GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE › boards › Transportation › ... · 2014-08-20 · September 17, 2013 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION

September 17, 2013

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

9:00 a.m. 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

A G E N D A1 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 October 9, 2013 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Transportation Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for October 9, 2013 as circulated.

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 June 20, 2013 Regular Meeting Minutes

That the Transportation Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held June 20, 2013 as circulated.

2.2 July 23, 2013 Joint Meeting Minutes That the Transportation Committee adopt the minutes of its joint meeting with

Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee held July 23, 2013 as circulated. 3. DELEGATIONS

3.1 Mayor John Douglas, City of Port Alberni Zoran Knezevic, CEO, Port Alberni Port Authority Subject: Development of a New Container Port in the Alberni Inlet

1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.

Transportation Committee Regular Agenda October 9, 2013

Agenda Page 2 of 4

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

4.1 Peter Xotta, Vice President, Planning and Operations, Port Metro Vancouver Subject: Smart Fleet Trucking Action Plan

4.2 Bob Paddon, TransLink Subjects: · Consultation on Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project · Regional Transportation Strategy Implementation Plan Update · Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook

5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 Comments on TransLink’s Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook Designated Speaker: Ray Kan, Senior Regional Planner,

Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board convey its support for the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook to the TransLink Board and Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation.

5.2 TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application Designated Speaker: Ray Kan, Senior Regional Planner,

Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board: a) endorse the 2013 list of TransLink projects to be forwarded to the Gas Tax

Management Committee for consideration as Approved Eligible Projects under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement; and

b) request that TransLink submit to the Metro Vancouver Board for consideration proposed amendments to prior year projects that require scope changes before submitted to review by the Gas Tax Management Committee.


Agenda Page 3 of 4

5.3 Comments on the Proposed Bridge to Replace the George Massey Tunnel Designated Speaker: Ray Kan, Senior Regional Planner,

Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board: a) advise the Premier of British Columbia and the Minister of Transportation and

Infrastructure that the proposed bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel should be subject to further evaluation as to the potential effects on the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, and Regional Transportation Strategy based on the Province’s technical information on project scope and performance.

b) request the TransLink Board provide Metro Vancouver with technical analysis and commentary on the potential transportation and emissions implications of expanding transportation capacity on the George Massey Tunnel corridor and effects with proximate Fraser River watercrossings, including tolling and non-tolling scenarios, and the degree of consistency and support the proposed bridge would have on the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, the Regional Transportation Strategy, and Regional Goods Movement Strategy.

5.4 Manager’s Report

Designated Speaker: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer

General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment That the Transportation Committee receive for information the Manager’s Report dated September 25, 2013.

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.1 Letter from City of Coquitlam re Regional Transportation Strategy, 2014 TransLink

Base Plan, Pattullo Bridge Study and Northeast Area Transit Plan dated July 30, 2013.

6.2 Letter from Port Metro Vancouver re PMV Land Use Plan Update Phase 3a –

Legacy Map Designation Feedback dated July 30, 2013. 6.3 Letter from City of Vancouver re Transit Referendum dated July 12, 2013. 6.4 Letter from City of Vancouver re Transit Plan for the Homeless dated July 11, 2013. 6.5 Conference Announcement re Moving the Future: A New Conversation about

Transportation and the Economy

7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.


Agenda Page 4 of 4

8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No item presented. 9. ADJOURNMENT/TERMINATION

That the Transportation Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of October 9 2013.

Membership: Watts, Dianne (C) – Surrey Jackson, Lois (VC) – Delta Brodie, Malcolm – Richmond Clay, Mike – Port Moody Corrigan, Derek – Burnaby

Drew, Ralph – Belcarra Fassbender, Peter – Langley City Forrest, Mike – Port Coquitlam Harris, Maria – Electoral Area A

Meggs, Geoff – Vancouver Mussatto, Darrell – North Vancouver City Walton, Richard – North Vancouver District Wright, Wayne – New Westminster

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Transportation Committee held on Thursday, June 20, 2013 Page 1 of 8

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Transportation Committee held at 12:37 p.m. on Thursday, June 20, 2013 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Director Dianne Watts, Surrey Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond (departed at 3:06 p.m.) Director Mike Clay, Port Moody (arrived at 12:37 p.m.) Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Director Ralph Drew, Belcarra Councillor Mike Forrest, Port Coquitlam Director Geoff Meggs, Vancouver (arrived at 12:49 p.m.) Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster MEMBERS ABSENT: Vice Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Director Peter Fassbender, Langley City Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A STAFF PRESENT: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager, Planning, Policy and

Environment Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services, Corporate

Services OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Holmes, Alternate Director, Electoral Area A 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 June 20, 2013 Regular Meeting Agenda

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for June 20, 2013 as circulated.

CARRIED 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

12:37 p.m. Director Clay arrived at the meeting.

TRANSPORTATION - 1

DDavis

Text Box

2.1


2.1 April 18, 2013 Regular Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held April 18, 2013 as circulated.

CARRIED 3. DELEGATIONS

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee hear the late delegation Shauna Sylvester, Executive Director, SFU Carbon Talks.

CARRIED

3.1 Shauna Sylvester, Executive Director, SFU Carbon Talks Shauna Sylvester, Executive Director, Carbon Talks – SFU Centre for Dialogue, introduced a revised SFU Carbon Talks project, focused on road pricing, and presented the objectives of the project; the importance of community engagement; the role of the SFU Centre for Dialogue; the proposed role of Metro Vancouver; and a revised funding request. On-table presentation material is retained with the June 20, 2013 Transportation Committee agenda.

12:49 p.m. Director Meggs arrived at the meeting.

Discussion ensued on: • The importance of a dialogue and community engagement and education on

the issue • Consortium members • The need for engagement and leadership by the provincial and federal

government • Concern about the limited resources to respond to public concerns that may

be triggered by the project

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

4.1 David Colledge, Colledge Transportation Consulting Inc.

David Colledge, President, Colledge Transportation Consulting Inc., provided a presentation titled “Understanding the Demand Outlook for Goods Movement in Metropolitan Vancouver”, highlighting the following: • The nature of transportation demand • Global trade routes and North American gateways • The role of exports and imports in the region • 2012 non-container and container traffic

TRANSPORTATION - 2


• Port Metro Vancouver’s 2012 commodity profile • Key considerations for commodity and container outlook • 2020 Port Metro Vancouver’s container projections • Conclusions:

o Goods movement growth is being driven by international demand for resources and the demand for household and consumer goods due to population growth.

o The most rapid growth is with the vast markets of Asia where most of the global growth is expected to occur.

o The demand outlook is volatile and complex reflecting changing economic conditions, trade relationships/policies, shifting demographics and community values.

o Responding effectively to the growth challenges will require better dialogue and coordination between local governments and private/port sector interests.

o Getting the facts on the table is a necessary first step o Proponents and local governments benefit by engaging in regular

dialogue to improve understanding, build trust and to resolve issues in a collaborative manner.

Presentation material is retained with the June 20, 2013 Transportation Committee agenda. Comments were provided on the following: • Consider extending the data to a 10-year term (rather than using a 5-year

data range) • It would be useful to see how the changes in commercial interest impact

Metro Vancouver’s regional transportation infrastructure • Truck traffic and container movement in communities is another issue that

should also be taken into consideration • One of the challenges of the regional goods movement prognostics is that it

is influenced by many variables • Concern about information received by the City of Burnaby contradicting the

results presented by Colledge Transportation Consulting • Concern about Port Metro Vancouver being led by economic interest and

convenience of companies rather than by an overall interest of the province and the country

• Concern about the use of the port not being maximized • Suggestion that the Committee assesses the location and the use of ports so

that its operations have the least environmental impact • Railways and other private sector stakeholders need to contribute to

infrastructure funding from which they benefit, they need to provide their infrastructure renewal plan

TRANSPORTATION - 3


In response to questions or comments, the Committee was informed about the following: • Main market that Port Metro Vancouver serves is container traffic • Vast majority of goods in the region are handled by train • 50% of imported containers are handled by trucks for local distribution or for

handling in re-load centres • Fraser Surrey Docks is underutilized; more effective use of the Fraser Surrey

Docks would reduce truck traffic across the region • Port Metro Vancouver’s resources need to be better utilized prior to

proceeding with port expansion

4.2 Robert Paddon, Executive VP, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink Robert Paddon, Executive Vice President, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink, provided an update on the Goods Movement Strategy, highlighting the following: • Related studies released by TransLink since 2008 • Recent goods movement investments in Metro Vancouver • Feedback received from the public consultation • Framework pertaining to TransLink’s infrastructure plans; research;

information, awareness building and leadership; and facilitation and coordination with TransLink’s partners

• Goods movement strategy development timelines

Members’ inquired about the following: • TransLink’s plan, if any, to include as part of the study potential for use of

the river (barge shipment) • Statistics pertaining to truck traffic across the border

4.3 Robert Paddon, Executive VP, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink Robert Paddon, Executive Vice President, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink, highlighted the following from the presentation pertaining to the Draft Strategic Framework for Consultation: • Metro Vancouver is a polycentric region, travel is moving across Metro

Vancouver in much different patterns than in any other region • Investment in the magnitude of $23 billion would be necessary over the next

30 years to meet all transportation needs • It is unlikely that the target pertaining to travel mode shift will be met • Transportation pricing is the preferred funding alternative • It is important that land use is taken into consideration in transportation

planning • Trip distances reduction by 1/3 would result in more compound

communities, protection of green zone, reduction of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and improved human health

• Emphasis of the plan are on the principles of affordability

TRANSPORTATION - 4


Presentation material is retained with the June 20, 2013 Transportation Committee agenda. Discussion ensued on the following: • road pricing:

o status of the road pricing study being prepared by TransLink o funding necessary to undertake a comprehensive study o type of road pricing envisioned by TransLink o examples of road pricing implemented by other North American

jurisdictions • The role of the TransLink board versus local government elected officials in

dealing with public transportation issues • The decision-making role of the province in preparation of TransLink’s plans • Whether municipal projects are screened by TransLink for potential inclusion

in an implementation plan; the benefits of input of municipal transportation staff

• The role of Metro Vancouver and the Transportation Committee


5.1 Comments on Regional Transportation Strategy Framework On-table report dated June 19, 2013, from Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing a progress update to prepare the first in a series of goods movement fact sheets to inform deliberation by the Transportation Committee. The Committee may choose to provide comments to staff on the content and fit of the draft fact sheet prior to being finalized. Presentation material is retained with the June 20, 2013 Transportation Committee agenda. The Committee proposed the following changes to the report: • under section “3. headline targets”, relate comments pertaining to multiple-

occupancy vehicles with actions to reduce distances driven by one-third • Pertaining to transportation demand management, include consideration of

shifting timing from peak to off hours; this could increase capacity significantly

• Under section “4. Strategic Investments”, replace a “call for projects” with “identification of issues”

• The provincial and federal government should co-lead the road pricing study • Insert a statement that “parking is a municipal work”

TRANSPORTATION - 5


Discussion ensued and/or comments were also provided on the following: • The need for inclusion of all partners in the decision-making process • Concerns about the lack of senior transportation funding • Timing and the extent of the road pricing study • Clarification of timelines for completion of the Regional Transportation

Strategy and the implementation guidelines Concerns were expressed about the lack of appropriate time to review and consult on the report with municipal council and staff. The Committee requested that the report be referred back to staff and staff be directed to convene a special Committee meeting in July to further consider the strategy. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee refer the report titled “Comments on TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy – Draft Strategic Framework for Consultation” dated June 19, 2013 back to staff for further consideration.

CARRIED

Request of Staff Staff was requested to convene a special Transportation Committee meeting in July 2013 to further discuss the TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy – Draft Strategic Framework.

5.2 Progress Update on Goods Movement Fact Sheet

Report dated June 14, 2013, from Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing a progress update to prepare the first in a series of goods movement fact sheets to inform deliberation by the Transportation Committee. The Committee may choose to provide comments to staff on the content and fit of the draft fact sheet prior to being finalized.

Concerns were expressed about information related to ports being supplied by involved parties. Concerns were expressed about costs incurred by local government as a result of port and related activities. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee receive for information the report dated June 14, 2013, titled “Progress Update on Goods Movement Fact Sheet“ and direct staff to report back on feasibility of a study pertaining to best utilization of port in Metro Vancouver and on regulatory tools available to proponents to contribute funding to work that needs to be carried out in support of the proponents’ activities.

CARRIED Director Drew absent at the vote.

TRANSPORTATION - 6


5.3 Process for Monitoring and Reviewing Regionally Significant Infrastructure Projects Report dated June 10, 2013, from Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing additional information on the approach for bringing forward regionally significant infrastructure projects to the Transportation Committee for review and comment as appropriate.

3:06 p.m. Director Brodie departed the meeting.

Discussion ensued on the potential of establishing a transportation staff advisory committee. Request of Staff Staff was requested to raise the potential for establishing a staff transportation advisory committee at a future Regional Administrative Advisory Committee meeting.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee receive for information the report dated June 10, 2013, titled “Process for Monitoring and Reviewing Regionally Significant Infrastructure Projects”.

CARRIED 5.4 Metro Vancouver Applied Transportation Research Update

Report dated June 10, 2013, from Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, updating the Committee on several applied transportation research initiatives that Metro Vancouver is undertaking to support the Transportation Committee. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee receive for information the report dated June 10, 2013, titled “Metro Vancouver Applied Transportation Research Update”.

CARRIED

5.5 Manager’s Report Report dated June 13, 2013, from Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing an update on the SFU Carbon Talks “Moving in a Livable Region” and the Transportation Forum on Goods Movement.

Discussion ensued on the SFU Carbon Talks funding request presented earlier at the meeting.

TRANSPORTATION - 7


It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board approve a one-time $15,000 grant to the SFU Centre for Dialogue to design and conduct community consultations on regional road pricing.

CARRIED It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee receive the report dated June 13, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report” for information.

CARRIED 6. INFORMATION ITEMS

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee receive for information the following information item: 6.1 Letter dated April 4, 2013 to Chair Moore from TransLink.

CARRIED 7. OTHER BUSINESS

No items presented.

8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No items presented.

9. ADJOURNMENT/TERMINATION

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee conclude its regular meeting of June 20, 2013.

CARRIED (Time: 3:15 p.m.)

____________________________ _______________________ Klara Kutakova, Dianne Watts, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees 7546334 FINAL

TRANSPORTATION - 8

Minutes of the Special Joint Meeting of the GVRD Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and the Transportation Committee held on Friday, July 23, 2013 Page 1 of 8

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT REGIONAL PLANNING AND AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE

AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

JOINT MEETING Minutes of the Special Joint Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and the Transportation Committee held at 9:06 a.m. on Tuesday, July 23, 2013 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia, to discuss TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee: PRESENT Chair, Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby* Vice Chair, Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Mike Clay, Port Moody* (arrived at 9:56 a.m.) Director Ernie Daykin, Maple Ridge Director Jack Froese, Langley Township Director Linda Hepner, Surrey Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City* (departed at 11:31 a.m.) Councillor Kerri Palmer Isaak, Anmore Councillor Ian Paton, Delta Director Michael Smith, West Vancouver Director Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster* MEMBERS ABSENT: Director Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Councillor Brad West, Port Coquitlam Transportation Committee: MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Director Dianne Watts, Surrey Vice Chair, Director Lois Jackson, Delta Director Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Director Mike Clay, Port Moody* (arrived at 9:56 a.m.) Director Derek Corrigan, Burnaby* Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Director Geoff Meggs, Vancouver Director Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City* (departed at 11:31 a.m.) Director Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Director Wayne Wright, New Westminster* * member serves on both, Regional Planning and Agriculture and Transportation Committees

TRANSPORTATION - 9

DDavis

Text Box

2.2


MEMBERS ABSENT: Director Ralph Drew, Belcarra Director Peter Fassbender, Langley City Councillor Mike Forrest, Port Coquitlam ALSO PRESENT: Board Chair, Director Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam STAFF PRESENT: Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager,

Planning, Policy and Environment Klara Kutakova, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services,

Corporate Services

Director Watts, Chair, Transportation Committee, chaired the meeting. 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 July 23, 2013 Special Joint Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee adopt the agenda for the special joint meeting scheduled for July 23, 2013 as circulated.

CARRIED 2. INVITED PRESENTATIONS 2.1 Bob Paddon, Executive VP, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink

Bob Paddon, Executive VP, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink, presented the results of TransLink’s consultation to date and the evolution of the Regional Transportation Strategy Framework, highlighting the following: • consultation carried out on the Regional Transportation Strategy by

TransLink since June 2013 • correlation between the regional growth strategy and transportation

planning • population growth forecast and TransLink’s proposed strategy to

accommodate the growth • shift in transportation management, investments and partnership • the updated vision • benefits of a 50% target of trips by walking, cycling and transit • links between Transport 2021 and the Regional Transportation Strategy

TRANSPORTATION - 10


• connections between the Regional Transportation Strategy and the Regional Growth Strategy

• consultation and collaboration with agencies since November 2011 to July 2013

• findings of the consultation process • key timelines Concerns were expressed about: • TransLink’s comments about the lack of investment in the system (despite

the legislated 3% annual property tax increase and dedicated gas tax funding); request for more funding may not be realistic in this economic climate

• the consultation process: o low number of on-line respondents o the lack of a broader consultation with municipalities and the public o transit users not being consulted o consulting with the wrong people about what the system should

deliver; the lack of information to make high quality decisions about where to allocate the resources

• the lack of transportation projects prioritization • inaccuracies of the employment statistics and employment areas in the

maps provided in the strategy • insufficient/lacking transportation services, length of commute/number of

transfers in many areas across the region • segregation of land use planning and transportation • potential short timeframe for a referendum advocacy program • targets in the plan do not resonate with commuters Comments were provided on the following: • the need to better define the benefits not just for the transit users but also

for commuters that need to use an automobile • the importance/benefits of the frequent transit network • integrated urban mobility • the need to make transit more affordable and attractive In response to questions and comments, members were informed about the following: • TransLink’s challenges to fund the existing services, articulated in the Base

Plan • 3% legislated increase of property taxes dedicated to TransLink translates to

1% increase in revenues for TransLink • fuel tax revenue decline • consultation carried out by TransLink, including meetings with stakeholders,

panel discussions, and engagement of municipalities

TRANSPORTATION - 11


• appropriate funding sources will be identified as part of the long-term plan preparation

• working in partnership and achieving the most productivity of the existing system is the key elements of the strategy

• the decline in the property tax revenue is approximately 4 million annually • the needs of additional funding capacity to fund the existing services has

been raised with the Minister and his staff • referendum may not be linked to the 2014 municipal election date;

referendum question has not been determined yet • the need for better data sources for employment travel data • the goods movement strategy will be completed in fall 2013 • Directors Walton and Wright meeting with the Minister in the upcoming

week to discuss matters pertaining to the referendum Presentation material is retained with July 23, 2013 Special Joint Meeting of the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee agenda.

9:56 a.m. Director Clay arrived at the meeting.


3.1 Updated Comments on the Regional Transportation Strategy Framework Report dated July 17, 2013, from Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager, and Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing formal comments on the draft Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS) Framework. Presentation material is retained with July 23, 2013 Special Joint Meeting of the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee agenda. Committee members suggested the following additional changes to the report: • under comment #3, add a headline target for “the reduction in single-

occupancy vehicles” • under comment #5, replace the reference to “rapidly growing suburban

parts of the region” with ”rapidly growing cities” • under comment #6, maintain the originally-proposed language pertaining to

regional priorities, as outlined in the June 20, 2013 staff report (the original recommendation reads as follows: “Figure 2 in the Strategic Framework should be amended to remove the “confirmed regional priorities”, and instead be labeled as “study corridors for potential rapid transit expansion”. They and other regional priorities that emerge from forthcoming dialogues and technical analysis will be confirmed through the preparation of the Implementation Plan.”)

TRANSPORTATION - 12


• under Comment #9: o revise the titled to “Demand-Side Management” o replace the characterization of the Mayors’ Council position on “road

pricing” with “integrated mobility pricing”

Committee members suggested the following additional comments on the Regional Transportation Strategy Framework: • TransLink to include maps depicting journey-to-work patterns and key

employment nodes to replace Figure 3 titled “Existing and Future Projected Population & Employment Density, indicating areas where transit demand is expected to grow”

• TransLink to outline conditions that need to be met by municipalities in order to receive transportation services

• TransLink to outline transportation solutions for accommodating travel past agricultural areas, which by its nature have a lower density

Committee members also commented on the following: • the importance of integrated planning; the integration regional priorities and

senior government priorities during the implementation phase • buses as the most effective way for moving people; the need for communities

to accommodate/prioritize buses, such as through dedicated bus lanes and synchronized traffic lights). Seek TransLink’s input on where municipalities are failing to provide priority for buses

• capital cost analysis pertaining to bus acquisition need to take into consideration municipalities that will be over capacity in near future

• consider whether the traffic congestion in the Massey Tunnel corridor could be alleviated by funding more buses in the area and by working with Port Metro Vancouver on alternative goods movement in the affected area; more technical analysis needed

• the need for TransLink to prioritize projects; TransLink needs to provide informed, objective recommendations

• the Fraser Valley Regional District should be involved in future discussions about regional road pricing given the interregional travel that takes place between the two regional districts

The Committee was informed that comments from the meeting will be included in a report that will forwarded to the Board. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board convey the comments in this report on the draft Regional Transportation Strategy Framework to the TransLink Board and Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation.

CARRIED Director Wright absent at the vote.

TRANSPORTATION - 13


3.2 Phase 3 Consultation Comments on Draft Elements of Port Metro Vancouver’s Land Use Plan Update Report dated July 15, 2013, from Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing an update on the range of technical comments staff intends to submit to Port Metro Vancouver as feedback for the current consultation on the draft elements of the Port’s Land Use Plan Update. Committee members commented on the following: • concern about the expansion of port activities to farmland • the need for better utilization of the existing Port Metro Vancouver

industrial land • the need for a shift in timing of port-related movement of goods and

services; concern about labour relations issues associated with the suggestion and the impact on businesses

• truck parking issue; request that truck parking be accommodated on Port Metro Vancouver lands

• ports as an important job creator • assistance provided by local governments to Port Metro Vancouver • the need for more clarity pertaining to Massey Tunnel replacement project • the lack of planning relative to the impact of ports operations on

neighbouring lands • the need for better utilization of inland ports and railways in goods

movement • concern about environmental assessment of port activities being carried out

by Port Metro Vancouver

11:31 a.m. Director Mussatto departed the meeting. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee: a) receive for information the report titled Phase 3 Consultation Comments on

Draft Elements of Port Metro Vancouver’s Land Use Plan Update dated July 15, 2013; and

b) recommend that the Board: 1. reiterate its strong objection to the use of agricultural land for port

purposes, and insist that the Port Metro Vancouver Land Use Plan confirm that agricultural land will not be used for Port Metro Vancouver’s current needs nor expansion;

2. recommend that Port Metro Vancouver expansion in the region will take place on industrially zoned properties; and

3. write a letter to Port Metro Vancouver, the Ministry of Transport Canada, the BC Ministry of Agriculture and the Agricultural Land Commission advising of the Board’s position.

CARRIED

TRANSPORTATION - 14


Request of Staff Staff was requested to preface its letter by highlighting the importance of agriculture as an economic driver for the region.

3.3 Manager’s Report Report dated July 5, 2013, from Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer and General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment, informing about the Pattullo Bridge review. Regarding the Pattullo Bridge review, concerns were expressed about: • additional traffic to Burnaby and other communities • the discrepancies between the original and current provincial assessment of

the bridge conditions • funding sources • the project not fitting in the regional priorities, the project competing with

other TransLink’s priorities Request of Staff Staff was requested to draft a report pertaining to the matter, including information on the condition of the Pattullo Bridge prior to the bridge transfer from the Province to TransLink. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee receive for information the Manager’s Report dated July 5, 2013.

CARRIED

4. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee close the special joint meeting scheduled for July 23, 2013 pursuant to the Community Charter provision(s), Section 90 (1) (k) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision

of a regional district service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the board or committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public.”

CARRIED

TRANSPORTATION - 15


5. ADJOURNMENT/TERMINATION It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee adjourn the special joint meeting of July 23, 2013.

CARRIED (Time: 11:45 a.m.)

____________________________ ____________________________ Klara Kutakova, Dianne Watts, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees 7649373 FINAL

TRANSPORTATION - 16

PRESENTATION SUMMARY

The concept envisioned by PAPA is in its early stages of feasibility and development. Essentially, the concept involves the construction of a new container port in the Alberni Inlet to capture, sort, and deliver by barge a significant percentage of ocean cargo passing by our region. Much of this cargo is currently destined for the Lower Mainland where it experiences significant off loading and trucking delays or to ports in the states of Washington, Oregon and California where the economic gain to Canada is lost. PAPA’s concept will dramatically increase the efficiencies of the logistics chain by receiving and delivering containers just when needed, just where needed and increase the capacity of the overall Asia-Pacific Canada Gateway network. Some of the benefits to communities other than Port Alberni include: 1. Reducing traffic congestion, wear and tear throughout Lower Mainland infrastructure 2. Reducing traffic congestion will dramatically reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)

emissions 3. Reducing number of ship calls and time spent in BC Waters, which also leads to less

GHG in coastal BC’s atmosphere 4. Capitalizing on underutilized facilities along the Fraser River by maximizing its

potential as a “marine highway” 5. Utilizing more container handling facilities in the Vancouver Harbour and along the

Fraser River 6. Diversification and strengthening of BC’s and Canada’s economy 7. In Comparison to the Terminal 2 project, Port Alberni’s proposal will result in much

smaller environmental impact to land utilization and community exposure

During our presentation we also plan on providing further details on PAPA’s other related goals for bulk and liquefied natural (LNG) shipment. We are seeking Metro Vancouver’s support for this concept which will assist in advancing this beneficial project.

TRANSPORTATION - 17

DDavis

Text Box

3.1

7878062

To: Transportation Committee From: Ray Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: September 25, 2013 Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Subject: Comments on TransLink’s Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook RECOMMENDATION That the Board convey its support for the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook to the TransLink Board and Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation. PURPOSE This report provides comments and a recommendation regarding TransLink’s draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook (Attachment). BACKGROUND TransLink is required under the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act to adopt a base plan and outlook document each year. TransLink must set out the relationship between the major actions planned in the base plan and regional objectives, and to consult with Metro Vancouver. This document must be submitted to the Regional Transportation Commissioner for review and to the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation for information no later than November 1st of each year. Mayors’ Council action is required only for a supplemental plan. The TransLink Board will consider the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook for approval on October 30. The base plan identifies all anticipated expenditures, including transportation services and major capital projects, to be funded with approved revenue sources. It also identifies borrowing limits and accumulated surpluses. The affected period is 2014-2016. The outlook component identifies the transportation services and major capital projects for the period 2017-2023. It is TransLink’s practice to forecast only expenditures fundable by approved revenue sources in its outlook. DISCUSSION The draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook is in essence a one-year increment on the 2013 Base Plan and Outlook. This report highlights some of the key items from the plan, including commentary as appropriate. Financial Element Highlights

• TransLink’s budgeted revenues will grow from $1.421 billion in 2013 to $1.608 billion in 2016.

• The cumulative funded surplus is forecast to remain above TransLink’s policy level of 12% if the sales of real estate assets proceed in 2016 and 2017. The amount of proceeds from the sale of assets is deemed a medium to high risk.

• Transit fares will be raised in 2015 after the full roll-out of the Compass farecard system. TransLink is allowed to increase short-term fares by a maximum of 2% per year without seeking the approval of the Regional Transportation commissioner. TransLink anticipates

5.1

TRANSPORTATION - 18

Comments on TransLink’s Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 2 of 4

implementing the next incremental fare increase in 2015. Fare revenue is deemed a medium risk. For example, a 1% rise in ridership will result in an additional $5 million per year in revenue. Transit fare revenue as a share of all revenues is expected to increase from 35% today to 39% by 2023. If it isn’t doing already, TransLink should work towards designs to leverage the Compass farecard system in the future to increase ridership and fare revenues.

• Property tax revenue will continue to grow by 3% per year as permitted in the legislation. Property tax revenue as a share of all revenues is expected to remain relatively stable (20-22%) over the horizon of the outlook.

• Fuel tax revenue is deemed a high risk revenue source. Fuel tax revenue as a share of all revenues is forecast to decline from 24% today to 18% by 2023.

Investment Element Highlights

• The 2014 Base Plan and Outlook maintains investments introduced in prior base plans: o 109,000 additional transit service hours introduced in the 2013 Base Plan and

Outlook have been fully implemented and will remain funded; o The King George Boulevard 96 B-Line commenced service in September 2013; o The Highway 1 rapid bus commenced service in December 2012; o TransLink will provides its share of contribution to the Evergreen Line; and, o Upgrades to the Expo Line SkyTrain stations are in progress.

• The 2013 Base Plan and Outlook allocated $150 million for the rehabilitation of the Pattullo

Bridge. TransLink is proposing to increase the allocation to $299 million based on updated cost information. For 2014, $22 million is budgeted for additional engineering design work to refine the scope of rehabilitation and potentially commence physical work. The majority of the physical work would commence in 2015. According to TransLink, a full rehabilitation of the existing bridge would involve replacing the deck, which would then have a useful life of 25-30 years, and upgrading the seismic robustness of the structure (but not to current standards). The actual scope and amount of money that will be spent on rehabilitating the bridge depends on the results of the engineering design analysis in 2014 and the outcome of the Pattullo Bridge Strategic Review Study. The Study is anticipated to yield a preferred solution in 2014 in conjunction with the preparation of the Regional Transportation Strategy. If the Study yields a preferred funded solution for a new bridge, then TransLink would seek to minimize the rehabilitation investment in the existing bridge. At face value, staff believes this is a prudent course of action in light of the current pace to systematically evaluate and identify a preferred solution. TransLink should ensure that maximum flexibility is preserved to modify and reallocate these committed funds should the preferred solution be a new bridge.

TRANSPORTATION - 19

Comments on TransLink’s Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013

Page 3 of 4

• TransLink also identifies a list of “unfunded needs”.1 While the list identified in the plan is

useful as a reminder that much work remains to improve the regional transportation system, it would be more useful if the plan instead framed that a more complete list of unfunded needs will be identified, evaluated, and prioritized during the preparation of the Implementation Plan for the Regional Transportation Strategy.

