Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project. Existing CTC Corridor U.S. Canada

Transcription

1 1 Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project Presented by Canadian Transit Company Detroit International Bridge Company 2 Existing CTC Corridor Begin Project End Project U.S. Modifications to both plazas have been implemented over the years to optimize the operation and minimize travel delays Canada 1

2 3 CTC Corridor Initiatives Gateway FONSI approved in 1997 and reevaluated in 1999, 2004 and 2007 Canadian expansion approved east and west phases in 2005 with construction completed in 2007 Main Span Deck Rehabilitation Currently Underway ABEP EIS Initial submitted in December CTC Corridor Initiatives 2007 Canadian Plaza Project FAST Truck processing capability introduced in 2006 and 2007 Construct bridge plaza expansion, including expansion of structure, retaining wall and customs booths as per committee of adjustment A-006/05, site plan control SPC 063/04 and approved plans. 2

3 5 CTC Corridor Initiatives 2007 CTC Plaza Improvements 2007 Improvements to the Canadian plaza provided additional border crossing capacity 6 CTC Corridor Initiatives Canadian Plaza Final 2007 Configuration Phase 1 January 2006 Buffer Zone (Security Upgrade) Phase 2 July 2007 Expanded capacity by adding nine additional custom booths Buffer area proposed along west side No modification to circulation patterns on local streets was required 3

4 7 Other Corridor Initiatives Capacity expansion study completed by the bi-national Detroit River International Crossing Study or DRIC Study All DRIC Build Alternatives assumed the Ambassador Bridge crossing is maintained At some time in the future an Ambassador Bridge replacement structure will be required to maintain safe operation 8 Project Need The existing bridge is over 80 years old The existing bridge has a tower in the river The existing bridge has substandard lanes and shoulders without capability for dedicated FAST lanes to serve the FAST booths now present in the plazas This structure is the vital link in the most important border crossing between the United States and Canada This corridor served 7.2 million vehicles in 2010 including 2.7 million trucks and buses Any disruption in traffic flow across the structure results in significant delays and causes economic losses in both countries Environmental impacts associated with the DRIC project assume an operational Ambassador Bridge for many decades to come 4

5 9 Project Purpose Upgrade the crossing to: Meet current standards Accommodate FAST lane operations with dedicated lanes on the new bridge Connect to and improve plaza operations Avoid navigational conflicts in the river Maintain current operations during construction 10 Replacement Bridge Alignment Alternatives Construct 3 new lanes east of the current facility and use existing structure for 3 lanes Construct 3 new lanes west of the current facility and use existing structure for 3 lanes Construct 6 new lanes east of the existing facility Construct 6 new lanes west of the existing facility Existing Structure 5

6 11 Bridge Replacement Tunnel Alternatives Construct new 3 lane tunnel east of the current facility and use existing structure for 3 lanes Existing Structure 12 Bridge Replacement Tunnel Alternatives Construct new 3 lane tunnel west of the current facility and use existing structure for 3 lanes Existing Structure 6

7 13 Bridge Replacement Tunnel Alternatives X Construct dual 3 lane tunnels east and west of the current facility and abandon the existing structure Existing Structure 14 Summary of Build Alternatives Evaluated Construct a Twin Suspension Bridge 3 new SB lanes (west) provide 3 NB lanes on existing structure Construct a Suspension Bridge 3 new NB lanes (east) provide 3 SB lanes on existing structure 3 new SB lanes (west) provide 3 NB lanes on existing structure 6 new lanes west of existing facility 6 new lanes east of existing facility Construct a Cable Stay Bridge 3 new NB lanes (east) provide 3 SB lanes on existing structure 3 new SB lanes (west) provide 3 NB lanes on existing structure 6 new lanes west of existing facility 6 new lanes east of existing facility Construct a Tunnel 3 new NB lanes (east) provide 3 SB lanes on existing structure 3 new SB lanes (west) provide 3 NB lanes on existing structure 3 new NB lanes (east) and 3 new SB lanes (west) 7

