POLICY REPORT
URBAN STRUCTURE

TO:

City Council

FROM:

General Manager of Engineering Services and the Director of City Plans in consultation with the Director of Current Planning

SUBJECT:

Richmond/Airport-Vancouver Rapid Transit Project

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

The Central Area Plan (1991) and CityPlan (1995) establish Vancouver's land use directions. They support nodes (Downtown, Central Broadway and Neighbourhood Centres) where concentrations of jobs, housing and services provide a focus for transit services.

CityPlan (1995) supports increasing transit use into and within the City by improving transit service, including new rapid transit lines serving regional and city centres.

The City Transportation Plan (1997) supports a minimum of two new rapid transit lines within Vancouver, including between downtown Vancouver and Richmond, and along Broadway/Lougheed to Granville. These lines should serve the needs of city riders as well as others, and should not result in a loss of local transit service.

The Downtown Transportation Plan (2002) supports a rapid transit line between the downtown and Richmond (and possibly the Airport) to achieve City and Regional objectives with stations in Downtown South, the central business district (centred at Burrard and Dunsmuir) and the transportation hub at Waterfront Station using tunnel rail technology.

On various dates, Council has rejected elevated rapid transit in residential areas.

As part of the Vancouver Transit Strategy adopted on April 23, 2002, Council indicated 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 destinations (e.g. Oakridge, Central Broadway). Council also directed that a subway under Cambie not encroach on the surface of the Cambie Heritage Boulevard median.

On January 14, 2003, Council reaffirmed its support for a rapid transit line from Richmond City Centre and the Vancouver International Airport to Downtown Vancouver in order to improve service in the corridor and increase regional transit ridership.

RELEVANT REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE POLICIES

The GVRD Livable Region Strategic Plan seeks to achieve complete communities throughout the Region, centred on the Metropolitan Core of downtown Vancouver and Central Broadway, and on Regional Town Centres, of which Richmond is one. The Plan proposes a transit-oriented, automobile-restrained transportation system based on intermediate capacity transit facilities linking the Metropolitan Core with the Regional Town Centres.

Transport 2021, the Region's long range Transportation Plan, recommends "high quality, fast, frequent (transit) services linking regional town centres". Transport 2021 further identifies that Intermediate Capacity Transit Systems (segregated busways, LRT, or ALRT) should be provided between Downtown Vancouver and Richmond, between Coquitlam and New Westminster, and in the Broadway-Lougheed corridor. All three of these lines were to be completed by 2006. The Millennium Line SkyTrain has completed much of the Broadway-Lougheed line and a portion of the Coquitlam - New Westminster link.

SUMMARY AND PURPOSE

The Richmond/Airport-Vancouver Rapid Transit Project is preparing to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design, construction, partial financing, and operation of a Richmond/Airport-Vancouver rapid transit line. The RFP will be issued if TransLink and the GVRD agree that the project should proceed, and once funding commitments from the provincial and federal governments are secured. The Vancouver International Airport Authority has agreed to contribute the funds required to build the connection between the main Richmond-Vancouver line and the airport.

Based on three decades of analysis of alternatives, and past direction from Council, the proposed line uses the Cambie corridor between downtown Vancouver and Richmond. The RAV Project has developed a range of potential alignments within the corridor, indicating where the line must be underground and where it could be at-grade or elevated. The RAV Project is also leaving the choice of technology up to the bidders responding to the Request for Proposals. Both partially grade-separated systems (conventional light rail transit) and fully grade-separated systems (SkyTrain or comparable) are therefore possible.

A rapid transit line on Cambie would benefit the city by increasing transportation choice, reducing the impact of car and bus traffic on neighbourhoods, and assisting the development of currently zoned capacity for population and employment growth in the downtown and along Central Broadway. It would encourage greater use of transit and help restrain automobile traffic and congestion, in accordance with City goals.

The City also has an overarching interest in ensuring that any impacts on the communities it will serve and pass through are minimised, and that the benefits to these communities, and the city and region as a whole, are maximised. It is important that Council provide its advice to TransLink and the contributing agencies at this time, so it can be incorporated into the Request for Proposals to ensure that the City's interests are reflected in the design of the system. The recommendations in this report form a basis for Council's advice and have been developed in the context of existing policy and public comments. Staff believe that a rapid transit project developed in accordance with these recommendations would be a significant asset to the transportation network while meeting the needs of the communities it would serve.

DISCUSSION

RECENT WORK ON THE VANCOUVER/RICHMOND CORRIDOR

A Richmond-Vancouver rapid transit link has been the subject of study and discussion for over three decades, following the City's decision not to build an urban freeway network. The most exhaustive review in 1990-92 looked at 200 route and alignment possibilities, concluding that the Cambie corridor would attract the most riders at the lowest cost per passenger, compared to other options.

During the 1999 public consultation for TransLink's Strategic Transportation Plan, several agencies expressed an interest in pursuing a Richmond-Vancouver rapid transit line, this time incorporating a rail link to the airport. In 2000, TransLink, in co-operation with seven other agencies, completed a Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE) of rail rapid transit in the Richmond/Airport-Vancouver (RAV) Corridor to determine whether there was any advantage to constructing such a project by 2010 or waiting until 2021.

The capital costs of major transit projects can seldom be fully and directly recovered from the users. Hence, the MAE process provided a mechanism to quantify other benefits to users, non-users, and society in general that might outweigh the capital costs. The MAE concluded that:

· The RAV Project should be implemented as net benefits exceed net costs (in present value terms);
· The net transportation user benefits are similar for 2010 and 2021;
· The net transportation user benefits could be significantly improved by developing an optimized line that incorporates low-cost improvements (e.g. priority signalling and selective grade separations) to reduce travel time delay; and,
· The non-transportation accounts (urban development, economic, environmental, social and community) favour constructing the line by 2010 rather than waiting until a later date.

