APPENDIX E Preliminary Electrical Design Report

Transcription

1 APPENDIX E Preliminary Electrical Design Report

2 HIGHWAY 427 EXTENSION FROM HIGHWAY 7 TO MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE W.O. O ELECTRICAL PRELIMINARY DESIGN January 5, 2011

3 1.0 INTRODUCTION EXISTING CONDITIONS ROADWAY ILLUMINATION TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEMS POWER SUPPLY UTILITIES Hydro One Trans Canada Pipelines Local Utilities ELECTRICAL PRELIMINARY DESIGN FREEWAY CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION -MTO FULL ILLUMINATION AT HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE - MTO Full Illumination Design Criteria Roadway Illumination Alternatives ALTERNATIVE 1 CONVENTIONAL ILLUMINATION ALTERNATIVE 2 HIGH MAST ILLUMINATION Selection of Preferred HPS Luminaires CONVENTIONAL LUMINAIRES HIGH MAST LUMINAIRES Conventional Versus High Mast Illumination LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS LIGHT TRESPASS MITIGATION OF TRESPASS LIGHTING ROADWAY PARTIAL ILLUMINATION - MTO CARPOOL LOT ILLUMINATION ROADWAY ILLUMINATION MUNICIPAL Zenway Boulevard TEMPORARY ILLUMINATION TRAFFIC SIGNALS...5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Proposed Traffic Signal Systems TRAFFIC COUNTING STATION POWER SUPPLIES EMBEDDED WORK ELECTRICAL REMOVALS SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE OPTIONAL CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE...6 APPENDIX A Exhibits...7 APPENDIX B Optional Full Illumination Exhibits...11 APPENDIX C Illumination Calculation Summary HIGHWAY HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVE 1 CONVENTIONAL ILLUMINATION AMERICAN ELECTRIC LIGHTING GENERAL ELECTRICAL LUMINAIRE HIGHWAY HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVE QUALITY LIGHTING LUMINAIRE HOLOPHANE ZENWAY BOULEVARD ILLUMINATION (CITY OF VAUGHAN) COOPER LIGHTING LUMINAIRE AMERICAN ELECTRIC LIGHTING LUMINAIRE...17 APPENDIX D Trespass Lighting Summary ALTERNATIVE 1 CONVENTIONAL ILLUMINATION AMERICAN ELECTRIC LIGHTING LUMINAIRE GENERAL ELECTRIC LUMINAIRE ALTERNATIVE 2 HIGH MAST ILLUMINATION QUALITY LIGHTING LUMINAIRE...19 Page i January 05, 2011

4 2.2 HOLOPHANE LUMINAIRE...19 APPENDIX E Life Cycle Cost Analysis APPENDIX F Construction Estimate ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MTO PARTIAL ILLUMINATION ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR CARPOOL COMMUTER LOT ILLUMINATION ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR FULL ILLUMINATION AT HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE (MTO WARRANTED) ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MUNICIPAL ILLUMINATION TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MTO OPTIONAL FULL ILLUMINATION ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MUNICIPAL OPTIONAL FULL ILLUMINATION ESTIMATED COST FOR OPTIONAL FULL ILLUMINATION...31 APPENDIX G Summary of Illumination Warrant Analysis LIST OF TABLES AND EXHIBITS Table 3.0 Summary of Life Cycle Cost Analysis... 4 Highway 427 at Highway 7 Full Illumination (MTO) Recommended Alternative - High Mast (Exhibit 1-3)... 8 Highway 427 Interchange Partial Illumination (MTO) (Exhibit 4-12)... 9 Zenway Boulevard Illumination (City of Vaughan) (Exhibit 13) MTO Optional Full Illumination (Exhibit 14-23) Municipal Optional Full Illumination (Exhibit 24-28) Page ii January 05, 2011

5 1.0 INTRODUCTION With the population forecasts anticipating a 35% to 50% increase and the corresponding employment forecasts predicting a 50% to 65% increase for the City of Brampton, the Town of Caledon and the City of Vaughan over the next fifteen years, the existing Highway 427 transportation network is not capable of supporting the projected growth in population, employment, and goods movement. Presently, it has already started to experience both safety and operational deficiencies due to the increased traffic volumes. The Ministry of Transportation, Ontario (MTO) is committed to extend Highway 427 from Highway 7 to Major Mackenzie Drive, in order to improve the efficiency and safety of Highway 427. Refer to the Environmental Assessment Report (EA), for details of the deficiencies and recommendations for the Highway 427 extension from. The Electrical Preliminary Design Report (PDR) spans 6.6 km of Highway 427 from the Highway 7 interchange to Major Mackenzie Drive. Within the limits of the project, the extension of Highway 427 includes one updated interchange (full illumination) at Highway 7 and three (3) new interchanges (partial illumination) at Langstaff Road, Rutherford Road and Major Mackenzie Drive. For illumination purposes, this portion of the Highway 427 is classified as a Divided, Urban, Fringe Freeway with a design speed of 120 km/h. Highway 7 provides a key east-west link across the GTA and within the adjacent regional municipalities. As part of the improvements to the Highway 7 Interchange, the existing E-S ramp will be modified and the three northerly oriented ramps (N-E/W, E-N and W-N) will be added. The design speed is 80 km/h. The Electrical PDR addresses pre-design issues related to the following: i) Upgrading the interchange illumination at Highway 7 within the project limits, ii) Partial illumination at the interchanges of Highway 427 with Langstaff Road, Rutherford Road and Major Mackenzie Drive, iii) Upgrading the underpass illumination at the Highway 7 Interchange, iv) Replacing the municipal illumination on Zenway Boulevard, v) Power supply and, vi) Light Trespass 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Roadway Illumination Within the limits of the project, there is existing illumination as follows: a) Highway 7 Interchange The illumination on the S-E/W, E-S and W-S ramps consist of base mounted steel conventional poles. The luminaires are cobra-head, High Pressure Sodium (HPS) attached to the poles with aluminum tapered elliptical arm brackets. The illumination on the E-S and W-S ramps was constructed as part of the Highway 407 construction during the mid 1990 s. The illumination on the S-E/W ramp was constructed in conjunction with the extension of Highway 427 to Highway 7 (early 1990 s). All equipment is in good condition. The illumination on the E-S ramp will be removed and replaced with new illumination as a result of the ramp re-alignment. The Highway 427 underpass at Highway 7 is also currently illuminated. The underpass illumination was installed under York Region Contract It will be updated as a part of the Highway 427 Extension due to a change in horizontal alignment. The underpass luminaires with tee brackets are in good conditions. b) Highway 7 Existing conventional illumination on Highway 7 both at the new E-N ramp and N-E/W ramp connections will require modifications as a result of the ramp construction. c) 427 Interim Arterial Extension (Regional Road 99) Existing conventional illumination on York Region s 427 Interim Arterial Extension (Contract ) will require complete removal since the existing arterial road will be removed due to the Highway 427 Extension. The existing illumination consists of base mounted sectional steel poles on both sides of the road complete with high pressure sodium luminaires and aluminum brackets. All equipment is in good condition. d) Zenway Boulevard The City of Vaughan lighting system along Zenway Boulevard consists of equipment including direct buried 37.5, class 3 concrete poles, aluminum tapered elliptical arm brackets, and cobra-head High Pressure Sodium (HPS) luminaires with 250 Watt lamps. In order to construct the Highway 427 underpass, the vertical profile of Zenway Boulevard will be raised and consequently the existing illumination will require removal and re-installation. The equipment is approximately three years old (poles have date stamps of 2007) and in good condition. 2.2 Traffic Signal Systems There are two existing signalized intersections within the project limits; Highway 427 S-E/W ramp terminal at Highway 7 and York Region s Interim Arterial Extension (Contract ) at Zenway Boulevard. The traffic signals at Highway 7 will not be impacted by the proposed extension. The traffic Page 1 January 05, 2011

6 signals at Zenway Boulevard however will be removed since the connection will be removed and Zenway Boulevard will remain as an overpass over Highway 427 with no interchange. 2.3 Power Supply The existing Highway 427 mainline and interchange illumination is fed by a 347/600 Volt distribution assembly located in the southwest quadrant of the Highway 7 Interchange next to the 150kVA 27.6/13.8kV 600/347V padmount transformer (LOC. * 57-11). The distribution assembly was constructed in conjunction with the Highway 407 construction in the mid 1990s. It is in good condition and should remain in place. There is also an existing 120/240 volt power supply cabinet in the northeast quadrant of the Highway 7 Interchange. This service is located on the first lighting pole on the east side north of the Highway 7 bridge and was installed under York Region contract to feed the illumination on the interim arterial extension. It will be removed with the illumination on the interim arterial extension. The traffic signals at Zenway Boulevard terminus are fed from an independent service located at the intersection. This independent service will be removed with the traffic signal system. 2.4 Utilities The existing utilities within the project limits are described in detail in the EA,. The following is a brief summary of the utilities. For more details refer to EA for complete existing utility information Hydro One A Hydro One corridor consisting of 3 transmission tower lines runs in a NW/SE direction from the southeast quadrant of the Langstaff Road Interchange, across Highway 427 north of Langstaff Road, and across Rutherford Road and Major Mackenzie Drive on the west side of each interchange. The operating voltage of the western and middle lines is 500 kv and the eastern line is 230 kv. The 230 kv transmission lines deliver power from Hydro One s major transformer station sites to various load centers throughout the province. Refer to the illumination layout exhibits for locations of the aerial Hydro cables (Exhibits 4 to 5 and 9 to 10). There is also a Lorna D. Jackson Transformer Station located on the south side of Rutherford Road owned and operated by PowerStream (formerly Hydro Vaughan Distribution Inc.) Trans Canada Pipelines A high-pressure pipeline running in a NE-SW direction is located to the north of Major Mackenzie Drive, which is owned by Trans Canada Local Utilities There are local utilities such as watermains, storm sewers, sanitary sewers, communication and hydro along the existing profiles of municipal roads. The Powerstream distribution hydro pole lines are located on the north side of Highway 7, south side of Langstaff Road, and the north and south sides of Rutherford Road. York Region is also currently constructing a new watermain connection along Huntington Road from Rutherford Road to Nashville Road. 3.0 ELECTRICAL PRELIMINARY DESIGN A detailed illumination warrant analyses was carried out for the entire study area in accordance with Directive PLNG-B-05 Ministry Policy for Highway Illumination. The study area was divided into main line sections separated by interchanges. The Warrant Analysis was carried out separately for each mainline section as well as each interchange. Refer to Appendix G. 3.1 Freeway Continuous Illumination -MTO In accordance with the Warrant Analysis, continuous freeway illumination is optional for Highway 427 and interchanges north of Highway 7. Following consultation with the MTO, it was agreed that there is no requirement for full illumination within those sections of the project limits at this time. However, this should be re-evaluated during the detail design phase in the event that funding is available at that time. The freeway full illumination plates and associated costs have been prepared as part of the preliminary design and are included in this report. See Appendix F, Table 7.0 and plates Full Illumination at Highway 7 Interchange - MTO Since the Highway 427 / Highway 7 interchange is presently fully illuminated, there is no requirement to perform a warrant analysis for this interchange. This report evaluates different alternatives for upgrading the existing illumination system within the project limits including expansion of the full illumination to accommodate the geometric changes and additional ramps. Two options for full illumination were investigated; conventional and high mast illumination. It should be noted that the illumination for the south half of the Highway 7 interchange will be assessed as part of another assignment (Highway 427 Preliminary Design from Albion to Highway 7. The proposed illumination for the Highway 7 interchange extends northerly to north of Zenway Boulevard and included underpass illumination at the Zenway underpass as well as modified underpass illumination at Highway Full Illumination Design Criteria The following illumination design criteria were used, based on the current roadway classification (refer to Section 1.0) and an R3 pavement type: a) Luminance b) Illuminance i) Minimum average maintained 0.6 cd / m2 ii) Average to Minimum Uniformity 3:1 iii) Maximum to Minimum Uniformity 6:1 i) Minimum average Maintained) 8.5 Lux Page 2 January 05, 2011