8 15 Alternatives Analysis No Build Twin Suspension 3 new lanes west Suspension 3 new lanes west 6 new lanes west 3 new lanes east 6 new lanes east Cable Stay 3 new lanes west 6 new lanes west 3 new lanes east 6 new lanes east Tunnel 3 new lanes west 3 new lanes east 6 new lanes e-w Nav Impacts Relocation Impacts Enviro Impacts Economic Impacts Function Constr Impacts ` Security Preferred Alternative Life Cycle Costs Poor Excellent 16 CTC Plaza Expansion CBSA Option A 8

9 17 CTC Plaza Expansion CBSA Option B 18 Preferred Alternative Begin Project End Project Phase 1 Construction of a 6 lane cable stayed structure adjacent to and west of the existing bridge Current plaza configurations adequate for normalized traffic projections Phase 2 Build Ultimate Plaza Configuration when necessary All mitigation required for the construction of both phases included in Phase 1 construction 9

10 19 Regional Traffic 2025 without DRIC Impacts in the EIS are based on traffic projections that assume the DRIC is not in operation The revised traffic projections increased by 70 percent for car volumes and by 378 percent for truck volumes 5,550,000 Cars 3,360,000 Trucks 8,910,000 Total 33,110,000 Ambassador 8,820,000 Cars 6,400,000 Trucks 15,220,000 Total 8,750,000 Cars 230,000 Trucks 8,980,000 Total Source: DRIC Travel Demand Forecasts Sep Project Profile Assessed in EIS The Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project begins just south of the US Plaza and end just south of Canadian Plaza The new 6 lane replacement bridge will be constructed west of the existing bridge and will consist of 4 general purpose lanes and 2 FAST lanes The ultimate Canadian Plaza Configuration is included in analysis of impacts The 2025 Traffic Demand Based Projections assume the DRIC is not operational The bridge and plaza will continue to connect directly to Huron Church Rd south of plaza The analysis limits for the EIS extend from the Canadian border 4.5 km south to Industrial Drive along Huron Church Rd 10

11 21 Studies Completed Spills Air Quality Surface Water Ground Water Geology and Soils Erosion and Sediment Control Fish and Fish Habitat Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Vegetation and Vegetation Communities Contamination and Waste Management Noise and Vibration Socioeconomics Visual and Aesthetics Windsor Plan and Zoning Archaeology Heritage Navigation Consultations 22 Spill Contingency Plan Addresses spills resulting in a release to the environment Possibility of a large spill is very remote Limited quantities of hazardous material on site Nature of construction and operation phases It is the policy of CTC to initiate clean up activities if associated with the spill Standard procedure Identification of spill Response Documentation Government notification as early as possible Communication Spill response training will be provided for site personnel 11

12 23 Air Quality Based on federal EA Guidelines & Air Quality Work Plan (reviewed by Env. Can.) Site Study Area: Existing bridge and Enhancement Project (ABEP) where construction would take place Local Study: Areas within 300 m of Huron Church Road extending 2 kilometers from the Site Study Area to the intersection of Huron Church Road and Industrial Drive. Regional Study Area: Area in which cumulative impacts may occur 24 Air Quality Emission factors used as input into state-of-science software to model impacts: CALQ3HCR; AERMOD; MOBILE6.2C 16+ pollutants and precursors of interest Detailed analysis of 6 emission scenarios: Present (Baseline) Construction Operation Future (Do Nothing) Future (6 Lanes) Future (10 Lanes) operation of existing bridge only construction of ABEP and operation of existing bridge (2015) operation of ABEP only (2015) operation of existing bridge only (2025) operation of ABEP only (2025) Operation of both ABEP and existing bridge (2025) Analysis includes the assessment of cumulative effects: 90th percentile concentrations were used for background ambient air concentrations Other projects (existing bridge, US side of ABEP, DRIC) 12

