Vancouver City Council |
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: December 24, 2002
Author/Local: L. LaClaire/6690
RTS No. 03141
CC File No. 5559T&T: January 14, 2003
TO:
Standing Committee on Transportation and Traffic
FROM:
General Manager of Engineering Services in consultation with Director of City Plans
SUBJECT:
Independent Review of the Richmond/Airport-Vancouver Rapid Transit Project
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council approve the terms of reference for an independent consultant to review previous studies and comment on the cost/benefit of various transit technology, corridor, and alignment options for the Richmond/Airport-Vancouver Rapid Transit Corridor as described in this report.
B. THAT Council endorse City of Vancouver staff working in partnership with TransLink and the GVRD as a review committee to advise and comment on the work of the consultant.
C. THAT the $60,000.00 cost of the independent review be funded by the City allocated from the 2003 Operating Budget.
POLICY
Over the years Council has approved motions on land use and related transit services. Key motions include:
· The Vancouver Transit Strategy (2002), over time, will create a network of transit services linking the City's main centres with the rest of the Region. It also established the City's transit priorities. The first priority is the replacement of the trolley fleet and the expansion of bus service followed by the development of an area service plan, exploration of a Streetcarsystem in and around downtown and on the Arbutus corridor, and the extension of the Millennium line as a subway serving Central Broadway to Granville. The strategy also included conditional support for a regional transit subway system generally along the Cambie Corridor between downtown and Richmond and the airport.· The Downtown Transportation Plan (2002) will help to minimize congestion, maximize access, promote liveability, and encourage walking & biking. The plan supports the enhancement of transit service to and around downtown through the creation of new and modified downtown bus routes and the development of a rail-based rapid transit line to Richmond.
· The Vancouver Transportation Plan (1997) supports the continued use of the trolley bus fleet as the basic transit service within the city. The Plan supports expansion of the False Creek Streetcar to serve the Downtown and the preservation of existing rail corridors so that, if goods and passenger services are discontinued, they may be used for other forms of transit as well as greenways. For City-Regional travel, the Plan supports two new rapid transit lines through the City: the Broadway-Lougheed line to Granville, and eventually to UBC, and Richmond to Downtown.· The Central Area Plan (1991) and City Plan (1995) establish Vancouver's land use directions. They support creating nodes - the Downtown, Central Broadway, and Neighbourhood Centres - where concentrations of jobs, housing, and services will encourage walking and provide a focus for transit services.
· On various dates (October 21, 1986, February 7, 1989, October 22, 1991, and July 25, 2000) Council rejected elevated rapid transit as an option in the City.BACKGROUND
At its regular meeting held on Tuesday, April 23, 2002, Council adopted the Vancouver Transit Strategy, specifically:
A. THAT Council reaffirm that its first priority for transit funding is the replacement of the trolley fleet and expansion of bus service.
B. THAT Council reaffirm its support for participating in the forthcoming TransLink - Vancouver Area Transit Plan and request TransLink to place a high priority on commencing this study.
C. THAT Council reaffirm its support for a Downtown Streetcar (linking Stanley Park,Waterfront Centre, Gastown, Chinatown, Concord Pacific, Main Street SkyTrain Station, South False Creek, Granville Island, and Vanier Park), and further, encourage the appropriate transportation agencies to explore with CP Rail opportunities (including acquisition) for use of the Arbutus Corridor for a future at grade extension of the streetcar line.
D. THAT Phase 1 of the Downtown Streetcar proposal (Waterfront Centre to Granville Island) be pursued in the short-term with a report back on funding options.
E. THAT Council reaffirm its support for the extension of the Millennium Line as a subway serving the Central Broadway corridor to Granville.