7 ii) Average to Minimum Uniformity 3:1 iii) Maximum to Minimum Uniformity 6:1 c) Veiling Luminance Ratio (maximum allowed) i) Recommended 0.3 This illumination design criteria were taken from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual, Electrical Design - Volume One, dated January All illumination calculations, including trespass lighting, were calculated with AGI32 by Lighting Analysts Inc, version2.11 Revision 0. The Highway 427 / Highway 7 interchange was subdivided into several sections to verify the illumination levels for each design alternative. The results of the lighting calculations for each section can be found in Appendix B. Detailed illumination analysis will be required at the detail design stage Roadway Illumination Alternatives All illumination alternatives utilized photometric data from the Ministry s current approved photometric list dated July For the purposes of this report, both conventional and high mast illumination layouts were reviewed in order to determine the most economically feasible alternative. The need for underpass lighting should be reviewed during detail design Alternative 1 Conventional Illumination This alternative is similar to the existing illumination system along Highway 427 and within the Highway 7 interchange. The alternative utilizes two rows of 15.0 m, base mounted steel poles in the median with a 400 watt luminaire and aluminium tapered elliptical arm bracket on each pole. A typical pole spacing of 60 m was realized for the median mounted installation. Within the interchange ramps, 12.0 m steel poles with frangible bases (where permitted by the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual, Electrical Design - Volume One, dated January 2001.) were used with a single 200 watt luminaire and an elliptical tapered arm bracket. A typical pole spacing of 60 m was realized. The Alternative 1 calculations were carried out with American Electric Lighting and General Electric luminaires. Refer to Appendix C Alternative 2 High Mast Illumination This alternative utilized 35m high mast poles installed along the median and also on the outside shoulders of the Highway 427/Highway 7 interchange. The number of luminaires mounted on a typical high mast pole ranged from eight to twelve luminaires. A typical roadway illumination design utilizes one illumination layout that is capable of achieving the minimum light levels (refer to Section 3.2.1) for different manufacturers (minimum two). Refer to Exhibits 1 to 2 and 8 for the proposed high mast illumination layout. The layout achieved a typical pole spacing of 150 m for a median mounted installation. The layout for High Mast Alternative was calculated with both Quality Lighting and Holophane luminaires. It is noteworthy to point out that the one high mast pole included in the south half of the interchange which provides illumination for the new W-N ramp should be re-evaluated as part of the planning assignment from Albion to Highway 7 to ensure the ramp illumination is compatible with the remainder of the design to south Selection of Preferred HPS Luminaires Conventional Luminaires Based on the illumination calculations, it was determined that the following conventional luminaires, provided the desired levels of illumination and uniformity at the optimum pole spacing. a) General Electric i) Flat Glass, Medium Cutoff Type III, photometric curve number GE b) American Electric Lighting i) Ovate Dropped Glass, Medium Cutoff Type III, photometric curve number AE3853i High Mast Luminaires Based on the illumination calculations, it was determined that the following high mast luminaires, provided the desired levels of illumination and uniformity at the optimal pole spacing. a) Quality Lighting i) Single Side Internal Shield, Photometric Curve Number ii) 3 Double Sided Shield, Photometric Curve Number iii) Short Cutoff Type II, 10 Double Side Shields Tapered, Photometric Curve Number iv) Medium Cutoff Type III, 10 Double Side Shields, Photometric Curve Number b) Holophane i) Short Cutoff Type V, photometric curve number ii) Short Cutoff Type II 8.75 double side shields tapered, photometric curve number iii) Short Cutoff Type III 4 front, back shields, photometric curve number Conventional Versus High Mast Illumination Both illumination options met the minimum illumination design criteria outlined in Section Further analysis was carried out to determine the most suitable form of illumination within the study limits including an economic evaluation (Life Cycle Cost Analysis) and Light Trespass analysis. It is noteworthy to point out that due to property restrictions and light trespass concerns, some conventional poles were utilized as part of the high mast alternative. The conventional poles were required at the following locations: Page 3 January 05, 2011

8 i) At the beginning of the ramp for Highway 7 westbound to Highway 427 northbound (6 conventional poles), and ii) The intersection of Highway 427 southbound off ramp terminal at Highway 7 (3 conventional poles). Two of the three poles will be joint use traffic signal poles Life Cycle Cost Analysis A Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) was carried out for the interchange at Highway 7. A comparison was made between the conventional and high mast illumination alternatives within the interchange, the results of which are outlined in Appendix E. The LCCA was performed as described in the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual, Electrical Design - Volume One, dated January One exception is the lump sum cost of constructing a typical illumination pole for any given lighting system. The cost per pole was re-calculated using per unit costs from the Ministry s HiCo system. It is assumed, however, that all other figures, such as maintenance, energy, incidental costs, etc. given in the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual are accurate and current for all calculations. Table 3.0 summarizes the LCCA. Description Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Conventional High Mast AEL & GE Quality Lighting Number of Poles Number of Luminaires Initial Construction Cost $1,093,400 $1,640,000 Other Construction Cost $ - $ - Replacement Cost 'A' $41,580 $13,080 Replacement Cost 'B' $129,360 $247,320 Replacement Cost 'C' $368,060 $ - Annual Energy Cost $5,770 $9,312 Annual Maintenance Cost $42,730 $14,232 Annual Incident Cost $12,000 $ - Salvage Value $73,150 $27,500 Present Value Life Cycle Cost $2,542,315 $2,309,911 Table 3.0 Summary of Life Cycle Cost Analysis The results of the LCCA indicate no appreciable cost advantage of one alternative over the other. Having said this, the high mast alternative does offer cost savings in maintenance and incident costs which may provide further intangible benefits Light Trespass Light trespass is the encroachment of light beyond its intended purpose causing annoyance, loss of privacy or other nuisance. Because it can be examined from both a qualitative as well as quantitative perspective, light trespass is the subject of many debates and there is currently no known recognized standard which defines trespass lighting criteria. The MTO, however, in an attempt to deal with the issue of light trespass, has specified a measurable limit of a horizontal illuminance measured at the right-ofway; 1.0 lux maximum for residential areas and 3.0 lux for commercial/industrial areas. A more recent study completed by the MTO provides alternate criteria based on eye illuminance. The recommendations of this study have not yet been adopted by the MTO and therefore have not been considered for this study. All illumination alternatives investigated in this report produced maximum light trespass beyond the 3.0 lux maximum at the right-of-way. Due to the limited right-of-way within the project limits, it was difficult to control and minimize the spillage of light beyond the MTO right-of-way. On the west side of Highway 427, the maximum light trespass illuminance has been calculated to be 3.3 lux with and average level of 1.61 lux. On the east side the maximum calculated level is 3.3 lux and the average is 1.58 lux. A summary of the trespass analysis is included in Appendix D. A closer look at the areas adjacent to the highway reveals that the trespass lighting levels may not be as serious a concern on the west side. This report is in no way attempting to trivialize the significance of trespass lighting but merely suggesting that the 3.0 lux requirement at right-of-way may be relaxed somewhat since the adjacent land is intended for a future transitway. It is therefore recommended that the trespass levels be reviewed further during detail design since the newer criteria may be adopted by then or other best practices may be available Mitigation of Trespass Lighting In order to reduce the extent of the light trespass, the following measures were adopted for the various alternatives considered; i) Use of American Electric Lighting ovate dropped glass luminaires for the conventional alternative, and ii) Use double side shields varying between 3 to 11 in length depending on the luminaire manufacturer for the high mast alternatives. There are other options that may be available to designers in the future as a method to reduce light trespass. At the detail design stage, these options should be investigated in an attempt to further reduce light trespass within the MTO s requirement. These options include; i) Modified dimensions of the house-side shields for the high mast luminaires to better control the spill of light, and Page 4 January 05, 2011

9 ii) Additional photometrics for high mast and conventional that may be available in the future. 3.3 Roadway Partial Illumination - MTO The AADT for Highway 427 throughout the study area exceeds 30,000, thus satisfying the criteria in subsection of Directive PLNG-B-05 for warranted partial illumination of the interchanges. Partial illumination is recommended at the following locations: i) The interchange of Highway 427 at Langstaff Road (13 poles), ii) The interchange of Highway 427 at Rutherford Road (14 poles), and iii) The interchange of Highway 427 at Major Mackenzie Drive (8 poles). The typical illumination layout utilizes 15.0 m, base mounted steel poles with 250 watt luminaires on aluminum tapered elliptical arm brackets along Highway 427 and 12.0 m, base mounted steel poles with 200 watt luminaires on aluminum tapered elliptical arm brackets along Municipal Roads. The typical locations are in accordance with the partial illumination design guidelines in Section 8 of Chapter 5 of the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual, Electrical Design - Volume One, dated January 2001, and Roadside Safety Manual dated March Refer to Exhibits 3 to 7 and 9 to Carpool Lot Illumination In accordance with the Guidelines for Lighting of MTO Carpool / Commuter Parking Lots (December 21, 2006), the design criteria for the Commuter Lot located a Rutherford Road is Enhanced Full Illumination as indicated below. This is attributable to the size of the carpool lot as well as the presence of a transit station. a) Illuminance i) Minimum average Maintained) 25 Lux ii) Average to Minimum Uniformity 3:1 iii) Maximum to Minimum Uniformity 6:1 The Carpool Lot is located directly below a major Hydro One network of overhead transmission lines. Therefore, the lighting poles should be selected to satisfy Hydro One requirements for both vertical and horizontal clearances. Parking lot grades relative to the overhead hydro conductors have not been determined at this time. For the purpose of providing a construction cost estimate, a preliminary design layout has been prepared based on worst case clearance conditions as defined in CSA standard C22.. The layout, however, must be reviewed during detail design when grades are known and maximum pole heights can be coordinated with Hydro One Roadway Illumination Municipal Crossroad municipal illumination requirements for Highway 7, Langstaff Road, Rutherford Road, and Major Mackenzie Drive, including underpass illumination along Rutherford Road and Major Mackenzie Drive where they cross under Highway 427 are to be reviewed during detail design to determine if the City of Vaughan wishes to construct the illumination. Ownership and maintenance agreements will be required if the City decides to proceed. Since it is not certain at this time, the illumination estimated costs and design plates have been included as an optional part of this report. Other issues that will need to be addressed include the presence of local overhead hydro lines along the municipal roads as these can have a significant impact on the preliminary layouts. Illumination for Zenway Boulevard is discussed below: Zenway Boulevard The construction of the extension of Highway 427 will impact a part of the existing municipal illumination along Zenway Boulevard. This new bridge structure over Highway 427 will raise the grade of Zenway Boulevard thereby affecting the existing illumination. The proposed replacement illumination is shown in Exhibit 13. The results of the lighting calculations for this segment of the updated Zenway Boulevard can be found in Appendix C. The proposed illumination includes both salvaged and new equipment (See Appendix F Table 5.0). The design of the proposed illumination system will conform to the City of Vaughan standards, including lighting criteria and material specifications. 3.6 Temporary Illumination In conjunction with the detail design, the existing illumination will be maintained in full night-time operation where roads remain open to traffic. Temporary illumination / electrical work will be provided where the existing illumination is affected during construction staging. 3.7 Traffic Signals The extension of Highway 427 will result in the six new ramp terminal intersections; one at Highway 7, two at Langstaff Road, two at Rutherford Road, and one at Major Mackenzie Drive. Traffic signals will be required at all six ramp terminal intersections Proposed Traffic Signal Systems At the detail design stage, it is recommended that the maintenance of the six new traffic signals be reviewed with the MTO and municipality to determine the construction standards to be used. The six new locations are: i) Highway 427 N-E/W ramp terminal at Highway 7, ii) Highway 427 N-E/W and S-E/W ramp terminals at Langstaff Road, iii) Highway 427 N-E/W and S-E/W ramp terminals at Rutherford Road, and iv) Highway 427 S-E/W ramp terminal at Major Mackenzie Drive. Page 5 January 05, 2011

