FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
1. What is the study area?
The study area includes Highway 401 and the adjacent land uses between
Warden Avenue and Brock Road, a distance of approximately 21 kilometres. The
project limits are located in the Cities of Toronto and Pickering (click here for
map).
2. What is the purpose of this study?
The purpose of this study is to determine the long-term strategy to address
the rehabilitation needs of the section of Highway 401 between Warden
Avenue and Brock Road. This project will also include contract sequencing
for the recommended highway improvements, safety and operational
improvements, and consideration of transit friendly initiatives. Alternatives
will be generated and evaluated based on technical and environmental
factors and in consultation with the public, stakeholders, municipalities and
government agencies. At the end of the study a Transportation
Environmental Study Report will be prepared, which will document the
recommended rehabilitation strategy for this section of Highway 401 along
with the process leading to the selection of the recommended plan.
3. Why is the Ministry examining improvements to Highway 401 between
Warden Avenue and Brock Road?
The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is committed to providing and
maintaining a safe and efficient provincial transportation system. Highway
401 is an important link in Ontario’s freeway network, connecting the
Detroit/Windsor area to the Quebec border. Improvements along this section
of Highway 401 are needed to bring the corridor up to current standards and
to maintain adequate operational and safety conditions in the future.
4. What alternatives are being considered as part of this study?
A wide range of reasonable alternatives will be developed and evaluated to
determine the most appropriate solution. Once the need for Highway 401
improvements has been defined and existing environmental conditions have
been identified, an assessment of Alternatives to the Undertaking will be
carried out. This assessment will examine fundamentally different ways of
addressing the identified problems and will include an analysis of the "Do
Nothing" option. Alternatives to the Undertaking that may be considered
include, but may not be limited to:
- Do nothing
- Improvements to other modes of transportation (e.g. rail, air, marine, transit, etc.)
- Transportation Demand Management (TDM) (i.e. the use of policies, programs, services and products to influence people's travel choices - where, how, when, why and whether people travel)
- Transportation Systems Management (TSM) (i.e. the use of relatively low-cost measures to increase capacity and/or provide safety improvements on an existing transportation system)
- Improvements to existing Highway 401
- Improvements to municipal transportation infrastructure
Some of these alternatives may be implemented in combination with one
another and/or introduced in a staged-manner in order to address the
existing and future deficiencies along this section of the Highway 401
corridor. Alternatives which address the identified deficiencies will be carried
forward for further consideration.
5. When will the preferred plan be constructed?
Should the recommendations of this study receive environmental clearance,
detail design would be initiated to develop engineering and construction
details. Construction cannot occur until the engineering details have been
finalized and environmental approvals have been obtained through the detail
design study.
6. What is the construction cost?
Preliminary construction costs will be developed as part of this study to
support the evaluation and selection of the preferred preliminary design
alternative.
7. Will municipal staff be involved in the project?
The Project Team will be consulting with staff from the City of Toronto and
the City of Pickering throughout the study - particularly before key milestones
in the project such as the generation, assessment, and evaluation of
alternatives.
8. How does the environmental assessment process work?
This study will follow the approved planning process for a Group 'B' project
under the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation
Facilities (2000), an approved process under the Ontario Environmental
Assessment Act.
The opportunity for public input will be provided throughout this study. A
Notice of Study Commencement was published in the Ajax/Pickering News
Advertiser on Wednesday January 13, 2010 in the Toronto Star on Friday January 15, 2010 in the Scarborough Mirror on Wednesday January 13, 2010
and in the L'Express on Tuesday January 12, 2010.(Avis de commencement d'étude)
Two Public Information Centres will be held during this study. Notices of the Public
Information Centres will be published in local newspapers and sent to
those on the Project Team's contact list.
At the end of the study a Transportation Environmental Study Report will be prepared, which will be made available for public review and will document:
- The transportation problems and opportunities
- The generation, assessment and evaluation of alternatives
- The recommended rehabilitation strategy for this section of Highway 401
- A summary of potential environmental issues and mitigation measures
- A summary of consultation undertaken throughout the study
A notice announcing the placement of the Transportation Environmental
Study Report on the public record for public review will also be published in local newspapers
and a notice will be distributed to those who requested to be placed on the
project contact list.
