CHAPTER 6 Alternatives to the Project The proposed Project was developed to improve the level of safety performance and service within this corridor, while considering of a number of factors, including funding; consultation with the public; safety needs within the Project area; and minimizing effects to the environment. The following outlines alternatives to the Project that were assessed as part of the Project development and the Environmental Assessment. 6.1 Alternatives to the Project Alternatives to the Project were considered during Project planning and included the following: Null alternative, i.e., no changes to the existing Highway 104 alignment; Alternative modes of transportation; and Highway 104 safety improvements. To be identified as viable alternative to the Project, a given project would need to satisfy the following criteria: Provide access to communities within regional area; and Improve the level of safety performance and service. Alternative alignments and design elements are further described in Section 6.2. Null Alternative: The null alternative, i.e., no changes to the existing Highway 104 alignment, was determined to not be a viable, suitable alternative to the Project as it does not improve existing conditions and does not address the traffic and safety concerns identified as concerns of both the general public and local stakeholders. In addition, this alternative does not align with NSTIR’s mandate to provide safe and efficient movement of people and goods (NSTIR, 2017). As a result, this alternative was not considered further. Alternative modes of transportation: Alternative modes of transportation was identified as a potential alternatives as it could be is possible to divert traffic off Highway 104, such as shipping of goods via trains. These alternative modes of transportation could reduce the amount of truck traffic along the existing Highway 104; however, this alternative does not improve the existing highway CBCL Limited | NSTIR Highway 104 Twinning - Environmental Assessment 230 Chapter 6 - Alternatives to the Project safety conditions, such as improving sightlines or roadway geometry to current standards. Therefore, it did not fit the criteria of a viable alternative, and no further consideration was given to this alternative. Highway 104 safety improvements: Implementation of safety improvement within the existing Highway 104 was identified as one viable alternative to the Project. NSTIR investigated the safety improvement alternative and, in 2015, OPUS completed an operations and safety review of this section of highway, because of public concern over recent collisions and fatalities. The study identified and prioritized a series of mitigation measures which would foreseeably have a positive impact on safety (OPUS, 2015). There were 42 safety measures that were identified which ranged from ‘Category 1 Improvements’ which included low cost, minimal engineering solutions which are easiest to implement (i.e. sign replacements and sightlines), as well as ‘Category 2 Improvements’ which are more comprehensive measures and may require more developed design and planning, and associated higher cost (i.e., roadway realigned and grade separation structures). For the purpose of alternatives, ‘Category 2 Improvements’ were considered as potential alternatives for this Environmental Assessment. There were 12 ‘Category 2 Improvements’ which were: Realignment at the east end of the corridor at the current transition between the two-lane and four-lane sections; Adjust roadside slope to 4:1 or less in areas where this would be more cost effective than installation of a new guard rail; Increase the paved shoulder to a minimum of 2.0 m and install shoulder rumble strips; Realign the curve at Barneys River (km 198.1-198.5) to accommodate a 100 km/h design speed; Correct superelevations at James River Interchange (km 208.7-209.7) and east of Barneys River (km 199.3 – 199.8); Complete a review of horizontal curves and upgrade to accommodate 10 km/h above the posted speed on curved section; Investigate replacement of at-grade crossings with grade separation structures; Investigation addition of full ramp movements at one of the two overpass locations with Trunk 4; Review and extend climbing lanes; Review all opposing climbing lanes; Provide a left-turn lane to John Munroe Road from Highway 104; and Investigate alternative road configuration such as 2+1 road cross-section within the vicinity Marshy Hope. The 12 ‘Category 2 Improvements’ were identified to be interim measures, to be employed until such time the Highway could be twinned (OPUS, 2015). When the Safety Improvement alternative option is compared to the proposed Project, it does not account for the added safety due to twinning, which is mainly due to reduction of collisions (CBCL, 2016, 2017). The proposed Project provides necessary safety improvement such as: Four-lane divided highway; Replacement of at grade structures with grade separation structures; and CBCL Limited | NSTIR Highway 104 Twinning - Environmental Assessment 231 Chapter 6 - Alternatives to the Project Increased marking and signage. Therefore, the proposed Project of twinning was ultimately selected as it addressed many of the existing concerns for operations and safety (OPUS, 2015). 6.2 Project Alternatives Assessment Operational and safety studies identified other alternatives as incremental improvements to road safety, until such time that a divided four-lane highway could be constructed (OPUS, 2015). Only twinning options were selected as Project Alternatives, as they have been identified as the best option for the reduction of collisions. The following alignments were selected for evaluation: Option 1: Twinning of the existing highway from Sutherlands River to Barneys River Station and James River to Antigonish, with a new four-lane divided highway alignment south of the existing highway between Barneys River Station and James River (i.e., the current Project); and Option 2: Twinning of the existing highway from Sutherlands River to Antigonish. Option 1: The first option, twinning of the existing highway from Sutherlands River to Barneys River Station and James River to Antigonish, with a new four-lane divided highway alignment south of the existing highway between Barneys River Station and James River was investigated as it use already construction infrastructure and minimized environmental impact by twining approximately 60% of the existing alignment and would provide additional space to design a new highway which meet NSTIR’s current design requirements. The new alignment would provide: Reduced potential for head on collisions due to 4 lane divided highway; Reduced potential for right angle and rear end type collisions with removal of at-grade accesses and installation of grade separation structures; and The ability to close portions of the highway vehicle during bad weather and notify road users in advance with variable message signs. The twinned highway and new alignment would also provide improved emergency response time for incidents as a result of the twinning, and provide the ability to reroute traffic on a reconnected Trunk 4 for incident management. Option 2: The second option included the twinning or alignment widening of the existing Highway 104 Alignment from Sutherlands River to Antigonish, including the portion through Barneys River and Marshy Hope. The alignment was found to have inadequate space through the Marshy Hope section to support a four-lane divided highway, as a result of the location of the existing infrastructure (i.e., Trunk 4, and railroad) and an existing watercourse, Barneys River. Other configuration alternatives, such as 2+1 road cross-section were also identified as a potential alternative; however, due to road geometry, space limitations, and safety considerations, this option was not investigated further. CBCL Limited | NSTIR Highway 104 Twinning - Environmental Assessment 232 Chapter 6 - Alternatives to the Project The ‘Option1’ twinning alignment was ultimately selected, as it allows for the implementation of safety improvements, such as twinning, as identified within the operational and safety reviews, and additional improvement (i.e., upgrading substandard highway geometry and removal of obstructed sightlines). The proposed alignment was refined throughout the Preliminary Screening and Feasibility Phases. Highway division such as cable or jersey barriers were not considered due to the risk collisions with the added barriers and potential for habitat fragmentation as a result of their installation. The various interchange design options and median widths have been considered during design. The final design will be determined during the DBFOM phase, and will meet NSTIR approved standards, minimize the Project footprint, as well as maximize traffic efficiency and safety. As a result of the alternatives assessment, the Project as described in Chapter 2, was selected as the preferred Project. CBCL Limited | NSTIR Highway 104 Twinning - Environmental Assessment 233 Chapter 6 - Alternatives to the Project CHAPTER 7 Accidents and Malfunctions The proposed Project activities through Site Preparation, Construction, and Operation and Maintenance phases creates the potential for malfunctions and accidents. The most likely accidents and malfunctions include: spills, erosion and sediment control failure, fires, and vehicular collisions. The nature and severity of malfunctions and accidental events are difficult to predict.