13 25 Air Quality Baseline Greatest air quality impacts occur around key intersection locations along Huron Church Road (within ~ <150 m of Huron Church Road) Aside from Huron Church Road, greatest impacts occur at the customs plaza Air quality modeling indicates that concentrations above the air quality criteria may occur at these locations for certain pollutants of interest (NOx, PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) For both PM 10 and PM 2.5, the selected background is a significant fraction of the maximum air quality concentration Idling and acceleration of vehicles related to traffic control lights appear to be a significant contributor to the air quality impacts Pollutant Relevant Air Units Baseline of Interest Averaging Quality Maximum Background Maximum Period Criteria Modelling Concentration Air Quality Concentration Concentration Pollutants and Precursors (1) CO 1 hr 36,200 µg/m NOx 1 hr 400 µg/m NOx 24 hr 200 µg/m SO2 1 hr 690 µg/m SO2 24 hr 275 µg/m PM10 24 hr 50 µg/m PM hr 30 µg/m VOC 1 hr NA ppm Air Quality Construction in 2015 All air toxics, greenhouse gases, ozone and most pollutants below air quality criteria Potential for PM10 and PM2.5 to be above the air quality criteria Mitigation Implementing BMPs and heavy equipment must meet design specifications Idling of equipment will be monitored Heavy equipment will be limited during smog advisories Number and size of equipment will be monitored when operating simultaneously with barges Construction activities will largely occur during daytime periods Pollutant Relevant Air Units 2015 (Construction) 2015 (Operation) of Interest Averaging Quality Maximum Background Maximum Maximum Background Maximum Period Criteria Modelling Concentration Air Quality Modelling Concentration Air Quality Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration Pollutants and Precursors (1) CO 1 hr 36,200 µg/m NOx 1 hr 400 µg/m NOx 24 hr 200 µg/m SO2 1 hr 690 µg/m SO2 24 hr 275 µg/m PM10 24 hr 50 µg/m PM hr 30 µg/m VOC 1 hr NA ppm

14 27 Air Quality Operation in 2025 Impacts are small compared to background concentrations Improvement of air quality with Project over future no build All air toxics, greenhouse gases, ozone and most pollutants below air quality criteria Potential for PM10 to be above the air quality criteria Most impacts of PM along Huron Church Road Pollutant Relevant Air Units 2025 (FDN) 2025 (A) of Interest Averaging Quality Maximum Background Maximum Maximum Background Maximum Period Criteria Modelling Concentration Air Quality Modelling Concentration Air Quality Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration Pollutants and Precursors (1) CO 1 hr 36,200 µg/m NOx 1 hr 400 µg/m NOx 24 hr 200 µg/m SO2 1 hr 690 µg/m SO2 24 hr 275 µg/m PM10 24 hr 50 µg/m PM hr 30 µg/m Air Quality 14

15 29 Air Quality 30 Surface Water No piers placed in, or immediately adjacent to, the Detroit River No dredging, in-water blasting, in-water pile driving, pier construction or in or along the Detroit River Use of barges for materials has no significant effect on water quality, levels or use No need to dredge channels for the barges Stormwater management facility proposed The Heritage River status of the Detroit River will be respected Erosion and Sediment control will occur during all project phases to manage stormwater from construction areas The Project does not inhibit floodplain or the ability of the Detroit River to accommodate a 100-year storm event The environmental effects of the Project on surface water within the assessment area, for all project phases, are not significant 15