A companion study to the Multiple Account Evaluation undertaken by Macquarie Bank concluded that the RAV Project has potential to be a Private Public Partnership (P3 or PPP).

TransLink has limited ability to fund capital projects, and is seeking senior government cost-sharing of major transportation projects in the GVRD. Given the potential for RAV to receive funding from the provincial and federal governments, and the VancouverInternational Airport Authority, and the consistency of the Richmond-Vancouver line with regional and municipal transportation plans, the RAV project represents a good opportunity to take advantage of senior government funding that would likely not be available for other regional transportation projects.

Broadly based public opinion supports the RAV project, although there is considerable concern about the potential effects on the Cambie Heritage Boulevard. Concern is especially strong with any proposals for elevated sections of line along the Cambie median. The results of the RAV Project team's most recent round of public consultation will be available when Council receives this report. The last survey, conducted in 2001, showed that 83% of Vancouver and Richmond residents polled think that a rapid transit line that connects Richmond, Vancouver, and the Airport would be good for their community.

CITY LAND USE PRIORITIES

The City's land use vision is to enhance accessibility through the co-location of housing, jobs, and services. The Central Area Plan, adopted in 1991, reaffirmed Downtown Vancouver as the region's focus for jobs, entertainment, and speciality services. Central Broadway was identified as a second inner city employment and service centre. Housing in the inner city minimizes the need for transit services. For those living outside the Central Area, the concentration of activities Downtown and along Central Broadway provides a focus for transit services.

Downtown

Downtown Vancouver is unique in North America because of the success of the City's "living first" strategy. This has resulted in an unprecedented influx of residents with a doubling of the downtown peninsula population to 80,000 over the last 10 to 15 years. This could increase to 110,000 residents over the next 10-15 years. This growth is environmentally sustainable since it improves the balance between jobs and housing downtown and so reduces the demand for travel. The intensity of land uses also favours the use of transit and an efficient rapid transit system is especially key to supporting commercial uses requiring good access for local and non-local residents.

Downtown is already the largest employment centre in the region, with 143,000 jobs. With the right economic environment and infrastructure, including the RAV line, this could grow to 175,000 jobs in 2021. The Downtown also attracts a wide range of trips that are not employment-based. Other key trip attractors include:
· The BC Place and GM Place sports stadia;
· Performing arts venues such as the Orpheum, Queen Elizabeth Theatre and Playhouse, and the Centre for the Performing Arts;
· Specialised shopping districts; and,
· Public and private post-secondary educational institutions, such as the downtown campuses of SFU, BCIT, UBC and VCC, and numerous ESL schools.

Outside Downtown

CityPlan, adopted in 1995, establishes Vancouver's land use vision outside the Central Area. CityPlan preserves industrial areas for port, city-serving, and high technology industry. Concentrating high tech jobs near rapid transit increases accessibility and opportunities for commercial services focussed at transit stations.

In established neighbourhoods, CityPlan supports a network of Neighbourhood Centres which provide local shopping and services. Multi-family housing above shops and around Centres locates residents close to services, bus, and other transit.

Vancouver's land use vision is intended to create "complete communities" to reduce the need for travel. However, not everyone can or wants to live near their job and services. Hence, an efficient transportation network is essential to link regional town centres, city employment centres (e.g. Downtown, Central Broadway, industrial areas), institutions (e.g. UBC, major hospitals), and local services (e.g. Neighbourhood Centres).

The Cambie corridor serves local and regional destinations. The corridor, as defined by a 1,000 metre radius around the five base-case non-downtown stations, contains 19 million square feet of industrial and commercial space. There are 20,400 jobs located within a seven minute walk (500 m radius) of the base-case stations outside downtown. If the walking radius is extended to fifteen minutes (1 km radius), an additional 34,000 jobs would be captured. See Appendix B for details.

A number of the employment uses in the corridor also generate large numbers of non-work trips. Examples include:

· students travelling to Langara College (7,500 students) and language schools on and near Broadway;
· shoppers patronizing Oakridge Centre (17,500 visitors/day), City Square and Central Broadway retailers;
· people attending medical specialists in the Central Broadway area; and;
· visitors to the City Hall and the hospitals along the corridor (VGH and Women's & Children's each have 7,500 visitors/day).

Housing in the corridor includes a variety of types, ranging from single-family dwellings to apartments. Altogether, 14,350 residents live within a seven-minute walk of the proposed stations along Cambie. If the walking radius is extended to fifteen minutes an additional 36,700 residents are captured.

There is potential for RAV to foster growth in the employment base in the corridor. Current zoned capacity allows for an additional 13 million square feet of commercial and industrial space, generating over 30,000 new jobs, for a total of 85,000 jobs. Adding stations at 2nd Avenue in Southeast False Creek and at 33rd Avenue would shorten walking times from some employment areas and add another 2,000 jobs to the overall catchment.

Future development could add up to 23,000 more residents to the population served by RAV along the Cambie corridor. Current zoned capacity allows for 5,000 additional residents. Beyond this, additional growth can be achieved though the Oakridge-Langara Area Plan (2,900 more residents), likely redevelopment of institutional properties (1,500 to 1,800 more residents), and the Southeast False Creek sustainable community (12,850 residents).

The objective of City land use and transportation policies is for transit to serve existing areas of employment and population and to shape areas identified for future growth. If the RAV Project proceeds, it is important that the City retains the authority to approve changes to land uses adjacent to stations. Any new housing or commercial capacity is subject to the City's Rezoning process, with full review and a Public Hearing. Recommendations G and P. ii recognize the need for the RAV Project to follow an agreed-upon approvals process.