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board convey its support for the 2014 Base and Outlook to the TransLink Board and

Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation. 2. That the Board provide additional comments to the TransLink Board on the 2014 Base Plan and

Outlook. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS It is the role of the Regional Transportation Commissioner to provide detailed comments on the reasonableness of the assumptions and parameters used by TransLink in the development of the base plan and outlook. If the Board approves Alternative 1, it is indicating support for the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook which essentially maintains current levels of investment in the regional transportation system and current revenue streams. For example, the motor fuel tax will remain at 17 cents/Litre, the property tax revenues will grow at 3% per year as permitted in the legislation, and transit fares will be raised in 2015 within the allowable range permitted in the legislation. The 2014 Base Plan and Outlook presents a stable scenario for TransLink in the near-term as it works through the preparation of the Regional Transportation Strategy and a commitment by the Province to carry out a transportation funding referendum in 2014. TransLink’s 2014 Base Plan and Outlook demonstrates continued improvements to maximizing transit efficiencies, maintaining assets in a state of good repair, continuing with the necessary work to modernize transit assets, and preparing the system for the Evergreen Line. There are worrisome elements in the plan, such as the static level of transit service hours in a growing region, the declining sustainability of fuel tax revenues, the continued operating subsidy for the Golden Ears Bridge, and the planned sale of real estate assets that is required to maintain a minimum cumulative funded surplus. Also, within the 3-year base plan period, a new agreement will be reached on the Federal Gas Tax allocation to the region – the provisions for which may look different from the current agreement. If the Board chooses Alternative 2, it may wish to convey other comments on the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook and advise the TransLink Board and Mayors’ Council accordingly. REGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS Overall, the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook provides support for the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy by holding steady transit service hours and continuing to make progress on maintaining assets in a state of good repair, and making strategic infrastructure upgrades. But the pace of new investment to expand the Frequent Transit Network, and to provide greater cycling,

1 Example: Additional bus service hours, 15-minute SeaBus all week, Lonsdale Quay upgrades, additional SkyTrain cars, improvements to capacity and reliability on the Broadway 99 B-Line, etc.

TRANSPORTATION - 20

Comments on TransLink’s Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 4 of 4

walking, and multiple-occupancy vehicle choices must increase soon. The implication is that transportation patterns and today’s land use decisions may be irreversibly locked in to the most convenient way to travel in the region today – by car, and this will be detrimental to the development of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION TransLink is consulting with Metro Vancouver on the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook. TransLink must submit an approved document to the Regional Transportation Commissioner by November 1, 2013. No action is required by the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation. It is anticipated that the TransLink Board will consider the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook for approval on October 30. The 2014 Base Plan and Outlook, while not proposing any expansion of the transportation system in general, remains aligned with past approved base plans, and supports the Regional Growth Strategy’s goal of providing sustainable transportation choices. The focus must remain on developing transportation strategies to support the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy and other regional objectives, including goods movement, and continuing the dialogue on long-term sustainable transportation funding. Staff recommends Alternative 1. ATTACHMENT TransLink’s draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook (Orbit #7914266).

TRANSPORTATION - 21

2014 Base Plan and OutlookDRAFT FOR CONSULTATION

October 3, 2013

Transportation & Financial Plan for 2014 to 2016 and Outlook for 2017 to 2023

TRANSPORTATION - 22

DDavis

Text Box

5.1 Attachment

ii Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook

TransLink Board Members Nancy Olewiler, Board Chair Howard Nemtin, Board Vice-Chair Robin Chakrabarti Rick Christiaanse Lorraine Cunningham W. John Dawson Barry Forbes Don Rose Marcella Szel About TransLink The South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (“TransLink”) is Metro Vancouver’s regional transportation authority. TransLink is responsible for regional transit, cycling, roads, goods movement and commuting options, as well as AirCare and Intelligent Transportation System programs. Transit services are delivered through operating companies, including Coast Mountain Bus Company, British Columbia Rapid Transit Company and third-party contractors. TransLink also shares responsibility for the Major Road Network (MRN) and regional cycling with its municipal partners in Metro Vancouver. TransLink is the first North American transportation authority to be responsible for planning, financing and managing all public transit in addition to major regional roads, bridges and cycling. About the 2014 Base Plan Under the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act (“SCBCTA Act”), TransLink is required to prepare a three-year base plan and seven-year outlook every year. The base plan is guided by TransLink’s long-term transportation strategy, and aims to support progress toward the Provincial Transit Plan, Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS), provincial greenhouse gas reduction targets and municipal plans. The base plan, as modified by any supplemental plans approved by the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation, forms TransLink’s strategic plan for that year. This document constitutes TransLink’s 2014 Transportation and Financial Base Plan and Outlook (“2014 Base Plan”). The 2014 Base Plan is an update to the 2013 Strategic Plan (the 2013 Base Plan as modified by the 2013 Supplemental Plan). It identifies the strategic initiatives, programs, investments and services that TransLink intends to pursue from 2014 through 2016 (the “plan period”), drawing only on established funding resources. It also identifies the services TransLink plans to provide and the major capital projects TransLink plans to complete from 2017 through 2023 (the “outlook period”). Caution regarding forward-looking statements From time to time, TransLink makes written and/or oral forward-looking statements, including in this document and in other communications. In addition, representatives of TransLink may make forward-looking statements orally to analysts, investors, the media and others. Forward-looking statements, by their nature, require TransLink to make assumptions and are subject to inherent risk and uncertainties. In light of the uncertainty related to the financial, economic and regulatory environments, such risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond TransLink’s control, and the effects of which can be difficult to predict, may cause actual results to differ materially from the expectations expressed in the forward-looking statements.

TRANSPORTATION - 23

Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary and Context 1

What’s in the Plan 2 Funding the Plan 4 A Renewed Vision: Regional Transportation Strategy 5 Looking Ahead 7

1. Invest Strategically 9 Transit Services 9 Roads, Bridges and Bicycle Investment Program 13 Summary of Capital Expenditures 17 Unfunded Needs 18

2. Manage the System 21 Transit Services 21 AirCare 23 Multi-Modal Programs 24 TransLink Corporate and Transit Police 25 Efficiencies 27

3. Partner to Make It Happen 28 Getting Land Use Right 28 The Goods Movement Strategy 28 Real Estate Program 29 Pass Programs 29

4. Funding the Plan: Revenue Sources 30 User Fees 30 Taxation Sources 32 Senior Government Contributions 33 Interest Income 35

5. Achieving Our Goals 36 Outcomes 36 Key Performance Indicators 41

6. Conclusion 44

Appendix A: Financial Information 46 Debt Service 46 Funding Adjustment 46 Cash Flow Statement 47 Balance Sheet 47 Key Assumptions 48 Risk Assessment and Sensitivity Analyses 49

Appendix B: Financial Tables 51

Appendix C: Consultation 60

TRANSPORTATION - 24

iv Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook

TABLES Table 1: Total Transit Service Hours by Service Type (thousands) .................................................................................................... 9 Table 2: Transit Operations Expenditure Forecasts (millions) ........................................................................................................ 10 Table 3: Overview of Station Upgrades for Which Capital Funding Is Secured ............................................................................... 12 Table 4: Summary of Roads Capital Expenditures (millions) ........................................................................................................... 13 Table 5: Summary of Roads Operating Expenditures (millions) ...................................................................................................... 14 Table 6: 2014 to 2016 Capital Cash Flow (thousands) .................................................................................................................... 18 Table 7: Major Capital Projects in the 2014 Base Plan (thousands) ................................................................................................ 18 Table 8: TransLink Corporate and Transit Police Expenditures (millions) ....................................................................................... 26 Table 9: Efficiency Measures in the 2013 Base Plan and 2014 Base Plan* (millions) ..................................................................... 27 Table 10: Summary of Revenues (millions) ..................................................................................................................................... 30 Table 11: Transit Revenue Projections (millions) ............................................................................................................................ 31 Table 12: Golden Ears Bridge Toll Rates (July 2013–July 2014) ...................................................................................................... 32 Table 13: Property Tax Projections (millions) ................................................................................................................................. 33 Table 14: Senior Government Contribution Forecasts for Capital and Operations (millions) ......................................................... 34 Table 15: Ridership Forecasts (millions) ......................................................................................................................................... 37 Table 16: Key Performance Indicators ............................................................................................................................................ 42 Table 17: Debt Service Expense (millions) ...................................................................................................................................... 46 Table 18: Funding Adjustments (millions)....................................................................................................................................... 47 Table 19: Key Assumptions for the 2014 Base Plan ........................................................................................................................ 49 Table 20: Consolidated Statement of Financial Position (thousands) ............................................................................................. 51 Table 21: Statement of Operations (millions) ................................................................................................................................. 52 Table 22: Funded Statement of Operations (millions) .................................................................................................................... 53 Table 23: Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows (thousands) ....................................................................................................... 54 Table 24: Projected Borrowing Compared to Borrowing Limit and Select Financial Ratios (millions) ............................................ 55 Table 25: Capital Cash Flows – Projects Approved and Proposed (thousands) .............................................................................. 56 Table 26: Transit Service Hours (thousands)................................................................................................................................... 57 Table 27: Schedule of Golden Ears Bridge Toll Rates ...................................................................................................................... 58 Table 28: Schedule of Transit Fares ................................................................................................................................................ 59

FIGURES Figure 1: RTS Strategic Framework ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2: Regional Weekday Mode Share from the 2011 Trip Diary ............................................................................................... 36 Figure 3: Transit Mode Share Trends and Forecasts ....................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 4: Percentage Change in Personal Vehicle Kilometers Travelled Through the Plan and Outlook Periods ........................... 40 Figure 5: Cumulative Funded Surplus Level Forecasts for 2013 through 2023 ............................................................................... 47 Figure 6: Debt Level ........................................................................................................................................................................ 48

TRANSPORTATION - 25

Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook 1

SUMMARY AND CONTEXT As the first transportation authority in North America to integrate management of regional transit, roads, cycling, and goods movement, it is TransLink’s mandate to plan and provide for the transportation needs of Metro Vancouver residents and businesses. This includes daily commuters, periodic travellers and the goods haulers who support regional and national economic prosperity. TransLink also has a statutory responsibility to produce a three-year Base Plan and seven-year Outlook, annually. Development of the Base Plan and Outlook must be guided by TransLink’s long term transportation strategy. The Base Plan and Outlook also aims to support the Provincial Transit Plan, Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy, provincial greenhouse gas reduction targets and associated municipal plans.

This 2014 Base Plan and Outlook shows TransLink to be performing well and under budget for 2013, and despite revenue challenges, meeting the commitments laid out in last year’s plans. On the transit side, TransLink’s bus, SeaBus, SkyTrain, and West Coast Express services continue to earn an all-time high customer-satisfaction rating of 7.7 out of 10. The ongoing management of the Major Road Network continues to improve regional traffic flow, and facilitate the timely and reliable movement of goods and services. And TransLink is having continued success in partnering with municipalities to improve and connect cycling infrastructure.

Given that TransLink’s principal sources of revenue are limited by statute (in the case of transit fares and property taxes) or projected to decline (in the case of fuel tax revenue), the major challenge in the Plan and Outlook period will be to extend TransLink’s success in improving service through efficiencies. While the TransLink rapid transit network continues to expand with the construction of the 11-kilometre Evergreen Line from Lougheed Town Centre to Lafarge Lake-Douglas Station in Coquitlam, this Plan anticipates no further expansion in bus, SeaBus or West Coast Express services. Similarly, on the Major Road Network, the Base Plan concentrates on maintaining the safety and serviceability of current infrastructure, and integrating new elements (such as the South Fraser Perimeter Road) smoothly as they come on stream.

Metro Vancouver residents and businesses have high expectations for their transportation network and great aspirations for its future; there are numerous pressing projects on the regional priority list. The region is also expected to welcome a million new residents, and support half a million new jobs, between now and 2045. As is evident in the Base Plan analysis of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy and TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy, new funding sources will be needed to accommodate current demands and future growth. In that regard, the Provincial Government has mandated a public referendum in 2014 to help guide future funding decisions. This Base Plan offers a starting point from which to launch the referendum discussion.

TRANSPORTATION - 26

2 Draft 2014 Base Plan and Outlook

What’s in the Plan

TRANSIT

Operational Efficiency Since 2010, TransLink has consistently improved its operational efficiency: current operating costs per passenger are lower; revenue per passenger is higher; boardings per service hour are higher; and cost recovery has improved. These gains reflect a wide range of efficiency measures. For example, in 2012, TransLink’s Coast Mountain Bus Company reallocated 56,000 hours of bus service from under-utilized routes to areas of otherwise under-served high demand routes. This enabled TransLink to increase bus boardings per service hour by 3.4 per cent while at the same time reducing the cost per boarded passenger by 2.2 per cent.

Other efficiencies include the adjustment of schedules to reduce route and driver down time, the rightsizing of fleet vehicles to ensure the most appropriate and affordable vehicle is used on every route, and the centralizing of dispatch and administration. The new Hamilton Transit Centre in Richmond, which will be operational in 2015, will increase dispatch efficiency yet further.

In its custom transit services, TransLink successfully reduced the HandyDART fleet size by 14 vehicles (4%) while maintaining the same level of service. Under the Base Plan, HandyDART will reduce the fleet further this year, again while maintaining ridership.

Service Improvements As included in the 2013 Base Plan, TransLink has added 109,000 additional bus and SeaBus service hours this year, including the new King George Boulevard B-Line service between Newton Exchange, Surrey City Centre and Guildford Town Centre. The Highway 1 Rapid Bus (route 555), connecting Carvolth Exchange and Braid SkyTrain Station over the new Port Mann Bridge, began operating in December 2012, and will be extended to Lougheed Town Centre SkyTrain Station once the Highway 1 ramps at Government Street are complete. And in 2016, service will commence on the Evergreen Line, connecting Lougheed Town Centre to Coquitlam.

Capital Expenditures Although no major new service expenditures are contemplated, the 2014 Base Plan includes significant expenditures for fleet improvement and capital upgrades for rapid transit, bus exchanges and park-and-ride assets. These include:

• $245.5 million for the replacement of conventional buses • $10.7 million for community shuttles • $156 million for the Expo Line upgrade

TRANSPORTATION - 27


Additional capital has also been set aside for trolley overhead system replacement.

Construction of the Evergreen Line is being led by the Province, with TransLink providing a financial contribution. Capital expenditures during the Base Plan period that will complement the new Evergreen Line include six new stations, bus exchanges, park and rides, and roadworks. These will be complete for the start of Evergreen Line operations in 2016. Operational changes will also adjust bus connections and improve the functionality of the West Coast Express, whose riders will have an option to connect to SkyTrain through the Evergreen Line.

Compass Card and Fare Gates TransLink is Beta testing the new Compass Card and Fare Gate system to optimize the transition to this new service option. The Compass Card, which will replace the current one-time use cards, is designed to increase customer convenience, improve fare collections (reducing fare evasion), improve safety and security, and improve service quality through data analysis.

Transit Police Improved efficiency has reduced Transit Police per-officer costs to among the lowest of any independent police agency in Metro Vancouver. In 2012, for example, Transit Police reduced overtime costs by 32 per cent and helped improve the perception of system safety by 16 per cent. The Base Plan proposes zero growth in the number of officers in the force.

MAJOR ROAD NETWORK

The 2014 Base Plan includes $25.7 million annually for Operating and Maintenance and $18.4 million annually for Rehabilitation of the Major Road Network, which includes more than 2,300 lane-kilometers of regionally significant roadways.

Pattullo Bridge The 2014 Base Plan identifies up to $299 million in funding for rehabilitation of the Pattullo Bridge. This funding level is higher than in the 2013 Base Plan to reflect new information about the state of the bridge deck, which will require rehabilitation sooner than previously expected. A joint review with municipal, regional and provincial partners is underway for the Pattullo Bridge. This review will define the most appropriate replacement or rehabilitation solution for the long term and will determine the scale of rehabilitation work to be undertaken in the near term. Public consultation on this review will continue into 2014.

Goods Movement TransLink is committed to providing an efficient Major Road Network and to making it easier and more convenient for people to move from personal automobiles to walking, cycling and transit, leaving the roads clearer for the movement of goods and services. TransLink is preparing a draft Goods Movement Strategy for a fall 2013 consultation on ways to foster collaboration and consistency on goods movement policies, regulations and strategies. These include investment, management and partnership activities. TransLink will then work with partners in 2014 on implementation.

Cycling The 2014 Base Plan includes $1.55 million annually for a cost-sharing program with municipalities in which TransLink contributes up to 50 per cent of capital costs for regional cycling upgrades. Also, TransLink has allocated funding to rehabilitate the BC Parkway, and construct secure bicycle parking

TRANSPORTATION - 28


structures to replace some of the aging bicycle lockers located at park and ride lots, transit exchanges and SkyTrain stations.

Funding the Plan

TransLink has found efficiencies sufficient to come in under budget in the last fiscal year – and is on track to do so again this year. But population and inflation pressures are outstripping revenue increases, which has required special measures (including the sale of real estate assets) to stay within budget during the Base Plan and Outlook period.

Total annual revenues are expected to be $1.44 billion in 2014, rising to $1.60 billion in 2016.

REVENUES

Three sources of revenue comprise 80% of all available TransLink income: Transit Fares, $518 million in the 2014 budget; Fuel Taxes, $338 million; and Property Taxes, $305 million. Both Fares and Property Tax increases are limited by statute to a degree that is inadequate to keep pace with the combination of inflation and population growth. Fuel Tax revenue has been dramatically affected by the general move toward fuel-efficient vehicles, more walking, cycling and transit use, and leakage of fuel purchases to areas outside the region. There was a sharp decline in fuel consumption in Metro Vancouver in 2011 and 2012, a trend that is reflected in other parts of North America. Accordingly, TransLink has significantly lowered its forecast for fuel

volume sales, anticipating a Fuel Tax revenue drop of $35 million during the Outlook period.

Although other sources of revenue are technically available, TransLink requires Provincial Government approval to access any of these. Accordingly, adding or increasing services – beyond what can be achieved through efficiency – must await the outcome of the 2014 referendum on public preference for new funding sources.

TRANSPORTATION - 29


A Renewed Vision: Regional Transportation Strategy

According to legislation, TransLink’s Base Plan and Outlook must be guided by its long-term Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). In collaboration with governments, stakeholders and the public, TransLink recently updated that strategy, previously called Transport 2040. The resulting RTS Strategic Framework, approved in July 2013, sets out an approach for accommodating the one million additional residents and supporting the 500,000 additional jobs expected in the region by 2045. This rise in residents and jobs will increase system demand from six million trips per day to nine million trips per day over this period. An overview of the RTS Strategic Framework is presented in Figure 3.

TRANSPORTATION - 30


Figure 1: RTS Strategic Framework

TRANSPORTATION - 31


Three high-level strategies will be essential in achieving regional goals: Invest, Manage, and Partner.

The first, Invest, is most obvious – and most dependent upon new sources of revenue. There is a growing list of projects and service improvements on the regional priority list, including rapid transit lines in Surrey and along the Broadway corridor in Vancouver. Much of TransLink’s planned investment is focused on maintaining the services and infrastructure currently in place.

The second, Manage, also has funding implications. One of the most effective ways to manage traffic flows, for example, is with pricing that encourages people and businesses to use the system more efficiently, for example by avoiding peak hours or areas of potential congestion, whether on the road or transit network. For the purposes of the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook, TransLink has concentrated on optimizing the management of its own assets and areas of responsibility.

The third strategy, Partner, recognizes that TransLink is a service provider to and partner with every municipality in the Metro Vancouver region and that our mutual success depends heavily on the extent of our collaboration. This is particularly true in the case of land use decisions that affect the provision and efficiency of transportation. Accordingly, TransLink will continue working with all of its partners, at every level of government, as well as the public and stakeholders to provide the best range of transportation options and to support land use decisions that promote a compact urban area that functions well and preserves valuable natural and agricultural spaces in the region.

Looking Ahead

This 2014 Base Plan sets out a path to pursue the three high-level RTS strategies of Invest, Manage and Partner over the Plan and Outlook periods. The Outcomes section highlights areas of progress and priorities for future attention, to support the RTS goals of Choice, Economy, Health and Environment.

The number of people using transit is expected to continue to grow; however, current funding levels cannot keep pace with RTS targets. For example, increases in transit services since 2009 have been overtaken by population growth. Per capita service levels have begun to decline and will continue to do so without new funding. The 2014 Base Plan and Outlook recognize this reality while continuing to align programs and strategies with long-term capital priorities.

There are clear and urgent public and political calls for more investment, specifically the desire for rapid transit in Surrey and along the Broadway corridor in Vancouver, as well as the need for more bus service across the region and more investment in roads and cycling. The dialogue with the region on the RTS and the feedback generated in the 2014 provincially mandated referendum will be important in clarifying what future the region wants, as well as the options stakeholders and taxpayers prefer. This will ensure our region can achieve that future in a timely and affordable way.

TRANSPORTATION - 32


Structure of the 2014 Base Plan Document

1. Invest Strategically, 2. Manage the System, and 3. Partner to Make it Happen In keeping with the RTS Strategic Framework, the services, programs, and infrastructure investment commitments in this plan are organized under the three high-level RTS strategies. 4. Funding the Plan: Revenue Sources This section explains how investments will be funded. 5: Achieving Our Goals This section describes the outcomes and performance expectations of the 2014 Base Plan investments.

TRANSPORTATION - 33


1. INVEST STRATEGICALLY Invest strategically to maintain and grow the transportation system is the first of three core strategies in the RTS Strategic Framework.

This section summarizes the expenditures TransLink will make over the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook periods to invest in maintaining our current services and infrastructure. Some improvements are included; however, given our available resources, no new infrastructure or service investments are introduced in this plan.

Transit Services

TransLink’s integrated transit system meets the needs of diverse markets with services of various levels of frequency, speed and daily span, provided by bus, rail, marine, commuter rail and custom transit. No new service hours are proposed under the 2014 Base Plan. Total service hours in 2014 are 6.8 million, which is slightly lower than in 2013 because of reduced non-revenue hours from scheduling efficiency improvements. As part of ongoing efficiency and optimization programs (outlined in the Manage the System section, starting on page 18), TransLink will continue to lower total vehicle hours while maintaining existing service. Table 1 below summarizes proposed service hours by service type.

Table 1: Total Transit Service Hours by Service Type (thousands)

TRANSIT OPERATIONS EXPENDITURES

Transit operating expenditures are forecast at $896.4 million in 2014, increasing to $953.4 million in 2016. Operating costs for bus and SkyTrain Canada Line transit services are held constant in 2014 reflecting continued focus on operational efficiency and effectiveness and then grow with inflation from 2015 onward. SkyTrain Expo and Millennium line and West Coast costs increase 4.2 per cent in 2014 before returning to inflationary level increases. These increases are driven by initiatives to improve maintenance and asset management practices, contracted service increases and impacts from the Evergreen line project. The operating expenses associated with the Evergreen Line are based on operation starting in late-summer of 2016.

Actual Budget OutlookService Hours in Thousands 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2023

Conventional Bus 4,239 4,233 4,165 4,163 4,163 4,134Community Shuttle 565 567 600 628 632 665West Vancouver Conventional Bus 134 135 139 140 140 140SkyTrain Expo and Millennium Lines 1,149 1,126 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096SkyTrain Canada Line 196 196 196 196 196 196SkyTrain Evergreen Line 0 0 0 0 47 136Rapid Transit Total 1,345 1,322 1,292 1,292 1,339 1,428SeaBus 11 11 11 11 11 11West Coast Express 41 42 41 41 41 41Total Conventional Transit 6,335 6,310 6,248 6,275 6,326 6,419Custom Transit (HandyDART) 592 598 598 598 598 598Total Service Hours 6,927 6,908 6,846 6,873 6,924 7,017

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 34


Table 2: Transit Operations Expenditure Forecasts (millions)

* The Canada Line expenditures include payment to the concessionaire to cover its operating expenditures and capital repayments, which are elevating the average annual growth rate metric. ** Evergreen Line operating costs in 2016 are for start-up. The Evergreen Line will go into service in 2016.

BUS AND SEABUS SERVICES

The 2013 Base Plan introduced 109,000 additional annual bus and SeaBus service hours. All of these hours have now been implemented, including the new King George Boulevard B-Line service, which started in September 2013 and operates between Newton Exchange, Surrey City Centre and Guildford Town Centre. The Highway 1 Rapid Bus (route 555) operating over the Port Mann Bridge, connecting Carvolth Exchange and Braid SkyTrain Station, began operating in December 2012. This service will be extended to Lougheed Town Centre SkyTrain Station once the Highway 1 ramps at Government Street are complete. No new revenue service hours are planned for the 2014–2016 plan period.

Over the Plan period, TransLink has committed $245.5 million in capital expenditures for the replacement of conventional buses, and $10.7 million for community shuttles. Capital has also been set aside for trolley overhead system replacement.

CUSTOM TRANSIT

TransLink’s Custom Transit services provide transportation for customers who cannot use conventional transit without assistance. The Custom Transit program includes:

• HandyDART (a shared ride, pre-booked, door-to-door service that uses specialized lift-equipped vehicles for registered people with temporary or permanent disabilities)

• HandyCard (a prequalified program for people with permanent disabilities that provides concession fares on conventional transit, the ability to bring an attendant on conventional transit for free and the opportunity to buy TaxiSaver coupons)

• TaxiSaver (a taxi subsidy available for people who qualify for HandyCard)

HandyDART is an on-demand service, so service hours fluctuate based on demand. The budgeted envelope of available service hours, however, will remain constant over the three-year Plan period.

Custom transit provided 1.38 million passenger trips in 2012, for which TransLink currently operates 318 custom transit vehicles. As a result of improved efficiency and asset use, TransLink reduced the fleet size by 14 vehicles from 2011, and in August 2013 it will cut eight more vehicles while still providing the same level of service. To maintain the custom transit service in a state of good repair, approximately 15 per cent of the fleet is replaced every year. Approximately 160 HandyDART vehicles will be retired over the three-year Plan period and will be replaced with a new mix of vehicles chosen to suit customer demand. A trial of smaller, van-based vehicles was conducted in 2013, but these were not found suitable for the type of service currently provided.

Actual Budget Outlook2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2023

Bus 623.0$ 639.2$ 639.4$ 656.3$ 670.5$ 741.0$ SkyTrain Expo/Millennium Lines & West Coast Express 131.2$ 142.3$ 148.2$ 151.8$ 156.3$ 156.1$ SkyTrain Canada Line * 107.1$ 108.8$ 108.8$ 109.9$ 112.2$ 126.7$ SkyTrain Evergreen Line ** -$ -$ -$ -$ 14.5$ 18.4$ Capital Infrastructure Contributions -$ 8.6$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total Operations 861.4$ 898.8$ 896.4$ 918.0$ 953.4$ 1,042.3$

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 35


TransLink also began a taxi pilot project in April 2013 that reallocated 10,000 hours of budgeted HandyDART service to taxis under specific conditions. Supplementary taxis are used where HandyDART is unable to provide the requested service effectively or economically. Taxis were used for less than two per cent of annual HandyDART service hours, and we expect that through diverting these 10,000 service hours to taxis, HandyDART will provide an additional 7,000 customer trips at the same cost. The program will be monitored for effectiveness.

In 2014, TransLink will continue work on the Custom Transit Service Delivery Model Review initiated in 2013 to ensure a sustainable custom transit delivery model that can adapt to the varied transportation needs of customers.

RAPID TRANSIT

TransLink’s rapid transit system consists of three high-capacity rail services in dedicated rights-of-way: the Expo Line, the Millennium Line and the Canada Line. Under the 2014 Base Plan, service on the Expo, Millennium and Canada Lines will be maintained at 2013 levels.

There are a number of state-of-good-repair projects on the Expo Line initiated in 2013 that will continue in 2014. Those projects will replace 34 kilometers of original power rail that supplies SkyTrain vehicles with power, and six switch controllers that allow trains to change tracks. These projects will ensure that the Expo Line continues to provide reliable service.

TransLink will also refurbish 114 Mark I cars to extend their service life by 15 years.

Evergreen Line Program In 2012, the province’s Evergreen Line Project Office awarded the major design-build contract for the 11-kilometer extension of SkyTrain line from Lougheed Town Centre to Lafarge Lake-Douglas Station in Coquitlam. The project includes six new stations, bus exchanges, park and rides, and roadworks. The extension will be complete and in service by the late-summer of 2016.

TransLink plays three roles on the project: future operator, contributing partner and transit service provider during construction. TransLink’s responsibilities include design review and construction support; testing and commissioning systems and infrastructure; procuring additional SkyTrain vehicles; and working with the contractor on temporary facility and service adjustments to maintain service during construction.

Evergreen Line Multi-Modal Integration Integration of the Evergreen Line will require upgrades across the transportation network. TransLink is responsible for the multi-modal integration projects within the 2014 Base Plan period as identified below:

• Commercial-Broadway Station upgrades to accommodate expected traffic from the Evergreen Line as well as growth in the local population and employment

• Development of Evergreen Line station area plans in collaboration with municipalities • Wayfinding improvements to inform customers of the new operating pattern and make

navigation easier

TRANSPORTATION - 36


Station Upgrades TransLink has begun making station upgrades on the Expo Line to improve capacity, accessibility, and customer amenities, and to implement fare gates. The $156 million upgrade program outlined in Table 3 is consistent with the Provincial Transit Plan and Expo Upgrade Strategy. It has received $123.6 million in funding from the federal and provincial governments.

Table 3: Overview of Station Upgrades for Which Capital Funding Is Secured

Station Status Select Project Elements Expected Completion

Main Street-Science World

Under construction • New east station house with escalator and elevator

access • Reconfigured west station house • Additional retail and bike parking

2014

Scott Road Under construction • Bus exchange and park and ride modifications • Station accessibility and customer amenity

improvements

2014

New Westminster

Detailed design • Replacement of end-of-life station elements • Upgraded lighting and finishes • Replacement of mesh screens with glazing

2015

Commercial-Broadway

Detailed design

• Additional inbound Expo Line platform, new footbridge, and associated stairs, escalators and elevators

• Widened crossing of the Grandview Cut • Upgraded bus passenger waiting areas

2016

Metrotown Detailed design • New east, west and central station houses • Up and down escalators and expanded elevator

capacity • Reconfigured and expanded bus exchange

2016

Joyce-Collingwood Planning • High-priority capacity and accessibility upgrades to

be identified 2016

Surrey Central Planning • High-priority capacity and accessibility station

upgrades to be identified • Station improvements coordinated with planning for

reconfigured bus exchange

2016

Station and Exchange Planning In addition to the station upgrade projects, TransLink has an active program of station and exchange planning to identify future facility requirements and respond to proposals for modification by others. Planning is underway or complete for the following stations:

• Brentwood Town Centre (redevelopment) • Richmond-Brighouse Exchange (new facility) • Phibbs Exchange (upgrade) • Langley Centre and Willowbrook exchanges (new facilities) • Lougheed Town Centre (redevelopment) • Lonsdale Quay (upgrade) • Surrey Central Exchange (upgrade)

TRANSPORTATION - 37


• Burquitlam Station and exchange (new facility)

Planning will consist of identifying functional requirements for each facility and applying the TransLink Transit Passenger Facility Design Guidelines and Transit-Oriented Communities Design Guidelines in cooperation with local municipalities and other stakeholders. The timing for implementation of some elements depends on how funding is allocated in future plans.

