July 24, 2017 - Minutes (Special)
|
|
General Purposes Committee
|
Date: |
Monday, July 24, 2017 |
|
Place: |
Anderson Room |
|
Present: |
Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie, Chair |
|
Call to Order: |
The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. |
|
|
|
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION |
|
|
1. |
George Massey Tunnel Replacement – Alternative Crossing Improvement Options |
|
|
|
|
With the aid of a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office), Victor Wei, Director, Transportation, provided background information and presented Alternative Crossing Improvement Options for the George Massey Tunnel Replacement project: |
|
|
|
|
§ |
the proposed alternative crossing improvement options revolve around the following criteria: (i) it should have little or no net adverse impacts on the environment, (ii) the scale of the infrastructure should be minimized, (iii) it should be compatible with the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy, and (iv) it should address congestion at both ends of the Tunnel; |
|
|
|
§ |
the proposed two options developed have the following common features: (i) a seismic upgrade of the current Tunnel to 1 in 475 year rating from the current 1 in 275 year rating, which is the same rating as other “life line” crossings such as the Lions Gate Bridge and the Ironworkers Memorial Bridge to name a few, (ii) the BC Hydro transmission lines will remain in the Tunnel, (iii) there will be provisions for cyclists and pedestrians, (iv) there will be limited capacity for single occupancy vehicles and improvements for sustainable travel modes, (v) costs will be no more than $3.5 billion, and (vi) transportation demand management measures will be utilized; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
Option 1 – retrofit the existing Tunnel and add a new 4-lane tunnel; under this option, the new tunnel would provide two general purpose lanes and two transit / high occupancy vehicle lanes (with the potential to accommodate light rail transit in the future); costs are estimated to be $3.5 billion (based on very limited information); the proposed two general purpose lanes would connect with adjacent interchanges only – the Steveston Highway and Highway 17A interchanges; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
Option 2 – retrofit the existing Tunnel and add a new 2-lane tunnel; under this option, the new tunnel would be dedicated to transit / high occupancy vehicle lanes (with the potential to accommodate light rail transit in the future); costs are estimated to be $3.1 billion (based on very limited information) and additional funds would be invested in transit / light rail transit connections to the new crossing; and |
|
|
|
|
§ |
the proposed two options have the following complementary measures: (i) mobility pricing, (ii) restrictions or bans on trucks during rush hours, (ii) reduction of the widening of Highway 99, (iii) reduction of the Steveston Highway interchange, and (iv) traffic integration improvements at Steveston Highway and No. 5 Road. |
|
|
|
|
Mr. Wei then commented on concerns raised by the Corporation of Delta with regard alternative crossing options, noting that the two options would upgrade the existing Tunnel to 1 in 475 year seismic rating, which is the same rating as other major crossings in the Lower Mainland. He commented on costs and the potential location of the proposed new tunnel. Also, Mr. Wei addressed concerns regarding annual collisions, highlighting that, based on ICBC records, there are approximately three times more collisions at various major bridges in the Lower Mainland than the Tunnel. |
||
|
|
|
Mr. Wei spoke to the proposed communications strategy, noting that a dedicated webpage has been created, a media release was issued, and arrangements are underway to schedule a meeting with the new provincial government. Also, Mr. Wei advised that staff will be working closely with Metro Vancouver, the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation and TransLink. |
||
|
|
|
In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Wei provided the following information: |
||
|
|
|
§ |
an in-depth analysis of the transit network was not done as the proposed options are at a preliminary stage; also, the transit network would fall under the sole jurisdiction of TransLink; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
staff did not examine liquefaction when developing the proposed two options as staff relied on the project consultants’ report dated July 2016, which concluded that twinning the Tunnel would be feasible and safe to do so; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
given the current federal government’s support for public transit improvements, staff are confident that federal funding for one of the two proposed options would be likely; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
the proposed two options would utilize any works already underway along Highway 99; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
staff believe that Option 2 – retrofitting the existing Tunnel and adding a new 2-lane tunnel is a feasible option as light rail transit is very sufficient and tracks are rarely doubled; |
|
|
|
|
§ |
staff approximate four to five years before any construction to twin the Tunnel commences; and |
|
|
|
|
§ |
staff propose that the Steveston Highway-Highway 99 interchange remain two-level but with significant reconfiguration, which would go a long way in addressing backups. |
|
|
|
|
Discussion took place on the importance of the communications strategy and Ted Townsend, Director, Corporate Communications and Marketing, advised that a number of communication initiatives to publicize the staff report’s findings and recommendations would take place, including the launch of a new webpage, issuance of media releases, and other outreach utilizing the City’s various social media platforms. |
||
|
|
|
In reply to further queries from Committee, Mr. Wei advised that staff are not aware as to how the proposed bridge would be built as this would be determined during the procurement phase. Also, he remarked that the proposed two options allow for the new tunnel to accommodate light rail transit in the future. |
||
|
|
|
Discussion then took place on (i) mobility pricing and subsidized fares, (ii) the potential restriction or ban on trucks during rush hours and how this would affect the City’s contractor for garbage collection, and (iii) the likelihood of either proposed option being constructed on time and on budget. |
||
|
|
|
The Chair remarked that it would be suitable to also send the staff report to Vancouver City Council for their information. |
||
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
||
|
|
|
(1) |
That a letter and copy of the staff report titled “George Massey Tunnel Replacement – Preliminary Assessment of Alternative Crossing Options” dated July 21, 2017, from the Director, Transportation be sent to the Premier of British Columbia requesting: |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
suspension of all current work associated with the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project, including the relocation of the BC Hydro transmission lines, pending a comprehensive review and analysis of alternative crossing improvement options; |
|
|
|
|
(b) |
consideration in a timely manner of the suggested alternative improvement crossing options for the George Massey Tunnel including estimated costs and complementary measures to improve regional transportation as described in the report; and |
|
|
|
|
(c) |
collaboration with stakeholders, including Metro Vancouver, the Mayors’ Council, TransLink and the Greater Vancouver Gateway Council, to develop a preferred mutually acceptable alternative tunnel crossing concept(s) that would be presented for public consultation; |
|
|
|
(2) |
That copies of the letter referenced in Recommendation 1 and this staff report be provided to: |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
the Leaders of the BC Green Party and the BC Liberal Party, |
|
|
|
|
(b) |
the Honourable Claire Trevena, MLA – North Island, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure; |
|
|
|
|
(c) |
the Honourable Selina Robinson, MLA – Coquitlam-Maillardville, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; |
|
|
|
|
(d) |
Bowinn Ma, MLA – North Vancouver-Lonsdale, Parliamentary Secretary for TransLink; |
|
|
|
|
(e) |
the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors; |
|
|
|
|
(f) |
the TransLink Board of Directors; |
|
|
|
|
(g) |
the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation; |
|
|
|
|
(h) |
all Richmond and Delta MPs; |
|
|
|
|
(i) |
all Richmond and Delta MLAs; |
|
|
|
|
(j) |
the Corporation of Delta’s Mayor and Councillors; |
|
|
|
|
(k) |
the Chair of BC Hydro Board of Directors; |
|
|
|
|
(l) |
the Mobility Pricing Independent Commission; |
|
|
|
(m) |
the Greater Vancouver Gateway Council; |
|
|
|
|
(n) |
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Team; and |
|
|
|
|
(o) |
the City of Vancouver’s Mayor and Councillors; and |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
That a communications strategy be undertaken to convey the urgent need to suspend all current work associated with the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project, including the relocation of the BC Hydro transmission lines, and undertake a timely comprehensive review and analysis of alternative crossing improvement options. |
|
|
|
|
The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued on the proposed two options as presented by staff. |
||
|
|
|
Councillor Steves distributed materials related to tunnels (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as Schedule 1). |
||
|
|
|
The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllr. Loo opposed. |
||
|
|
|
ADJOURNMENT |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That the meeting adjourn (5:39 p.m.). |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Special General Purposes Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Monday, July 24, 2017. |
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
|
Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie |
Hanieh Berg |