land in parts of Sections 13, 14, 21-29, 32, 33, 35 and 36 - TWP 49 - RGE 3 - W5M, Sections 1, 3 and 10 - TWP 50-RGE 3 - W5M.

• There are a large hog operation in Section 7 - TWP 50 - RGE 26 - W4M, in Sections 2, 11, 12 and 24 - TWP 49 - RGE 3 - W5M, and in Section 18 - TWP 49 - RGE 2 - W5M.

All these farms generate large quantities of agricultural traffic such as large single units and semis, as well as farm machinery. The critical times, for the loaded trucks from grain farms, is early spring at seeding time and early fall during the harvest.

2.3.3 Oil and Gas Traffic Oil and gas activity is prevalent throughout the County, and continues throughout the year. The following areas have been identified as concentrated areas of oil and gas production traffic:

• Range Roads 262 and 263 between Township Road 480 and Glen Park Main Road (Township Road 490) • Range Road 273 south of Glen Park Main Road • Township Road 502, East of Joseph Lake Main Road (Range Road 221) • Range Road 40, North of Highway 39

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-6 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• Township Road 492, East of Thorsby, and • Township Road 474, West of Pigeon Lake. • Range Road 221, Secondary Highway 623 to Township Road 504 • Looking Back Lake Main Road from Highway 21 to Range Road 221.

There is also much oilfield traffic in the Sunnybrook and Warburg areas as well as around the Alsike area where trucks were transporting flyash from the mine and Genesee Power Plant.

2.3.4 Landfill Traffic The Leduc Regional landfill site is located in NE Section 29 - TWP 49 - RGE 24 - W4M. The landfill accepts solid waste from all over the County, the City of Leduc and the Towns of Calmar, Devon and Beaumont. Although most of the travel is along Alberta Infrastructure controlled roads there is some landfill haul on the County gravel roads bypassing the City of Leduc such as Range Roads 245 and 250 and Township Road 500.

There is a modified landfill site at St. Francis, located in NE Section 11-TWP-50-RGL-3- W5M, and solid waste transfer stations located at New Sarepta, (NE Section 34 TWP 49 RGE 22 W4M), Rollyview (NE Section 22 TWP 49 RGE 23 W4M), Looma (NW Section 36 TWP 50 RGE 23 W4M), Thorsby (SE 27-49-28-W4M), Mission Beach (NW 32-47-1-W5M), Sunnybrook (NW 11-49-2-W5M), and Warburg (SE 34-48-3-W5M). Each of these transfer stations accept mostly domestic solid waste.

2.3.5 Bulk Fertilizer and/or Seed Cleaning Plants Fertilizer and/or seed cleaning plants do the majority of their business in the spring during seeding time. Unfortunately, this is when the structures of the roads are at their weakest. Fertilizer and/or seed plants are concentrated on Highway 39 close to the intersection with Highway 60.

2.3.6 Nisku Industrial Business Park The Nisku Industrial Business Park is a large industrial subdivision located north of Leduc. Its heavy industries consist largely of oil and gas equipment producers who ship to the oil and gas fields throughout the Province.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-7 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

2.3.7 Future Truck Traffic Generators The majority of generators of heavy volumes of truck traffic fall into one of two categories:

• Truck traffic to and from major generators • Truck traffic generated by the Nisku Industrial Business Park.

Truck traffic to and from the oil and gas fields, large farms and/or the bulk fertilizer and seed cleaning plants are likely fairly constant in the short term. The truck traffic to and from these existing origins and destinations need to be monitored more closely to enable proper road structure to be reviewed and selected and allow the timely application of road bans. As development permits and the like are issued for new large traffic generators there should be a mechanism in place to review the effect on the functional classification of the roadway, and, in particular, the roadway structure type in the vicinity of the new development.

The truck traffic in and out of the Nisku Industrial Business Park warrants special consideration. A number of specialized oilfield equipment manufacturing plants contribute potentially extremely heavy loads to the pavements both in the Park and on the roads connecting the Park to the surrounding primary and secondary highway network. These roads should be carefully monitored to assess the type of pavement structure required. Classification counts to determine percentage of truck traffic and calculation of ESAL’s are required to develop the appropriate thicknesses of the roadway pavement structure. The main collectors identified for special monitoring and possible upgrading are:

• 5 Street (Airport Road - Secondary Highway 625) • 7 Street (Airport Road - 15 Avenue) • 8 Street (7 Street - Secondary Highway 625)

9th Street is included as part of the Nisku Spine Road.

Based upon the present economic situation, growth in the Nisku Industrial Business Park is expected to continue in an extremely rapid fashion. In order to maintain a high class industrial subdivision, the County will need to renew the existing roadway cross-sections

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-8 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

and structural capacities of the roadways within and connecting to the Nisku Industrial Business Park.

2.4 Road Bans

Road bans control the amount of potentially damaging heavy truck traffic during the spring when the road structure is at its weakest because of spring thaw. The County provided information on the road bans put in place during the spring.

Road bans are presently controlled by Bylaw 15-87 and the Vehicle Axle Weight Committee. Typically, the majority of the paved County main roads and graveled local roads are given a 75% axle weight restriction during the spring thaw, starting in March, and is lifted in May or June. Exemptions to this are given to:

• GVW not greater than 5,000 kg • school buses • rubber-tired farm tractor NOT pulling a trailer • a vehicle crossing a highway • a vehicle being operated by the Government for the purpose of road testing • a unit transporting fresh milk and cream from the place of production • a unit transporting pregnant mare urine from place of production • a vehicle required by the local authority to transport material that is required for emergency maintenance • a vehicle required by the local authority for snow/ice removal • a vehicle required for the transportation of equipment to a forest fire, flood, train derailment, pipeline spill or other emergency.

The maximum allowable weight is set to 80% for vehicles carrying:

• bread • domestic drinking water • mail as defined in the Canada Post Corporation Act (Canada) • heating fuel.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-9 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Nisku Industrial Business Park roads are ban-fee, year round.

2.5 Available Traffic Accident Records

There are three RCMP detachments that cover the Leduc County area. The Leduc Detachment covers the eastern side of the County; Thorsby RCMP covers the centre of the County and the Breton Detachment covers the west side of the County. Each of these three detachments were contacted for their records of fatal and injury accidents. Many of the multiple accident locations provided were on Primary and Secondary highways which are outside of the jurisdiction of Leduc County. Details of the accident locations collected are provided in Appendix D.

There appears to be some issues with the intersection of main roads and primary/ secondary highways. The County has prudently attempted to alleviate these issues by placing rumble strips, “Important Intersection” signs and oversized “Stop” signs at these intersections. Critical incident studies could be conducted to assess whether more visible traffic control, such as advanced signs or flashing warning lights are required.

2.6 Bridge/Culvert Information

There are a total of 237 bridges and/or culverts identified by the Province in Leduc County crossing a total of nine different creeks. Each of these bridges has an Alberta Infrastructure bridge file associated with it and have been summarized in Appendix F. The County is responsible for the maintenance and construction of all bridges and culverts on local roads. Alberta Infrastructure provides funding assistance for local road bridges in accordance with the department's bridge guidelines and procedures (GAP). The County ensures that condition assessments are conducted on all local road bridge structures at least every three years. These assessments are used to prepare or update annually, a three-year bridge priority list that is submitted to Alberta Infrastructure for assignment of priorities on a regional and provincial basis. Twenty-five bridges have been identified in a recent bridge maintenance report as requiring some maintenance work in the future.

Details of these bridges are provided in Tables 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-10 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

2.7 Budget and Cost Information

Unit annual maintenance costs for the various classifications of roadway and surface types are difficult to quantify because these costs are identified in the annual budget in line items of labour, equipment and materials. A new system is currently being implemented that will track costs on a project by project basis. Approximately $1 million per annum is allocated to capital improvements such as major upgrades to existing roads.

In order to track the maintenance budget expenditures for each maintenance activity, the County is presently implementing a system whereby each of the activities, ie. grading, snow clearing, etc. is identified separately. This will allow the calculation of statistics to obtain reliable cost per kilometre for each activity, and provide a benchmark for future analysis and improvements. This will also lend itself to further breakdowns and analysis in future, such as the tracking of costs on paved roadways, thereby providing an indication of repair requirements.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 2-11 May, 2001 Table 2.3 2001 Bridge Plan - General Information (in priority order)

Bridge Legal Stream Nom Year Road Bridge Hwy Bridge Description File # Land Name Length Built Width Width Blackmud Treated-Beam 73211 L INW 8-50-24-4 12.2 1955 6.1 6.7 Creek 2-6.1 m Spans Precast Type “HC” Girder 75574 L WSW 24-48-25-4 6.1 1962 6.4 7.3 1-6.1 m Span Precast Type “HC” Girder 76923 L SSW 18-48-24-4 6.1 1968 7.3 8.2 1-6.1 m Span Black Treated-Beam 07067 L SSE 17-49-2-5 18.3 1951 6.1 6.7 Creek 3 Span, (4.9-8.5-4.9) Conjuring Precast Type “HC” Girder 08150 L SSE 13-49-27-4 10.1 1965 7.3 8.2 Creek 1-10.1 m Span SPCSP 02099 S622:02 SSW 33-49-1-5 113.4 1984 9.0 1-1.5 m ON 30 deg RHF Skew BP (CIP Box Cell) 01090 L SNW 24-50-26-4 18.3 1950 7.3 2-1.5 m Cells CMP 76777 L WSW 10-49-24-4 15.8 1968 7.3 1-1.5 Dia on 10 deg LHF Skew CMP 1962/ 07747 L WSW 4-50-2-5 37.4 8.0 1-1.5 Dia. 1983 Clearwater SP 01726 L WSW 16-50-23-4 21.3 1963 7.3 Creek 1-2.1 m RPP (SPCSP ARCH PIPE) 74928 L INE 2-49-4-5 2490 x 1750 on 15 deg RHF 18.9 1962 7.3 Skew Clearwater SPCMP 13921 L WSW 17-50-23-4 13.4 1953 6.6 Creek 1-2.1 m Conjuring Precast Type “G” Girder 08492 L SSE 1-48-27-4 6.1 1957 7.3 8.2 Creek 1-6.1 m Span Precast Type “G” Girder 1952/ 79676 L WNW 18-50-1-5 Watercourse 6.1 7.3 8.2 1-6.1 m Span 1982 SPCMP 1961/ 71689 S770:02 WNW 13-48-3-5 57.9 12.0 1-2.7 m on 28 deg LHF Skew 1986 BPX (CIP Box Cell, Extended) 2.0m 1954/ 01748 S622:02 SSW 32-49-1-5 107 9.1 U/S SPCSP, D/S 1980 x 1600 1984 CSP Precast Type “G” Girder 1961/ 78007 L WNW 8-49-3-5 6.1 7.3 8.2 1-6.1 m Span 1979 CMP 07541 L WSW 29-49-1-5 1-1.5 m Dia. on 15 deg RHF 20.1 1966 7.3 Skew Blackmud 81485 L INE 6-51-24-4 1989 Creek Table 2.4 2001 Bridge Plan - Condition and Cost Information (in priority order)

Bridge Legal Stream Load Cond’n Suffic’y Life Date of Last County Hwy Total Cost $ File # Land Name Rating Rating Rating Left Inspection Cost $

Blackmud 10 yrs 73211 L INW 8-50-24-4 38% 51.3% 94-01-20 $ 66,000 $ 275,000 Creek

HS 20 15 yrs 75574 L WSW 24-48-25-4 66% 71.0% 92-04-14 $ 4,000 $ 29,000

HS 20 15 yrs 76923 L SSW 18-48-24-4 61% 68.9% 00-02-25 $ 4,000 $ 29,000

Black 07067 L SSE 17-49-2-5 33% 34.2% 5 yrs 95-03-15 $ 90,000 $ 300,000 Creek

Conjuring HS 20 08150 L SSE 13-49-27-4 33% 69.1% 5 yrs 93-12-15 $ 50,000 $ 250,000 Creek

30 yrs 02099 S622:02 SSW 33-49-1-5 77% 50.1% 99-08-11 $ 30,000 $ 170,000

01090 L SNW 24-50-26-4 33% 19.8% 2 yrs 00-04-19 $ 75,000 $ 250,000

76777 L WSW 10-49-24-4 22% 33.6% 2 yrs 99-08-10 $ 24,000 $ 80,000

07747 L WSW 4-50-2-5 44% 55.0% 1 yr 99-08-10 $ 30,000 $ 100,000

Clearwater 01726 L WSW 16-50-23-4 11% 24.8% 3 yrs 98-10-29 $ 36,000 $ 120,000 Creek

10 yrs 74928 L INE 2-49-4-5 66% 56.7% 93-02-25 $ 36,000 $ 120,000

Clearwater 13921 L WSW 17-50-23-4 55% 48.3% 1 yr 97-01-14 $ 30,000 $ 100,000 Creek

Conjuring HS 20 10 yrs 08492 L SSE 1-48-27-4 55% 34.8% 99-08-11 $ 12,000 $ 70,000 Creek

HS 20 79676 L WNW 18-50-1-5 Watercourse 77% 80.0% 5 yrs 96-11-25 $ 45,000 $ 150,000

20 yrs 71689 S770:02 WNW 13-48-3-5 77% 72.4% 99-08-12 $ 4,000 $ 10,000

10 yrs 01748 S622:02 SSW 32-49-1-5 44% 45.8% 99-08-11 $ 0 $ 15,000

HS 20 10 yrs 78007 L WNW 8-49-3-5 61% 72.5% 93-02-25 $ 2,000 $ 2,000

07541 L WSW 29-49-1-5 55% 44.8% 5 yrs 96-11-25 $ 7,500 $ 50,000

Blackmud 81485 L INE 6-51-24-4 $ 70,000 $ 440,000 Creek

$ 615,500 $ 2,560,000 Table 2.5 2002 Bridge Plan - General Information (in priority order)

Bridge Legal Stream Nom Year Road Bridge Hwy Bridge Description File # Land Name Length Built Width Width Clearwater Precast Type “HC” Girder 1961/ 00588 L WNW 12-50-24-4 8.5 7.3 8.2 Creek 1-8.5 m Span 1987 Irvine CMP 71293 L WSW 8-51-23-4 29.9 1957 7.9 Creek 1-1.5 Dia Precast Type “G” Girder 06888 L SSW 16-49-26-4 8.5 1959 6.4 7.3 1-8.56 m Span Conjuring Precast Type “HC” Girders 00138 L SSW 1-50-27-4 25.5 1971 7.3 8.2 Creek 3-8.5 m Spans on 30 deg LHF Skew 1954/ 6982 S622:02 SSE 31-49-1-5 BPX 2-2.0 m on 10 deg LHF Skew 75.5 9.8 1984 Black CMP 13993 L SSW 15-48-2-5 1953 Creek 1-1.5 Dia Table 2.6 2002 Bridge Plan - Condition and Cost Information (in priority order)

Bridge Legal Stream Load Cond’n Suffic’y Life Date of Last County Hwy Total Cost $ File # Land Name Rating Rating Rating Left Inspection Cost $

Clearwater 00588 L WNW 12-50-24-4 61% 70.9% 10 yrs 99-08-12 $ 75,000 $ 250,000 Creek

Irvine 71293 L WSW 8-51-23-4 33% 38.9% 2 yrs 99-08-12 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Creek

HS 20 06888 L SSW 16-49-26-4 44% 55.6% 10 yrs 99-08-10 $ 5,000 $ 20,000

Conjuring HS 20 00138 L SSW 1-50-27-4 50% 63.1% 20 yrs 99-08-10 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Creek

6982 S622:02 SSE 31-49-1-5 22% 42.1% 10 yrs 95-04-11 $ 0 $ 3,000

Black 13993 L SSW 15-48-2-5 55% 44.2% 45 yrs 96-11-19 $ 24,000 $ 80,000 Creek

$ 116,000 $ 365,000 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report 3

Information Review and Analysis

3.1 Introduction

Additional information was gathered from previously prepared reports and issue definition meetings with key County personnel and members of Council. The information gathered for this portion of the study included:

• Past roadway planning studies including transportation plans, traffic studies, etc. for the County and surrounding areas • Issue definition meetings with County Council, County administration and maintenance personnel • Municipal Development Plan and other planning documents • Field reviews • Traffic count analysis and forecasts.

3.2 Past Roadway Planning and Traffic Studies

The following transportation studies were obtained from the County for review:

3.2.1 County of Leduc No. 25, Leduc Area Transportation Study - Delcan DeLeuw Cather Canada Ltd., May 1981 This study, completed in May 1981, provided two plans, one for the core area and of the Town of Leduc, Nisku Industrial Park and the Edmonton International Airport and the other for a conceptual long term network for the area of the County generally defined by Boundary Road to the North, Highway 21 to the east, Secondary Road 616 to the south and the Towns of Calmar and Thorsby to the west.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-1 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

In the core area, several new roadway links were recommended for the 2001 design year: these are provided in Appendix E.

3.2.2 County of Leduc No. 25, 9th Street (Nisku Spine Road) Functional Study - Stewart, Weir & Co., June 1985 The Nisku Spine Road Functional Study completed by Stewart Weir and Company in 1985 provides the alignment, cross-sections and functional plans for 9 th Street from Airport Road at the south end of Nisku Industrial Business Park to the City of Edmonton boundary where 9th Street joins 101 Street. The ultimate plan for this roadway is for a four lane divided facility.

3.2.3 County of Leduc No. 25 Nisku Industrial Park Roadway Improvements Study - Stewart, Weir & Co., October 1995 The Roadway Improvements Study for the Nisku Industrial Park, completed in October 1985 by Stewart Weir and Company examined the overall engineering requirements as well as the capital costs to upgrade the roads in the Nisku Industrial Park to a paved roadway standard (it is currently oiled). It provided traffic counts, conditions of existing road subgrades and recommended pavement structures for approximately 39 km of arterial collector and local roadways. The capital cost in 1985 dollars was estimated at approximately $25 million.

3.2.4 County of Leduc No. 25 Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study - Final Report - Reid Crowther and Partners, June 1997 The Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study, completed by Reid Crowther in June 1997 provides an assessment of traffic patterns and develops functional planning recommendations for roadways within the Nisku Industrial Park. This project included an assessment of the traffic operations, at that time, along Secondary Highway 625 and Airport Road, as well as intersectional operations along the two corridors. Recommendations in this report were divided into short term and long term improvements.

The short term recommended improvements from this report were:

• The signalization and upgrading of SH 625 and 5th Street intersection as well as the signalization and upgrading of the Airport Road and Sparrow Drive

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-2 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

intersection. The improvements at Airport Road and Sparrow Drive include the upgrading of Airport Road from Sparrow Drive to east of the 4th Street intersection. This has been completed . • The upgrading of the SH 625 and 8 th Street intersection. This has been completed. • The upgrading of the SH 625 and 6th Street intersection as well as the upgrading of the Airport Road and 5th Street intersection.

In addition, the following long term improvements were recommended:

• Adequate shoulders be developed along the entire length of Secondary Highway 625 and Airport Road within the Nisku area. Shoulders are particularly important for the remaining two lane section of roadway; however, this may be deferred until intersectional improvements are made. • Twinning of SH 625 and Airport Road within Nisku when traffic volumes reach levels of approximately 12,000 vehicles per day. • The development of a service road system on the south side of Airport Road to limit the number of intersections to key locations. This will be especially important as the development of commercial / residential land uses increases. • Developing a four lane facility along SH 625 to Beaumont and along Airport Road to Highway 21 when AADT volumes reach 10 to 12,000 vehicles per day along the entire section of highway.

3.2.5 City of Edmonton Transportation Master Plan - Transportation and Streets Department, April 1999 The City of Edmonton Transportation Master Plan completed by the City in April 1999 provides an overall picture of the transportation system within the City of Edmonton. In particular, it provides for a number of feeders from the City into the adjacent counties. Main feeders into Leduc County are from the outer ring road (Anthony Henday Drive) proposed for construction by 2005:

• Terwillegar Drive - Range Road 253 • Calgary Trail (Highway 2) • 50 Street - Range Road 241

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-3 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

3.2.6 Highway 19:10 Junction Highway 60 - Junction Highway 2 Functional Planning Study - Final Report - Reid Crowther and Partners Ltd., January 2000 The Highway 19 Functional Planning Study provides several alternatives for the twinning of Highway 19 between Devon and Nisku and a recommendation based on cost and public input.

3.2.7 City of Leduc Transportation Study - Infrastructure Systems Ltd., July 2000 The City of Leduc Transportation Master Plan provides roadway improvement recommendations for growth from 1999 population of 14,900 to a 5 year and 10 year horizon plus a 25,000 and long range 40,000 population horizon. A long range arterial road network is recommended. Truck and dangerous goods routes are also recommended, including a routing along Airport Road, Range Road 250, Township Road 500 and Range Road 245 which will be important to both the City and the County.

3.2.8 Summary Four of the reports reviewed have particular significance to this study; as their implications are fairly immediate:

• 9th Street (Nisku Spine Road) Functional Planning Study • Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study • City of Edmonton Transportation Master Plan • City of Leduc Transportation Master Plan

9th Street (Nisku Spine Road) Functional Planning Study - Plans to develop a parallel arterial route east of Highway 2, from the City of Leduc, through the Nisku Industrial Business Park to the City of Edmonton corporate limits, have been in existence since 1981. This roadway will provide the first step of an important link between Nisku, eastern Edmonton and the northeast of the Province. The Nisku Spine Road travels south from the boundary with the City of Edmonton at 101 Street (Range Road 244), through Section 5, Township 51, Range 24 W4M and Section 31, Township 50, Range 24 W4M to connect to Range Road 250 and continue south to Township Road 502 (Airport Road).

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-4 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Nisku Traffic Analysis and Functional Planning Study - The majority of the roadways within the Nisku Industrial Business Park are presently oil based. In order to maintain the effectiveness of the industrial park serving the oil and gas and other businesses, these roads will need to be upgraded to a more permanent structure. Although the initial cost of this may seem to be prohibitively high, some of the costs may be borne by the direct beneficiaries, the industries in Nisku, through application of a local improvement policy.