PIC 2
1. What is the purpose of PIC #2?
The purpose of PIC #2 is to review the alternatives and the evaluation leading to the selection of the preferred alternative, present the preliminary design of the preferred alternative including recommendations for rehabilitation and construction sequencing, and present recommended mitigation measures.
2. What was presented at PIC #1?
PIC #1 was held on October 5 and October 7, 2010 in Toronto and Pickering. Approximately 50 people attended both PIC venues. The following material was presented:
- Study background, schedule and process information
- Summary of existing conditions, deficiencies and transportation problems
- Evaluation of the Alternatives to the Undertaking
- Overview of Potential Rehabilitation Requirements
- Mainline, interchange and intersection alternatives
- Commuter parking lot alternatives and potential transit initiatives to be considered
- Next steps
3. What was the key feedback from PIC #1?
The key feedback received consisted of support for the mainline improvement alternatives in the west section of study area to improve existing congestion and questions regarding timing for constructing these improvements.
4. What are the recommendations for rehabilitation?
- Pavement along the Highway 401 is in "fair to good" condition, however the last major pavement rehabilitation for all sections of the mainline occurred between 13 to 22 years ago. A visual pavement condition survey has been completed. More comprehensive investigations will be completed during Detail Design. Given that these improvements will be implemented over several years the pavement conditions will continue to deteriorate over time and the preliminary recommendation is to replace top layers of asphalt completely and carry out full depth repair of the concrete base. The most urgent need is in the westbound lanes from Warden Avenue to Rougemount Drive.
Structures
- A total of 61 structures are located within the study area. The majority of bridges are generally in fair to good condition. Structural recommendations include replacement of the deck and girders for some overpass structures in the west end of the study limits, including Birchmount Road, Kennedy Road, Midland Avenue and Markham Road. Additional recommendations are to replace the entire structures crossing the CN and CP tracks near Kennedy Road, and minor rehabilitation of the other structures, such as repairs to existing structural elements.
Illumination
- Existing electrical/illumination is generally in good condition, however approximately 20% of luminaires are reaching the end of their life cycle. Aging luminaires/poles will eventually require replacement in some locations to address minor deficiencies (e.g. reduced light distribution due to old luminaires and glare, and deterioration of internal electrical equipment due to salt spray / build-up in HML poles).
Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS)
- In general, there are no major issues with the performance of the ATMS equipment along the Highway 401 corridor. Some ATMS equipment that is impacted by proposed operational improvements will need to be relocated. All CCTV cameras will be upgraded to new technology (i.e. dome cameras with camera lowering systems). The temporary non-intrusive traffic detectors will be replaced with Vehicle detector stations (VDS) at appropriate locations.
5. How will construction be undertaken?
A conceptual construction staging strategy has been developed. Assumptions used in the construction staging strategy include generally maintaining the existing number of lanes along the corridor (e.g. if 1 lane is closed in the collectors for rehabilitation, 1 temporary lane will be added to the express lanes), maintaining all lanes and adequate shoulder width during day construction and increasing the work zone at night by closing additional lanes and reducing shoulders, and utilizing the existing left and right shoulders for construction staging (strengthening of shoulders required in advance).
A final construction staging strategy will be developed during detail design subject to additional review / traffic analysis.
6. Will the entire study area be under construction at the same time?
No, an alternative contract sequencing strategy to implement the recommended rehabilitation / improvement alternatives has been developed. It is anticipated that the construction of will take place under 6 different contracts. Based on pavement and structure needs, the contracts have been broken down as follows:
- Contract 1 - Warden Avenue to Neilson Road (westbound collector and express)
- Contract 2 - Neilson Road to Rougemount Drive (eastbound collector and express)
- Contract 3 - Neilson Road to Rougemount Drive (westbound collector and express)
- Contract 4 - Warden Avenue to Neilson Road (eastbound collector and express)
- Contract 5 - Rougemount Drive to Brock Road (westbound collector and express)
- Contract 6 - Rougemount Drive to Brock Road (eastbound collector and express)
Once one contract is finished, a new contract will commence (based on funding). Alternatively, 2 contracts may undergo construction at the same time; however, not for both eastbound and westbound sections of the same stretch, and/or not for consecutive stretches in the same direction.
7. When will construction commence and how long is it anticipated to complete all the work?
The timing of construction is dependent on completion of the EA, Detail Design and funding. This project is currently not identified on the 5-year Capital Program. Each contract is anticipated to take 4-5 years to complete, and the total program is anticipated to take 20-25 years to complete.
8. What alternatives have been developed?
Alternatives have been developed for the following components:
- Mainline Highway 401 - both eastbound and westbound streams;
- Interchanges/intersections;
- Carpool lots; and
- Transit friendly initiatives
9. How were mainline alternatives selected?
A 2-step process was used to select a preferred alternative. The first step was to conduct a general feasibility analysis based on traffic impacts, property impacts, complexity of construction staging, and preliminary construction cost. Those alternatives which passed the first step were carried forward to a more detailed evaluation (Step 2), which determined natural, socio-economic, and cultural impacts, as well as transportation benefits and costs. A reasoned argument (trade-off) method of evaluation was used to select the preferred alternative. This method identifies the relative advantages and disadvantages of the mainline alternatives in order to select a preferred alternative.
10. Which mainline alternatives were selected as preferred?
Eastbound - Alternative B includes the provision of a third through lane in the eastbound collectors through the
Kennedy Road interchange, and relocation of the core-collector transfer located east of Warden Avenue to just east of
the Kennedy Road eastbound off-ramp.
Overall, Alternative B is the preferred alternative because it had a 4.5 minute travel time-saving, a relatively low
capital cost, and does not impact any commercial/industrial lands. Although there are impacts to Glamorgan Park,
there are significant environmental benefits with reduced congestion and, in addition, it may be possible to minimize
these impacts. Further investigations and discussion with the City of Toronto are required. Alternative B will
substantially improve the safety and operations through this stretch of Highway 401 while avoiding or minimizing
impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural environments to the extent possible.
Westbound – Alternative J includes the provision of a third through lane in the westbound collectors through the
Kennedy Road interchange, relocation of the collector-core transfer located east of Warden Avenue to east of
Kennedy Road, and addition of a fourth lane in the westbound collectors between the Neilson Road and Kennedy
Road interchanges.
Overall, Alternative J is the preferred alternative as it best resolves the existing and future congestion and queuing
issues, provides good route flexibility for emergency services, and provides better traffic distribution by maintaining
all of the existing transfers. Overall, Alternative J provides substantial benefit to safety and operations through this
stretch of Highway 401 while avoiding or minimizing impacts to the natural, social, economic and cultural
environments to the extent possible.
11. Which interchange improvements are recommended?
In addition to mainline improvements, opportunities to address existing or future operational, capacity or safety
concerns at interchanges/intersections were also reviewed. Given the constrained nature of this corridor, significant
alterations (e.g. major reconfiguration of interchange ramps) are not considered appropriate given the high associated
impacts. Therefore, minor operational improvements were examined. Improvements that did not result in significant
effects on adjacent properties or features were recommended, including:
- Elimination of existing channelized right-turns at off-ramps (Warden Avenue, McCowan Road, Markham Road)
- Extension of left-turn or right-turn lanes along off-ramps or on crossing roads (McCowan Road, Markham Road)
- Modification of pavement markings along exit ramps to create a more equal lane distribution ( e.g. develop 1 left and 1 right turn lane along ramp, rather than developing 2 right turn lanes) (Kennedy Road, McCowan Road, Markham Road, Morningside Avenue, Liverpool Road)
- Review of signal timing at intersections (Whites Road, Highway 2/Kingston Road/Port Union Road)
- Provision of double left turn at off-ramps to reduce queue lengths.
12. Which carpool lot alternatives were selected?
The Ministry of Transportation has a commitment to build, operate and maintain carpool lots. As such, the Project Team has examined all interchanges for feasible carpool lot locations. 4 carpool lot opportunity areas were identified in the study area:
- 3 carpool lot alternatives in the vicinity of the Kingston Road / Highway 2 / Port Union interchange were evaluated.
- The southeast quadrant of the Whites Road interchange was also identified as a separate feasible carpool lot location.