As well, City policy aims to ensure that transit complements the roles of streets and respects neighbourhoods. These objectives can be translated into principles for integrating a new transit project into the established city. Appendix A identifies key principles for the RAV Project to respect including:

Serving Land Use
· reduce the negative effects of automobile traffic (congestion, pollution, collisions, etc.) on livability and the environment by providing a transit service that provides a clean, viable alternative to driving;
· offer a variety of transit services to support and connect Neighbourhood Centres where people can live, shop and work; and
· connect to other employment destinations in the city and region.

Shaping Land Use
· assist the take-up of residential and employment capacity in the city;
· contribute to a compact, high amenity Central Business District focussed on transit;
· concentrate jobs where they can be served by transit, and more specifically concentrate office employment in the Downtown and Central Broadway;
· increase the number and choice of jobs in the city in locations served by rapid transit; and
· support regional goals of creating complete communities, focussing employment and population growth in the growth concentration area, and achieving densities to support transit services.

Complementing Land Use: Fit within the Neighbourhood
· minimize neighbourhood impacts such as noise, air pollution, vibration, visual intrusion and view loss;
· minimize local disruptions such as street, lane and path closures;
· minimize traffic intrusion through neighbourhoods;
· minimize impact on goods movement and servicing of local businesses;
· enhance safety near stations; and
· minimize the number of people and properties impacted.

Complementing Land Use: Fit within the Street and Buildings
· encourage compatible new development;
· improve development potential for local commercial sites;
· retain and enhance public realm amenities such as landscaping, trees, open space, walking and bike paths; and,
· support streetscape character and public art.

These principles need to be considered by companies bidding on the RAV Project. (See Recommendations F through N ).

CITY TRANSIT PRIORITIES

The City's transportation policies, as expressed in CityPlan, the Vancouver Transportation Plan, the Vancouver Transit Strategy and the Downtown Transportation Plan include a Richmond-Vancouver rapid transit line. Other key elements of these strategies and their status is as follows:

· Trolley bus fleet replacement: This is Council's first transit priority. TransLink is proceeding with this project, using its own revenue sources.
· Vancouver Area Transit Plan: TransLink is scheduled to begin work on a five-year plan for local bus service in the city late this year. TransLink is planning to introduce a West End - Downtown - Central Broadway trolley bus route, as proposed in the Downtown Transportation Plan, in 2004. Additional bus service improvements within the City will be developed through the Area Transit Plan.
· Downtown Streetcar: This is a City-initiated project for which funding has not yet been identified. A local service on the Arbutus rail corridor could be an extension to the Downtown Streetcar to complement a regional-serving line on Cambie.
· Millennium Line Extension: Extending the Millennium Line from its current terminus at Broadway and Commercial to Granville to serve the Central Broadway medical/civic/business district, was studied extensively in 1999-2000. This remains a City priority and awaits funding and a decision to proceed from TransLink. The Province previously agreed to fund two-thirds of the capital cost of this extension, provided SkyTrain technology was used. Staff recommend that Council reiterate its support for this project, including enhanced transit service to UBC. (See Recommendation B.)

As noted, the RAV line would complement these other projects in helping achieve a comprehensive transit network within the city. It would serve a corridor containing one-third of the region's jobs and act as a north-south transit spine connecting the metropolitan core of Vancouver with Richmond City Centre. Along its route, it would serve several region-serving destinations and connect to east-west bus routes in the city, many of which serve UBC, the region's second-largest transit destination after downtown Vancouver. The Vancouver International Airport Authority's agreement to fund a spur line connecting to the airport will greatly improve transit access to the 26,000 jobs at the airport, and provide alternate access to the airport for air travellers.

RAV would contribute to achieving the City's land use goals by providing improved access to the downtown and Central Broadway. Downtown Vancouver had 143,000 jobs in 2001and this could increase to 175,000 by 2021. Without RAV, increasing congestion would make the downtown a less attractive place to do business. The Downtown Transportation Plan projects that, without RAV, the number of vehicles entering downtown would increase by 2.2% and this would cause a 15% increase in vehicle delay. As well, transit speeds in the downtown would decrease by about 10%. Employment in Central Broadway (Main to Arbutus) could grow from 60,000 to 90,000 jobs over the same 2001-2021 period. RAV and the completed Millennium Line would be mutually supportive in providing Central Broadway with a high level of transit service. See Appendix B for more details.

Ridership modelling done by the RAV Project team indicates that the majority of RAV ridership would be generated by Vancouver riders. In the morning peak hour, 61% of RAV passengers would board in Vancouver. Further, 68% of Vancouver boardings would be outside the downtown. It is notable that more people would board the system in Vancouver outside downtown than would board in Richmond. Altogether, it is expected that the Vancouver stations would handle two-thirds of the 100,000 total weekday passenger trips expected on RAV after the post-opening ramp up in ridership is complete.

RAV would improve the liveability of streets now carrying suburban bus traffic as diesel buses are replaced by an electric rail system. Based on current schedules, about 600 weekday diesel bus trips would be removed from Granville Street and 40 trips from Oak Street. The liveability of the increasingly residential streets in Downtown South now affected by suburban bus traffic, such as Seymour, Howe, and parts of Richards, would also be improved as noise and vibration from diesel buses would be reduced. RAV is also expected to result in 18,000 fewer weekday automobile trips in the corridor.

