King's Landing Wharf and Waterfront Marina

Schedule C, Class Environmental Assessment

Problem Statement

The existing wharf portion of the King’s Landing Wharf and Waterfront Marina is in poor condition and requires significant capital investment to maintain or restore it to a safe and useful condition. Therefore the purpose of this Municipal Class EA is to examine alternatives for the repair, replacement or redesign of the King’s Landing Wharf and Waterfront Marina.

Relationship with Downtown Waterfront Master Plan (DWMP)

  • These are separate studies but are related
  • The Class EA for the King’s Landing Wharf and Waterfront Marina only relates to the study area in the immediate vicinity of the site
  • The Class EA will not impact the DWMP
  • The information obtained through the DWMP will be used to help evaluate Alternatives in the Class EA

ArchaeologyMarine Archaeological Study Map

  • Area has been greatly disturbed so there is no archaeological potential on the land
  • The Northern Bell burned at the dock in 1926 however no remains were identified within the study area during the completion of the marine archaeological study

Marine Archaeological Study

  • A marine archaeological survey was conducted consisting of a magnetometer survey
  • Anomaly A is a structure that could represent a former mooring location and is not interpreted to represent a heritage resource (image on the right)
  • Anomaly B consists of two pieces of metal that cannot be positively identified. As this is outside of any proposed development, further study is not warranted (image on the right)

Cultural Heritage

  • King’s Landing Wharf, Freight Shed & Ticket Office and Chief Commanda I have cultural heritage value or interest as a local landmark
  • A Heritage Impact Assessment should be conducted prior to the decommissioning of any of these features

 

Alternative 1 - Do Nothing

This alternative includes no major repairs or alterations to the existing wharf; vehicle access remains restricted and after a short period of time it is expected that all vehicle traffic will be prohibited; eventually the wharf will become unsafe for pedestrians and closed.

- Architectural Drawing

Alternative 2 - Repair the Existing Wharf

This alternative includes the replacement of the foundations; adding to the rock breakwater adjacent to the wharf; repair to the existing decking and wood boardwalk west of the sheet piling and concrete dock of the wharf.

- Architectural Drawing

Alternative 3 - The Existing Wharf is Decommissioned and Removed

This alternative includes replacing the existing wharf with a stone breakwater to allow the continued operation of the marina. This alternative does not include a location for the Chief Commanda II to dock and all boathouses will be removed.

- Architectural Drawing

Alternative 4 - The Existing Wharf is Removed and Replaced with a Naturalized Spit with a Recreational Trail On It

This alternative includes removing the existing wharf and constructing a parking area on the north side of the marina and relocating the OPP boathouse; a new pier will be built along the south side of the marina to provide docking for the Chief Commanda II.

Alternative #4 is the preferred alternative that will be evaluated further in the next steps.

- Architectural Drawing

Summary Matrix

To review the details of each alternative against pre-determined needs, you can review the following matrix.

Summary Matrix

Scoring Matrix

To review how each alternative scored against the pre-determined needs, you can review the results in the following matrix.

Scoring Matrix

Preferred Alternative

Alternative 4, Expansion With Naturalized Wave Break, scored the highest in the evaluation matrix and was selected as the preferred alternative. Primary benefits include:

  1. It has the best potential to enhance the environment.
  2. Provides preferred docking locations for the wharf tenants that will provide easier access for passengers and delivery vehicles.
  3. This configuration is well aligned with municipal plans and objectives and would make the area a destination and focal point of the waterfront

Preferred Alternative - Alternative Design Areas (A.D.A.) detail drawing.

Alternative Design Concepts

There are a number of ways in which the Preferred Alternative can be developed. The Improvement Areas on the following slides have been developed to incorporate opportunities identified from:

  1. Public Comments
  2. Background Studies
  3. Evaluation criteria

Preliminary Preferred Design

The Alternative Design Areas (ADAs) identified key features as well as the opportunities presented to improve the design. The ADAs were evaluated using the same criteria in the evaluation matrix to determine which opportunities and constraints should be incorporated in the Preliminary Preferred Design.

This design will be used to consult with stakeholders and will serve as the basis for the engineering design.

Preliminary Preferred Design detail drawing.

Next Steps

The next steps in the EA process are as follows:

  1. Obtain Public Feedback on Design Concepts
  2. Confirm the preferred Design Concept
  3. Consult with review agencies
  4. Present to City Council
  5. Complete the Environmental Study Report
  6. File the ESR with the Municipal Clerk for a 30 day review period

Contacts

The City of North Bay
Gerry McCrank C.E.T., LEL
Senior Project Manager
P.O. Box 360, 200 McIntyre Street East
North Bay, Ontario, P1B 8H8
Tel: (705) 474-0626 ext. 2305
e-mail: Gerry.McCrank@cityofnorthbay.ca

Hemmera Envirochem Inc.
Terry Rasmussen
Environmental Impact Assessment Manager
104-1540 Cornwall Road
Oakville, Ontario, L6J 7W5
Tel: (905) 825-4936 ext. 556
e-mail: terry.rasmussen@hemmera.com