MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Public Works & Transportation Committee held on Wednesday, October 20th, 2004, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That the order of the agenda be varied to deal with Item No. 4 - Proposed Installation Of A Special Crosswalk At No. 5 Road/Kingsbridge Drive Intersection, at this time.

CARRIED

The Acting Director of Transportation, Victor Wei, was not available and the Chair indicated that the meeting would continue and that Item No. 4 would be dealt with when Mr. Wei entered the meeting.

POLICIES / STRATEGIES (0 ITEMS)

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

DECISIONS / ACTIONS (3 ITEMS)

ENGINEERING & PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION

2.

ESTABLISHMENT OF LATECOMER AGREEMENT FOR TEMPLE NORTH SANITARY SEWER CATCHMENT

(Report:  Oct. 25/04, File No.:  10-6060-03-01/2004-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 1347932, 1349172)

The Director, Engineering, Robert Gonzalez, accompanied by the Manager, Engineering Planning, Siu Tse, provided the following information:

§           

the cost of the paving contract, which had been awarded in 2004, would be subtracted from the latecomer payments prior to forwarding any payments to the India Cultural Centre

§           

the capacity of the new sewer pump station and force main would be sufficient to accommodate the entire Temple North sanitary catchment area for years to come

§           

the fees to be charged against the remaining benefiting properties when they were connected to the sanitary sewer system would be fixed fees; however the property owners would be responsible for the cost of installing the individual gravity systems to connect to the sewer system

§           

the Latecomer Agreement would only be in effect for a period of ten years as permitted under the Local Government Act, and no charges can be levied beyond that time period; the India Cultural Centre was aware of this condition.

It was moved and seconded

That:

(1)

The City enter into a Latecomer Agreement with the India Cultural Centre of Canada to allow cost recovery of sanitary sewer infrastructure for the Temple North sanitary sewer catchment area (shown on Schedule A attached to the report dated October 25th from the Director of Engineering);

(2)

The properties in the Temple North sanitary sewer catchment area be deemed to benefit from the extended service provided by the India Cultural Centre of Canada and are thus liable for their respective portion of the charge that represents the cost of that benefit, as documented in Schedule C, when they connect to the sanitary sewer;

(3)

Annually calculated interest be applied to the charges at the rate of 8.85%, being the 10 year mortgage rate on the project completion date of November 29, 2001, as established under Bylaw 6936;

(4)

A charge under this resolution be imposed commencing November 29, 2001, on the understanding that no charges are payable beyond 10 years from this date;

(5)

The City will deduct $69,787.85 from the latecomer payments to recover the road resurfacing costs prior to forwarding any payments to the India Cultural Centre of Canada and;

(6)

All charges collected under the authority of this resolution be forwarded to the India Cultural Centre of Canada upon complete payment of the monies owed to the City.

CARRIED

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

4.

PROPOSED INSTALLATION OF A SPECIAL CROSSWALK AT NO. 5 ROAD/KINGSBRIDGE DRIVE INTERSECTION

(Report:  Oct. 29/04, File No.:  10-6450-17-02/2004-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 1350027)

The Acting Director, Transportation, Victor Wei, accompanied by Traffic Supervisor, Bob Gilchrist, indicated that a funding source for the entire cost of the project had been obtained.

Discussion then ensued among Committee members and staff on the feasibility of relocating the proposed sidewalk 190 metres north to the area of the India Cultural Centre of Canada.  Information was provided that based on traffic engineering standards, the crosswalk should be located first and foremost at an intersection because motorists were expecting pedestrian crossings to be at intersections and not mid-block.  Secondarily, by having the hardware at the intersection, in the future, should the City find it was necessary to upgrade the pedestrian signal to a full system, the change could be readily undertaken.  However, if the pedestrian signal was moved to mid-block and it was found necessary to install a traffic signal at Kingsbridge Road, it would be even more difficult to do.  Mr. Wei further advised that the location of the pedestrian walkway at Kingsbridge Road would allow the City to incorporate a signalized crosswalk at the intersection.