City of Edmonton Transportation Master Plan - The Transportation Master Plan document and the Anthony Henday Drive Extension (Whitemud Drive to Calgary Trail) Functional Plan Review document both call for an Outer Ring Road around the southwest of the City of Edmonton. This roadway will provide some linking opportunities between the City of Edmonton and Leduc County, namely at Range Roads 250 to 254.

City of Leduc Transportation Master Plan - The 2000 update of the City’s transportation plan addressed the City of Leduc’s roadway requirements for the 5 and 10 year and long range time frames. The needs for the 5 and 10 year periods included priorities for the work. A long range network of arterial roads was recommended. Notable was the importance of Airport Road, Range Road 250, Township 500 and Range Road 245 in the City’s long range network, which are presently under the County’s jurisdiction.

3.3 Issue Definitions Meeting

Meetings were held with the project steering committee, the County Council, the maintenance supervisors and grader operators, and other County administration departments to develop a list of the needs for the study.

3.3.1 Projects Steering Committee An initialization meeting with the Project Steering Committee was held on October 7, 1999. At this meeting, the basic outline and requirements for the study was discussed.

As noted previously, the objective of this Transportation Master Plan is to develop a logical, credible and defendable system of:

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-5 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• transportation system policies • roadway functional service classifications including guidelines for these classifications • surfacing guidelines • design guidelines including management tools for access control and right-of-way dedication • roadway project prioritization system

Each of the issues raised by Council and the Maintenance Supervisors and Grader Operators was used as input to the recommendations provided at the end of this report. They were not dealt with singly, rather, a system of transportation system policies, classification and surfacing criteria and design guidelines are provided that will allow the administration and Council to deal with each one on an individual basis.

3.3.2 Leduc County Council A meeting was held with Leduc County Council on November 1st, 1999, at the County Centre in Nisku to discuss issues with respect to the project. The issues discussed included general transportation issues, roadway design and construction issues as well as maintenance issues.

Transportation Issues • The impact of grain haulers on heavy haul roads. • The requirements for connections to Wetaskiwin County, especially around the Pigeon Lake area. • The roads on the old three year program that have not yet been addressed. • The impact of weekend traffic on high use traffic areas. • The requirement for consistent standards, especially for 9 Street into City of Leduc, Range Road 224 and Rabbit Hill Road. • The requirement for City access west of Highway 2. • The requirement for another river crossing between Devon and Genesee. • The requirement for Highway 2 access from Tower Road. • Accommodation of Trans-Canada Trails.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-6 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• Speed limits on Airport Road from Highway 2 to Secondary Highway 814 and Glen Park Road in the Michigan Centre area. • Accommodation of bike traffic on the County Main Roads. • Requirements for standards of access control and approaches for various classifications.

Design Issues • The requirement for some policy regarding road right of way dedication. • Standards for intersections, particularly shelter belts and trees obstructing sight lines, right turn lanes at intersections should provide guidelines.

Construction Issues • The requirement for criteria for ongoing local road construction. • The requirement for criteria for the reworking and oiling of roads. • The requirement for a consistent standard for putting a stronger base under an oiled surface.

Maintenance Issues • The requirement for traffic volume criteria for dust control. • The requirements for some criteria for oilfield haul road assistance from the oil companies. • The requirement for criteria for the banning of roads. • The requirement for a benefit/cost analysis of a 90% ban versus a 75% ban.

3.3.3 West Area Maintenance Supervisor and Grader Operators A meeting was held at the Telfordville Hall in October, 1999 to discuss issues with respect to the project with the West Area Maintenance Supervisor and Grade Operators. The major issues were identified as:

• Major traffic generators such as large farms, gas plants and schools • The area of vacation properties around Pigeon and Wizard Lakes and the traffic generated by them. • Accident areas.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-7 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• Spring washouts throughout the west part of the County. • Several sections, particularly at hills, with sub-standard geometry and very steep grades. • Several sections with sub-standard cross-sections, in particular, poor ditches, too narrow, poor topsoil bases. • Poor quality aggregates with rounded faces. • Difficulties with weed cleaning and spraying. • Calcium chloride not used as there is nothing to hold the moisture.

3.3.4 East Area Maintenance Supervisor and Grader Operators A meeting was held in October, 1999 at the County Centre in Nisku to discuss issues with respect to the project. The major issues identified by the East area maintenance supervisor and grader operators were:

• Requirement for criteria that addresses the oiling and re-oiling of roadways, in particular, how often roads should be re-oiled. • Connections to surrounding counties, especially between Wetaskiwin and the Pigeon Lake Recreation area. • Intersection concerns at the intersections of Highway 60 and Highway 39. • High truck traffic on Range Road 263 south of that intersection. • Problems with vertical and horizontal alignment on many roads. • Oil and gas activity in many areas. • Required technical criteria for dust control, possibly related to traffic volumes. • Trip origins and destinations such as large farms, oil and gas activity, seed cleaning and fertilizer plants, riding stables, and gravel pits and the traffic that these generate. • High traffic in and around the Nisku Industrial Park area. • Sight distances at the intersections of Range Road 230 and Township Road 500; Secondary Highway 625 and Range Roads 234 and 235, particularly where there are shelter belts. • Criteria whereby the County could charge the oil companies for upgrading roads to oil fields.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-8 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• North Saskatchewan River crossings between the Town of Devon (Highway 60) and the Genesee plant (Highway 770). • Spring washouts.

Issue definition meetings with the Project Steering Committee, Leduc County Council and the maintenance supervisors and grader operators provided important details with respect to the geometric and structural conditions of various roadway segments. This information was taken into account when estimating the costs of the upgrades to the roadways identified in the program.

3.4 Municipal Development Plan (MDP), Area Structure Plans, Development Plans and Other Land Use Data 3.4.1 Sparrow Developments Ltd., Nisku West Area Structure Plan - Mackenzie Spencer Associates, June 1980 The ASP’s purpose is to serve as a framework for the industrial subdivision and development of the east halves of Sections 11, 14 and 23, Township 50, Range 25, W4M. It provides for the land use and roadway patterns for this area, south of the Nisku Industrial Park, as well as servicing options.

3.4.2 County of Leduc No. 25 Nisku Area Structure Plan - Stewart, Weir & Co., October 1981 The Nisku Area Structure Plan provides for:

• A major regional service centre on Airport Road with hotels, offices, and shops with business, professional and other support services designed to serve air passengers and tourists, “fly-in” business meetings and as a promotion and development centre for local industry. • Areas for premium sites along Highway 2 and around regional service centre on fully serviced land. • Large areas for light industry with special areas designated for extensive storage type uses. • A new road system with grade separated free flow access (with one new access) to Highway 2, limited access arterial roads and internal industrial collector roads.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-9 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• New rail spur lines and a team track service area. • Agricultural zones on east and south boundary to protect the integrity of the creek and lake valley and to buffer non-compatible uses. • Provision of local service centres and recreational amenities.

3.4.3 Hamma Investments Ltd. Highway No. 2 Industrial Area Structure Plan - Stanley Associates Engineering Ltd., November 1982 The Highway No. 2 Industrial Area Structure Plan provides a framework for the development of the NW 1/4 of Section 5 - Township 51, Range 24, W4M into an industrial park. This area, just south of the City of Edmonton boundary on the east side of Highway 2 was to be developed into a series of industrial lots.

3.4.4 Carma Developers Ltd. Ellerslie Area Structure Plan - Stanley Urban Land, July 1998 The Ellerslie Area Structure Plan takes into account the development of the Nisku Spine Road (9th Street) and 91 Street (Range Road 243). It also provides guidance as to other important north-south connecting arterials, within the City of Edmonton.

3.4.5 Strathcona County 1999 Market Areas Study Albert Economic Development, April 1999 Provides information on where residents of communities within Leduc County purchase various consumer goods.

3.4.6 Leduc County Municipal Development Plan Leduc County Planning Department, December 1999 Provides guidelines for the future municipal land uses within Leduc County.

3.4.7 Heritage Valley Area Structure Plan - City of Edmonton, (Draft - July 2000) Provides information on the land use in the area around Ellerslie Road between the proposed Anthony Henday Drive to the north, 41 Avenue SW to the south, Highway 2 to the east and the North Saskatchewan River to the west. These are the Heritage Valley and Windermere communities.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-10 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

3.4.8 Summary The majority of the Municipal Development Plans and Area Structure Plans deal with the growth of the industrial areas in and north of the Nisku Industrial Business Park and Leduc County and confirm the requirement for the Nisku Spine Road. The Heritage Valley Area Structure Plan also confirms the recommendations provided in the Anthony Henday Drive Functional Plan and the City of Edmonton Transportation Master Plan.

3.5 Field Reviews of Leduc County

The roadways were driven on October 11, 21 and 25, 1999, and again on August 22 and 23, 2000. The purpose of the field reviews was to become familiarized with the County road system and to review the proposed programs. Approximately 100 photographs were taken from around the County. A couple of key issues or trends were noted during the field reviews:

• Many of the hills in the northwest of the County have poor horizontal and vertical geometry causing substandard sightlines and many increases and decreases in speed. • Large volumes of passenger vehicle traffic travel to and from the country residential subdivisions in the east end of the County to the City of Edmonton.

3.6 Input from Other Jurisdictions / Stakeholders

3.6.1 Strathcona County (Chris Batty) • Correction line on boundary causes offset intersections on Twp. Rd. 510 • Cooking Lake moraine causes some road design (alignment, profile, sight distance) problems • Joseph Lake Main Road with fairly heavy traffic volumes, is not paved in Strathcona County • Rg. Rd. 234, some complaints regarding standard of road access to Eagle Rock Golf Course located within Leduc County • Intersection of Rg. Rd. 232 (in Leduc County) / Twp. Rd. 510 / CNR tracks has sight distance problems and offset intersections on Twp. Rd. 510 • Correction line on Twp. Rd. 510 causes different Rg. Rd. designations in Leduc County and Strathcona County.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-11 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

3.6.2 County of Beaver • No road connection between counties due to Ministik Lake Game Bird Sanctuary.

3.6.3 County of Camrose (Howard Bouck) • Largest concern is non-paved section of SH 616 within County of Camrose • Some concerns about truck traffic on Rg. Rd. 221 in County of Camrose. proceeding north to disposal well in Joseph Lake area in Leduc County.

3.6.4 County of Wetaskiwin (Dave Dextraze) • Range Road 240 (extension of SH 814 in Wetaskiwin) has heavy traffic volumes and is designated an arterial in their Roads Study. This road is 2 miles east of SH 814 in Leduc County • Township Road 480 between Range Road 271 and Range Road 10 is designated as arterial in County of Wetaskiwin • Range Road 31 designated as arterial in County of Wetaskiwin. This road is the south extension of SH 770 in Leduc County.

3.6.5 M.D. of Brazeau (Terry Fleming) • Only coordination issue is Twp. Rd. 500 (St. Francis Road). They are regrading for 3 miles west of Leduc County and south over next five years. Are co-ordinating with Leduc County on paving contract for connection between SH770 and 759.

3.6.6 Parkland County (Dan Hungle) • No concerns over the last few years. • Have discussed Meridian Bridge with Leduc County in the past. They generally support the connection and it may have merit as a secondary highway designation as it would be an extension of S.H. 779 in Parkland County.

3.6.7 City of Edmonton (Alan Brownlee, Hassan Shaheen) • Area Structure Plans for Ellerslie and for Heritage Valley have connections to north- south system in County:

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-12 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• 91 Street planned to divert 1.6 km west to align with Rg. Rd. 244 “Nisku Spine Road” • 66 Street planned to divert 1.6 km west to align with Rg. Rd. 243 • Will be a major divided arterial (41 Ave. S.) along boundary in long term • Difference in perception between City and County as to when additional capacity required (presently some differences over 50 Street / SH814).

3.6.8 City of Leduc (Ron Hanson) • The following boundary County roads are important, particularly as truck bypass routes serving both City and County and providing access to the landfill. • Airport Road • Rg. Rd. 250 • Twp. Rd. 500 • Rg. Rd. 245

3.6.9 Leduc/Nisku Economic Development Authority (John Bernard) • need improved ability to move large loads from plants in Nisku to highway system. • some ramps at Highway 2 interchanges need to be designed for large truck turning movements. • 91 Street connection into Edmonton is important. • capacity at Highway 19 Interchange for commuters (to work at Nisku).

3.6.10 Edmonton Regional Airports Authority (Edmonton International Airport) • No concerns with County Roads.

3.6.11 Genesee Generating Station (Terry Ronniuk) • no concerns, most traffic to and from generating station travels on Secondary Highway 770 • may be upgrading generating station in 2001 - 2002. This will include 750 construction staff.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-13 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

3.6.12 Summary The input from the surrounding counties/municipalities confirmed the information found from other sources, namely:

• the need for connections to Anthony Henday Drive. • the need for good connectors to and from the Nisku Industrial Business Park.

Other issues raised through these contacts are:

• the need for paving the St. Francis West Main Road extension west to connect with the future paved roads in the M.D. of Brazeau.

3.7 Traffic Analyses and Forecasts 3.7.1 Traffic Count Analysis More than 1000 individual raw traffic counts over the ten years between 1990 and 2000 were extracted from the the County Traffic Count Maps. Because of daily and monthly variations in traffic counts over time, counts are adjusted to provide an Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT). The procedure for making this adjustment is shown in the flowchart and each of the steps in the flow chart is expanded upon below. An example of the calculation for each traffic count is provided in Appendix C.

Exhibit 3.1 - Flow Chart for Conversion of Traffic Count Data

A. Locate Raw Traffic Count Stations

B. Assign Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR’s)

C. Factor Raw Counts to provide AADTs

D. Calculate Annual Growth Factors from ATR Volumes

E. Factor Latest Counts to Present Day and Future

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-14 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Table 3.1 Automatic Traffic Recorder Locations

ATR Location Road Name Chainage 019101 3.4 km W of Jct Hwy 2 Devon PH019:01 3400 021261 3 km S of Jct Hwy 14 Sherwood Park PH021:01 25880 02A261 6.0 km S of Jct Hwy 2 Leduc PH002A:01 33340 039085 3.6 km W of Jct Sec Hwy 778 Thorsby PH039:01 37840 039101 3.2 km W of Jct Hwy 2 Leduc PH039:01 1600 625026 1.2 km W of Jct Sec Hwy 814 Beaumont SH625:01 12537 778021 9.6 km S of Jct Hwy 39 Thorsby SH778:01 8788 814027 0.8 km S of Jct Sec Hwy 625 Beaumont SH814:01 23448

A. Locate Raw Traffic Count Stations The raw traffic count stations are located by their position north, southeast or west of an intersection of two roads. In order to be useful in a network model, these locations needed to be converted into a chainage distance along each road. At the same time, limits along the roadway over which the traffic count was deemed to be acceptable were added to the database.

B. Assign Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR’s) ATR’s collect traffic volume data for 24 hours a day, 365 days per year. The sum of an entire year’s traffic divided by the number of days in the year will provide the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT).

Each raw traffic count location was assigned an ATR based upon which had the most similar traffic characteristics. In general, the Range Roads to the east of the County were assigned ATR# 814027. The Township Roads in the east of the County were assigned ATR# 625026. All roads in the west of the County were assigned ATR# 778021. The traffic characteristics provided from the other ATR’s was not similar to those which could be expected on the local roads in Leduc Country as these ATR’s are located on Primary Highways.

C. Factor Raw Counts to Provide AADT’s By dividing the ATR traffic on any one day in any particular year, by the AADT for that year a factor for that day can be calculated. In order to adjust the raw traffic counts to an AADT,

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-15 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

each of these counts was multiplied by the factor for the date on which the raw count was taken, for the ATR assigned to it. This provides an estimate of the AADT for each roadway where counts were taken. Prior to 1998, the County collected traffic counts providing only the month and year instead of the full date. In these cases, a similar factor was calculated by dividing the monthly average daily traffic by the AADT. However, these counts are considered to be not as accurate as those for which the full date was provided.

D. Calculate Annual Growth Factors from ATR Volumes In order to project the AADT’s to the future an annual growth rate was required. This growth rate was calculated from the annual growth of traffic at the ATR’s.

If the annual growth rates for the three ATR’s that were used to calculate the AADT’s are reviewed; it can be seen that the growth rates are as follows:

Table 3.2 Annual Growth Rate Factors

625026 814027 778021

ATR# Growth Growth Growth AADT AADT AADT Rate Rate Rate

1990 4274 2781 880

1991 4436 3.79% 2886 3.78% 910 3.41%

1992 4598 3.79% 2992 3.81% 940 3.41%

1993 4761 3.81% 3098 3.81% 970 3.41%

1994 4923 3.79% 3203 3.78% 1000 3.41%

1995 5085 3.79% 3309 3.81% 1030 3.41%

1996 5248 3.81% 3414 3.78% 1050 2.27%

1997 5410 3.79% 3520 3.81% 1130 9.09%

1998 5470 1.40% 3650 4.67% 1190 6.82%

Mean Growth Rate 3.50% 3.91% 4.40%

The Provincial average growth rate is approximately 1.5 - 2.0%. This is considerably less than that shown from the local ATR’s. This can be expected as these ATR’s and Leduc County fall within the Edmonton Greater Metropolitan Region and because of the growth

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-16 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

in population and employment in the City and region, the travel in the greater metropolitan region will be expected to grow faster than the Province as a whole.

E. Factor Latest Counts to Present Day and Future The traffic counts from past years were increased to reflect what the traffic volumes would likely be in 2000 and also in 2003 and 2010. A linear growth rate of 3% was used.

These traffic counts, projected to 2000 on links are shown in Exhibit 3.2. An example of one of these calculations is provided in Appendix F. The Traffic Count Projections to 2003 and 2010 are illustrated in Exhibits 3.3 and 3.4, respectively.

3.8 Public Open Houses

The transportation master plan and the long range capital program was introduced to the public at two open houses held on April 18th and 19th, 2001. The first was held at the Thorsby and District Regional Recreation Complex, 4901 48 Avenue, Thorsby between 5:00 and 8:00pm and 13 persons attended and signed in. The second was held at the Nisku Recreation Centre at 606 18th Avenue, Nisku between 5:00 and 8:00pm and 24 persons attended. The open house was set up with information boards providing details of the purpose of the open house, the existing and projected traffic volumes, the functional classification system and the proposed program. A Microsoft Powerpoint™ continuous slide show was also shown, providing details of the proposed program. A copy of this presentation is provided in the appendix.

A questionnaire was provided to open house participants to allow them to record their overall impressions of the program, the open house and staff. A total of six questionnaires were returned to ISL by the deadline date of April 27th, 2001. The response to the questions regarding the open house hours, location, staff and information was positive, indicating that all of those who responded were happy with the format of the open house.

A total of thirteen comments were also recorded, and these are provided in the appendix in summary format. Four of the comments were specific, regarding dust control on various roads around the county. As this is not within the scope of this study, these comments

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-17 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

were passed on to the Director of Public Works and Engineering as action items. Other comments referred to the apparent lack of spending in the west end of the County, the status of various roads which are not in the program with respect to surfacing, and the timing of St. Francis West Main Road.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 3-18 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report 4

Development of Guidelines/Standards

4.1 Introduction

In order to objectively define which roads should be classified as main roads and which roads as locals, it is necessary to provide defendable classification criteria for road type and surface type.

4.2 Proposed Guidelines 4.2.1 Functional Classification Guidelines Four functional classes of roadways can be defined in the Leduc County Road hierarchy. These are:

• Primary and Secondary (Provincial jurisdiction) Highways • County Main Roads • Special Purpose Roads • Local Roads

The primary and secondary highways, while forming important linkages within the County, are the responsibility of Alberta Infrastructure and therefore are not considered other than as links to other roadways.

County main roads form the main connector routes between the primary and secondary highways. These function similarly to the arterial network within an urban environment.

Special purpose roads are the collectors between the major origins and destinations (recreational areas and parks, country residential, subdivisions and so on) and the County main roads or primary/secondary highways.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 4-1 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

All other roads are classified as local roads and provide local access to individual residences, farms, developments, etc. The majority of the developed portions of the two mile by one mile grid road system are local roads.

The criteria upon which the Transportation Master Plan has been developed is dependent upon several variables:

• Function in the overall road network. • Traffic • Continuity and Connectivity • Isolation of residences and farmsteads (ie. distance from Main or Special Purpose roads) • Adjacent land use.

The functional or administrative “service” classification of the roadways is based upon the function, continuity and connectivity, isolation and adjacent land use variables, as well as the existing road system.

The functional classification criteria were developed as shown in Table 4.1 on the following page.

4.2.2 Surfacing Guidelines The surfacing type for each roadway takes into account the functional classification, amount of traffic on the roadway or how much it is used, and whether the roadway is banned. These criteria provide guidelines of when surfacing will be considered and evaluated. Other issues such as life cycle costing, geotechnical evaluation, budgetary constraints and impacts of surfacing on traffic from other roadways also need to be taken into account. Particularly for paved surfaces, it is important that adequate subgrade material and preparation be provided to ensure an adequate service life for the pavement.