F. THAT Council indicate its support for a regional transit subway system linking Vancouver, Richmond, and Vancouver International Airport generally along the Cambie Corridor to serve important institutional (e.g. hospitals, Langara College, City Hall), employment (e.g. Central Broadway), and retail (e.g. Oakridge) destinations subject to the following conditions:
i. a financing package which is approved by TransLink after due consideration of the implications for other regional transportation priorities;
ii. a technical review that identifies a specific alignment and station locations within the corridor, a bus-rapid transit integration plan and recommended solutions to traffic and environmental impacts, and impacts of the stations and alignment on adjacent neighbourhoods;
iii. a broad consultation and approval process that involves affected municipalities and takes into consideration municipal issues and neighbourhood feedback; and
iv. a business case, based on a complete analysis of all major alternative transportation technologies (Light Rail, SkyTrain, Rapid Bus), demonstrates that:
a. The subway system is more effective in terms of costs and benefits than a surface transit system that includes dedicated lanes, synchronized traffic lights, and mass boarding.
b. The business case is based on provision of services that includes quality control through modern service standards and monitoring service supply and ridership.
c. That comprehensive transportation demand management is part of the plan.
G. THAT, when funding is identified to proceed with the extension of the Millennium Line and/or a north-south subway, Council direct staff to report back on a work program, staff resources, and budget to:
· enable the City to participate in the technical review identified in Recommendation F; and
· undertake a consultation process with affected neighbourhoods so their feedback can be incorporated into the technical review in identifying solutions to station, alignment, and environmental impacts, and crime and safety concerns.
H. THAT the Vancouver Transit Strategy, as outlined in Recommendations A through F and, as described in the Policy Report, dated February 22, 2002, entitled "Vancouver Transit Strategy" be transmitted to the federal and provincial governments, regional authorities, Richmond, and the Airport.
I. THAT a subway will not encroach on the surface of the Cambie Heritage Boulevard median.
At its meeting on December 10, 2002, Vancouver City Council passed the following motion:
THAT Council urge TransLink and the GVRD to work in partnership with the City to undertake an independent cost/benefit analysis in accordance with the April 2002 Vancouver Transit Strategy, which expresses support for a subway connecting Richmond, the Airport, and Vancouver, subject to: a business case, based on a complete analysis of all major alternative transportation technologies (Light Rail, SkyTrain, Rapid Bus), demonstrates that:
a. the subway system is more effective in terms of costs and benefits than a surface transit system that includes dedicated lanes, synchronized traffic lights, and mass boarding;
b. the business case is based on provision of services that includes quality control through modern service standards and monitoring service supply and ridership;
c. comprehensive transportation demand management is part of the plan.
In addition, the cost/benefit analysis should
d. compare alternate routes to Richmond;
e. identify full funding prior to commencement of the plan;
f. reference the operational and capital funding of the entire Vancouver Transit system.
City staff should report back as soon as possible with the cost, terms of reference, timeliness and cost-sharing arrangements for completing this analysis."
This report is in response to this motion and is consistent with the Vancouver Transit Strategy.
DISCUSSION
Council has requested an independent cost/benefit analysis of the various alignment and technology options for the Richmond/Airport-Vancouver (RAV) transit corridor. There are two ways to acheive an independent analysis. One way is to do an independent study of the RAV corridor which would require a consultant to replicate much of the data and analysis that has been generated over the years. The other approach is to use an independent consultant to review and comment on the work completed to date and report their findings to Council. Under the circumstances, given the time and money that would be required for an independent study, it would be more effective to hire an independent consultant to build on the work that has been completed by reviewing and comparing options and drawing independent conclusions.
TIMING
A decision by the Rapid Transit Project team and TransLink on this project is expected in March 2003. To have a constructive impact on this decision, the independent study would need to be completed by the end of February for a Council opinion in the beginning of March. This would allow five or six weeks for a consultant to complete a comphrehensive review. While ambitious, this can be achieved with the scope of the work as defined in Appendix A.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The consultants primary task would be to review the reports listed in Appendix B and provide an objective comparison of transit technologies (Light rail, SkyTrain, Rapid Bus) and corridors (Cambie, Arbutus, or other), and vertical alignments (at-grade, subway). The consultant would compare the options in terms of the long-term sustainability for the City and the Region. Key sustainability measures would include:
1. Enconomic Sustainability (capital funding, operating costs, economic development)
2. Environmental Sustainability (noise, vibration, air quality, water quality, etc)
3. Social Sustainability (accessibility for disabled, captive transit riders, liveability, etc.)The consultant would pay particular attention to the specific questions raised by Council, including:
1. Is there a business case for rail-based rapid transit on the RAV corridor?
2. How does a RAV subway system compare with a surface rail transit system?
3. What is the minimum tunneling required and what is the incremental benefit of additional tunnelling or other grade separation?