The 3 carpool lot alternatives in the Kingston Road area were evaluated using the same method as the mainline alternatives to determine a preferred location. Alternative 1, which is located between Kingston Road and Highway 2, is preferred from a transportation perspective and from all aspects of the environment (natural, social, economic, and cultural).
As only one location was available at Whites Road, it was determined that the benefits of providing a carpool lot at this location outweigh the minor impacts. As such, a second carpool lot at Whites Road is also recommended in addition to the recommended lot at Port Union Road.
13. Have transit-friendly elements been incorporated into the recommended plan?
Transit friendly initiatives have been considered along the corridor (in consultation with Metrolinx and GO Transit), including Bus Bypass Shoulders and Bus Pass-Through Lanes at interchanges. Based on discussions with GO Transit, bus bypass shoulders have been requested and are considered feasible at:
- Westbound collector lanes between Neilson Road and Markham Road (right shoulder); and
- Westbound collector lanes from transfer west of Brimley Road to transfer east of Warden Avenue (left shoulder).
Bus pass through lanes at interchanges have been requested and are considered feasible at:
- Eastbound at Neilson Road (infrastructure already in place).
- Eastbound at Brock Road (infrastructure already in place).
- Westbound at Kennedy Road.
14. Why are HOV lanes not being recommended?
HOV Lanes are considered impractical through this section of Highway 401 given the potential property impacts and the difficulties associated with implementing an effective HOV network in a core-collector system. In order to avoid significant impacts along the corridor, it would be necessary to replace one of the existing lanes with an HOV lane. It is anticipated that this would significantly reduce the capacity of Highway 401.
15. What mitigation measures are being recommended?
The following potential mitigation measures may be necessary during detail design:
- Groundwater - Further hydrogeological studies will be conducted as required during detail design at locations where dewatering is necessary.
- Surface water - Erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented during construction to prevent the potential migration of sediment off-site. Stormwater run-off from Highway 401 will be collected and treated to the extent possible.
- Natural Environment – Impacts on vegetation will be mitigated by restoration of vegetation removed, as required. Requirements under the Migratory Birds Convention Act will be met. If, and where necessary, measures will be incorporated to address requirements under the Fisheries Act.
- Landscaping – If applicable, and where appropriate, landscaping planting plans will be prepared and implemented to existing vegetation communities.
- Noise – Detailed noise analysis will be completed during detail design with the refinement of the preferred alternative(s). If required, a noise by-law exemption will be obtained by the local municipality for the construction phase of the project for any night work.
- Property – Negotiation with affected property owners will occur during the subsequent detail design stage. Compensation will be provided at fair market value.
- Traffic – Construction activities will be staged to minimize traffic delays. Traffic impacts due to ramp changes during construction will be minimized through advance detour signing. Coordination with potentially affected agencies (i.e., EMS, Fire, Police and Cities of Toronto and Pickering) will be maintained throughout the project duration.
- Archaeological / Cultural Heritage – A Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment will be carried out for areas that appear to be undisturbed during detail design.
- Socio-Economic – Where possible, measures to reduce disruption to the travelling public will be considered. These include minimizing the duration of ramp/lane closures, absorbing improvements in the ongoing rehabilitation program, and maintaining through highway capacity during construction.
16. What are the next steps following PIC 2?
Following PIC #2, the Project Team will review and respond to all comments received, incorporate any revisions, and finalize the preliminary design plans. The final Transportation Environmental Study Report will be prepared and filed for a 30-day review period.
17. Have you consulted with the local municipalities?
Yes. We have consulted with both the City of Toronto and the City of Pickering from the beginning of the study. We recently held a meeting with the City of Toronto, the City of Pickering, and the Regional Municipality of Durham to present and receive their feedback on the material being presented at PIC #2. We will continue to consult with these municipalities throughout this study.
18. When will I know if I am going to be impacted?
Having assessed and evaluated the alternatives and selected a recommended plan, the Project Team has developed the preliminary design of the recommended plan and identified potential property impacts. The Project Team will be presenting the evaluation of the alternatives as well as the preliminary design of the Project Team's preferred rehabilitation strategy at the second round of Public Information Centres for review and comment. The Project Team has also notified potentially impacted properties of the anticipated impacts. The design will be finalized in consultation with any potentially impacted stakeholders.