16 31 Ground Water No significant impact on groundwater resulting from the Enhancement Project Groundwater in not used as a source of drinking water for the urban area Not a recharge area for underlying aquifers Construction materials consist of concrete, steel, plastic and wood and are non-reactive with water There will be minimal impacts to groundwater flows in the deep aquifers from the Enhancement Project 32 Geology and Soils Boreholes confirmed geological and soil conditions in the Site Study area as calcerous limestone Study areas: Site Study area project footprint Local Study area - area within a 100 metre (328 foot) radius of the Site Study Area Regional Study area City of Windsor Surface soils are fill and disturbed native soils Sub-surface soils consists of metres of unconsolidated deposits mainly of lacustrine clay with interspersed gravel and sand deposits Underlying bedrock part of Michigan Basin and Dundee formation underlies Local Study area No salt beds located in the Site Study area Except for the permanent removal of the geologic materials from the excavation during foundation construction and localized rock fracturing, no other permanent environmental changes to the site geology will occur 16

17 33 Erosion and Sediment Control An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be developed Construction Stabilize unprotected surfaces through seeding, mulching and dust suppression Sediment barriers and flow check dams (silt fence, straw bales) Inlet protection Stormwater management facilities Operation The Ambassador Bridge currently collects stormwater runoff and directs it to the City of Windsor storm sewer system A stormwater treatment system will be developed and implemented to treat stormwater runoff for both the second span and additional property for the plaza improvements 34 Fish and Fish Habitat No adverse effects to fish and fish and habitat expected from construction or operation of Project No construction activities within Detroit River No piers within Detroit River All towers and piers situated a minimum of 30 metres (approximately 100 feet) from the riverbank No impacts on any Species at Risk Erosion and sediment control systems will be implemented Dust suppression measures, silt fences, diversions, temporary ground cover Stormwater management facilities to collect, convey, and treat stormwater Project results in No net loss of fish habitat 17

18 35 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Field review conducted to assess and identify existing wildlife in Local and Site Study areas Study areas: Site Study area Project footprint where construction will occur Local Study area Area within 300 m radius of site study area Regional Study area City of Windsor and surrounding communities including Towns of LaSalle, Tecumseh and Amherstburg Common Name Indian Road McKee Park Riverside Adjacent to Bridge American Goldfinch X X Wildlife Species Observed in the Local Study Area American Robin Bank Swallow X X X X Canada Goose* X Eastern Gray Squirrel X European Starling X House Sparrow X Ring-billed Seagull X Rock Dove X X X * Evidence (scat) of Canada goose was observed only. 36 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Wildlife reflects urban environment and tolerant of humans (mice, squirrels, skunks, opossum, raccoons, birds) No threatened or endangered wildlife or species at risk or suitable habitat found within project Impacts limited to species highly tolerant of human activities Areas within Project previously disturbed Migratory Birds Project crosses Atlantic and Mississippi flyway Birds tend to fly over or under bridges to avoid collisions The cable stays for the Enhancement Project will be 4 inches in diameter or greater which is very visible and greatly reduces the potential for avian collisions Non-reflective surfaces will be used to eliminate the possibility of avian collisions resulting from deception Downward lighting, low intensity, white strobe lighting will be used to prevent avian confusion caused by light refracted or reflected by mist No regional linkages or corridors in local or site study areas A tree planting/preservation plan will be undertaken to restore wildlife habitats 18

19 37 Vegetation and Vegetation Communities Field review conducted to assess and identify existing vegetation in Local and Site Study areas Study areas: Site Study area Project footprint where construction will occur Local Study area Area within 300 m radius of site study area Regional Study area City of Windsor and surrounding communities including Towns of LaSalle, Tecumseh and Amherstburg Existing vegetation limited to street trees, shrubs and manicured grass Impacts limited to small areas Support towers and piers for the bridge Areas required for the plaza All areas already heavily disturbed 38 Vegetation and Vegetation Communities Few Natural Heritage features No wetlands within Project area Existing vegetation limited to street trees Two Carolina Trees within project limits White Oak (less than 5 individuals) Tulip Tree (less than 5 individuals) No unique, endangered or threatened tree species or Species at Risk No Provincial Parks, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest, Environmentally Significant Areas, and Candidate Natural Heritage Sites Tree Preservation Plan has been developed 19