WEST COAST EXPRESS

The 20-year service agreement between TransLink and the Canadian Pacific Railway to operate the West Coast Express expires in 2015. Negotiations for renewal are expected to be complete within the Plan period. In 2013, TransLink completed the West Coast Express Strategy, which considers the likely interaction of the West Coast Express with the Evergreen Line and other travel markets in the same corridor. The preferred path for service and infrastructure improvements will be selected and confirmed in concert with the service agreement renewal process.

West Coast Express service levels, including TrainBus, will be maintained at 2013 levels throughout the Plan period.

Roads, Bridges and Bicycle Investment Program

TransLink’s mandate is to provide a multi-modal regional transportation system that moves people and goods. This includes supporting the overall efficiency of the road network to serve drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. TransLink has responsibilities to:

• Establish guidelines to identify which roads can become part of the Major Road Network (MRN) • Establish standards for managing, operating, building and maintaining the MRN • Review and approve all proposed changes that could result in a reduction of people-moving

capacity on the MRN • Designate routes and times for dangerous goods movement on the MRN • Approve the municipal prohibition of truck movements from any road in the region (including

non-MRN roads) • Provide funding as outlined in Table 4 and Table 5 below

Table 4: Summary of Roads Capital Expenditures (millions)

2014 2015 2016 ITEM

Municipally-Owned Regional Road and Bicycle Assets

Rehabilitation $18.4 $18.4 $18.4

Upgrades – MRN 0 0 0

Upgrades – Bicycle (BICCS) $1.55 $1.55 $1.55

TransLink-Owned Road and Bicycle Assets

Pattullo Bridge Annual Repairs – Capital $3.0 $3.0 0

Pattullo Bridge Rehabilitation Project – Capital $22.0 $78.0 $77.0

Bike Asset Capital $1.0 $1.0 $1.0 TOTAL CAPITAL $45.95 $101.95 $97.95

TRANSPORTATION - 38


Table 5: Summary of Roads Operating Expenditures (millions)

2014 2015 2016 ITEM

Municipally-Owned Regional Road and Bicycle Assets

Operating and Maintenance $25.7 $25.7 $25.7

TransLink-Owned Road and Bicycle Assets

Golden Ears Bridge Tolling Operation $6.1 $6.4 $6.9

Other Bridges Operating $1.8 $1.5 $1.5 TOTAL OPERATING $33.6 $33.6 $34.1

FUNDING FOR MUNICIPALLY-OWNED REGIONAL ROAD AND BICYCLE ASSETS

The Major Road Network (MRN) encompasses the major municipally-owned arterial corridors in the region and connects the provincial highway system with the local road network. The MRN enables people to access major destinations through the efficient movement of buses and longer-distance auto travel, and forms the backbone for the movement of goods throughout the region. Some MRN corridors also serve significant volumes of cyclists and pedestrians.

TransLink assists with the management and operations of the MRN through the funding and investment programs described below.

MRN Operations, Maintenance and Pavement Rehabilitation TransLink works with municipalities to ensure the MRN is in a state of good repair for the efficient movement of people and goods. TransLink provides operating funding for the operation and maintenance of the MRN, which is distributed to the municipalities, which then undertake the necessary work. The amount of funding is based on the number of MRN lane-kilometers within each municipality; for 2014 there are approximately 2,300 total lane kilometers across the region, and TransLink’s contribution is $11,140 per lane kilometer. TransLink has budgeted a total of $25.7 million in operating funding.

TransLink also contributes capital funds for pavement rehabilitation, which in 2014 is budgeted at $7,960 per lane kilometer, for a total of $18.4 million. In 2013, TransLink introduced flexible terms for municipalities by allowing them to transfer TransLink funds between operations and maintenance funding and the rehabilitation funding. The annual budget is adjusted based on municipal requests, up to the total amount available.

In 2014, TransLink will conclude a review of the actual recent costs incurred by municipalities for the operation, maintenance and pavement rehabilitation of the MRN. TransLink will adjust future Operating, Maintenance and Rehabilitation (OMR) payments in consultation with the municipalities and in accordance with TransLink’s mandate and long-term goals.

MRNB Minor Capital Program (Upgrades to the Regional Road and Bicycle Networks) TransLink has a cost-sharing program to contribute up to 50 per cent of eligible capital costs to upgrade roads on the MRN and bicycle infrastructure anywhere on the transportation network. Funds are

TRANSPORTATION - 39


allocated to each municipality based on its proportion of the population and employment growth forecast in the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy. Consistent with the 2013 Base Plan, $1.55 million is allocated annually for the BICCS (Bicycle Infrastructure Capital Cost-Sharing) Regional Needs Program. No funding for MRN upgrades is budgeted for 2014–2016.

In recognition of the need for upgrades on the MRN and bicycle network, TransLink has made it possible for municipalities to transfer capital funding from the Pavement Rehabilitation Fund to the MRNB Minor Capital Program. A municipality that transfers funding into the MRNB Minor Capital Program then enters into a cost-sharing capital funding agreement with TransLink to complete the eligible upgrade project within four years. The rehabilitation funds are not replaced by TransLink, and municipalities continue to be responsible for appropriate pavement rehabilitation.

FUNDING FOR TRANSLINK-OWNED ROAD AND BICYCLE ASSETS

TransLink owns and maintains a number of road-based assets, including bridges and cycling infrastructure. Below is a description of these assets and planned investments related to those assets.

TransLink Bridges TransLink owns and maintains five major bridges in the region: the Pattullo Bridge, the Golden Ears Bridge, the Knight Street Bridge, the Westham Island Bridge, and the Canada Line bike and pedestrian bridge. TransLink hires private-sector companies to operate and maintain these bridges. This work includes minor repairs, sweeping, lighting and responding to traffic incidents. The 2014 budget for these service contracts is $1.8 million.

Ongoing “state of good repair” investments include repairs to bridge decks, deteriorating concrete, drainage and railings. As each bridge ages, it will need repairs or replacement.

i. PATTULLO BRIDGE Technical studies have revealed that many components of the 76-year-old Pattullo Bridge are now reaching the end of their useful lives and the bridge is at risk of being undermined by river scour. In its current condition, the bridge is at risk in the event of a moderate earthquake or ship collision. The Pattullo Bridge does not meet current roadway design guidelines (for a new bridge built today) for lane widths and curvature, which may contribute to collisions. Pattullo Bridge facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, such as sidewalks, barriers and connections, could be improved to provide greater protection from traffic. A strategic review process is underway to examine all practical rehabilitation or replacement alternatives (see below).

TransLink manages the Pattullo Bridge to ensure safe operations, which includes conducting continuous short-term repairs to various components of the bridge. In 2014 and 2015, $3 million in capital funding per year is allocated to Pattullo Bridge repairs, which are intended to address minor repairs to the bridge.

To ensure that the bridge remains open until a long-term solution is in place, TransLink is proceeding with the design work for a rehabilitation program to mitigate the seismic risk and maintain the structural integrity of the bridge. Based on current cost estimates, a budget of up to $299 million is included in the

TRANSPORTATION - 40


Plan and Outlook periods for Pattullo Bridge rehabilitation work, which would be completed by 2017. This is an increase from the $150 million that was included in the 2013 Base Plan, reflecting updated information about the condition of the bridge. During 2014, $22 million is budgeted for engineering design to provide better definition of the rehabilitation measures required, the costs, and the options for proceeding. The scope of the rehabilitation will be informed by the design work in 2014 and the outcome of the Strategic Review. The assumptions in this plan are based on the information available today and will be updated if and when new information is available.

Strategic Review Process Together with its partners the City of New Westminster, the City of Surrey and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, TransLink will continue the Pattullo Bridge Strategic Review to examine all practical rehabilitation or replacement alternatives. Adjacent municipalities (Burnaby, Coquitlam and Richmond) have also been involved to the extent that some alternatives under consideration affect them. In 2013, the partners screened 25 alternatives, identifying six that warrant further evaluation. These findings were the subject of extensive consultation in June 2013. Additional technical and financial analysis, supported by public consultation, will continue through the remainder of 2013 and early 2014 to identify two or three preferred alternatives, from which a final solution is expected to be selected in early 2014 in conjunction with the development of the Regional Transportation Strategy.

ii. GOLDEN EARS BRIDGE TransLink’s investment in the Golden Ears Bridge (and its associated road network) is managed through a contract with the Golden Crossing General Partnership (GCGP). This contract covers capital payments, operations, maintenance and rehabilitation for the bridge until 2041. The contract payments to GCGP are budgeted for $66.5 million in 2014. A separate contract for the toll system operations is budgeted at approximately $6.1 million in 2014.

TRANSLINK’S BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE

TransLink owns and operates three major bicycle infrastructure assets: the BC Parkway, bicycle storage structures and the Canada Line bike and pedestrian bridge.

BC Parkway TransLink is responsible for the BC Parkway, which runs parallel to or under the Expo SkyTrain Line. TransLink has budgeted $650,000 for repairs along this important cycling and pedestrian facility in 2014, and will continue to work with other stakeholders in the corridor to identify and implement further improvements.

Bicycle Storage Infrastructure TransLink owns and contracts the operations and maintenance of over 400 bike lockers located at park and ride lots, transit exchanges and SkyTrain or Canada Line stations. Many of the lockers are now past their useful lives, and the inventory is shrinking as lockers are disposed of. To continue to meet the need for secure bike parking, TransLink uses a small amount of the budget to repair bike lockers and move inventory to new locations. In addition, TransLink is introducing secure bike parking structures, which

TRANSPORTATION - 41


are stand-alone modular buildings where cyclists can enter and lock their bicycles, for which $350,000 is budgeted in 2014. The advantages of a secure bike parking structure include a higher capacity for parking bikes in a small area, good security measures to discourage theft, good visibility of the bike parking availability and more flexible terms for customers to park.

OTHER PLANNED ROAD INVESTMENTS

TransLink is actively engaged with partners to deliver several major goods movement projects now underway in the region. In 2014, TransLink will contribute $18 million (toward the project cost of $50 million) to the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor project. This is a multi-partner initiative to reduce road/rail crossings between Delta and Langley, improving safety and facilitating the movement of goods. It will also include a new Rail Crossing Information System (RCIS) to help drivers choose appropriate routes. The project is within budget, and completion is scheduled in 2014.

TransLink has contributed $3.7 million and $5 million respectively to the Powell Street Overpass Project in Vancouver and the Low Level Road Project in North Vancouver. Both of these projects are intended to improve the reliability and safety of goods movement and will be under construction in 2014.

In partnership with Transport Canada and the Province, TransLink introduced the Real-Time Traffic Map on the Provincial DriveBC website and on TransLink’s website in 2013. The map allows drivers to monitor travel conditions on the region’s major roads so that they can choose the best route.

The Regional Traffic Management Centre (RTMC), which will help manage and coordinate traffic conditions in the region, received a $1 million contribution from TransLink. It will be fully functional in 2014.

TransLink will continue its involvement with the Applied Freight Research Initiative, a program of studies sponsored by TransLink, Transport Canada, and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. TransLink will also continue to support research into technology methods to reduce unnecessary truck trips by making more information about container locations available online.

Summary of Capital Expenditures

This section summarizes all planned capital expenditures over the Plan and Outlook periods, including those expenditures mentioned in previous sections of this plan. TransLink plans to invest $2.61 billion in capital over the Plan and Outlook period, of which $1.44 billion will be invested between 2014 and 2016 to address corporate priorities, including maintaining existing services and a state of good repair and, based on previously approved projects, undertaking upgrades or expansion.

TRANSPORTATION - 42


Table 6: 2014 to 2016 Capital Cash Flow (thousands)

In the outlook period, TransLink will invest an average of $150 million per year, of which about 37 per cent will be funded through government contributions.

MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS

In accordance with Section 194 of the SCBCTA Act, all capital projects exceeding $50 million planned for the Plan and Outlook period are shown in Table 7 below.

Table 7: Major Capital Projects in the 2014 Base Plan (thousands)

Cash Flow

Total Capital Cost

Beginning in Year

Planned Year of

Completion 2014 2015 2016

Evergreen Line Contribution (excludes contributions already made) $89,725 $221,603 $10,813 $375,000 2012 2016

EXPO Line Propulsion Power System Upgrades $27,996 $0 $0 $58,361 2009 2014

Hamilton Transit Centre Design & Construction $58,846 $34,452 $0 $125,633 2012 2015

Compass Card & Fare Gate Project - Phase 3 $77,187 $0 $0 $194,200 2008 2014

Pattullo Bridge – Seismic upgrade $24,466 $78,000 $77,000 $299,000 2014 2017

Unfunded Needs

The 2012 Moving Forward Plan included several priority investments that could not be funded last year and are not included in the 2014 Base Plan. They include:

• Increased bus service hours to reduce overcrowding, accommodate population growth, and meet U-Pass demand

2014 - 2016 Less 2014 -2016 Net 2014 - 2016CF Gross CF Funding Cash Flow

SUMMARYEquipment 27,637 (1) 27,637 Facilities 120,542 (75,792) 44,750 Infrastructure 339,222 (191,543) 147,680 Major Construction Projects 477,141 - 477,141 Technology Applications 54,877 - 54,877 Vehicle - Convention Revenue 299,856 (276,490) 23,365 Vehicle - Other Revenue 8,595 (3,387) 5,208 Subtotal 1,327,870 (547,213) 780,658

Capital infrastructure contributions 111,672 - 111,672 Total 1,439,542 (547,213) 892,329

Net 2014 - 2016 Capital Cash Flow

TRANSPORTATION - 43


• Extending 15-minute SeaBus service to seven days a week, year round • Upgrading Lonsdale Quay bus terminal and SeaBus terminal passenger amenities • Station area improvements • Increased funding for Major Road Network and cycling upgrades

In addition, TransLink has identified the following as population growth-related priority items:

• Additional SkyTrain cars to meet demand • Increased West Coast Express capacity • Improved capacity and reliability of the Broadway 99 B-Line

These remain priority items that will be considered for funding should TransLink’s revenue picture change within the Base Plan and Outlook period.

TRANSPORTATION - 44


- - This page intentionally left blank. - -

TRANSPORTATION - 45


2. MANAGE THE SYSTEM Manage the transportation system to be more efficient and user-focused is the second of three core strategies in the RTS Strategic Framework.

This section outlines the programs and services TransLink has or will implement over the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook periods to ensure assets and resources are being used in the most efficient manner. Key elements of managing the system include:

• Making travel safe and secure for all users • Making travel easy and attractive for all users • Optimizing roads and transit for efficiency, safety and reliability • Using integrated mobility pricing for fairness, efficiency and revenue • Managing parking for fairness, efficiency and revenue

Under this Plan, TransLink will continue to optimize bus service, price our Park and Ride lots for efficiency and effectiveness, provide our customers with information to enable them to make informed decisions, implement the Compass Card program and fare gates, and use Transit Police to protect people, property and revenue.

Transit Services

MAKING THE BUS SYSTEM MORE EFFECTIVE

Service Optimization is TransLink’s ongoing program to improve the productivity of the transit system by reallocating resources from low-productivity uses to routes and times where demand is higher. Since 2010, service optimization has played an important role in increasing the productivity of TransLink’s existing bus network. To date, more than 276,000 hours, or 5.6 per cent of total bus service hours in the region – have been reallocated. The 2013 Base Plan committed to reinvesting 25,000 service hours each year by reallocating revenue hours from low-productivity services and time periods to those with higher demand. The program follows principles established in 2010 to maintain the integrity of the network and guide reinvestments.

To inform this program, TransLink conducts an annual review of system performance. This review examines trends in bus service ridership at a system-wide, sub-regional and route-by-route basis.

The results of this review demonstrate that optimizing service across the region has allowed TransLink to serve more people without increasing resources. The 2012 Bus Service Performance Review1 shows a trend of increasing productivity and cost-effectiveness. In 2012, bus boardings per revenue hour increased by 3.4 per cent while cost per boarded passenger decreased by 2.2 per cent, as compared with performance in 2011.

1 This report is available online at www.translink.ca/networkmanagement.

TRANSPORTATION - 46


In 2012 and 2013, TransLink reallocated approximately 102,000 annual service hours of bus service from lower-performing services to areas of higher performance. After public consultation, projects were advanced, revised or deferred based on input received. Proposed service change concepts for 2014 are in the preliminary planning stages and will be advanced for public consultation in the fall of 2013.

MAKING THE BUS SYSTEM MORE EFFICIENT

TransLink is committed to ensuring the bus system operates as efficiently as possible, in partnership with its operating subsidiaries. Over the 2014 Base Plan period, Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) will pursue the following initiatives:

• Recovery times: Recovery time is included at the end of each trip so that a bus can make the next trip on schedule. CMBC is using bus trip data to reduce recovery and other non-revenue time, while maintaining reliable service and without compromising safety. In 2012, CMBC removed 48,000 non-service hours from the conventional bus system, reducing recovery time to 17.1 per cent of total service hours from 18.2 per cent. The 2014 Base Plan sets a target of further reductions to 16 per cent of total service hours in 2016 and to just over 15 per cent by the end of the outlook period.

• Scheduling efficiencies: CMBC continually seeks efficiencies in bus scheduling and operations. Efficiency initiatives underway include trolley vehicle conversions, assessing timing points for bus connections, optimizing bus stop distances and reducing the pay to platform ratio.

• Reducing the pay to platform ratio: A key statistic to assess the efficiency of the operators’ shifts is the pay to platform ratio. This statistic divides platform hours (the number of hours a bus is on the road) by pay hours (the number of hours that a bus operator is paid for). This ratio is improved by reducing non-operating driver allowances and premiums such as travel time, make up and overtime. As of September 2013, CMBC has reduced the rate to 1.0955, bringing the total reduction since 2011 to 1.25 per cent per cent and saving $1.5 million dollars each year.

• Improving schedule reliability: To assess and monitor the effect of recovery time adjustments and scheduling efficiencies, CMBC relies on staff and customer feedback and GPS data from the buses. In 2013, CMBC added over 19,000 annual service hours to maintain and improve schedule reliability. TransLink’s increased provision of real-time transit information also helps customers plan their journey when buses are delayed.

• “Rightsizing” the vehicle: TransLink and CMBC work to analyze passenger demand and make adjustments to ensure that each transit route is served by a bus of appropriate size and capacity for customer demand. To take advantage of a lower cost per hour of service, the plan will increase the share of low-demand service provided with minibuses.

• “Rightsizing” the fleet: CMBC and contracted transit services continue to review and revise the size of the vehicle fleet and spare ratios to balance service reliability with vehicle investment and support costs. By retiring and not replacing vehicles, CMBC has reduced the size of the conventional bus, HandyDART and non-revenue support vehicle fleets in 2012 and 2013.

TRANSPORTATION - 47


• Depot administration: In September 2013, CMBC increased efficiency by centralizing dispatch and operations administration, reducing the number of operating depots from six to one. This centralization streamlined processes and removed duplication of tasks, saving $1.4 million in annual operating expenses.

DEPOTS

In accordance with our regional bus facility plan, TransLink began construction of the Hamilton Transit Centre in Richmond in 2013; the centre is expected to be operational by 2015. This modern facility will allow efficient maintenance and dispatching and have capacity for future service growth. TransLink will close the outdated North Vancouver Transit Centre in 2015 and service will be redistributed to the remaining transit centres.

AREA TRANSIT PLANS

Area Transit Plans identify future transit networks and priorities for improving local transit service in each of seven sub-areas within the Metro Vancouver region. Each plan includes a long-range (approximately 30-year) transit network vision, established in coordination with local growth patterns and land use plans. It also includes identified shorter-range transit network priorities for consideration in subsequent base or supplemental plans or ongoing network management efforts. The Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan will be completed in 2014, to be followed by a plan for the Richmond area.

COMPASS CARD AND FARE GATES

In 2013, TransLink will introduce an automated fare collection system, called Compass, across all transit modes. This project is a key initiative to increase customer convenience, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of collecting fare revenue, improve transit service quality through data analysis, reduce fare evasion and increase revenue, and improve safety and security on the transit system. The Provincial and Federal governments are providing a financial contribution to this project.

As a result of the introduction of Compass, TransLink has made changes to our fare products. Phased implementation of the Compass card program began in fall 2013 with a Beta Test period. Results from the Beta Test may also result in further tariff changes, which will be reflected in our transit tariff.

AirCare

The AirCare program, administered by TransLink since 1999, is considered to be one of the most effective vehicle emissions testing programs in North America. Since its implementation in 1992, AirCare has tested 2,754,298 vehicles, with 964,901 failing an emissions inspection at least once. By requiring these defective vehicles to be repaired, AirCare has significantly improved air quality in this region. The Province announced it will end AirCare testing for light-duty vehicles on December 31, 2014, shifting the government’s focus to controlling diesel particulate matter, which is generated mostly by heavy-duty diesel trucks. The program will continue normal operations until the end of 2014, performing about 450,000 inspections.

TRANSPORTATION - 48


Multi-Modal Programs

MOBILITY PRICING

As outlined in the adopted RTS Strategic Framework, TransLink will work with partners to undertake a near-term study to understand the impacts and implementation requirements of applying mobility pricing to the transit and road systems. This major regional study will increase the awareness and understanding of options for how to align the price of transportation more closely with how the system is used. TransLink will start engaging with stakeholders to scope and design the study, with the main part of the study taking place in 2014 and 2015.

PARK AND RIDE

TransLink adopted a comprehensive Park and Ride Policy in 2012 to guide the strategic decisions concerning park and ride facilities in the region. Park and ride facilities serve an important role in the regional transportation system because they provide access to the transit network to customers with low transit accessibility where they live. The policy addresses inconsistencies in facility amenities, pricing, management and access priority across the park and ride facilities that are under our control.

The pricing of park and ride facilities is consistent with TransLink’s broader mobility pricing strategy, as established in the RTS Strategic Framework. The price levels will be set to meet a number of key objectives, including: equity (all transportation users are paying for the infrastructure they use); cost recovery (both land and operational costs); efficiency; recognizing future land development potential; and leveraging the best use of assets and major TransLink projects. Charging for park and ride use provides some customer service benefits as well: customers can be more certain of finding a parking space at busy facilities, and TransLink will be able to provide more consistent facility amenities.

Since the adoption of the policy, fees were introduced at the new Carvolth Exchange park and ride facility in September 2013. Further work is underway to use variable pricing at all parking facilities under TransLink control.

For the purposes of this plan, increases in revenue are assumed starting in 2014.

CUSTOMER SERVICE

E-Communication Customer information is core to TransLink’s business. People who are well-informed about options and current conditions will be able to make more efficient and timely travel choices. TransLink has engaged in a number of electronic communication initiatives, including:

• Implementation of the real-time Next Bus travel information system for buses, mobile devices and desktop applications

• Implementation of the Regional Traffic Data System (RTDS) to provide real-time road speed and travel time information

• Social media applications that integrate with the TransLink website

TRANSPORTATION - 49


• Integration of transit data with Google Maps • Improved navigation and search features for the TransLink website • A new online customer information tool for Compass (AskCompass)

Under the 2014 Base Plan, TransLink will continue to improve our communications tools and look for new opportunities where appropriate. In addition, TransLink will continue to measure and report annually on effectiveness in all of our operations, as part of the statutory reporting requirements.

Wayfinding Wayfinding refers to the various types of information that customers rely on to plan, confirm and complete a journey. TransLink developed a wayfinding strategy that lays the groundwork for an integrated system of information across modes.

Consistent with past plans, TransLink will continue to upgrade wayfinding at new or renovated facilities, and wayfinding improvements will be implemented with the Evergreen Line rapid transit project.

TRAVELSMART

TravelSmart is a suite of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs that use information, outreach and online tools to promote changes in travel behaviour by increasing awareness of travel options and trip reduction initiatives.

Under the 2014 Base Plan, TransLink will continue to provide a wide range of programs under the TravelSmart brand, supported by partnerships with employers, municipalities, schools and other public and private agencies. The Travelsmart.ca website will continue to be a hub for program support, information and tools to help Metro Vancouverites make more sustainable travel choices. The programs include:

• Support for carpool and vanpool programs • Active transportation sponsorship and promotion • TravelSmart Schools program • Targeted outreach to new Canadians and seniors • Other programs such as Corporate Car Share, Telework, Guaranteed Ride Home program and

help with implementing workplace travel programs

TransLink Corporate and Transit Police

Under the 2014 Base Plan, the combined expenditures for TransLink Corporate and Transit Police total $118.6 million in 2014, a decline of $3.4 million from 2013, and are forecast to further decline to $113 million in 2016.

TRANSPORTATION - 50


Table 8: TransLink Corporate and Transit Police Expenditures (millions)

TRANSLINK CORPORATE EXPENDITURES

During 2013, TransLink continued to streamline corporate processes and seek out efficiencies. As of July 2013, payroll, financial systems support, administrative services, human resources, BCRTC technology services, and procurement and purchasing were centralized at TransLink. In 2014, TransLink started allocating the cost of shared services to its subsidiaries.

In 2014, TransLink will incur the following one-time costs:

• Compass start-up costs of $11 million, which were deferred from 2013 • Pattullo Bridge Strategic Review, costing $900,000 • Feasibility studies for roads, costing $1.5 million

The cost to operate Compass is estimated at $19.8 million per year for the remainder of the Plan, of which approximately $12 million per year is contract payments to Cubic, the Compass card and fare gate contractor. The remaining $7.8 million of ongoing operating costs are included in TransLink corporate costs.

TRANSIT POLICE

The Transit Police force has a vital role in ensuring safety and security on public transportation in the Metro Vancouver area. This dedicated policing presence remains an effective and flexible way to reduce crime and disorder, ensure high levels of police presence on the region’s transportation network and increase perceived safety. The Transit Police focuses on protecting people, property and revenue.

Addressing crime and fear of crime on public transit directly affects TransLink’s financial sustainability, as the perception of violence and fear of crime reduces ridership and revenues. The Transit Police will continue to focus on reducing crimes against people (both riders and transit personnel), such as assaults and robberies, and on controlling disorder, such as aggressive panhandling, vandalism, graffiti, unauthorized vending, and people avoiding payment of fare or flagrantly violating rules. While disorder offences may seem minor, these quality of life violations result in rider discomfort, and the discomfort fuels perceptions of fear.

Transit Police is committed to zero growth in the number of police officers it employs in the coming years. In 2012, Transit Police reduced overtime costs by 32 per cent and reduced the cost per police officer to one of the lowest rates among independent police agencies in Metro Vancouver2.

2 Ministry of Justice Police Resources in British Columbia, 2011 (dated January 2013). Available online at: http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/policeservices/statistics/docs/PoliceResourcesBC.pdf


TransLink Corporate 55.3$ 56.3$ 58.6$ 61.4$ 62.2$ 67.8$ SmartCards and Gating and Studies 9.1$ 34.6$ 28.0$ 16.4$ 17.3$ 20.7$

Subtotal - TransLink 64.5$ 90.9$ 86.6$ 77.8$ 79.5$ 88.4$ Transit Police 28.2$ 31.1$ 32.0$ 33.1$ 33.5$ 36.6$

Total TransLink and Police 92.7$ 122.0$ 118.6$ 110.9$ 113.0$ 125.0$

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 51


With the launch of Compass Card, Transit Police will assess opportunities to increase police presence on the regional transportation network. The organization will increase productivity and identify new models of deployment to manage the increase in service area expected with the development of the Evergreen Line.

Efficiencies

Independent audits in 2012 confirmed that TransLink is an efficient organization that provides the transportation services, programs and infrastructure that residents in this region depend on. Last year we faced some significant financial challenges. In the 2013 Base Plan, TransLink committed to a number of initiatives to reduce costs and boost revenues through efficiencies. These included finding scheduling and maintenance efficiencies, using the appropriate vehicle on each service route, and optimizing transit services to serve more riders across the region. Table 9 provides an overview of the efficiencies identified in the 2013 Base Plan and what is assumed in this plan.

Table 9: Efficiency Measures in the 2013 Base Plan and 2014 Base Plan* (millions) 2013 Base Plan

(annual average for Plan Period, 2013–2015)

2014 Base Plan (annual average for

Plan Period, 2014–2016) COST-SAVING EFFICIENCIES Scheduling Efficiencies $5.4 $3.9 Rightsizing the Transit Fleet $3.1 $1.3 Maintenance and Operations Efficiencies $8.8 $13.7 Reduced SkyTrain Frequency on Weekends $0.5 $0.5 Subtotal $17.8 $19.4 REVENUE-INCREASING EFFICIENCIES Additional Optimization of Bus Services $3.2 $6.2 Leveraging Real Estate Assets $18.3 $13.3 Park and Ride Pricing $2.2 $0.9 Subtotal $23.7 $20.4 Total Cost-Saving and Revenue-Increasing Efficiencies

$41.5 $39.8

* As compared to the cost predicted in the 2012 Moving Forward Plan.

COST-SAVING EFFICIENCIES

We are on track to exceed our overall target for cost-saving efficiencies, largely because of further efficiencies committed to within Coast Mountain Bus Company’s maintenance and operations.

REVENUE-INCREASING EFFICIENCIES

We identified some risks associated with the efficiency measures assumed in last year’s plans, and the revenue-increasing efficiencies are proving harder to achieve. Some of these risks have materialized, resulting in delays in our ability to leverage real estate assets and challenges with implementing pricing across all of our park and ride facilities.

TRANSPORTATION - 52


3. PARTNER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN Partner to make it happen is the third of three core strategies in the RTS Strategic Framework.

To make our plans a reality, we have to work together with all levels of governments, businesses, residents and customers to increase the level of certainty around timing and scale of investments, land use changes and policy measures. Transportation is not an end in itself, but a means of getting where we want to go and a vital component of our economy.

The sections below outline how TransLink will work with municipalities to ensure transportation decisions support land use decisions, ensure that goods move efficiently through the region, ensure we leverage our real estate assets, and partner with senior levels of government to invest in the transportation network.

Getting Land Use Right

As outlined in Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS), it is important to create a compact urban area and to get jobs, housing and major trip generators in the right locations to facilitate shorter trips and more trips by walking, cycling and transit. This is principally a matter for municipalities, who are responsible for local land use planning that is consistent with the RGS.

The Regional Transportation Strategy sets a target of 50 per cent of trips to be made by walking, cycling and transit by 2045. Investment in transportation services and infrastructure alone are not enough to achieve this goal. The region also needs land use policies that focus new development in areas where infrastructure for transit, bicycling and walking is already strong and that encourage community design to support future transit investment. When land use policies support higher-density, mixed-use walkable communities, the region can invest in services where they will be most effective and achieve better transportation performance. The Regional Transportation Strategy, the Regional Growth Strategy and municipal Official Community Plans all call for the integration of land use and transportation planning.

To achieve these goals, TransLink partners with municipalities, Metro Vancouver and other regional agencies to craft strong land use policies and plans that will support a sustainable transportation network for the future. TransLink participates in a variety of ways, including creating or supporting land use and design guidelines, and working with and providing guidance to partner agencies and municipalities on Official Community Plans, Regional Context Statements, major development proposals, transportation plans and other plan efforts.