10 3.8 Traffic Counting Station The requirements for traffic counting stations shall be reviewed with the Regional Traffic Section during detail design. 3.9 Power Supplies New power supplies are required for the interchange partial illumination and the traffic signals at ramp terminals. The Highway 427 / Highway 7 interchange illumination will be fed from the existing Power Distribution Assembly (PDA) located in south west quadrant of the interchange. The PDA is rated for 347/600 Volt, 225A, three phase, four wire. For each traffic signal, a separate power supply is required at each intersection. The power supply will be an MTO Type 1 supply control cabinet assembly rated 120/240 Volt, single phase, three wire. The partial illumination for each interchange will be fed, where possible from the same supply cabinets as the traffic signals.. This should be reviewed during detail design and may require change depending on the traffic signal maintenance arrangements Embedded Work The Zenway Boulevard structure will require a minimum of one 75mm conduit in each barrier wall for municipal illumination. The requirements for additional conduits or for embedded work in the other structures are to be reviewed during detail design based on any municipal illumination requirements or those of MTO Electrical Removals The electrical removals include the existing illumination poles and associated equipment on the Highway 7 E-S ramp and on the interim extension. It also includes the removal of City of Vaughan lighting on Zenway Blvd. The equipment on Zenway Blvd. should be salvaged for re-installation. options, conventional and high mast, were considered for the full illumination. This report investigated and compared the performance and cost of both alternatives. Both alternatives were capable of satisfying the illumination design criteria as defined in section Although both alternatives utilized approved Ministry s photometry, both also exceeded the maximum illuminance level of 3.0 lux at the Ministry s right-of-way. As discussed in Section , although the MTO has stipulated a maximum level for light trespass, there are currently not any generally accepted recommendations for light trespass criteria from any established lighting authority including the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. Under the present conditions of the study limits, the proposed illumination options are performing as optimally as possible. Despite the failure by both options to satisfy the 3.0 lux (maximum) criteria for trespass lighting, an illumination solution must be resolved. It is the recommendation of this report to utilize the high mast illumination alternative to provide full illumination of the Highway 7 Interchange. Although the conventional option is almost equivalent to the high mast option in terms of economic feasibility, the high mast is considered safer for motorists in terms of the number and frequency of roadside hazards (for every high mast pole there is an average of seven conventional poles, refer to Table 3.0). 4.1 Construction Cost Estimate The estimated construction cost for the proposed electrical works associated with this project is provided in Appendix F Table 6.0 and in summary is approximately $4,754, Optional Construction Cost Estimate The full Illumination for Highway 427 and interchanges north of Highway 7 is optional based on the Warrant Analysis. If the full illumination option is chosen, the estimated optional construction cost for the proposed electrical works associated with this project is provided in Appendix F Table 9.0 and in summary is approximately $8,076, Special Requirements From the southeast quadrant of the Langstaff Road Interchange, crossing the proposed extension of Highway 427 to the northwest quadrant of the Major Mackenzie Drive interchange, there is a major network of overhead transmission cables owned and operated by Hydro One Networks. During detail design, any illumination poles being located in close proximity to these cables must be brought to the attention of Hydro One. The poles/luminaires in that area will have to satisfy both vertical and horizontal clearances as dictated by Hydro One. Based on preliminary highway profiles developed as part of the preliminary design, pole heights have been limited to 6.0m but should be re-evaluated. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The existing full illumination at the Highway 7 Interchange will be impacted during construction and therefore warrants replacement. In addition, the new ramps also require full illumination. Two equipment Page 6 January 05, 2011

11 APPENDIX A Exhibits Page 7 January 05, 2011

12 Highway 427 at Highway 7 Full Illumination (MTO) Recommended Alternative - High Mast (Exhibit 1-3) Page 8 January 05, 2011

13 HIGHWAY 7 RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S RAMP W-S RAMP S-E/W RAMP W-N RAMP E-N Highway 427 Transportation Corridor Electrical Preliminary Design RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) EXHIBIT 1

14 RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S RAMP E-N HIGHWAY 7 HIGHWAY 7 RAMP W-N RAMP W-S RAMP S-E/W RECOMMENDED PLAN Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 AT HIGHWAY 7 Electrical Preliminary Design INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) 2 EXHIBIT

15 ZENWAY BOULEVARD HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL POND 01 RAINBOW CREEK DRIVE DRIVE RECOMMENDED PLAN Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 AT HIGHWAY 7 Electrical Preliminary Design INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) 3 EXHIBIT

16 Highway 427 Interchange Partial Illumination (MTO) (Exhibit 4-12) Page 9 January 05, 2011

17 PROPOSED TRANSIT STATION RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S RAMP W-S HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL HIGH LANGSTAFF ROAD RAMP E-N RAMP S-E/W RAMP W-N RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT LANGSTAFF ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 4 (MTO) EXHIBIT

18 LANGSTAFF ROAD PROPOSED TRANSIT STATION RAMP E-S RAMP E-N RAMP N-E/W HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT LANGSTAFF ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 5 (MTO) EXHIBIT

19 TRANSIT STATION FUTURE TRANSITWAY STATION PARKING RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S RAMP W-S HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAMP E-N LANGSTAFF ROAD PROPOSED RAMP W-N RAMP S-E/W match line RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT LANGSTAFF ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 6 (MTO) +900 EXHIBIT

20 HIGHWAY 427 SBL RAMP W-S RAMP W-N ROAD RUTHERFORD RAMP S-E/W RAMP E-N HIGHWAY 427 NBL BEHEL CHRISTIAN NTRE RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT RUTHERFORD ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 7 (MTO) EXHIBIT

21 ACKSON ER STATION RAMP W-S RAMP W-N ROAD RUTHERFORD RAMP E-N RAMP E-S RAMP N-E/W HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT RUTHERFORD ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 8 (MTO) EXHIBIT

22 14+ P CARPOOL LOT (FUTURE TRANSITWAY STATION PARKING) TRA RAMP N-E/W HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAMP E-S RAMP E-N end of taper end of taper RUTHERFORD ROAD RAMP W-S RAMP W-N RAMP S-E/W D JACKSON RMER STATION RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT RUTHERFORD ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 9 (MTO) EXHIBIT

23 d of taper ROAD RUTHERFORD RECOMMENDED PLAN Highway 427 Transportation Corridor Electrical Preliminary Design CARPOOL PARKING LOT 10 EXHIBIT

24 HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAMP W-S RAMP S-E/W MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT MAJOR MACKENZIE DR. Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 11 (MTO) EXHIBIT

25 RAMP E-S MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE RAMP W-S RAMP S-E/W RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT MAJOR MACKENZIE DR. Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 12 (MTO) EXHIBIT

26 Zenway Boulevard Illumination (City of Vaughan) (Exhibit 13) Page 10 January 05, 2011

27 NEW ENTERPRISE WAY ZENWAY BOULEVARD MATCH EXISTING STA HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAINBOW CREEK DRIVE MATCH EXISTING STA RECOMMENDED PLAN Highway 427 Transportation Corridor ZENWAY BOULEVARD ROADWAY Electrical Preliminary Design ILLUMINATION (CITY OF VAUGHAN) 13 EXHIBIT

28 APPENDIX B Optional Full Illumination Exhibits Page 11 January 05, 2011

29 MTO Optional Full Illumination (Exhibit 14-23) Page 12 January 05, 2011

30 HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL POND 01 ZENWAY BOULEVARD RAINBOW CREEK DRIVE OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 Highway 427 Transportation Corridor FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) Electrical Preliminary Design 14 EXHIBIT

31 RAMP W HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 Highway 427 Transportation Corridor FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) Electrical Preliminary Design 15 EXHIBIT

32 PROPOSED TRANSIT STATION RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S W-S LANGSTAFF ROAD RAMP W-N RAMP S-E/W RAMP E-N HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT LANGSTAFF ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE Electrical Preliminary Design 16 FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) EXHIBIT

33 KV Existing Tower to be Relocated Relocated Tower 500 KV HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL 230 KV Relocated Tower OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 Highway 427 Transportation Corridor FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) Electrical Preliminary Design 17 EXHIBIT

34 HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAMP W-N RAMP S-E/W OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 Highway 427 Transportation Corridor FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) Electrical Preliminary Design 18 EXHIBIT

35 ON MER STATION RAMP W-S RUTHERFORD ROAD RAMP E-N RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL PROPOSED TRANSIT STATION OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT RUTHERFORD ROAD Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE Electrical Preliminary Design 19 FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) EXHIBIT

36 HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 Highway 427 Transportation Corridor FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) Electrical Preliminary Design 20 EXHIBIT

37 HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL ACCESS ROAD OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 Highway 427 Transportation Corridor FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) Electrical Preliminary Design 21 EXHIBIT

38 TRANSIT RAMP E-S RAMP W-S HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAMP S-E/W MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE RECOMMENDED PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT MAJOR MACKENZIE DR. Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Electrical Preliminary Design 22 (MTO) EXHIBIT

39 MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE FUTURE TRANSITWAY STATION PARKING TRANS PROPOSED OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 427 AT MAJOR MACKENZIE DR. Highway 427 Transportation Corridor INTERCHANGE Electrical Preliminary Design 23 FULL ILLUMINATION (MTO) EXHIBIT

40 Municipal Optional Full Illumination (Exhibit 24-28) Page 13 January 05, 2011

41 RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S RAMP E-N end of taper HIGHWAY 7 RAMP W-N RAMP W-S RAMP S-E/W OPTIONAL PLAN HIGHWAY 7 AT Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 Electrical Preliminary Design 24 FULL ILLUMINATION (MUN) EXHIBIT

42 FUTURE TRANSITWAY STATION PARKING PROPOSED TRANSIT STATION RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S HIGHWA LANGSTAFF ROAD RAMP W-S RAMP E-N RAMP W-N RAMP S-E/W match line end RAINB 0 OPTIONAL PLAN LANGSTAFF ROAD AT Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 Electrical Preliminary Design 25 FULL ILLUMINATION (MUN) EXHIBIT

43 14+ P (FUTURE TRANSITWAY STATION PARKING) TRA HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL CARPOOL LOT RAMP N-E/W RAMP E-S RAMP E-N end of taper end of taper RAMP W-S RUTHERFORD ROAD RAMP W-N RAMP S-E/W D JACKSON RMER STATION OPTIONAL PLAN RUTHERFORD ROAD AT Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 Electrical Preliminary Design 26 FULL ILLUMINATION (MUN) EXHIBIT

44 FUTURE TRA STATION P T RAMP E-S MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE OPTIONAL PLAN MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE AT Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 Electrical Preliminary Design 27 FULL ILLUMINATION (MUN) EXHIBIT

45 MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE HIGHWAY 427 SBL HIGHWAY 427 NBL RAMP W-S RAMP S-E/W OPTIONAL PLAN MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE AT Highway 427 Transportation Corridor HIGHWAY 427 Electrical Preliminary Design 28 FULL ILLUMINATION (MUN) EXHIBIT

46 APPENDIX C Illumination Calculation Summary Page 14 January 05, 2011

47 1.0 HIGHWAY HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVE 1 CONVENTIONAL ILLUMINATION 1.1 American Electric Lighting 1.2 General Electrical Luminaire Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min LVRatio Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min LVRatio Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 N-EW Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-S Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-N Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 W-N Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 N-EW Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-S Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-N Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 W-N Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Page 15 January 05, 2011

