December 14, 2016

Queen Street Sanitary Pumping StationClass Environmental AssessmentPublic Information Centre

Page 1

Welcome

Please complete the sign-in sheet andreview display materials.

As you move through the informationpresented today, we encourage you toask questions and provide feedback.

Your input is valued! Please fill out asurvey/comment form.

Page 2

Phase 1

Problem or Opportunity- Identify problem/deficiency and

opportunity- Notification of Project Commencement

to public and agencies

Spring 2016

Phase 2

Alternative Solutions- Identify and evaluate alternative

solutions- Agency consultation

- Public Information Centre- Establish preferred solution and

confirm project schedule selection(i.e. A, A+, B or C)

30 day PublicReview Period

Fall 2016

Schedule BProject File Report

ImplementationDesign and Construction

December 2016

2017 - 2018

Class EA Process

July 2016

Page 3

Schedule A+Public Notification

Queen Street Sanitary Pumping Station and Catchment Area

• SPS is located near the intersectionof Queen St. and Harvey St.(accessible from Guelph Ave.)

• Sanitary sewer collectionmodifications in 2015:• revised catchment area from 435

to 227 hectares• reduced peak flows from 380 to

223 L/s• Sanitary Sewer Master Plan

identified required improvementsincluding:• pump & piping• stand-by generator• electrical• building

Page 4

Problem/Opportunity Statement

Recent changes to the City’s sanitary collection system have significantly

reduced the drainage area and flows to the Queen Street Sanitary Pumping

Station (SPS). The 2014 Cambridge Sanitary Sewer Master Plan identified the

need for a number of improvements and equipment replacements at the Queen

Street SPS that are required to address age and expected life span as well as to

meet current standards. The required improvements, planned over a 20 year

period, represent a large capital investment.

Proposed development plans in the area surrounding the SPS provide an

opportunity to review the location of the SPS to better integrate with adjacent

land uses.

Page 5

Identification of Potential SPS Sites

Criteria for selecting potentialsites:• Close proximity of the existing

wastewater pumping station• City owned, or available

privately-owned lands• Separation from residential

areas and/or other non-compatible land uses

• Proximity of trunk sewers andarea to be serviced

• Sufficient area for the SPSincluding emergency storage

• Avoid areas of archaeologicalpotential, natural heritageareas, future residentialdevelopment, etc.

• Separation from the SpeedRiver regulatory flood line

Page 6

Overview of Alternative SPS Siting Options

Page 7

Evaluation CriteriaComponent Description IncludesNaturalEnvironment

Component having regard forprotecting significant natural andphysical elements of theenvironment (i.e. air, land, waterand biota) including naturalheritage-environmentally sensitivepolicy areas.

Potential Impact of GRCA Regulated FloodplainSensitive species habitatSiting considerations or constraints, including displacements ordisruption to natural features (woodlands, trees and other terrestrialvegetation)Effects on ground/surface water quality

Social &Cultural

Component that evaluatespotential effects on residents,neighbourhoods, businesses,community character, socialcohesion, community features andhistorical/archaeological andheritage components in addition tomunicipal and provincialdevelopment objectives.

Potential effects on short-term and long-term community growthPotential impacts to businesses and residences andrecreational/institutional land uses (parking, odours, etc)Cultural heritage resourcesArchaeological resourcesPotential temporary disruption during construction (i.e. dust, noise,vibrations, traffic management, and pedestrian movement, detours,access to property and maintain existing services.)Complexity of ApprovalsLand Requirements (City or privately owned)Potential disruption during daily operation

Economic &Financial

Component that addresses thepotential effect on infrastructurecapital and O&M costs.

Capital cost, O&M costs.

TechnicalConsiderations

Component that considerstechnical suitability.

System stability and sustainabilityConstructability - ease of construction, construction scheduling(pumping station)Constructability - new forcemain and trunk sewersAdditional mitigation for floodplain issuesPotential for managing contaminated soilsOperational and maintenance issues

Page 8

Preliminary Evaluation

Page 9

Preferred Alternative – Option 1. Upgrade Existing SPSAdvantages:• Proposed construction withinexisting site

• Minimal impacts on localresidents

• Lower cost than reconstructionon new site

• Class EA Schedule A+Disadvantages:• In GRCA floodway – requiresfloodproofing measures

• Need to improve aesthetics• Constructability – need to keepexisting SPS operational duringconstruction

Conceptual Cost Estimate($2016): $4.63M

Description:• Upgrades to existing SPS including:• Pumps & piping; standby power replacement• Electrical, instrumentation and SCADA upgrades• Structural and building repairs; aesthetic improvements• Addition of underground emergency storage

Page 10

Proposed Mitigation MeasuresWork Near Water• In water works (if required) to take place

outside of fish spawning timing window• Develop comprehensive

erosion/sedimentation control strategyincluding regular inspections

• Prepare and follow contingency plans forcontrol and cleanup should a spill occur

Noise/Vibration/Dust:• Construction operations to occur during day

shift• Use of low noise equipment during

construction, where possibleTrees and Vegetation• Minimize tree and vegetation removal• Prepare Tree Protection Plan, if required• Breeding Birds - in accordance with the

Migratory Birds Convention Act, any treetrimming or site clearing should take placebetween August 1 and April 30

Archaeological• If any archaeological and/or historical resources

are discovered during the performance ofconstruction work, the performance of the work inthe area of the discovery is to halt. The Ministryof Culture (Archaeological Unit) will be notified foran assessment of the discovery. Work in the areaof the discovery would not resume until cleared todo so by the Ministry

Groundwater Management• Implement dewatering plan based on

hydrogeological assessment

Page 11

Next Steps

2016

• See project website for a copy of thedisplay materials

• Receive public comments byJanuary 6, 2017

2017• Design, Permitting - Approvals

2018*

• Tender and Construction• Post construction monitoring

The following steps will be completed next:

Page 12

Thank You for Attending

We appreciate the time you have taken to learnmore about the project and value your input.Stay involved and up-to-date as the projectprogresses:• Join our mailing list: leave us an email or

mailing address• Visit the project website:

http://www.cambridge.ca/QueenStSanitaryPS• Contact us with additional comments or

questions at any time:

Scott MacDonald, P. Eng.Project EngineerCity of Cambridge50 Dickson Street, PO Box 669Cambridge, ON, N1R 5W8Tel: 519-621-0740 ext 4679macdonaldscott@cambridge.ca

Ms. Patricia Quackenbush, P.Eng.Senior Project ManagerAECOM50 Sportsworld Crossing Rd, Suite 290Kitchener, ON N2P 0A4Tel: 519-650-8691patty.quackenbush@aecom.com

Page 13