20 39 Contaminated Sites Radius search of 0.25 km from Project Footprint (Study Area) No known contaminated sites within Study Area Several spills adjacent to Project property Spill in 1995 below Ambassador Bridge with environmental impact Spill in 1999 at intersection of College Avenue and Huron Church Road that was cleaned up Eight spills between 1988 and 2008 within the customs plaza or Ambassador Bridge with no environmental impacts Two additional spills on the Ambassador Bridge in 2006 and 2007 that were cleaned up Wastes will be treated and disposed of in accordance with regulatory requirements Excess construction materials will be properly managed and disposed Spills Prevention and Contingency Plan implemented Emergency Spills Response Plan implemented 40 Noise and Vibration Followed Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) guidelines for Highway Improvements Study Area Schools, Residences and Heritage Sites within 300m of the project footprint Predicted Sound Levels at 23 representative NSRs for: Present Day Scenario (2010 traffic volumes) Future No-Build Scenario (2025 traffic volumes) Future Build Scenario (2025 traffic volumes ) 20

21 41 Noise and Vibration Noise Criteria MTO Guidelines, Environmental Office Manual, Technical Areas Noise (May 15, 1992), states that if future sound levels will be greater than 55 dba and will increase by more than 5 dba (Build vs. No- Build), mitigation should be investigated on the Right of Way Health Canada suggested that mitigation be considered for all noise receptors that are predicted to increase by 1 dba or more for the ABEP 42 Noise and Vibration Construction Related to construction of tower and support piers Construction time restrictions in Municipal noise by-laws will be adhered to Sound level limits for construction equipment based on MOE guildelines (NPC 115) will be complied with Sound and vibration levels will be monitored during pile driving within 100 metres of sensitive receptors Operation Most receptors experience a decrease in sound level or no change in sound level between the build and no-build scenario Without mitigation, noise levels could increase up to 3 dba higher than no-build levels 21

22 43 Noise and Vibration Mitigation Noise Noise barrier 3.0 metres in height along part of the west edge of the bridge Noise barrier 5.5 metres in height along the western extent of the proposed customs plaza Noise barriers will reduce levels of all receptors so that no receptor experiences any increase in noise between the build and no build scenario Sound levels above 65 dba would remain at 4 receptors Sound levels at these location are the same or less than the no build condition with the noise barriers Vibration Vibration levels expected to be lower than existing conditions due to new foundation and smooth road surface 44 Socioeconomics Enhancement Project is compatible with surrounding land use Project constructed entirely on land owned by Proponent No displacement or loss of any homes, businesses, industrial sites or institutional land uses Project results in increased employment opportunities during construction and operation supporting the local economy No increase in community fragmentation Within an established international transportation corridor More efficient and safer crossing reducing congestion which improves cross-border movement of goods 22

23 45 Visual and Aesthetics The Ambassador Bridge is recognized as an international gateway between Canada and the US The Enhancement Project compliments the aesthetics of this transportation corridor Allows for an integration of the state-of-the-art technology of the 20th century with the state-of-the-art technology of the 21st century The Project will be visible from several heritage sites and no significant visual impacts are anticipated. The Ambassador Bridge has been a landmark of the urban skyline for over 80 years 46 Archaeology Stage 1 investigation results indicated a thorough Stage 2 investigation of entire area was necessary Stage 2 investigation led to discovery of artifacts at 7 locations (AbHs -28, -29, -30, -31, -32, -33, -34) AbHs-29, -32, -33 will not be impacted by the project so not require Stage 3 investigations. Stage 3 was required at 4 locations (AbHs -28, -30, -31, -34) which identified one property requiring stage 4 investigation Stage 4 investigation will be required at one location (AbHs-34) AbHs-34 AbHs-33 AbHs-32 AbHs-31 AbHs-30 AbHs-28 AbHs-29 23