48 2.0 HIGHWAY HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVE Quality Lighting Luminaire 2.2 Holophane Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min LVRatio Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min LVRatio Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 N-EW Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-S Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-N Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 W-N Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-S Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 E-N Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 W-N Illuminance Lux Ramp-Hwy427 at Hwy7 N-EW Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy SB Illuminance Lux Interch-Hwy427 & Hwy NB Illuminance Lux Page 16 January 05, 2011

49 3.0 ZENWAY BOULEVARD ILLUMINATION (CITY OF VAUGHAN) 3.1 Cooper Lighting Luminaire 3.2 American Electric Lighting Luminaire Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min LVRatio Zenway EB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenway EB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Zenway WB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenway WB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Zenwy EB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenwy EB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Zenwy WB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenwy WB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min LVRatio Zenway EB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenway EB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Zenway WB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenway WB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M N.A. N.A Zenwy EB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenwy EB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Zenwy WB_Lum L_Roadway Cd/Sq.M N.A. Zenwy WB_Lv L_Veiling Cd/Sq.M Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Zenway EB_Ill Illuminance Lux Zenway WB_Ill Illuminance Lux Zenwy EB_Ill Illuminance Lux Zenwy WB_Ill Illuminance Lux Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Zenway EB_Ill Illuminance Lux Zenway WB_Ill Illuminance Lux Zenwy EB_Ill Illuminance Lux Zenwy WB_Ill Illuminance Lux Page 17 January 05, 2011

50 APPENDIX D Trespass Lighting Summary Page 18 January 05, 2011

51 1.0 ALTERNATIVE 1 CONVENTIONAL ILLUMINATION 1.1 American Electric Lighting Luminaire 2.0 ALTERNATIVE 2 HIGH MAST ILLUMINATION 2.1 Quality Lighting Luminaire Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Trespass at Hwy427 West Illuminance Lux Trespass at Hwy427 East Illuminance Lux Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Trespass at Hwy427 West Illuminance Lux Trespass at Hwy427 East Illuminance Lux General Electric Luminaire 2.2 Holophane Luminaire Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Trespass at Hwy427 West Illuminance Lux Trespass at Hwy427 East Illuminance Lux Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Trespass at Hwy427 West Illuminance Lux Trespass at Hwy427 East Illuminance Lux Page 19 January 05, 2011

52 APPENDIX E Life Cycle Cost Analysis Page 20 January 05, 2011

53 Description Hwy 427 / Hwy 7 Interchange Summary of Life Cycle Cost Analysis Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Conventional High Mast Initial Construction Cost $ 1,093,400 $ 1,640,000 Other Construction Cost $ - $ - Replacement Cost 'A' $ 41,580 $ 13,080 Replacement Cost 'B' $ 129,360 $ 247,320 Replacement Cost 'C' $ 368,060 $ - Annual Energy Cost $ 5,770 $ 9,312 Annual Maintenance Cost $ 42,730 $ 14,232 Annual Incident Cost $ 12,000 $ - Salvage Value $ 73,150 $ 27,500 Present Value Life Cycle Cost $2,542,315 $2,309,911 Description Conventional Pole High Mast Pole Cost of Pole $3,500 $60,000 Concrete Foundation $2,500 $20,000 Cost of ducts associated with one pole $3,000 $8,250 (Approx. 60 m pole $50/m) (Approx. 150 m pole $50/m) Cost of wiring $3,000 $7,920 (4 low voltage $5/m + Insulated ( Approximately 60 m ( Approximately 150 m ground $4/m) pole spacing) pole spacing) Cost of grounding per pole $25 $250 (1 electrodes for every 5 poles) (2 $ / pole) Electrical Chambers $200 $1,500 Total Cost / Pole only $12,225 $97,920 Approximated Cost / Pole $13,000 $100,000 Cost of Luminaire $900 $2,500 Notes: Cost Schedule For Roadway Illumination Poles 1. For the purposes of the Life Cycle Cost Analysis, the total cost per pole only was approximated as follows: Cost of High Mast poles is approximately $100,000 and $ 13,000 for Conventional Poles Page 21 January 05, 2011

54 Initial Construction Cost Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Poles : 77x $13,000 = $ 1,001,000 HPS luminaires : 77x $1200 = $ 92,400 Total $ 1,093,400 Material : 77 x $60 = $ 4,620 Labour : 1 hr x 77 x 6 men x $20/hr = $ 9,240 Equipment : 77 hrs x 3 truck x $120/hr = $ 27,720 Total = $ 41, hrs / 4000 hrs/yr = 6 years Material : 77 x $1200 = $ 92,400 Labour : 1 hr x 77 x 6 men x $20/hr = $ 9,240 Equipment : 77 hrs x 3 truck x $120/hr = $ 27,720 Total = $ 129, years Materials : 77 x $3,500 = $ 269,500 Labour : 5.0 hr x 77 x 8 men x $20/hr = $ 61,600 Equipment : 77 hrs x 4 truck x $120/hr = $ 36,960 Total $ 368,060 Annual Energy Cost (0.310 KW x 43 x 4,000 x $0.05)+(0.485 KW x 32 x 4,000 x $0.05) = $ 5,770 Annual Maintenance Cost Time period poles are to be replaced : Conventional Poles Labour : 77 hrs x 6 men x $20/hr = $ 9,240 Equipment : 77 hrs x 3 truck x $120/hr = $ 27,720 Total = $ 42,730 Incident Cost 2% of poles : 2 x $6,000 = $ 12,000 Salvage Value (after a 30 years) Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data for Alternative 1 Conventional Illumination Hwy 427 / Hwy 7 Interchange Other Construction Costs Not Applicable = Lamps : 0 = $ - Liminaires : 77 x (50% x $700) = $ 26,950 Poles : 77 x $600 = $ 46,200 Total = $ 73,150 = $ 30 Years - Initial Construction Cost Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Period for 'B' Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data for Alternative 2 High Mast Illumination Hwy 427 / Hwy 7 Interchange Poles : 11 x $100,000 = $ 1,400,000 HPS luminaires : 96 x $2,500 = $ 240,000 Total $ 1,640,000 Other Construction Costs Not Applicable = Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Material : 96 x $60 = $ 5,760 Labour : 0.5 hrs x 96 x 2 men x $20/hr = $ 1,920 Equipment : 45 hrs x 1 truck x $120/hr = $ 5,400 Total = $ 13, hrs / 4000 hrs/yr = 6 years Material : 96 x $2,500 = $ 240,000 Labour : 0.5 hrs x 96 x 2 men x $20/hr = $ 1,920 Equipment : 45 hrs x 1 truck x $120/hr = $ 5,400 Total = $ 247, years Material : Not Applicable Labour : Not Applicable Equipment : Not Applicable Total $ - Annual Energy Cost KW x 96 x 4,000 x $0.05 = $ 9,312 Annual Maintenance Cost Labour : 8.0 hrs x 2 men x $20/hr = $ 1,080 Equipment : 8.0 hrs x 1 truck x $120/hr = $ 3,840 Total = $ 14,232 Incident Cost Not Applicable $ - Salvage Value (after a 40 years) Time period poles are to be replaced : High Mast Poles Lamps : 0 = $ - Liminaires : 0 = $ - Poles : 11 x $2,500 = $ 27,500 Total = $ 27,500 = $ $ 40 Years - - GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs were quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs were approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' worksheet C. Material Quantities were obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs were quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs were approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' worksheet C. Material Quantities were obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Page 22 January 05, 2011

55 Lifecycle Cost Analysis Alternative 1 - Hwy 427 / Hwy 7 Interchange (Convensional Pole) 05-Jul-10 Conventional Basic Information Time Frame For Analysis 30 years (Should be <= 50 years) Inflation Rate 2.5% (eg.05 For 5%) Discount Rate 5.3% (eg.1 For 10%) Relevant Information ($ x 1,000) Inital Construction Cost $ 1,093,400 Other Construction Cost $0 Detour Lighting Cost $0 Replacement Period in years (eg if every 5 years enter 5) Replacement Cost "A" $ 41,580 6 Replacement Cost "B" $ 129, Replacement Cost "C" $ 368, Annual Energy Cost $ 5,770 Annual Maintenance Cost $ 42,730 * ******** ******** ************ Annual Incident Cost $ 12,000 Present Value Lifecycle Costs $2,542,315 Salvage Value $ 73,150 * ******** ******** ************ Analysis Of Alternative Time Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year ($ x 1,000) Inflation Index Inital Construction Cost 1,093,400 Other Construction Cost 0 Detour Lighting Cost 0 Replacement Cost "A" , , Replacement Cost "B" Replacement Cost "C" Annual Energy Cost 5,914 6,062 6,214 6,369 6,528 6,691 6,859 7,030 7,206 7,386 7,571 7,760 7,954 8,153 8,357 Annual Maintenance Cost 43,798 44,893 46,016 47,166 48,345 49,554 50,793 52,062 53,364 54,698 56,065 57,467 58,904 60,376 61,886 Annual Incident Cost 12,300 12,608 12,923 13,246 13,577 13,916 14,264 14,621 14,986 15,361 15,745 16,139 16,542 16,956 17,380 Salvage Value Annual Cash Flow 1,093,400 62,013 63,563 65,152 66,781 68, ,382 71,915 73,713 75,556 77,445 79, ,286 83,400 85,485 87,622 Discount Factors Discounted Cash Flow 1,093,400 58,891 57,325 55,801 54,317 52,873 86,839 50,098 48,766 47,470 46,207 44,979 73,873 42,618 41,485 40,382 Present Value Lifecycle Costs $2,542,315 Page 23 January 05, 2011

56 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year , , , ,566 8,780 8,999 9,224 9,455 9,691 9,933 10,182 10,436 10,697 10,965 11,239 11,520 11,808 12,103 63,433 65,019 66,644 68,310 70,018 71,769 73,563 75,402 77,287 79,219 81,200 83,229 85,310 87,443 89,629 17,814 18,259 18,716 19,184 19,663 20,155 20,659 21,175 21,705 22,247 22,804 23,374 23,958 24,557 25, , ,813 92, ,210 96, , , , , , , , , , , , ,308 38,263 62,843 36, ,750 34,353 33,439 32,550 53,460 30,842 30,022 29,224 28,447 27,690 59,543 Page 24 January 05, 2011

57 Lifecycle Cost Analysis Alternative 2 - Hwy 427 / Hwy 7 Interchange (High Mast Pole) 05-Jul-10 Highmast Basic Information Time Frame For Analysis 30 years (Should be <= 50 years) Inflation Rate 2.5% (eg.05 For 5%) Discount Rate 5.3% (eg.1 For 10%) Relevant Information ($ x 1,000) Inital Construction Cost $ 1,640,000 Other Construction Cost $0 Detour Lighting Cost $0 Replacement Period in years (eg if every 5 years enter 5) Replacement Cost "A" $ 13,080 6 Replacement Cost "B" $ 247, Replacement Cost "C" $0 40 Annual Energy Cost $ 9,312 Annual Maintenance Cost $ 14,232 * ******** ******** ************ Annual Incident Cost $0 Present Value Lifecycle Costs $2,309,911 Salvage Value $ 27,500 * ******** ******** ************ Analysis Of Alternative Time Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year ($ x 1,000) Inflation Index Inital Construction Cost 1,640,000 Other Construction Cost 0 Detour Lighting Cost 0 Replacement Cost "A" , , Replacement Cost "B" Replacement Cost "C" Annual Energy Cost 9,545 9,783 10,028 10,279 10,536 10,799 11,069 11,346 11,629 11,920 12,218 12,524 12,837 13,158 13,487 Annual Maintenance Cost 14,588 14,952 15,326 15,709 16,102 16,505 16,917 17,340 17,774 18,218 18,674 19,140 19,619 20,109 20,612 Annual Incident Cost Salvage Value Annual Cash Flow 1,640,000 24,133 24,736 25,354 25,988 26,638 42,473 27,986 28,686 29,403 30,138 30,892 49,255 32,456 33,267 34,099 Discount Factors Discounted Cash Flow 1,640,000 22,918 22,309 21,715 21,138 20,576 31,156 19,496 18,978 18,473 17,982 17,504 26,504 16,585 16,144 15,715 Present Value Lifecycle Costs $2,309,911 Page 25 January 05, 2011