ALIGNMENT OPTIONS IN VANCOUVER

Recent work on the RAV project has focussed on the alignment options within Vancouver and Richmond, using the Cambie Corridor as the preferred route. The route (shown in Figure 1) would start at Waterfront Station (at Cordova Street), follow Granville and Davie Streets, and go under False Creek. From there, the line would follow Cambie Street, transitioning to Ash Street near Kent Avenue, south of Marine Drive, to a new bridge crossing the North Arm of the Fraser River to Richmond.

Nine options were developed by the RAV Project team for the Granville and Cambie street portions of the route where the line could be below, at, or above street level. Options were developed for both partially-grade separated (conventional LRT) and fully grade-separated (SkyTrain or comparable) technologies.
 

Figure 1 RAV alignment in Vancouver

 
A tenth option was developed by the RAV Project team in response to a suggestion from their peer review panel to minimize tunnelling. This option would use LRT technology and operate on the surface throughout downtown. It would run south on Granville Mall from Cordova, turn east on to Robson, cross the Terry Fox Plaza, then become elevated to pass through the Concord Pacific site west of BC Place, cross False Creek on a new bridge, and rejoin the tunnel alignment near Cambie and Broadway.

Staff have reviewed these options and make the following observations and recommendations concerning the City's preferred alignments. The analysis below breaks the line into sections for discussion purposes. (Schematics of the 10 alignment options, and an expanded discussion of the alignment types, are included in Appendix B.)

Throughout the discussion, options for tunnels are supported. While staff recognise that tunnels add cost to the project, unlike the Millennium Line's path through industrial areas and corridors, the RAV line would run through the Downtown, Central Broadway, and along the Cambie Heritage Boulevard through established neighbourhoods. Building high-capacity rail service in these areas requires special efforts to manage impacts, including extensive use of tunnelling.

Downtown

Three options have been developed for the downtown, starting at Waterfront Station at Granville and Cordova. They are:
· An all-tunnel alignment under Granville and Davie Streets, considered to be the base alignment;

· A partially-tunnelled alignment that would be elevated over Cordova Street to Granville and Hastings, then at-grade on Granville to a tunnel portal in the middle of Granville Street at Nelson; and,

· A surface/elevated option that would run elevated over Cordova Street to Granville and Hastings, then at-grade on Granville Mall to Robson, turn east on Robson to Beatty, cross through the Terry Fox Plaza, then run elevated to a new bridge over False Creek, just east of the Cambie Street Bridge. This option was anticipated to save capital costs but preliminary estimates suggest that there would not be any savings because of land and development rights acquisition costs.

Surface alignments downtown can be challenging depending on the route chosen and the technology proposed. Speed and travel time requirements may necessitate significant interruption to pedestrian mobility and bus services. Adjacent land uses can also be affected. Depending on the technology, curb side parking and sidewalk space may need to be traded off in order to fit the system into intensively used streets. The comparatively narrow downtown streets mean that systems possible elsewhere may not easily fit the Vancouver situation, or may severely compromise pedestrian space or property access.

Staff conclude that, in the downtown, the only suitable alignment is in tunnel, given service coverage, urban fit and transit network issues. The key factors are as follows:

Service coverage
A key City objective for the RAV line is that it help create a more complete rapid transit network in the downtown, including serving the Downtown South/Yaletown area. This area is becoming the most densely populated neighbourhood in Vancouver. The all-tunnel and partially-tunnelled alignments serve this area well since both would have a station located on Davie Street in Yaletown. The all-surface/elevated alignment that runs on Granville, Robson, and elevated over False Creek provides a station near Expo Boulevard and Smithe Street, too far north to adequately serve much of the Downtown South community.

Urban fit
The partially-tunnelled and all-surface/elevated options have a number of aspects that staff conclude would be incompatible with the urban design standards that are expected in the downtown:
· Surface alignments on Granville Mall would require an elevated guideway between Cordova and Hastings Streets. This would be visually intrusive and out of scale in the context of the narrow street right-of-way.

· The partial-tunnel option would require a tunnel portal in the middle of Granville Street, between Smithe and Nelson Streets. The portal would be visually intrusive, occupy the length of the block, and would be impossible to mitigate satisfactorily. It would also likely require sidewalks to be narrowed in the central block of the city's entertainment district, raising concerns for pedestrian safety. In addition, the strategy for revitalizing Granville Street and the pending redesign of the street would be compromised in terms of urban fit, programming capability, ambience and other factors that are key to a successful regeneration of the street.

· The all-surface/elevated option would require changing the function of Robson Street east of Granville from a mixed-traffic street to one with limited private vehicle access. This would create problems for some properties, especially the hotels which rely on easy vehicular access. This option would also reduce the size of the Terry Fox Plaza, reducing gathering space outside BC Place stadium.

· Surface LRT on Granville could impact growing residential areas along adjacent streets where local buses would need to be re-routed. The function of a "bus spine" along Granville may need to be replaced using transit-only lanes on Seymour and Howe Streets. This could affect accessibility and livability on these streets, although the LRT service would replace the suburban diesel buses currently using these streets.

· The elevated section of the all-surface/elevated option would split the Concord Pacific development site between BC Place stadium and the Cambie Bridge. This would reduce the current development potential of this site and would shade part of Cooper's Park, south of Pacific Boulevard. From an urban design aspect, the coherence of the neighbourhood from Cambie to the Plaza of Nations would be affected with an elevated system running through it. City guidelines recommend up to a 30 metre separation between residential towers and the existing road bridges. Applying these guidelines to the proposed line could affect a large swath through the neighbourhood, affecting the development economics for the projects. Including development impacts on the south side of False Creek, this alignment could affect up to 800 planned residential units. The costs of purchasing these development rights would outweigh any savings from not tunnelling. Waterfront parks are valued by residents, especially in dense downtown neighbourhoods where they serve not only waterfront developments but also downtown neighbourhoods with limited park supply. Structures that could limit the utility of parks are of concern. Additionally, the elevated option would conflict with the Pacific Boulevard off-ramp from the Cambie Street Bridge, either requiring its removal or the elevated guideway to fly over it.