24 47 Archaeology Stage 4 investigation for site AbHs-34 will be provided during the excavation of the tower pier foundation AbHs-34 Tower Pier Foundation 48 Heritage Structure and Sites of Significance Study Area Pie shaped area bounded by the Detroit River, Huron Church Road, and Prince Road There are numerous heritage sites designated by the Ontario Ministry of Culture situated within the Regional and Local Study Area Site Study Area - Row of houses east of Indian Road from Wyandotte Street to Mill Street None of the houses in the Site Study Area merit heritage designation Landscape buffer proposed in this location would act as a buffer to the neighborhood for noise and air pollution No heritage sites will be demolished or moved as part of the Project The integration of design elements that reflect the characteristics of the existing Ambassador Bridge will mitigate the visual impacts of the replacement span on heritage sites 24

25 49 Navigation Statutory requirements: Canada Shipping Act, 2001 Collision Regulations (CRC, VOl. XV, c. 1416) The St. Clair & Detroit River Navigation Safety Regulations (SOR/84-335) Competency of Operators of Pleasure Craft Regulations (SOR/99-53) Barges used during construction to transport materials Barge activities will be coordinated so no impediment to other vessels Licensed operators No piers will be placed in the waters of the Detroit River, resulting in no environmental effects 50 Public Consultation Public Outreach ongoing since 2005 Series of public information sessions held between April 16-19, 2007 at four locations Open houses held June 25 and 26, 2007 to discuss preliminary results of studies Two additional open houses held October 1 and 2, 2007 to discuss final results of studies Numerous meetings with municipalities, local chambers of commerce, unions, business improvement areas, community groups and other interested groups Mailings were sent out requesting comments First Nations Consultation through letters Meeting with Walpole Island Heritage Committee on June 28,

26 51 Summary of ABEP Entire estimated $600M funds required for construction of the project will be provided by CTC No significant impacts have been discovered Air quality is improved over no build alternative All minimal impacts will be mitigated in phase 1 Zero increase in noise levels with wall along west edge of plaza and part of west side of the new bridge Stage 4 Archeology when constructing tower foundation The environmental impacts from the DRIC project are assessed assuming that the Ambassador Bridge is in operation The environmental impacts from the ABEP project are assessed assuming that the DRIC project is NOT in operation Therefore, the ABEP is a stand alone project while the DRIC project requires that the ABEP project be constructed 52 Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project 26

27 1 Environmental Impacts Comparison DRIC and ABEP The following slides present a comparison of the environmental impacts reported in the environmental documents prepared for the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) study and the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project (ABEP) study 2 ABEP vs DRIC Air Quality ABEP Impacts from the Project are small compared to the background concentrations Results show a positive environmental change as the future air quality is predicted to improve with the replacement span A comparison of the future 2025 do nothing and replacement span only scenarios indicate that the replacement span and customs plaza will result in an improvement in air quality, notably in the area close to the bridge and the customs plaza Under the future scenario, in 2015, that considers impacts from construction, the potential exists for concentrations of PM 10 and PM 2.5 to be above the air quality criteria. Under the future scenario, in 2025, the increased concentration of higher emitting heavy duty vehicles along the replacement span is predicted to result in concentrations of PM 10 above the air quality criteria due to road dust, in the vicinity of the customs plaza DRIC During the operation scenario, there are exceedances of PM 10 and PM 2.5 Both PM 10 and PM 2.5 are higher in the build scenario over the future no-build scenario Other contaminants in the TEPA report exceed criteria, but the background concentrations are the main contributors as the cause for the exceedances Impacts from The Windsor- Essex Parkway would be small relative to background concentrations From DRIC Air Quality Impact Assessment Technical Memo, December

