ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Date: October 15, 1998
Author/Local: D.Henderson/7343
RTS No. 236
CC File No. 5559

TO:	Vancouver City Council
FROM:	General Manager of Engineering Services and the Director of City Plans
SUBJECT:	Rapid Transit Project - Special Commission, SkyTrain Review

RECOMMENDATION

A. THAT the Rapid Transit Project Office be requested to provide more detail on ridership, design and costs prior to the City presentation to the Commission.

B. THAT Council request the Province to extend the deadline for the Special Commission, SkyTrain Review to provide for a more meaningful assessment of the project impacts.

C. THAT the enclosed list of issues be forwarded to the Commission for examination during its term.

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The General Manager of Engineering Services and the Director of City Plans recommend that A, B and C be approved.

COUNCIL POLICY

Council approved the Transportation Plan which provides a higher priority for rapid transit.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to provide Council an opportunity to review the role of the Special Commission, SkyTrain Review for Broadway-Lougheed and Coquitlam-New Westminster Rapid Transit Project, prior to a presentation by the Special Commission.

BACKGROUND

The Province announced the process for implementation of SkyTrain in June. A project of this magnitude is normally subject to Provincial and Federal environmental review requirements. Often to reduce complexities, a blended assessment dealing with both Provincial and Federal environmental review requirements is undertaken.

The Province, on September 17, 1998, announced a "New Environmental Process for Urban Transit Rail" for the independent review of the SkyTrain Project. See Appendix A for the announcement and the Terms of Reference.

DISCUSSION

The Commissioner of Environmental Review of the SkyTrain extension, Derek Thompson, has provided a preliminary information meeting with City staff to discuss his Terms of Reference, the process he proposed, and identification of City issues that could be addressed in the review.

The Commission proposes the following process:

· meet stakeholders, including Councils and staff

· information outlets in 10 libraries and on the internet

· gather information on issues

· hold meetings where delegations would be heard

· review the material, suggestions and develop recommendations

· prepare an independent report of findings and recommendations by December 1998

· ongoing monitoring throughout the design phase.

It is anticipated that a public meeting would be held in Vancouver in November where delegations would be able to make presentations to the Commission.

The difficulty of the task assigned to the Special Commission is apparent. Given a normal time frame, an assessment would likely take 6 to 18 months to complete, including a public consultation process; the three-month time period appears to be inadequate.

To conduct an Environmental Assessment requires project details and plans of the project. For this project, several City requests for fundamental information have not been addressed by the Rapid Transit Project Office; this deficiency creates a difficult, if not impossible, environment for the City to prepare a submission.

Even when the information is provided to the City and the Commission during the short review process, the City would have to first review the information from a project perspective, and then respond to the assessment.

Another factor to consider is the relative uncertainty of an Environmental Assessment in an urban area. An assessment in a rural area may deal with well-defined aspects like vegetation, fauna, drainage patterns and endangered species. In the City, many different factors such as social impacts, noise, views, and economic impacts, would be issues. In particular, west of Commercial the line enters a densely developed urban area where impacts can be substantial, and very different in nature.

Although the Commission has been given the autonomy to provide independent recommendations, the Commission staff is comprised of Provincial employees reassigned to this project. Even if the Commission is formulated to be independent, there is the appearance that the group may not be independent.

ISSUES TO BE REVIEWED

The following issues are recommended for inclusion in the assessment process:

1. Station Location Impacts

· How do proposed stations alter adjoining communities? Will circulation patterns be altered? What pressures will be imposed on land use and zoning? What measures are proposed to address these concerns? How will communities be involved in developing solutions?

· How will transit connections be achieved? What effects will this have on the proportion of people using public transit?

· How will underground stations be integrated into the denser adjoining areas? How can they be made attractive elements of the streetscape? How will they become assets to this developed area?

· What are the effects on existing businesses? What new business opportunities will be created?

· How will the street system service transit, pedestrians and other system-related activity? What facilities will be available to address these needs in a direct and convenient way?

· Will station design be conducive to criminal activities? How will graffiti be limited? How will neighbourhood security be changed?

2. Grandview Cut

· What types and amounts of vegetation and wildlife are sustainable in this area with its multiple uses?

· Have greenway/bikeway opportunities been included in planning? How will they be affected and enhanced?

· How can stream daylighting (provision of storm drainage) be included in this project? What are the environmental benefits?

· Have future rail requirements on the BN/CN tracks been included in planning? How will overlooking neighbourhoods be affected?

· Will station design take into account the unique opportunity represented by this green space?

3. Guideway

· Does the appearance of the guideway create visual clutter? Will it block view opportunities? How will the design and alignment address these issues?

· What amenities such as linear parks and public art will be included to make the guideway more compatible?

· How will visual intrusion in the form of reduced privacy for attributing properties be addressed?

4. System Wide

· What impact will this level of investment have on the funding of the entire transit system? Will there be sufficient funding to support buses and provide for area-wide ridership increases, to feed the rail system, handle population growth and reduce auto use?

· How does the project contribute to improved air quality?

· How do noise levels affect nearby properties? What mitigation measures are recommended?

· How will security be addressed on this system?

· How will construction impacts be mitigated? Will access to businesses be affected? Will dust and noise be created in developed areas? How will they be controlled?

· What noise and vibration will be transmitted in the underground sections? How will the concerns about vibration be addressed?

· What economic opportunities will be created in station areas? How will underground stations relate to adjoining developments? Will access be available on a 24-hour basis?

· How will the existing deficiencies at Broadway/Commercial Station of existing SkyTrain be re-addressed?

CONCLUSION

With the many concerns raised, the proposed deadline of December does not provide adequate time for an informed response. An extended deadline for the special assessment by at least 3 months would provide for a more complete review. The items listed above could form the basis for this review if adequate information were available.

* * * * *

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver