Agenda Index City of Vancouver

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

TO:

Vancouver City Council

FROM:

Project Manager, City Rapid Transit Project, in consultation with General Manager of Engineering Services

SUBJECT:

Phase 2 Rapid Transit Technology and Alignment Review: Award of Consultant and Steering Committee

 

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER’S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is twofold:

1. To recommend the award of the consulting contract to review the transit alignment and technology options west of Commercial Drive to UBC; and,

2. To advise on the membership and mandate of the Phase 2 Study’s Steering Committee.

BACKGROUND

In response to a staff report titled “Rapid Transit Project - Independent Consultant Review” (See Appendix A), Council on November 5, 1998 recommended:

A. THAT the Terms of Reference for a comparative study of rail technology options for the western portion of the Broadway-Lougheed Rapid Transit Project be approved.

B. FURTHER THAT the Terms of Reference be expanded to include the implications of the decision on the technology for the western portion in relation to the eastern portion line (east of Commercial Drive/VCC).

C. THAT Council approve funding for the Rapid Transit Technology and Alignment Review, for the alignment west of Commercial Drive, coordinated with the extension to UBC, in the amount of $200,000; source of funding to be a reallocation of the Capital from Revenue provision in the 1999 Capital Budget as detailed in the Administrative Report dated October 19, 1998.

D. THAT Council seek cost sharing for the Rapid Transit Technology and Alignment Review, west of Commercial Drive, from the GVTA (now TransLink) and the Rapid Transit Project Office (now Rapid Transit Project2000).

Subsequent to Council approval, staff:

1. Obtained agreement in principle for cost sharing of the Study with TransLink and Rapid Transit Project2000. Both TransLink and the Province, through its Rapid Transit Project2000 Office, each agreed to fund 25% of the Study, up to a maximum of $50,000 each.

2. Issued a Request for Proposals: Phase 2 Study to the following consulting companies:

DISCUSSION

Award of Consultant

As mentioned above, Requests for Proposals were sent to six consultants. Four of these firms are in Canada and two in the United States. Proposals were sent to firms whose offices were in reasonable proximity to Vancouver and who were not already under contract with Rapid Transit Project2000. These parameters severely limited the number of consultants available to do the study.

One consultant team responded to the Request: BRW, Inc. of Portland, Oregon partnered with UMA. For varying reasons, the other four consultants were unable to submit proposals in the time provided.

The BRW team is comprised of:

· BRW, Inc. of Portland, a multi-disciplinary transportation consulting firm with significant experience in transportation planning and management (Portland LRT including Hillsboro extension, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, general transportation planning services to the Los Angeles Metro Transit Authority).

· UMA Engineering (part of the UMA Group, an international organization with a broad range of transportation disciplines); the local transportation consulting office has most recently assisted New Westminster in assessing the impacts associated with the New Westminster component of the “T” line; in addition the local office participated in the development of the Queensborough (New Westminster) Neighbourhood Plan.

· Davidson Yuen Simpson Architects, a local firm with experience in transportation and land use planning; Davidson Yuen Simpson Architects is presently participating in the development of a long range plan for the development of bio-tech research facilities in the Vancouver Hospital campus.

· Lloyd D. Lindley, an urban design, planning and landscape architect firm in Portland specializes in transit and transportation oriented projects.

The work program and project budget (See Appendix B - on file in City Clerk’s Office) are consistent with staff expectations and the team assembled to undertake the work is experienced and well qualified in all aspects of public transit system planning and urban design.

Copies of the BRW team proposal have been forwarded to TransLink and Rapid Transit Project2000 and it is anticipated that both will concur with the recommendation to proceed with the Study on the basis of the submitted proposal.

Steering Committee

Although the City’s Rapid Transit Office administers the Phase 2 Consultant Study, a Steering Committee will oversee the Study. Membership of the Steering Committee will consist of two representatives from the City of Vancouver, one from TransLink, one from Rapid Transit Project2000, and two independent members. Selection of the two independent members will be made jointly by the three governmental bodies. Reimbursement for travel costs and time for the two independent members is estimated at $5,000 each. Funds for these members are available within the Rapid Transit Office’s budget.

The six member Steering Committee will review the work of the Consultant and provide direction at the following stages:

CONCLUSION

Staff recommends that the contract for the undertaking of the Phase 2 Rapid Transit Technology and Alignment Review study be awarded to the consortium of BRW, Inc./UMA/Davidson Yuen Simpson/Lloyd Lindley, ASLA, at an estimated fee of $180,000.

The Study will be administered by the City of Vancouver. A six member Steering Committee, comprised of two City of Vancouver members, one TransLink member, one Rapid Transit Project2000 member and two independent members, will oversee the Study.

----

APPENDIX ‘A’

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

TO:

Standing Committee on Transportation and Traffic

FROM:

General Manager of Engineering Services the Director of City Plans

SUBJECT:

Rapid Transit Project - Independent Consultant Review

 

RECOMMENDATION

The following recommendations are included in the companion report on transportation priorities and resource needs and are presented here for information:

GENERAL MANAGER’S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

On April 28, 1998 Council approved funding of $15,000 from Contingency Reserve contingent on participation by UBC and/or BC Transit. to study the cost and implications of extending the proposed LRT to UBC. On April 30, 1998, Council adopted a number of principles to guide planning the light rapid transit system in the Broadway corridor.

On September 8, 1998, Council passed four motions (see Appendix A). One forms the basis for this report. The motion states:

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to provide the terms of reference and a cost estimate for an independent consultant to evaluate LRT technology compared to SkyTrain and the alignment along the Broadway corridor for the City portion west of Commercial Drive and the Vancouver Community College Station.