The Goods Movement Strategy

As part of the Regional Transportation Strategy, TransLink has started to develop Metro Vancouver’s first Goods Movement Strategy. Goods movement in Metro Vancouver is complex, involving flows of freight and services associated with the region’s function as a gateway as well as serving local needs. Numerous private entities and public agencies have an interest in the goods movement sector. TransLink’s statutory mandate includes providing for the efficient movement of goods through the region. In this role, TransLink has undertaken various coordination and research activities in partnership

TRANSPORTATION - 53


with municipalities, senior government and stakeholders. However, TransLink presently has limited authority to provide regional-level planning, management and leadership for the goods movement system. The draft Goods Movement Strategy policy framework identifies potential ways for TransLink to foster greater regional collaboration and consistency with respect to goods movement policies, regulations and strategies. We expect to publish the draft Goods Movement Strategy in the fall of 2013 for consultation on policies and potential goods movement strategies. These will include investment, management and partnership activities. In 2014, TransLink will work with partners to develop a goods movement implementation plan to advance specific strategies for the goods movement sector.

Real Estate Program

The Real Estate Program manages leases, property rights, facilities and land to optimize its footprint and reduce real estate liabilities. TransLink Real Estate works with internal and external stakeholders to secure and invest in future real estate requirements in advance of transportation infrastructure projects and system growth. Acquiring the necessary real estate early allows TransLink to earn income on these assets and reduces the future capital cost. When property assets are no longer needed, TransLink will seek to maximize the sale value of those assets.

The Real Estate Program aims to pursue partnerships on projects that will provide integration with transportation infrastructure and promote transit-oriented development. Through the Adjacent and Integrated Development (AID) review process, TransLink works with the development community to mitigate the impact of development proposed for land near TransLink facilities and improve integration of transportation and land use activities. Between 1996 and 2011, there were only a handful of AID projects. However, due to the real estate market placing increased importance on proximity to transit, as well as the anticipated opening of the Evergreen Line in 2016, there are now 33 AID projects that are active or known to be starting soon.

Pass Programs

TransLink partners with the Province to deliver a number of pass programs, including the U-Pass and the BC Bus Pass.

The U-Pass BC Program is provided in partnership with the Province and participating post-secondary institutions and student societies. The purpose of the U-Pass is to encourage students to use transit while at university and college to establish lifelong travel behaviours. The U-Pass BC Program is funded by monthly pass fees charged to eligible students and contributions from the Province. TransLink will accommodate the demand generated by the program within the existing envelope of service hours.

The BC Bus Pass offers a reduced-cost annual bus pass for low-income seniors and individuals receiving disability assistance from the Province of British Columbia. Passes are valid in communities serviced by BC Transit or TransLink. The pass is only valid for the eligible rider and is non-transferable. HandyDART is not included in this program.

TRANSPORTATION - 54


4. FUNDING THE PLAN: REVENUE SOURCES As outlined in this section, TransLink will have sufficient revenues to maintain the services and programs committed to in the 2013 Base Plan, but we will not be able to invest in additional services or programs to meet the demands of our growing region. The SCBCTA Act defines the revenue sources that can be used in the annual Base Plans. Within that legislative framework, the 2014 Base Plan uses only “established funding sources” (as defined in the SCBCTA Act) to fund TransLink operations.

Revenue projections are based on the following assumptions for 2014 to 2016: • Transit fares: allowable increases (2 per cent per year) will resume in 2015 • Fuel tax rate: maintained at $0.17 per litre (statutory maximum) • Property tax revenues: will grow by 3 per cent per year • Parking rights tax rate: maintained at 21 per cent (statutory maximum) • Bridge toll rates: will increase at CPI index (assumed at 2 per cent per year) • Replacement tax revenues: maintained at $18 million per year (statutory maximum) • Hydro Levy: maintained at $1.90 per month per household account (fixed statutory amount)

Under this plan, total annual revenues are expected to be $1,439.9 million in 2014, rising to $1,608.4 million in 2016. The Outlook period of the financial strategy (2017 to 2023) captures the financial obligations and implications of the investments in services and infrastructure that have been committed to as of December 2016.

Table 10: Summary of Revenues (millions)

* Concessionaire’s Credit is the amortization of funding provided by the Concessionaire for the right to operate the Canada Line.

User Fees

While TransLink is committed to making the transportation system as affordable and accessible as possible, it is important for users to recognize that there is a cost associated with those services. User fees not only help TransLink pay for the services people use, but they also give people a clearer understanding of the true cost of their transportation choices. This section outlines the types of user fees TransLink currently employs.

Actual Budget2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2023

Transit Revenues 463.5$ 501.0$ 518.2$ 551.0$ 572.0$ 720.7$ Toll Revenues 38.9$ 40.1$ 39.6$ 41.1$ 42.6$ 52.5$

User Fees 502.4$ 541.1$ 557.8$ 592.1$ 614.6$ 773.1$ Motor Fuel Tax 335.3$ 335.1$ 337.8$ 335.7$ 334.7$ 328.5$ Property Tax 288.7$ 296.1$ 304.9$ 314.1$ 323.5$ 397.9$ Parking Rights Tax 53.2$ 52.9$ 56.0$ 56.9$ 57.7$ 64.1$ Other Taxes 37.2$ 37.5$ 37.7$ 38.0$ 38.4$ 40.6$

Taxation Revenues 714.4$ 721.6$ 736.4$ 744.7$ 754.3$ 831.1$ Senior Government Contributions 84.3$ 85.6$ 88.1$ 111.8$ 132.2$ 142.3$ Canada Line Concessionaire credit 23.3$ 23.1$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ Interest Revenue 31.7$ 36.7$ 34.2$ 37.7$ 43.9$ 66.2$ Gain on Disposal 41.6$ 13.0$ -$ -$ 40.0$ -$ Total Revenues 1,397.7$ 1,421.2$ 1,439.9$ 1,509.6$ 1,608.4$ 1,836.1$

Forecasts Outlook

TRANSPORTATION - 55


TRANSIT REVENUES

Transit revenues, consisting of both direct transit fare revenues, fare infraction revenues from the introduction of Bill 51, property rental, transit advertising and other revenues, account for more than one-third of total revenues.

Actual 2012 transit fare revenues were approximately $4 million more than budgeted in the 2013 Base Plan. Fare revenues in 2014 are expected to be less than forecasted in the 2013 Base Plan due to the delayed fare increase.

Table 11: Transit Revenue Projections (millions)

TransLink’s short term fares are regulated by the SCBCTA Act and by the Regional Transportation Commissioner. For short-term fares (i.e. passes up to three days in duration, such as single rides and DayPasses), TransLink may set prices up to the “targeted fare” level within a base plan. The “targeted fare” for a revenue transit service is equal to the fare as of April 1, 2008, increased by 2 per cent per year. In order to exceed the “targeted fare” level, TransLink must include the short term fare in a supplemental plan, the plan must be approved by the Mayors’ Council, and the Commissioner must approve the fare. The prices for non-short term fare products (e.g. monthly passes) are not subject to regulation.

Transit fare revenue will continue to grow through the Plan Period as a result of increased ridership. As part of the Compass card implementation, TransLink will maintain current fare rates through to 2015, and will discontinue certain discount programs to make rates more equitable across the system. Once the Compass card has been fully implemented in 2015, TransLink plans to implement a fare increase. Under this Plan, TransLink will not be reapplying to the Commissioner for the fare increase that was turned down in 2012. A schedule of transit fares is presented on page 58.

In 2013, TransLink will be introducing an automated fare collection system called Compass. As a result of the introduction of Compass, TransLink has made some significant changes to our fare products. A Beta Test in fall 2013 may also result in further tariff changes, which will be reflected in our transit tariff.

TOLL REVENUES

TransLink’s only source of toll revenues at this time is from the Golden Ears Bridge. Toll revenues will continue to grow over the plan period, although at a slightly slower rate than previously expected, as demonstrated in Table 10. Revenue forecast have been revised to account for lower than expected demand in 2013, possibly due to the introductory toll rates on the new Port Mann Bridge. Travel volumes on the Golden Ears Bridge are expected to stabilize and to increase by 2.5 per cent in 2014 and at declining rates of growth thereafter.


Transit Fare Revenue 448.8$ 486.4$ 504.8$ 536.1$ 555.9$ 702.1$ Property Rentals, Advertising, Other 14.7$ 14.6$ 13.4$ 15.0$ 16.1$ 18.6$ Total: Transit Revenues 463.5$ 501.0$ 518.2$ 551.0$ 572.0$ 720.7$

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 56


Toll revenues contribute to the cost of building and operating bridges but do not cover the full costs. In 2014, the cost of the contract payments to the Concessionaire and other operating and maintenance costs will exceed revenues by $47 million. As contract payments are scheduled to increase, the revenue gap will increase to approximately $53 million by 2016.

Toll rates vary by vehicle type and type of account, as is shown Table 12. The toll rates are adjusted for changes in inflation annually on July 15, and are forecast to increase each year by a rate of inflation of 2 per cent. TransLink continues to work with the Transportation Investment Corporation on interoperability between the Golden Ears and Port Mann bridges. Customers who use the Port Mann Bridge’s toll decal may be eligible for Transponder Registered toll rates when crossing the Golden Ears Bridge. In the near future, it may be possible for these customers to receive a single bill and manage their tolls for both Bridges through one tolling agency.

Table 12: Golden Ears Bridge Toll Rates (July 2013–July 2014) Vehicle Classification Transponder Registered Video Registered Unregistered Car $3.00 $3.55 $4.25 Small Truck $6.00 $6.55 $7.15 Large Truck $8.95 $9.60 $10.15 Motorcycle n/a $1.50 $2.75

Taxation Sources

Taxation is used as a revenue source to help spread the cost of providing a safe and efficient transportation system across as many beneficiaries as possible. Fuel taxes are used as a proxy for road user fees to help pay for the cost of maintaining and upgrading roads. Property taxes are used because all residents benefit from the transportation system, even if they don’t drive or use transit; the efficient movement of people, goods and services is vital to our economy, our environment and our quality of life.

MOTOR FUEL TAX REVENUES

Under the SCBCTA Act, TransLink is allowed to collect a fuel tax of $0.17/L in the Metro Vancouver region. The forecast revenues over the Plan and Outlook periods are expected to grow slightly in 2014 to $337.8 million and then begin to decline to $334.7 million in 2016 and $328.5 million in 2023, as shown in Table 10.

Fuel tax is currently TransLink’s second-largest source of revenue, accounting for 24 per cent of total revenues in 2014. In 2011 and 2012, there was a sharp decline in fuel consumption in the Metro Vancouver region; the same trend occurred in other parts of North America, and this has caused TransLink to re-evaluate its assumptions used to predict future fuel volume sales. The causes of the change in fuel consumption are believed to be reduced driving, increased use of fuel-efficient vehicles, and cross-border fuel purchases. Growth in diesel consumption has helped to dampen this decline in 2013.

TRANSPORTATION - 57


The forecasted fuel tax revenues for the Plan Period are estimated to be very close to what was forecast in the 2013 Base Plan (approximately 1 per cent higher than expected in the 2013 Base Plan), indicating that our near-term forecasts are accurate. However, further downward revisions to long-term gasoline volumes sales predictions forecast a decrease of $35 million relative to previous estimates for the outlying seven years. Fuel tax revenues thus continue to pose a revenue risk in the long term. TransLink will continue to monitor fuel consumption in the region, but the decline in this revenue source means that we need to find a new, more sustainable revenue source.

PROPERTY TAX

Property tax revenue will increase by 3 per cent per year, the maximum annual increase permitted under legislation for a base plan. Tax rates for all property classes necessary to generate the targeted revenue increase will be calculated to generate no more than the amount permitted by law and will be “rebalanced” for growth in the region and assessed values of homes. For example, if regional growth was 2 per cent, there would only be a 1 per cent increase in owner property taxes.

Table 13: Property Tax Projections (millions)

The 2013 Supplemental Plan removed the time-limited property tax increase (approximately $30 million per year in 2014 and 2015), and it is no longer included in TransLink’s expected revenues.

PARKING RIGHTS TAX REVENUE

Under the 2014 Base Plan, parking rights tax revenue is forecast to be $56 million in 2014 and is expected to increase to $57.7 million by 2016. The tax rate is set at 21 per cent, the maximum permitted under the SCBCTA Act.

The 2014–2016 forecasts assume a 1.5 per cent increase on the price of paid parking, based on various, and in some cases offsetting, factors such as declining office vacancy rates, vehicle use, and increasing tourism, inflation and population.

OTHER TAXES: REPLACEMENT TAX, HYDRO LEVY

The Replacement Tax forecast remains at its legislated maximum of $18 million per year for the Base Plan and Outlook period. The tax will continue to be collected from all allowable property tax classes. The Hydro Levy will be held at the statutory rate of $1.90 per month per residential account with no increases other than general population growth.

Senior Government Contributions

The Federal and Provincial governments contribute to TransLink’s capital projects through the Strategic Priorities (Federal Gas Tax) Fund, Building Canada Fund and the Provincial Transit Plan.


Property Tax 288.7$ 296.1$ 304.9$ 314.1$ 323.5$ 397.9$ Time-limited Property Tax -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 58


Restricted transfers from governments are deferred, and then recognized as revenue as the related stipulations in the agreement are met. A significant portion of funds received from the federal government programs requires TransLink to acquire specific transit assets with the funds, maintain the assets over a set holding period, and repay funds if the associated assets are sold before the end of the holding period. The revenue is recognized over the holding period of the asset rather than upon receiving the funds, which results in annual revenues as shown in Table 14 below. TransLink will recognize $88.1 million of revenues from senior government funding in 2014, increasing to $132.2 million in 2016.

Table 14: Senior Government Contribution Forecasts for Capital and Operations (millions)

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FUND (FEDERAL GAS TAX)

Under the terms of The Agreement on the Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues under the New Deal for Cities and Communities 2005–2015, Metro Vancouver agreed to commit 100 per cent of the federal Gas Tax Fund revenues earmarked for the Greater Vancouver Strategic Priorities Fund (SPF) to TransLink and transit initiatives. This SPF agreement with Metro Vancouver expires March 31, 2014, concurrent with the overarching federal agreements.

The Gas Tax Fund currently contributes roughly $122 million a year to transit projects across the region. Under current programs, senior government funding is applied to those projects meeting the funding program’s criteria up to the allowable limit. The funds are restricted and cannot be used for TransLink’s day-to-day business operations.

To date, TransLink has received $676.9 million in gas tax funds, which has been used to improve the accessibility of the fleet, replace older buses with new fuel-efficient vehicles and expand the transit fleet, including electric trolley, hybrid and CNG buses, a new SeaBus passenger ferry and 14 new SkyTrain cars. The Fund has also allowed us to make improvements to the Hamilton Transit Centre and SkyTrain Operations and Maintenance Centre and has supported the rehabilitation of TransLink’s vehicle fleet. This has helped us expand service by 28.4 per cent from 2005 to 2012 and given our customers one of the newest, most accessible and environmentally friendly bus fleets in North America.

The cumulative budget for anticipated new gas tax–eligible projects in the 2014–2016 three-year capital plan is $299 million, with $243 million in federal gas tax funding approved or planned to be proposed. These projects include several infrastructure improvements and replacements, but most are fleet replacement projects with the following anticipated vehicle volumes:

• Replacement of 289 conventional buses • Replacement of 57 Community Shuttles • Replacement of 129 HandyDART vehicles


Capital 65.1$ 66.3$ 68.8$ 92.5$ 112.9$ 123.0$ Operations 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ Total Contributions 84.4$ 85.6$ 88.1$ 111.8$ 132.2$ 142.3$

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 59


OTHER SENIOR GOVERNMENT FUNDING

To date, TransLink has received $20.1 million in Building Canada funding (BCF) on $39.8 million in capital costs as of December 31, 2012. In 2013 and onwards, we expect to receive $198.4 million on $287.0 in capital expenditures on BCF projects for SkyTrain station upgrades, fare gates, and West Coast Express facility and fleet expansion. All BCF projects are scheduled to be complete or substantially complete by the end of 2016.

TransLink receives an operating contribution of $19.3 million per year representing deferred provincial contributions for the Canada Line.

The 2013 federal budget, Economic Action Plan 2013, introduced over $53 billion in infrastructure investments, including over $47 billion in the new 10-year Building Canada Plan that renews and expands existing programs starting in 2014–2015. This new program includes a Community Improvement Fund (Gas Tax Fund and incremental GST rebate for municipalities), a new Building Canada Fund and the P3 Canada Fund as well as providing for funding through the end of current agreements. The implementation of the Building Canada Plan and its subsequent regional allocations through agreements such as a Strategic Priorities Fund require new agreements between all partners.

Interest Income

Interest is earned on sinking funds, capital contributions, debt reserve funds and cash balances. Most of the interest income is restricted and cannot be used to fund operations, with the exception of interest from cash balances.

In previous years, interest income has been calculated on restricted cash, but as the interest earned on these restricted funds can only be applied to fund eligible capital projects and not toward general operations it has been excluded in the 2014 Base Plan. This change is a requirement of the recently adopted Public Sector Accounting standards.

Interest revenue in the plan increases mainly due to the accumulation of further contributions to the sinking fund. The funds accumulated in this sinking fund go towards funding maturing debt issues, which happens in the later part of the Outlook period.

TRANSPORTATION - 60


Figure 2: Regional Weekday Mode Share from the 2011 Trip Diary1

5. ACHIEVING OUR GOALS

Outcomes

This section evaluates regional performance toward goals adopted in the 2013 Regional Transportation Strategy through the plan and outlook period. Only modest progress will occur toward most of these goals through 2015; progress will come mostly from vehicle efficiency improvements and the upcoming Evergreen Line. In spite of significant rapid transit network expansion, these gains will not be sustained through the outlook period, making the long-term goals more difficult to accomplish. Land use changes are essential to meeting regional and provincial transportation targets. Without transit-oriented land use and increased transit capacity and cycling infrastructure to support it, there will be little shift away from trips in personal vehicles and not much reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Under this 2014 Base Plan, there will be little progress toward reduced reliance on personal vehicles, reduced traffic congestion, and efficient movement of people and goods. This limits our ability to do our part to fulfil the Regional Transportation Strategy’s aspirations for a sustainable region.

The following analysis uses quantitative methods when possible, supplemented by qualitative analysis. TransLink offers comment on the implications for 2023 if current resource levels are extrapolated into the future.

Goal 1: Provide Sustainable Transportation Choices TransLink supports alternatives to single-occupant vehicle trips by:

• Improving regional accessibility • Reducing the need to own a car • Reducing distances travelled by car • Increasing walking, cycling and transit use

Limited progress toward this goal is expected under this plan, in part due to decreasing transit service levels per capita (2.58 hours per capita in 2013, declining to 2.33 in 2023), which will occur if expansion investments beyond those identified in this plan are not made in the intervening years. As a reference for these forecast impacts, Figure 2 shows the breakdown of regional weekday mode share as revealed in the 2011 Trip Diary.3

The 2011 Trip Diary results show that transit mode share has increased substantially since 1999, from 10 per cent to 14 per cent and is expected to remain at this level through the plan and outlook periods. This is well below the Provincial Transit Plan’s 2020 target of 17 per cent of weekday trips. 3 The Trip Diary is a household-level survey TransLink carries out about every four to five years to understand travel behaviours in the region better. Participants are asked to provide details about all trips made within a 24-hour period, including mode, destination and trip purpose.

TRANSPORTATION - 61


Table 15: Ridership Forecasts (millions)

Figure 3: Transit Mode Share Trends and Forecasts

Results from the 2011 Trip Diary indicate that walking mode share has declined since the 1990s,

remaining steady at the 2004 level of 11 per cent. This is not expected to increase under this plan.

Greater gains have been achieved in cycling, with cycling mode share increasing to 1.8 per cent (from

1.5 per cent). Achieving greater shifts to walking, cycling and transit depends on investment in

pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, demand‐side management measures and supportive land use.

Goal 2: Support a Compact Urban Area

TransLink supports the development of a compact urban area through:

Support for RGS Growth Targets

TRANSPORTATION - 62


The Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy (approved in 2011) set a goal to “create a compact urban area” by focusing growth in designated urban centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas (FTDAs). This goal is bolstered by employment and dwelling growth targets, which TransLink supports by ensuring that urban centres and FTDAs are connected to the Frequent Transit Network (FTN).

Based on data from the recently released 2011 Census of Canada and Pitney Bowes Canada Business Points, 54 per cent of the region’s dwellings and 66 per cent of regional jobs are located within walking distance4 of the FTN. This achievement results primarily from expansion of the FTN network, though employment growth has been slightly stronger along the FTN. Employment and residential projections provided by Metro Vancouver indicate that by 2023, growth within walking distance of the Frequent Transit Network will be offset by growth in areas that are less conducive to transit. It is expected that progress on this goal will erode over the Outlook period unless development in the region is concentrated in urban centres and FTDAs.

Goal 3: Enable a Sustainable Economy Projects that further this goal are grounded by the following objectives:

• Improve access to jobs • Ensure efficient and reliable goods movement • Ensure efficient and reliable movement of people • Increase resilience to fossil fuel shortages and price shocks

The opening of the Evergreen Line in 2016 will deliver progress on this goal by connecting Coquitlam Centre and Port Moody’s Inlet Centre to urban centres along the Expo and Millennium SkyTrain Lines. This will directly expand transit access to employment opportunities in Coquitlam, Port Moody, Burnaby, New Westminster, Surrey and Vancouver.

TransLink will continue to work with Transport Canada and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure on the Applied Freight Research Initiative (AFRI). Through a series of detailed studies focusing on various freight market sectors, AFRI informs decision makers to help increase the efficiency and reliability of goods movement in the region.

TransLink will also continue to identify opportunities to improve network efficiency. Initiatives such as transit signal prioritization, the Major Road Network review and the Goods Movement Strategy have the potential to improve traffic flow and travel times. Additional congestion relief is expected as personal vehicle trips shift to transit due to the opening of the Evergreen Line and other transit improvements. Efforts to improve congestion must be carefully evaluated, as experience worldwide has shown that gains can be lost to induced travel over time.

Goal 4: Foster Safe, Healthy and Complete Communities Investments that contribute toward this goal support some or all of the following objectives:

• Improve access to communities, including access by walking, transit and cycling

4 “Within walking distance” is defined as within a 5-minute walk (400 m) of a frequent bus corridor or within a 10-minute walk (800 m) of a rapid transit station.

TRANSPORTATION - 63


• Ensure transport safety • Ensure transport security • Reduce contribution to respiratory illness • Improve cardiovascular health

The Compass card and fare gates initiative, which will be implemented in 2013, will increase the public’s sense of safety and security on the transit system.

On the road network, the incidence of traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries has been declining since 2007. TransLink is working with municipalities to improve safety and security through the designation of a Dangerous Goods Movement Network on the Major Road Network. In 2012, TransLink summarized baseline conditions for traffic safety on the MRN. In 2013, TransLink will work with the municipalities to consider various initiatives for improving traffic safety for motorists in the region.

Transportation negatively impacts respiratory health through the emission of Criteria Air Contaminants (CACs), which refer to a group of pollutants that include sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, Particulate Matter (PM), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide, and ammonia. In Metro Vancouver cars and trucks were the primary source for regional Criteria Air Contaminant (CAC) emissions in 2010, responsible for 22% of the total5.

CAC emissions from transport are a product of distance travelled and vehicle fuel efficiencies. As shown in Figure 4, personal vehicle kilometers travelled (VKT) is expected to grow at a slower rate than population. While this is a positive shift in trend, it still means that total VKT in the region will continue to grow. The 2014 Base Plan is expected to deliver moderate progress on CAC emission reductions between 2014 and 2017, with greater gains in the outlook period due to the opening of the Evergreen Line. More significant reductions are expected through continued technological advancements to make vehicles more efficient.

5 Metro Vancouver. Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan (IAQGGMP), Burnaby: Metro Vancouver, 2011, 34.

TRANSPORTATION - 64


Figure 4: Percentage Change in Personal Vehicle Kilometers Travelled Through the Plan and Outlook Periods

Goal 5: Protect the Environment TransLink will contribute to protecting the environment through:

• Reduce contribution to climate change by lowering its greenhouse gas emissions • Support a compact urban form within the Urban Containment Boundary • Minimize encroachment on designated conservation, recreation, agricultural and rural lands

Transportation is a significant contributor to climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHGs from transport are a product of distance (vehicle kilometers travelled, or VKT), fuel economy (determined by vehicle fuel efficiency and network operations, such as congestion) and the carbon intensity of fuels. As with CAC emissions, the 2014 Base Plan is expected to deliver moderate progress on GHG emission reductions between 2014 and 2017, with greater gains in the outlook period due to the opening of the Evergreen Line. Additional reductions in emissions will result through continued technological advancements to make vehicles more efficient.

TransLink’s average transit fleet fuel efficiency and GHG emissions rates compare favourably to peer regions because of the electric-powered SkyTrain system and trolley buses, and the hybrid and alternative fuel conventional buses and community shuttles. Through the period of this plan and outlook, TransLink will continue to make improvements by replacing older-generation diesel buses.

TRANSPORTATION - 65


Key Performance Indicators

Key performance indicators for TransLink’s conventional and custom transit services are summarized in Table 16. These indicators show improvements in the conventional system over the plan period: operating costs per revenue passenger are lower, revenue per passenger is higher, boardings per service hour are higher, and cost recovery has improved. Operating cost per revenue passenger in the custom system will increase at inflation, while boardings per service hour remain stable.

TRANSPORTATION - 66


Table 16: Key Performance Indicators

Key Performance Metric* Actual results Budget Forecasts 2010-2016

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Avg Annual

Growth Rate

Conventional SystemBoarding per Service Hour 54.40 56.21 57.08 59.24 58.88 59.25 60.29

Annual change 3.3% 1.6% 3.8% -0.6% 0.6% 1.8% 1.7%

Operating Cost per Revenue Passenger 1 $3.90 $3.64 $3.76 $4.03 $3.98 $3.98 $3.96Annual change -6.9% 3.4% 7.2% -1.3% 0.0% -0.5% 0.2%

Operating Cost per Revenue Passenger (without energy) 1 $3.64 $3.37 $3.47 $3.72 $3.66 $3.64 $3.60Annual change -7.5% 3.0% 7.2% -1.5% -0.7% -1.0% -0.2%

Average Fare per Revenue Passenger $1.89 $1.86 $1.88 $2.08 $2.09 $2.20 $2.24Annual change -1.5% 1.0% 10.8% 0.7% 5.1% 1.8% 2.9%

Cost Recovery (all Transit Revenue) 1 51.4% 52.6% 51.6% 53.0% 54.2% 57.0% 58.4%Annual change 2.3% -1.9% 2.7% 2.3% 5.2% 2.4% 2.1%

Operating Cost per Total Vehicle Km - All 1 $5.61 $5.60 $5.91 $6.29 $6.32 $6.38 $6.38Annual change -0.2% 5.5% 6.4% 0.5% 0.9% 0.1% 2.2%

Operating Cost per Total Vehicle Km - All (without energy) 1 $5.24 $5.19 $5.45 $5.80 $5.82 $5.83 $5.80Annual change -1.0% 5.1% 6.4% 0.4% 0.1% -0.5% 1.7%

Access TransitBoarding per Service Hour 2.47 2.53 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55

Annual change 2.6% 0.9% -0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6%

Operating Cost per Revenue Passenger $34.03 $33.35 $34.53 $35.28 $35.16 $36.03 $36.60Annual change -2.0% 3.6% 2.2% -0.3% 2.5% 1.6% 1.2%

Operating Cost per Total Vehicle Km $4.60 $4.59 $4.83 $4.90 $4.99 $5.12 $5.20Annual change -0.2% 5.4% 1.3% 2.0% 2.5% 1.6% 2.1%

Operating Cost per Service Hour $76.39 $77.22 $80.61 $82.33 82.01$ 84.05$ 85.38$ Annual change 1.1% 4.4% 2.1% -0.4% 2.5% 1.6% 1.9%

1 Operating cost excludes one-time costs of $16M for Compass card and $4M for relocation in 2013, and $11M for Compass card in 2014, and $7.8M for Evergreen Line in 2016.

TRANSPORTATION - 67



TRANSPORTATION - 68


6. CONCLUSION TransLink continues to face financial challenges, but our commitment to efficiency and good management have allowed us to carry through with commitments made in last year’s plans and avoid cutting services or programs. These steps are still not enough to meet the current and future needs of the region. We continue to run an annual deficit, and our revenue sources are insufficient to make the investments we need.

TransLink will continue to support the dialogue between the Mayors’ Council and the Province on identifying new funding sources, with a referendum on transportation funding expected sometime in 2014.

Through 2014, TransLink will continue the dialogue with the region on the RTS Strategic Framework to identify an implementation plan for the next 15 years. This implementation plan will bring together strategies for investing in system expansion, managing demand and coordinating land use to ensure that the region achieves a transportation system that is affordable and supports healthy lives, in communities with prosperous businesses, safe streets, clean air and thriving natural environments.

TRANSPORTATION - 69



TRANSPORTATION - 70


APPENDIX A: FINANCIAL INFORMATION This section provides information on debt service, funding adjustments and cumulative surplus, assets and liabilities, and key economic assumptions and risk assessment. Appendix B contains detailed financial tables.

Debt Service

Debt service is made up of interest paid and depreciation.

Interest expense is budgeted at $182.6 million in 2014 and forecast to reach $211.6 million in 2016 and $249.3 million in 2023. The increase in interest expenses is due to growing debt related to capital expenditures. Interest rates are also forecast to increase somewhat over the plan and outlook periods.

Depreciation expenses are budgeted at $165.1 million in 2014 and are forecast to increase to $205.3 million in 2016 and reach $237.7 million in 2023. This increase reflects the replacement of assets, with new assets being more expensive than the older replaced assets due to inflation, as well as the depreciation of new major projects coming into service (Compass, Hamilton Transit Centre, Evergreen Line).

Table 17: Debt Service Expense (millions)

Funding Adjustment

TransLink is required by the SCBCTA Act to generate sufficient funds to pay for its expenditures and cannot budget for a funding deficit. The legislation specifies that TransLink must retain an accumulated funded surplus. TransLink has a policy of maintaining a minimum cumulative funded surplus of 12 per cent of annual operating expenditures for each of the plan period years, and a 10 per cent minimum cumulative funded surplus in each of the Outlook period years. The funded annual surplus/deficit and resulting cumulative fund balance are determined by adjusting the excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures (consistent with Canadian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) for the following:

• Reversing depreciation and other non-cash expenditures • Reversing restricted capital contributions and capital payments to municipalities for the MRN • Adding payments to sinking funds and public-private partnerships (P3) for debt repayment

A combined negative funding adjustment means a reduction of the cumulative fund balance, while a combined positive funding adjustment means an increase to the cumulative fund balance.