Mr. Wei then provided information on the type of crosswalk being installed, advising that because the criteria did not warrant a stop light, and because motorists would be required to wait until the light had turned green before proceeding, staff were recommending a flashing yellow light.  He stated that this type of system would allow motorists to proceed at their discretion once the pedestrian had crossed the road, and would be more cost efficient and less expensive to install.

In response to questions Mr. Wei advised that (i) the width of No. 5 Road was the same width of No. 3 Road; (ii) the cost of installing a flashing yellow light would be $35,000; and (iii) while it would be possible to have a pedestrian signal in front of the India Cultural Centre, it was not recommended because the closeness with the Kingsbridge Road and No. 5 Road system could confuse motorists.

Reference was made to the referral to staff which requested that staff also consider other mitigating issues on No. 5 Road.  In response, advice was given that as part of the standard crosswalk design, advance warning signs would be posted to alert motorists to stop when occupied.  In addition, advice was given that 24 hour down-lighting would be installed to make the crosswalk visible at all times of the day and night.  Mr. Wei further advised that staff were working with the RCMP about regular traffic enforcement to ensure that motorists were aware of a constant police presence.

At the request of the Chair, Mr. Wei provided information on the meaning of the term ‘85^th percentile speed was 74 km/h’, stating that this meant that 85% of the free-flowing vehicles were travelling at or below 74 km/h.  He stated that staff had found that speeding was an issue as most motorists were travelling 24 or 25 km/h over the speed limit.

Mr. Balwant Sanghara, representing the India Cultural Centre, voiced concern about the lack of consultation between the Cultural Centre and the City about the matter.  He also expressed concern about the proposed recommendation, indicating that the proposed location of the crosswalk would not help those people wishing to cross No. 5 Road at the gates of the temple.  He questioned when Francis Road would be extended east to No. 5 Road, and commented on the need for enforcement to deal with motorists speeding along No. 5 Road.  Mr. Sanghara also suggested that residents living on or close to Blundell Road would not walk all the way down to Kingsbridge Road to use the crosswalk and then back up 190 metres to reach the Centre.  He indicated that the India Cultural Centre would be willing to pay for some type of crosswalk between the India Cultural Centre and the adjacent Mosque, and asked that consideration be given to relocating the pedestrian crosswalk northward.

At the request of the Chair, Mr. Wei provided the following information, in response to Mr. Sanghara’s concerns and questions from the Chair;

§           

attempts were made to contact a representative of the India Cultural Centre without success

§           

staff did not recommend a mid-block location for the crosswalk, however, if Committee so directed, a crosswalk could be located at the Cultural Centre

§           

there were no plans to extend Francis Road to No. 5 Road

§           

staff were working with the RCMP to develop a regular enforcement program

§           

the City would always welcome financial contributions, however staff would still have to ensure that the right type of equipment was installed at the appropriate location

§           

installation of a full signal system in front of the Cultural Centre 200 metres away from Kingsbridge Road would preclude the installation of a system at the Kingsbridge Road and No. 5 Road intersection

§           

a full signal system would not provide 24 hour down-lighting; street lights would provide the only light during evening hours

§           

it was staff’s opinion that the installation of an additional crosswalk in front of the India Cultural Centre as well as at the Kingsbridge Road and No. 5 Road intersection would be ‘overkill’ as the pedestrian figures were relatively low.

Discussion ensued among Committee members and the delegation, during which in answer to questions, Mr. Sanghara indicated that he would like a crosswalk installed between the Mosque and the India Cultural Centre.  In concluding his presentation, Mr. Sanghara asked that the India Cultural Centre be consulted on any future issues, and reiterated that the Centre would be willing to provide a financial contribution to install a flashing light in front of the Cultural Centre.  He noted that the power poles were already in place.

Ms. Margaret Caplett, of #61 – 11751 King Road, spoke in support of a pedestrian crosswalk located somewhere between Blundell Road and Williams Road.  She expressed the view that people would utilize the crosswalk if it was available.  Ms. Caplett also spoke about the increase in speed of motorists using No. 5 Road.