58 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year , , , ,824 14,169 14,524 14,887 15,259 15,640 16,031 16,432 16,843 17,264 17,696 18,138 18,591 19,056 19,533 21,127 21,656 22,197 22,752 23,321 23,904 24,501 25,114 25,742 26,385 27,045 27,721 28,414 29,124 29, , ,951 35,825 57,121 37, ,842 39,544 40,533 41,546 66,243 43,649 44,740 45,859 47,005 48, , ,297 14,890 22,547 14, ,001 13,369 13,013 12,667 19,180 12,002 11,683 11,373 11,070 10,776 22,741 Page 26 January 05, 2011

59 APPENDIX F Construction Estimate Page 27 January 05, 2011

60 1.0 ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MTO PARTIAL ILLUMINATION Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Interchange at Langstaff Road Each 13 $12,000 $156,000 Interchange at Rutherford Roas Each 14 $12,000 $168,000 Interchange at Major Mackenzie Drive Each 8 $12,000 $96,000 Total $420, ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Highway 7 Interchange Each 1 $150,000 $150,000 Langstaff Road Interchange Each 2 $150,000 $300,000 Rutherford Road Interchange Each 2 $150,000 $300,000 Major Mackenzie Drive Interchange Each 1 $150,000 $150,000 Total $900, ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR CARPOOL COMMUTER LOT ILLUMINATION Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Rutherford Road Carpool Lot Each 187 $6,000 $1.122,000 Total $1,122,000 Page 28 January 05, 2011

61 4.0 ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR FULL ILLUMINATION AT HIGHWAY 7 INTERCHANGE (MTO WARRANTED) Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Interchange at Highway 7 High Mast Illumination (Refer to Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data for Alternative 2 in Appendix C) Lump sum 1 $1,640,000 $1,640,000 Interchange at Highway 7 Conventional Poles Each 8 $12,000 $96,000 Interchange at Highway 7 Underpass Illumination Each 1 $40,000 $40,000 Zenway Boulevard Underpass Illumination Each 1 $20,000 $20,000 York Region s 427 Interim Arterial Extension Removals Lump sum 1 $300,000 $300,000 Total $2,096, ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MUNICIPAL ILLUMINATION Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Zenway Boulevard Removals Lump Sum 1 $10,000 $10,000 Zenway Boulevard New Pole Installation Each 13 (Salvaged) + 4 (New) $6,000 (Salvaged) $7,000 (New) $106,000 Total $116,000 Page 29 January 05, 2011

62 6.0 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST Description Costs Partial Illumination Work $420,000 Traffic signals $900,000 Carpool Commuter Lot Illumination $1,122,000 Full Illumination at Highway 7 Interchange (MTO Warranted) $2,096,000 Temporary Illumination $100,000 Municipal Illumination $116,000 Total $4,754, ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MTO OPTIONAL FULL ILLUMINATION Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Highway 427 Zenway Boulevard to Langstaff Road Each 7 (High Mast) $122,000 (High Mast), $ (Conventional) $854,000 Interchange at Langstaff Road Each 8 (High Mast) + 1( Conventional) $122,000 (High Mast), $ (Conventional) $988,000 Underpass at Langstaff Road Lump sum 1 $20,000 $20,000 Highway 427 Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Each 11 (High Mast) + 54( Conventional) $122,000 (High Mast), $ (Conventional) $1,990,000 Interchange at Rutherford Road Each 7 (High Mast) $122,000 (High Mast) $ (Conventional) $854,000 Highway 427 Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Each 13 (High Mast) $122,000 (High Mast) $ (Conventional) 1,586,000 Interchange at Major Mackenzie Drive Each 4 (High Mast) + 13( Conventional) $122,000 (High Mast) $ (Conventional) $644,000 Total $6,936,000 Page 30 January 05, 2011

63 8.0 ESTIMATED COST SCHEDULE FOR MUNICIPAL OPTIONAL FULL ILLUMINATION Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Highway 7 Each 27 $10,000 $270,000 Langstaff Road Each 23 $10,000 $230,000 Rutherford Road Each 21 $10,000 $210,000 Major Mackenzie Drive Each 41 $10,000 $410,000 Total $1,120, ESTIMATED COST FOR OPTIONAL FULL ILLUMINATION Description Costs MTO Optional full Illumination $6,956,000 Municipal Optional full Illumination $1,120,000 Total *** $8,076,000 *** Total cost for optional full illumination does not include the savings realized from the partial illumination that is no longer required. Page 31 January 05, 2011

64 APPENDIX G Summary of Illumination Warrant Analysis Page 32 January 05, 2011

65 Highway 427 East Extension Highway 427 extension from Highway 7 to Major Mackenzie Road Executive Summary April 9, 2009 Table 1 Freeway Interchange Illumination (FORM 1) Location Total Points Warranting Condition (min number of points required = 75) Benefit/Cost Ratio Illumination Warrant As shown in the tables above, the warranting condition for the proposed mainline section of Highway 427 between Highway 407 and Major Mackenzie Road is satisfied as the total number of points is above the minimum indicated in Directive PLNG-B-05. The result of the Benefit/Cost Ratio for all freeway and freeway interchange was below the warranted ratio and therefore making full illumination Optional and to be determined by the MTO. Lighting at the interchange of Highway 7 and Highway 427 should have full illumination due to the adjacent freeway illumination being continuous (Freeway Interchange - Full Illumination 1.1.1). It is recommended that partial illumination be installed at each interchange based on the volume of the freeway exceeding 30,000 AADT (Partial Illumination of an Interchange ). Highway 427 and Highway7 N/A N/A N/A N/A Highway 427 and Langstaff Road 80.9 Satisfied 0.56 Optional Highway 427 and Rutherford Road 88.9 Satisfied 0.37 Optional Highway 427 and Major Mackenzie Drive 83.5 Satisfied Optional Table 2 Freeway Continuous Illumination (FORM 2) Location Total Points Warranting Condition (min number of points required = 80) Benefit/Cost Ratio Illumination Warrant Highway 427 From Highway 7 to Langstaff Road 87.9 Satisfied 0.73 Optional Highway 427 From Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road 95.4 Satisfied 0.53 Optional Highway 427 From Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Road 91.4 Satisfied 0.22 Optional Page 33 January 05, 2011

66 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] Grades (vertical) < 3% 3-3.9% 4-4.9% 5-6.9% 7% (B) DIFF. (A - B) Geometric Factors Ramp Types Directio nal Diamond Cloverleaf Parclo Buttonhook Multilevel (iv) Trumpet Sight Distance Cross Road Intersection (m) > < Geometric Total 17.4 Cross-road Channelization (Raised Islands) none continuou s at intercha nge intersec tion Operational Factors Level of Service (ii) (any dark hour) A B C D E, F Service Roads none one-way two-way Freeway Lane Widths (m) Freeway Median Widths (m) > < > 15.0 or barrier < No. Freeway Lanes Main Line Curves m (deg.) >1,800 (< 1 o ) 1, (1-2 o ) (2.1-3 o ) (3.1-4 o ) <450 (> 4 o ) Environmental Factors Development Cross-road Approach Illumination Freeway Illumination Operational Total none 1 quad 2 quad 3 quad 4 quad none partial continuo us none adjacent interchan ges continuo us * Environment 19.5 Page 34 January 05, 2011

67 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) al Total DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] Accidents % of Night-to-Total Accidents (3 yr. avg.) (iii) < 20% 20-30% 31-40% 41-50% > 50% Accidents Total 24.0 Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C) GEOMETRIC TOTAL = 17.4 OPERATIONAL TOTAL = 20.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOTAL = 19.5 ACCIDENTS TOTAL = 24.0 SUM = 80.9 POINTS FULL ILLUMINATION = 75 points WARRANTING CONDITION YES Page 35 January 05, 2011

68 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Rutherford Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Rutherford Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] Grades (vertical) < 3% 3-3.9% 4-4.9% 5-6.9% 7% (B) DIFF. (A - B) Geometric Factors Ramp Types Directio nal Diamond Cloverleaf Parclo Buttonhook Multilevel (iv) Trumpet Sight Distance Cross Road Intersection (m) > < Geometric Total 25.4 Cross-road Channelization (Raised Islands) none continuou s at intercha nge intersec tion Operational Factors Level of Service (ii) (any dark hour) A B C D E, F Service Roads none one-way two-way Freeway Lane Widths (m) Freeway Median Widths (m) > < > 15.0 or barrier < No. Freeway Lanes Main Line Curves m (deg.) >1,800 (< 1 o ) 1, (1-2 o ) (2.1-3 o ) (3.1-4 o ) <450 (> 4 o ) Environmental Factors Development Cross-road Approach Illumination Freeway Illumination Operational Total none 1 quad 2 quad 3 quad 4 quad none partial continuo us none adjacent interchan ges continuo us * Environment 19.5 Page 36 January 05, 2011

69 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Rutherford Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Rutherford Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) al Total DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] Accidents % of Night-to-Total Accidents (3 yr. avg.) (iii) < 20% 20-30% 31-40% 41-50% > 50% Accidents Total 24.0 Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C) GEOMETRIC TOTAL = 25.4 OPERATIONAL TOTAL = 20.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOTAL = 19.5 ACCIDENTS TOTAL = 24.0 SUM = 88.9 POINTS FULL ILLUMINATION = 75 points WARRANTING CONDITION YES Page 37 January 05, 2011

70 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Major MacKenzie Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Major MacKenzie Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] Grades (vertical) < 3% 3-3.9% 4-4.9% 5-6.9% 7% (B) DIFF. (A - B) Geometric Factors Ramp Types Directio nal Diamond Cloverleaf Parclo Buttonhook Multilevel (iv) Trumpet Sight Distance Cross Road Intersection (m) > < Geometric Total 25.0 Cross-road Channelization (Raised Islands) none continuou s at intercha nge intersec tion Operational Factors Level of Service (ii) (any dark hour) A B C D E, F Service Roads none one-way two-way Freeway Lane Widths (m) Freeway Median Widths (m) > < > 15.0 or barrier < No. Freeway Lanes Main Line Curves m (deg.) >1,800 (< 1 o ) 1, (1-2 o ) (2.1-3 o ) (3.1-4 o ) <450 (> 4 o ) Environmental Factors Development Cross-road Approach Illumination Freeway Illumination Operational Total none 1 quad 2 quad 3 quad 4 quad none partial continuo us none adjacent interchan ges continuo us * Environment 19.5 Page 38 January 05, 2011

71 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Major MacKenzie Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 FORM 1 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE FULL ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Location: Hwy 427 and Major MacKenzie Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) al Total DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF. (A - B) SCORE [RATING X (A - B)] Accidents % of Night-to-Total Accidents (3 yr. avg.) (iii) < 20% 20-30% 31-40% 41-50% > 50% Accidents Total 24.0 Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C) GEOMETRIC TOTAL = 25.0 OPERATIONAL TOTAL = 15.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOTAL = 19.5 ACCIDENTS TOTAL = 24.0 SUM = 83.5 POINTS FULL ILLUMINATION = 75 points WARRANTING CONDITION YES Page 39 January 05, 2011