Interest Expense 177.7$ 180.2$ 182.6$ 191.4$ 211.6$ 249.3$ Depreciation Expense 164.0$ 176.6$ 165.1$ 186.2$ 205.3$ 237.7$

Forecasts

TRANSPORTATION - 71


Table 18: Funding Adjustments (millions)

As shown in Figure 5, the cumulative funded surplus is forecast to remain above TransLink’s stated policy levels for the plan and outlook period due to injection of revenues from the sale of real estate assets planned for in 2016 and 2017. Without the real estate revenues, the cumulative funded surplus would be below policy levels starting in 2017.

Figure 5: Cumulative Funded Surplus Level Forecasts for 2013 through 2023

Note: The dotted green line is the Cumulative Funded Surplus, as a percentage of operating expenditures. Based on the Funded Statement of Operations

Cash Flow Statement

The cash flow statement (Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows) can be found in Appendix B: Financial Tables. The beginning cash balance in 2014 is forecast at $217.0 million decreasing to $180 million at the end of 2016, representing a decrease of $37 million over the plan period. During the outlook period, the cash balance is forecast to grow to $445 million in 2023. The increase in cash balance is primarily due to the sale of real estate assets, which assumes net proceeds of $40 million in 2016 and $110 million in 2017.

Balance Sheet

The detailed balance sheet (Consolidated Statement of Financial Position) is shown in Appendix G: Financial Tables. Total assets will increase by $857 million from the beginning of 2014 to the end of


Funding Adjustments 20.3$ 24.4$ 7.3$ (37.4)$ (70.0)$ (60.2)$

Forecasts

23.0%18.9%

17.0% 15.5%

19.8%17.9% 17.3% 17.6% 18.7%

20.7%23.7%

12.3%8.8%

6.4% 5.1% 4.9% 5.4% 6.7%9.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

$1,600

$1,800

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Cum

ulat

ive

Surp

lus a

s a %

of O

pera

ting

Expe

nditu

re

Reve

nue

and

Expe

nditu

res (

Mill

ions

)

Operating Expenditure

Revenue

Revenue without real estate sales

Cumulative Funded Surplus % (Going Forward)Cumulative Surplus % without real estate sales (Going Forward)

3 Year Plan Outlook

TRANSPORTATION - 72


2016, bringing total assets to $6.2 billion, of which $5.3 billion are capital assets. By the end of 2023, total assets will amount to $6.4 billion, of which $4.7 billion are capital assets.

The gross direct debt level peaks at $3.49 billion at the end of 2017, which is below the borrowing limit of $3.5 billion. Thereafter it declines slightly to $3.45 billion by the end of 2023.

Figure 6: Debt Level

Key Assumptions

Economic assumptions have been developed through research from a variety of sources.

• Real GDP growth, employment and inflation are based on estimates from the BC Ministry of Finance Budget and Fiscal Plan (2013/2014 to 2015/16), which reflect consensus opinion of a blue-ribbon panel of economic advisors.

• Interest rates are based on forecasts from major Canadian chartered banks, the BC Ministry of Finance’s Budget and Fiscal Plan and TransLink’s credit spread and issue costs.

• The fuel volume forecast is based on the Provincial forecast modified for specific characteristics to Metro Vancouver, and fuel prices are estimated using US Energy Information Administration forecasts adjusted for Canadian prices, taxes and price differentials, which is the same method used for the 2013 Base Plan and Supplemental Plan.

• Construction inflation growth rates are based on BTY Group Market Intelligence (mid-range of the estimates).

Other major assumptions in the 2014 Base Plan include:

• Operation and maintenance funding for roads is maintained at the 2011 rate, adjusted for a 2 per cent annual allowance for inflation.

TRANSPORTATION - 73


• Continuation of senior government funding is assumed in this plan. TransLink will continue to use senior government funding made available for eligible projects.

Table 19: Key Assumptions for the 2014 Base Plan

Risk Assessment and Sensitivity Analyses

TransLink’s risk management strategies, policies and limits are designed to ensure TransLink’s risks and related exposures are aligned with corporate business objectives and risk tolerances. Using an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process, annual assessments are conducted that focus on strategic, political, reputational, financial, human resources, business effectiveness, health and safety, environmental, reporting and regulatory risks.

All residual risks that are considered high or moderate are incorporated into a corporate risk action plan whereby risks are assigned to an executive who is accountable for reporting back on efforts to mitigate this risk. The Chief Executive Officer provides an update to the Board of Directors at each Board meeting.

TransLink’s governance structure requires that a three-year Base Plan with Outlook be adopted each year. This structure, along with the alignment of the Budget and the Plan, ensures that TransLink is able to continually monitor all revenues and expenditures and modify its strategy to respond to changes in conditions.

Assumption Impact% Change/Rate per Year 2014 2015 2016 2017-2023 $ million / yr

Real GDP growth 2.2% 2.5% 2.5% 2.0%

Goods and Services Inflation 2.2% 2.2% 2.2% 2.2% + / - 1.7

Construction (excluding road construction) Inflation 1.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% + / - 0.0

Road Construction Inflation 1.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% + / - 0.0

Hydro Cost 1.9% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% + / - 0.1

Gasoline Cost (per litre & net of HST rebate) $1.37 $1.44 $1.52 $1.6 to $1.8Diesel Cost (per Litre & net of HST rebate) $1.39 $1.49 $1.61 $1.72 to $1.96 + / - 0.9

Interest Rates - Short Term 2.50% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% + / - 1.2 - Long Term 4.8% 5.3% 6.0% 6.8% + / - 1.3

Regional Fuel Consumption - Gasoline (million litres) 1,674 1,657 1,645 1633 to 1560 + / - 2.8 - Diesel (million litres) 313 317 324 330 to 372 + / - 0.6

TRANSPORTATION - 74


ENERGY Fuel Tax Revenue – High risk. Fuel price and fuel consumption forecasts are based on a number of assumptions, and even small changes in those assumptions accumulate large financial impacts over the plan and outlook period. For example, a 0.5 per cent change in annual average growth results in an impact of $90–$100 million over 10 years, with an impact of $10 million in the first three years.

Transit Operations Fuel Cost – Medium risk. Coast Mountain Bus Company secures future fuel contract prices up to a year in advance on up to 75 per cent of the anticipated diesel volume consumption requirements. A 1 per cent change to the price of purchased fuel would change expenditures by $400,000. TransLink is investigating further fuel hedging opportunities. TransLink and CMBC are looking at replacing retiring diesel buses with new compressed natural gas vehicles that provide significant fuel cost savings.

BC Hydro – Medium risk. BC Hydro’s resource plan calls for rate increases at double and triple the rate of inflation over the next three years due to lagging capital investments. For every 1 per cent increase in hydro rates, operating expenses would increase by approximately $700,000.

TRANSIT FARE REVENUES Medium risk. Ridership assumptions are the inherent driver for fare revenue projections. A 1 per cent change in ridership will result in a fluctuation of approximately $5 million per year in revenues.

ECONOMIC FACTORS Low risk. Future interest rates, inflation and general economic growth are notable risk factors that increase over the planning horizon. As the economy emerges from the present downturn, general inflation may exceed the annual rate increases allowed under the SCBCTA Act. A 1 per cent increase in general inflation over the plan and outlook period would affect TransLink expenditures by $1.7 million per year.

SENIOR GOVERNMENT CONTRIBUTION Medium risk. Federal agreements remain outstanding; consequently, regional agreements remain to be secured. The terms of those agreements will be critical to providing adequate long-term surety for project planning, especially in cases where project duration extends beyond the three-year Base Plan period and into the following seven-year Outlook.

GAIN (LOSS) FROM THE SALE OF ASSETS Medium to high risk. TransLink will manage the financial risk of surplus assets not being sold at forecasted amounts. Strategies would include additional cost containment and a re-evaluation of the capital investment plan.

OPERATIONAL SAVINGS Medium risk. CMBC achieved significant cost efficiencies in 2013. This plan assumes further efficiencies in scheduling, recovery and vehicle deployment, and other operating costs. The rate of conversion of conventional buses to community shuttles and savings realized will be less than what was anticipated in the 2013 plan.

TRANSPORTATION - 75


APPENDIX B: FINANCIAL TABLES Table 20: Consolidated Statement of Financial Position (thousands)

For the years ending 31 Dec. 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Financial AssetsCash 217,000 190,068 176,055 180,004 262,868 251,549 262,929 288,166 325,190 377,082 444,941Accounts receivable 110,249 113,556 116,963 120,472 124,086 127,808 131,643 135,592 139,660 143,849 148,165Restricted cash & investments 326,004 356,121 395,500 445,510 502,386 566,530 635,584 659,870 733,443 812,805 865,032Investments 116,856 119,329 122,907 127,567 133,408 139,516 145,904 152,585 159,571 166,877 174,518Debt reserve deposits 38,958 37,652 38,136 36,934 35,074 32,104 30,938 30,344 28,482 26,086 26,845

Financial Assets Total 809,068 816,726 849,561 910,487 1,057,822 1,117,507 1,206,998 1,266,557 1,386,346 1,526,700 1,659,500

LiabilitiesA/P & accrued liabilities 231,074 238,007 245,147 252,501 260,076 267,879 275,915 284,192 292,718 301,500 310,545Debt 2,127,587 2,319,671 2,626,694 2,700,946 2,800,393 2,785,947 2,792,392 2,755,673 2,766,114 2,772,607 2,748,088Deferred government transfer 1,211,930 1,405,225 1,484,681 1,494,570 1,470,351 1,435,388 1,367,840 1,308,062 1,246,616 1,167,019 1,149,203Employee future benefits 86,076 94,684 104,152 114,567 126,024 138,626 152,489 167,738 184,512 202,963 223,259Deferred Concessionaire credits 618,878 595,541 572,204 548,867 525,530 502,193 478,856 455,519 432,182 408,845 385,508Golden Ears Bridge contractor liability 1,045,059 1,051,375 1,050,913 1,049,021 1,045,557 1,040,378 1,033,348 1,024,302 1,013,077 999,512 983,403

Liabilities Total 5,320,604 5,704,502 6,083,790 6,160,472 6,227,931 6,170,410 6,100,839 5,995,486 5,935,219 5,852,445 5,800,006

Net DEBT Total (4,511,536) (4,887,776) (5,234,229) (5,249,985) (5,170,109) (5,052,903) (4,893,842) (4,728,929) (4,548,873) (4,325,746) (4,140,505)

Non-Financial AssetsNon-Financial Assets

Tangible capital assets 4,520,777 4,843,806 5,207,973 5,281,405 5,332,824 5,246,933 5,130,208 5,019,747 4,906,794 4,768,877 4,693,040Supplies inventory 38,978 40,147 41,352 42,592 43,870 45,186 46,542 47,938 49,376 50,857 52,383Prepaid expenses 8,684 8,944 9,213 9,489 9,774 10,067 10,369 10,680 11,000 11,330 11,670

Non-Financial Assets Total 4,568,438 4,892,898 5,258,538 5,333,487 5,386,468 5,302,186 5,187,118 5,078,365 4,967,171 4,831,065 4,757,093Non-Financial Assets Total 4,568,438 4,892,898 5,258,538 5,333,487 5,386,468 5,302,186 5,187,118 5,078,365 4,967,171 4,831,065 4,757,093

Accumulated Surplus 56,902 5,122 24,309 83,501 216,358 249,283 293,277 349,436 418,298 505,319 616,588

TRANSPORTATION - 76


Table 21: Statement of Operations (millions)

Actual Budget2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Transit Revenues 463.5$ 501.0$ 518.2$ 551.0$ 572.0$ 596.8$ 618.5$ 640.6$ 661.9$ 681.2$ 701.0$ 720.7$ Toll Revenues 38.9$ 40.1$ 39.6$ 41.1$ 42.6$ 44.1$ 45.5$ 46.9$ 48.4$ 49.7$ 51.1$ 52.5$

User Fees 502.4$ 541.1$ 557.8$ 592.1$ 614.6$ 640.9$ 664.0$ 687.6$ 710.2$ 731.0$ 752.1$ 773.1$ Motor Fuel Tax 335.3$ 335.1$ 337.8$ 335.7$ 334.7$ 333.7$ 332.7$ 331.8$ 330.9$ 330.1$ 329.3$ 328.5$ Property Tax 288.7$ 296.1$ 304.9$ 314.1$ 323.5$ 333.2$ 343.2$ 353.5$ 364.1$ 375.0$ 386.3$ 397.9$ Parking Rights Tax 53.2$ 52.9$ 56.0$ 56.9$ 57.7$ 58.6$ 59.5$ 60.3$ 61.3$ 62.2$ 63.1$ 64.1$ Other Taxes 37.2$ 37.5$ 37.7$ 38.0$ 38.4$ 38.7$ 39.1$ 39.4$ 39.7$ 40.0$ 40.3$ 40.6$

Taxation Revenues 714.4$ 721.6$ 736.4$ 744.7$ 754.3$ 764.2$ 774.5$ 785.1$ 796.0$ 807.3$ 819.0$ 831.1$ Senior Government Contributions 84.3$ 85.6$ 88.1$ 111.8$ 132.2$ 138.3$ 142.8$ 141.5$ 134.9$ 134.4$ 137.1$ 142.3$ Canada Line Concessionaire credit 23.3$ 23.1$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ 23.3$ Interest Revenue 31.7$ 36.7$ 34.2$ 37.7$ 43.9$ 49.9$ 51.7$ 51.0$ 54.6$ 57.7$ 61.9$ 66.2$ Gain on Disposal 41.6$ 13.0$ -$ -$ 40.0$ 110.0$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total Revenues 1,397.7$ 1,421.2$ 1,439.9$ 1,509.6$ 1,608.4$ 1,726.7$ 1,656.2$ 1,688.4$ 1,719.1$ 1,753.8$ 1,793.5$ 1,836.1$

Roads, Bridges and Bicycles 115.3$ 117.9$ 111.5$ 84.0$ 65.8$ 66.6$ 67.1$ 67.8$ 68.4$ 69.1$ 69.9$ 70.5$ Transit Operations 861.4$ 898.8$ 896.4$ 918.0$ 953.4$ 960.6$ 973.7$ 985.3$ 1,000.4$ 1,014.5$ 1,030.0$ 1,042.3$ TransLink Corporate & Police 92.7$ 122.0$ 118.6$ 110.9$ 113.0$ 114.2$ 115.7$ 119.3$ 118.9$ 122.0$ 123.3$ 125.0$

Operating Expenditures 1,069.3$ 1,138.7$ 1,126.5$ 1,112.9$ 1,132.3$ 1,141.5$ 1,156.6$ 1,172.3$ 1,187.7$ 1,205.7$ 1,223.1$ 1,237.8$ Surplus Before Interest and Depreciation 328.4$ 282.4$ 313.4$ 396.7$ 476.1$ 585.3$ 499.7$ 516.2$ 531.4$ 548.2$ 570.3$ 598.3$ Interest Expense 177.7$ 180.2$ 182.6$ 191.4$ 211.6$ 233.6$ 239.3$ 239.9$ 243.0$ 248.4$ 248.1$ 249.3$ Depreciation Expense 164.0$ 176.6$ 165.1$ 186.2$ 205.3$ 218.8$ 227.4$ 232.2$ 232.2$ 230.9$ 235.2$ 237.7$ Surplus/(Deficit) before Other Items (13.3)$ (74.4)$ (34.3)$ 19.2$ 59.2$ 132.9$ 32.9$ 44.0$ 56.2$ 68.9$ 87.0$ 111.3$

Provision for Contingency Fund Adjustment -$ (9.9)$ (13.5)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Surplus/(Deficit) before Funding Adjustments (13.3)$ (84.3)$ (47.8)$ 19.2$ 59.2$ 132.9$ 32.9$ 44.0$ 56.2$ 68.9$ 87.0$ 111.3$

Funding Adjustments 20.3$ 24.4$ 6.6$ (37.6)$ (70.0)$ (65.1)$ (57.6)$ (50.7)$ (47.4)$ (48.1)$ (51.6)$ (60.2)$ Funded Surplus/(Deficit) 7.1$ (59.9)$ (41.2)$ (18.4)$ (10.8)$ 67.7$ (24.6)$ (6.7)$ 8.7$ 20.7$ 35.4$ 51.1$ Opening Cumulative Funded Surplus 287.7$ 294.8$ 294.9$ 253.7$ 235.3$ 224.6$ 292.3$ 267.6$ 261.0$ 269.7$ 290.4$ 325.8$

Adjustment for 2013 forecast deficit 60.0$ Cumulative Funded Surplus 294.8$ 294.9$ 253.7$ 235.3$ 224.6$ 292.3$ 267.6$ 261.0$ 269.7$ 290.4$ 325.8$ 376.9$

The Statement of Operations does not include the results of AirCare and Transportation Property and Casualty Company Inc. ("TPCC")The 2013 budgeted cumulative surplus was based on the 2012 year end cumulative surplus forecast in August of 2012The 2014-2016 forecast reflects the current 2013 year end cumulative surplus forecast

Forecasts Outlook

TRANSPORTATION - 77


Table 22: Funded Statement of Operations (millions)

Actual Budget2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Transit Revenues 463.5$ 501.0$ 518.2$ 551.0$ 572.0$ 596.8$ 618.5$ 640.6$ 661.9$ 681.2$ 701.0$ 720.7$ Toll Revenues 38.9$ 40.1$ 39.6$ 41.1$ 42.6$ 44.1$ 45.5$ 46.9$ 48.4$ 49.7$ 51.1$ 52.5$

User Fees 502.4$ 541.1$ 557.8$ 592.1$ 614.6$ 640.9$ 664.0$ 687.6$ 710.2$ 731.0$ 752.1$ 773.1$ Motor Fuel Tax 335.3$ 335.1$ 337.8$ 335.7$ 334.7$ 333.7$ 332.7$ 331.8$ 330.9$ 330.1$ 329.3$ 328.5$ Property Tax 288.7$ 296.1$ 304.9$ 314.1$ 323.5$ 333.2$ 343.2$ 353.5$ 364.1$ 375.0$ 386.3$ 397.9$ Parking Rights Tax 53.2$ 52.9$ 56.0$ 56.9$ 57.7$ 58.6$ 59.5$ 60.3$ 61.3$ 62.2$ 63.1$ 64.1$ Other Taxes 37.2$ 37.5$ 37.7$ 38.0$ 38.4$ 38.7$ 39.1$ 39.4$ 39.7$ 40.0$ 40.3$ 40.6$

Taxation Revenues 714.4$ 721.6$ 736.4$ 744.7$ 754.3$ 764.2$ 774.5$ 785.1$ 796.0$ 807.3$ 819.0$ 831.1$ Senior Government Contributions 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ 19.3$ Interest Revenue 4.3$ 7.3$ 4.1$ 5.8$ 7.4$ 11.0$ 12.5$ 12.5$ 13.3$ 14.6$ 16.6$ 19.2$ Gain on Disposal 40.7$ 13.0$ -$ -$ 40.0$ 110.0$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total Revenues 1,281.0$ 1,302.4$ 1,317.6$ 1,361.9$ 1,435.6$ 1,545.5$ 1,470.3$ 1,504.4$ 1,538.8$ 1,572.2$ 1,607.0$ 1,642.8$

Roads, Bridges and Bicycles 49.0$ 53.6$ 46.9$ 46.8$ 45.2$ 46.0$ 46.5$ 47.2$ 47.8$ 48.5$ 49.3$ 49.9$ Transit Operations 861.4$ 890.3$ 896.4$ 918.0$ 953.4$ 960.6$ 973.7$ 985.3$ 1,000.4$ 1,014.5$ 1,030.0$ 1,042.3$ TranLink Corporate & Police 92.7$ 122.0$ 118.6$ 110.9$ 113.0$ 114.2$ 115.7$ 119.3$ 118.9$ 122.0$ 123.3$ 125.0$

Operating Expenditures 1,003.0$ 1,065.9$ 1,061.9$ 1,075.8$ 1,111.6$ 1,120.9$ 1,135.9$ 1,151.7$ 1,167.1$ 1,185.1$ 1,202.5$ 1,217.2$ Surplus Before Interest and Depreciation 278.0$ 236.5$ 255.7$ 286.1$ 324.0$ 424.6$ 334.3$ 352.8$ 371.7$ 387.2$ 404.5$ 425.6$ Interest Expense 110.8$ 112.6$ 114.4$ 123.0$ 143.3$ 165.5$ 171.5$ 172.5$ 176.1$ 182.1$ 182.6$ 184.8$ Capital Repayments 160.2$ 173.8$ 169.0$ 181.5$ 191.4$ 191.4$ 187.5$ 187.0$ 186.9$ 184.4$ 186.4$ 189.7$ Surplus/(Deficit) before Other Items 7.1$ (50.0)$ (27.7)$ (18.4)$ (10.8)$ 67.7$ (24.6)$ (6.7)$ 8.7$ 20.7$ 35.4$ 51.1$

Provision for Contingency Fund Adjustment -$ (9.9)$ (13.5)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Funded Surplus/(Deficit) 7.1$ (59.9)$ (41.2)$ (18.4)$ (10.8)$ 67.7$ (24.6)$ (6.7)$ 8.7$ 20.7$ 35.4$ 51.1$ Opening Cumulative Funded Surplus 287.7$ 294.8$ 294.9$ 253.7$ 235.3$ 224.6$ 292.3$ 267.6$ 261.0$ 269.7$ 290.4$ 325.8$

Adjustment for 2013 forecast deficit 60.0$ Cumulative Funded Surplus 294.8$ 294.9$ 253.7$ 235.3$ 224.6$ 292.3$ 267.6$ 261.0$ 269.7$ 290.4$ 325.8$ 376.9$

The Statement of Operations does not include the results of AirCare and Transportation Property and Casualty Company Inc. ("TPCC")The 2013 budgeted cumulative surplus was based on the 2012 year end cumulative surplus forecast in August of 2012The 2014-2016 forecast reflects the current 2013 year end cumulative surplus forecast

Forecasts Outlook

TRANSPORTATION - 78


Table 23: Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows (thousands)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 TOTALGro Projects Approved or Underway 368,906 457,924 337,498 35,395 - - - - - - - 1,199,723

- - - - - - - - - - - Bus Equipment - 2,636 2,395 1,835 2,539 1,867 1,498 1,000 803 - - 14,574

Facilities - 3,985 6,780 3,695 3,650 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 2,082 2,083 29,275 Infrastructure Exchanges/Bus loops - 525 325 775 620 620 500 500 500 564 564 5,492

Other - 250 - 925 5,150 33,150 50,750 58,750 62,550 52,448 50,198 314,171 TOH - 8,428 7,371 4,357 5,399 2,900 6,500 4,000 5,500 7,500 2,500 54,455

Vehicles Community Shuttle Replace - - 4,841 2,617 3,218 6,600 8,500 13,900 10,100 1,300 - 51,075 Conventional 40 ft Replace - - 64,117 90,303 91,080 59,700 12,300 - - - 76,300 393,800 Custom Replace - 23 9,432 6,512 5,283 7,900 6,300 11,700 10,300 7,400 6,800 71,650 Non-Revenue - 1,212 1,367 1,881 1,055 2,407 1,909 2,112 1,911 1,070 - 14,924

Non-Revenue - - - - 90 - - - - - - 90 Bus Total - 17,060 96,627 112,899 118,084 116,894 90,007 93,712 93,414 72,364 138,444 949,505 Rail Equipment - 3,088 11,761 15,213 9,359 1,872 2,590 1,404 656 2,300 - 48,243

Facilities - - 710 1,250 1,250 - - - - - - 3,210 Infrastructure Other - 2,906 3,662 5,335 2,000 5,483 2,828 7,784 5,000 4,000 745 39,743

Stations & surroundings - 3,117 1,218 2,230 1,180 1,505 1,180 1,505 1,180 1,881 1,180 16,176 Wayside Power Propulsion - - - 690 - 2,186 3,279 - - 699 - 6,854

Vehicles Non-Revenue - 250 725 175 90 135 - - - - - 1,375 SkyTrain Refurbish - - - - - - - 2,500 2,500 - 6,200 11,200

Non-Revenue - - - - - - 190 405 285 218 - 1,098 Other - - 18,000 9,000 - - - - - - - 27,000

Rail Total - 9,362 36,076 33,893 13,879 11,181 10,067 13,598 9,621 9,097 8,125 154,898 Roads MRNB and BICCS - 19,950 20,350 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 205,132 Roads Total - 19,950 20,350 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 205,132 Bridges Infrastructure Knight Street - 500 1 - - - - - - - - 501

Pattullo - 24,924 81,076 77,000 120,000 - - - - - - 303,000 Bridges Total - 25,424 81,078 77,000 120,000 - - - - - - 303,501 Corporate Technology Applications Applications - 3,137 8,170 10,189 5,500 6,000 8,000 7,000 7,500 8,318 8,000 71,814

Infrastructure - 4,319 3,922 2,367 2,250 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 24,858 Other - 353 726 1,021 - - - - - - - 2,100

Other - 14,450 2,000 5,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 61,450 Corporate Total - 22,260 14,818 18,577 17,750 13,000 15,000 14,000 14,500 15,318 15,000 160,222

TransLinkTL-Owned Bicycle Infrastructure - 750 1,000 1,000 480 450 450 450 450 523 303 5,856

TransLink Total - 750 1,000 1,000 480 450 450 450 450 523 303 5,856 Gross Cost Total 368,906 552,728 587,446 299,367 290,797 162,129 136,128 142,364 138,589 117,907 182,476 2,978,838 CoFed (107,777) (224,386) (156,535) (112,862) (89,622) (83,280) (49,390) (50,540) (48,360) (32,830) (99,790) (1,055,372)

Prov (24,438) (34,836) (11,658) (5,420) - - - - - - - (76,353) Other (457) (513) (502) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (5,472)

Contribution Total (132,672) (259,735) (168,695) (118,783) (90,122) (83,780) (49,890) (51,040) (48,860) (33,330) (100,290) (1,137,197) Total Net Cost 236,234 292,993 418,751 180,585 200,675 78,349 86,238 91,324 89,729 84,577 82,186 1,841,641

FORECASTS OUTLOOK

TRANSPORTATION - 79


Table 24: Projected Borrowing Compared to Borrowing Limit and Select Financial Ratios (millions)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Opening Gross Direct Borrowing 2,547 2,751 2,968 3,345 3,433 3,489 3,413 3,433 3,424 3,433 3,420 Retirements/Other (121) (76) (32) (93) (145) (155) (66) (100) (81) (97) (49) Short term borrowings 90 - - - - - - - - - - Borrowing in Yr - Capital 235 293 409 181 201 78 86 91 90 85 82

Closing Gross Direct Borrowing 2,751 2,968 3,345 3,433 3,489 3,413 3,433 3,424 3,433 3,420 3,454 Less: Sinking funds (679) (732) (841) (902) (912) (911) (991) (1,039) (1,108) (1,165) (1,271) Less: Debt Reserve Funds (39) (38) (38) (37) (35) (32) (31) (30) (28) (26) (27)

Closing Net Direct Borrowing 2,033 2,198 2,467 2,494 2,542 2,470 2,412 2,354 2,297 2,229 2,155

Established Borrowing Limit 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500

Reconciliation of Borrowing During Year to Annual Capital Expenditures:

Captial Expenditures (including MRN) 368 552 578 299 291 162 136 142 139 118 182 Less: Sr Gov't Contributions (132) (259) (168) (118) (90) (83) (49) (51) (48) (33) (100) Less: Other Contributions (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)

Net Expenditures 235 293 409 181 201 78 86 91 90 85 82

Add: Gross-up for Debt Reserve Fund - - - - - - - - - - - Net Borrowing amount for capital 235 293 409 181 201 78 86 91 90 85 82

FORECASTS OUTLOOK

TRANSPORTATION - 80


Table 25: Capital Cash Flows – Projects Approved and Proposed (thousands)

$ Thousands 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 TOTALGro Projects Approved or Underway 368,906 457,924 337,498 35,395 - - - - - - - 1,199,723

- - - - - - - - - - - Bus Equipment - 2,636 2,395 1,835 2,539 1,867 1,498 1,000 803 - - 14,574

Facilities - 3,985 6,780 3,695 3,650 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 2,082 2,083 29,275 Infrastructure Exchanges/Bus loops - 525 325 775 620 620 500 500 500 564 564 5,492

Other - 250 - 925 5,150 33,150 50,750 58,750 62,550 52,448 50,198 314,171 TOH - 8,428 7,371 4,357 5,399 2,900 6,500 4,000 5,500 7,500 2,500 54,455

Vehicles Community Shuttle Replace - - 4,841 2,617 3,218 6,600 8,500 13,900 10,100 1,300 - 51,075 Conventional 40 ft Replace - - 64,117 90,303 91,080 59,700 12,300 - - - 76,300 393,800 Custom Replace - 23 9,432 6,512 5,283 7,900 6,300 11,700 10,300 7,400 6,800 71,650 Non-Revenue - 1,212 1,367 1,881 1,055 2,407 1,909 2,112 1,911 1,070 - 14,924

Non-Revenue - - - - 90 - - - - - - 90 Bus Total - 17,060 96,627 112,899 118,084 116,894 90,007 93,712 93,414 72,364 138,444 949,505 Rail Equipment - 3,088 11,761 15,213 9,359 1,872 2,590 1,404 656 2,300 - 48,243

Facilities - - 710 1,250 1,250 - - - - - - 3,210 Infrastructure Other - 2,906 3,662 5,335 2,000 5,483 2,828 7,784 5,000 4,000 745 39,743

Stations & surroundings - 3,117 1,218 2,230 1,180 1,505 1,180 1,505 1,180 1,881 1,180 16,176 Wayside Power Propulsion - - - 690 - 2,186 3,279 - - 699 - 6,854

Vehicles Non-Revenue - 250 725 175 90 135 - - - - - 1,375 SkyTrain Refurbish - - - - - - - 2,500 2,500 - 6,200 11,200

Non-Revenue - - - - - - 190 405 285 218 - 1,098 Other - - 18,000 9,000 - - - - - - - 27,000

Rail Total - 9,362 36,076 33,893 13,879 11,181 10,067 13,598 9,621 9,097 8,125 154,898 Roads MRNB and BICCS - 19,950 20,350 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 205,132 Roads Total - 19,950 20,350 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 20,604 205,132 Bridges Infrastructure Knight Street - 500 1 - - - - - - - - 501

Pattullo - 24,924 81,076 77,000 120,000 - - - - - - 303,000 Bridges Total - 25,424 81,078 77,000 120,000 - - - - - - 303,501 Corporate Technology Applications Applications - 3,137 8,170 10,189 5,500 6,000 8,000 7,000 7,500 8,318 8,000 71,814

Infrastructure - 4,319 3,922 2,367 2,250 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 24,858 Other - 353 726 1,021 - - - - - - - 2,100

Other - 14,450 2,000 5,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 61,450 Corporate Total - 22,260 14,818 18,577 17,750 13,000 15,000 14,000 14,500 15,318 15,000 160,222 TransLink TL-Owned Bicycle Infrastructure - 750 1,000 1,000 480 450 450 450 450 523 303 5,856 TransLink Total - 750 1,000 1,000 480 450 450 450 450 523 303 5,856

Gross Cost Total 368,906 552,728 587,446 299,367 290,797 162,129 136,128 142,364 138,589 117,907 182,476 2,978,838 CoFed (107,777) (224,386) (156,535) (112,862) (89,622) (83,280) (49,390) (50,540) (48,360) (32,830) (99,790) (1,055,372)

Prov (24,438) (34,836) (11,658) (5,420) - - - - - - - (76,353) Other (457) (513) (502) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (500) (5,472)

Contribution Total (132,672) (259,735) (168,695) (118,783) (90,122) (83,780) (49,890) (51,040) (48,860) (33,330) (100,290) (1,137,197) Total Net Cost 236,234 292,993 418,751 180,585 200,675 78,349 86,238 91,324 89,729 84,577 82,186 1,841,641

FORECASTS OUTLOOK

TRANSPORTATION - 81


Table 26: Transit Service Hours (thousands)

Actual BudgetService Hours in Thousands 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023Conventional Bus 4,239 4,233 4,165 4,163 4,163 4,165 4,161 4,151 4,151 4,144 4,139 4,134 Community Shuttle 565 567 600 628 632 637 641 646 650 655 660 665 West Vancouver Conventional Bus 134 135 139 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 SkyTrain Expo and Millennium Lines 1,149 1,126 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 1,096 SkyTrain Canada Line 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 SkyTrain Evergreen Line 0 0 0 0 47 136 136 136 136 136 136 136 Rapid Transit Total 1,345 1,322 1,292 1,292 1,339 1,428 1,428 1,428 1,428 1,428 1,428 1,428 SeaBus 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 West Coast Express 141 42 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 Total Conventional Transit 6,435 6,310 6,248 6,275 6,326 6,422 6,422 6,417 6,421 6,419 6,419 6,419 Custom Transit (HandyDART) 592 598 598 598 598 598 598 598 598 598 598 598 Total Service Hours 7,027 6,908 6,846 6,873 6,924 7,020 7,020 7,015 7,019 7,017 7,017 7,017

Forecasts Outlook

TRANSPORTATION - 82


Table 27: Schedule of Golden Ears Bridge Toll Rates

Vehicle Classification July 2013 July 2014 July 2015 July 2016

Car 1.02 1.02 1.02

Transponder registered $3.00 3.05 3.10 3.15 Video registered $3.55 3.60 3.65 3.70 Unregistered $4.25 4.35 4.45 4.55 Small Truck

Transponder registered $6.00 6.10 6.20 6.30 Video registered $6.55 6.70 6.85 7.00 Unregistered $7.15 7.30 7.45 7.60 Large Truck

Transponder registered $8.95 9.15 9.35 9.55 Video registered $9.60 9.80 10.00 10.20 Unregistered $10.15 10.35 10.55 10.75 Motorcycle

Transponder registered n/a n/a n/a n/a Video registered $1.50 1.55 1.60 1.65 Unregistered $2.75 2.80 2.85 2.90

TRANSPORTATION - 83


Table 28: Schedule of Transit Fares

Note: Canada Line YVR Add Fare is applicable only to outbound travel from YVR.