4. How would implementing aggressive transportation demand management (TDM) measures change the choice for a prefferred option?
5. How would capital funding and operational costs affect TransLink and the GVRD?The consultant would provide commentary and make conclusions where possible. City staff would work in partnership with TransLink and the GVRD to to review the work of the consultant and would provide advise and comments on their work. The detailed terms of reference are attached in Appendix A.
Eligible consultants would possess recognized expertise in the field of transit planning and would have little or no association with work on this project. Given the time constraints for completing the study, the draft terms of reference, as attached, have already been sent out to eligible consultants and formal responses to the call for proposals are expected to be recieved following Council approval of this report. Potential candidates include the following firms:
- HDR Planning (Portland)
- Gannett Fleming Inc. - Engineers and Planning (Phoenix)
- Wilbur Smith Associates (Cleveland)
- Collings Johnston Inc. (Vancouver)
- DMJM-Harris (Los Angeles)
- Parsons Brinkerhoff (Portland)FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
A budget of $60,000 has been established for the proposed study. This may have to be adjusted once the proposals are received from the consultants. Funding is recommended from the 2003 Operating Budget.
It is further recommended that the entire amount be funded by the City in order to facilitate the review and its independence. We understand that TransLink has initiated an internal staff review of many of the same issues as outlined in this report.
CONCLUSIONS
Provided there is an interested and available consultant, there is sufficient time to complete an independent review of the Richmond/Airport-Vancouver Project prior to the go/no-go decision expected in March, 2003. The review would compare the cost/benefit of the various transit technology and corridor options for the project. The cost of the study is estimated at $60,000 although this may be adjusted once the final proposals are reviewed.
* * * * *
APPENDIX A
Terms of Reference
1. GENERAL
1.1 Eligible Consultants
Elegible consultants will have recognized expertise in the field of transit planning in medium sized cities, such as Vancouver, and will excel at communicating complex information to the general public. A review that is truly independent is critical to this work. Therefore conflicts of interest both actual and the perceived must be avoided. Therefore to remove any actual or percieved conflict of interest, consultants that have been significantly involved in past studies for Richmond/Airport-Vancouver rapid transit project (RAVP) and those that expect to bid on any major up-coming RAVP work or studies are not eligible for this work.
1.2 Schedule
The City is anticipating awarding a consulting contract in mid January. The Consultant must be available to begin immediately following a contract award. The study time frame is a total of six weeks, including time for City review of draft reports. Expected completion of the study is the end of February, 2003.
1.3 Budget
The budget for this study is $60,000.00 including the Goods and Services Tax (GST). The proposal should be for a fixed price inclusive of all disbursements consistent with the budget. If the required scope cannot be completed within the proposed budget, an alternative budget or scope of work should be submitted for consideration. Payment will be upon satisfactory completion of the final report.
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
2.1 The consultant will:
· meet with City staff at the beginning of the consultancy to discuss details of the scope of work and to address any outstanding questions
· meet with City, TransLink, or other staff on an on-going basis as needed
· review all past reports on the Richmond-Vancouver transit corridor (listed in Appendix A) and summarize key findings, recommendations, etc.
· using existing data from these reports, compare transit technologies, corridors, andalignments, including grade-separated rail transit, conventional at-grade light rail transit, and rapid bus technologies for the Cambie, Arbutus, and Granville corridors with varying degrees of tunnelling.