With reference to the motorists speeding along No. 5 Road, Mr. Wei suggested that speed limit signs could be posted.  As a result, the following motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That speed limit signs be posted on No. 5 Road, indicating that the speed limit is 50 k/mh.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the installation of a special crosswalk at the intersection of No. 5 Road and Kingsbridge Drive be approved for implementation with construction to commence in 2004.

(2)

That funding for this project come from the 2003 Transit-Related Road Infrastructure Program (TRRIP) account.

The question on the motion was not called, as Cllr. Barnes suggested that the matter should be referred to staff to consult with other property owners in the area as well as the India Cultural Centre.  As well, she asked that Mr. Wei determine if power was available.

The Chair indicated that he respected the comments made by Mr. Sanghara, however, he expressed concern about the possible confusion which could result from not following the ‘best advice of the traffic professionals’.  Cllr. Howard stated that in combination with speed limit signs and increased surveillance, the crosswalk in its proposed location would work best for the community in the long run.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllr. Barnes opposed.

3.

SUBMISSION TO PROVINCIAL 2004/05 CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM – GARDEN CITY ROAD BIKE ROUTE (CAPSTAN WAY TO SEA ISLAND WAY

(Report:  Nov. 3/04, File No.:  1087-18-01) (REDMS No. 1351130)

Mr. Wei, accompanied by Transportation Planner Joan Caravan, introduced Mr. Tony Adema, a member of the Richmond Community Cycling Committee, and indicated that the Committee supported the staff recommendation.  In response to questions, advice was given that a bicycle  over the Steveston Overpass to connect Ironwood with the Riverport area had not been considered because of the negotiations currently underway regarding possible improvements to the Steveston Overpass which could include the addition of a cycling route.  Further advice was given that the Garden City Road bicycle route would provide a link between Capstan Way and Sea Island Way.

Discussion ensued briefly on the need for enforcement of cycling regulations on local streets.  The lack of bicycle routes within the downtown core was also addressed, with information being provided that this issue had been identified as a project for the 2005 work plan.  Information was provided during the discussion on the Japanese law which stipulated that in any collision between a motor vehicle and a cyclist, the motorist was always found to be 100% at fault.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the proposed project to improve the Garden City Road bicycle route from Capstan Way to Sea Island Way, (as described in the report dated November 3^rd, 2004, from the Acting Director, Transportation), be endorsed for submission for 50/50 cost-sharing to the Province’s 2004/05 Cycling Infrastructure Partnership Program at an estimated City cost of $72,650.

(2)

That the source of funding for the City’s share of the above project cost, if approved by the Province for cost-sharing, be the Garden City Road Extension Project from the approved 2001 and 2002 Capital Programs.

CARRIED

4.

PROPOSED INSTALLATION OF A SPECIAL CROSSWALK AT NO. 5 ROAD/KINGSBRIDGE DRIVE INTERSECTION

(Report:  Oct. 29/04, File No.:  10-6450-17-02/2004-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 1350027)

Please see Page 3 of these minutes for action taken on this matter.

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

INFORMATION / AWARENESS (1 ITEM)

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

5.

“RESPECT SLOW MOVING FARM VEHICLES” ROAD SIGNAGE

(Report:  Sept. 29/04, File No.:  10-6450-06-02/2004-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 1340216)

It was moved and seconded

That the report (dated September 29^th, 2004, from the Acting Director, Transportation), regarding the current status of implementing road signage and regulations for the protection of slow moving farm vehicles on public roadways, (as directed by Council at its regular meeting on September 13, 2004), be received for information.

CARRIED

6.

MANAGER’S REPORT

The Manager, Engineering Design & Construction, Jim Young, reported that the City had been recognized in a national magazine, Environmental Science & Engineering, for its innovative work in East Richmond regarding the installation of a light weight storm sewer system.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (5:00 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, November 17^th, 2004.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Rob Howard
Chair

Fran J. Ashton
Executive Assistant, City Clerk’s Office