28 3 ABEP vs DRIC Vegetation ABEP Only species present are those associated with roadsides Two species of Carolina trees found within the study area including white oak and tulip trees (both had less than 5 individuals within the study area) No endangered or threatened species or Species at Risk Proposed tree Preservation/Planting Plan to offset the minimal impacts DRIC Total of 134 vegetation communities ( ha) will be partially or fully displaced including eight high quality communities (3.62 ha), 45 moderate quality communities (40.72 ha) and 81 low quality communities (87.37 ha) 4 ABEP vs DRIC Wildlife ABEP Site preparation and construction activities may result in displacement and potential mortality to wildlife Only species present are those adapted to urban environments No endangered or threatened species or Species at Risk Proposed tree Preservation/Planting Plan to provide wildlife habitat DRIC Site preparation activities will result in the displacement of wildlife and wildlife habitat and potential mortality to Species at Risk Portions of provincially significant wildlife habitat will be lost Portions of the habitat of the Butler s gartersnake and eastern foxsnake may be displaced by construction 2

29 5 ABEP vs DRIC Species at Risk ABEP No Species at Risk or habitat within study areas DRIC A total of 5.47 ha of designated natural area will be displaced including the Black Oak Woods (1.68 ha of a total area of 46 ha), Ojibway Park (0.51 ha of a total area of 64 ha) and TC2 (3.28 ha of a total area of 9.0 ha) No encroachment will occur at the St. Clair College Prairie A total of ha of designated natural area may be disturbed on adjacent lands located within 120 m of the footprint of the Recommended Plan. 6 ABEP vs DRIC Noise and Vibration ABEP No receptors experienced an increase in noise of 5 dba or greater 10 years after completion Health Canada required mitigation measures to be undertaken for all noise sensitive receptors at which sound levels may increase by more than 1 decibel between the build and no-build scenarios (typical requirements are 5 dba) Nine of the receptors modeled, representing many more sites, were predicted to experience an increase in traffic noise levels of 1 dba or more Nine receptors were predicted to experience no change in sound levels between the build and no-build scenario Thirteen receptors were predicted to experience a reduction in noise levels between the build and no-build scenario Construction of a noise wall 3.0 metres in height along the west edge of the bridge and a second noise wall 5.5 metres in height along the western extent of the proposed plaza provides sufficient mitigation such that there would be no increase in sound level between the build and no-build scenarios at any receptor DRIC DRIC only required to look at mitigation if sound levels increased by 5 or more dba Noise exceedances of greater than 5 dba were observed at many receptors (10 modeled receptors) and in several cases (6 modeled receptors), an exceedance of greater than 10 dba was predicted With a barrier 5 metres in height in place, the proposed project is predicted to result in no to marginal noise impact for The Windsor-Essex Parkway, except for one receptor 3

30 7 ABEP vs DRIC Land Use ABEP No displacement or loss of any homes, businesses, industrial sites or institutional land uses Some disruption due to noise and dust during construction can be expected Two noise walls are proposed to mitigate for noise disturbances DRIC Displacement of 360 homes Changes to cohesion and character in some neighbourhood communities Loss of 48 businesses and overall disruption and nuisance effects to both residents and the public during construction 8 ABEP vs DRIC Heritage Sites ABEP No direct impacts to Heritage Sites The integration of design elements that reflect the characteristics of the existing Ambassador Bridge will mitigate the visual impacts of the replacement span on heritage sites There are no significant adverse visual effects of the Project on heritage sites DRIC Six Built Heritage Resources will be removed Mitigation will include either relocation of structures or salvage of significant architectural elements followed by demolition 4

31 9 ABEP vs DRIC Archaeology ABEP Four sites were recommended for a Stage 3 archaeological investigation Based on the Stage 3 archaeological investigation, three of the four sites were not considered significant Fourth site, AbHs-34 is a significant heritage resource which will require avoidance or Stage 4 mitigation DRIC Twenty-four sites located within the TEPA were recommended for a Stage 3 archaeological assessment This assessment has not been completed 10 ABEP vs DRIC Contaminated Sites ABEP No known contaminated sites within the Study Area The Ontario Occurrence Reporting Information System listed several spills immediately adjacent to the proposed Project property DRIC Thirty-six properties with high potential for contamination Phase II screening of these sites is underway 5