The following surfacing criteria were developed:

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 4-2 May, 2001 Table 4.1 Functional Classification Guidelines

Connectivity # of Roadway Type Continuity Adjacent Land Uses Spacing (connects to) Points Primary and Secondary Highways Determined by Province

County Main Roads greater than / equal to 8 • Primary and Secondary • residences 1 all residences within km (5 miles) in length Highways maximum distance of 4.8km • industrial uses (gas plants, 2 of a Main Road or Special • other County Main Roads, fertilizer outlets, seed Purpose Road Towns, Villages or Hamlets cleaning plants) other important roads • churches, community halls 2

Total must be at least 15

Special Purpose Routes No limit on length • Primary and Secondary • park/recreational area 10 maximum distance of 4.8km Highways • summer village access 10 • country residential with • County Main Roads greater than 6 residences per mile • other Special Purpose Roads • Nisku Industrial Business 10 Park Roads • Oil and Gas serving either 10 5 producing wells or 1 plant per mile • connections to Towns and 10 villages of at least 100 persons

Total must be at least 10 Local Roads All others All roads n/a n/a Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Table 4.2 Surfacing Guidelines Surface Type Traffic Volumes (AADT) Truck Volumes Paved >400 vpd $40 vpd Oiled 200 - 400 - Dust Controlled 100 - 200 - Gravel < 100 -

4.3 Proposed Geometric Design Guidelines 4.3.1 Proposed Cross-Sections Typical cross-sections were developed for each of the roadway classifications defined for Leduc County. Whenever possible, existing cross-sections have been used, with minor modifications as necessary. Any of these standard sections may be modified if the traffic or geometric conditions warrant the change.

Roadway cross-sections in developed residential and industrial subdivisions are presently dealt with in the Leduc County Development Guidelines and Minimum Servicing Standards for Residential and Industrial Subdivisions document (Land Use Bylaw No. 1665-83).

The roadway cross-sections below deal with the roadways elsewhere in the County.

County Main Roads

• Right-of-way 30 m minimum • Road Surface 9 m minimum • Lanes 2 x 4 m • Shoulders 2 x 0.5 m • Transitional Sideslopes 2 x 0.5 m (optional) • Sideslopes 4:1 naturalized (minimum) • Backslopes 3:1 naturalized (minimum) • Crossfall from centre 2% • Ditch minimum 1.0 m, channel bottom 0.5% crossfall to outside; minimum 0.3 m below subgrade elevation.

This cross section is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1 on the following page.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 4-3 May, 2001 EXHIBIT 4.1

30m RIGHT OF WAY

11m MIN. SUBGRADE WIDTH 9m

1.0m SHD. 4m

Rounding 1m 3:1 min. 2% 2% (optional) 0.5% 4:1 min. 4:1 min. 1m min. 0.3m min. Fill Cut 100mm ACP 50mm CMX (OBBC) MIN. min. {150mm GBC 250mm GBC } Structure 1 Structure 2 Naturalized Slopes Naturalized Slopes

COUNTY MAIN ROAD Scale 1:150 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Special Purpose Roads Special purpose roads should have a cross-section that is slightly wider than a local road, to accommodate more traffic. • Right-of-way 20 m minimum; 30 m desirable • Road Surface 8.5 m minimum • Lanes 2 x 3.75 m • Shoulders 2 x 0.5 m • Rounding 2 x 0.5 m (optional) • Sideslopes 4:1 naturalized (minimum) • Backslopes 3:1 naturalized (minimum) • Crossfall from centre 2% • Ditch minimum 1.0 m channel bottom, 0.5% crossfall to outside, minimum 0.3 m below subgrade elevation.

This cross-section is illustrated in Exhibit 4.2.

Local Roads Several different classifications of local roads were identified. However, in general, local roads should have the following cross-section: • Right-of-way 20 m minimum; 30 m desirable • Road Surface 8 m minimum • Lanes 2 x 3.5 m • Shoulders 2 x 0.5 m • Rounding 2 x 0.5 m • Sideslopes 4:1 naturalized (minimum) • Backslopes 3:1 naturalized (minimum) • Crossfall from centre 2% • Ditch 1.0 m channel bottom, 0.5% crossfall to outside, minimum 0.3 m below subgrade elevation.

This cross-section is illustrated in Exhibit 4.3.

4.3.2 Design Speeds Generally, a minimum design speed 90 km/h should be utilized for Main Roads and for Special Purpose Roads which qualify for paving. Transportation Association of Canada Design Guidelines should be used for geometric design of these facilities. Exceptions could be made when there are major topographic or property constraints.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 4-4 May, 2001 3:1 min. 3:1 1m min. 0.5% Cut

4:1 min. SPECIAL PURPOSE ROAD 0.3m min. 9.7m SUBGRADE WIDTH 3.75m

2% Naturalized Slopes RIGHT OF WAY Scale 1:150 (DESIRABLE) 8.5m 30m 0.5m SHD.

150mm GBC

Fill 4:1 min. 4:1 EXHIBIT 4.2 EXHIBIT 4.3

30m RIGHT OF WAY (DESIRABLE) 9.2m SUBGRADE WIDTH

3.5m 0.5m SHD.

2% 2% 3:1 min. 0.5% 4:1 min. 4:1 min. 150mm GRAVEL 1m min. 0.3m min.

Cut Fill

Naturalized Slopes

LOCAL ROAD Scale 1:150 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

4.3.3 Right-of-Way Requirements As areas of the County are developed, the road right-of-way required for the above cross- sections should be acquired by subdivision dedication, otherwise the right-of-way should be purchased by the County prior to construction.

4.3.4 Access Guidelines The number of accesses on major roads has significant impacts on traffic operations and safety. The number of accesses on County Main roads should be kept to a minimum, with a desirable spacing of 800 m or more. A minimum spacing of 400 m may be used in special circumstances. It is desirable from an operational point of view to have 400 m between accesses for lesser roads. If necessary, this may be reduced to a minimum of 200 m. It may be necessary to utilize service roads to maintain this spacing for reconstructed roads. Access management to attain this spacing should be initiated at time of construction or reconstruction.

4.4 Network Options

Using the above noted criteria roadway network options were developed for the main roads and special purpose roads. At the same time, the surface types of the existing and proposed roads were also reviewed. In addition, the input of surrounding municipalities, particularly the City of Edmonton and the Municipal District of Brazeau were taken into account. The resulting recommended Functional Classifications are illustrated in Exhibit 4.4.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 4-5 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report 5

Capital and Rehabilitation Programs

5.1 Program Description 5.1.1 Capital Projects 1. Airport Road Widening (5th Street - 9th Street)

Description Airport Road is an important regional route, providing access for people, goods and services to the International Airport, City of Leduc and Nisku Industrial Business Park from centers in the east, such as the Town of Beaumont, Strathcona County, City of Wetaskiwin, Town of Camrose, etc. In the past few years traffic has increased significantly due largely to the economic growth in the region.

Upgrades to Airport Road from Sparrow Drive to east of 5th Street were completed in 1999. Future upgrades would see four-laning east to just past 9th Street in 2002 and an intersection improvement at 5th Street including signalization in 2004. These improvements will be cost-shared equally with the City of Leduc in accordance with the 1998 Annexation Agreement between the two municipalities.

Implementation Tasks

Task Cost Year

Prepare detailed design & tender documents $ 20,000 2001

Widening $ 565,000 2002

Improve intersection & install signals at 5 St. $ 150,000 2004

Total $ 735,000

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-1 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

2. West Devon Main Road Paving

Description Paving of the West Devon Main Road commenced in 1998 and is slated for completion in 2002. This project includes improvements to the horizontal and vertical geometry of the roadway as well as the paving. Once complete, this will provide a link from south of Devon (at the Highway 19 intersection) to West of Calmar on Highway 39.

Implementation Tasks

Task Cost Year

Completion of Paving $ 1,500,000 2002

Total $ 1,500,000

3. Range Road 244/250 (Township Road 502-512) (Nisku Spine Road)

Description The Nisku Spine Road has been proposed as a link between the Nisku Industrial Business Park and the City of Edmonton 101 Street/91 Street corridor since the late 1970's. The Leduc Area Transportation Study (1981), Nisku General Development Plan (1979), the Nisku Area Structure Plan (1981), the Nisku Industrial Park Roadway Improvements Study (1985), the Highway #2 Industrial Area Structure Plan (1982), and the recently published Ellerslie Area Structure Plan all recognize the need to upgrade 9th Street to a major four lane divided arterial as development in Nisku Industrial Business Park continues. At the time that the Functional Planning Study was completed in 1985, approximately 800 hectares were developed as medium density industrial land. Today there are more than 2000 hectares of developed or developing land in the Nisku area. Reasonable peak hour estimates of the traffic on 9th Street at that time were approximately 200 vehicles per hour.

Traffic counts taken in this area on Range Roads 243 and 244 show traffic to have increased to approximately 1500 - 2800 vehicles per day. With the increasing

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-2 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

development in the Nisku area, the traffic usage on these range roads will continue to increase. Given the increase in development and traffic, it is recommended that the County revisit the timing for the Nisku Spine Road. The Spine Road north of Secondary Highway 625 is contingent on scheduling of the City of Edmonton for their portion and the possibility of Provincial funding assistance.

Implementation Tasks The total cost of the Nisku Spine Road has been estimated at approximately $11.9 million, plus $200,000 for land1. The first step in the process will be to undertake an update to the functional plan to determine the staging of construction. For the purposes of this planning document it has been assumed that construction will be staged over six years.

Task Cost Year

Undertake concentrated traffic count program and functional planning study update to confirm requirements for Nisku Spine Road construction $ 50,000 2001 Acquire right-of-way for Spine Road $ 200,000 2001/03

Prepare preliminary plans and staged design of Spine Road $ 250,000 2002

Prepare detailed plans and tender documents for first stage construction $ 200,000 2003

Construct first stage of Spine Road $ 10,900,000 2004/09

Prepare detailed plans and tender documents for subsequent stages as required $ 400,000 2007 Total $ 12,000,000

4. St. Francis West Main Road

Description As part of an intermunicipal understanding that has been in place for many years, the extension of paving on St. Francis West Main Road (Township Road 500) from

1 Approximate land required = 4000 m x 100 m ha x $5,000/ha 10000

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-3 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Range Road 40, to the west County boundary should be paved. This provides desirable connectivity between future paved roadways in the M.D. of Brazeau and Leduc County. The priority of this is dependent upon the schedule of the M.D. of Brazeau which is unknown at this time. The M.D. suggested that it may happen within the next four years. For the purposes of the program it has been scheduled for construction in 2003.

Implementation Tasks

Task Cost Year

Preliminary / Detailed Design $ 190,000 2002

Construction $ 1,890,000 2003

Total $ 2,080,000

5. Range Road 243 (Township Road 510 - 512); Township Road 510 (Secondary Highway 814 - Range Road 243)

Description The majority of traffic in the northeast of the County traveling during peak hours are commuters to and from residential subdivisions and the City of Edmonton and City of Leduc. Because of this, all north-south routes are well used and consequently require high maintenance when compared to lower use roads. A review of the traffic volumes would indicate that they exceed 1800 vehicles per day for this portion of Township Road 510 and between 1300 - 1900 vehicles per day for this portion of Range Road 243.

Once in the City of Edmonton, these commuters would want to connect with one of the major north-south arterial routes into the City. Range Road 240 connects to 34 Street, east of Mill Woods. Highway 814 connects to 50 Street in Mill Woods.

As Range Road 242 ends at Cawes Lake, this leaves Range Road 243 to connect back across to 66 Street which eventually becomes 75 Street and Wayne Gretzky Drive, a part of the Inner Ring Road loop, in the City of Edmonton. As the majority

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-4 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

of the traffic is probably heading towards the Central Business District of Edmonton, this is the most probable route, next to Secondary Highway 814. Upgrading Range Road 243 will provide a route from the northeast of the County into the City. As the upgrading of this road improves the connectivity of the County with the City, this route is designated as a County Main Road. As the traffic on this roadway exceeds the criteria, this roadway should also be paved. All this work should be closely coordinated with the City of Edmonton to coincide with the restructuring of the Ellerslie area.

Implementation Tasks The improvement of the cross-section to a Main Road standard and paving consists of the following tasks:

Task Cost Year

Preliminary/Detailed Design $ 130,000 2004

Construction $ 1,340,000 2005

Total $ 1,470,000

6. Range Road 253 / 254 (Township Road 504 - 512)

Description The Provincial Government and City of Edmonton have made a commitment to completing the southwest leg of the Edmonton outer ring road (Anthony Henday Drive) by 2005. These plans include major at-grade intersections or interchanges at each of the major connector arterials within the City of Edmonton. One of the first of these interchanges will be constructed at Terwillegar Drive.

In order to provide a route for commuters traveling between Edmonton and Devon (approximately 35% of the population of Devon works in the City of Edmonton), a north-south link should be constructed to connect with the City, at one of the major arterials. Also, this link would provide a useful function for vehicles traveling from the west portion of the City of Edmonton to the International Airport.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-5 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Recent counts indicate that the traffic volumes on Range Road 253/254 are more than 400 which, under the outlined criteria, warrants paving. If the fact that all the traffic on the north-south links between Highway 19 and the City limits would probably be concentrated on any upgraded road that was constructed, this would increase these volumes, and should reduce the amount of required maintenance on all the other parallel routes. Therefore it is recommended that Range Road 254 be paved between Highway 19 and Township Road 510 with a minor deflection through the correction line. Range Road 253 could then be paved to a County Main Road standard between Township Road 510 and the County boundary.

Other alternatives were reviewed in the area of this option. Firstly, Township Road 510 between Range Road 253 and Rabbit Hill Road could be widened and paved to connect Range Road 253 to Rabbit Hill Road, which is already paved. This would make better use of the existing pavement on Rabbit Hill Road. While this option would provide a good access for those commuters to and from Devon, it would not provide as direct a route for those traveling to the Airport, and therefore would not serve those travelers as well. It is thought that this option would cost as much as the original option in any event.

It was thought that other north-south routes would be close to Highway 2, and therefore would not be as attractive as an alternative route to Anthony Henday Drive and the south and west of the City of Edmonton.

In order to make this route as direct as possible, it is recommended that right-of- way be acquired, if feasible, at the corners of SW 3-Twp51-Rge24-W3M and NE 32- Twp50-Rge24-W3M to allow development of a continuous north-south route across the correction line.

Implementation Tasks The County should contact the City of Edmonton to ensure that the connection from the County boundary to Terwillegar Drive and Anthony Henday Drive will be upgraded to a high standard. Construction should coincide with the completion of the Anthony Henday Drive / Terwillegar Drive Interchange.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-6 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Task Cost Year

Acquire land $ 40,000 2002-04

Preliminary/Detailed Design $ 130,000 2004-05

Construction $ 1,260,000 2005-06

Total $ 1,430,000

7. Collectors in Nisku Industrial Business Park

Description A Roadway Improvements Study completed for Nisku Industrial Business Park in 1985 recognized that the gravel and oiled surfaced roadways within the Park were reaching the end of their useful life. While these roadways can certainly be maintained indefinitely, the amount and cost of maintenance on these roads will continue to increase as heavy truck traffic increases. A life cycle cost analysis indicates that it is more economically advantageous to upgrade these roads with a paved section than to continue maintaining them.

The traffic volumes on the primary routes within the Nisku Industrial Business Park are between 1000 and as high as 6000 vehicles per day. This volume is thought to comprise of many heavy trucks, although classification counts (breaking down percentages of various vehicle types) are not available.

The work would include the removal of the oil base road structure and replacement with a heavy duty concrete base to withstand the loads from the heavy trucks. A road structure of 300 mm granular base, 200 mm roller compacted or Portland cement concrete and 50 mm asphalt concrete was used for estimating purposes. This should be confirmed once actual traffic counts and subgrade strengths are known. The County should be aware that traffic disruption is likely to be a major issue with the business and industry owners and operators when construction takes place. This work would likely have a major cost implication on the County, and the County could consider the assessment of local improvement charges to the businesses to offset at lease some of this cost. The

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-7 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

cross-section should be to an industrial special purpose road standard with upgrading of the drainage as necessary. A review of the traffic volumes is recommended complete with classification counts on all major roadways within the Business Park, to assist in determination of priorities. The design and construction work could be staged over several years, dependent upon budget and cost limitations.

Implementation Tasks

Task Cost Year

Undertake traffic counts and functional planning study $ 30,000 2001

Initiate negotiations with businesses for local improvement changes n/c ongoing

Undertake preliminary and detailed design - Stage 1 $ 160,000 2003

Undertake construction - Stage 1 $ 1,800,000 2004

Undertake preliminary and detailed design - Stage 2 $ 160,000 2005

Undertake construction - Stage 2 $ 1,800,000 2006

Undertake preliminary and detailed design - Stage 3 $ 160,000 2007

Undertake construction - Stage 3, etc. $ 1,800,000 2008

Total $ 5,910,000

8. Range Road 233 (Secondary Highway 623 to Secondary Highway 625)

Description Range Road 233 between Township Roads 494 and 504 exists as Clover Lawn North Main Road. At present, this section has a gravel surface and a substandard profile with poor sightlines. The traffic volumes on this road presently exceed the 250 vehicle per day warrant for oiling of this roadway, and therefore it is recommended that this surface be upgraded. Some grading is required to bring the vertical alignment and cross-section up to standard. The County should

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-8 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

upgrade this roadway when the traffic volumes increase to a level where paving would be required. Again, it is likely that improving the vertical alignment and surface of this roadway would draw traffic from other parallel north-south routes.

Implementation Tasks The construction of this roadway can be divided into two stages as it is intersected by Airport Road. The first stage could be between Secondary Highway 623 and Airport Road, and the second between Airport Road and Secondary Highway 625. The implementation tasks and associated costs are as follows:

Task Cost Year

Undertake preliminary and detailed design $ 130,000 2005

Undertake construction - Stage 1 $ 870,000 2006

Undertake construction - Stage 2 $ 430,000 2007

Total $ 1,430,000

9. Township Road 500 (Range Road 221 - 223)

Description This 3.2 kilometre section of Township Road 500 between Joseph Lake Road and New Sarepta exists as an oiled 9.0 m section. The existing traffic volumes on this piece of roadway are at approximately 300 - 400 vehicles per day. It is projected that by 2003 - 2010, these traffic volumes will increase to over 400 vehicles per day, which may warrant consideration for the roadway to be improved to a paved standard.

Implementation Tasks The total cost of this work has been cost estimated at $556,000. These costs may be split over three years as follows:

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-9 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Task Cost Year

Conduct concentrated traffic counts to confirm traffic volumes $ 2,000 2005

Undertake preliminary and detailed design of upgrade Township Road 500 $ 50,000 2006

Construct upgrade with a nominal thickness of 100 mm ACP. Leveling of uneven surface may be required $ 510,000 2007

Total $ 562,000

10. Fruitland Road (Range Road 11-Hwy 39-Township Road 502)

Description The purpose of Fruitland Road is to serve the residences to the north of Highway 39, east of the Genesee Generating Station. Although the traffic volumes on this road are low, this roadway will serve the requirement outlined in the County policy to provide a surfaced access within four miles of all residences in the County. This road should be upgraded to a special purpose road standard. The priority on this project is low. Other alternative routes which serve the same purpose should be reviewed at the preliminary design stage.

Implementation Tasks

Task Cost Year Preliminary/Detailed Design $ 110,000 2008 Construction $ 1,140,000 2009 Total $ 1,250,000

The total capital program is illustrated in Exhibit 5.1.

11. Other Projects The following is a list of other projects that should be reviewed for future implementation. Each of these projects does not completely meet the criteria for implementation within the next ten years, however they should be monitored for construction at some time in the future. These projects have been included for

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-10 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

discussion purposes only, and have not been cost estimated; nor included in the program.

• Range Road 263 (Highway 39-Twp Road 490 - Glen Park Main Road). One of the roads indicated by the County administration as being a maintenance issue was the Range Road 263 connector between Glen Park Main Road and the Highway 39/Highway 60 intersection. It was felt that heavy trucks are using the Glen Park Main Road - Range Road 263 route as a bypass of the Alberta Infrastructure Weigh-In-Motion scale and Vehicle Inspection Station on Hwy. 2 to connect back onto Highway 60. Traffic counts taken by the Province, supplemented by those conducted by ISL would indicate that while there are a few trucks taking advantage of this route, there are not enough to warrant upgrading this section. Total volumes through this portion of roadway are at approximately 90 AADT with less than 7% trucks.

It is likely that the truck volumes on this “by-pass” route will increase if the route is surfaced and becomes more well known. The County should continue to monitor the traffic volumes, and particularly the truck volumes on this route. Should the truck volumes increase to over 40 per day, this route, under the presented criteria, will warrant paving.

• Genesee Bypass Road. The Genesee Bypass Main Road has substandard curves. This project would include geometric improvements to these curves, including the purchase of land to make the necessary corrections.

• Genesee West Connector, Range Road 40 (Township Road 500-504). The purpose of the Genesee West connector roadway is to serve the isolated residences to the north of St. Francis West Main Road, west of the Genesee Generating Station. Although the traffic volumes on this road are low, this roadway will serve the requirement outlined in the County policy to provide a surfaced access within four miles of all residences in the

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-11 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

County. This road should be upgraded to a special purpose road standard. The priority on this project is low. Other alternative routes which serve the same purpose should be reviewed at the preliminary design stage.

• Genesee North Connector, Range Road 511 (Range Road 30-32). Again, the purpose of the Genesee North connector roadway is to serve the isolated residences to the west of Secondary Highway 770, north of the Genesee Generating Station. Although the traffic volumes on this road are low, this roadway will serve the requirement outlined in the Functional Classification Guidelines to provide a surfaced access within four miles of all residences in the County. This road should be upgraded to a special purpose road standard. The priority on this project is low. Other alternative routes which serve the same purpose should be reviewed at the preliminary design stage.

• Range Road 21 (SH 771 - Glen Park Main Road). This would provide for the connectivity of SH 771 to Glen Park Road and Highway 39.

5.1.2 Road Rehabilitation Projects The following road rehabilitation projects have been identified as part of the Pavement Management Study conducted in 1997. These projects include the overlay/final paving of sections of paved main roads. As noted in the report, timing is the key for these projects. If they are deferred for too long, the structural condition of the pavements may get to the stage where it is no longer cost-effective to rehabilitate them, and it becomes necessary to reconstruct them at a much higher cost.