TRANSPORTATION - 84


APPENDIX C: CONSULTATION To be completed following consultation to summarize input.

TRANSPORTATION - 85

7897908

To: Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee From: Ray Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: September 25, 2013 Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Subject: 2013 TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application RECOMMENDATION That the Board:

a) endorse the 2013 list of TransLink projects to be forwarded to the Gas Tax Management Committee for consideration as Approved Eligible Projects under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement; and

b) request that TransLink submit to the Metro Vancouver Board for consideration proposed amendments to prior year projects that require scope changes before submitted to review by the Gas Tax Management Committee.

PURPOSE This report provides comments and a recommendation on the list of TransLink projects to be submitted for funding under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement in 2013. BACKGROUND Every year, TransLink submits a list of projects to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) for funding under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement (i.e. federal gas tax revenues allocated to the region). UBCM staff reviews the application and makes recommendations to the Gas Tax Management Committee. Beginning in 2012, the Metro Vancouver Board endorsed the list of projects for funding in the current year prior to it being forwarded for final approval (Attachment). Under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement, TransLink can use the funds only for eligible regional transportation projects. Local roads, bridges, tunnels, bike lanes, walking paths, and sidewalks are not eligible transportation projects. The current fiscal year 2013/2014 (year 9 of the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement) is the final year for all current agreements in the province. Dialogue at Metro Vancouver about the renewal of this agreement and provisions for the allocation of Federal Gas Tax funds to the region is being led by the Intergovernmental and Administration Committee. For years 1 to 8, TransLink received $676 million in committed funding from the Strategic Priorities Fund, of which $349 million has been transferred to date from the committed Gas Tax restricted account toward approved Gas Tax projects. The total cost of all the approved projects to date is approximately $1 billion.

5.2

TRANSPORTATION - 86

2013 TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 2 of 4

DISCUSSION The Year 9 (2013) Application TransLink is proposing to submit projects with a total cost of $158.5 million, of which $122.6 million is being sought from the Strategic Priorities Fund. TransLink’s contribution is $35.9 million. Generally, these investments are consistent with the “Manage the System” principle in TransLink’s recently adopted Regional Transportation Strategy Framework.

Year 9 (FY 2013) Project # of Vehicles In-Service or

Completion Year

Total Cost ($ millions)

SFP Funding Request

($ millions)

TransLink Contribution ($ millions)

Conventional Bus Fleet Replacement

26 60-ft Hybrids 2016 $31.7 $25.4 $6.3 54 40-ft CNG 2017 $101.2 $75.9 $25.3 60 60-ft Hybrids

West Coast Express Buyout Part 3

28 2014 $12.8 $12.6 $0.2

Trolley Overhead Metrotown Group Rectifier Replacement

N/A 2017 $6.3 $4.7 $1.6

Automated Train Control – Existing Equipment Replacement – Phase 2

N/A 2016 $6.5 $4.0 $2.5

Total -- -- $158.5 $122.6 $35.9 TransLink provided additional information about the definition, scope, and urgency of these projects: • Conventional Bus Fleet Replacement: These buses are intended to replace aging diesel buses. • West Coast Express Buyout: TransLink is exercising a contract option to buy out the 28 West

Coast Express cars. The end of the operating lease is approaching and cannot be extended. The buyout (including a decision on how to replace the cars in 2030) must be exercised before December 28, 2013 for 13 cars and before March 28, 2014 for the remaining 15 cars. The “Part 3” represents the portion of the buyout that is allocated to Year 9. Parts 1 and 2 are to be claimed with reallocated funds in Years 5 and 6 as proposed in the amendments.

• Trolley Overhead Replacement: The Metrotown transit exchange has three rectifier stations that are approaching the end of their useful lives. They were first installed in 1987. About one rectifier station will be replaced per year starting in 2015.

• Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement: This equipment is nearing the end of its useful life after nearly 28 years of service. Implementation will begin in June 2014 and the in-service date is June 2016.

TRANSPORTATION - 87

2013 TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013

Page 3 of 4

Also included in the memorandum from TransLink is a “Plan B” list of projects. TransLink’s intention is to bring forward the “Plan B” list of projects only in the event that changes are required to the “Plan A” list of projects. Proposed Amendments to Years 5 to 8 As part of this application, TransLink is proposing amendments to previously approved projects for years 5 to 8. TransLink has the ability to submit amendments, if required, to approved projects from prior years, and they have done so before through an application to UBCM concurrent with the application for that current year. Generally, according to TransLink, these amendments reflect budget changes as projects progress, and reallocation of funds remaining from completed projects to other projects. It is the role of the Gas Tax Management Committee, with recommendations from UBCM staff, to adjudicate all applications, including requests for amendments to prior year approved projects. Comments on the Current Process to Endorse TransLink’s Applications As the current agreement is nearing completion, it is worthwhile reflecting on some of the practical challenges to date. This discussion could benefit the preparation of a new agreement for the allocation of Federal gas tax dollars to the region. One of the challenges is that the information provided to Metro Vancouver from TransLink is non-standardized and comes in different forms and levels of detail from year to year. There are no measures of incremental performance, such as reductions in fuel consumption or air emissions. It is challenging for staff to provide a consistent level of review of the merits of these projects. A second challenge is TransLink’s ability to modify current year projects and amend prior year approved projects without Metro Vancouver involvement after the Board has reviewed and endorsed them. The ability to modify current year projects or amend approved projects based on completions, changing scopes, priorities, and costs is generally a supportable feature. The issue is that there is no feedback loop in place for UBCM staff to either advise Metro Vancouver of these modifications/amendments, and their merits, or seek review and endorsement of the proposed changes before recommendations and decisions are made. Looking forward, future processes should consider building in a feedback loop for Metro Vancouver to review and take action on any modifications to current year projects and amendments to prior year approved projects, notwithstanding the content and merit for these changes. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board:

a) endorse the 2013 list of TransLink projects to be forwarded to the Gas Tax Management Committee for consideration as Approved Eligible Projects under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement; and

b) request that TransLink submit to the Metro Vancouver Board for consideration proposed amendments to prior year projects that require scope changes before submitted to review by the Gas Tax Management.

2. That the Board provide alternative direction to staff.

TRANSPORTATION - 88

2013 TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 4 of 4

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The 2013 projects support the Regional Growth Strategy and Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan because they contribute to the continual modernization of transit fleet and assets, and help to preserve the reliability of transit services for customers. If the Board chooses Alternative 1, TransLink can proceed with its formal submission for funding of $122.6 million under the Strategic Priorities Fund Agreement. If the Board chooses Alternative 2, the Board may wish to provide additional comments on the 2013 list of TransLink projects. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Metro Vancouver received a list of projects that TransLink intends to submit for funding under the Strategic Priorities Fund agreement. Staff recommends Alternative 1 as the list of projects for 2013 is endorsable and the projects are supportive of the transit objectives in the Regional Growth Strategy. Attachment: Memorandum from Bob Paddon and Cathy McLay, TransLink, dated

September 25, 2013, “TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application” (Orbit #7885974)

TRANSPORTATION - 89

To: Metro Vancouver Transportation Committee From: Bob Paddon, Executive Vice-President Strategic Planning and Public Affairs,

TransLink Cathy McLay, CFO and Executive Vice-President of Finance and Corporate Services, TransLink

Subject: TransLink Strategic Priorities Fund Application Date: October 1, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Purpose This report outlines the projects TransLink proposes to forward to the Strategic Priorities Fund Management Committee for approval as Approved Eligible Projects under the Strategic Priorities Fund agreement. 2. Context The federal Strategic Priorities Fund (SPF) initiative was started in 2005/06 fiscal year and provides predictability and long-term funding for municipalities. The fund is tied to the following environmental improvements:

• Reduced GHGs • Clean air • Clean water

In Metro Vancouver, 100% of the SPF is dedicated to transit investment, which has been agreed upon by Metro Vancouver, TransLink and the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM). The Fund is administered by UBCM through the Gas Tax Fund Management Committee and use of the funds is limited to development or improvement of public transit system. Projects are approved by application to the UBCM Management Committee and changes must be approved by the Management Committee. Funds are held in a restricted account and interest earned is also restricted to approved projects; funds are received by TransLink after successful application. Funds are audited annually by external auditors and TransLink reports on proposed projects annually to UBCM and Metro Vancouver. The Federal Government has indicated that current agreements will end after Year 9 (2013/2014). 3. Gas Tax Funding Outcomes The SPF is an essential element of TransLink’s funding resources, enabling TransLink to replace and upgrade vehicles and infrastructure as they near their end of life. Without the SPF, these investments would either not happen or would require funding to be redirected from other areas of the organization, likely leading to service reductions across the region.

TRANSPORTATION - 90

DDavis

Text Box

5.2 Attachment

TransLink uses the funds for the following projects to achieve key goals and objectives: :

• Replace older diesel buses with 680 fuel-efficient vehicles (Hybrid and CNG) (453 received to date)

o Achieves air quality improvements including reductions in GHG’s • Expand the transit fleet with 284 new buses

o Provides better coverage o Improves frequency

• Acquire 287 new HandyDART vehicles (157 rec’d to date) o Improves service for customers with mobility impairments

• Improve Fleet o Establishes a 100% accessible fleet o Expands service by 22.9% o Provides the most modern fleet in North America

• Acquire two new replacement SeaBus passenger ferries (1 rec’d to date) • Expand by 14 new SkyTrain vehicles

o Increases capacity • Upgrade Infrastructure

o Hamilton Transit Centre o Expo Line Propulsion power upgrades o SkyTrain Operating and Maintenance Facility Expansion

For years 1 to 8, TransLink received $676 million in committed funding from the Strategic Priorities Fund, of which $349 million has been transferred to date from the committed Gas Tax restricted account toward approved Gas Tax projects. The total cost of all the approved projects is approximately $1 billion. As of December 2012, TransLink has received/committed the following amount of funds:

$-

$20,000,000

$40,000,000

$60,000,000

$80,000,000

$100,000,000

$120,000,000

$140,000,000

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8

Received/Committed Remaining Funds Spent

TRANSPORTATION - 91

Below is a summary of approved projects:

Year Conventional Bus

Community Shuttle HandyDART SkyTrain SeaBus Supporting

Infrastructure

1 119

2 139

3 178

4 108 19 55 1

SkyTrain Maintenance Facility Expansion

5 32 81 14

SkyTrain Yard Expansion Expo Line Propulsion Power System Upgrade

6 39 68 114* 1 Compass card equipment for buses

7 52 69 Hamilton Transit Centre

8 117 24 133

Total 784 180 269 128 2 * Refurbishment of 114 Mark 1 cars to extend the life of the vehicles by 15 years 4. Year 9 Proposed Gas Tax Projects For Year 9 (2013/2014), TransLink has identified the following projects to be considered for funding under the SPF. The total cost is $158.5 million, of which $122.6 million is being sought from the SPF. TransLink’s contribution is $35.9 million.

Year 9 (2013/2014) Proposed Projects Purpose

No. of Vehicles (if applicable)

Total Costs ($ millions)

Gas Tax Funding ($ millions)

Expected Completion Date

2016 Conventional Bus (Part 2)

Fleet Replacement (40ft)

Fleet 26 $ 31.7 $ 25.4

TRANSPORTATION - 92

Year 9 (2013/2014) Proposed Projects Purpose




Expected Completion Date

Replacement (60' Hybrid)

Trolley Overhead (TOH) Metrotown Group Rectifier Replacement

$ 6.3 $ 4.7 2017

WCE Buyout Part 3 28 $ 12.8 $ 12.6 2014 Automated Train Control- Existing Equipment Replacement - Phase 2

$ 6.5 $ 4.0 2016

2017 Conventional Bus

Fleet Replacement (40' CNG)

54

$ 101.2 $ 75.9

Fleet Replacement (60' Hybrid)

52

Total Year 9 $ 158.5 $ 122.6 These are practical investments that are consistent with TransLink’s Manage the System principle. Further detail on the projects is listed below:

• Conventional Bus Fleet Replacement: These buses are intended to replace aging diesel buses.

• West Coast Express Buyout: TransLink is exercising a contract option to buy out the 28

West Coast Express cars. The end of the operating lease is approaching and cannot be extended. The buyout (including a decision on how to replace the cars) must be exercised before December 28, 2013 for 13 cars and before March 28, 2014 for the remaining 15 cars. The “Part 3” represents the portion of the buyout that is allocated to Year 9. Parts 1 and 2 are to be claimed with reallocated funds in Years 5 and 6 as proposed in the amendments.

• Trolley Overhead Replacement: The Metrotown transit exchange has three rectifier stations that are approaching the end of their useful lives. They were first installed in 1987. About one rectifier station will be replaced per year starting in 2015.

• Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement: This equipment is nearing the end of its useful life after nearly 28 years of service. Implementation will begin in June 2014 and the in-service date is June 2016.

TransLink has also prepared a list of alternate projects, below, if any of the above proposed projects are not approved.

TRANSPORTATION - 93

Year 9 (2013/2014) Alternate Projects Purpose No. of

Vehicles Total Costs ($millions)

Gas Tax Funding ($millions)

2016 Community Shuttles Fleet Replacement 13 $ 2.25 $ 1.80

2016 HandyDart Fleet Replacement 39 $ 6.40 $ 5.12 2017 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement (20) Fleet Replacement 20 $ 3.58 $ 3.22

2017 HandyDART Vehicle Replacement (35) Fleet Replacement 35 $ 5.87 $ 5.28

Total- Plan B Projects $ 18.10 $ 15.42 5. Amendments to Previous Years TransLink will also be bringing forward amendments to previously approved projects from Gas Tax years 5 to 8. Budget changes are sometimes made as projects progress, and require additional internal approval. The proposed amendments are intended to better match committed funding for each gas tax project to their respective updated budgets. Re-allocations will also be requested to move funds remaining from completed projects to other Gas Tax projects. This will ensure that funds are in place for the projects that most require funding A list of proposed amendments are included in Appendix A.

TRANSPORTATION - 94

Appendix A: Proposed Amendments to Projects in Years 5-8 Below is a list of previously approved projects and proposed amendments for each year from 2009-2013. The highlighted fields indicate areas that would change under the proposed amendments. 1. Year 5 Projects for 2009/10 – Previously Approved Year 5 (2009/2010) Previously Approved

Purpose


Total Costs ($ Millions)

Gas Tax Funding ($ Millions)

Conventional Bus- Hybrid Expansion and Replacement Option 1

Fleet Expansion/ Replacement 32 21.2 20.0

Skytrain Mark II Vehicle Expansion- Option 1 Fleet Expansion 14 42.2 41.0

Expo Line Propulsion Power Upgrade

Infrastructure Upgrade N/A 58.3 43.0

Skytrain Operating and Maintenance Centre-Phase 2


HandyDART Vehicle Replacement 2011-2012 Fleet Replacement 81 12.0 10.9

Total Year 5 180.9 124.3

Projects for 2009/10 – Requested Change Year 5 (2009/2010) Requested Change

Purpose




Conventional Bus- Hybrid Expansion and Replacement Option 1

Fleet Expansion/ Replacement 32 21.2 20.0

Skytrain Mark II Vehicle Expansion- Option 1 Fleet Expansion 14 42.2 41.0

Expo Line Propulsion Power Upgrade


Skytrain Operating and Maintenance Centre-Phase 2


HandyDART Vehicle Replacement 2011-2012 Fleet Replacement 81 9.3 9.0

WCE 28 car buyout (Part 1) 28 7.6 1.9 Total Year 5 179.3 124.3

TRANSPORTATION - 95

2. Year 6 Projects for 2010/11 – Previously Approved

Year 6 (2010/2011) Previously Approved Purpose No. of Vehicles

(if applicable) Total Costs ($ Millions)


2nd SeaBus Replacement Fleet Replacement 1 25.1 23.2 2011 Community Shuttle Fleet Replacement 13 3.0 2.7 2012 Conventional Bus (60ft.) Fleet Replacement 39 38.7 31.9 SkyTrain Mark 1 Vehicles Fleet Refurbishment 114 37.9 28.5 2014 Community Shuttles Fleet Replacement 55 14.9 13.4

Smart Card Bus Upgrades Infrastructure Upgrade N/A 171.3 22.8

Total Year 6 290.9 122.6 Projects for 2010/11 – Requested Change Year 6 (2010/2011) Requested Change

Purpose




2nd SeaBus Replacement Fleet Replacement 1 24.2 21.1 2011 Community Shuttle Fleet Replacement 13 2.0 1.9 2012 Conventional Bus (60ft.) Fleet Replacement 42 29.7 28.6 SkyTrain Mark 1 Vehicles Fleet Refurbishment 114 37.9 28.5 2014 Community Shuttles Fleet Replacement 53 9.9 8.9

Smart Card Bus Upgrades Infrastructure Upgrade N/A 47.4 30.3

WCE 28 car buyout (Part 2) 28 3.4 3.2 Total Year 6 154.4 122.6

TRANSPORTATION - 96

3. Year 7 Projects for 2011/12 – Previously Approved Year 7 (2011/2012) Previously Approved

Purpose




2012 Community Shuttle Fleet Replacement 25 6.2 5.5

2013 Community Shuttle Fleet Replacement 44 8.7 8.3

2014 Conventional Bus Fleet Replacement 52 34.0 30.6 Hamilton Transit Centre Facilities Upgrade N/A 125.4 78.2

Total Year 7 174.3 122.6


Purpose




2012 Community Shuttle Fleet Replacement 25 3.9 3.7 2013 Community Shuttle Fleet Replacement 57 8.8 7.9

2014 Conventional Bus Fleet Replacement 45 30.6 25.8

Hamilton Transit Centre Facilities Upgrade N/A 122.6 85.2

Total Year 7 174.3 122.6

TRANSPORTATION - 97

4. Year 8 Projects for 2012/13 – Previously Approved

Year 8 (2012/2013) Previously Approved Purpose No. of Vehicles

(if applicable) Total Costs ($ millions)


2013 HandyDART Vehicles Fleet Replacement 35 4.5 4.0 2014 HandyDART Vehicles Fleet Replacement 65 11.3 10.1 2015 HandyDART Vehicles Fleet Replacement 33 6.0 5.4 2015 Community Shuttle Bus Fleet Replacement 24 7.2 6.3


Fleet Replacement (40ft) 51 36.7 33.0





Total Year 8 137.3 122.6


Purpose




2013 HandyDART Vehicles Fleet Replacement 31 4.5 4.0 2014 HandyDART Vehicles Fleet Replacement 65 10.3 9.0 2015 HandyDART Vehicles Fleet Replacement 55 9.0 7.8 2015 Community Shuttle Bus Fleet Replacement 24 4.9 4.2







Total Year 8 141.2 122.6

TRANSPORTATION - 98

7883817

To: Transportation Committee From: Ray Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 2, 2013 Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Subject: Comments on the Proposed Bridge to Replace the George Massey Tunnel RECOMMENDATION That the Board: a) advise the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure that the project scope, design, and

performance of the proposed bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel should take into careful consideration of the effects on the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, and Regional Transportation Strategy, and that measures be included to support, and not detract from, regional objectives.


PURPOSE On September 20, 2013, the Premier of British Columbia announced a preferred alternative for the replacement of the George Massey Tunnel. A new bridge will replace the tunnel on approximately the same alignment. This report provides comments based on published information from the Province, and the consultation that was undertaken over the past year. BACKGROUND In fall 2012, the Province undertook Phase 1 consultation on the replacement of the George Massey Tunnel to solicit feedback from stakeholders on issues around the current tunnel. In spring 2013, the Province undertook Phase 2 consultation to solicit feedback on five scenarios for replacing the tunnel. Metro Vancouver staff participated in stakeholder sessions and attended public meetings in both phases. Two staff letters were sent to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (see Attachments 1 and 2). There was a general understanding that the process to select a preferred alternative would take place after the provincial election, and after additional analysis have been completed and the results shared with stakeholders. The announcement by the Premier on September 20, 2013 was unexpected in light of the absence of technical information provided during consultation about the performance and other attributes of the alternatives. DISCUSSION

5.3

TRANSPORTATION - 99

Comments on the Proposed Bridge to Replace the George Massey Tunnel Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 2 of 7

Current Facility The George Massey Tunnel is an important regional facility being one of five Fraser River crossings in the region. According to the Province, the George Massey Tunnel carried over 80,000 vehicles each day in 2011.

Source: Phase 1 Consultation Discussion Guide, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure

The existing capacity of the tunnel is close to or over capacity for most of the day, leading to long queues and travel times. The lack of capacity was identified by the Province as a key issue as both sides of the river is expected to experience growth in population, jobs, and travel. The Province also identified other issues with the tunnel such as not meeting modern seismic standards, aging operating systems, narrow lanes, the general lack of redundancy when traffic incidents occur, and no capacity for cyclists. According to the Province, the modal share of vehicles traversing the tunnel in 2011 was:

• Single-occupant vehicles: 77% • Multiple-occupant vehicles: 10% • Heavy commercial trucks: 9% • Light commercial trucks: 3% • Buses: 1% (accounts for 26% of person throughput)

TRANSPORTATION - 100

Comments on the Proposed Bridge to Replace the George Massey Tunnel Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013

Page 3 of 7

Proposed Bridge Concept Only limited information has been provided by the Province about the proposed bridge. An animated flyover prepared by the Province depicts a facility with 5 lanes in each direction (4 general purpose lanes, plus one high-occupancy vehicle lane) and protected cycling/pedestrian lanes in each direction. In comparison, the current tunnel provides 3 lanes of travel in the peak direction (comprising a counterflow lane). The bridge concept represents an increase in vehicle travel capacity over the existing tunnel. Construction on the new bridge would start in 2017. Table 1. Capacity of Proximate Fraser River Crossings

Lanes per Direction

George Massey Tunnel

Proposed Bridge

Concept

Alex Fraser Bridge

Queens-borough Bridge

Pattullo Bridge

Port Mann Bridge

Golden Ears

Bridge General Purpose

3 in peak direction;

1 in off-peak direction

4 3 2 2 (reduced to 1 at night)

4 (3 in service)

3

High-Occupancy Vehicles

0 1 0 0 0 1 0

Total 3 in peak direction;

1 in off-peak direction

5 3 2 2 (reduced to 1 at night)

5 (4 in service)

3

The geographic scope of the project remains unclear. In earlier consultation materials, the scope was stated to include consideration of “all interchanges within the Highway 99 corridor from Bridgeport Road in Richmond to the Canada/US border in Surrey, as well as connections to other provincial highways, and regional and local routes”. From inspection of the animated flyover and a schematic provided by the Province, the portion of the bridge on Deas Island appears to be located on land owned by the Province. This land divides the east and west portions of Deas Island Regional Park. The Province has owned this land since before the Park was established in the early 1980’s. It is likely that the Province will release a more complete description of the project in the near future, and staff’s analysis will be updated as appropriate. Considerations for a Regional Dialogue The George Massey Tunnel was identified by the Province as a longer-term gateway priority. With the Gateway Program nearing completion, the Province has elevated the watercrossing to be the next roadway expansion priority in the region. And much like the Gateway Program, the proposed bridge will engender debate and discussion about the way transportation projects are prioritized and the impacts of expanding road capacity on land use, air quality, transportation, and economic objectives. A new bridge with expanded capacity provides opportunities to incorporate new measures that cannot be accommodated in the existing tunnel. These measures could include (subject to the release of detail project information by the Province):

• direct access for pedestrians and cyclists; • a structure that meets modern seismic standards; • lane widths that meet current guidelines;



• better lane allocation for trucks and high-occupancy vehicles; • better lane allocation for longer-distance through trips and shorter-distance trips; and • a better match between capacity and current and future travel demands by commercial

trucks, buses, and general purpose traffic. Staff sees no objections to these measures. From a transportation performance and economic perspective, ensuring traffic runs safely and efficiently benefits commuters in passenger vehicles and buses, transit service providers, and trucks carrying goods to market. From an environmental perspective, reducing extensive periods of idling vehicles is beneficial for air quality, fuel consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. These interests are aligned with the Regional Growth Strategy:

RGS Action 1.2.9(c): That TransLink and the province, as appropriate, work with municipalities to support the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and service vehicles, to, from, and within Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas (e.g., by enhancing the design and operation of the road network), where appropriate. RGS Action 2.1.5: That TransLink, the federal government and the province and their agencies develop and operate transportation infrastructure to support economic activity in Urban Centres, Frequent Transit Development Areas, Industrial, Mixed Employment areas and ports and airports.

The major objections are the missing perspective on the relationship between this corridor and the wider transportation network, and the absence of appropriate capacity and transportation demand management measures required to carefully align this facility with broader regional land use, environmental, and transportation objectives. There are some potential near-term and long-term consequences. 1. Potential for Induced Vehicle Travel and Emissions in the Near-Term

A new facility having expanded vehicle capacity could induce more vehicle trips. Inducing more vehicle trips runs counter to established regional objectives. TransLink’s newly adopted Regional Transportation Strategy Framework establishes two regional targets:

• To make half of all trips by walking, cycling, and transit; and • To reduce the distances people drive by one-third.

Metro Vancouver has established ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets and air quality objectives. An expanded facility might:

• unleash pent up travel demand (travelers who may be adverse to sitting in traffic may decide to take more trips in the future as a result of the improved travel times and safety),

• shift travelers from transit or carpooling to single-occupant vehicles, or • change travel patterns (travelers who were used to taking an alternate route, such as the

Alex Fraser Bridge, may switch over to the new facility via the South Fraser Perimeter Road).



Page 5 of 7

An expanded facility without additional complementary measures to discourage single-occupant vehicles and to encourage carpooling, transit, and cycling would indeed be deficient and short-sighted.1 Unfettered access could easily result in a congested facility. Further, an expanded facility may simply move the “bottleneck” further downstream or upstream. The Regional Growth Strategy anticipated that the current spate of road expansion projects would not be the last one. During consultation, Metro Vancouver advised the Ministry of the following actions in the Regional Growth Strategy:

RGS Action 5.2.6: That TransLink and the province, as appropriate, in collaboration with municipalities seek to minimize impacts from within-and-through passenger, goods, and service vehicle movement on the environment and public health affecting the region and areas within the Lower Fraser Valley Airshed.

RGS Action 5.2.7: That the TransLink and the Province, as appropriate, evaluate the following elements when contemplating future expansion of private vehicle capacity on major roads, highways, and bridges: a) Transportation demand management strategies as alternatives to, or as integral

with, such capacity expansion; b) Impacts on the achievement of the Regional Growth Strategy and the Integrated Air

Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, including potential cumulative impacts.

2. Potential for Unanticipated Land Use Changes in the Long-Term

Reducing travel time expands the catchment area for a given travel time budget. Improvements to accessibility are capitalized in land markets. The improved access to lands, be it residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural, could have a distributional effect on shifting growth from one area to another. This is an uncertainty that the Regional Growth Strategy never explicitly considered in the population and employment forecasts. It is unclear what basic demographic assumptions the Ministry has been using to justify the proposed capacity on the bridge. It is also unclear what assumptions have been made about plans by Port Metro Vancouver to expand container throughput capacity at Roberts Bank, and to better utilize available marine terminal capacity at Fraser Surrey Docks.

3. Unclear Impacts on the Development of the Regional Transportation Strategy and Regional

Goods Movement Strategy The uncertainty around the new bridge puts into doubt the validity of the technical work being undertaken by TransLink for the Regional Transportation Strategy, the Regional Goods Movement Strategy, and the Pattullo Bridge Strategic Review Study. The development of the Implementation Plan is crucial – priorities for new medium-term transportation investments will be deliberated and established. The uncertainty around the capacity of the new bridge and interactions with other components of the regional transportation system must be understood (i.e., whether the new bridge will be tolled). The effect on truck movement is unclear.