BACKGROUND

In June 1998, the Province announced some Rapid Transit Project characteristics for the Broadway-Lougheed and New Westminster-Coquitlam corridors, including the following:

· SkyTrain technology will be employed on Broadway-Lougheed and New Westminster-Coquitlam corridors.

· Based on a cost comparison of SkyTrain technology and conventional light rail, the project cost may now be in excess of $2 billion and well beyond the financial projection used in the Provincial/Regional negotiations.

· The schedule is to have the line complete from New Westminster to Commercial/Vancouver Community College (VCC) by 2001. West of this location, the next City phase from VCC to Granville/Arbutus is to be completed by 2003.

· In Vancouver, the corridor will use the Burlington Northern Railway Right-of-Way, the Grandview Cut and a tunnel under Broadway.

Council reviewed this information at the September 8, 1998, meeting.

DISCUSSION

The announcement to proceed with a system having the foregoing system characteristics was based on limited technical and financial information. Much of the relevant information has not been released, or is available with little detail. These basic decisions on system characteristics will have significant implications for transportation systems, cost-sharing, urban design, neighbourhoods, and mitigation.

The Vancouver segment of the line has been divided into two portions: the accelerated portion from Boundary to Broadway Station or Vancouver Community College (VCC) Station scheduled for completion by 2001, and the portion from Broadway Station to the Granville/Arbutus area. The first portion is rapidly approaching the detailed design phase. An alignment along the Burlington Northern Railway (BNR) right-of-way and the Grandview Cut has been selected. Initially, this alignment appears to minimize impacts, as the right-of-way is available and adjacent land use is primarily industrial.

Also, while there is no ridership information available yet, it can be presumed that there will be a significant transfer of trips from the new rail line to go downtown, as well as from the existing SkyTrain to go to Central Broadway. The higher numbers east of Commercial Station can be accommodated by a system such as a SkyTrain system. The need for such capacity levels may also be required to Arbutus and beyond to UBC. However, the environs of the system are very different west of Commercial Drive. The Rapid Transit Project Office has indicated, on occasion, some flexibility in the choice of technology for this section. Before finalizing the design for the western portion, a study should be undertaken to compare the benefits of a SkyTrain system and other technologies.

In order to be prepared to study the western portion in the City of the SkyTrain system compared with alternative systems, the following terms of reference have been prepared:

Objectives:

· compare the ability of alternative systems to meet the transportation needs as defined in Transport 2021/Liveable Regional Strategic Plan

· compare the ability of a Light Rapid Transit System with a SkyTrain System to address the City of Vancouver Transportation Plan and how well they serve local-based trips as well as regional trips

· assess how well each system fits within the community including impacts on adjoining properties, businesses, safety and security and its effect on other elements of the Transportation System such as vehicles, pedestrians and goods movement.

·identify impacts to be mitigated

· assess affordability

Scope of Work:

· review background from Transport 2021, Livable Region Strategic Plan and the City Transportation Plan, as well as other supporting material

· review Provincial/Rapid Transit Project material that led to the decision to support SkyTrain technology

·
review findings of Special Commission, SkyTrain Review

· evaluate ridership in terms of origins, destinations, trip length, mode share

· evaluate impacts on other elements of the transportation system

· provide a discussion of alternative rail systems vs. SkyTrain that will address the objectives and provide an evaluation of benefits and costs

· provide an assessment of community fit, including elements such as:

· assess measures which are available to mitigate the community impacts as identified above

· assess ability to construct the system, and how this affects the community

· identify the areas of significant cost differences between the two technologies

· provide a construction timetable for each option including any phasing options

· prepare a report of findings and analysis, including a multiple account comparison of a range of rail systems

· make presentations to City staff and the Transportation and Traffic Committee of Council at an interim stage and at the conclusion

Cost and Staff Resources

A preliminary cost estimate to conduct the scope of work described has been developed. The estimate is approximately $200,000, including fees, taxes and disbursements. The time-frame to complete such a study would be about 6 months. However, it may be necessary to retain a consultant from the US, in order to obtain a more independent comparison of the alternatives. This could add to the total cost.

Although a consultant would be retained to undertake the study, staff would be required to supply the consultant with data and information to enable a complete study, to monitor the study and prepare it for Council review. The staff resources to monitor this work are included. Although an extensive public consultation program is not proposed at this stage, an element of public communication would be provided through the broader Rapid Transit Work Program, underway simultaneously.

Council has already allocated $15,000 for a preliminary study of a rail extension to UBC, and the University has agreed to match this amount. It is proposed to coordinate these two studies so that the work efforts can be shared, and the conclusions of the two studies would be consistent with one another.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient data has been provided by the Province to enable a full comparison of different technologies, especially for the portion of the line west of Broadway Station. However, the decision that has been made would have substantial implications for the transportation system, impacts, cost-sharing and urban design. The terms of reference as outlined would provide more information to fill this gap. Given its regional and project implications, such as cost, the Regional Transportation Plan and inter-municipal extent of the project, it is suggested that the Region and the Rapid Transit Project Office be invited to participate in the study.

-----

APPENDIX A

On September 8, 1998, Council resolved the following:

· that the city will collaborate with the Province on planning for the ALRT route, alignment, station locations and station area planning, while continuing to resolve issues through the GVTA about cost-sharing and completion of the entire T-line;

· that should negotiations between the GVTA and the Province prove unsuccessful, Council will re-evaluate its participation in the planning process;

· directed staff to report back with terms of reference and costs for an independent consultant study, reviewing the basic decision of the SkyTrain technology and corridor;

· that the City of Vancouver recommend to the Rapid Transit Project Office and the Province that the time line for planning the accelerated segment be adjusted to provide for a meaningful public consultation process.

* * * * *

ag990427.htm

Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver