The future of King’s Landing has taken another step forward in the planning stage, with consultants narrowing down to one of the preferred alternatives: the expansion with naturalized wave break.
This alternative, the fourth presented during the public consultation session held in December 2016, would replace King’s Landing Wharf with a naturalized wave break and a scenic path while also moving the pier and Chief Commanda II dock to the other side of the area.
While this alternative was the most popular within the department at the city at the time, residents who had a chance to see the plan were weary of the cost associated with it, between an estimated $9 and $14 million to build, as well as between $180,000 to $210,000 a year to maintain, according to the consultant's report.
However, Senior Project Manager, Gerry McCrank said a lot of the construction funds could be leveraged from higher levels of government, as well as a phased construction plan for the project, would ease the financial burden of a project of that high in scale.
“We could do it all at once, or in phases, so we can go as far as the funding can take it,” he said. “[The naturalized spit] is very practical because it separates the recreational with the commercial.”
According to the report, the preferred option scored the highest on the evaluation matrix, a tool used to compare all options considered for the project. It has the best potential to enhance the environment, provides preferred docking locations for the wharf tenants that will provide easier access for passengers and delivery vehicles, and is aligned with municipal plans.
At this point, the designs for the expansion and naturalized spit have been further detailed, split into six different design areas (see image above) looking at the opportunities those areas present.
- Looks at the possibility of reusing rock ballast and concrete capped sheet piles from existing wharf for the base of the naturalized spit; adding a recreational trail along the spit; adding dedicated fishing piers along the trail, and adding heritage plaque for original King’s Landing wharf.
- Presents the possibility of additional parking or drop-off for boat trailers to reduce congestion.
- Mentions adding a bridge or flow channel at the base of new spit.
- Would be the new location for the Chief Commanda II, offering decreased wave impact on the vessel as a result of a closed dock.
- Would provide additional space for large craft docking adjacent to the Chief Commanda II.
- Would extend the existing dock area at the Chief Commanda I for public and commercial use, including semi-permanent or temporary restaurants and/or retail spaces.
Also in the report, a general review of construction phases details how the city might split up the process to ease the financial cost so it wouldn’t have to be done all at once.
Phase I would see the King’s Landing wharf remain as is, with a barricade in place to prevent public entry, while a new sheet piled dock is constructed for the Chief Commanda II to use, while also expanding the area for public and commercial use in that area. The estimated cost of this phase is $6 million.
Phase II would see the King’s Landing wharf removed and salvaged, followed by the placement of the wavebreak over the existing footprint. The estimated cost of this phase is $5 million.
Phase III, the final phase, would see the finalization of the wavebreak, naturalized and recreational facilities to complete the new spit, while fishing piers, heritage plaque, lighting standards, and seating features are added to the trail. The estimated cost of this phase is $2.5 million.
“People will be able to fish, walk, enjoy the view, and it all sort of ties together,” McCrank said about the naturalized spit. “I’m quite happy with the way [the plan] looks, and while we aren’t into the details yet, it appears to work for what it was meant for.
He said although a public consultation was held on February 2 discussing this alternative, the city is always looking for feedback on the designs as they continue to move forward. The designs still have ways to go before being approved, needing first to be presented to council.
The next steps include obtaining more public feedback, confirming the preferred design concept, consulting with review agencies, presenting to City Council, completing the Environmental Study Report, and filing it with the Municipal Clerk for a 30 day review period.
For more information on the report, click here.