Transit network
At grade LRT operation on Granville would require the relocation of the ten local bus routes that currently operate on the Mall. The Granville Street right-of-way is not sufficient to accommodate surface light rail and intense local bus service while maintaining the sidewalk widths required for this major pedestrian thoroughfare. Relocating local bus services to other downtown streets, like Seymour and Howe Streets, would compromise the ease of using the bus route network, and City goals to maintain bus routes on two-way streets with increasedbus priority. The current ability to provide a seamless transit service the length of Granville would be lost with LRT proposals that run along only part of the Mall.

Conclusion

After considering the proposed surface alignments in terms of service coverage, urban fit, property acquisition requirements, and potential consequences for the rest of the downtown transit network, staff recommend that RAV be in a tunnel throughout the downtown.

False Creek to Broadway

There are two potential alignments between False Creek and Broadway, both of which depend on the alignment selected for the downtown. Options that tunnel under False Creek remain in tunnel to Broadway. The option that crosses False Creek on a new bridge would be elevated on the east side of Cambie to about 8th Avenue, where it would enter a tunnel and the Broadway station. The slopes of Cambie Street north and south of Broadway require the Broadway station to be either elevated or underground. While there are many issues associated with an elevated guideway in this part of the City, urban fit alone requires that the Broadway station be in a tunnel, and this is recommended by staff. The elevated option would have a significant impact on development sites on the east side of Cambie and limit their ability to utilise their Cambie frontages. The elevated option would also affect the Southeast False Creek development, and particularly the park planned for its western end.

Broadway to King Edward Avenue

The RAV Project Team and City staff both recommend that the RAV line be underground below Cambie Street, between Broadway and King Edward Avenue. With an underground Broadway station, and the slope of Cambie, providing a tunnel portal between Broadway and King Edward Avenue would require a long trench, creating a significant visual and physical barrier in the middle of the narrowest section of Cambie .

The earliest practical opportunity to end the tunnel is at King Edward Avenue, where the combination of slope, right-of-way width, and land-use make it technically possible to build a tunnel portal. However, staff do not recommend a portal here as it would be highly intrusive to the neighbourhood and street, and would diminish the value of the Cambie Heritage Boulevard as a gateway to Queen Elizabeth Park.

King Edward Avenue to 46th- 49th Avenues

Staff recommend that the system remain in tunnel from King Edward Avenue to at least 46th and Cambie for a partially grade-separated system, and to south of 49th and Cambie for a fully grade-separated system. The requirement to remain in tunnel through this section is related to the significance of the Cambie Heritage Boulevard as a heritage landscape feature, and to traffic issues in the Oakridge area.

Cambie Heritage Boulevard

A significant factor affecting the alignment is the need to preserve, to the maximum extent possible, the heritage, landscape and urban design values of the Cambie Street right-of-way. In response to a previous rapid transit proposal, City Council designated the Cambie Street central median (Cambie Heritage Boulevard) between King Edward Avenue and SW Marine Drive as a heritage landscape in 1993. Any proposed changes to the central median would require a Heritage Alteration Permit approved by Council, having sought the advice of the Vancouver Heritage Commission and Urban Design Panel. The details of this review process can be negotiated with the proponents.(See Recommendations D. iii and G)

The Cambie Boulevard's heritage values include its history, urban design and landscape features. The 1929 Bartholomew Plan identified Cambie as an important route linking Downtown past Queen Elizabeth Park to the Fraser River. Pursuant to the plan's urban design and landscape framework for "Pleasure Drives", Cambie Street has been developed as a wide central median separating roadways and bordered by boulevards. With its hundreds of shade, ornamental and coniferous trees, some dating back to the 1920s and 30s, and especially notable for its golden English elms, Sequoias, Japanese flowering cherries and dogwoods, Cambie Street is one of city's finest examples of living urban forest and heritage landscape.

Having a heritage designated resource does not mean there can be no change. Rather, it establishes a process that carefully manages that change. To minimise the effects on the Cambie Heritage Boulevard and adjacent residents, the RAV line should remain in tunnel, preferably beneath traffic lanes on Cambie, from King Edward Avenue as far south as technically and financially feasible. Staff therefore recommend that the RFP include an option for a tunnel to 63rd Avenue. However, this option may exceed the project's budget. If so, staff recommend continuing the tunnel to at least 46th Avenue for a partially grade-separated system, and to south of 49th Avenue for a fully grade-separated system.

Oakridge traffic issues
The intersection of Cambie and 41st would be problematic for at-grade light rail operation. Because of the high left-turn volumes, the signal cycle is up to three minutes in length. This would make signal pre-emption favouring LRT difficult to achieve without significant disruption to other traffic, including east-west buses. Providing limited or no pre-emption would extend LRT travel times and reduce schedule reliability, reducing ridership. Between 41st and 45th are a number of vehicular crossings of the median into and out of Oakridge Centre that would also interfere with surface LRT operation. As there appear to be no alternatives to tunnelling under 41st, staff recommend that the potential conflicts between 41st and 45th also be avoided by remaining in tunnel to at least 46th Avenue.

46th- 49th Avenues to 63rd Avenue

Based on past policy and public input, staff recommend against an elevated guideway north of 63rd Avenue, given the intrusiveness of such structures. Consequently, if tunnelling is not affordable south of 49th, surface or trenched alignments could be considered, provided satisfactory design solutions are developed.