· use accounts for comparison that focus on long-term sustainability issues that should include, economic impact (overall cost/benefit, regional economy, operating costs, consequences for TransLink etc), environmental impact (noise, air quality, vibration, water quality etc), and social impacts (accessibility for disabled, captive transit riders, etc.).
· compare options under a scenario of agressive implementation of transportation demand management measures that may be more aggressive than those detailed in the regional plan
· where data is limited or unavailable but necessary the consultant should make qualitative observations to rank and compare the options
· summarize the findings using tables, charts, and graphs that best communicate the information
· make subjective commentary and make conclusions where possible
· present and defend (respond to questions) the findings at a meeting of Vancouver City Council
2.2 City staff will:
· provide a hard copy of the reports listed in Appendix A
· coordinate the logistics of the meeting of Vancouver City Council
2.3 Deliverables
The draft report will describe the findings. It will include a brief summary of the reports that have been reviewed and their relevance, a list of the options evaluated, brief discussion regarding the process to shortlist, a cost benefit analysis of each shortlisted option, a list of implications for each shortlisted option, and the prioritized options with discussion regarding the prioritization process. This report should be very succinct.
(a) Progress Updates
The consultant will present their progress on their work to staff in the form of a draft report and a presentation to staff.
(b) Final Report
The final report will present the results of the entire study. The report should take the form of a written report in 8.5" x 11" vertical format. Included in the report will be relevant maps, drawings, and specifications as deemed necessary by the staff project manager. The consultant will provide 5 unbound copies of the draft report, oneunbound reproducible black and white final copy and 10 bound copies of the final report. A disk copy of the written report in a City compatible format will also be provided by the consultant. Any other presentation material including maps, drawings, photographs as slides or as electronic files for LCD projection as deemed necessary will also be provided by the consultant.
The report will have logical order and structure such that the general public will be able to follow and understand the choices and their implications. This report should have a high educational value. It is anticipated that the findings could be published and may be widely distributed by the City.
All work completed by the consultant is to be to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services.
The report and other materials will be the property of the City of Vancouver.
APPENDIX B
List of Reports
List of Reports to be reviewed by the consultant.
· 2002/2003 A number of recent reports undertaken by the RAV Project on ridership, costs, alignment/stations, revenue, etc. will be made available
· 2002 TransLink's Regionally Significant Capital Projects and Funding Opportunities
· 2001 Maquarie Report on RAV
· 2001 Multiple Account Evaluation Report on RAV
· 1999 Vancouver Airport's Rail Access Study
· 1997 Sustainable Development Strategy - Transport Canada
· 1995 BC Transit's Multiple Account Evaluation of Rapid Transit Options in Greater Vancouver.
· 1995 BC Transit's Summary of Intermediate Capacity Transit Studies in Greater Vancouver.
· 1994 BC Transit's Review of intermediate Capacity Transit Systems - Vancouver Richmond
· 1993 Vancouver Airport: Rapid Transit Concept Study
· 1992 Vancouver-Richmond Rapid Transit Study: Urban Design and Integration Report
· 1992 Vancouver-Richmond Rapid Transit Project: N.D. Lea Report
· 1991 Vancouver/Richmond Rapid Transit Project:Vancouver International Airport Connector Report
Additional Reference Documents
· 2002 City of Vancouver Downtown Transportation Plan
· 2000 TransLink's Strategic Transportation Plan.
· 1998 Rapid Transit Project 2000: Vancouver West Alignment Report
· 1997 City of Vancouver Transportation Plan
· 1996 Vancouver International Airport 1995-2015 Master Plan
· 1996 GVRD Liveable Region Strategic Plan
· 1993 A Medium-Range Transportation Plan for Greater Vancouver - Transport 2021
· 1993 A Long-Range Transportation Plan for Greater Vancouver - Transport 2021
· 1989 GVRD Freedom to Move Study
· 1981 Hickling Report examines Cambie and Arbutus
· 1979 GVRD Light Rail Studies
· 1972 Kelly Report
· 1970 Report on the Greater Vancouver Area Rapid Transit Study