The timing and scope of these projects was not reviewed as part of this study. They are included for completeness only.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-12 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Total Cost

• Airport Road (SH 814 to Highway 21) $ 990,000

• Glen Park Road (Highway 2A - Secondary Highway 814) $ 650,000

• Joseph Lake Road (Secondary Highway 623 to Township Road $ 880,000 510)

• Looking Back Lake Road (Highway 21 to Joseph Lake Road) $ 870,000

5.1.3 Bridge Rehabilitation Projects The following bridge rehabilitation projects have been identified as part of a Bridge Study currently underway. The timing and scope of these projects was not reviewed as part of this study. They are included for completeness only.

• 2001 Bridge Plan

Total Cost Bridge Plan # 73211 INW 8-50-24-4 $ 275,000 Bridge Plan # 75574 WSW 24-48-25-4 $ 29,000 Bridge Plan # 76923 SSW 18-48-24-4 $ 29,000 Bridge Plan # 07067 SSE 17-49-2-5 $ 300,000 Bridge Plan # 08150 SSE 13-49-27-4 $ 250,000 Bridge Plan # 02099 SSW 33-49-1-5 $ 170,000 Bridge Plan # 01090 SNW 24-50-26-4 $ 250,000 Bridge Plan # 76777 WSW 10-49-24-4 $ 80,000 Bridge Plan # 07747 WSW 4-50-2-5 $ 100,000 Bridge Plan # 01726 WSW 16-50-23-4 $ 120,000 Bridge Plan # 74928 INE 2-49-4-5 $ 120,000 Bridge Plan # 13921 WSW 17-50-23-4 $ 100,000 Bridge Plan # 08492 SSE 1-48-27-4 $ 70,000 Bridge Plan # 79676 WNW 18-50-1-5 $ 150,000 Bridge Plan # 71689 WNW 13-48-3-5 $ 10,000 Bridge Plan # 01748 SSW 32-49-1-5 $ 15,000 Bridge Plan # 78007 WNW 8-49-3-5 $ 2,000 Bridge Plan # 07541 WSW 29-49-1-5 $ 50,000 Bridge Plan # 81485 INE 6-51-24-4 $ 440,000

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-13 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• 2002 Bridge Plan

Total Cost Bridge Plan # 00588 WNW 12-50-24-4 $ 250,000 Bridge Plan # 71293 WSW 8-51-23-4 $ 10,000 Bridge Plan # 06888 SSW 16-49-26-4 $ 20,000 Bridge Plan # 00138 SSW 1-50-27-4 $ 2,000 Bridge Plan # 6982 SSE 31-49-1-5 $ 3,000 Bridge Plan # 13993 SSW 15-48-2-5 $ 80,000

5.2 Program Costs

The costs of each of the individual projects was estimated in 2001 dollars for the units of roadway construction materials. For more details of these cost breakdowns, see Appendix A. The costs of each of the 11 individual projects within the program are identified in the table on the following page.

A contingency of 25% and an engineering amount of 10% have been included.

5.3 Program Prioritization

The program was prioritized based on the immediate needs of the County and surrounding municipalities, the traffic counts and projections, and the needs due to isolation. This is provided in the table on the following page.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 5-14 May, 2001 Table 5.1 Leduc County - 2000 Transportation Master Plan Preliminary Capital Program Costs

Total Project Kilo- Construction Contingency Construction Engineering Right of Way Number Project Description metres Cost (25%) Costs Costs (10%) Costs Total Costs 1 Airport Road Widening 1.0 $ 550,000.00 $ 137,500.00 $ 687,500.00 $ 47,000.00 $ 735,000.00 2 West Devon Main Road Paving 8.0 $ 1,093,000.00 $ 270,000.00 $ 1,363,000.00 $ 137,000.00 $ 1,500,000.00 Nisku Spine Road - Range Road 244/250 3 (Township Road 502-512) 9.6 $ 8,720,000.00 $ 2,180,000.00 $ 10,900,000.00 $ 900,000.00 $ 200,000.00 $ 12,000,000.00 4 St. Francis West Main Road 8.0 $ 1,512,000.00 $ 378,000.00 $ 1,890,000.00 $ 190,000.00 $ 2,080,000.00 Beaumont Connector - Township Road 510 (SH 814 - Range Road 243) & Range Road 5 243 (Township Road 510 - 512) 6.8 $ 1,083,600.00 $ 270,900.00 $ 1,335,000.00 $ 135,000.00 $ 1,470,000.00 Range Road 253/254 (Township Road 504 - 6 512) 6.8 $ 1,009,000.00 $ 252,250.00 $ 1,261,250.00 $ 126,125.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 1,430,000.00 7 Collectors in Nisku Industrial Park 8.0 $ 4,320,000.00 $ 1,080,000.00 $ 5,400,000.00 $ 510,000.00 $ 5,910,000.00

8 Range Road 233 (Township Road 494-504) 9.6 $ 1,040,000.00 $ 260,000.00 $ 1,300,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 1,430,000.00 New Sarepta Connector - Township Road 9 500 (Range Road 221 - 223) 3.2 $ 404,000.00 $ 101,000.00 $ 505,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 560,000.00 Fruitland Road (Highway 39 - Township 10 Road 502) 4.8 $ 901,920.00 $ 225,480.00 $ 1,127,400.00 $ 112,740.00 $ 1,250,000.00

Total Program (Ten Years) $ 27,630,000.00

Based upon: Contingency Amount 25% Engineering Amount 10% Table 5.2 Leduc County Construction Program

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Project Costs CAPITAL PROJECTS Airport Road (5th Street - 9th Street)* $ 20,000 $ 565,000 $ 150,000 $ 735,000 West Devon Main Road Paving $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Nisku Spine Road $ 120,000 $ 320,000 $ 260,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,900,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 400,000 $ 12,000,000 St. Francis West Main Road $ 190,000 $ 1,890,000 $ 2,080,000 Beaumont West Connector $ 130,000 $ 1,340,000 $ 1,470,000 Range Road 253 (Terwilegar Drive Connector) $ 10,000 $ 20,000 $ 50,000 $ 40,000 $ 680,000 $ 630,000 $ 1,430,000 Nisku Industrial Park Collectors $ 30,000 $ 160,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 160,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 160,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 5,910,000 Range Road 233 (Township Road 494 to 504) $ 130,000 $ 870,000 $ 430,000 $ 1,430,000 New Sarepta Connector - Township Road 500 (Range Road 221-223) $ 50,000 $ 510,000 $ 560,000 Fruitland Road (Range Road 11 - Highway 39 - Town $ 110,000 $ 1,140,000 $ 1,250,000

SUB-TOTALS $ 170,000 $ 2,585,000 $ 2,330,000 $ 3,930,000 $ 3,470,000 $ 5,300,000 $ 3,530,000 $ 3,600,000 $ 1,910,000 $ 1,540,000 $ 28,365,000

* Cost-shared 50/50 with City of Leduc Table 5.2 - Cont'd. Leduc County Construction Program

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Project Costs REHABILITATION PROJECTS Airport Road (SH 814 to Highway 21) $ 990,000 $ 990,000 Glen Park Road (Highway 2A-SH 814) $ 950,000 $ 950,000 Joseph Lake Road (SH 623 to TR 510) $ 880,000 $ 880,000 Looking Back Lake Road (Hwy 21 to Joseph Lake Road) $ 870,000 $ 870,000 Bridge File # 73211 - INW 8-50-24-4 $ 66,000 $ 66,000 Bridge File # 75574 - WSW 24-48-25-4 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 Bridge File # 76923 - SSW 18-48-24-4 $ 4,000 Bridge File # 07067 - SSE 17-49-2-5 $ 90,000 Bridge File # 08150 - SSE 13-49-27-4 $ 50,000 Bridge File # 02099 - SSW 33-49-1-5 $ 30,000 Bridge File # 01090 - SNW 24-50-26-4 $ 75,000 Bridge File # 76777 - WSW 10-49-24-4 $ 24,000 Bridge File # 07747 - WSW 4-50-2-5 $ 30,000 Bridge File # 01726 - WSW 16-50-23-4 $ 36,000 Bridge File # 74928 - INE 2-49-4-5 $ 36,000 Bridge File # 13921 - WSW 17-50-23-4 $ 30,000 Bridge File # 08492 - SSE 1-48-27-4 $ 12,000 Bridge File # 79676 - WNW 18-50-1-5 $ 45,000 Bridge File # 71689 - WNW 13-48-3-5 $ 4,000 Bridge File # 01748 - SSW 32-49-1-5 $ - Bridge File # 78007 - WNW 8-49-3-5 $ 2,000 $ 2,000

Bridge File # 07541 - WSW 29-49-1-5 $ 7,500 $ 7,500 Bridge File # 81485 - INE 6-51-24-4 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 Bridge File # 00588 - WNW 12-50-24-4 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Bridge File # 71293 - WSW 8-51-23-4 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Bridge File # 06888 - SSW 16-49-26-4 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Bridge File # 00138 - SSW 1-50-27-4 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000 Bridge File # 6982 - SSE 31-49-1-5 $ - $ - Bridge File # 13993 - SSW 15-48-2-5 $ 24,000.00 $ 24,000

$ 1,565,500.00 $ 1,106,000.00 $ 880,000.00 $ 870,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,421,500

Totals $ 1,735,500.00 $ 3,691,000.00 $ 3,210,000.00 $ 4,800,000.00 $ 3,470,000.00 $ 5,300,000.00 $ 3,530,000.00 $ 3,600,000.00 $ 1,910,000.00 $ 1,540,000.00 $ 32,786,500.00 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report 6

Recommendations

6.1 Transportation System Policies 6.1.1 Funding Opportunities - Local Improvement Policy It is recommended that the County should review and assess the viability of a Local Improvement Policy for roadways that can be improved to the benefit of residents/ users of one area. Of particular note would be the Special Purpose Roads within Nisku Industrial Business Park.

Division 7 of the Municipal Government Act (MGA) (Statutes of Alberta, 1994, Chapter M- 26.1 with amendments in force as of January 1, 2000) provides definitions and regulations regarding the imposition of Local Improvement taxes. A local improvement project is generally a project that the Council considers to be of greater benefit to an area of the municipality than to the whole municipality. The MGA provides the rules for petitioning the affected property owners and gives an outline of a Local Improvement Plan, which must be prepared when a local improvement policy is proposed. Finally, the contents of the Local Improvement Tax Bylaw required for the imposition of each local improvement tax is provided.

6.1.2 Funding Opportunities - Senior Government Grants It is recommended that the County should continue to make application to senior levels of government for additional special grants such as the recently canceled Canada Infrastructure Works Program as they become available.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-1 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

6.1.3 Funding Opportunities - Cost Sharing It is recommended that for some of the more major roadways that clearly provide benefits for another municipality, the County should explore the option of cost sharing with that municipality.

6.1.4 Data Collection - Traffic Counts A major basis of the proposed criteria for road surfacing, function classification and the proposed capital program are traffic counts which must be conducted by the County. In order to take the priority of various individual projects to the next level, a more formal traffic counting program, including some traffic classification counts that determine percentages and types of trucks need to be conducted on the selected roadways in order to confirm the functional classification, surfacing requirements made and design pavement structures.

It is recommended that a bi-annual traffic count program be set up to enable alternate year general counts and classification counts once every four years. These counts should be conducted on all County Main and Special Purpose Roads, as well as others that, in the opinion of the administration, warrant special attention because of development, complaints, etc. This information should be updated in the Geographic Information System for Transportation (GIS-T).

6.1.5 Data Collection - Accident Records It is recommended that accident records be routinely collected from the three RCMP detachments in the County (Leduc, Breton and Thorsby) and be entered into a database. This will allow the administration to keep track of intersections which have high numbers of collisions and to initiate safety assessments and provide corrective action as necessary. This information should be kept and updated in the GIS-T.

6.1.6 Data Collection - Pavement Management System It is recommended that the County continue with its pavement planning and management guide on a bi-annual basis on the high volume paved roads. This provides important structural information used in rehabilitation planning. This information should be kept and updated in the GIS-T.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-2 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

6.1.7 Data Collection - Bridge Management System It is recommended that the County continue with it’s bridge maintenance records. This information should be kept and updated in the GIS-T.

6.2 Roadway Functional Service Classifications

Three functional classes of roadway were defined for Leduc County jurisdiction roads. These are:

• County Main Roads • Special Purpose Roads • Local Roads

These were developed for each of the roadways in the County and are dependent upon:

• Function in the overall road network • Continuity and Connectivity • Isolation of residences and farmsteads • Adjacent land use

The guideline warrants for each of the three roadway functional types are provided in Table 4.1.

It is recommended that the County adopt these roadway functional classifications and classification guidelines.

6.3 Surfacing Guidelines

There are four types of surfacing used for County Roads. These are, in declining order of expense:

• Paved • Oiled • Dust Control • Gravel

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-3 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Paving is typically only used on high volume roads whereas gravel is used to maintain a driving surface for low volumes of traffic. Guidelines based on traffic volume have been developed for when roadways will be reviewed for a surfacing upgrade. A surfacing upgrade will also depend on other issues such as life cycle costs, including required subgrade and horizontal and vertical alignment upgrading, geotechnical evaluation, budgetary constraints and the impacts of surfacing on other adjacent roadways.

These criteria provide guidelines of when surfacing will be considered and evaluated.

It is recommended that the County adapt these surfacing guidelines.

6.4 Design Guidelines

Design guidelines were developed in Section 4 of this report providing information on cross-sections, design speed, right-of-way and access spacing. Cross-sections for each of the three functional classes of roadway are shown in Exhibits 4.1 to 4.3 and indicate the width of roadway, right-of-way requirements, sideslopes and backslopes of ditches, etc. for each of the three roadway types. Again, these cross-sections are guidelines only and will depend upon the actual right-of-way available at the time of construction. Other cross- sections for arterials, collectors and local roads in developed subdivisions are not included as part of the Transportation Master Plan. These are dealt with in the Leduc County Development Guidelines and Minimum Servicing Standards for Residential and Industrial Subdivisions.

It is recommended that the County adopt these roadway design guidelines.

6.5 Capital / Rehabilitation Program and Priorities

There are several roads in the program that provide inter-regional links to the City of Edmonton or other municipalities; examples include the Nisku Spine Road, Range Road 253 and the St. Francis West Main Road. These roads serve the residents of Leduc County as well as those of City of Edmonton, City of Leduc, Town of Devon and the M.D. of Brazeau. Although it may be argued that these roads to not provide benefits internally to the County, they will serve numerous trips by County residents, and will provide corridors where increased economic development may occur.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-4 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

The first two projects are recommended for implementation in accordance with their pre- determined schedules. These projects were slated for implementation previously.

The following six capital projects are recommended for implementation according to the schedule provided. The additional five projects should be programmed as need for the project become evident and as sufficient funding becomes available.

The rehabilitation projects should also be implemented as outlined in the schedule.

6.5.1 Airport Road Widening It is recommended that the County continue with the widening (4-laning, urban section) of Airport Road between 5th and 9th Streets in Nisku.

6.5.2 Devon Main Road Paving It is recommended that the County continue with the paving of the West Devon Main Road to provide a continuous paved link between Highway 19, south of Devon to Highway 39, west of Calmar.

6.5.3 Nisku Spine Road It is recommended that the County continue to purchase right-of-way for the Nisku Spine Road. The traffic volumes warrant the construction of this link between Nisku Industrial Business Park and the City of Edmonton as soon as possible. This road has been considered as an inter-municipal connector for many years and should be constructed as a County Main Road. Once land requisition is complete design and construction should be completed.

6.5.4 St. Francis West Main Road It is recommended that the western portion of St. Francis West County Main Road be upgraded from a gravel section to a paved County Main Road section. Under a literal application of the Main Road criteria, this roadway does not warrant paving, however this has been a long standing agreement between Leduc County and the MD of Brazeau to complete this as a high standard link, and this will complete the gap once the M.D. upgrades their portion.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-5 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

6.5.5 Beaumont West Connector It is recommended that the County upgrade and pave Range Road 243 between Township Roads 510 and 512 and Township Road 510 between SH 814 and RR 243 to a Main Road standard. Traffic volumes warrant this upgrade and the upgrading of this route will improve the connectivity between the County and the City of Edmonton. All this work should be coordinated with the City to coincide with the restructuring of the Ellerslie area.

6.5.6 Range Road 253 (Terwillegar Drive Extension) It is recommended that the County commence purchasing the right-of-way to construct a through connector from Highway 19 in the south to Range Road 253 in the north. Traffic projections indicate that this section of roadway will require upgrading to a paved roadway in approximately 2005. This coincides with the City of Edmonton / Province of Alberta’s completion date for the Anthony Henday Drive South West Extension and connection to Terwillegar Drive.

6.5.7 Collectors in Nisku Industrial Business Park It is recommended that an aggressive program of traffic volume and classification counts be undertaken in the Nisku Industrial Business Park. In order to maintain the roads in the Park a series of upgrading projects will need to be undertaken on key collectors. A suitably designed base of roller compacted or portland cement concrete is recommended for these roadways because of the very heavy traffic at slow speeds that they are expected to carry. This will reduce rutting potential and provide a smoother, more durable surface. However, in order to make this financial commitment, up-to-date and accurate traffic counts will be required to determine design and relative priorities. Special funding through local improvement taxes should be explored.

6.5.8 Range Road 233 The traffic projections indicate that Range Road 233 will not require paving for many years. However, both ends would warrant an oil based pavement structure. It is recommended that the traffic volumes on this road be monitored to assess whether paving or oiling is warranted over the entire length.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-6 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

6.5.9 Road Rehabilitation Projects It is recommended that the County implement the following road rehabilitation projects as outlined in Section 5.1.2:

• Airport Road (SH 814 to Highway 21) • Glen Park Road (Highway 2A - Secondary Highway 814) • Joseph Lake Road (Secondary Highway 623 to Township Road 510) • Looking Back Lake Road (Highway 21 to Joseph Lake Road)

Timing will be dependent on the technical assessments of the structural condition of each of these sections.

6.5.10 Bridge Rehabilitation Projects It is recommended that the County implement the following bridge rehabilitation projects:

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-7 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. 6-8 May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix A

Cost Estimate Breakdown

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Cost Estimate Breakdown Unit Prices (2001 dollars)

Oil Base Removal 100 mm (nominal) $ 12 / sq.m

Total Grading (from A.I. prices) RAD 412.5 $ 775,000 / km Total Grading (from A.I. prices) RAU 209 $ 106,700 / km

150 mm Granular Base Course (GBC) $ 7 / sq.m 300 mm Granular Base Course (GBC) $ 9 / sq.m

200 mm Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) $ 30 / sq.m 150 mm Cold Mix (CMX) $ 12 / sq.m 50 mm Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) $ 6 / sq.m 100 mm Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) $ 14 / sq.m

Major Creek Crossings (large plate culverts) $ 130,000 each

Prices for Unit Length (1 km) of Roadway (2001 dollars) 1. Main road from oiled section to paved section: 100 mm ACP - $14/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $ 126,000 / km 2. Main road from gravel to paved section: 150 mm GBC - $7/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $ 63,000 / km 100 mm ACP - $14/sq.m x 9.0 m x 100 m = $ 126,000 / km Total $ 189,000 / km 3. Main road from gravel to oiled section: 150 mm CMX - $12/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $ 108,000 / km 4. Special purpose road from oiled to RCC section: 100 OB removal - $12/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $ 108,000 / km 300 GBC - $9/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $ 81,000 200 RCC - $30/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $ 270,000 / km 50 ACP - $6/sq.m x 9.0 m x 1000 m = $54,000 / km Total $513,000 / km

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix B

Intersection Traffic Count Locations

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Reference Intersection Of Number

66430 Primary Highway 39 and Secondary Highway 770 NW of Warburg

66460 Secondary Highway 622 and Secondary Highway 770 at St. Francis

67420 Secondary Highway 616 and Secondary Highway 770 South of Warburg

67430 Primary Highway 39 and Secondary Highway 770 N of Warburg

73420 Secondary Highway 616 and Secondary Highway 771 NW of Pigeon Lake

77442 Primary Highway 39 and W Thorsby Access

77445 Primary Highway 39 and Range Road 14

78420 Secondary Highway 616 and Secondary Highway 778 East of Itaska

78431 Secondary Highway 778 and Township Road 490

78450 Primary Highway 39 and Secondary Highway 778 North of Thorsby

78460 Primary Highway 39 and Secondary Highway 622 East of Telfordville

79463 Primary Highway 39 and Buford Road (Range Road 275)

83421 Secondary Highway 795 and Township Road 490

84460 Primary Highway 39 and Range Road 265

85460 Primary Highway 39 and Primary Highway 60 East of Calmar

85470 Primary Highway 19 and Primary Highway 60 South of Devon

86473 Primary Highway 19 and Rabbit Hill Road

92460 Secondary Highway 625 and Secondary Highway 814 at Beaumont

93430 Secondary Highway 616 and Secondary Highway 814 Northeast of Millet

93450 Secondary Highway 623 and Secondary Highway 814 East of Leduc

990037 Primary Highway 39 and 52 Street, Calmar

990067 Secondary Highway 814 and Township Road 505

990096 Primary Highway 19 and Airport Service Road

Data collected includes Average Annual and Average Summer Daily Traffic, as well as a.m. and p.m. 30th highest hour estimates.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix C

Examples of Traffic Count Calculations

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Example of Traffic Count Calculation

Factor to Average Annual Daily Traffic:

ATR # 625026

Year - 1998 Month - June Day of Week - Wednesday

Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) for 1998 - 5470 vehicles per day Average Daily Traffic for Wednesdays in June - 6417

Factor for Wednesdays in June - 5470/6417 = 0.852

Township Road 502:02

Raw Traffic Count June 3, 1998 = 3867

Therefore AADT at this location = 3867 x 0.852 = 3295

Factor to Present Day: Example - For ATR # 778021

ATR Year AADT Growth 778021 01-Jan-94 1000 778021 01-Jan-95 1030 3.0% 778021 01-Jan-96 1050 1.9% 778021 01-Jan-97 1130 7.6% 778021 01-Jan-98 1190 5.3% 778021 01-Jan-99 1180 -0.8% average 3.4%

Growth in traffic at ATR 778021

1250 1200 1150 1100 1050 1000 950 900 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Although the average growth rate provided by the ATR is 3.4%, a more conservative growth rate of 3.0% was used. The provincial average for traffic growth is approximately 1-2%, however, because of its proximity to the City of Edmonton, the growth rate will be slightly higher than the provincial average.

Therefore for an AADT count of 452 taken in 1995:

Projected traffic in 2000 = 452 + (5 x 0.03 x 452) = 452 + 68 = 520 vehicles per day

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix D

Accident Locations

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Accident Locations (1997 - 1999)

On County Roads

Two km east of Calmar (x2) TWP 510 and RR 243 (x2) TWP 512 and RR 243 (x2) 1 mile east and south of Calmar 2 miles east of Alsike, Hwy 39 Airport Rd., 3.5 km east of Nisku In Airport Road, 2.5 km east of Hwy 2 Airport Road and RR 245 Ashland Dam Edmonton International Airport RR 225 and 494 TWP RR 225 and Hwy 21 RR 232 and TWP 484 RR 233, eight km south of Hwy 623 RR 234 and TWP 505 RR 234, 0.5 km south of Hwy 623 RR 234, 520 km south of Hwy 814 RR 240 and TWP 510 RR 241, one km north of Hwy 625 RR 243 and TWP 510 RR 244, two miles south of TWP 494 RR 244, just south of Airport Road RR 245 and TWP 492 RR 245, one mile north of Hwy 625 RR 250, one km south TWP 482 RR 251 and RR 490 RR 253, .5 km north of Hwy 39 RR 260, three km north of Hwy 19 RR 260, 1 mile north of Hwy 39 RR 260, one mile north of Hwy 19 RR 261 and Hwy 39 RR 265 and Hwy 19 RR 272, four miles north of Hwy 39 RR 33 and TWP 484 RR 40 and TWP 494 SH 616, five km east of Breton SH 616, two km south of Breton TWP 482, 300 metres east of RR 490 TWP 484, 100 metres east of RR 231 TWP 490, one km west of Hwy 795 TWP 490 and RR 263 TWP 490, just east of Hwy 2 TWP 494 and RR 275 TWP 500, 0.6 km east of Hwy 814 TWP 500, .5 km east of RR 261

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

TWP 500, .5 km west of RR265 TWP 500 and RR 230 TWP 500 and RR 41 TWP 500 and RR 271 TWP 502 and RR 235 TWP 505 and RR 244 TWP 510 and RR 260 TWP 510, 100 metres east of RR 244 TWP 510, just east of RR 243 TWP 510 three miles east of 50 Street TWP 510 and Hwy 814 TWP 510 and RR 240

On Provincial Roads

Hwy 2, four km north of Hwy 19 (x2) Hwy 2 n/b at Airport Road (x2) Hwy 21 and TWP 500 (x2) Hwy 2A, 4.3 km south of overpass (x2) Hwy 39 and RR 27s (x2) Hwy 39 just east of Hwy 60 (x2) Hwy 625 just east of Nisku (x2) Hwy 795 and RR 490 (x2) Hwy 814 and Airport Road (x3) Hwy 625, 100 metres west of RR 234 (x3) Hwy 625 and RR 232 (x3) Hwy 2A, three km north of Millet (x3) Hwy 2, 3.5 km north of Hwy 19 (x3) Hwy 2 and Blackmud Creek (x4) Hwy 60 and 39, intersection (x4) Hwy 2 and Hwy 19 (x5) Hwy 2, at weigh scales (x5) Hwy 2 and Edmonton City Limits (x7) Hwy 19, 10 km west of Devon Hwy 19, 1 km west of Hwy 2 Hwy 19, 100 metres west of Hwy 2 Hwy 19, five km west of Hwy 2 Hwy 19 just south of Devon Hwy 19 and RR 253 Hwy 19, three miles west of Hwy 60 Hwy 2, three km south of TWP 490 Hwy 2, 0.5 miles west of Millet Hwy 2 and TWP 490 overpass Hwy 2, 20 minutes south of Leduc Hwy 2, 8 km south of Leduc Hwy 2, one km north of Millet overpass Hwy 2 n/b, 1 km north of overpass Hwy 2 , five km south of Leduc Hwy 2 n/b just north of Leduc Hwy 20/39

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Hwy 20/39 e/b on 39 Hwy 20 & 39 Hwy 21, just south of New Sarepta Hwy 21 at Bull Hills Golf Course Hwy 21 and Hwy 625 Hwy 21 near TWP 510 Hwy 21, 1.5 km west of new Sarepta Hwy 2A, six km south of Leduc Hwy 2A and RR 490 Hwy 39, one mile east of Hwy 60 Hwy 39, 3.3 km east of Alsaac Hwy 39, one km east of Alsaac Hwy 39, 3 m north of Alsaac Hwy 39, three miles west of Calmar Hwy 39 and RR11 Hwy 39, 100 metres south of Hwy 60 Hwy 39 and RR 34 Hwy 39 and RR 40 Hwy 39, six km west of Calmar Hwy 39, 0.5 km east of Hwy 60 Hwy 39, 1 mile east of Alsaac Hwy 39 and RR 34 Hwy 39, five km west of Warburg Hwy 60, five km south of Devon Hwy 60 and Hwy 19 Hwy 623 and RR 233 Hwy 623 and RR 232 Hwy 623, three km west of Hwy 814 Hwy 623, just west of RR 231 Hwy 623 and Hwy 814 Hwy 623, one km east of Hwy 814 Hwy 624, 5.5 km east of Nisku Hwy 625, six km east of Nisku Hwy 625 and RR 235 Hwy 625, 0.5 km west of RR 243 Hwy 625 and RR 244 Hwy 625 and Hwy 814 Hwy 625, 0.25 miles east of Hwy 21 Hwy 625, 100 metres east of 50 Street Hwy 625, halfway between RR 234 and 235 Hwy 795 and TWP 494 Hwy 795, 4.5 km south of Calmar Hwy 795, three km south of Calmar Hwy 795, 1.5 south of Calmar Hwy 814, nine km south of Hwy 623 Hwy 814, 1.5 miles north of Hwy 616 Hwy 814, one mile south of 625 Hwy 814, just south of Hwy 625 Hwy 814 and TWP 490

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix E

Details of Leduc Area Transportation Study - May 1981

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

• 65 Avenue will be required as a four lane divided arterial from Nisku Spine Road to a new north-south arterial west of Highway 2 (65 Avenue, west of Highway 2, was originally conceived as a “replacement” route for Highway 39, access to this roadway is subject to review by both the Town and Alberta Transportation).

• The interchange of Highway 2 and 65 Avenue will have to be completed. Due to the high volumes of Leduc and Nisku traffic which are projected to use this interchange, the existing ramps connecting Highway 2 southbound to 50 Street, and 50 Street to Highway 2 northbound, will have to be upgraded.

• The new West Arterial will be required as a four lane divided arterial from 65 Avenue to south of 50 Avenue (Highway 39).

• A new four lane divided arterial will be required running east of Telford Lake from Nisku Spine Road to Rollyview Road.

• Highway 39 (50 Avenue) will be required as a six lane divided arterial from Highway 2 to the new West Arterial. This improvement is necessary to accommodate the through and local traffic, and the traffic which will be generated by the proposed regional shopping centre.

• 44 Avenue to be extended from 50 Street across the CPR tracks to 46 Street as four lane undivided roadway.

• 42 Avenue to be widened to a four lane undivided roadway from 50 Street to the new West Arterial.

• 47 / 48 Streets to be constructed as a four lane undivided arterial from 50 Street (at 62 Avenue) to 44 Avenue.

• A new at-grade railway crossing to connect 48 and 46 Street at 54 Avenue.

• The existing 46 Avenue at-grade railroad crossing to be removed.

• Rollyview Road to be widened to a four lane undivided arterial from east of Black Gold Drive to the new East Arterial.

• 46 Street to be widened to a four lane undivided arterial from 46 Avenue to South Park Drive.

• Black Gold Drive to be widened to a four lane divided arterial from South Park Drive to Rollyview Road.

• Coady Boulevard to be extended as a four lane undivided arterial.

• Completion of the north and south ends of 50 Street as a four lane arterial.

• Channelization of 50 Avenue from 52 Street to 50 Street to facilitate its function as a downtown penetrator / distributor.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

In addition, the report made the following recommendations with respect to the rest of the study area.

• Nisku Spine Road will be required as a four lane arterial from 65 Avenue in Leduc to 91 Street in Edmonton. (This has since been changed to 101 Street)

• SR 814 will be required as a four lane arterial from Airport Road to the Edmonton Ring Road.

• 75 Street to be extended south from the Ring Road to Nisku Road (SR 625) as a four lane arterial. This roadway was added to the network to relieve capacity problems on Nisku Spine Road and SR 814, and to allow excess capacity for development north of Boundary Road.

• Airport Road, Nisku Road and Boundary Road will be required as four lane arterials from Highway 2 to SR 814.

• Highway 39 will be required as a four lane roadway west of the Town of Leduc boundary (see also Town of Leduc roadway implementation program).

• Highway 19 will be required as a four lane roadway from Highway 2 to Highway 60.

• Two new north-south arterials will be required west of Highway 2. The furthest west arterial, to run along the west side of the International Airport from Highway 39 to Highway 19 and then proceed north to connect to the Ring Road in the Riverbend area. This arterial will serve both Nisku traffic and provide an alternate route for traffic generated by Leduc. The second new arterial will start from Boundary Road immediately east of Highway 2 and run north to join the Ring Road in the vicinity of 111 Street - 119 Street (the precise configuration and location of Ring Road interchanges is not yet finalized).

• Boundary Road will be required as a four lane arterial from Highway 2 to the furthest west of the new north-south arterials.

• An interchange will be required at the intersection of Highway 2 and Boundary Road.

• Improvements will be required to the west-north and north-west ramps at the Highway 2 / Airport Road Interchange.

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix F

Bridge Information System Output

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 Bridge Inventory Document

12 Highway 14 Local 3 Assoc 3 Assoc 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 7 Stream 7 Stream 8 Electoral 10 11 Control 13 Highway Road 15 16 1,2 FileDir File No 1 File No 2 Quarter Section Township Range Meridian 5 Bridge Name 6 Stream Name Control Sequence District 9 Region District Highway Section Sequence Authority Category Usage 00222 WNW 19 48 23 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00371 WNW 30 49 23 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00393 SSW 1 49 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.07 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00482 WNW 23 49 24 4 LEDUC BLACKMUD CK 0.04 60 5 7 S814 2 12.6 C25 C RV 00497 SSE 27 49 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00537 SSW 4 51 24 4 EDMONTON IRVINE CK 0.09 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00561 WSW 15 49 24 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00585 SSE 16 50 24 4 NISKU CLEARWATER C 0.13 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00743 SSW 13 48 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.03 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00748 WNW 12 49 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00816 SSW 25 49 26 4 CALMAR W WHITEMUD C 0.08 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01076 WSW 16 50 24 4 NISKU CLEARWATER C 0.14 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01090 SNW 24 50 26 4 DEVON 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01182 WSW 7 51 23 4 ELLERSLIE IRVINE CK 0.05 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01263 WNW 18 48 26 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 S795 6 20 C25 C RV 01264 SSW 2 49 26 4 CALMAR W WHITEMUD C 0.03 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01265 SSE 5 49 1 5 THORSBY WATERCOURSE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01269 SSW 5 49 26 4 KAVANAGH 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01270 SSE 14 49 26 4 LEDUC W WHITEMUD C 0.06 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01722 WNW 24 49 26 4 LEDUC W WHITEMUD C 0.07 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01726 WSW 16 50 23 4 NISKU CLEARWATER C 0.06 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01727 SSW 16 50 23 4 BEAUMONT CLEARWATER C 0.04 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 01748 SSW 32 49 1 5 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 S622 2 17 C25 C RV 01749 SSE 29 50 1 5 TELFORDVILLE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 02071 SSW 28 49 2 5 TELFORDVILLE SUNNYBROOK C 0.06 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 02073 SSE 26 49 2 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 02074 ISE 2 50 2 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 02098 SSW 33 49 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 S622 2 18.799999 C25 C RV 02247 WNW 15 48 25 4 MILLET EYOT IRR.DIT 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06539 SSW 5 49 27 4 CALMAR CACHE CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06543 WNW 13 49 24 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06616 ISW 24 49 24 4 LEDUC BLACKMUD CK 0.03 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06644 SSE 16 48 25 4 LEDUC EYOT IRR.DIT 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06837 INE 12 50 26 4 CALMAR 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06838 WSW 10 50 23 4 ROLLYVIEW CLEARWATER C 0.05 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06840 WNW 19 50 23 4 NISKU 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 06982 SSE 31 49 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 S622 2 16.200001 C25 C RV 07016 WSW 18 50 23 4 LEDUC CLEARWATER C 0.08 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 07068 WSW 32 49 1 5 TELFORDVILLE BLACK CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 07541 WSW 29 49 1 5 TELFORDVILLE WATERCOURSE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 07543 WNW 19 49 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 07745 SSE 3 50 2 5 ST FRANCIS 0 50 5 7 S622 2 9.1999998 C25 C RV 07746 SSW 4 50 2 5 TELFORDVILLE 0 50 5 7 S622 2 6.8000002 C25 C RV 07747 WSW 4 50 2 5 TELFORDVILLE WATERCOURSE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 07748 SSE 25 49 2 5 TELFORDVILLE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 07749 WSW 5 49 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08043 WNW 23 48 26 4 LEDUC W WHITEMUD C 0.01 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08044 SSE 29 48 26 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08075 WNW 29 49 2 5 TELFORDVILLE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08144 SSE 18 48 23 4 KAVANAGH COAL LAKE CK 0 60 5 7 S616 10 9.1999998 C25 C RV 08145 SSW 27 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08146 SSW 26 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08148 WSW 1 50 28 4 CALMAR CACHE CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08151 WNW 10 48 25 4 MILLET EYOT IRR.DIT 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08494 WSW 2 49 26 4 CALMAR W WHITEMUD C 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08509 SSW 3 50 4 5 BRETON 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08528 INW 24 50 27 4 NISKU CONJURING CK 0.14 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08624 SSW 18 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08627 WNW 26 48 3 5 BRETON STRAWBERRY C 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 08881 WSW 26 49 3 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 S770 4 6.4000001 C25 C RV 08885 SSE 28 50 26 4 DEVON 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09206 INW 2 51 3 5 GENESEE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09352 WSW 29 48 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0.02 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09407 SSW 28 50 1 5 GENESEE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV

Page 1 Bridge Inventory Document

12 Highway 14 Local 3 Assoc 3 Assoc 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 7 Stream 7 Stream 8 Electoral 10 11 Control 13 Highway Road 15 16 1,2 FileDir File No 1 File No 2 Quarter Section Township Range Meridian 5 Bridge Name 6 Stream Name Control Sequence District 9 Region District Highway Section Sequence Authority Category Usage 09436 WSW 3 50 2 5 TELFORDVILLE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09438 SSW 4 49 1 5 THORSBY WATERCOURSE 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09647 WSW 21 48 26 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09649 SSE 13 49 28 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09650 WSW 4 50 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09651 WSW 9 50 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09652 SSW 28 49 27 4 BUFORD WILLOW CK 3 0.01 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09655 WNW 15 50 1 5 CALMAR STRAWBERRY C 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 09864 SSW 29 48 25 4 KAVANAGH WHITEMUD CK 0.01 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13083 SSE 28 48 2 5 SUNNYBROOK SUNNYBROOK C 0.01 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13256 SSW 14 48 26 4 LEDUC 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13257 SSE 17 49 23 4 LEDUC BLACKMUD CK 0.01 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13389 SSW 3 50 23 4 NEW SAREPTA CLEARWATER C 0.03 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13392 WSW 28 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0.03 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13435 SSW 27 47 2 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13724 WSW 6 49 2 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13921 WSW 17 50 23 4 BEAUMONT CLEARWATER C 0.07 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13993 SSW 15 48 2 5 WARBURG SUNNYBROOK C 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 13995 SSW 17 50 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 70071 WSW 26 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 S778 2 10.2 C25 C RV 70463 SSE 16 49 24 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 71293 WSW 8 51 23 4 BEAUMONT IRVINE CK 0.04 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 71461 WSW 2 51 24 4 BEAUMONT IRVINE CK 0.07 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 71495 WSW 6 49 3 5 ALSIKE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 71689 WNW 13 48 3 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 S770 2 4.4000001 C25 C RV 71755 SSW 26 48 26 4 CALMAR W WHITEMUD C 0.02 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 71990 INW 10 51 3 5 GENESEE DRAINAGE DIT 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72211 WNW 29 48 1 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72341 WNW 35 49 23 4 LEDUC CLEARWATER C 0.02 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72446 WNW 4 49 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72451 WNW 3 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72504 SSE 15 50 3 5 ST FRANCIS 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72505 SSW 17 50 3 5 GENESEE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72714 WSW 13 48 3 5 WARBURG STRAWBERRY C 0 50 5 7 L 2 3.2 C25 C RV 72716 SSE 28 50 2 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72855 WSW 15 49 3 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 72922 INW 22 50 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 73244 SSE 16 49 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 73315 WSW 34 47 3 5 BRETON LITTLE STRAW 0.01 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 73860 ISE 23 50 25 4 NISKU 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 73862 ISE 14 50 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 74292 SSW 3 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 S616 4 26.6 C25 C RV 74331 SSW 14 49 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 74334 WNW 19 49 27 4 BUFORD WILLOW CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 74645 WSW 17 50 3 5 GENESEE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 74646 WNW 7 49 3 5 ALSIKE STRAWBERRY C 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 74738 SSW 17 48 24 4 KAVANAGH 0 60 5 7 S616 10 0.4 C25 C RV 74926 INE 2 49 4 5 ALSIKE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 74970 WSW 2 50 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 75180 SSE 2 50 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 75181 WNW 16 49 3 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 75321 SSW 16 48 26 4 KAVANAGH 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 75458 SSE 16 50 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 75572 WNW 25 49 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 75749 SSE 29 48 27 4 CALMAR CACHE CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 76281 WSW 22 48 2 5 SUNNYBROOK BLACK CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 76733 INW 13 49 1 5 THORSBY 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 76777 WSW 10 49 24 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 76921 WSW 17 48 25 4 KAVANAGH 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 76922 WSW 23 48 25 4 KAVANAGH 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 77040 WNW 23 49 24 4 LEDUC WATERCOURSE 0.05 60 5 7 S814 2 12.4 C25 C RV 77116 WNW 8 48 24 4 KAVANAGH 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 77602 WSW 1 50 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 77658 WNW 8 50 27 4 CALMAR WATERCOURSE 0.06 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV

Page 2 Bridge Inventory Document

12 Highway 14 Local 3 Assoc 3 Assoc 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 7 Stream 7 Stream 8 Electoral 10 11 Control 13 Highway Road 15 16 1,2 FileDir File No 1 File No 2 Quarter Section Township Range Meridian 5 Bridge Name 6 Stream Name Control Sequence District 9 Region District Highway Section Sequence Authority Category Usage 77661 SSE 28 48 2 5 SUNNYBROOK SUNNYBROOK C 0.02 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 77718 WSW 2 49 26 4 LEDUC W WHITEMUD C 0.05 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 78362 SSE 26 50 25 4 NISKU 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 78862 SSE 14 50 25 4 NISKU 0 60 5 7 X 0 C25 C RV 78863 SSE 26 50 25 4 NISKU 0 60 5 7 X 0 C25 C RV 78886 ISE 26 50 25 4 NISKU DRAINAGE DIT 0 60 5 7 X 0 C25 C RV 79094 SSE 26 50 25 4 NISKU 0 60 5 7 X 0 C25 C RV 79314 SSE 19 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 79388 WNW 24 49 3 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 79686 WSW 20 47 2 5 MISSION BCH 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 79690 ISE 26 50 25 4 NISKU DRAINAGE DIT 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 80784 ISW 36 50 25 4 NISKU DRAINAGE DIT 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 81153 WSW 14 49 24 4 LEDUC WATERCOURSE 0 60 5 7 S814 2 10.4 C25 C RV 81214 SSW 2 49 27 4 CALMAR WATERCOURSE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 81368 WSW 12 48 3 5 WARBURG WATERCOURSE 0 50 5 7 S770 2 1.8 C25 C RV 81475 WSW 15 49 1 5 THORSBY WATERCOURSE 0.06 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 81589 SSW 13 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 C RV 00746 ISE 15 50 1 5 THORSBY STRAWBERRY C 0.11 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 01248 INW 36 49 2 5 TELFORDVILLE STRAWBERRY C 0.08 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 06547 WSW 5 50 1 5 TELFORDVILLE STRAWBERRY C 0.1 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 07066 ISE 11 50 28 4 CALMAR WEED CK 0.1 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 09204 WSW 14 49 3 5 WARBURG STRAWBERRY C 0.05 50 5 7 S770 4 3.5999999 C25 M RV 72209 WSW 13 49 3 5 WARBURG STRAWBERRY C 0.06 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 72607 INW 27 49 2 5 TELFORDVILLE STRAWBERRY C 0.07 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 74642 SSW 1 50 28 4 CALMAR CASH CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 M RV 77212 INE 36 49 2 5 TELFORDVILLE STRAWBERRY C 0.09 50 5 7 S622 2 12.2 C25 M RV 79766 INE 25 50 3 5 GENESEE HWY LOCAL 0 50 5 7 S770 4 1.35 C25 M GS 00138 SSW 1 50 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.12 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00300 WSW 31 50 24 4 NISKU BLACKMUD CK 0.1 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00329 WSW 12 51 24 4 BEAUMONT IRVINE CK 0.06 60 5 7 S814 2 27.6 C25 S RV 00483 SSE 6 51 24 4 EDMONTON BLACKMUD CK 0.11 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00586 WNW 10 50 24 4 NISKU CLEARWATER C 0.12 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00587 SSW 13 50 24 4 LEDUC CLEARWATER C 0.1 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00588 WNW 12 50 24 4 NISKU CLEARWATER C 0.09 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00736 SSE 18 50 24 4 LEDUC BLACKMUD CK 0.08 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00738 WNW 28 49 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00749 SSW 30 49 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0.05 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00822 SSE 17 50 24 4 LEDUC CLEARWATER C 0.15 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 00905 SSE 6 49 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0.03 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01139 WSW 3 51 24 4 ELLERSLIE IRVINE CK 0.08 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01266 SSW 3 49 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01267 WSW 33 50 25 4 NISKU WHITEMUD CK 0.1 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01268 SSW 28 49 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01355 SSW 3 51 25 4 NISKU WHITEMUD CK 0.11 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01718 WSW 30 48 26 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.05 50 5 7 S795 6 23 C25 S RV 01719 WSW 31 48 26 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.06 50 5 7 S795 6 24.6 C25 S RV 01720 WSW 24 49 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0.08 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01721 WSW 11 50 24 4 NISKU CLEARWATER C 0.11 60 5 7 S814 2 18 C25 S RV 01724 WNW 8 50 27 4 CALMAR WILLOW CK 3 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01728 SSE 28 49 26 4 LEDUC 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 01732 INE 14 47 2 5 FISHER HOME PIGEON LAKE 0 50 5 7 S771 6 14.6 C25 S RV 01751 WNW 21 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK SUNNYBROOK C 0.05 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 02072 SSW 15 49 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0.05 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 02099 SSW 15 49 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06540 WNW 8 49 27 4 GLEN PARK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06541 SSW 25 49 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.1 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06545 SSE 17 50 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06546 WSW 8 50 26 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06752 SSE 18 49 27 4 BUFORD 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06839 SSE 4 50 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06888 SSW 16 49 26 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 06940 SSE 25 48 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 07065 SSE 4 50 26 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 07067 SSE 17 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK BLACK CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV

Page 3 Bridge Inventory Document

12 Highway 14 Local 3 Assoc 3 Assoc 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 4 Legal 7 Stream 7 Stream 8 Electoral 10 11 Control 13 Highway Road 15 16 1,2 FileDir File No 1 File No 2 Quarter Section Township Range Meridian 5 Bridge Name 6 Stream Name Control Sequence District 9 Region District Highway Section Sequence Authority Category Usage 07069 SSE 12 48 27 4 GLEN PARK CONJURING CK 0.02 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 07070 WNW 1 50 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.13 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 07071 WNW 30 49 25 4 LEDUC W WHITEMUD C 0.09 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 07072 SSE 18 50 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0.08 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08149 WNW 30 49 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08150 SSE 13 49 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.08 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08492 SSE 1 48 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.01 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08493 SSW 18 49 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0.04 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08512 WNW 9 49 26 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08878 WNW 29 49 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08879 SSE 6 50 25 4 LEDUC WHITEMUD CK 0.07 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08880 SSW 29 48 3 5 WARBURG LITTLE STRAW 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08883 WNW 10 49 3 5 WARBURG STRAWBERRY C 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 08949 SSE 30 50 24 4 NISKU BLACKMUD CK 0.09 60 5 7 S625 2 3.2 C25 S RV 09354 SSW 17 49 23 4 LEDUC BLACKMUD CK 0.02 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 09472 WSW 31 50 24 4 NISKU IRVINE CK 0.1 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 09648 SSE 32 48 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 09653 SSW 30 49 27 4 BUFORD 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 13009 SSE 26 49 27 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 13084 SSW 28 50 3 5 GENESEE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 13391 SSW 24 49 27 4 CALMAR CONJURING CK 0.09 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 13393 WSW 20 48 1 5 SUNNYBROOK WEED CK 0.01 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 13725 WSW 24 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 13994 SSW 29 50 3 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 70082 SSE 15 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 70083 SSW 29 48 1 5 SUNNYBROOK WEED CK 0.02 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 70099 WSW 3 49 3 5 WARBURG STRAWBERRY C 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 72265 WSW 9 50 26 4 CALMAR 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 72404 WSW 36 49 23 4 LEDUC CLEARWATER C 0.01 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 73211 INW 8 50 24 4 NISKU BLACKMUD CK 0.07 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 73812 SSW 27 49 24 4 LEDUC BLACKMUD CK 0.06 60 5 7 S623 2 4.4000001 C25 S RV 73830 WNW 14 47 2 5 BRETON PIGEON LK CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 74332 SSW 13 48 1 5 THORSBY WEED CK 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 74641 SSE 5 50 27 4 BUFORD WILLOW CK 3 0.03 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 75269 INE 7 50 27 4 CALMAR WILLOW CK 3 0.05 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 75574 WSW 24 48 25 4 LEDUC 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 76385 SSE 13 49 4 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 76920 ISE 7 51 24 4 ELLERSLIE BLACKMUD CK 0.14 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 76923 SSW 18 48 24 4 KAVANAGH 0 60 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 78007 WNW 8 49 3 5 WARBURG 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 78045 ISE 20 49 2 5 SUNNYBROOK SUNNYBROOK C 0.04 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 79138 SSE 17 48 3 5 ALSIKE LITTLE STRAW 0.03 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 79497 WSW 24 50 2 5 TELFORDVILLE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 79676 WNW 18 50 1 5 TELFORDVILLE WATERCOURSE 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV 81033 WNW 3 49 3 5 WARBURG STRAWBERRY C 0 50 5 7 L 0 C25 S RV

Page 4 Bridge Inventory Document

Page 5 Bridge Inventory Document

Page 6 Bridge Inventory Document

17Span 17 Span 18 Span 19 Year 19 Year 21 Rail 22 Rail 23 Side 24 Wearing 25 Deck 26 Sub 27 Bearing 27 Bearing 27 Bearing 27 Bearing 28 Abutment 28 Abutment 28 Abutment 28 Pier 1 28 Pier 1 1,2 FileDir Type 1 Type 2 Code Prime Last 20 Curb Post Type Walk Surface Joint Deck Cat Expansion Type Expansion Cat Fixed Type Fixed Found Type Backwall Seat foundation Shaft 77661 SP 93 93 77718 SP 64 64 78362 MP 80 80 78862 MP 78 81 78863 FP 78886 MP 78 78 79094 MP 78 78 79314 MP 80 80 79388 MP 82 82 79686 MP 82 82 79690 SP 82 82 80784 SP 83 83 81153 MP 89 89 81214 MP 89 89 81368 MP 88 88 81475 MP 88 81589 MP 90 90 00746 DBT S 88 88 C S G N N B P E NR E NR H T C 01248 PT TT S 30 60 T N G N T T S SP S PF T T T B 06547 PT TT S 30 68 T N G N T T S SP S PF T T T T B 07066 RG TT 60 81 T S G N T T S SP S PF T T T P P 09204 PQ S 56 56 C C P A P S SP S PF C C 72209 PT TT 24 75 T S G T T S SP S PF T T T T B 72607 TH TT S 48 83 T T G N T T E NT E NR T T T H H 74642 PJ 61 0 C S G N P T T 77212 PM S 70 70 C S G N A S P E NS H E P P 79766 FM CV S 83 83 P N C N H AA P E NR E NR H C C H Q 00138 HC 71 71 C S G C P T 00300 HC 65 65 C S T C P T 00329 VS 77 77 C S H C P T T 00483 SM S 84 84 C S H N C B P E NS H C P P 00586 PG S 60 60 C S G C P T T T T T 00587 HC S 71 71 C S G A P T T 00588 HC S 61 87 C S G N C P T T T 00736 SM S 80 80 C S G N C B P T T 00738 HC 70 70 C S G N P T T 00749 HC 70 70 C S G C P T 00822 SC S 93 93 C S G N A B P E NS H T S 00905 HC S 65 65 C S G N C P T T T T T 01139 HC S 60 63 C S G N N P T T T 01266 HC S 65 65 C S G N A P T T T T T 01267 HC 69 69 C S G C P T 01268 PG 69 69 C S T N P T T 01355 SC S 94 94 C S G N N B P E NS H T C P P 01718 HC S 61 61 C S G N A P T T 01719 HC S 61 70 C S G N A P T T T T T 01720 PG 55 55 C T T N P T T T T T 01721 PG S 58 58 C S G C P T T 01724 PG S 58 58 C S G N N P T T 01728 PG 56 69 C S G C P T T 01732 SM S 85 85 C S G C N P E NS S H H 01751 TT S 68 68 T T G T T T T 02072 HC S 66 66 C S G N A P T T T T T 02099 HC S 66 66 C S G N A P T T T T T 06540 HC 66 66 C S T N P T T 06541 HC 66 66 C S T C P T 06545 HC 71 71 C S G N P T T 06546 SM S 88 88 C S G N C B P E NS H T C P P 06752 PG S 60 60 C S G N C P T T T T T 06839 SC S 93 93 C S G N N B P E NS H T S 06888 PG 59 59 C S T C P T T 06940 HC 64 64 C S T C P T T 07065 HC 71 71 C S G C P T T 07067 TT 51 51 T T T T T T T

Page 7 Bridge Inventory Document

17Span 17 Span 18 Span 19 Year 19 Year 21 Rail 22 Rail 23 Side 24 Wearing 25 Deck 26 Sub 27 Bearing 27 Bearing 27 Bearing 27 Bearing 28 Abutment 28 Abutment 28 Abutment 28 Pier 1 28 Pier 1 1,2 FileDir Type 1 Type 2 Code Prime Last 20 Curb Post Type Walk Surface Joint Deck Cat Expansion Type Expansion Cat Fixed Type Fixed Found Type Backwall Seat foundation Shaft 07069 SM 82 82 C S H N C B P T T T 07070 HC 70 70 C S G N P T T T T T 07071 HC 63 63 C T T C P T T 07072 HC 69 69 C S G N P T T 08149 HC S 62 62 C S G N C P T T T T T 08150 HC 65 65 C S T C P T T 08492 PG 57 57 C T G C P T T 08493 VS 75 75 C S G C P T 08512 PG 57 57 C T T C P T T 08878 PG 59 59 C S T C P T T 08879 VH 74 74 C S G C P T 08880 PG 61 61 C S T N P T T T T T 08883 HC S 67 67 C S G N C P T T 08949 SM 79 79 C S H A P H H C P P 09354 HH 61 61 C T T C P T T 09472 HC 65 65 C S T C P T T 09648 PG 67 67 C S G C P T T 09653 PG S 59 59 C S G N C P T T T T T 13009 PG 58 58 C S T C P T T 13084 TT 50 64 T T T T T T T 13391 HC 65 65 C S T C P T T 13393 VS 75 75 C S G N P T T 13725 SM S 84 84 C S G N N B P T T 13994 TT 32 67 T T G T T T T 70082 PG 53 53 C T T N P T T 70083 HH 61 61 C S T N P T T 70099 PG S 58 58 C S G N C P T T T 72265 PG 56 56 C T T N P T T T T T 72404 PG 60 60 C T T C P T T 73211 TT 55 55 T T T T T T 73812 SC S 92 92 C S H N A B P E NS H H S 73830 SM S 87 87 C S G N C P E NS H T S 74332 PG 54 54 C T T N P T T 74641 PG 56 56 C T T C P T T 75269 PG 60 60 C S T C P T T 75574 HC 62 62 C S T C P T T 76385 HC 68 68 C S G C P T T 76920 HC S 69 69 C S G N C B P E NS E NS H C P P 76923 HC 68 68 C S G C P T T 78007 PG 61 79 C T G C P T T 78045 TT 75 75 T T T T T T T 79138 PG S 55 93 C S G N C P E NS H T S 79497 PG S 52 82 C T G N N P T T 79676 PG S 52 82 C T G N C P T T 81033 PG S 58 58 C S G N C P T T

Page 8 Bridge Inventory Document

38 Water 28 Pier 1 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 29 Number 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 31 Bridge 32 Theoretical 34 Clear 35 Gross 36 Vertical 36 Vertical 37 Deck Control 1,2 FileDir Cap Foundation Shaft Cap of Spans Length 1 Length 2 Length 3 Length 4 Length 5 Length Length 33 Skew Roadway Deck Width Clearance Over Clearance Under Height Authority 00222 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 18.29999924 0 0 0 0 0 0 00371 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 20.70000076 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3.7 00393 1 3.7 0 0 0 0 36 0 22 11 0 0 0 5.1 00482 2 1.8 1.8 0 0 0 78.59999847 0 -30 12 0 0 0 10 00497 1 3.3 0 0 0 0 26 0 -5 8 0 0 0 4.7 00537 1 3.7 0 0 0 0 39.59999847 0 -25 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.6 00561 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 14 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 1.8 00585 1 4.9 0 0 0 0 41.5 0 11 12 0 0 0 6.5 00743 2 1.8 1.8 0 0 0 36 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 7.6 00748 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 19.5 0 -30 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 00816 1 3 0 0 0 0 22.60000038 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 3.7 01076 1 4.9 0 0 0 0 46.29999924 0 30 9 0 0 0 5.6 01090 2 1.5 1.5 0 0 0 18.29999924 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 1.5 01182 1 3 0 0 0 0 35 0 27 9 0 0 0 3.5 01263 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 26.79999924 0 8.5 0 0 0 4.6 01264 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 36 0 38 11 0 0 0 3.1 01265 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 22 0 -20 11 0 0 0 2 01269 1 3.4 0 0 0 0 38.40000153 0 -15 11 0 0 0 5.7 01270 1 2.7 0 0 0 0 22.60000038 0 8 0 0 0 3.5 01722 1 2 0 0 0 0 25.60000038 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 6.4 01726 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 21.29999924 0 6.3000002 0 0 0 4 01727 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 15.80000019 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 01748 1 2 0 0 0 0 107 0 9.1000004 0 0 0 10.1 01749 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 28 0 -20 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.9 02071 1 3.7 0 0 0 0 113.4000015 0 -17 8 0 0 0 16.6 02073 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 71.90000153 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 10.4 02074 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 20.10000038 0 0 0 0 0 0 02098 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 113.4000015 0 30 9 0 0 0 15 02247 2 1.2 1.2 0 0 0 15.19999981 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.1 06539 1 2.9 0 0 0 0 31.70000076 0 23 11 0 0 0 3.2 06543 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 24.39999962 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.6 06616 1 4 0 0 0 0 33.5 0 17 8 0 0 0 5.5 06644 2 1.2 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 6.0999999 0 0 0 0 06837 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 100.5999985 0 10 8.5 0 0 0 14.3 06838 1 3 0 0 0 0 29.29999924 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.6 06840 3 0.9 0.6 0.6 0 0 9.100000381 0 6.6999998 0 0 0 1.5 06982 2 2 2 0 0 0 75.5 0 -10 9.8000002 0 0 0 11.8 07016 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 27.39999962 0 -50 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.6 07068 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 49.40000153 0 20 8 0 0 0 6.7 07541 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 20.10000038 0 15 7.3000002 0 0 0 3 07543 2 1.5 1.5 0 0 0 17.10000038 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.7 07745 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 26.20000076 0 8.5 0 0 0 4.6 07746 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 53 0 -40 11 0 0 0 5.5 07747 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 37.40000153 0 8 0 0 0 5 07748 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 15.80000019 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.1 07749 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 15.19999981 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 1.5 08043 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 11.89999962 0 0 0 0 0 0 08044 2 1.8 1.8 0 0 0 14.30000019 0 5.5 0 0 0 2.1 08075 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 37.79999924 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 7.6 08144 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 103.5999985 0 10 0 0 0 10.5 08145 1 3.7 0 0 0 0 39 0 8 0 0 0 9.8 08146 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 27.39999962 0 9.8000002 0 0 0 5.2 08148 1 4.3 0 0 0 0 46.29999924 0 -5 8 0 0 0 8.1 08151 2 1.4 1.4 0 0 0 20 0 7.1999998 0 0 0 2.2 08494 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 33.5 0 45 8 0 0 0 2.8 08509 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 40 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.6 08528 1 7.1 0 0 0 0 82.30000305 0 -10 10 0 0 0 14.2 08624 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 40 0 8 0 0 0 5.5 08627 2 1.8 1.8 0 0 0 47.5 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 10.7 08881 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 33.5 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 4.3 08885 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 22.5 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 2.7 09206 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 70.09999847 0 -5 7.9000001 0 0 0 10.4 09352 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 27.39999962 0 -15 7.9000001 0 0 0 4.6 09407 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 22.60000038 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 4

Page 9 Bridge Inventory Document

38 Water 28 Pier 1 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 29 Number 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 31 Bridge 32 Theoretical 34 Clear 35 Gross 36 Vertical 36 Vertical 37 Deck Control 1,2 FileDir Cap Foundation Shaft Cap of Spans Length 1 Length 2 Length 3 Length 4 Length 5 Length Length 33 Skew Roadway Deck Width Clearance Over Clearance Under Height Authority 09436 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 18.29999924 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 09438 1 3.6 0 0 0 0 31.70000076 0 -9 10 0 0 0 4.7 09647 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 24.70000076 0 -45 7.9000001 0 0 0 3 09649 1 2.4 0 0 0 0 20.70000076 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.7 09650 1 4.2 0 0 0 0 26.79999924 0 8 0 0 0 3.8 09651 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 11.89999962 0 0 0 0 0 0 09652 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 21.89999962 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.1 09655 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 73.19999695 0 -45 9.1000004 0 0 0 7.6 09864 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 28 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 5.5 13083 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 27.39999962 0 8 0 0 0 3.9 13256 2 1.6 0.6 0 0 0 12.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 13257 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 29.29999924 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 5.5 13389 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 43.90000153 0 8 0 0 0 6 13392 1 4 0 0 0 0 28.70000076 0 8 0 0 0 5.2 13435 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 13.39999962 0 0 0 0 0 0 13724 2 0.9 0.5 0 0 0 14.60000038 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3.4 13921 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 13.39999962 0 6.5999999 0 0 0 3.4 13993 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 19 0 8.1999998 0 0 0 0 13995 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 106.6999969 0 -40 9.1000004 0 0 0 12.2 70071 1 3 0 0 0 0 40.20000076 0 11 0 0 0 6.1 70463 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 14 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 1.8 71293 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 29.89999962 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 3.7 71461 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 27.39999962 0 8 0 0 0 3.5 71495 1 3.1 0 0 0 0 45.70000076 0 9 0 0 0 6.5 71689 1 2.7 0 0 0 0 57.90000153 0 -28 12 0 0 0 6.7 71755 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 14 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 71990 2 1.8 1.8 0 0 0 28 0 28 7.9000001 0 0 0 4.9 72211 2 0.9 1.1 0 0 0 18.29999924 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 72341 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 39.59999847 0 -33 8 0 0 0 5 72446 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 15.80000019 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.7 72451 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 19.5 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3 72504 2 1.2 0.9 0 0 0 38.40000153 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 9.1 72505 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 26.20000076 0 30 7.9000001 0 0 0 4.6 72714 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 23 0 8 0 0 0 2.7 72716 1 1.2 0 0 0 0 30.5 0 6.6999998 0 0 0 6.4 72855 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 23.79999924 0 -30 9.1000004 0 0 0 2.7 72922 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 37.79999924 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 5.5 73244 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 12.80000019 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.1 73315 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 29.89999962 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 5.2 73860 1 0.9 0 0 0 0 20.10000038 0 12.8 0 0 0 0 73862 2 1.8 1.2 0 0 0 90.30000305 0 12.8 0 0 0 0 74292 2 1.5 1.2 0 0 0 36.59999847 0 12 0 0 0 4.9 74331 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 22.60000038 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 3.7 74334 1 3.2 0 0 0 0 34 0 38 8 0 0 0 4 74645 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 44.5 0 -30 8 0 0 0 5.7 74646 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 20.10000038 0 8 0 0 0 5.7 74738 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 44.5 0 -32 9 0 0 0 4.5 74926 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 18.89999962 0 15 7.3000002 0 0 0 3 74970 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 21.89999962 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3.7 75180 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 13.39999962 0 -30 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.1 75181 1 2.4 0 0 0 0 29.89999962 0 -25 8 0 0 0 4.7 75321 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 16.5 0 30 8 0 0 0 2.1 75458 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 34 0 10 9 0 0 0 3.5 75572 1 2.4 0 0 0 0 23.20000076 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.3 75749 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 14 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.7 76281 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 17.70000076 0 6.6999998 0 0 0 2.4 76733 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 13.39999962 0 -10 6.0999999 0 0 0 1.5 76777 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 15.80000019 0 -10 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 76921 2 1.5 1.5 0 0 0 16.5 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.4 76922 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 15.19999981 0 6.4000001 0 0 0 2.7 77040 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 51.20000076 0 10 0 0 0 5 77116 1 1.5 0 0 0 0 15.19999981 0 30 7.3000002 0 0 0 1.8 77602 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 30.5 0 30 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.9 77658 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 23.20000076 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3.7

Page 10 Bridge Inventory Document

38 Water 28 Pier 1 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 29 Number 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 31 Bridge 32 Theoretical 34 Clear 35 Gross 36 Vertical 36 Vertical 37 Deck Control 1,2 FileDir Cap Foundation Shaft Cap of Spans Length 1 Length 2 Length 3 Length 4 Length 5 Length Length 33 Skew Roadway Deck Width Clearance Over Clearance Under Height Authority 77661 1 2.7 0 0 0 0 37.20000076 0 -14 8 0 0 0 5.9 77718 1 2.1 0 0 0 0 19.5 0 7.9000001 0 0 0 2.7 78362 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 46 0 12 0 0 0 5.8 78862 2 1.8 1.2 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 4.3 78863 2 2.1 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78886 2 1.5 1.5 0 0 0 30.5 0 -18 7.3000002 0 0 0 2.1 79094 2 1.5 1.5 0 0 0 86.59999847 0 58 8.5 0 0 0 4.6 79314 1 1.6 0 0 0 0 22 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3 79388 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 28 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 3.5 79686 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 35 0 7.3000002 0 0 0 4.9 79690 1 2.3 0 0 0 0 55.5 0 15.3 0 0 0 7 80784 1 2.8 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 81153 1 1.6 0 0 0 0 45 0 10 0 0 0 6.2 81214 1 1.6 0 0 0 0 33 0 -18 8 0 0 0 5.7 81368 1 1.6 0 0 0 0 35 0 15 10.6 0 0 0 3.7 81475 2 1.5 1 0 0 0 18 0 6 0 0 0 2.3 81589 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 24 0 8 0 0 0 3.5 00746 1 40 0 0 0 0 40 45.59999847 7.5999999 8.60000038 0 0 6.6 01248 T 3 8.5 18.3 8.5 0 0 35.29999924 0 4.8000002 5.5 0 0 5.2 06547 T 3 6.1 24.4 6.1 0 0 36.59999847 0 5 5.5999999 0 0 5.8 07066 C 3 8.5 18.3 8.5 0 0 35.29999924 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 6.4 09204 C 3 15.2 15.2 15.2 0 0 45.59999847 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 7.9 72209 T 3 6.1 24.4 6.1 0 0 36.59999847 0 7.5999999 8.5 0 0 5.8 72607 S 5 8.5 8.5 34.9 8.5 6.0999999 66.5 0 6.5999999 7 4.900000095 0 8 74642 T 3 6.1 9.1 6.1 0 0 21.29999924 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4.3 77212 E 3 16.8 16.8 16.8 0 0 50.40000153 0 9.1000004 10.6999998 0 0 9.1 79766 C 5 25 6 27 6 25 89 0 11 12 0 8.300000191 0 00138 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 -30 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 5.5 00300 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 -15 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.7 00329 1 9.1 0 0 0 0 9.100000381 0 11.3 12.1999998 0 0 3 00483 C 3 11 11 11 0 0 33 0 10 11 0 0 5.4 00586 T 3 6.1 6.1 6.1 0 0 18.29999924 0 -30 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 3.7 00587 1 11.6 0 0 0 0 11.60000038 0 9.8000002 10.6999998 0 0 2.7 00588 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.8 00736 T 3 6 8 6 0 0 20 0 -15 8.8000002 9.80000019 0 0 3.1 00738 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3 00749 2 6.1 6.1 0 0 0 12.19999981 0 15 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3 00822 1 12 0 0 0 0 12 0 9.1999998 10.1999998 0 0 3.1 00905 T 3 6.1 6.1 6.1 0 0 18.29999924 0 9.1000004 10 0 0 4.9 01139 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.4 01266 T 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 5.8 01267 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 6.4 01268 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.4 01355 C 3 10 10 10 0 0 30 33 8 9 0 0 6 01718 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 2.4 01719 T T T T 2 6.1 6.1 0 0 0 12.19999981 0 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 2.5 01720 T 5 8.5 8.5 8.5 6.1 6.0999999 37.70000076 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 7.5 01721 T 3 6.1 6.1 6.1 0 0 18.29999924 0 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 3.7 01724 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.7 01728 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.4 01732 S 2 10 10 0 0 0 20 0 8.8000002 11 0 0 4.2 01751 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 6.0999999 6.69999981 0 0 2.5 02072 T 3 6.1 6.1 6.1 0 0 18.29999924 0 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 4 02099 T 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 4.9 06540 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 15 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.4 06541 3 6.1 6.1 6.1 0 0 18.29999924 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.7 06545 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.4 06546 C 3 11 11 11 0 0 33 0 8.8000002 9.80000019 0 0 6.5 06752 T 2 6.1 6.1 0 0 0 12.19999981 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.5 06839 1 8 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 9 0 0 2.5 06888 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 30 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.7 06940 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.7 07065 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3 07067 T 3 4.9 8.5 4.9 0 0 18.29999924 0 6.0999999 6.69999981 0 0 3.7

Page 11 Bridge Inventory Document

38 Water 28 Pier 1 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 28 Pier 2 29 Number 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 30 Span 31 Bridge 32 Theoretical 34 Clear 35 Gross 36 Vertical 36 Vertical 37 Deck Control 1,2 FileDir Cap Foundation Shaft Cap of Spans Length 1 Length 2 Length 3 Length 4 Length 5 Length Length 33 Skew Roadway Deck Width Clearance Over Clearance Under Height Authority 07069 1 8 0 0 0 0 8 0 9 9.89999962 0 0 3.2 07070 T T T T 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 6.1 07071 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.4 07072 T 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4 08149 T 3 6.1 8.5 6.1 0 0 20.70000076 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4.6 08150 1 10.1 0 0 0 0 10.10000038 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.4 08492 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 1.8 08493 2 6.1 6.1 0 0 0 12.19999981 0 7.5999999 8.5 0 0 3.4 08512 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 3 08878 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.4 08879 3 6.1 6.1 6.1 0 0 18.29999924 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4.6 08880 T T T T 3 6.1 8.5 6.1 0 0 20.70000076 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4.3 08883 T 3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0 0 25.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4.9 08949 C P P C 3 11 11 11 0 0 33 0 15 10.1 7.5999999 0 0 3.7 09354 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3 09472 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.7 09648 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.1 09653 T 3 6.1 8.5 6.1 0 0 20.70000076 0 8.1999998 9.10000038 0 0 4.3 13009 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.4 13084 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.0999999 6.69999981 0 0 3.4 13391 1 10.1 0 0 0 0 10.10000038 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.4 13393 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.5999999 8.5 0 0 2.7 13725 1 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 7.3000002 8.30000019 0 0 3 13994 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7 0 0 3 70082 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.4 70083 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.7 70099 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 3 72265 T T T T 2 6.1 6.1 0 0 0 12.19999981 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 3.7 72404 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.4 73211 2 6.1 6.1 0 0 0 12.19999981 0 6.0999999 6.69999981 0 0 2.7 73812 1 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 10.4 11.3999996 0 0 3 73830 1 8 0 0 0 0 8 0 7.5999999 8.60000038 0 0 4 74332 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 3 74641 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.7 75269 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 3.4 75574 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 2.1 76385 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.1 76920 C 3 10.1 10.1 10.1 0 0 30.29999924 0 9.1000004 10.1000004 0 0 5.5 76923 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.4 78007 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.4 78045 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 6.0999999 7 0 0 3.7 79138 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 4 79497 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.5 79676 1 6.1 0 0 0 0 6.099999905 0 7.3000002 8.19999981 0 0 2.5 81033 1 8.5 0 0 0 0 8.5 0 6.4000001 7.30000019 0 0 3

Page 12 Bridge Inventory Document

39 Drainage 40 Design 41 Design 42 Total 43 Cost 44 Steel 45 Design 45 Design HS 47 47 47 47 47 Other 47 No 48 Info 48 Info Status 48 Info Status 49 Highway 51 1,2 FileDir Area Flow Frequency Cost Code Weight Load 1 Load 2 H Rating Rating Phone Gas Power Light Utility Utility Status Code Month Year Units Subsystem Coordinate 1 00222 0 0 0 0 0 28 M 1 96 I 1600 00371 10 4 0 0 0 57 C 1 96 I 1600 00393 112 16 25 0 0 89 C 3 98 M 1200 00482 146 12 50 102 W 0 89 89 C 6 96 I 3 1626 00497 47 19 25 25 P 0 92 C 5 0 M 400 00537 129 21 0 0 0 C 2 80 M 1200 00561 18 4 0 0 0 67 C 1 96 I 1600 00585 285 46 25 96 E 0 86 C 5 0 M 200 00743 64 3 0 0 0 56 C 1 96 I 1200 00748 16 4 0 0 0 70 C 1 96 I 1600 00816 52 13 25 0 0 65 C 1 96 I 1200 01076 290 46 25 113 D 0 86 C 5 0 M 1600 01090 18 6 0 0 0 50 C 1 96 I 1200 01182 95 12 25 83 R 0 71 M 5 0 M 1600 01263 0 0 0 0 0 56 C 1 96 I 3 1631 01264 65 7 25 16 P 0 C 5 96 I 1200 01265 18 6 0 10 A 0 C 3 98 I 400 01269 39 14 25 41 P 0 89 C 3 98 M 1200 01270 83 14 25 19 A 0 90 C 5 96 M 400 01722 52 17 0 0 0 54 C 1 96 I 1600 01726 65 18 0 0 0 63 C 6 99 I 1600 01727 52 11 0 0 0 69 C 1 96 I 1200 01748 8 3 0 42 A 0 C 3 95 I 3 1250 01749 3 1 0 0 0 64 C 1 96 I 400 02071 65 25 25 131 P 0 89 C 5 96 M 1200 02073 10 7 0 0 0 61 C 5 96 I 400 02074 0 0 0 0 0 34 M 1 96 I 400 02098 8 3 0 36 A 0 84 C 5 96 M 3 950 02247 0 3 0 0 0 63 C 5 96 I 1600 06539 31 12 25 30 P 0 90 C 5 96 M 1200 06543 10 4 0 0 0 66 C 1 97 I 1600 06616 64 28 25 45 P 0 92 C 5 0 M 1200 06644 0 0 0 0 0 63 M 5 96 I 400 06837 5 2 0 0 0 78 C 1 96 I 400 06838 65 8 0 0 0 78 C 5 0 M 1600 06840 0 0 0 0 0 37 C 1 96 I 1600 06982 26 13 25 39 A 0 C 3 95 I 3 500 07016 207 10 0 0 0 62 C 1 96 I 1600 07068 23 8 0 0 0 62 C 5 96 I 1600 07541 3 3 0 0 0 66 C 12 98 I 1600 07543 21 8 0 0 0 60 C 1 96 I 1600 07745 5 2 0 0 0 64 C 1 96 I 3 550 07746 16 5 0 18 E 0 83 C 1 97 M 3 1200 07747 13 4 0 6 E 0 C 12 98 I 1600 07748 27 6 0 0 0 60 C 5 96 I 400 07749 8 4 0 0 0 60 C 5 96 I 1600 08043 0 0 0 0 0 44 M 1 96 I 1600 08044 28 8 0 0 0 67 C 6 98 I 400 08075 10 7 0 0 0 56 C 1 96 I 1600 08144 25 5 0 100 E 0 87 C 3 98 M 4 600 08145 40 22 25 45 P 0 92 C 1 96 M 1200 08146 18 7 0 0 0 67 C 5 96 I 1200 08148 122 44 25 72 P 0 91 C 3 98 I 1600 08151 22 5 25 11 P 0 94 C 5 96 M 1600 08494 23 8 0 14 P 0 C 3 95 I 1600 08509 13 4 0 17 P 0 83 C 1 96 M 1200 08528 315 83 25 360 E 0 96 C 3 97 M 1200 08624 29 7 25 14 P 0 85 C 1 97 M 1200 08627 39 23 0 0 0 55 C 6 98 I 1600 08881 10 3 0 0 0 61 C 1 96 I 3 1625 08885 12 7 0 0 0 C 6 98 I 400 09206 3 1 0 0 0 62 C 1 96 I 1200 09352 28 8 0 0 0 72 C 1 96 I 1600 09407 3 1 0 0 0 64 C 1 96 I 1200

Page 13 Bridge Inventory Document

39 Drainage 40 Design 41 Design 42 Total 43 Cost 44 Steel 45 Design 45 Design HS 47 47 47 47 47 Other 47 No 48 Info 48 Info Status 48 Info Status 49 Highway 51 1,2 FileDir Area Flow Frequency Cost Code Weight Load 1 Load 2 H Rating Rating Phone Gas Power Light Utility Utility Status Code Month Year Units Subsystem Coordinate 1 09436 8 3 0 0 0 61 C 1 96 I 1600 09438 39 25 50 44 P 0 91 C 3 98 M 1200 09647 20 6 0 0 0 57 C 6 98 I 1600 09649 24 9 0 0 0 63 C 1 96 I 400 09650 65 25 25 40 P 0 85 C 1 97 M 1600 09651 0 0 0 0 0 45 M 1 96 I 1600 09652 26 6 0 0 0 65 C 1 96 I 1200 09655 5 2 0 0 0 64 C 1 96 I 1600 09864 18 6 0 0 0 62 C 5 0 I 1200 13083 9 4 25 12 P 0 90 C 1 97 M 400 13256 0 0 0 0 0 L 6 99 I 1200 13257 10 3 0 0 0 61 C 1 96 I 400 13389 96 8 0 22 P 0 85 C 1 96 M 1200 13392 34 18 25 48 P 0 94 C 1 96 M 1600 13435 0 0 0 0 0 52 M 1 96 I 1200 13724 10 5 0 0 0 L 1 96 I 1600 13921 200 6 0 0 0 53 C 3 98 I 1600 13993 6 2 0 0 0 53 M 10 99 I 1200 13995 16 5 25 0 0 62 C 1 97 I 1200 70071 36 14 0 0 0 C 12 71 I 3 1630 70463 18 4 0 0 0 C 5 72 I 400 71293 70 11 0 0 0 57 C 1 96 I 1600 71461 117 25 25 13 P 0 C 3 95 M 1600 71495 23 8 0 50 P 0 90 C 5 96 M 1600 71689 21 7 0 26 P 0 C 3 95 I 4 1632 71755 16 6 0 0 0 62 C 6 98 I 1200 71990 41 23 0 0 0 55 C 1 96 I 1200 72211 0 0 0 0 0 63 C 1 96 I 1600 72341 87 6 25 20 P 0 93 C 5 0 M 1600 72446 23 7 0 0 0 63 C 2 97 I 1600 72451 8 4 0 0 0 58 C 12 96 I 1600 72504 13 4 0 0 0 60 C 1 96 I 400 72505 23 4 0 0 0 60 C 1 96 I 1200 72714 16 6 25 10 E 0 89 C 5 96 M 1200 72716 5 2 0 0 0 42 C 1 96 I 400 72855 13 6 0 0 0 58 C 1 96 I 1600 72922 10 8 0 0 0 56 C 6 98 I 1200 73244 29 6 0 0 0 58 C 1 96 I 400 73315 18 3 0 0 0 57 C 1 96 I 1600 73860 0 0 0 0 0 C 3 96 I N1 705 73862 0 0 0 0 0 M 8 98 M N1 780 74292 15 4 25 8 P 0 C 12 96 I 3 1001 74331 15 8 0 0 0 54 C 1 96 I 1200 74334 42 18 25 28 P 0 93 C 1 96 M 1600 74645 14 5 25 19 P 0 89 C 5 96 M 1600 74646 23 8 0 5 P 0 C 3 98 I 1600 74738 6 6 0 36 E 0 87 C 5 0 M 4 1400 74926 21 7 0 0 0 62 C 1 96 I 400 74970 9 7 0 0 0 58 C 5 96 I 1600 75180 16 7 0 0 0 60 C 1 96 I 400 75181 16 8 25 0 0 90 C 5 96 M 1600 75321 21 7 0 0 0 60 C 6 98 I 1200 75458 12 5 25 52 R 0 61 99 M 5 0 M 400 75572 31 12 0 0 0 62 C 1 96 I 1600 75749 10 3 0 0 0 63 C 2 97 I 400 76281 6 3 0 0 0 65 C 5 96 I 1600 76733 21 5 0 0 0 67 C 2 97 I 1200 76777 13 4 0 0 0 68 C 1 96 I 1600 76921 3 1 0 0 0 69 C 1 96 I 1600 76922 16 5 0 0 0 68 C 1 96 I 1600 77040 28 8 50 46 A 0 89 C 3 98 M 3 1625 77116 8 3 0 0 0 70 C 6 98 I 1600 77602 26 8 0 0 0 69 C 1 96 I 1600 77658 5 2 0 0 0 60 C 3 98 I 1600

Page 14 Bridge Inventory Document

39 Drainage 40 Design 41 Design 42 Total 43 Cost 44 Steel 45 Design 45 Design HS 47 47 47 47 47 Other 47 No 48 Info 48 Info Status 48 Info Status 49 Highway 51 1,2 FileDir Area Flow Frequency Cost Code Weight Load 1 Load 2 H Rating Rating Phone Gas Power Light Utility Utility Status Code Month Year Units Subsystem Coordinate 1 77661 30 13 25 26 R 0 93 C 1 96 M 400 77718 26 8 0 0 0 64 C 1 96 I 1600 78362 12 7 0 0 0 80 C 1 96 M 400 78862 14 7 100 0 0 M 11 93 M 400 78863 12 7 0 0 0 L 1 96 I 400 78886 12 7 0 0 0 78 C 1 96 M 400 79094 12 7 0 0 0 78 C 1 96 M 400 79314 14 4 0 0 0 80 C 2 97 M 400 79388 7 3 0 0 0 82 C 1 96 M 1600 79686 10 4 0 0 0 82 C 1 96 M 1600 79690 9 6 0 0 0 82 C 1 96 M 400 80784 10 5 0 0 0 83 M 1 96 M 1200 81153 8 2 50 20 A 0 89 C 3 98 M 3 1600 81214 8 3 25 9 P 0 89 C 3 98 M 1400 81368 9 3 50 10 E 0 88 C 3 98 M 4 1600 81475 7 3 25 4 E 0 L 3 98 M 1600 81589 15 7 25 10 P 0 90 C 5 96 M 1200 00746 585 250 50 375 R 0 MS 300 88 T C 8 98 M 400 01248 448 170 100 0 15 C 8 98 I 1200 06547 452 170 100 0 21 C 8 98 I 1600 07066 285 100 25 0 0 HS 20 C 8 98 M 400 09204 256 85 0 53 0 HS 20 56 M 8 98 I 3 1626 72209 259 85 0 0 89 C 8 98 I 1600 72607 440 170 100 0 58 C 6 99 M 1200 74642 85 34 0 0 0 HS 20 61 M 5 0 I 1200 77212 453 198 50 0 0 HS 20 70 C 1 96 I 3 754 79766 0 0 0 0 0 MS 300 83 C 6 99 M 3 400 00138 178 37 0 0 0 HS 20 71 M 1 96 I 1200 00300 643 14 0 0 0 HS 20 65 M 1 96 I 1600 00329 85 17 0 0 0 HS 25 77 M 1 96 I 3 1635 00483 700 76 100 130 R 0 MS 23 84 C 5 96 M 400 00586 257 35 0 0 0 HS 20 60 C 5 0 I 1600 00587 168 14 0 0 W 0 HS 20 71 81 C 5 0 I 1200 00588 168 5 0 25 S 0 87 M 5 0 M 1600 00736 600 12 0 0 0 MS 23 80 C 1 96 M 400 00738 39 13 0 0 0 HS 20 70 M 1 97 I 1600 00749 78 25 0 0 0 HS 20 70 M 1 96 I 1200 00822 181 28 0 99 R 0 CS 750 93 C 1 96 M 400 00905 34 9 0 21 W 0 HS 20 65 87 C 1 96 I 200 01139 123 21 0 0 0 HS 20 63 C 3 98 I 1600 01266 83 18 0 0 0 HS 20 65 C 5 96 I 1200 01267 304 76 0 0 0 HS 20 69 M 1 96 I 1600 01268 39 13 0 0 0 HS 20 69 M 1 97 I 1200 01355 335 125 50 196 R 0 CS 750 93 C 1 96 M 850 01718 44 17 0 0 W 0 HS 20 61 70 C 3 98 I 3 1631 01719 50 18 0 0 U 0 HS 20 56 70 C 3 98 I 3 1631 01720 176 102 50 0 0 HS 20 55 M 1 97 I 1600 01721 175 14 0 0 0 HS 20 58 C 1 96 I 3 1624 01724 36 17 0 0 0 HS 20 58 C 6 98 I 1600 01728 65 21 0 0 S 0 HS 20 69 M 1 96 I 400 01732 52 14 25 95 R 0 MS 23 85 C 1 97 M 4 309 01751 60 18 0 0 0 68 C 1 96 I 1600 02072 75 91 100 0 0 HS 20 66 C 1 97 I 1500 02099 93 102 100 0 0 HS 20 66 C 3 98 I 1200 06540 31 8 0 0 0 HS 20 66 M 3 98 I 1600 06541 78 17 0 0 0 HS 20 66 M 1 96 I 1200 06545 48 0 0 0 0 HS 20 71 M 1 97 I 400 06546 90 24 25 178 R 0 MS 226 88 C 1 96 M 1600 06752 29 15 0 0 0 HS 20 60 C 1 96 I 400 06839 41 11 0 56 R 0 CS 750 93 C 1 96 M 400 06888 41 14 0 0 0 HS 20 59 M 1 96 I 1200 06940 39 13 0 0 0 HS 20 64 M 1 96 I 400 07065 80 17 0 0 0 HS 20 71 M 1 96 I 400 07067 62 72 0 0 0 51 M 1 97 I 400

Page 15 Bridge Inventory Document

39 Drainage 40 Design 41 Design 42 Total 43 Cost 44 Steel 45 Design 45 Design HS 47 47 47 47 47 Other 47 No 48 Info 48 Info Status 48 Info Status 49 Highway 51 1,2 FileDir Area Flow Frequency Cost Code Weight Load 1 Load 2 H Rating Rating Phone Gas Power Light Utility Utility Status Code Month Year Units Subsystem Coordinate 1 07069 60 0 0 0 0 MS 23 82 C 1 96 M 400 07070 106 46 0 0 0 HS 20 70 M 3 98 I 1600 07071 75 0 0 0 0 HS 20 63 M 1 96 I 1600 07072 129 21 0 0 0 HS 20 69 M 1 97 I 400 08149 78 42 0 0 0 HS 20 62 C 1 96 I 1600 08150 65 17 0 0 0 HS 20 65 M 1 96 I 400 08492 56 0 0 0 0 HS 20 57 M 1 96 I 400 08493 62 21 0 0 0 HS 25 75 M 5 0 I 1200 08512 39 14 0 0 0 HS 20 57 M 1 96 I 1600 08878 42 13 0 0 0 HS 20 59 M 1 96 I 1600 08879 207 34 0 0 0 HS 25 74 M 5 0 I 400 08880 52 14 0 0 0 HS 20 61 M 3 98 I 1200 08883 145 48 0 0 0 HS 20 67 C 1 96 I 1600 08949 620 14 0 0 0 MS 23 79 M 5 0 M 2 551 09354 30 0 0 0 0 HS 20 61 M 1 96 I 1200 09472 134 21 0 0 0 HS 20 65 M 1 96 I 1600 09648 31 10 0 0 0 HS 20 67 M 1 97 I 400 09653 47 15 0 0 0 HS 20 59 C 1 96 I 1200 13009 15 8 0 0 0 HS 20 58 M 1 96 I 400 13084 23 6 0 0 S 0 64 M 5 96 I 400 13391 70 15 0 0 0 HS 20 65 M 1 96 I 1200 13393 18 8 0 0 0 HS 25 75 M 5 96 I 1600 13725 32 10 0 25 R 0 MS 23 84 C 1 97 M 1600 13994 39 13 25 0 S 0 67 M 1 97 I 1200 70082 41 13 0 0 0 HS 20 53 M 3 98 I 400 70083 23 8 0 0 0 HS 20 61 M 5 96 I 1200 70099 55 25 0 0 0 HS 20 58 C 1 96 I 1600 72265 100 23 0 0 0 HS 20 56 M 3 98 I 1600 72404 34 9 0 0 0 HS 20 59 M 5 0 I 1600 73211 233 30 0 0 0 55 M 1 96 I 1200 73812 66 0 0 79 R 0 CS 750 92 C 5 0 M 3 1149 73830 49 28 0 65 R 0 MS 23 87 C 1 96 M 1600 74332 23 14 0 0 0 HS 20 54 M 3 98 I 1200 74641 28 12 0 0 0 HS 20 56 M 1 96 I 400 75269 36 17 0 0 0 HS 20 60 M 1 96 I 400 75574 18 6 0 0 0 HS 20 62 M 1 96 I 1600 76385 26 6 0 0 0 HS 20 68 M 1 96 I 400 76920 55 11 0 39 0 HS 20 69 T C 1 96 I 400 76923 21 7 0 0 0 HS 20 68 M 1 96 I 1200 78007 16 7 0 0 S 0 HS 20 79 M 1 96 M 1600 78045 60 31 0 0 0 75 M 5 96 I 400 79138 34 14 25 38 U 0 HS 20 93 93 C 1 96 M 400 79497 8 4 0 0 S 0 HS 20 82 M 3 98 M 1600 79676 5 3 0 0 S 0 HS 20 82 M 3 98 I 1600 81033 0 0 0 0 0 HS 20 58 C 1 96 I 1600

Page 16 Bridge Inventory Document

51 52 Detour 53 Road 53 Road 53 Road 53 Number 53 Roadway 53 Design 20 Curb 21 Post 22 Rail 23 Sidewalk 24 Wearing 26 Substructure 54 AADT 54 AADT 54 AADT 55 Responsible 1,2 FileDir Coordinate 2 Length Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 of Lanes Width Speed Sec Sec Sec Sec Surface Sec Sec 57 Inspect Type Count Year Road Authority 00222 400 0 C25 00371 400 0 Y C25 00393 1600 6 Y E 94 96 C25 00482 1453 5 Y A 3390 99 C25 00497 1600 6 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 00537 1600 0 Y C25 00561 1200 0 Y C25 00585 1600 6 R C U 2 09.0 100 Y C25 00743 1600 0 Y C25 00748 400 0 Y C25 00816 1600 0 Y C25 01076 1200 3 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 01090 800 0 Y C25 01182 1200 5 R L U 2 09.0 80 Y C25 01263 652 3 A 1320 99 C25 01264 1600 6 Y A 1000 94 C25 01265 1600 6 Y E 46 96 C25 01269 1600 6 Y E 110 96 C25 01270 1600 6 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 17 95 C25 01722 400 0 Y C25 01726 1200 3 Y E 40 98 C25 01727 1600 0 Y C25 01748 1608 5 Y A 530 99 C25 01749 1600 0 C25 02071 1600 6 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 17 95 C25 02073 1600 6 R L U 2 09.0 60 Y E 46 95 C25 02074 1200 0 C25 02098 1608 5 R L U 2 09.0 110 Y A 530 99 C25 02247 400 3 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 32 95 C25 06539 1600 3 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y A 1000 94 C25 06543 400 999 Y C25 06616 1200 2 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y C25 06644 1600 12 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y A 72 94 C25 06837 400 0 Y C25 06838 1200 3 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 06840 400 0 N C25 06982 1608 5 Y A 530 99 C25 07016 1200 0 Y C25 07068 1200 6 Y C25 07541 1200 6 R L U 2 07.G 60 Y C25 07543 400 0 Y C25 07745 1627 3 A 530 99 C25 07746 1625 3 R C U 2 09.0 110 Y A 530 99 C25 07747 1200 6 R L U 2 07.G 60 Y E 20 96 C25 07748 1600 6 R L U 2 08.0 60 Y E 46 95 C25 07749 1200 3 Y E 18 95 C25 08043 400 0 C25 08044 1600 8 Y E 39 98 C25 08075 400 0 Y C25 08144 1626 5 Y A 250 99 C25 08145 1600 0 Y C25 08146 1600 3 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 40 95 C25 08148 1200 3 Y E 41 97 C25 08151 400 8 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y E 32 95 C25 08494 1200 0 Y C25 08509 1600 0 Y C25 08528 400 13 R A U 2 10.0 110 Y E 50 95 C25 08624 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y C25 08627 400 8 Y E 50 97 C25 08881 1501 10 A 840 99 C25 08885 1600 8 Y E 54 98 C25 09206 400 0 C25 09352 1200 0 Y C25 09407 1600 0 C25

Page 17 Bridge Inventory Document

51 52 Detour 53 Road 53 Road 53 Road 53 Number 53 Roadway 53 Design 20 Curb 21 Post 22 Rail 23 Sidewalk 24 Wearing 26 Substructure 54 AADT 54 AADT 54 AADT 55 Responsible 1,2 FileDir Coordinate 2 Length Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 of Lanes Width Speed Sec Sec Sec Sec Surface Sec Sec 57 Inspect Type Count Year Road Authority 09436 1200 0 C25 09438 1600 6 Y E 31 96 C25 09647 1200 6 Y E 39 98 C25 09649 1600 0 Y C25 09650 1200 3 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 09651 1200 0 C25 09652 1600 0 Y C25 09655 400 0 C25 09864 1600 6 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 13083 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 15 95 C25 13256 1600 0 C25 13257 1600 0 Y C25 13389 1600 0 Y C25 13392 1200 0 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y C25 13435 1600 0 C25 13724 1200 0 N C25 13921 1200 3 Y E 61 97 C25 13993 1600 6 R L U 2 09.G 90 Y E 17 96 C25 13995 1600 9 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 34 95 C25 70071 1100 3 Y A 1240 99 C25 70463 1600 0 Y C25 71293 1200 0 Y C25 71461 1200 0 Y C25 71495 1200 10 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 19 95 C25 71689 201 5 Y A 720 99 C25 71755 1600 8 Y E 28 97 C25 71990 400 0 Y C25 72211 400 0 N C25 72341 400 3 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 72446 400 3 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 39 95 C25 72451 400 3 R L U 2 09.G 60 Y E 42 95 C25 72504 1600 0 Y C25 72505 1600 0 Y C25 72714 1600 6 R L U 2 08.0 80 E 19 95 C25 72716 1600 0 C25 72855 1200 0 Y C25 72922 400 8 Y E 14 97 C25 73244 1600 0 Y C25 73315 1200 0 Y C25 73860 1202 5 C25 73862 1199 999 R L U 2 08.0 100 C25 74292 1629 5 R C U 2 09.0 110 Y A 590 99 C25 74331 1600 0 Y C25 74334 400 0 Y C25 74645 1200 0 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 16 95 C25 74646 400 3 Y E 18 96 C25 74738 1626 8 R L U 2 09.0 110 Y A 250 99 C25 74926 400 0 Y C25 74970 1200 999 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 17 95 C25 75180 1600 0 Y C25 75181 400 3 R L U 2 08.0 80 Y E 18 95 C25 75321 1600 8 Y E 39 98 C25 75458 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 75572 400 0 Y C25 75749 1600 3 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 76281 1200 3 R L U 2 09.0 60 Y E 17 95 C25 76733 400 3 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 30 95 C25 76777 1200 0 Y C25 76921 1200 0 Y C25 76922 1200 0 Y C25 77040 1250 5 Y A 3390 99 C25 77116 400 2 Y E 14 97 C25 77602 1200 0 Y C25 77658 400 0 Y E 16 95 C25

Page 18 Bridge Inventory Document

51 52 Detour 53 Road 53 Road 53 Road 53 Number 53 Roadway 53 Design 20 Curb 21 Post 22 Rail 23 Sidewalk 24 Wearing 26 Substructure 54 AADT 54 AADT 54 AADT 55 Responsible 1,2 FileDir Coordinate 2 Length Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 of Lanes Width Speed Sec Sec Sec Sec Surface Sec Sec 57 Inspect Type Count Year Road Authority 77661 1600 0 Y C25 77718 1200 0 Y C25 78362 1600 0 Y C25 78862 1600 0 Y C25 78863 1600 0 Y C25 78886 1200 0 Y C25 79094 1600 0 Y C25 79314 1600 999 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 79388 400 0 Y C25 79686 1200 0 Y C25 79690 1200 0 Y C25 80784 1200 0 Y C25 81153 900 3 A 3390 99 C25 81214 1600 6 E 94 96 C25 81368 1200 0 Y A 720 99 C25 81475 1300 1 Y E 24 96 C25 81589 1600 3 R L U 2 08.0 80 E 48 95 C25 00746 1200 10 Y E 20 96 C25 01248 400 2 T T G N T T Y E 50 96 C25 06547 1200 6 T T G N T T Y E 25 96 C25 07066 1200 10 T T G N T T Y E 30 96 C25 09204 1101 10 Y A 840 99 C25 72209 1200 0 T T G T T Y E 20 96 C25 72607 400 6 T T G N T T Y E 30 96 C25 74642 1600 3 R L U 2 07.0 60 Y E 15 96 C25 77212 691 5 Y A 530 99 C25 79766 400 5 A 840 99 C25 00138 1600 0 Y C25 00300 1200 0 Y C25 00329 1401 3 Y A 3390 99 C25 00483 1600 0 Y C25 00586 300 3 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 00587 1600 3 R C U 2 09.0 100 Y C25 00588 300 6 R L U 2 07.G 80 Y C25 00736 1600 0 Y C25 00738 400 3 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 00749 1600 0 Y C25 00822 1600 0 Y C25 00905 1600 0 Y C25 01139 1200 3 Y E 156 97 C25 01266 1600 3 R L U 2 09.0 110 Y A 530 93 C25 01267 1200 0 Y C25 01268 1600 0 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 16 95 C25 01355 1600 0 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y C25 01718 1053 3 Y A 1320 99 C25 01719 1000 3 Y A 1320 99 C25 01720 1200 5 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 45 95 C25 01721 1300 3 Y A 3390 99 C25 01724 400 6 Y E 33 97 C25 01728 1600 0 Y C25 01732 622 5 R C U 2 08.0 110 Y A 520 99 C25 01751 400 0 Y C25 02072 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 163 95 C25 02099 1600 6 Y E 163 97 C25 06540 400 0 Y E 20 96 C25 06541 1600 0 Y C25 06545 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 06546 1200 0 Y C25 06752 1600 0 Y C25 06839 1600 0 Y C25 06888 1600 0 Y C25 06940 1600 0 Y C25 07065 1600 0 Y C25 07067 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 60 95 C25

Page 19 Bridge Inventory Document

51 52 Detour 53 Road 53 Road 53 Road 53 Number 53 Roadway 53 Design 20 Curb 21 Post 22 Rail 23 Sidewalk 24 Wearing 26 Substructure 54 AADT 54 AADT 54 AADT 55 Responsible 1,2 FileDir Coordinate 2 Length Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 of Lanes Width Speed Sec Sec Sec Sec Surface Sec Sec 57 Inspect Type Count Year Road Authority 07069 1600 0 Y C25 07070 400 0 Y E 39 96 C25 07071 400 0 Y C25 07072 1600 9 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 08149 300 0 Y C25 08150 1600 0 Y C25 08492 1600 0 Y C25 08493 1600 6 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 08512 400 0 Y C25 08878 400 0 Y C25 08879 1600 3 R L U 2 07.G 80 Y C25 08880 1600 6 Y E 72 96 C25 08883 400 0 Y C25 08949 1627 10 R C U 2 09.0 100 Y A 6330 99 C25 09354 1600 0 Y C25 09472 1200 0 Y C25 09648 1600 3 R L U 2 07.G 60 Y E 19 95 C25 09653 1600 0 Y C25 13009 1600 0 Y C25 13084 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 18 95 C25 13391 1600 0 Y C25 13393 1200 3 Y E 42 95 C25 13725 1200 3 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 13 95 C25 13994 1600 4 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 18 95 C25 70082 1600 0 Y E 58 96 C25 70083 1600 6 R L U 2 08.G 60 Y E 17 95 C25 70099 1200 0 Y C25 72265 1200 0 Y E 39 96 C25 72404 1200 3 R L U 2 07.0 80 Y C25 73211 400 0 Y C25 73812 1629 5 R L U 2 09.0 100 Y A 1660 99 C25 73830 400 0 Y C25 74332 1600 6 Y E 36 96 C25 74641 1600 0 Y C25 75269 400 0 Y C25 75574 1200 0 Y C25 76385 1600 0 Y C25 76920 1200 0 Y C25 76923 1600 0 Y C25 78007 400 0 Y C25 78045 1200 999 Y E 15 95 C25 79138 1600 0 Y C25 79497 1200 0 Y E 20 96 C25 79676 400 3 Y E 20 96 C25 81033 400 0 Y C25

Page 20 Leduc County Transportation Master Plan - Final Report

Appendix G

Public Open House Materials and Feedback

Infrastructure Systems Ltd. May, 2001 QUESTIONNAIRE

LEDUC COUNTY TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN

Leduc County would appreciate your feedback on any issues or concerns you have, respecting the existing transportation system or the proposed roadway improvement program. Please take a few minutes to answer the following questions after first taking the opportunity to review the exhibits and discuss any concerns you have with the Open House staff.

1. Please list any issues or concerns you have about the existing roadway/transportation system or the proposed roadway improvement program. (Use back of this sheet if space is not sufficient).

2. If you wish, please provide your name and mailing address, so if necessary, we can contact you respecting your comments or concerns. Name:

Mailing Address: Phone No.:

City: Postal Code:

3. Did you find the Open House information useful? ______Yes ______No 4. Were the hours of the Open House satisfactory? ______Yes ______No 5. Was the staff courteous? ______Yes ______No 6. Was the Open House location convenient? ______Yes ______No

Please deposit your questionnaire in the box at the door when leaving or mail/fax it by April 27th, 2001 to:

Steven J. Melton, P.Eng. Janis Fong, P.Eng. Infrastructure Systems Ltd. Leduc County Suite 300, 5241 Calgary Trail S. County Centre, Suite 101 Edmonton, Alberta Nisku, Alberta T6H 5G8 T9E 2X3

Fax: (780) 438-7303 Fax:(780) 955-7814

Thank you for your participation. Welcome to the Open House for Leduc County’s new TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN

April, 2001

Capital Projects

• Airport Road • Collectors in Widening Nisku Industrial • West Devon Main Park Road Paving • Range Road • Nisku Spine Road 253/254 • Range Road 233 • St. Francis West • New Sarepta Main Road Connector • Beaumont Connector • Fruitland Road Airport Road Widening

Airport Road Widening

• Limits: 5th Street - 9th Street • Description: Four laning of Airport Road to accommodate traffic • Justification: Significant traffic increases • When: Years 1 to 5 Devon West Main Road

West Devon Main Road

• Limits: end of paved section to Highway 39 • Description: Improvements in horizontal and vertical geometry; paving • Justification: Completion of Main Road paving. • When: Years 1 to 5 Nisku Spine Road

Nisku Spine Road

• Limits: Nisku to Edmonton City limits • Description: link between Nisku and City of Edmonton • Justification: Traffic volumes; Proposed as link between Nisku and City of Edmonton since 1979 • When: Years 1 to 10 St. Francis West Main Road

St. Francis West Main Road

• Limits: Range Road 40 - Range Road 45 • Description: Paving of St. Francis Road West • Justification: co-ordinated effort between Leduc County and M.D. of Brazeau • When: Years 1 to 5 Beaumont Connector

Beaumont Connector

• Limits: Township Road 510 - 512; Secondary Highway 814 to Range Road 243 • Description: paving of above roadways to Main Road Standard • Justification: Commuters from Leduc County area to and from City of Edmonton • When: Years 1 to 5 Nisku Industrial Park Collectors

Nisku Industrial Park Collectors

• Limits: Collectors in Nisku • Description: Oiled roadways replaced with high grade pavement • Justification: High traffic volumes; heavy industrial traffic • When: Years 1 to 10 Range Road 253/254

Range Road 253/254

• Limits: Township Road 504-512 • Description: Link to City of Edmonton between Highway 19 and Terwillegar Drive • Justification: Connection for Devon Commuters and Airport; Traffic warrants • When: Years 1 to 5 Range Road 233

Range Road 233

• Limits: Secondary Highway 623 to Secondary Highway 625 • Description: Horizontal and vertical geometry improvements and paving • Justification: Upgrade of Main Road • When: Years 5 to 10 New Sarepta Connector

Township Road 500

• Limits: Range Road 221 to 223 • Description: Connector to New Sarepta • Justification: Upgrade of Oiled Road to paved road section with increase in traffic • When: Years 5 to 10 Fruitland Road

Fruitland Road

• Limits: Highway 39 to Township Road 502 • Description: Upgrading of geometry and maybe surface • Justification: Service to isolated residences • When: Years 5 to 10 The End - Thank You

Have you any questions?

Please see the study team members. Project LEDUC COUNTY TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN OPEN HOUSE QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

DATE TIME PLACE Wednesday, April 18th, 2001 The Thorsby and District Regional Recreation 5:00-8:00 pm Complex, 4901 - 48 Avenue, Thorsby Thursday, April 19th, 2001 The Nisku Recreation Centre, 5:00-8:00 pm 606 - 18 Avenue, Nisku

Question Comments

1. Please list any issues or concerns you have - It would be very important that some commitment about the existing roadway / transportation to the St. Francis West could be obtained for the system or the proposed roadway completion of paving. Both from a stand point is improvement program. the area for its residents plus the political aspect of not having all the money spent in the east end of the County.

- Making sure that the interface of roads with the City of Edmonton is jointly and efficiently planned.

- My concern is for soft roads in parts of the southern region of the County. Oil development and the new methods of moving grain is taking its toll on roadways. To rebuild these roads will of course be very costly but piece by piece it will have to be done. We do however have a good system in the north made more so by the anticipated changes.

- I would like to see St. Francis West completed next 1-2 years. I think there is a need for some kind of hard surfacing on Genessee Bypass Rd. and Rd. 21 north of 622 and that over 1/3 of County revenue comes from this area there should be some money and services put back in the area. I strongly feel we have been left out in the past 10 years since the power plant came in. Our land values have gone down, and land is hard to sell, one factor is the road system, if we had a hard surface road people would start moving back and real estate would go up. This would help the schools and community halls and would benefit a lot of people. I have spoken to EPCOR people about the situation and they informed me they pay big taxes about over 1/3 County tax base to the County so there should not be a problem for the County to look after the area, so please do so. And also I think we have the traffic volume to justify it. Question Comments

1. Continued - How do you propose to finance the projects?

- Highway 233 (Cloverlawn) should go north all the way to Strathcona County so that there is no connection of traffic through Beaumont or Nisku. Range Rd. 240 and Hwy. 616 south into Wetaskiwin be paved 3 miles.

- There is no recognition of concern from the Village of Warburg, where they would like a west entrance into Town because of the seed plant, plus the heavy traffic of this sort. Range Road 32 south of Hwy 39, 1 mile south and east into Warburg. This would make better road for the garbage collection site.

- Twp. Rd. 494 west of RR 272 (SE-27-49-27-W4) Designated Dust Control at a Residence was graveled over during the winter graveling operations and she would like to have it repaired as soon as possible.

- The Resident complained of the dust conditions but primarily about the volume and speed of the truck traffic on Twp. Rd. 482 west of SH 795.

- Residents live midway between Glen Park Road and Hwy. 39 on RR 263. Their Designated Dust Control was graveled over and they would like somehow be ensured of more consistent dust control. They experience high volume of traffic which is substantially comprised of trucks bypassing the Weigh Scales on Hwy. 2

- Resident was inquiring as to the status of the future surfacing of RR 21 north of SH 622 and the geographics of the area which contribute to the traffic on RR 21.

- Resident also expressed concern about RR 15 north of SH 622 where it crosses the Strawberry Creek that the profile is quite poor and the gradient becomes difficult at certain times of the year.

- Resident also expressed concern about the condition of the dust control on RR 31 about 1 mile north of Hwy. 39 and the hole in the Dust Control Question Comments

1. Continued on RR 31 about 1 1/4 miles north of SH 622. He was inquiring about the feasibility of patching the 1 bad hole with cold mix in the spot north of SH 622.

2. If you wish, please provide your name and - 6 provided mailing address, so if necessary, we can contact you respecting your comments or concerns.

3. Did you find the Open House information - Yes - 6 useful? - No - 0

4. Were the hours of the Open House - Yes - 5 Satisfactory? - No - 0

5. Was the staff courteous? - Yes - 6 - No - 0

6. Was the Open House location convenient? - Yes - 6 - No - 0