In considering surface alignment options, staff have developed the following conditions:

· An LRT-type system could cross 49th Avenue at-grade and so could surface north of 49th, the RAV Project has suggested near 46th Avenue. Traffic volumes at the intersection of Cambie and 49th Avenue suggest that an at-grade crossing of 49th Avenue is feasible.

· Because an elevated guideway is not acceptable to the City, a fully grade-separated system (such as SkyTrain) would have to cross under 49th Avenue. Consequently, staff recommend that any such system remain in tunnel to south of 49th Avenue to avoid a concrete trench connecting a tunnel portal at 46th with an underpass below 49th Avenue.

· There should be no net loss of green space from the median. Green space used for transit should be replaced by widening the median. Grassing over the space between the rails, as is common on many European LRT systems, is strongly encouraged. If the median widening requires that a lane of pavement be removed, on-street parking may need to be eliminated in order to maintain two travel lanes in each direction, at least during daytime hours. Over the longer term, these restrictions may be required at all times.

· The location of the tracks within the median needs to be determined. They could be down the centre of the existing median, with the widened median forming a buffer between traffic and residents on either side. Alternately, the tracks could be built on the outside edges of the widened median. This would preserve the existing median but would provide less separation from traffic and residents. It would also be contingent on dealing with the underground utilities currently located under the median. Local residents should be consulted on potential track locations within the median.

· Any trees removed during construction should be replaced with trees of a species and diameter mutually agreed to between the City arborist, the General manager of Engineering Services and the RAV Project.(See recommendation Dvii)

· Overhead power wires and support poles for an LRT-type system should be designed to be as unobtrusive as possible.

· Pedestrian and cyclist crossings should be provided every 400 metres, and correspond to desire lines to schools, parks, bus stops and commercial areas. Vehicular crossings should be provided at 57th and 59th Avenues, as well as a U-turn route under the elevated guideway, if possible, between 63rd and Marine Drive. Crossings would need to be overpasses with a fully grade-separated system.

63rd Avenue to the Fraser River

South of 63rd Avenue the RAV Project team concludes that the line must become elevated to cross over Marine Drive and gain access to a dedicated rail crossing of the North Arm of the Fraser River. Staff concur with this and recommend the following conditions:

· The elevated structure across Marine Drive should be as low as possible while maintaining acceptable vertical clearances.

· Crossing from the south end of the Cambie median to the south-east corner of Cambie and Marine is encouraged in order to minimise the required span and avoid the use of bents spanning Cambie Street. (Bents are guideway supports that use two columns to bridge an obstacle, such as a street.)

· An elevated alignment on the east side of Cambie, south of Marine Drive, is strongly encouraged to provide separation between the guideway and the residential developments on the west side of Cambie Street.

SERVICE STANDARDS

Travel Time

A transit service needs to be fast, frequent, and reliable to be attractive to riders, and encourage commuters to use transit rather than an automobile. However, a transit line must also fit into and serve the communities through which it passes. The RAV Project includes performance specifications for maximum travel times of 25 minutes between Waterfront Station and the Airport, and 30 minutes between Waterfront Station and Richmond Centre. Concerns have been expressed that these travel times may drive decisions that may not be cost-effective and which could increase impacts and reduce benefits in Vancouver. Staff recommend that the RAV Project team take a flexible approach to these standards if their rigid application could result in a more intrusive system that would limit access to Vancouver residents. (See Recommendation E).

Accessibility

It is accepted practice to make all new transit projects accessible to people with disabilities, whether they be mobility or sensory-related. It is expected that RAV would follow this practice but it is worth reinforcing this requirement. A situation such as Granville Station, which will soon have elevator access after almost 20 years of operation, should not be repeated. Providing a fully accessible system also makes it easier to use by other riders, particularly people with small children and the elderly. (See Recommendation K.)

Bus Integration

A past concern with rapid transit proposals in the region has been the potential impact on local bus service. This concern is largely based on what happened around the time of the Expo SkyTrain line when a provincial restraint program led to many cuts to bus service, even on routes which did not parallel the SkyTrain line. Given this concern, staff recommend that the RAV line should result in no net loss of local bus service within the city. While some reductions on the Cambie bus route, and perhaps Main and Oak, are to be expected as many riders would switch to the RAV line, there will also be increased demands on other bus routes to connect to the RAV line. For example, service between UBC and the RAV line would experience high demand and should be improved. Likewise, the RAV line can be expected to increase demand for bus service along Marine Drive to reach the Marine Drive station.( See Recommendation L)

TransLink has prepared a bus integration strategy for the RAV Project that largely complies with these objectives. It proposes that local bus service in Vancouver be increased by about 15% (over 2002 levels) to coincide with the opening of RAV. The increase in bus service with RAV would be slightly greater than without it, given the general increase in transit use that would come with an expanded rail network.

The Vancouver bus route network would change relatively little with RAV - riders should not be "forced" to connect with RAV, but would have improved travel options. A significant change would be the creation of a transit hub at Cambie and Marine Drive. This would become the southern terminus of the Main, Cambie, and Oak trolley routes. Staff recommend that TransLink also consider extending the Granville service to this station to ensure that the commercial and medium-density residential areas of Marpole remain well connected to the regional transit system. (See Recommendation J (vi).)

Some region-serving destinations within the RAV corridor are some distance from proposed stations. Staff suggest that community shuttle services be considered, such as connecting the King Edward Avenue station to the Children's & Women's Health Centre complex on Oak Street.

