MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Public Works & Transportation Committee held on Wednesday, March 17^th, 2004, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

DELEGATION

2.

(1)

Alex Lee, representing ICBC, regarding the ICBC Community Crash Reduction Challenge (Agenda Item No. 3)  (PowerPoint Presentation) 
 

Mr. Lee gave a PowerPoint presentation on a new initiative being implemented by ICBC, Community Crash Reduction Challenge, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerks Office.  During the presentation, Mr. Lee responded to questions on various aspects of the challenge.
 

Please see Agenda Item No. 3 for further discussion on this matter.

DECISIONS / ACTIONS (3 ITEMS)

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

3.

COMMUNITY CRASH REDUCTION CHALLENGE
(Report:  Mar. 30/04, File No.:  10-6450-09-01/2004 Vol. 1) (REDMS No. 1216674)
 

Further discussion ensued following the conclusion of Mr. Lees presentation, with the following information being provided in response to questions:

-

the challenge did not deal specifically with street racing, however, the campaign would deal with excessive driving, which included speeding and aggressive driving

-

many of the communities of similar size were being encouraged to participate in the challenge.
 

During the discussion, staff were requested to develop and submit to Council prior to the April 26^th, 2004 meeting, a strategy to which various stakeholders, including the School District, the Chamber of Commerce, RAPBA and Sunbrite, could be invited to support the City in the challenge.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the City endorse and participate in ICBCs Community Crash Reduction Challenge, (as described in the report dated March 30^th, 2004, from the Director, Transportation), to help reduce vehicle crashes and road‑related harm in the community;
 

(2)

That Richmond City Council challenge the Mayor and Council of the Municipality of Delta, with the terms to be announced at a future date;
 

(3)

That a proclamation be issued to indicate that Richmond would be an official participant in the Community Crash Reduction Challenge; and
 

(4)

That the challenge be referred to various community groups, including the School District, the Chamber of Commerce, the Chinese Federation of Commerce of Canada (formerly Sunbrite Business Association), RAPBA, SUCCESS, the Seniors Advisory Committee and other City‑related organizations.

CARRIED

4.

LANE STANDARDS
(Report:  Mar. 29/04, File No.:  10-6360-07-01/2004-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 1216490, 1099781)
 

The Director, Engineering, Robert Gonzales, advised that Mr. Peter Simpson, of the Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association, had contacted him about the report, and had made generally positive comments about the proposed recommendations.  He added that Mr. Simpson had indicated that the meeting had been a good corroborative approach and should be taken advantage of more often.

The Chair noted that correspondence had been received from Mr. Cameron Thorn, of the Urban Development Institute, and from Steve Kurrein of Progressive Construction Ltd.  Also circulated to Committee members was a substitute page which provided information on lane costs without fencing.

A brief discussion ensued on the new figures provided, with it being noted that the cost of fencing was not included in the current figures, and if this cost was to be included, then the cost should be included in all three options.

In response to questions, the following information was provided:

-

a grass swale was comprised of drain rock and topsoil material, with a grid placed on top; additional top soil would be pressed into the grid; the grid would not be visible but would prevent ruts from occurring if vehicles happened to be parked on the shoulder of the lane; however, the swale was not intended to be driven on on a regular basis
 

-

the proposed annual maintenance costs were correct as the figures shown were based on a ten year period; the costs reflected the work required of City crews to clean out catch basins and repair pot holes, ruts, etc.
 

During the discussion, support was offered for the proposed pilot project, however, concern was expressed about costs increasing even more to maintain lanes.  Discussion then ensued on the cost of constructing only a gravel lane without any other utilities.  Reference was made to the grass swale option, and advice was given that this option was relatively minimal in reducing the amount of drainage water and other components would have to be reviewed as part of the pilot project to determine how the grass swale option would affect the City's drainage system.

Questions were raised about the feasibility of having more than one pilot project, and a brief discussion ensued on this issue.  Also raised and addressed was the issue of a homeowner installing concrete in place of grass after the lane had been constructed to the new standards.

The Chair commented on the report and proposed recommendations, during which he noted that the cost savings were not as great as he had hoped.  However, he also noted that a 20% reduction in capital cost expenses could be achieved, along with a savings of 15% in maintenance.  The Chair stated that if property owners could be encouraged to accept the environmental benefits of the new lane standards, and expand some environmental treatments to their properties, then overall benefits would be increased. 