1 In recent years, the Province has implemented transit-supportive measures along Highway 99, such as the expansion of the South Surrey Park and Ride, highway shoulder bus lanes, and queue jumpers.



ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board:

a) advise the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure that the project scope, design, and performance of the proposed bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel should take into careful consideration of the effects on the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, and Regional Transportation Strategy, and that measures be included to support, and not detract from, regional objectives.


2. That the Board receive for information the report titled, “Comments on the Proposed Bridge to Replace the George Massey Tunnel”, dated September 25, 2013.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Information about the project scope, design, performance, cost, procurement method, and tolling policy has yet to be released by the Province. The availability of provincial funding for other transportation priorities in the region may be affected by this decision. There may be potential impacts imposed by the bridge on Deas Island Regional Park and proximate ecologically sensitive areas – these impacts may have financial bearing on Metro Vancouver, and will be further analyzed and deliberated by the Environment and Parks Committee. If the Board approves Alternative 1, then staff will continue to work with the Province to ensure that the land use and air quality/GHG implications of the new bridge be considered and integrated into the project scope, design, and performance. If the Board chooses Alternative 2, then no further action will be taken at this time. Given the lack of information about the proposed bridge, it may be prudent for the Board to simply monitor and respond once the project definition report, or equivalent document, is released by the Province. At that point, staff would be able to clarify some or all issues identified in this report, and a more fulsome discussion could take place. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION On September 20, 2013, the Premier of British Columbia announced a preferred alternative for the replacement of the George Massey Tunnel. A new bridge will replace the tunnel on approximately the same alignment. This report provides comments based on published information from the Province, and the consultation that was undertaken over the past year. Providing for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods is one of many regional objectives. Staff recommends Alternative 1 to ensure that the project takes into careful consideration of the effects on the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas



Page 7 of 7

Management Plan, and Regional Transportation Strategy, and that measures are included to support, and not detract, from these regional objectives. Further, the regional transportation authority has an important role to play in this process. In the newly adopted Regional Transportation Strategy Framework, TransLink commits to “work with the Province to ensure a replacement to the Massey Tunnel is integrated with the regional network in a way that is consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy and the Regional Transportation Strategy.” Therefore, staff recommends Alternative 1 requesting that TransLink advise Metro Vancouver on the potential transportation implications of this bridge. This information will be useful to advance the regional dialogue, not only on the merit of the bridge itself, but also implications for investment priorities in the Regional Transportation Strategy. Issues related to potential impacts that a new bridge may impose on Deas Island Regional Park and ecologically sensitive areas, and the appropriate mitigation and compensation, will be addressed by the Environment and Parks Committee. Attachments: 1. Province of British Columbia News Release, “B.C. moves forward with bridge to replace Massey

Tunnel”, dated September 20, 2013. (Orbit doc # 7884824) 2. Letter to Geoff Freer, Executive Project Director, dated April 3, 2013, “Metro Vancouver Staff

Comments on the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project, Phase 2” (Orbit doc # 7882676) 3. Letter to Geoff Freer, Executive Project Director, dated December 19, 2012, “Metro Vancouver

Staff Comments on the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project” (Orbit doc # 7885026)


N E W S R E L E A S E

For Immediate Release

2013PREM0095-001430 Sept. 20, 2013

Office of the Premier

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure

B.C. moves forward with bridge to replace Massey Tunnel

VANCOUVER – Today, Premier Christy Clark announced that the Government of British Columbia will move ahead on the project to replace the George Massey Tunnel, with construction of a new bridge on the existing Highway 99 corridor to begin in 2017.

“We are keeping our promise to replace the George Massey Tunnel and improve the Highway 99 corridor, starting in 2017,” said Premier Christy Clark. “Congestion at the tunnel is frustrating

for families and stalling the economy. A new bridge will improve travel times for transit, commuters and commercial users, and open the corridor up to future rapid transit options.”

The first step in the project was to consult with the public and stakeholders about support for a

new crossing and on crossing options. The findings were summarized in two reports, the second of which was released today. In addition to indicating public support for a new bridge on the

existing Highway 99 corridor, other key findings include:

Strong support for resolving the problem of congestion, safety and rel iability at the Massey Tunnel.

Strong desire for transit, cycling and pedestrian improvements, including protecting the Highway 99 corridor for future rapid transit.

Doing nothing is not an option; strong opposition to only improving the existing tunnel. With a consensus that people want a new bridge on the existing Highway 99 corridor, the next step in the project is the preparation of a more detailed project scope and business case.

“With the Port Mann Bridge open to traffic and the South Fraser Perimeter Road nearing completion, we’re moving to fix the next of B.C.’s worst traffic bottlenecks,” said Transportation

and Infrastructure Minister Todd Stone. “Today, we’re getting to work to develop a solution that will improve the movement of people and goods on a highway that is important to

commuters, and vital to our Asia Pacific Gateway.”

Engineering and technical work is now underway to develop a project scope and business case for the new bridge and associated Highway 99 corridor improvements. This work will be

presented for public discussion next spring, ensuring that the project remains on track for

construction to begin in 2017.


DDavis

Text Box

5.3 Attachment 1

In the interim, the ministry will proceed immediately to lengthen the Steveston off-ramp on Highway 99 at the north end of the George Massey Tunnel. This will improve safety and reduce

Highway 99 congestion for motorists at this location. The project will go to tender by the end of September.

“Traffic congestion at the George Massey Tunnel has been the number one concern for

residents and businesses in Delta for well over a decade,” said Corporation of Delta Mayor Lois Jackson. “Premier Christy Clark and the B.C. Government are to be commended for making the tunnel replacement a priority issue and for its timely commencement of public consultation to gauge community support. The tunnel replacement will form a critical part of the transportation infrastructure supporting the movement of people and goods; strengthening the

local and regional economy as well as trade through the Asia-Pacific Gateway.”

“Congestion at the George Massey Tunnel negatively impacts the safe and efficient movement of goods by truck, effectively slowing our economy,” added BC Trucking Association President

and CEO Louise Yako. “We support an improved crossing and I look forward to providing input from our association and membership as the project develops.”

“The Province’s continued commitment to improve and expand our highway infrastructure,

like the replacement of the George Massey Tunnel, supports our economy,” B.C. Road Builders & Heavy Construction Association President Jack Davidson said. “In addition to the good-paying

construction jobs these projects create, there are long-term benefits to communities and for all road users.”

The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure intends to open an office for the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project on Steveston Highway near the tunnel, where the public

can learn more about the project. The office will be open later this fall.

Consultations for the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project were held in two phases between November 2012 and April 2013. There were more than 2,000 participants in the on-

line engagement and at open houses in Delta, Richmond and Surrey. Learn More: Learn more about the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project at www.masseytunnel.ca

The report on the second phase of consultations is available at: http://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel/information-centre/document-library/ A rendering of a bridge on the Highway 99 corridor is available at: http://ow.ly/p2aS3 An animated video flyover is available at: http://ow.ly/p2bix

A backgrounder follows. Contacts:

Sam Oliphant Office of the Premier 250 952-7252


http://www.masseytunnel.ca/

http://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel/information-centre/document-library/

http://ow.ly/p2aS3

http://ow.ly/p2bix

Kate Trotter Government Communications and Public Engagement

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure 250 356-8241


BACKGROUNDER

Progress on Highway 1 improvements and other major projects

The B.C. government’s commitment to invest $650 million over 10 years into Highway 1 between Kamloops and the Alberta border was announced by Premier Christy Clark at the

Union of B.C. Municipalities meeting in 2012.

This year, the government of British Columbia moved ahead with work to widen sections of the

Trans-Canada Highway between Kamloops and the Alberta border, to improve safety and support goods movement, trade and tourism.

The ten-year Highway 1 Kamloops to Alberta Four-Laning Program will create an estimated

3,300 direct jobs.

Highway 1 projects underway in 2013:

Phase 2 of the Monte Creek to Pritchard project, which will widen seven kilometres of Highway 1 to four lanes and construct an interchange at the community of Pritchard.

Phase 1 of the Pritchard to Hoffman’s Bluff project, which will widen three kilometres of Highway 1 to four lanes.

Five other Highway 1 projects are in various stages of development. Cariboo Connector Phase 2:

The $200-million second phase to widen sections of Highway 97 to four lanes between Prince George and Cache Creek is well underway.

Two of the nine projects have been completed.

Construction is nearing completion on another two projects.

All nine will be completed or underway by 2017.

This builds on 18 projects valued at $240-million in Phase 1, completed in 2011.

At the completion of Phase 2, almost 50 per cent of the 440 km highway between Cache Creek and Prince George will be either three or four lanes wide.

Other major four-lane improvement projects in B.C.:

Highway 2: 8th Street to Rolla Road under construction. Value $36.5 million.

Highway 2: Tupper Creek to 192nd Road under construction. Value $39.2 million.

Highway 3: Friday Creek to Laidlaw under construction. Value $10.9 million.

Highway 97: Winfield to Oyama completed August 2013. Value $77.9 million.

Contact:

Kate Trotter Government Communications and Public Engagement

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure 250 356-8241

Connect with the Province of B.C. at www.gov.bc.ca/connect


http://www.gov.bc.ca/connect

7

- Pbinn,nq, Policy irnil Env,ronrr’ent (3epo,t,nent

IL’!. 6044 326350 Fux 604 432-6296

File: CP-15-02

Mr. Geoff Freer

Executive Project Director

George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure

c/o 7351 Vantage WayDelta, BC V4G 3C9

Dear Mr. Freer:

Re: Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project, Phase 2

Metro Vancouver is pleased to provide the attached comments on the George Massey Tunnel Replacement

Project. As part of the Phase 2 consultation, Metro Vancouver staff attended one of your community open

houses, and the stakeholder meeting. In lieu of completing the feedback form, we are providing this letter.

In Phase 1, Metro Vancouver provided comments from a broad perspective based on its plans: Regional

Growth Strategy, Integrated Air quality and Greenhouse Gas Management, Regional Parks Plan, and

Regional Food System Strategy. The attached comments identify which items have been addressed and

which items remain outstanding. As the Phase 2 technical analysis proceeds through the summer, the

Ministry should make every opportunity to consult with Metro Vancouver on the issues identified in this

letter.

For further information, please contact Heather McNeil, Regional Planning Division Manager, at

604.436.6813, or myself at 604.451.6615. Thank you.

Yours truly,

&Delia Laglagaron, MPA

Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer

General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment

D L/R K/mit

cc: Bob Paddon, Executive VicePresident, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLink

End: Attachment 1: Detailed Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on Phase 2

Attachment 2: Letter dated December 19, 2012, “Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on

George Massey tunnel Replacement Project”

lt/3278 TRANSPORTATION - 110

DDavis

Text Box

5.3 Attachment 2

ATTACHMENT 1George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project, Phase 2

Detailed Metro Vancouver Staff Comments

Multi-Modal PerspectiveThe draft project goals and evaluation criteria support a multi-modal perspective to a certain extent. Oneof the draft project goals is to support objectives for regional people movement, including increasing transitridership and protecting the Highway 99 corridor for future rapid transit, and providing cyclist andpedestrian access. One of the evaluation criteria is pedestrian and cycling accessibility.

In our first letter, dated December 19, 2012, we suggested that the George Massey Tunnel ReplacementProject should be recast as a multi-modal mobility project, where in transportation demand managementand features to support walking, cycling, buses, rapid transit, and multiple-occupancy vehicles are built intothe project definition rather added afterwards.

It is desirable for the project to respond to Action 5.2.7 in the Regional Growth Strategy requestingTransLink and the Province to evaluate the following elements when contemplating future expansion ofprivate vehicle capacity on major roads, highways, and bridges:

a) Transportation demand management strategies as alternatives to, or as integral with, such capacity

expansion;

b) lrnpacts on the achievement of the Regional Growth Strategy and the Integrated Air Quality andGreenhouse Gas Management Plan, including potential cumulative impacts.

Forecasting ConsiderationsWe remain concerned about the absence of information about the basic assumptions being made aboutfuture population and employment projections and spatial allocations in the travel demand modeling work.We understand that there may two versions of the Regional Transportation Model being calibrated anddeployed right now on two major infrastructure planning projects — the Massey Tunnel ReplacementProject and the Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project. Both are truck corridors.

It is urgent that a meeting of provincial, TransLink, and Metro Vancouver staff be convened to set out theparameters for travel demand forecasting. Ministry staff committed to this at the stakeholder meeting.And we reiterate that if alternative land use scenarios or adjustments to land use assumptions are madethat depart from current assumptions, the Ministry should coordinate with Metro Vancouver staff toensure transparency and traceability of such work. Metro Vancouver will be happy to assist in such efforts.

Performance-Based PerspectiveIn our first letter we suggested clear outcomes should be identified so that alternative can be evaluated.We also offered some performance measures, which are consistent with regional objectives, to beincluded. The following tables shows to what degree our initial comments have been incorporated into theproject definition. We respectively request that the Ministry incorporate the remaining elements of ourcomments.


Performance Measure Included in Included in DraftDraft Project Evaluation Criteria

GoalChange in Mode Share for transit, multiple-occupant vehicles, No Nocycling, walking, goods/service vehicles (net reduction of single-occupant vehicles required)Change in vehicle kilometers travelled as a measure of No Notransportation intensity and emissions (net reduction required)Change in greenhouse gas emissions (net reduction required) No NoChange in common air contaminants, including diesel particulates Yes Yesand road dust (net reduction required)Travel time reliability for transit, and goods and service vehicles Yes Yes(net reduction in travel time for multiple-occupant vehicles andtransit vehicles; same or increased travel time for single-occupantvehicles)

Change in agricultural lands acreage (no net loss) Yes YesChange in parks acreage (no net loss) Yes NoChange in industrial lands acreage (no net loss) No NoChange in environmental and natural assets (no net loss) Yes Yes

Corridor PerspectiveIn our first letter, we encouraged a broader outlook on the ultimate role of the corridor, and how a newcrossing may have upstream or downstream implications along the Highway 99 corridor and adjacent lands.We appreciate the draft scope now “considers all interchanges within the Highway 99 corridor fromBridgeport Road in Richmond to the Canada/US border in Surrey, as well as connections to other provincialhighways, and regional and local routes.”

What remains to be articulated is consideration of the impacts on adjacent lands. Modifications to existinginterchanges or new interchanges will have materials impacts on adjacent agricultural, parks, industrial, orgeneral urban lands. These matters must be carefully quantified and evaluated for potential mitigationmeasures.

Network and Whole Systems PerspectiveRelated to the corridor perspective is the network and whole systems perspective. What is missing fromthe project scope of work is an awareness of other potential regional transportation investment priorities,the growth targets set out in the Regional Growth Strategy, and other established regional objectives. Itwould benefit the region, and the province, if major transportation investments are brought forward aspart of the Regional Transportation Strategy process for evaluation and debate, as opposed to having apiecemeal process. Such a comprehensive process will help to establish the medium-term and long-terminvestment priorities and to confirm the funds that the region can generate locally and the funds that mustbe requested from senior governments to pay for these investments.

Environmental and Parks ConsiderationsAs noted above, the impacts on parks acreage must be included in the evaluation framework.Consideration should be made to prepare specific plans to reduce, mitigate, and compensate for impactson Deas Island Regional Park and the immediate marine environment and associated habitats. For


example, it is unknown whether under Scenarios 2, 3, and 4 the construction will block public access to thewest end of the park along the right of way, and what the construction and operations impacts will be. Inaddition, the project should ensure solid east-west recreational connectivity supportive of Experience theFraser.

Agricultural ConsiderationsWe reiterate from our first letter that agricultural impact assessments should be undertaken for eachscenario alternative. We note that minimizing adverse agricultural impacts and access to/from agriculturalareas are included as evaluation criteria.

CongestionWe note that the summary of the Phase 1 consultation identifies “congestion reduction” as the mostimportant factor to consider in developing replacement options. We request that analysis be provided toindicate to what degree weekday and weekend congestion are caused by recurring or non-recurringcongestion. Non-recurring congestion, whether caused by a stalled vehicle or collision, points to differenttypes of solutions, such as ramp metering.

The region has adopted regional greenhouse gas reduction targets of 33 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by2050. These are the same targets adopted by the Province. To make incremental steps towards thesetargets, the region (and Province) must recognize managing the growth, and even reversing, in vehiclekilometres travelled is crucial to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

We recognize reducing idling and improving the overall flow of traffic will reduce emissions. But we alsorecognize that the region cannot build itself out of congestion solely through expanding roadways. Roadpricing should be tested, not simply as a revenue source to pay off the construction and operatingexpenses, but to also manage existing and incremental private vehicle demand.

Regional Economy ConsiderationsThe current discourse over expansion of highways and watercrossing capacities is missing a broaderperspective on the regional economy. What assumptions are being made about the growth in containersand commodities as they relate to increased truck and rail traffic, and origins and destinations, for thisregion versus Prince Rupert? What is the correlation with specific road investments? Why aretransportation demand management and system management measures, such as the deployment oftechnology and pricing, and smarter port logistics, not contemplated as part of these infrastructureproposals? What policy assumptions are being made about servicing goods movement as a priority overother economic, environmental, and social objectives? What policy assumptions are being made aboutprioritizing the reduction of delay for private vehicles versus the reduction of delay for transit customers?These questions need to be answered in a more holistic fashion long before investment decisions are madeon capital-intensive and irreversible infrastructure. The assumptions must be made transparent anddeliberated for their validity.

ConclusionAs Phase 2 progresses, we will remain engaged to better understand the performance benefits, costs,interactions with other parts of the regional transportation system, and implications to agricultural,industrial, and park lands.


l)ecmher 19, 2012

Mr. Geoff FreerExecutive Project DirectorGeorge Massey Tunnel Replacement ProjectMinistry of Transportation and Infrastructurec/n 1 S I Vanitage WayDelta, AC V.16 It!)

Dear Mr. Freer:

Re: Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on the George Massey Tunnel Replacement ProjectMetro Vancouver is pleased to provide the attached comments regarding the George Massey TunnelReplacement Project. The George Massey Tunnel Is an important connection between people, jobs andservices in the region. Projects like the Massey Tunnel Replacement always hold the potential to transformland use and traffic patterns locally. If it is carefully Integrated with regional land use and transportationplans, a replacement crossing should also have a significant impact on reducing the ri’ümber of single-occupant vehicles, improving air quality and enhancIng sustainablllty In the entire region.Metro Vancouver is providing these preliminary comments from a broad perspective based on Its plans:Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, Regional ParksPlan, and Regional Food System Strategy.

Metro Vancouver staff attended two of your stakeholder meetings as part of the Phase 1 consultation titled“Understanding the Need”. In lieu of completing the feedback form, we are providing this letter with ourcomments on key items for your consideration. As the Phase 2 consultation proceeds in 2013, MetroVancouver will remain engaged and comment as appropriate to ensure that a broad regional perspectiveremains when identifying the project’s problem statement and appropriate solutions.Our staff comments in the enclosed attachment should be treated as preliminary and subject to revisionand expansion as new information emerges. For further information, please do not hesitate to contactRaymond lCan, Senior Regional Planner, at 604.436.6991, or myself at 604.816.5399. Thank you.

GR/RICj’mltcc: Bob Paddon, Executive VicePresldent, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransUnkAttachment

;r ti

Metropoisron S’lnns,is,q Fnwv,nma•ns and Pork s flrportnhvntFe? •04 .0326 MO low ‘*fl 4126)95

File: CP-O7-0I 016

Yours truly,

Gaëtan Royer, ManagerMetropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks

6850767


,\ ITA(1 ifvlFN r( ieorge lassey I nitel Rt’pl cement ProlectPeta led r’Jletro Vancouver Staff Comments

‘d3yf tflLP±11LMLiL0iMPi

Metro Sl, cov’r’; .iistrblit’ ut”i’t is to acheve the hiihest quality of life erribraciiig ilturil

vitality, ei.onoiilic prosper 1/, social justice lilti compassion. ill nurtured by a beautiful and healthyenvironment within the region. Mi1or in1rstructure decisions are made by municipalities, MetroVancouver, frinsl ink, hi’ Province, ‘(VP, Port Metro Vancouver, irul private entities. In orrier for thesedecisions to cuniiilutiveiy rIlnVi tills Ii’!JiOrl forward, it is necessary that these rlecrsions be contemplatedrelative to the more comprehensive values and objectives established in the region. It is far too easy tomake decisions which lptirniLe only one particular objective, willie weakening other important goals. Thebest way to reach a win-win solution is to ensure that the appropriate scope is established at the veryoutset of project conception to account for and to evaluate the costs, benefits, and legacy that thesedecisions may leave in the region for generations.

The proposed George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project will be a significant capital undertaking servinglocal, regional, provincial, arid national interests. It also has implications for shaping travel demand,expanding travel choices, improving access to jobs and recreation, and enhancing the economiccompetitiveness of the region.

The project may also result in more vehicular traffic , harmful air emissions and loss of agricultural lands.Additional road capacity may attract more single occupancy vehicles and detract from achievements theregion has made in shifting to more efficient transportation modes. It may also have implications for thefuture expansion of port facilities. For these reasons, it is necessary to consider this project within the totaltransportation infrastructure needs of the region. The George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project wasconsidered using the following “whole system planning” approach.

1. Performance-Based Perspective

Taking a cue from TransLink’s Transport 2040, the long-term transportation strategy for the region,public plans and investments should follow the rule of identifying the outcomes that the regionshould attain. For example, in Transport 2040, one of the goals is to have “most trips by transit,walking, or cycling by 2040”. In other words, trips by private vehicles ought to be in the minority inthe future. The actions required to achieve this outcome would necessarily be different than if thegoal was to simply reduce travel time for single-occupant vehicles only, for example.

Clear outcomes should be identified so that alternatives can be evaluated. Metro Vancouver canprovide assistance to Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure staff in the preparation of anevaluation framework and associated desired outcomes so that established regional objectives arerecognized early in the planning process. Metro Vancouver staff has been involved in depth inTransLink’s transportation initiatives and through the preparation of the Regional Growth Strategy,which contains numerous performance measures.


.vir) V.r’”r ‘,i,ut in,i’. ‘ur f5’’’y iunn’I I )I,r’ni i)p’ I (A i mm)

In (ditini ii) iiynie cii Ie’, tue p(tnrnim(e outputS s Inuniuud [miii IoniIr.ri.uuv’; ,IuuoiItI lie cv cited, cuune simple uutrics, wluu Ii urn ‘ier’i1 with u’(900ulbjutuvu”;, wee!) i’Idj:

• ilmupn ii medal shire (or transit, multiple )c ipant vehicles cycling, walking, goods/servicevelmiules (net reduction of ngle-nccimpint vehicles required)• Change in vehicle kikumeters travefled as a measure of transportation i teumsity and emissions(i met mdi ictiun requirme I)• Chmne in greenhouse gas emissions and common air contaminants, including diesel)uirticuldtes imni road dust (net reduction required)• have) time reliability for transit, and goods mnuvemnent and service vehicles (net reduction intravel time for multi nccupant and transit vehicles / same or increased travel time for single-occupant vehicles)

• Chane in agricultural lands acreage (no net loss through compensation)• Change in parks acreage (no net loss)• Change in industrial lands acreage (no net loss)• Change in environmental and natural assets (no net loss through compensation)

2. Corridor and Network PerspectiveThe George Massey Tunnel is one element of a regionally-significant corridor. And the Highway 99corridor is part of an integrated network of highways and major roads serving the region. Relatedto having a performance-based perspective, there ought to be a broader outlook on the ultimaterole of the corridor, and how a new crossing may have upstream or downstream implications alongthe Highway 99 corridor and adjacent lands.

A network perspective is also important for a different set of reasons, There are numeroustransportation needs in the region. Whether that is expanding the Frequent Transit Networkfurther into Surrey and Langley, or extending rapid transit along the Broadway corridor inVancouver, there are pressing needs that have yet to be funded. Given the prospective problemsthat the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project is expected to address (and solve), how do thebenefits and costs compare to the other known needs around the region? Without this networkperspective, public investment decisions may actually end up being sub-optimal and detract frombroader regional objectives.

We acknowledge that doing nothing is not a viable option over the long-term. Knowing that theGeorge Massey Tunnel Replacement Project was once included in the Gateway Program, but wassubsequently removed due to re-prioritization, does not necessarily qualify this project as theregion’s next number one priority for transportation investment.

The merits of the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project should be evaluated relative toMetro Vancouver’s existing and planned transportation infrastructure as part of TransLink’s newRegional Transportation Strategy process.


rvi,’iri V,r ,rnJ’r iif rrrir’rit’, ri, rn,,r M.isi’y irrrrr,rl i’,r,ri,rurt i’rrjiri (Ati.kIirrrrrt)

Multi-Modal Perspective

lioth the /?eponof &rvuvih Ornh’qy and Irinisport 2010 coritrmpIite a future where growth islocii’,eil 0 fIr bin Centres arid ,rrea’, near tIm Ereq mt franit Network, md that the reich andcapacity of nonveliicular innues of transport are expmded.

transit, multiple occupancy vehicles, cycling, arid walking all rank as higher priorities than singleoccupant vehicles. Any new crossing should contemplate opportunities for pedestrians, cyclists,md tramisit vehicles to move safely, efficiently, mud s&’amlessly to connections on either crud of thefacility (eg., access to employment lands in Richmond and Delta, and to recreational opportunitiesin arid around Dmrs lshurrd Regional Park).

Ensuring viable recreational connections to the Experience the Fraser network of waterfront trailsand amenities using non-vehicular modes is also paramount. Experience the Fraser is acollaborative concept led by the Province, Fraser Valley Regional District, and Metro Vancouver. Itenvisions a seamless, contiguous, and publicly-accessible network of multi-use trails on both sidesof the Fraser River from Hope to the Salish Sea. Watercrossings are critical connectors. Forexample, based on input from Metro Vancouver, fransLink has incorporated connections toExperience the Fraser as a project objective for the Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project and plansto reinforce the integration of pedestrian and cycling conrmections into new Fraser River crossings.

This multi-modal perspective needs to be spelled out as part of the planning process, problemstatement arid desired performance outcomes. The need for pedestrian arid cycling connectionsshould be integrated at the outset during the project definition phase.

Further, the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project should in essence be recast as a multi-modal mobility project, wherein transportation demand management and features to supportwalking, cycling, buses, rapid transit, and multiple-occupancy vehicles are built into the projectdefinition rather than added afterwards. This is the true difference between responding to currenttravel patterns (i.e., 77% of vehicles traversing the tunnel being cars) versus purposefully shapingtravel patterns based on a performance and outcomes-based approach.

The Regional Growth Strategy contains a key action (Action 5.2.7) requested of TransLink and theProvince to evaluate the following elements when contemplating future expansion of privatevehicle capacity on major roads, highways, and bridges:a) Transportation demand management strategies as alternatives to, or as integral with, such

capacity expansion;

b) Impacts on the achievement of the Regional Growth Strategy and the Air QualityManagement Plan (Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan), includingpotential cumulative impacts.

Metro Vancouver staff stands ready to provide appropriate technical and policy assistance to theMinistry to ensure a whole-systems planning approach and coordinated planning dialogue.


i,’, ‘,i.,it u,lS ,1 r,’ i51.,-j iu’’! iipI ‘i’i r’’ .t (Mi ,ii’ni)

Ii un’,ult,it on silt It nnuhiiril)aI p,H tners, Metro V. cou’ier is espoiisible for prepar iie the pn ii)ill,IliOil md‘‘iniployin’nnr qiiiwth fori,ist’, roil geogriplic distribution is put of its regional growth management role.these lorec,msts support lire timsel demomnI modeling work of IrunsLmnk. In tIm past four years, MetroVanti nrmver has worked closely with IruisLmnik to coordinate a consistent protocol for preparing the land useassumptions critical to travel dein,mnd forecasting. Fins protocol has been put into practice to great successin the UltC Line Rpid transit Study and the Surrey Rapid Transit Alternatives Study, both of which are cosponsored by the Province aol trinsLink. Further, Metro Vancouver, upon request by Fr;tnstink, led thepreparation ot ilternitive l,iiiil use scenarios to test the robustness of rapid transit alternatives.

lo maintain the coilsistuncy of assumptions arid methods, we would request Ministry staff to confirm withMetro Vancouver that the appropriate iongterm land use assumptions are being used for the GeorgeMassey Funnel Replacement Project. We also trust that Ministry staff is coordinating with fransLink’sforecasting team to ensure the most current regional transportation model is being applied. In addition toexisting nntjor trip generators, such as the BC Ferries terminal, port terminals, and the Canada/UnitedStates border, assumptions about population and employment growth anticipated in Richmond, Delta,Tsawwassen First Nation, Surrey and the region as a whole need to be carefully accounted for. Newproposed developments related to port logistics and industrial development will also require carefulcoordination with stakeholders, such as Port Metro Vancouver. If alternative land use scenarios oradjustments to and use assnmptions are mmdc that depart from current assumptions, we request that theMinistry contact and coordinate with Metro Vancouver staff to ensure transparency and tra:eability of suchwork. Metro Vancouver staff will be happy to assist in such efforts.

Interdependence with Po it Metro Vancouver InitiativesBeyond the immediate role of the George Massey Tunnel to facilitate trips across the Fraser River, thecurrent crossing also plays a direct role in the facilitation of goods movement along the Fraser River. Areplacement crossing, whether a deeper tunnel or a bridge, could facilitate the movement of much largercontainer vessels to Fraser Surrey Docks. It has been suggested that the ultimate capacity of Fraser SurreyDocks to handle container movements is underutilized by the current channel depth at the tunnel. If this“bottleneck” is removed, then it may unlock the potential at Fraser Surrey Docks and concurrently influencethe business case to create a new Roberts Bank Terminal 2, a proposed new marine container terminalcurrently in the project definition phase. We recommend that the Province and Port Metro Vancouverwork together to bring greater clarity about the interdependent relationship between these two initiativesand their arid use implications.

Environment and Parks ConsiderationsDeas Island Regional Park is a popular Metro Vancouver regional park which accommodates nearly 300,000visits each year. Care should be taken when designing alternatives for the George Massey TunnelReplacement project to identify the opportunities and impacts on the integrity of the park, both duringconstruction and in operation. Deas Island Regional Park’s recreational facilities include group picnicgrounds and a group campground in the central “grassy meadow” area of Deas Island.


P0,1 fl Vin, ,,v 5oif LflflhlnflhltS Cli (re Miocy Iiinnl R’pliiiment ir ct (‘ti.enil

Nw perimeter if DOaS lSFiiid ConSistS of coastal 1100(1 plain forest and in.irSliOS 01 (COI()gin1I inportincetiot of the l)ei; lough (south) side of Deas Island i coded red by the I riser River Estuary MineniontProgram (FRE MP) indicating high productivity habitat. The red coding wraps around the western tip ofPeas bland. Most of the north side of l)eis Island is coded yellow, which indicates moderate prudi ictivitywildlife habitat. Metro Vancouver will share ecological sensitivity mopping for the Park with Ministry staff.