Staff also recommend that the Vancouver Area Transit Planning process receive public comment on the RAV-bus integration strategy. This process has been delayed several times but is now expected to commence in late 2003. As the Area Transit Plans are intended to be five-year plans, the integration strategy should also be publicly reviewed in advance of the RAV line opening. (See Recommendation L)

Bicycle Integration

In keeping with a multi-modal transportation strategy, the RAV line should be accessible to cyclists and integrated with the City's cycling network. Cycling integration should include designated routes between City bikeways and stations, bicycle parking at stations, and the ability to take bikes on board trains. A common message from cyclists is that they would like secure, weather-protected, short-term bicycle parking at stations.

An opportunity exists to incorporate a cycling facility into the RAV bridge crossing the Fraser River's North Arm to Richmond. The Knight Street, Oak Street and Arthur Laing bridges can be intimidating to cyclists and the potential to provide a more comfortable bicycle crossing, with connections to the Heather, Ontario and Kent bikeways in Vancouver should be pursued. (See Recommendations M and N)

VISUAL, NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACTS

A rapid transit line can be intrusive if designed insensitively. Elevated structures are especially intrusive and hard to integrate into communities and must be kept to an absolute minimum on the RAV line in Vancouver. The system design should minimize visibility, noise and vibration impacts on adjacent properties.(See Recommendation H.)

Where the line is visible, it should be sensitively and attractively designed. For example, many European LRT systems grass over the track bed, leaving only the rail heads exposed, where lines operate at grade. For LRT systems, the design of the overhead electric power supply system is important to minimize its visual impact.

Fully grade-separated systems with their ground-level power supply and automated operation require the line to be securely fenced off. Where fences are required, alternatives to chain-link should be pursued and carefully screened and landscaped.

Noise and vibration transmissions can be reduced with suitable vehicle and track design. The RAV Project team should ensure that the RFP reflects this concern.

Construction of the project will create noise, vibration, mud and dust at work sites and generate truck and construction equipment traffic. Road closures will also likely be required. To address these issues, the RAV Project team should work with the City to develop a construction management plan that ensures that construction effects on residents, businesses and commuters are minimised and well communicated to the affected parties. Construction phasing and a truck management plan will be major parts of this effort. Maximum use should be made of barges to remove material excavated from tunnelling. ( See Recommendation I.)

STATIONS AND STRUCTURES

Design

Stations on the RAV line are expected to achieve a high level of architectural quality while meeting the local aspirations of the communities that they will serve. The application of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles will be particularly important to ensure that riders feel safe using the system and local residents have confidence that it will not affect neighbourhood safety. Public art should be incorporated into station designs to make the system more enjoyable to ride and a point of interest in the community.(See Recommendation F)

As key parts of the city's transportation network, stations and their access routes should be designed for maximum integration with existing and future transit, pedestrian and cycling routes. Access should be made as convenient and direct as possible, especially by providing pedestrian underpasses to reach major underground stations where crossing conditions on the surface are unpleasant. (See Recommendation J.)

Integrating stations into adjacent developments can provide additional benefits by creating synergies between stations and ridership-generating land uses and is strongly encouraged.

Some other RAV structures also merit design attention. For example, vent shafts/emergency exits will be required between underground stations and these should be treated in the context of their surroundings.

To monitor and improve on the design of the system, the RAV Project team should consult with local communities on matters of station and structure design. Station and structure plans should be submitted to the City's Urban Design Panel and Development Permit Board for review and comment. Recommendations G and P (ii) provide the basis for this process.

Station Specifics

Some of the proposed stations raise specific issues which staff want to ensure are considered at an appropriate time in the process. (See Recommendation J.)

· The Vancouver terminus of the line in the Cordova Street/waterfront area will be a key part of the intermodal transportation hub being developed between Waterfront Station and Canada Place. The role of this station within the hub should be recognised in its connections to the SkyTrain, SeaBus, West Coast Express, bus routes, cruise ship terminal, air services, and future passenger ferries. As well, it should relate to the proposed convention centre expansion and any possible future development of the Port lands. As with the other RAV stations, the integrated Hub will be required to achieve architectural and urban design prominence, contribute to place-making and enhance pedestrian connectivity in this precinct.

· The Broadway station must be designed to accommodate a future passenger interchange with the extension of the Millennium Line to Granville. This station also offers good potential for joint development of the City-owned block between Cambie and Yukon streets, and Broadway and 10th Avenue.

· Integration of the 41st Avenue station into the east side of Oakridge Shopping Centre would create mutual benefits in terms of transit ridership and shopping patronage. The large corner plaza in front of the shopping centre offers opportunities for an attractive connection. As the pedestrian crossing conditions at Cambie and 41st are especially onerous, station accesses should be provided from as many corners of the intersection as possible.

· The Marine Drive station will require a bus loop with terminal facilities for a minimum of three, and ideally four, bus routes. A station location on the east side of Cambie, just south of Marine Drive, is strongly encouraged to provide an off-street bus loop of adequate size with good bus access. The ICBC claim centre site appears ideal and would present an opportunity for a joint development project integrated with the station. This station should not preclude a connection to the diesel light rail service being studied to connect Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, New Westminster, south Burnaby and south Vancouver using the existing CPR line. (This is under study by TransLink and will be reported to Council shortly.)

Additional Stations

In reviewing the characteristics of the Cambie corridor, staff have concluded that several additional stations should be considered by the Project.(See Recommendation J)

· A station at the south end of the Cambie Bridge, near 1st or 2nd Avenues, would provide access for residents of the existing and future residential areas of False Creek South and Southeast False Creek, as well for employees in the Mount Pleasant Industrial Area. It would also connect to the City's proposed streetcar service, linking to Science World, Granville Island, and in future the Arbutus rail corridor. While this station would be close to the Broadway station, it would minimise the amount of uphill travel residents would need to reach the RAV system. As the station site will likely serve as a base for tunnel excavation, adding a station at this location should be less expensive than where a dedicated excavation would be required.

