Regina Highway #1 Bypass by Lori Kluge

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PREMIER FROM CONCERNED TAXPAYERS OF SASKATCHEWAN Dear Mr. Premier, We have serious concerns regarding the proposed by-pass development around the City of Regina, specifically along Highway #1 East, including Pilot Butte and Great Plains Access Rd, and the lack of meaningful input the Government has allowed in the choosing of the best location.We are asking you to please reconsider the east terminal point for the much needed east Regina bypass location be placed at Gravel Pit Rd instead of 400 meters east of Tower Rd. The bypasses at Balgonie and Highway 48 should be started immediately, but the Tower Rd location MUST be revisited. We have tried to get copies of the Functional Study to answer our questions and concerns, and despite the study being paid for by taxpayers, so much useful information has been redacted as to make the report useless: what is The Highways Department trying to conceal? The former Highways Minister advised in an interview that taxpayers should ‘trust me’ that concerns have been addressed: how can we trust a government who refuses to release the relevant material they are advising us they have relied on? Where is the transparency and public accountability? Many cheaper and safer options for locating the bypass have been suggested, yet your government remains determined to locate the east terminal point at 400 meters east of Tower Rd, within City limits. As you may recall, originally, the bypass was to go directly onto Tower Road but was then changed to go 400 meters east of Tower Road, resulting in a much more complicated overpass, with high speed curves over top of railroad tracks, and the destruction of 2 residences and businesses, as well as limiting access to property owners and other businesses along this route. Why would the government ignore legitimate safety concerns, cost and general common sense by putting a bypass within City limits? Are certain interest groups influencing government decisions as to the locations of the bypass? One wonders how the location of the bypass happens to be so near their proposed mega mall complex, providing them with direct exposure and advertising to their retail outlets.The plans for the Aurora Shopping District and suburban developments including Foxtail Grove and The Towns were available long before your government even announced the route, and they boasted of their prime location: Have you allowed large land developers to influence the location to their benefit yet turned a blind eye to everyone else’s concerns? Taxpayers support the need for a bypass for both commercial traffic and commuter use, but cannot support spending hundreds of millions of dollars for an unsafe, dysfunctional, costly bypass that cannot serve as a true bypass around not only the congested traffic in east Regina, but for the whole city.According to trucking companies we have contacted, well over 70% of the truck traffic would still have to come into the city for fuel, deliveries and their city terminal locations. Extensive traffic will also need to use the Ring Rd to go north to highway 11.The congestion that currently exists with traffic coming off highways 6 & 11 merging onto the Ring Rd could be alleviated by a northern bypass route that could easily connect to the Gravel Pit Rd location. There will be a bottleneck created at Victoria Avenue and Tower Rd. that would not exist at the Gravel Pit Rd location.The proposed location would not allow a northern route, because the CTV Tower and Brandt Industries would have to be relocated. Why would the government approve a bypass to move traffic around the city, but only in one direction?

ISTHISTRANSPARENCY? Ratings

Evaluation Criteria

Weighting

Base Case

Concept 1

Concept 2

TransCanada Highway Functionality

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

Safety & Trafﬁc Operations

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Potential Phasing Opportunities

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Access to Adjacent Development

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Environmental Impacts

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d 18(1)(d) 18(1)(d

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Utility / Railway Impacts

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Economic Development Potential

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Right-of-Way

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

Construction Cost

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18( 18(

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

18(1)(d)

18(1)(d) 18(1)(d)

Property Impacts Constructability Noise Impacts

18(( 1 )(( d ) 18(1)(d) 18(1)(d) 18 8 ( 1)) (d d)

Weighted Total

Concept 2a 18( 18(

We have repeatedly attempted to obtain the Functional Study related to this matter, and have only recently been provided a heavily vetted copy: so much information has been censored as to make the report no use.

At a recent P3 Conference in Regina, the Alberta Ministry said they advised they released their functional study for the Edmonton Bypass before the project went to tender, to ensure government transparency and clarity to the public. Why is the Saskatchewan Government averse to freely providing its constituents the details supporting their decision? We fully appreciate that the Highways Department has done lots of background work on this matter; however in the absence of an unvetted report, taxpayers are left to wonder what has been purposely withheld from public scrutiny? Taxpayers have paid for the study, we are paying for the roadway, and we will pay for the consequences of this Government’s choices. Effective democracy allows input from all taxpayers and access to information for everyone, not just the inﬂuential.