72 = 30 BENEFIT / COST RATIO Location : Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Interchange This calculation is based on the March 20, 2003 seminar example provided by MTO The Ministry's Directive B-5, Form 1, provides a warranting condition for full mainline illumination at this location. The Benefit Cost Analysis is based on High Mast Illumination. TIMELINE FOR BASE CASE (yrs) Base Case - Deferred Construction Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost (For Years 0 to 30) Alternative - Constructed Now Reduction in Collisions = 30% = $13,400 Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost = $9,380 (For Years 0 to 29) =70% of Base Case Summary of Night-time Accident Data (Proposed) Location : Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Interchange Total 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100% Percentages fo Fatal, Injury an Property Damage type accident provided by the MRC Traffic Section were used. The total number of collisions is calculated using the weighted collision rate and AADT from the traffic modeling for Highway 427 Fatalities Injury Property Damage Actual # of Collisions / year Actual Collision Cost / yr = = $321,280 Actual Collision Cost / yr = $224,896 (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) Initial Construction Costs = $2,050,000 Initial Construction Costs = $2,050,000 (Start of Year 30) (Start of Year 0) Benefit Cost Calculation Benefits = Actual Collision Cost of Alternative - Actual Collision Costs of Base Case = -$96,384 The negative sign indicates a drop in collision costs. This reduction in collision = $96,384 cost is considered a benefit and is treated as a positive value. Benefits (Present Worth) = Benefits * (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) Estimated Traffic Growth = 2.00% Discounting Factor = 5.00% (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/A, 5.0%, 0%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/F, 5.0%, 30yrs) = Estimated AADT v/day Night Time Collision Rate 0.42 collisions/mvkm Distance 1.7 km Annual Collisions VEHICLE COLLISION COSTS Location : Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Interchange Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) Fatal $800,000 Injury $35,000 Property Damage Only (PDO) $8, Location % Fatalities % Injuries % PDO Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) Benefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $1,903, East Link and Hwy % 20.00% 80.00% $ 13,400 Disbenefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $ 753, = PW of Parts Replacement Costs, Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Benefit Cost Ratio = (PW Benefits - PW Disbenefit) / ( PW Alternative Costs- PW Base Case Costs) = 0.56 Notes: 1. VCC = (% Fatalities * $875,000) + (% Injuries * $27,000) + (% PDO * $6,000) 1 2. Vehicle collision costs were taken from Prioritorized Contract Content Guidelines, Edition 2.1, M arch 1997 Page 40 January 05, 2011

73 No of High Mast Poles = 12 # of poles on tall wall = 0 # of Luminaires / High Mast Pole = 12 TCB required for closure (m) = 0 # of Median Mounted Poles = 10 # of poles with Attenuator protection = 10 # of Conventional Poles = 35 Initial Construction Cost of HML Equipment Other Construction Costs (e.g. Barrier modifications for poles) (These, and any other additinal costs, should be reviewed on project specific bases Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Poles, Luminaires, Ducts, Wiring, Power Supply, etc. Tall Wall Modifications for median mounted poles Protection in rural medians (where width is less than 31m and there is no other protection) Costs associated with traffic management (closure) No. of high mast poles x cost /pole ($100,000) No. of conventional poles x cost /pole ($10,000) $ 1,200,000 $ 350,000 # of poles * 50m /pole x cost/m ($150) $ - # of poles * cost/pole ($50,000) $ 500,000 length of TCB * cost/m ($90) + cost for nightly closures and traffic control ($100,000 lumpsum) $ - $ 2,050,000 Material no. of luminaires x $50 $ 7,700 $60/hr $120/hr Material $60/hr $120/hr 0.5hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men $ 21,240 per conventional lum 0.5 hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 44,280 conventional lum Total $ 73, hrs(4000 hrs/yr burning) = 6 years $1500 per high mast lum, $400 per conventional lum $ 230, hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men per conventional lum $ 21, hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 44,280 conventional lum Total $ 295, years Material $2500 per conventional pole $ 87,500 $60/hr 3 hrs, 3 men per conventional pole $ 18,900 $120/hr 3 hrs, 3 trucks per conventional pole $ 37,800 Total $ 144,200 Annual Energy Cost KW x no. of lum x 4,000 x $0.10/kWH $ 17,363 1 hr, 2 men per high mast pole+0.5 hr, 6 men $60/hr $ 2,580 per conventional pole 1hr, 1 truck per high mast pole (2 trucks for Annual Maintenance Cost $120/hr median poles)+0.5 hr, 3 trucks per $ 8,940 conventional pole Total $ 11,520 Incident Cost 2% of conventional poles (material, labour and equipment) $ 3,200 Salvage Value (after a 40 years) Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data Location : Highway 427 and Langstaff Road Interchange TOTAL INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST 40 Yrs for HM Poles, 30 Yrs for Conventional poles Lamps Not Applicable $ - Liminaires Not Applicable $ - Poles no. of conv poles x 66% $ 57,750 Total $ 57,750 This calculation is based on the March 20, 2003 seminar example provided by MTO TIMELINE FOR BASE CASE (yrs) Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost Actual # of Collisions / year Actual Collision Cost / yr = 30 Reduction in Collisions = 30% = $13,400 Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost = $9,380 = = $202,443 Actual Collision Cost / yr = $141,710 =70% of Base Case = $1,860,000 Initial Construction Costs = $1,860,000 Benefit Cost Calculation Benefits = Actual Collision Cost of Alternative - Actual Collision Costs of Base Case = -$60,733 The negative sign indicates a drop in collision costs. This reduction in collision (Alternative) (Start of Year 30) = $60,733 = Estimated Traffic Growth = 3.00% Discounting Factor = 5.00% = $1,371, (Alternative) = $ 679, BENEFIT / COST RATIO The Ministry's Directive B-5, Form 1, provides a warranting condition for full mainline illumination at this location. The Benefit Cost Analysis is based on High Mast Illumination. Base Case - Deferred Construction (For Years 0 to 30) (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) Initial Construction Costs Benefits (Present Worth) (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/A, 5.0%, 0%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/F, 5.0%, 30yrs) = Benefits (Present Worth) Disbenefits (Present Worth) Location : Highway 427 and Rutherford Road Interchange Alternative - Constructed Now (For Years 0 to 29) (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) (Start of Year 0) cost is considered a benefit and is treated as a positive value. Benefits * (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = PW of Parts Replacement Costs, Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs w ere quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs w ere approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' w orksheet C. Material Quantities w ere obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Benefit Cost Ratio = (PW Benefits - PW Disbenefit) / ( PW Alternative Costs- PW Base Case Costs) = 0.37 Page 41 January 05, 2011

74 Estimated AADT Night Time Collision Rate Distance Summary of Night-time Accident Data (Proposed) Percentages fo Fatal, Injury an Property Damage type accident provided by the MRC Traffic Section were used. The total number of collisions is calculated using the weighted collision rate and AADT from the traffic modeling for Highway 427 Fatalities 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100% v/day 0.42 collisions/mvkm 1.35 km Annual Collisions Location : Highway 427 and Rutherford Road Interchange Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) Injury Fatal $800,000 Injury $35,000 Property Damage Only (PDO) $8,000 Property Damage VEHICLE COLLISION COSTS Total Location : Highway 427 and Rutherford Road Interchange Location % Fatalities % Injuries % PDO Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) East Link and Hwy % 20.00% 80.00% $ 13,400 No of High Mast Poles = 11 # of poles on tall wall = 0 # of Luminaires / High Mast Pole = 12 TCB required for closure (m) = 0 # of Median Mounted Poles = 9 # of poles with Attenuator protection = 9 # of Conventional Poles = 31 Initial Construction Cost of HML Equipment Other Construction Costs (e.g. Barrier modifications for poles) (These, and any other additinal costs, should be reviewed on project specific bases Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Poles, Luminaires, Ducts, Wiring, Power Supply, etc. Tall Wall Modifications for median mounted poles Protection in rural medians (where width is less than 31m and there is no other protection) Costs associated with traffic management (closure) No. of high mast poles x cost /pole ($100,000) No. of conventional poles x cost /pole ($10,000) $ 1,100,000 $ 310,000 # of poles * 50m /pole x cost/m ($150) $ - # of poles * cost/pole ($50,000) $ 450,000 length of TCB * cost/m ($90) + cost for nightly closures and traffic control ($100,000 lumpsum) $ - $ 1,860,000 Material no. of luminaires x $50 $ 7,050 $60/hr $120/hr Material $60/hr $120/hr 0.5hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men $ 19,080 per conventional lum 0.5 hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 39,960 conventional lum Total $ 66, hrs(4000 hrs/yr burning) = 6 years $1500 per high mast lum, $400 per conventional lum $ 210, hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men per conventional lum $ 19, hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 39,960 conventional lum Total $ 269, years Material $2500 per conventional pole $ 77,500 $60/hr 3 hrs, 3 men per conventional pole $ 16,740 $120/hr 3 hrs, 3 trucks per conventional pole $ 33,480 Total $ 127,720 Annual Energy Cost KW x no. of lum x 4,000 x $0.10/kWH $ 15,811 Annual Maintenance Cost $60/hr $120/hr 1 hr, 2 men per high mast pole+0.5 hr, 6 men $ 2,300 per conventional pole 1hr, 1 truck per high mast pole (2 trucks for median poles)+0.5 hr, 3 trucks per $ 7,980 conventional pole Total $ 10,280 Incident Cost 2% of conventional poles (material, labour and equipment) $ 2,800 Salvage Value (after a 40 years) Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data Location : Highway 427 and Rutherford Road Interchange TOTAL INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST 40 Yrs for HM Poles, 30 Yrs for Conventional poles Lamps Not Applicable $ - Liminaires Not Applicable $ - Poles no. of conv poles x 66% $ 51,150 Total $ 51,150 Notes: 1. VCC = (% Fatalities * $875,000) + (% Injuries * $27,000) + (% PDO * $6,000) 1 2. Vehicle collision costs were taken from Prioritorized Contract Content Guidelines, Edition 2.1, M arch 1997 GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs w ere quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs w ere approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' w orksheet C. Material Quantities w ere obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Page 42 January 05, 2011

75 This calculation is based on the March 20, 2003 seminar example provided by MTO TIMELINE FOR BASE CASE (yrs) Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost Actual # of Collisions / year = 30 BENEFIT / COST RATIO The Ministry's Directive B-5, Form 1, provides a warranting condition for full mainline illumination at this location. The Benefit Cost Analysis is based on High Mast Illumination. Base Case - Deferred Construction (For Years 0 to 30) Location : Highway 427 and Major Mackenzie Drive Interchange Reduction in Collisions = 30% = $13,400 Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost = $9,380 = 7.05 Alternative - Constructed Now (For Years 0 to 29) =70% of Base Case Summary of Night-time Accident Data (Proposed) Location : Highway 427 and Major Mackenzie Drive Interchange Percentages fo Fatal, Injury an Property Damage type accident provided by the MRC Traffic Section were used. The total number of collisions is calculated using the weighted collision rate and AADT from the traffic modeling for Highway 427 Fatalities Injury Property Damage Total 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100% Actual Collision Cost / yr (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) = $94,494 Actual Collision Cost / yr = $66,146 (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) Estimated AADT Night Time Collision Rate Distance v/day 0.42 collisions/mvkm 1 km Initial Construction Costs = $1,200,000 Initial Construction Costs = $1,200,000 (Start of Year 30) (Start of Year 0) Benefit Cost Calculation Benefits = Actual Collision Cost of Alternative - Actual Collision Costs of Base Case = -$28,348 The negative sign indicates a drop in collision costs. This reduction in collision = $28,348 cost is considered a benefit and is treated as a positive value. Benefits (Present Worth) = Benefits * (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) Estimated Traffic Growth = 1.00% Discounting Factor = 5.00% (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/A, 5.0%, 0%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/F, 5.0%, 30yrs) = Annual Collisions 7.05 Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) VEHICLE COLLISION COSTS Location : Highway 427 and Major Mackenzie Drive Interchange Fatal $800,000 Injury $35,000 Property Damage Only (PDO) $8, Location % Fatalities % Injuries % PDO Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) Benefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $492, East Link and Hwy % 20.00% 80.00% $ 13,400 Disbenefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $ 524, = PW of Parts Replacement Costs, Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Benefit Cost Ratio = (PW Benefits - PW Disbenefit) / ( PW Alternative Costs- PW Base Case Costs) = Notes: 1. VCC = (% Fatalities * $875,000) + (% Injuries * $27,000) + (% PDO * $6,000) 1 2. Vehicle collision costs were taken from Prioritorized Contract Content Guidelines, Edition 2.1, M arch 1997 Page 43 January 05, 2011