· To allow for future flexibility, staff suggest that the profile of the line be designed to allow stations to be added in the future at 16th, 33rd, and 57th Avenues. These points are about 750 m from the nearest stations and could, in the longer term, be potential station locations.

PROJECT FINANCING AND PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT

The cost of the Project is estimated to be between $1.5 billion and $1.7 billion depending on the level of grade separation. The following contributions are known or expected:

Federal Government:

$450 million

Provincial Government:

$300 million

Airport Authority (YVR)

$300 million

TransLink

$300 million

TOTAL

$1350 million

The private sector will contribute the difference through a design-build-operate-maintain contract. The amount the private sector will contribute will depend on the "best and final offer" agreed to between the funding agencies and the proponent and could be in the order of $250 million.

Of particular interest to the City is the cost impact this Project will have on TransLink which will have to increase its budget by about $30 million per year to pay its $300 million capital share (TransLink's present annual budget is $640 million). Staff recommend TransLink's share be capped at $300 million to bring increased certainty to TransLink's cost exposure (See Recommendation O).

TransLink's existing revenue sources include fares, 11 cent/litre fuel tax, property tax, a parking tax, tolls on new facilities and the hydro levy. Except for tolls on new facilities, no one specific revenue source is applied to a specific program. In 2009, TransLink will have to increase one or more of its revenue sources to pay its share of capital. The Provincial Government must approve an increase to the fuel tax.

TransLink will also be "buying" the service provided by the proponent. The cost of this service will be negotiated and will offset the proponent's cost of capital, operating and maintenance costs, and profit. To pay for this, TransLink will continue to receive all fares and other revenues recovered from the transit system, including the RAV line. The financial analysis concluded that the increased system-wide revenues as a result of the RAV line (compared to without a RAV line) are sufficient to cover this cost.

The proposed private sector involvement through a public private partnership (P3) is not a new form of owner/contractor relationship. The Millennium Line was a P3 with the private sector designing and building a portion of the line. However, the RAV line P3 would not only have the private sector designing and building the line but also providing partial financing, and operating and maintaining it for 35 years.

This expanded P3 results in a reallocation of risk between the owner (TransLink) and the proponent. TransLink takes on the risk that the RAV line will not generate sufficient system-wide fare revenues to pay for the service at the agreed, negotiated price. The proponent takes on the risk of designing and building the system on time and on budget, providing the service it negotiated, designing a system and vehicle fleet that have acceptable maintenance costs, and negotiating a fee with TransLink that will cover its costs. This is complex and staff recommend that an independent monitoring process be implemented to ensure that the public investment and risk transfer is appropriate. As well, a comparison of the P3 approach versus a more conventional public sector delivery model (public sector comparator) should be undertaken to determine whether a P3 would indeed provide the lowest life-cycle cost (See Recommendation P.)

The Provincial Government typically sets up separate agencies to implement its major transportation projects. Most recently, Rapid Transit Project 2000 Ltd. (RTPO) managed the implementation of the Millennium Line. It is uncertain what the relationship will be between the City, TransLink and its funding partners, and the private sector. This is still "work in progress" that the City is involved in with the RAV office. There are many issues that need to be resolved including resolution of design and alignment issues, approvals processes, community consultation, traffic and environmental issues, station and alignment compatibility issues with adjacent neighbourhoods, and other mitigation measures. In a P3, the private sector becomes an integral part of the process and so it is important the relationships between partners, including the City are understood and protected. Recommendations G and P address this matter.

As many of the companies bidding on the P3 are expected to come from outside the region, it is recommended that the Project commit to local employment and procurement wherever possible (Recommendation Q).

PUBLIC AND COUNCIL INPUT

The RAV Project team and its partners are expected to work closely with affected communities during the refinement of the RFP to ensure compatibility between the line and adjacent neighbourhoods. The RAV Project team is also expected to work with transportation interest groups representing persons with disabilities, cyclists, pedestrians and transit users to ensure the system meets the expectations of its customers. If the RAV Project proceeds, staff will report back on a planning process for the line and its stations. (See Recommendation R.)

City Council will continue to be involved, initially through the special council meetings at which public comment on this report will be heard, and then throughout the project as decisions on the project need to be made. In addition, Council has received, and will likely continue to receive, many letters and e-mails from the public commenting on the RAV Project. This input is circulated to Council and staff. Staff will continue to review submissions from the public to assist in providing continuing advice to Council and the RAV Project team.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential for a rapid transit line between Vancouver and Richmond has been studied over three decades. The Vancouver - Richmond corridor is one of three rapid transit lines included in City and regional transportation plans, and is key to local and regional land use plans. The RAV Project has developed a proposal for a rapid transit line along the Cambie corridor, with a decision to proceed with a Request for Proposals expected in the near future.

A Richmond-Vancouver rapid transit line would help the City achieve many of its transportation and land use objectives, including supporting existing growth plans and maintaining and improving liveability. It is important that Council provide its advice to the RAV Project team to be reflected in the Request for Proposals. The recommendations developed in this report form a basis for Council's advice to the project and have been developed in the context of existing policy and public comments. Staff believe that a project developed in agreement with these recommendations would be a significant asset to the transportation network while meeting the needs of the communities it would serve.

LINK TO APPENDIX A

LINK TO APPENDIX B

* * * * *

ag20030422.htm

Comments or questions? Send us e-mail at info@city.vancouver.bc.ca
© 2002 City of Vancouver