The content of this ad were compiled utilizing the information available from the Dept. of Highways.Any errors/omissions should be viewed through this lens.

In 1996, the Reid Crowther Study explored multiple options for the east terminal point of the bypass.Their recommended option was Gravel Pit Rd. In 2004, a study by Stantec also explored multiple options, and determined it could be located at either Gravel Pit Rd or AT Tower Rd., based on the conclusion that the development of the City was not expected to reach its current point (up to Tower Rd) until 2044. In 2013, using that same data from the 2004 study and exploring ONLY options related to Tower Rd, the location was changed from being AT Tower Rd to 400 meters EAST of Tower Rd, which has resulted in a more complex and complicated design. It is rumoured that this change alone has increased the cost of the project by $100 Million. Who will beneﬁt most by the 400 meter move?

Multiple options were explored for the southern route of the bypass, but just Tower Rd, for the east.The southern leg is 5 kms out of the city, but the east will be well within city limits.At each of the numerous meetings we attended, 98% of people felt Tower Rd was too close to the city and felt that other options should have been explored. Why was Tower Rd, and options of Tower Rd., the only locations the MMM Group was mandated to study for the east Regina bypass?

SAFETY CONCERNS We attended open houses and informational sessions,and noted that most attending felt that their concerns, while many and well-articulated, were not taken into consideration. The meetings were informational in nature only, and feedback was discouraged if not ignored. With the extra height required due to this speciﬁc location of the Bypass and on/ off ramps, a much higher danger to the travelling public exists. The construction of the bypass would include high level overpasses which would curve over the existing rail lines, with SaskPower Transmission lines nearby, so when an accident occurs on the overpass, it could possibly include consequences on the tracks below. It is unfortunate we must say ‘when’ an accident will occur, and would prefer to say ‘if’, however, given the known risks associated with bridge icing, high winds, frost and ice conditions which would be unfavorable for at least 6 months of the year, it seems the likelihood of a tragedy occurring on these 4 lanes of high level overpasses will simply be a matter of time. While we are unsure as to who would bear the brunt of culpability to any ensuing lawsuits, clean-up costs, or other costs associated with such a disaster, the costs would be extensive to Governments at some or all levels. That means TAXPAYER dollars are on the line for the future: why can’t we get answers NOW??

Everyone who drives Saskatchewan roadways realize certain hazards exist when encountering raised roadways or bridges. The chosen location presents very speciﬁc challenges for the commuters and commercial trafﬁc travelling east Regina.The fact that there will be high speed curves over the rail tracks (that carry the same oil that exploded at Lac Megantic); that the connector to the Victoria Avenue leg is going to be over 40 feet in the air on piers with an approximately ¼ mile run; that wind and freezing conditions on raised roadways is well known, and will be a factor for at least 6 months of the year on this curved, raised stretch that 24,000 vehicles per day travel: Why would the government ignore legitimate safety concerns, cost and general common sense by approving such a dangerous design when safer options are so close by? Please, we are asking you to simply use some common sense here: as an experienced Saskatchewan driver, does this really make sense to YOU? We believe that you are a dedicated and intelligent man, and if you looked at the design fully for yourself, your conclusion would be the same as the 85% of the people who responded to the CTV poll, and you would re-evaluate this design and location and effect meaningful changes to make this a safe bypass worthy of Saskatchewan tax dollars and safe for all users.

TOWER ROAD

CTV TOWER

While the Minister has advised that the 50 year plan included this choice of location, as it provides a buffer between the Regina Bypass and homes and businesses in east Regina; • City development is already at this point. The City of Regina annexed this land in 2013. Since this area was not expected to be developed to its current boundaries for another 40 years, the expected growth of the city has been underestimated.What about future growth?

RAILROAD TRACKS

• At least two families between Arcola Ave and Hwy 1, are losing their homes

It seems that in East Regina, we are building a new Ring Road, not a by-pass.

• New homeowners in the Creeks and the areas soon to be developed up to the tracks are going to be experiencing noise and light pollution from the bypass being located inside the city limits and near their back fences. • Taxpayers of Saskatchewan will be paying higher price when the Ministry purchases the city annexed land required to build the overpass than if largely agricultural land at the Gravel Pit Rd location were to be purchased. The costs for needlessly extensive and complicated overpasses, when simpler and less costly alternatives are readily available, will also be borne by taxpayers.

There is considerable development both north and east of the proposed route

City development has already reached Tower Rd. Where will it be in 2017 when this bypass opens? The location is too close already, and this will not serve Regina and area longterm.

Hwy#1

No existing impediments for future expansion GRAVEL PIT RD • Taxpayers of Saskatchewan would get more value for their money if purchasing the largely agricultural land at the Gravel Pit Rd location. • There are fewer homes and businesses impacted. • There is room for a future northern route to be constructed without buying expensive City land. No homes or businesses would be affected. • Plenty of room for future city growth to be accommodated. • Able to accommodate standard overpasses at ground level, with no need for piers or raised roadways. • No need for high speed curves over rail tracks. • No impediments to future expansion exisiting

There are about 24,000 vehicles per day who utilize the East Regina access: if you have questions or concerns about how this BILLION DOLLAR project is developing, please, contact your Saskatchewan MLA before it is too late. (List of MLA’s is available at http://www.legassembly.sk.ca/mlas/ ) We need full disclosure NOW!! It is not too late to voice your concerns. Join us on Facebook and Twitter as we try to hold this Government accountable to make the best long term decisions for our safety and the growth of Regina and Area.

Regina Highway #1 Bypass: why Tower Road? or email WhyTowerRd@gmail.com

es s ins Acc a l P t a e Gr

• 86 acres of prime commercial development land will be taken out of development. As a result of moving the bypass the 400 meters east, it is also expected that up to 260 acres of City annexed land in the area of Arcola Ave to #Hwy 1 will be lost to roads.This will have impact to municipal and provincial tax revenues.

Gravel Pit Rd

• Local ball teams will have to ﬁnd someplace else to play when the baseball diamonds located along Tower Road are torn down and not replaced, as the cost for their replacement is estimated to be in excess of $4 million dollars

Railroad Track

Proposed Regina East Terminal

Tower Rd .

A recent CTV Regina News Poll asking if the bypass should be located at Tower Rd or further east resulted in 85 % agreeing it needs to be further east of the city.

• A number of local businesses are losing both land and access, which will affect their livelihoods.

PROPOSED TOWER RD. INTERCHANGE Hwy #1

The purpose of a bypass is, by deﬁnition, to bypass the city developments and reduce travel times and accident rates for the beneﬁt of both the traveller and the city.Why, then, will the Regina east section of the planned $1.2 billion dollar project be well within city limits? The planned location 400 meters east of Tower Road is within sight of the areas already developed, and will quickly be overtaken by the planned Aurora Shopping District as well as the residental areas planned for Foxtail Grove and The Towns.

Tower R d

Victoria Avenue

SASKPOWER TRANSMISSION LINES

d. R r we o T

IS IT A BY-PASS… OR A NEW RING ROAD? WHERE IS COMMON SENSE???

A COMMON SENSE ALTERNATIVE GRAVEL PIT AND GREAT PLAINS Emerald Park/White City access to Highway #1 would NOT have to be via extensive service roads. This is of great concern not just for commuters, but for those driving large trucks, implements, RTM homes, and even access for the RCMP Detachment. It is simple common sense: Great Plains Access and Gravel Pit Rd locations for interchanges ensure the 2 mile separation between highway entrance points the Highways Department requires. There would be no need for the proposed Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) at Pilot Butte, and the communities of Emerald Park, Pilot Butte and White City would have better access than the system of service roads proposed with the Tower Rd. location.

While the Commuters from East of Regina look forward to a safer ride into the city, the proposed routes and roads are far more complex than any before seen in Canada. In addition to an overpass over an overpass over train tracks at the 400 meters East Of Tower Rd location, there will be extra lights and a ‘diverging diamond interchange’ (DDI) planned for the Pilot Butte interchange. This DDI will apparently be the ﬁrst of its kind in Canada, although these types of intersections in the United States have been built since 2009: feedback from drivers there indicates there is much confusion when drivers encounter it. Even proponents of the DDI admit that the drivers inconvenienced most by the DDI are those that are going straight through on the cross route, as they must crossover to the left side of the road and then back again to reach their destination. There are no comments available as to the success rate of farm implements and prefabricated houses being moved across DDIs, but at least four large local farm implement dealers are anticipating challenges presented not only by the extensive service roads they will now have to use to move their irregular shaped equipment or pre-manufactured homes to the highway access points, but also getting used to the challenges navigating the DDIs will likely provide.

REG00196962_1_1