76 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data Location : Highway 427 and Major Mackenzie Drive Interchange No of High Mast Poles = 6 # of poles on tall wall = 0 # of Luminaires / High Mast Pole = 12 TCB required for closure (m) = 0 # of Median Mounted Poles = 5 # of poles with Attenuator protection = 5 # of Conventional Poles = 35 Initial Construction Cost of HML Equipment Other Construction Costs (e.g. Barrier modifications for poles) (These, and any other additinal costs, should be reviewed on project specific bases Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Poles, Luminaires, Ducts, Wiring, Power Supply, etc. Tall Wall Modifications for median mounted poles Protection in rural medians (where width is less than 31m and there is no other protection) Costs associated with traffic management (closure) No. of high mast poles x cost /pole ($100,000) No. of conventional poles x cost /pole ($10,000) $ $ 600, ,000 # of poles * 50m /pole x cost/m ($150) $ - # of poles * cost/pole ($50,000) $ 250,000 length of TCB * cost/m ($90) + cost for nightly closures and traffic control ($100,000 lumpsum) $ - $ 1,200,000 Material no. of luminaires x $50 $ 3,850 $60/hr $120/hr Material $60/hr $120/hr 0.5hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men $ 16,920 per conventional lum 0.5 hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 28,440 conventional lum Total $ 49, hrs(4000 hrs/yr burning) = 6 years $1500 per high mast lum, $400 per conventional lum $ 122, hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men per conventional lum $ 16, hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 28,440 conventional lum Total $ 167, years Material $2500 per conventional pole $ 87,500 $60/hr 3 hrs, 3 men per conventional pole $ 18,900 $120/hr 3 hrs, 3 trucks per conventional pole $ 37,800 Total $ 144,200 Annual Energy Cost KW x no. of lum x 4,000 x $0.10/kWH $ 10,379 Annual Maintenance Cost $60/hr $120/hr 1 hr, 2 men per high mast pole+0.5 hr, 6 men $ 2,340 per conventional pole 1hr, 1 truck per high mast pole (2 trucks for median poles)+0.5 hr, 3 trucks per $ 7,620 conventional pole Total $ 9,960 Incident Cost 2% of conventional poles (material, labour and equipment) $ 3,200 Salvage Value (after a 40 years) TOTAL INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST 40 Yrs for HM Poles, 30 Yrs for Conventional poles Lamps Not Applicable $ - Liminaires Not Applicable $ - Poles no. of conv poles x 66% $ 57,750 Total $ 57,750 GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs w ere quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs w ere approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' w orksheet C. Material Quantities w ere obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Page 44 January 05, 2011

77 FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR Geometric Factors No. of Lanes (2- way) RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGHT- ED WEIGH T (B) DIFF Lane Width (m) > < Median Width (m) > 15.0 or barrier (A - B) < SCO RE [RATI NG X (A - B)] FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR Factors Level of Service (ii) (any dark hour) Environmental Factors % Development RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGHT- ED WEIGH T (B) DIFF (A - B) SCO RE [RATI NG X (A - B)] A B C D E, F Operational Total 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Shoulders (m) Critical Curves m Slopes 7:1 6:1 5:1 4:1 < 4: (degrees) >3,500 (< 1/2 o ) 3,500-1,800 (2-1 o ) 1, (1.1-2 o ) (2.1-3 o ) (3.1-4 o ) Grades (vertical) < 3% 3-3.9% 4-4.9% 5-6.9% 7% Illumination adjacent to Freeway Accidents % of Night-to-Total (iii) Accidents (3 yr. avg.) none 0-40% 41-60% 61-80% essentia lly continuo us Environmental Total 19.0 < 20% 20-30% 31-40% 41-50% > 50% Interchange Spacing (km) > < Accidents Total 24.0 Geometric Total 29.9 Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C) Operational Page 45 January 05, 2011

78 FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGHT- ED WEIGH T (B) DIFF (A - B) SCO RE [RATI NG X (A - B)] GEOMETRIC TOTAL = 29.9 OPERATIONAL TOTAL = 15.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOTAL = 19.0 ACCIDENTS TOTAL = 24.0 SUM = 87.9 POINTS CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION = 80 points WARRANTING CONDITION YES Page 46 January 05, 2011

79 FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR Geometric Factors No. of Lanes (2- way) RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF (A - B) SCOR E Lane Width (m) > < Median Width (m) > 15.0 or barrier < [RATI NG X (A - B)] FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR Factors Level of Service (ii) (any dark hour) Environmental Factors % Development RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF (A - B) SCOR E [RATI NG X (A - B)] A B C D E, F Operational Total 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Shoulders (m) Critical Curves m Slopes 7:1 6:1 5:1 4:1 < 4: (degrees) >3,500 (< 1/2 o ) 3,500-1,800 (2-1 o ) 1, (1.1-2 o ) (2.1-3 o ) (3.1-4 o ) Grades (vertical) < 3% 3-3.9% 4-4.9% 5-6.9% 7% Interchange Spacing (km) > < Geometric Total Illumination adjacent to Freeway Accidents % of Night-to- Total (iii) Accidents (3 yr. avg.) Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C) none 0-40% 41-60% 61-80% essentia lly continuo us Environment al Total 19.0 < 20% 20-30% 31-40% 41-50% > 50% Accidents Total 24.0 Operational Page 47 January 05, 2011

80 FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF (A - B) SCOR E [RATI NG X (A - B)] GEOMETRIC TOTAL = 37.4 OPERATIONAL TOTAL = 15.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOTAL = 19.0 ACCIDENTS TOTAL = 24.0 SUM = 95.4 POINTS CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION = 80 points WARRANTING CONDITION YES Page 48 January 05, 2011

81 FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR Geometric Factors No. of Lanes (2- way) RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF (A - B) SCOR E Lane Width (m) > < Median Width (m) > 15.0 or barrier < [RATI NG X (A - B)] FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR Operational Factors Level of Service (ii) (any dark hour) Environmental Factors % Development RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF (A - B) SCOR E [RATI NG X (A - B)] A B C D E, F Operational Total 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Shoulders (m) Slopes 7:1 6:1 5:1 4:1 < 4: Illumination adjacent to Freeway none 0-40% 41-60% 61-80% essentia lly continuo us Critical Curves m (degrees) >3,500 (< 1/2 o ) 3,500-1,800 (2-1 o ) 1, (1.1-2 o ) (2.1-3 o ) (3.1-4 o ) Grades (vertical) < 3% 3-3.9% 4-4.9% 5-6.9% 7% Interchange Spacing (km) > < Geometric Total Accidents % of Night-to- Total (iii) Accidents (3 yr. avg.) Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C) Environment al Total 19.0 < 20% 20-30% 31-40% 41-50% > 50% Accidents Total 24.0 Page 49 January 05, 2011

82 FORM 2 FREEWAY - CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION Highway: Highway 427 GWP No.: Limits: Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Name: MRC Date: April 9, 2009 CLASSIFICATION FACTOR RATING (I) UNLI T WEIG HT (A) LIGH T- ED WEIG HT (B) DIFF (A - B) SCOR E [RATI NG X (A - B)] GEOMETRIC TOTAL = 34.4 OPERATIONAL TOTAL = 15.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOTAL = 19.0 ACCIDENTS TOTAL = 24.0 SUM = 91.4 POINTS CONTINUOUS ILLUMINATION = 80 points WARRANTING CONDITION YES Page 50 January 05, 2011

83 This calculation is based on the March 20, 2003 seminar example provided by MTO TIMELINE FOR BASE CASE (yrs) Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost Actual # of Collisions / year = 30 BENEFIT / COST RATIO Location : Highway 427 From Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Freeway The Ministry's Directive B-5, Form 1, provides a warranting condition for full mainline illumination at this location. The Benefit Cost Analysis is based on High Mast Illumination. Base Case - Deferred Construction (For Years 0 to 30) Reduction in Collisions = 30% = $13,400 Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost = $9,380 = 7.05 Alternative - Constructed Now (For Years 0 to 29) =70% of Base Case Summary of Night-time Accident Data (Proposed) Location : Highway 427 From Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Freeway Percentages fo Fatal, Injury an Property Damage type accident provided by the MRC Traffic Section were used. The total number of collisions is calculated using the weighted collision rate and AADT from the traffic modeling for Highway 427 Fatalities Injury Property Damage Total 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100% Actual Collision Cost / yr (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) Initial Construction Costs (Start of Year 30) = $94,494 Actual Collision Cost / yr = $66,146 (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) = $600,000 Initial Construction Costs = $600,000 (Start of Year 0) Estimated AADT v/day Night Time Collision Rate 0.42 collisions/mvkm Distance 0.5 km Annual Collisions 7.05 Benefit Cost Calculation Benefits = Actual Collision Cost of Alternative - Actual Collision Costs of Base Case = -$28,348 The negative sign indicates a drop in collision costs. This reduction in collision = $28,348 cost is considered a benefit and is treated as a positive value. Benefits (Present Worth) = Benefits * (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) Estimated Traffic Growth = 2.00% Discounting Factor = 5.00% (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/A, 5.0%, 0%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/F, 5.0%, 30yrs) = Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) VEHICLE COLLISION COSTS Location : Highway 427 From Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Freeway Fatal $800,000 Injury $35,000 Property Damage Only (PDO) $8, Location % Fatalities % Injuries % PDO Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) Benefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $559, East Link and Hwy % 20.00% 80.00% $ 13,400 Disbenefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $ 155, = PW of Parts Replacement Costs, Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Benefit Cost Ratio = (PW Benefits - PW Disbenefit) / ( PW Alternative Costs- PW Base Case Costs) = 0.73 Notes: 1. VCC = (% Fatalities * $875,000) + (% Injuries * $27,000) + (% PDO * $6,000) 1 2. Vehicle collision costs were taken from Prioritorized Contract Content Guidelines, Edition 2.1, M arch 1997 Page 51 January 05, 2011