Discussion then ensued among Committee members and staff on the requirement that a fence be constructed along the side of the lane located farthest away from a new development.  Advice was given that the current practice was on an as required basis, and the suggestion was made that the  practice should continue on a project by project basis.  Further advice was given that at the present time, if the suggestion was made that a developer construct a fence, that fence would be constructed and maintained by the developer on private property.  If a fence had to be replaced as part of the construction process, then the developer would be responsible for replacement of that fence.  As a result of the discussion, staff were instructed to amend the report prior to its submission to Council to delete all references to fencing and fence requirements.

Discussion again took place on the question of whether more than one pilot project could be considered, during which staff were encouraged to find more than one developer, and on the feasibility of selecting particular areas as sites for pilot projects.  The request was made during the discussion that staff provide the Committee with information on the chosen area and that the Committee be given the opportunity to examine the criteria to determine whether a pilot project would be feasible.

Mr. Amar Sandhu, of 8671 Cambie Road, questioned the amount that a developer would be charged per metre to construct a lane, if he was to agree to enter into a pilot project.  Advice was given that the developer could build to the chosen standard or the City could construct the lane, with the cost as outlined in the information provided by staff. 

Further advice was given that current lane standards would still be applied to any developer whose project required a lane, until such time as the results of the pilot project had been evaluated.  In response to concerns expressed about the availability of possible pilot projects, staff indicated that they were confident that a pilot project would be found very quickly, however, Committee would be advised if a significant delay occurred.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the Grass Swale Lane option, (as discussed in the report dated March 29^th, 2004, from the Director, Engineering, the Manager, Policy Planning, and the Manager, Transportation Planning), be implemented as a pilot project; and
 

(2)

That staff report to Council with an assessment of the pilot project together with final recommendations for Richmond's lane standards.

CARRIED

 

5.

2003 CAPITAL PROGRAM WATER PROJECTS CONSTRUCTED BY CITY FORCES
(Report:  Apr. 2/04, File No.:  6340-01) (REDMS No. 1120419)
 

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That $110,000 of excess funds from the 2003 Minor Capital Waterworks Program Account (No. 40419) be transferred to the Viking Way watermain replacement Capital Project Account (No. 40418).
 

(2)

That $37,753 of excess funds from the Blundell Road Capital Project Account (No. 40311) be transferred to the Westminster Highway Ditch Infill Project Account (No. 40323).

CARRIED

***********************************

INFORMATION / AWARENESS (1 ITEM)

ENGINEERING & PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION

6.

HYDRO UNDERGROUNDING WESTMINSTER HIGHWAY, GILBERT ROAD TO MINORU BOULEVARD CONTRACT T.1562
(Memo:  Mar. 26/04, File No.:  03-1000-20-T.1562) (REDMS No. 1204067)
 

It was moved and seconded

That the memorandum (dated March 26^th, 2004, from the Director, Engineering), regarding Hydro Undergrounding Westminster Highway, Gilbert Road to Minoru Boulevard Contract T.1562, be received for information.
 

Prior to the question on the motion being called, a brief discussion ensued on whether the Committee wished to deal with these types of information reports in the future.  As a result, it was agreed that these types of memos would be circulated to Council in their drawers.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

7.

MANAGERS REPORT

Councillor Barnes recognized Steve McClurg and Jim Young, for their efforts at the recent Trade & Career Fair organized by the Richmond School District.  She noted that the two gentlemen had attended the fair on their own time and had responded to many questions from students. 

Councillor Howard provided information on a potential drainage problem in areas where lanes had been constructed of either gravel or pavement with no other utilities and where adjacent new developments were occurring with the land being higher than the lane and the shoulder paved back to the lane.  He voiced concern that a problem could arise with drainage in the area because of this situation, and he asked staff to prepare a report to Committee on the seriousness of the problem.

Mr. Gonzales reminded Committee members that the Engineering & Public Works annual open house on capital projects would be taking place on Thursday, October 29^th, 2004 from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m., at Richmond City Hall.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (4:57 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Public Works & Transportation Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Wednesday, April 21^st, 2004.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Rob Howard
Chair

Fran J. Ashton
Executive Assistant, City Clerks Office