City of Edmonton Valley Line-Stage 1 Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project Bylaw 7188 Site Location Study Final Report Prepared for: City of Edmonton Transportation Services LRT D and C Edmonton, Alberta Prepared by: Spencer Environmental Management Services Ltd. Edmonton, Alberta Under contract to: AECOM Connected Transit Partnership Edmonton, Alberta Project Number EP - 522 July 2013 Spencer Environmental Distribution List # of Hard Copies # CDs Required Association / Company Name 1 1 Glinis Buffalo, Sustainable Development, C of E 6 6 LRT D and C, C of E 3 1 AECOM July 2013 Valley Line - Stage 1 Site Location Study Spencer Environmental Executive Summary The purpose of the Valley Line-Stage 1 Site Location Study is to detail the social, financial, environmental and institutional constraints that make location of the proposed project within the North Saskatchewan River Area Redevelopment Plan (Bylaw 7188) boundaries, essential. This report also provides a detailed examination of project conformance to the goals, objectives and policies of Bylaw 7188. Any LRT extension from downtown to the community of Mill Woods must cross the North Saskatchewan River. Any such crossing within City limits would require development within Bylaw 7188 boundaries. From 2008-2009, the City of Edmonton Transportation Department undertook a comprehensive, multi-step decision-making process to identify a recommended corridor for the LRT Southeast Extension. Numerous alignments were initially considered and subjected to a fatal flaw analysis. From these, four proposed alignments were analyzed more closely, using weighted criteria approved by City Council; public input was sought throughout the process. The process culminated in identification of the “Connors Road Corridor” as the recommended corridor, followed by City Council approval of that corridor in December 2009. Planning continued. In January 2011, Council approved a concept plan for the southeast LRT and in June 2011, approved funding for preliminary design. In April 2013, the preliminary design exercise culminated in further refinement of the alignment and preliminary design of various essential component project elements (such as track, stop, and utilities, including stormwater drainage infrastructure). The final product is referred to as the Reference Design. The City has adopted a P3 model to deliver detailed design, construction, finance, operation and maintenance for the project. Partial project funding has been secured through the P3 Canada Fund program. The Reference Design will be carried forward into the P3 Procurement Phase. The project as a whole, and therefore all component parts, must be located in the river valley as a result of the following constraints and, in doing so, provides the following benefits. Social: The 2008/2009 corridor selection process indicated that this corridor was preferred when compared to alternatives on the basis that it is able to maximize the use of existing corridors while respecting neighbourhoods, parkland and the North Saskatchewan River Valley. Specifically, selection criteria included impacts to recreational accessibility, the acquisition of public lands, physical barriers to local residents and potential impacts of noise and vibration within 150 m. More recently, additional analysis and planning has identified a conceptual and now a more refined alignment within that corridor that confirms compatibility with these criteria and many social benefits, including a river valley stop that will provide direct and easy pedestrian access to many events, facilities and homes. July 2013 Valley Line - Stage 1 Site Location Study Page E1 Spencer Environmental Financial: The costs associated with the Connors Road Corridor compared favourably to those of another considered corridor. Environmental: Corridor selection criteria included potential impacts to parks, riparian habitat and natural areas and, ultimately, the proposed corridor was determined to have relatively few potential impacts on such resources because it is largely situated within, or immediately adjacent to, developed areas, thus, adhering to the positive planning principle of clustering development. More specifically, the proposed alignment has sought to minimize environmental impacts and project infrastructure has been designed to provide for wildlife movement, to protect aquatic resources and to ensure protection of existing drainage function and infrastructure in the area. Institutional: The Valley Line-Stage 1 selected corridor meets relevant criteria pertaining to land use such as promoting compact urban form, serving an area of greater density in comparison to alternate alignments, providing a direct connection between downtown and Mill Woods, and balancing service between established neighbourhoods, infill opportunities and planned residential communities. The Reference Design within the river valley provides an enhanced connection through placement of a station that directly links several public amenities to the City’s LRT network. This Site Location Study concludes that the location and preliminary design of the river valley components of the Valley Line-Stage 1 LRT conform to the goals, and applicable objectives and policies of Bylaw 7188. July 2013 Valley Line - Stage 1 Site Location Study Page E2 Spencer Environmental Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 2.0 RECOMMENDED CORRIDOR AND ALIGNMENT ....................................... 2 3.0 THE PROPOSED PROJECT .............................................................................. 4 3.1 Project Overview ................................................................................................ 4 3.2 Reference Design River Valley Alignment ........................................................ 4 3.3 Key Project Components .................................................................................... 6 4.0 CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 8 4.1 Social Constraints ............................................................................................... 8 4.2 Financial .............................................................................................................. 8 4.3 Environmental Constraints.................................................................................. 8 4.3.1 Institutional Constraints .................................................................................. 9 5.0 CONFORMANCE WITH NSR VALLEY ARP .............................................. 10 5.1 Major Goals ...................................................................................................... 10 5.2 Parkland Development Objectives .................................................................... 11 5.2.1 Parkland Development Policies .................................................................... 13 5.3 Environmental Protection Objectives ............................................................... 17 5.3.1 Environmental Protection Policies ................................................................ 17 5.4 Transportation Objectives ................................................................................. 18 5.4.1 Transportation Policies ................................................................................. 19 5.5 Major Facility and Natural Resource Development Objectives ....................... 19 5.5.1 Major Facility and Natural Resource Development Policies ........................ 20 5.6 Agricultural Land Use Objectives .................................................................... 22 5.6.1 Agricultural Land Use Policies ..................................................................... 22 5.7 Residential Land Use Objectives ...................................................................... 22 5.7.1 Residential Land Use Policies ...................................................................... 23 5.8 Central Area Land Objectives ........................................................................... 23 5.8.1 Central Area Land Use Policies .................................................................... 23 5.9 Upland Areas .................................................................................................... 25 6.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................. 26 7.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 27 7.1 Literature Cited ................................................................................................. 27 7.2 Personal Communication .................................................................................. 27 APPENDIX A: SOUTHEAST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT DOWNTOWN TO MILL WOODS .......................................................................................................................... A1 List of Figures Figure 1. Project Setting and Components ........................................................................ 5 July 2013 Valley Line - Stage 1 Site Location Study Page i Spencer Environmental List of Tables Table 1. Detailed Corridor Evaluation Undertaken in 2009. ............................................. 3 Table 2. Additional Essential Project Components ........................................................... 6 July 2013 Valley Line - Stage 1 Site Location Study Page ii Spencer