84 No of High Mast Poles = 4 # of poles on tall wall = 0 # of Luminaires / High Mast Pole = 12 TCB required for closure (m) = 0 # of Median Mounted Poles = 4 # of poles with Attenuator protection = 4 # of Conventional Poles = Initial Construction Cost of HML Equipment Other Construction Costs (e.g. Barrier modifications for poles) (These, and any other additinal costs, should be reviewed on project specific bases Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data Location : Highway 427 From Highway 7 to Langstaff Road Freeway Poles, Luminaires, Ducts, Wiring, Power Supply, etc. Tall Wall Modifications for median mounted poles Protection in rural medians (where width is less than 31m and there is no other protection) Costs associated with traffic management (closure) No. of high mast poles x cost /pole ($100,000) No. of conventional poles x cost /pole ($10,000) $ $ 400,000 # of poles * 50m /pole x cost/m ($150) $ - # of poles * cost/pole ($50,000) $ 200,000 length of TCB * cost/m ($90) + cost for nightly closures and traffic control ($100,000 lumpsum) $ $ ,000 Material no. of luminaires x $50 $ 2,600 $60/hr $120/hr Material $60/hr $120/hr 0.5hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men $ 2,880 per conventional lum 0.5 hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 11,520 conventional lum Total $ 17, hrs(4000 hrs/yr burning) = 6 years $1500 per high mast lum, $400 per conventional lum $ 72, hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men per conventional lum $ 2, hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 11,520 conventional lum Total $ 86, years Material $2500 per conventional pole $ - $60/hr 3 hrs, 3 men per conventional pole $ - $120/hr 3 hrs, 3 trucks per conventional pole $ - Total $ - Annual Energy Cost KW x no. of lum x 4,000 x $0.10/kWH $ 4,656 Annual Maintenance Cost TOTAL INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST $60/hr $120/hr 1 hr, 2 men per high mast pole+0.5 hr, 6 men $ 160 per conventional pole 1hr, 1 truck per high mast pole (2 trucks for median poles)+0.5 hr, 3 trucks per $ 960 conventional pole Total $ 1,120 Incident Cost 2% of conventional poles (material, labour and equipment) $ - Salvage Value (after a 40 years) 40 Yrs for HM Poles, 30 Yrs for Conventional poles Lamps Not Applicable $ - Liminaires Not Applicable $ - Poles no. of conv poles x 66% $ - Total $ - This calculation is based on the March 20, 2003 seminar example provided by MTO TIMELINE FOR BASE CASE (yrs) Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost Actual # of Collisions / year Actual Collision Cost / yr = 30 Reduction in Collisions = 30% = $13,400 Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost = $9,380 = 6.17 = $82,627 Actual Collision Cost / yr = $57,839 = $750,000 Initial Construction Costs = $750,000 Benefit Cost Calculation Benefits = Actual Collision Cost of Alternative - Actual Collision Costs of Base Case (Alternative) (Start of Year 30) =70% of Base Case = -$24,788 The negative sign indicates a drop in collision costs. This reduction in collision = $24,788 = = $559, (Alternative) = $ 194, BENEFIT / COST RATIO Location : Highway 427 From Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Freeway The Ministry's Directive B-5, Form 1, provides a warranting condition for full mainline illumination at this location. The Benefit Cost Analysis is based on High Mast Illumination. Base Case - Deferred Construction (For Years 0 to 30) (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) Initial Construction Costs Benefits (Present Worth) (P/F, 5.0%, 30yrs) = Alternative - Constructed Now (For Years 0 to 29) (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) (Start of Year 0) cost is considered a benefit and is treated as a positive value. Benefits * (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) Estimated Traffic Growth = 3.00% Discounting Factor = 5.00% (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/A, 5.0%, 0%Growth, 30yrs) = Benefits (Present Worth) Disbenefits (Present Worth) = PW of Parts Replacement Costs, Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs w ere quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs w ere approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' w orksheet C. Material Quantities w ere obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Benefit Cost Ratio = (PW Benefits - PW Disbenefit) / ( PW Alternative Costs- PW Base Case Costs) = 0.53 Page 52 January 05, 2011

85 Percentages fo Fatal, Injury an Property Damage type accident provided by the MRC Traffic Section were used. The total number of collisions is calculated using the weighted collision rate and AADT from the traffic modeling for Highway 427 Estimated AADT Night Time Collision Rate Distance Summary of Night-time Accident Data (Proposed) Location : Highway 427 From Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Freeway Fatalities Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100% v/day 0.42 collisions/mvkm km Annual Collisions 6.17 Injury Property Damage VEHICLE COLLISION COSTS Location : Highway 427 From Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Freeway Fatal $800,000 Injury $35,000 Property Damage Only (PDO) $8, Location % Fatalities % Injuries % PDO Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) East Link and Hwy % 20.00% 80.00% $ 13,400 Total Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data Location : Highway 427 From Langstaff Road to Rutherford Road Freeway No of High Mast Poles = 5 # of poles on tall wall = 0 # of Luminaires / High Mast Pole = 12 TCB required for closure (m) = 0 # of Median Mounted Poles = 5 # of poles with Attenuator protection = 5 # of Conventional Poles = Initial Construction Cost of HML Equipment Other Construction Costs (e.g. Barrier modifications for poles) (These, and any other additinal costs, should be reviewed on project specific bases Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Poles, Luminaires, Ducts, Wiring, Power Supply, etc. Tall Wall Modifications for median mounted poles Protection in rural medians (where width is less than 31m and there is no other protection) Costs associated with traffic management (closure) No. of high mast poles x cost /pole ($100,000) No. of conventional poles x cost /pole ($10,000) $ $ 500,000 # of poles * 50m /pole x cost/m ($150) $ - # of poles * cost/pole ($50,000) $ 250,000 length of TCB * cost/m ($90) + cost for nightly closures and traffic control ($100,000 lumpsum) $ $ ,000 Material no. of luminaires x $50 $ 3,250 $60/hr $120/hr Material $60/hr $120/hr 0.5hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men $ 3,600 per conventional lum 0.5 hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 14,400 conventional lum Total $ 21, hrs(4000 hrs/yr burning) = 6 years $1500 per high mast lum, $400 per conventional lum $ 90, hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men per conventional lum $ 3, hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 14,400 conventional lum Total $ 108, years Material $2500 per conventional pole $ - $60/hr 3 hrs, 3 men per conventional pole $ - $120/hr 3 hrs, 3 trucks per conventional pole $ - Total $ - Annual Energy Cost KW x no. of lum x 4,000 x $0.10/kWH $ 5,820 Annual Maintenance Cost $60/hr $120/hr 1 hr, 2 men per high mast pole+0.5 hr, 6 men $ 200 per conventional pole 1hr, 1 truck per high mast pole (2 trucks for median poles)+0.5 hr, 3 trucks per $ 1,200 conventional pole Total $ 1,400 Incident Cost 2% of conventional poles (material, labour and equipment) $ - Salvage Value (after a 40 years) TOTAL INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST 40 Yrs for HM Poles, 30 Yrs for Conventional poles Lamps Not Applicable $ - Liminaires Not Applicable $ - Poles no. of conv poles x 66% $ - Total $ - Notes: 1. VCC = (% Fatalities * $875,000) + (% Injuries * $27,000) + (% PDO * $6,000) 1 2. Vehicle collision costs were taken from Prioritorized Contract Content Guidelines, Edition 2.1, M arch 1997 GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs w ere quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs w ere approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' w orksheet C. Material Quantities w ere obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Page 53 January 05, 2011

86 = 30 BENEFIT / COST RATIO Location: Highway 427 From Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Freeway This calculation is based on the March 20, 2003 seminar example provided by MTO The Ministry's Directive B-5, Form 1, provides a warranting condition for full mainline illumination at this location. The Benefit Cost Analysis is based on High Mast Illumination. TIMELINE FOR BASE CASE (yrs) Base Case - Deferred Construction Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost (For Years 0 to 30) Actual # of Collisions / year Reduction in Collisions = 30% = $13,400 Avg. Vehicle Collision Cost = $9,380 = 5.99 Alternative - Constructed Now (For Years 0 to 29) =70% of Base Case Summary of Night-time Accident Data (Proposed) Location: Highway 427 From Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Freeway Percentages fo Fatal, Injury an Property Damage type accident provided by the MRC Traffic Section were used. The total number of collisions is calculated using the weighted collision rate and AADT from the traffic modeling for Highway 427 Fatalities Injury Property Damage Total 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 100% Actual Collision Cost / yr (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) = $80,320 Actual Collision Cost / yr = $56,224 (Avg. cost * # of collisions/yr) Estimated AADT Night Time Collision Rate Distance v/day 0.42 collisions/mvkm 0.85 km Initial Construction Costs = $900,000 Initial Construction Costs = $900,000 (Start of Year 30) (Start of Year 0) Benefit Cost Calculation Benefits = Actual Collision Cost of Alternative - Actual Collision Costs of Base Case = -$24,096 The negative sign indicates a drop in collision costs. This reduction in collision = $24,096 cost is considered a benefit and is treated as a positive value. Benefits (Present Worth) = Benefits * (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) Estimated Traffic Growth = 1.00% Discounting Factor = 5.00% (P/A, 5.0%, 6.6%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/A, 5.0%, 0%Growth, 30yrs) = (P/F, 5.0%, 30yrs) = Annual Collisions 5.99 Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) VEHICLE COLLISION COSTS Location: Highway 427 From Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Freeway Fatal $800,000 Injury $35,000 Property Damage Only (PDO) $8, Location % Fatalities % Injuries % PDO Vehicle Collision Costs (VCC) Benefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $418, East Link and Hwy % 20.00% 80.00% $ 13,400 Disbenefits (Present Worth) (Alternative) = $ 233, = PW of Parts Replacement Costs, Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Benefit Cost Ratio = (PW Benefits - PW Disbenefit) / ( PW Alternative Costs- PW Base Case Costs) = 0.22 Notes: 1. VCC = (% Fatalities * $875,000) + (% Injuries * $27,000) + (% PDO * $6,000) 1 2. Vehicle collision costs were taken from Prioritorized Contract Content Guidelines, Edition 2.1, M arch 1997 Page 54 January 05, 2011

87 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Input Data Location: Highway 427 From Rutherford Road to Major Mackenzie Drive Freeway No of High Mast Poles = 6 # of poles on tall wall = 0 # of Luminaires / High Mast Pole = 12 TCB required for closure (m) = 0 # of Median Mounted Poles = 6 # of poles with Attenuator protection = 6 # of Conventional Poles = Initial Construction Cost of HML Equipment Other Construction Costs (e.g. Barrier modifications for poles) (These, and any other additinal costs, should be reviewed on project specific bases Replacement Cost 'A' (Lamps) Replacement Period for 'A' Replacement Cost 'B' (Luminaires) Replacement Period for 'B' Replacement Cost 'C' (Poles) Replacement Period for 'C' Poles, Luminaires, Ducts, Wiring, Power Supply, etc. Tall Wall Modifications for median mounted poles Protection in rural medians (where width is less than 31m and there is no other protection) Costs associated with traffic management (closure) No. of high mast poles x cost /pole ($100,000) No. of conventional poles x cost /pole ($10,000) $ $ 600,000 # of poles * 50m /pole x cost/m ($150) $ - # of poles * cost/pole ($50,000) $ 300,000 length of TCB * cost/m ($90) + cost for nightly closures and traffic control ($100,000 lumpsum) $ $ ,000 Material no. of luminaires x $50 $ 3,900 $60/hr $120/hr Material $60/hr $120/hr 0.5hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men $ 4,320 per conventional lum 0.5 hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 17,280 conventional lum Total $ 25, hrs(4000 hrs/yr burning) = 6 years $1500 per high mast lum, $400 per conventional lum $ 108, hr, 2 men per high mast lum+1hr, 6 men per conventional lum $ 4, hr, 1 truck per high mast lum (2 trucks for median poles)+1 hr, 3 trucks per $ 17,280 conventional lum Total $ 129, years Material $2500 per conventional pole $ - $60/hr 3 hrs, 3 men per conventional pole $ - $120/hr 3 hrs, 3 trucks per conventional pole $ - Total $ - Annual Energy Cost KW x no. of lum x 4,000 x $0.10/kWH $ 6,984 1 hr, 2 men per high mast pole+0.5 hr, 6 men $60/hr $ 240 per conventional pole 1hr, 1 truck per high mast pole (2 trucks for Annual Maintenance Cost $120/hr median poles)+0.5 hr, 3 trucks per $ 1,440 conventional pole Total $ 1,680 Incident Cost 2% of conventional poles (material, labour and equipment) $ - Salvage Value (after a 40 years) TOTAL INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST 40 Yrs for HM Poles, 30 Yrs for Conventional poles Lamps Not Applicable $ - Liminaires Not Applicable $ - Poles no. of conv poles x 66% $ - Total $ - GENERAL NOTES: A. Labour and Equipment costs w ere quoted from the MTO Electrical Engineering Manual Volume 1, Dated March 1990 and are assumed to be current. B. Material Costs w ere approximated from past contracts in the MTO HICO system. Refer to the 'Cost Schedule' w orksheet C. Material Quantities w ere obtained from the Preliminary lighting layout design. Page 55 January 05, 2011