As part of the design process, consideration should be made to prepare specific plans to reduce, mitigate,and compensate for any impacts on Peas Island Regional Park and the mnmedia te marine environment andassociated habitats.

Further, the integrity of the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area mist he upheld with respect to anyproposed alternative. Burns Bog and the Fraser River estuary have now been recognized as a “RamsarWetland of International Importance’.

n sid era t ionsAlternative locations of a new crossing may have serious implications for the regional supply of farmlandand the viability of agriculture. It will be important to provide an agricultural impact assessment for eachalternative, particularly any bridge options.

Fhe agricultural impact assessments should define what parcels of agricultural land may be permanentlylost and describe other potential impacts related to farmland fragmentation, drainage and irrigation, farmtraffic corridors and compatibility/incompatibility with adjacent nonfarm uses. It is also important toconsider the impact of a new crossing on the future economic growth of the agri-food industry.

Ehe cumulative impacts of the Massey funnel Replacement project, in addition to the other majorinfrastructure projects being contemplated in the south of the Fraser such as Roberts Bank Terminal 2, maybe detrimental to the future viability of the agricultural industry and local food production needed for agrowing metropolitan population. For this reason, any agriculture impact assessment should consider anAvoid— Mitigate — Compensate approach, whereby avoidance is the priority course of action and mitigationis considered only when negative impacts cannot be avoided.

In addition to consulting with the Agricultural Land Commission, we highly recommend that the Ministryconsult with the City of Richmond, the Corporation of Delta, their respective Agricultural AdvisoryCommittees, and the Tsawwassen First Nation directly regarding potential impacts on agriculture from theGeorge Massey Tunnel Replacement Project.

Conclusion

Metro Vancouver staff, Committees and the Board are keenly interested in the careful integration of landuse, transportation and economic development in the region. Projects like the Massey Tunnel Replacementalways hold the potential to transform land use and traffic patterns locally. If it is carefully integrated withregional land use and transportation plans, a replacement crossing should also have a significant impact onreducing the number of single-occupant vehicles, improving air quality and enhancing sustainability in theentire region.


41

p

Metropotitan Plonninq, Environment and Parks Departmentre/s 604 4326 350 Fox: 60443262%

December 19, 2012File: CP-07-01-016

Mr. Geoff FreerExecutive Project DirectorGeorge Massey Tunnel Replacement ProjectMinistry of Transportation and Infrastructuredo 7351 Vantage WayDelta, BC V4G 1C9

Dear Mr. Freer:

Re: Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on the George Massey Tunnel Replacement ProjectMetro Vancouver is pleased to provide the attached comments regarding the George Massey TunnelReplacement Project. The George Massey Tunnel is an important connection between people, jobs andservices in the region. Projects like the Massey Tunnel Replacement always hold the potential to transformland use and traffic patterns locally. If it is carefully integrated with regional land use and transportationplans, a replacement crossing should also have a significant impact on reducing the number of single-occupant vehicles, improving air quality and enhancing sustainability in the entire region.

Metro Vancouver is providing these preliminary comments from a broad perspective based on its plans:Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, Regional ParksPlan, and Regional Food System Strategy.

Metro Vancouver staff attended two of your stakeholder meetings as part of the Phase 1 consultation titled“Understanding the Need”. In lieu of completing the feedback form, we are providing this letter with ourcomments on key items for your consideration. As the Phase 2 consultation proceeds in 2013, MetroVancouver will remain engaged and comment as appropriate to ensure that a broad regional perspectiveremains when identifying the project’s problem statement and appropriate solutions.Our staff comments in the enclosed attachment should be treated as preliminary and subject to revisionand expansion as new information emerges. For further information, please do not hesitate to contactRaymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, at 604.436.6991, or myself at 604.816.5399. Thank you.

GR/RK/mft

cc: Bob Paddon, Executive Vice-President, Strategic Planning and Public Affairs, TransLinkAttachment

Yours truly,

Gaëtan Royer, ManagerMetropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks

6850767TRANSPORTATION - 120

DDavis

Text Box

5.3 Attachment 3

ATTACHMENT

George Massey Tunnel Replacement ProjectDetailed Metro Vancouver Staff Comments

onsiderations

Metro Vancouver’s sustainability commitment is to achieve the highest quality of life embracing culturalvitality, economic prosperity, social justice and compassion, all nurtured by a beautiful and healthyenvironment within the region. Major infrastructure decisions are made by municipalities, MetroVancouver, TransLink, the Province, YVR, Port Metro Vancouver, and private entities. In order for thesedecisions to cumulatively move this region forward, it is necessary that these decisions be contemplatedrelative to the more comprehensive values and objectives established in the region, It is far too easy tomake decisions which optimize only one particular objective, while weakening other important goals. Thebest way to reach a win—win solution is to ensure that the appropriate scope is established at the veryoutset of project conception to account for and to evaluate the costs, benefits, and legacy that thesedecisions may leave in the region for generations.

The proposed George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project will be a significant capital undertaking servinglocal, regional, provincial, and national interests, It also has implications for shaping travel demand,expanding travel choices, improving access to jobs and recreation, and enhancing the economiccompetitiveness of the region.

The project may also result in more vehicular traffic, harmful air emissions and loss of agricultural lands.Additional road capacity may attract more single occupancy vehicles and detract from achievements theregion has made in shifting to more efficient transportation modes. It may also have implications for thefuture expansion of port facilities. For these reasons, it is necessary to consider this project within the totaltransportation infrastructure needs of the region. The George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project wasconsidered using the following “whole system planning” approach.

1. Performance-Based Perspective

Taking a cue from TransLink’s Transport 2040, the long-term transportation strategy for the region,public plans and investments should follow the rule of identifying the outcomes that the regionshould attain. For example, in Transport 2040, one of the goals is to have “most trips by transit,walking, or cycling by 2040”. In other words, trips by private vehicles ought to be in the minority inthe future. The actions required to achieve this outcome would necessarily be different than if thegoal was to simply reduce travel time for single-occupant vehicles only, for example.

Clear outcomes should be identified so that alternatives can be evaluated. Metro Vancouver canprovide assistance to Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure staff in the preparation of anevaluation framework and associated desired outcomes so that established regional objectives arerecognized early in the planning process. Metro Vancouver staff has been involved in depth inTransLink’s transportation initiatives and through the preparation of the Regional Growth Strategy,which contains numerous performance measures.


Minitr’j it [r t1,iLitnn md irmlrmsuctmimnMetro Vancouver Stiff Comments on George Massey riinnel Replacement Project (Attachment)l’:gn 2 cmf

In addition to identifying clear outcomes, the performance outputs stemming from the projectalternatives should be evaluated. Some sample metrics, which are consistent with regionalobjectives, would include:

• Change in modal share for transit, multiple-occupant vehicles, cycling, walking, goods/servicevehicles (net reduction of single-occupant vehicles required>• Change in vehicle kilometers travelled as a measure of transportation intensity and emissions(net reduction required>• Change in greenhouse gas emissions and common air contaminants, including dieselparticulates and road dust (net reduction required)• Travel time reliability for transit, and goods movement and service vehicles (net reduction intravel time for multi-occupant and transit vehicles / same or increased travel time for singleoccupant vehicles)

• Change in agricultural lands acreage (no net loss through compensation)• Change in parks acreage (no net loss)• Change in industrial lands acreage (no net loss)• Change in environmental and natural assets (no net loss through compensation)

2. Corridor and Network PerspectiveThe George Massey Tunnel is one element of a regionally-significant corridor. And the Highway 99corridor is part of an integrated network of highways and major roads serving the region. Relatedto having a performance-based perspective, there ought to be a broader outlook on the ultimaterole of the corridor, and how a new crossing may have upstream or downstream implications alongthe Highway 99 corridor and adjacent lands.

A network perspective is also important for a different set of reasons. There are numeroustransportation needs in the region. Whether that is expanding the Frequent Transit Networkfurther into Surrey and Langley, or extending rapid transit along the Broadway corridor inVancouver, there are pressing needs that have yet to be funded. Given the prospective problemsthat the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project is expected to address (and solve), how do thebenefits and costs compare to the other known needs around the region? Without this networkperspective, public investment decisions may actually end up being sub-optimal and detract frombroader regional objectives.

We acknowledge that doing nothing is not a viable option over the long-term. Knowing that theGeorge Massey Tunnel Replacement Project was once included in the Gateway Program, but wassubsequently removed due to re-prioritization, does not necessarily qualify this project as theregion’s next number one priority for transportation investment.

The merits of the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project should be evaluated relative toMetro Vancouver’s existing and planned transportation infrastructure as part of TransLink’s newRegional Transportation Strategy process.


MI1H7 Ifl,pO[t.iOr1 md IriIi,tructum

Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project (Attachment)d

3. Multi-Modal Perspective

Both the Regional Growth Strategy and Transport 2040 contemplate a future where growth isfocused in Urban Centres and areas near the Frequent Transit Network, and that the reach andcapacity of non-vehicular modes of transport are expanded.

Transit, multiple-occupancy vehicles, cycling, and walking all rank as higher priorities than singleoccupant vehicles. Any new crossing should contemplate opportunities for pedestrians, cyclists,and transit vehicles to move safely, efficiently, and seamlessly to connections on either end of thefacility (e.g., access to employment lands in Richmond and Delta, and to recreational opportunitiesin and around Deas Island Regional Park).

Ensuring viable recreational connections to the Experience the Fraser network of waterfront trailsand amenities using non-vehicular modes is also paramount. Experience the Fraser is acollaborative concept led by the Province, Fraser Valley Regional District, and Metro Vancouver. Itenvisions a seamless, contiguous, and publicly-accessible network of multi-use trails on both sidesof the Fraser River from Hope to the Salish Sea. Watercrossings are critical connectors. Forexample, based on input from Metro Vancouver, TransLink has incorporated connections toExperience the Fraser as a project objective for the Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project and plansto reinforce the integration of pedestrian and cycling connections into new Fraser River crossings.

This multi-modal perspective needs to be spelled out as part of the planning process, problemstatement and desired performance outcomes. The need for pedestrian and cycling connectionsshould be integrated at the outset during the project definition phase.

Further, the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project should in essence be recast as a multi-modal mobility project, wherein transportation demand management and features to supportwalking, cycling, buses, rapid transit, and multiple-occupancy vehicles are built into the projectdefinition rather than added afterwards. This is the true difference between responding to currenttravel patterns (i.e., 77% of vehicles traversing the tunnel being cars) versus purposefully shapingtravel patterns based on a performance and outcomes-based approach.

The Regional Growth Strategy contains a key action (Action 5.2.7) requested of TransLink and theProvince to evaluate the following elements when contemplating future expansion of privatevehicle capacity on major roads, highways, and bridges:

a) Transportation demand management strategies as alternatives to, or as integral with, suchcapacity expansion;

b) Impacts on the achievement of the Regional Growth Strategy and the Air QualityManagement Plan (Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan), includingpotential cumulative impacts.

Metro Vancouver staff stands ready to provide appropriate technical and policy assistance to theMinistry to ensure a whole-systems planning approach and coordinated planning dialogue.


Fl. poFtaFlon ui! Fiostructuo’Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on George Massey tunnel Replacement Project (Attachment)I oF

Forecasting ConsiderationsIn consultation with municipal partners, Metro Vancouver is responsible for preparing the population andemployment growth forecasts and geographic distribution as part of its regional growth management role.These forecasts support the travel demand modeling work of TransLink. In the past four years, MetroVancouver has worked closely with TransLink to coordinate a consistent protocol for preparing the land useassumptions critical to travel demand forecasting. This protocol has been put into practice to great successin the UBC Line Rapid Transit Study and the Surrey Rapid Transit Alternatives Study, both of which are Cosponsored by the Province and TransLink. Further, Metro Vancouver, upon request by TransLink, led thepreparation of alternative land use scenarios to test the robustness of rapid transit alternatives.

To maintain the consistency of assumptions and methods, we would request Ministry staff to confirm withMetro Vancouver that the appropriate long-term land use assumptions are being used for the GeorgeMassey Tunnel Replacement Project. We also trust that Ministry staff is coordinating with TransLink’sforecasting team to ensure the most current regional transportation model is being applied. In addition toexisting major trip generators, such as the BC Ferries terminal, port terminals, and the Canada/UnitedStates border, assumptions about population and employment growth anticipated in Richmond, Delta,Tsawwassen First Nation, Surrey and the region as a whole need to be carefully accounted for. Newproposed developments related to port logistics and industrial development will also require carefulcoordination with stakeholders, such as Port Metro Vancouver. If alternative land use scenarios oradjustments to land use assumptions are made that depart from current assumptions, we request that theMinistry contact and coordinate with Metro Vancouver staff to ensure transparency and traceability of suchwork, Metro Vancouver staff will be happy to assist in such efforts.

Interdependence with Port Metro Vancouver InitiativesBeyond the immediate role of the George Massey Tunnel to facilitate trips across the Fraser River, thecurrent crossing also plays a direct role in the facilitation of goods movement along the Fraser River. Areplacement crossing, whether a deeper tunnel or a bridge, could facilitate the movement of much largercontainer vessels to Fraser Surrey Docks. It has been suggested that the ultimate capacity of Fraser SurreyDocks to handle container movements is underutilized by the current channel depth at the tunnel. If this“bottleneck” is removed, then it may unlock the potential at Fraser Surrey Docks and concurrently influencethe business case to create a new Roberts Bank Terminal 2, a proposed new marine container terminalcurrently in the project definition phase. We recommend that the Province and Port Metro Vancouverwork together to bring greater clarity about the interdependent relationship between these two initiativesand their land use implications.

Environment and Parks ConsiderationsDeas Island Regional Park is a popular Metro Vancouver regional park which accommodates nearly 300,000visits each year. Care should be taken when designing alternatives for the George Massey TunnelReplacement project to identify the opportunities and impacts on the integrity of the park, both duringconstruction and in operation. Deas Island Regional Park’s recreational facilities include group picnicgrounds and a group campground in the central “grassy meadow” area of Deas Island.


Mtnstry ut frrisportation md InfrtrudureMetro Vancouver Staff Comments on George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project (Attachment)

ct

The perimeter of Deas Island consists of coastal flood plain forest and marshes of ecological importance.Most of the Deas Slough (south) side of Deas Island is coded red by the Fraser River Estuary ManagementProgram (FREMP) indicating high productivity habitat. The red coding wraps around the western tip ofDeas Island. Most of the north side of Deas Island is coded yellow, which indicates moderate productivitywildlife habitat. Metro Vancouver will share ecological sensitivity mapping for the Park with Ministry staff.

As part of the design process, consideration should be made to prepare specific plans to reduce, mitigate,and compensate for any impacts on Deas Island Regional Park and the immediate marine environment andassociated habitats.

Further, the integrity of the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area must be upheld with respect to anyproposed alternative. Burns Bog and the Fraser River estuary have now been recognized as a “RamsarWetland of International Importance”.

AriculturaI ConsiderationsAlternative locations of a new crossing may have serious implications for the regional supply of farmlandand the viability of agriculture. It will be important to provide an agricultural impact assessment for eachalternative, particularly any bridge options.

The agricultural impact assessments should define what parcels of agricultural land may be permanentlylost and describe other potential impacts related to farmland fragmentation, drainage and irrigation, farmtraffic corridors and compatibility/incompatibility with adjacent nonfarm uses. It is also important toconsider the impact of a new crossing on the future economic growth of the agri-food industry.

The cumulative impacts of the Massey Tunnel Replacement project, in addition to the other majorinfrastructure projects being contemplated in the south of the Fraser such as Roberts Bank Terminal 2, maybe detrimental to the future viability of the agricultural industry and local food production needed for agrowing metropolitan population. For this reason, any agriculture impact assessment should consider anAvoid — Mitigate — Compensate approach, whereby avoidance is the priority course of action and mitigationis considered only when negative impacts cannot be avoided.

In addition to consulting with the Agricultural Land Commission, we highly recommend that the Ministryconsult with the City of Richmond, the Corporation of Delta, their respective Agricultural AdvisoryCommittees, and the Tsawwassen First Nation directly regarding potential impacts on agriculture from theGeorge Massey Tunnel Replacement Project.

Conclusion

Metro Vancouver staff, Committees and the Board are keenly interested in the careful integration of landuse, transportation and economic development in the region. Projects like the Massey Tunnel Replacementalways hold the potential to transform land use and traffic patterns locally. If it is carefully integrated withregional land use and transportation plans, a replacement crossing should also have a significant impact onreducing the number of single-occupant vehicles, improving air quality and enhancing sustainability in theentire region.


7861595

To: Transportation Committee and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee From: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Administrative Officer

General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment Date: September 25, 2013 Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Subject: Manager’s Report RECOMMENDATION That the Transportation Committee receive for information the Manager’s Report dated September 25, 2013. Proposed 2014 Regional Planning Budget Addressing the integration of transportation and land use is contemplated within the context of Metro Vancouver’s role in developing and implementing the Regional Growth Strategy. As such, the proposed 2014 budget addresses support for the Transportation Committee through the Regional Planning function. The Regional Planning operating budget is proposed to increase by $298,508 (17.6%) in 2014 for a total operating budget of $1,998,696. This increase is due to new costs associated with supporting the Transportation Committee ($200,000), and the reallocation of the GM’s salary and other administrative salaries ($90,000) from other departmental budgets which funded these positions in 2013. With the exception of a proposed new transportation planner position, administrative salaries are reallocated from the previous Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks division and CAO Office departments. Work is ongoing associated with the implementation of the RGS. This will involve enhancing the evidence-based research and policy development that can be used at the regional and/or municipal level to support the goals of the RGS and to more effectively communicate the multiple values of the RGS to different audiences. The key actions for 2014 include:

• Board acceptance of 21 Regional Context Statements • Thorough but timely assessment of proposed amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy

for Board consideration • Completion of sub-regional profiles and visualization of sub-regions in the year 2040 • Advance implementation of Frequent Transit Development Areas through the development

of case studies, updated web profile and workshops. • Improved information and stronger policy analysis will focus on topics including industrial

lands development, the integration of land use and transportation planning, increasing the agricultural use of agricultural lands and the protection of valuable ecosystems and other natural assets.

5.4


Manager’s Report Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 2 of 4

Highlights of professional fees and contracts anticipated to be undertaken in 2014 include: • Work related to the integration of land use and transportation planning including scenario

analysis for port land use. • Work related to industrial land protection and intensification including: refining the

industrial land inventory with the inclusion of market readiness characteristics, highlighting locations with the most potential for intensification, and the completion of guidelines to address constraints.

• Identification of local government policies that could improve farmers’ access to land and compensate farmers for the multiple values of their land.

The total staffing for Regional Planning is 15.32 full-time equivalent positions. One new transportation position is proposed to support the new activities related to transportation within Metro Vancouver. The Regional Planning budget was forwarded to the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee on October 4, 2013 to endorse and forward to the October 18, 2013 Special Joint Finance Committee for information and to the October 30, 2013 Metro Vancouver Board Budget Workshop for consideration. Update on the Regional Transportation Strategy The Regional Transportation Strategy Framework was adopted by the TransLink Board in July 2013. The Strategic Framework incorporates many of the comments conveyed by the Metro Vancouver Board. TransLink is now focusing on the preparation of the Implementation Plan, or 15-30 year program for implementing the goals and strategies laid out in the Strategic Framework. One of the key recommendations from Metro Vancouver was that TransLink should include in the Strategic Framework the milestones and consultation process for preparing the Implementation Plan, and the approach for collaborating with local governments and the Province. This information was not included in the adopted Strategic Framework. TransLink remains committed to continuing to work with local governments through a steering committee and partner advisory committee on the Implementation Plan. However, the lack of definition around specific milestones risks deferring important decisions for new transportation investments and could materially affect the preparation for any regional dialogue or referendum on sustainable transportation funding. Metro Vancouver staff will continue to participate and monitor the Regional Transportation Strategy process. Metro Vancouver staff involvement in the Regional Transportation Strategy technical work Over the past several years, staff has spent significant time providing policy input into the RTS Strategic Framework to ensure consistency and support for the Regional Growth Strategy and Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Staff also supported TransLink’s renovation of the regional travel demand forecasting model by providing detail household demographic information. Turning now to the Implementation Plan process, TransLink has sought the input of Metro Vancouver and other partners on the technical analysis of alternative transportation investment levels and transportation demand management measures. One of the activities is to undertake a market-based analysis and forecast of how urban development (population and employment) may be affected by the type, location, and timing of different rapid transit investments in the region. Metro Vancouver staff has participated in this process with an aim to ensuring the work remains


Manager’s Report Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013

Page 3 of 4

consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy and accepted Regional Context Statements. This work will also help inform and refine Metro Vancouver’s methodology for preparing growth forecasts in collaboration with municipal partners. Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project Definition On September 12, 2013, Port Metro Vancouver submitted the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project Definition to provincial and federal regulators as per the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012). The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency will decide whether a federal environmental assessment is required for this project. The Agency is seeking comments from the public by October 15, 2013 on the project and its potential effects on the environment. According to the Agency’s website:

“if it is determined that a federal environmental assessment is required, the public will have three more opportunities to comment on this project, consistent with the transparency and public engagement elements of CEAA 2012. Projects subject to CEAA 2012 are assessed using a science-based approach. If the project is permitted to proceed to the next phase, it will continue to be subject to Canada's strong environmental laws, rigorous enforcement and follow-up, and increased fines.”

Metro Vancouver was notified of this public comment process via e-mail from Port Metro Vancouver on September 24, 2013. Staff is preparing written comments to be submitted to the Agency by October 15, 2013. These comments will come from multiple perspectives within Metro Vancouver (i.e., environmental, air quality, climate change, parks, utilities, transportation, agriculture, etc.) and will be attached to the November Transportation Committee agenda for information. SFU Centre for Dialogue’s Mobility Pricing Dialogues At its June 28, 2013 meeting, the Metro Vancouver Board approved a $15,000 funding request from SFU Carbon Talks to support community engagement on the topic of road pricing (the other funders are TransLink, Vancouver Foundation, North Growth Management, and the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia). Since that time, this initiative has been rebranded as an initiative of the SFU Centre for Dialogue, and independent from the Moving in a Livable Region initiative (see below). The goal of the Mobility Pricing Dialogues is to gauge the public’s understanding of and interest in road pricing options for expanding the region’s transportation system within the context of the Regional Growth Strategy. Four subregional dialogues have been scheduled:

• October 22 (Surrey) • October 24 (Burnaby) • October 28 (Vancouver) • October 29 (Langley)

A regional summit is scheduled for November 30 (time and location to be determined). The results of the dialogues will be prepared and made available to the public in early 2014. Metro Vancouver’s staff role to date has been to review a draft discussion guide prepared by the SFU Centre for Dialogue and to provide guidance on the design of the dialogue process. Staff will attend one or more of the subregional dialogues, including the regional summit.


Manager’s Report Transportation Committee Meeting Date: October 9, 2013 Page 4 of 4

SFU Carbon Talks’ Moving in a Livable Region Initiative The Moving in a Livable Region initiative is a project of SFU Carbon Talks to help facilitate and support a consortium of partners in a dialogue with residents around sustainable transportation funding and the proposed transportation funding referendum as pledged by Premier Clark. This initiative is supported financially by the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia, North Growth Management, SFU, and the Vancouver Foundation. Metro Vancouver has not provided funding for this initiative. Metro Vancouver’s staff role to date has been to participate on a steering committee to ensure the Regional Growth Strategy and other regional objectives are brought to bear when discussing funding for transportation. A website has been prepared that contains research and information on transportation funding in the region, basic information on referenda, and lessons learned from voter-approved transportation funding initiatives in other jurisdictions (www.movinginalivableregion.ca). Transportation Forum Staff is continuing to prepare the scope for a multi-stakeholder Transportation Forum to discuss key transportation and related infrastructure issues related to goods movement in and through the region. The proposal was to host this Forum in fall 2013 but given limited staff resources and a dynamic environment surrounding transportation issues, the forum will have to be scheduled during the spring of 2014.


AUG06 2013

Co uatlamOffice ofthe Mayor

July 30, 2013 RNO,..&O( QL—Our File: 01-0410-20/034/2013-1 Doc.No

CAO Tracker No.. / ........Doc#: 1508094

Greg Moore, ChairGreater Vancouver Regional District Board4330 KingswayBurnaby, BC V5H 4G8

Dear Mr. Moore:

RE: Regional Transportation Strategy, 2014 TransLink Base Plan, Pattullo BridgeStudy and Northeast Area Transit Plan

Please be advised that at the July 8, 2013, Regular Meeting of Council for the City ofCoquitlam, the following resolution was adopted:

That Council:1. Call on the Province to exercise leadership by ensuring TransLink has the tools

necessary to implement regional plans including transit, goods movement androad system projects in a timely manner;

2. Receivefor discussion TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy, (Draft)Strategic Framework;

3. Advise TransLink that anyfuture road pricing initiatives will need to be linked tothe provision of transit expansion (i.e. new andfrequent bus service) as increasingtransit service in the northeast sector is necessary to provide a viable realisticalternative to travel by vehicle;

4. Request TransLink to reinstatefunding levels as per 2011 levels in the 2014 BasePlan to $20 Million for the Major Road Network and Bike Program and to$6 Million for the Regional Bike Program;

5. Request TransLink in concert with the Province address the City’s questions andcomments as outlined in this report pertaining to the short-listed Pattullo BridgeStudy, Coquitlam-Surrey Alternative as part of the next stage of the work;

6. As part of the Northeast Area Transit Plan request TransLink to incorporate andimplement transit related initiatives as outlined in the City’s StrategicTransportation Plan;

7. Request TransLink to place a high priority on the early implementation of transitservice to newly developing neigh bourhoods with transit-supporting densities, soas to shape and encourage transit related travel behavior.

._.;,, E:

L)f11(C b 92 J Fa bi 92/ 3wwwc qutari TRANSPORTATION - 130

DDavis

Text Box

6.1

Page 2July 30, 2013

The resolutions have been forwarded to the Province and the TransLink Board by theClerk’s office. As outlined in the staff report, copies of the relevant resolutions areprovided for information as well as the City’s interests pertaining to the Pattullo BridgeStudy. Should you, or your staff, have any questions or require any further informationwith respect to this matter, please contact myself or Bill Susak, General Manager,Engineering and Public Works, at 604-927-3501, or at [email protected].

Attachment:Staff Report to Council entitled Regional Transportation-Regional TransportationStrategy, 2014 TransLink Base Plan, Pattullo Bridge Study and Northeast AreaTransit Plan

c - Dianne Watts, Chair — Metro Vancouver Transportation CommitteeCarol Mason, CÁO, Metro VancouverCity of Surrey — Mayor and CouncilCity of New Westminster - Mayor and CouncilCity of Port Coquitlam — Mayor and CouncilCity of Port Moody — Mayor and CouncilCity ManagerDeputy City ManagerGeneral Manager, Engineering and Public WorksManager, Transportation Planning

Richard StewartMayor


CoQuitlam For Council

July 2, 2013Our File: 16-8690-30/TLRTS (2045)/iDoc #: 1483 746.vi

To: City ManagerFrom: General Manager, Engineering and Public Works

Subject: Regional Transportation — Regional Transportation Strategy, 2014 TransLinkBase Plan, Pattullo Bridge Study and Northeast Area Transit Plan

For: Council

Recommendation:That Council

1. Call on the Province to exercise leadership by ensuring TransLink hasthe tools necessary to implement regional plans including transit,goods movement and road system projects in a timely manner;

2. Endorse TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy, (Draft)Strategic Framework;

3. Advise TransLink that any future road pricing initiatives will need tobe linked to the provision of transit expansion (i.e. new and frequentbus service) as increasingtransit service in the northeast sector isnecessary to provide a viable realistic alternative to travel by vehicle;

4. Request TransLink to reinstate funding levels as per 2011 levels inthe 2014 Base Plan to $20 Million for Major Road Network and BikeProgram and to $6 Million for the Regional Bike Program;

5. Request TransLink in concert with the Province address the City’squestions and comments as outlined in this report pertaining to theshort-listed Pattullo Bridge Study, Coquitlam-Surrey Alternative aspart of the next stage of the work;

6. As part of the Northeast Area Transit Plan request TransLink toincorporate and implement transit related initiatives as outlined inthe City’s Strategic Transportation Plan; and


Page 2

7. Forward recommendations and comments to other municipalities,

regional agencies and provincial/federal agencies as noted in

Appendix A.

Report Purpose:To update Council on a number of significant regional transportation issues

regarding the Regional Transportation Strategy Framework, 2014 TransLink

Base Plan, Pattullo Bridge Study and Northeast Area Transit Plan and outline

a course of action that reflects the City’s interests.

Strategic Goal:This report supports the objectives associated with enhancing the City’s

transportation system and optimizing resources to effectively respond to

regional issues.

Executive Summary:TransLink is in the process of updating the Regional Transportation Strategy.

The update proposes to invest strategically, manage the transportation

system and partnerto make it happen. This will require leadership bythe

Province to ensure that transportation investments are not delayed but are

provided in a manner that will sLipport and promote the economic vitality of

the region.

Background:Adequate transportation infrastructure is critical to the economic, social,

and environmental sustainability of the Metro region and its sub-regional

sectors. This report provides context, status and updates for the following

regional and sub-regional initiatives of interest to Coquitlam:

• Regional Transportation Strategy — Draft Strategic Framework

(TransLink’s long range plan/vision due August 15t);

• TransLink’s 2014 Base Plan

• Pattullo Bridge Study and Goods Movement Routing; and

• Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan

These items were discussed by Council at a recent joint Tn-City Council

meeting held 6 June 2013.

Fi’e #: 16-869O3O/TLRTS (2045)/i Dcc : 1483746.vi


Page 3

Discussion/Analysis:The following provides an overview of each initiative with recent relevantupdates as well as a potential set of Council resolutions for consideration oneach item.

Transportation Leadership:The first recommendation to this report emphasizes the need for ongoingleadership and Provincial support in order for the region to achieve itspotential in contributing to the economy and well being of the Province. Theattached letter to the Premier emphasizes the point. (Attachment i)

Regional Transportation StrategyTransLink is in the process of preparing an updated plan entitled RegionalTransportation Strategy (RTS) which must be endorsed by the MetroVancouver Board and approved by the TransLink Board by August 1, 2013.

There are two parts to the plan, the first part - Strategic Framework(i.e. 30-year plan) is the document that will need to be approved onAugust 1, 2013; the second part, the RTS Implementation Plan, planned forcompletion in 2014, identifies investments over the next 10 to 15 years. Theprimary purpose of the RTS is to provide a set of updated goals and strategiesin concert with the Regional Growth Strategy but more importantly set thecontext under what conditions TransLink will makefuture investmentsregarding transit services and street related initiatives.

The RTS proposes three key strategies:

1. Invest strategically to maintain and expand the transportationsystem;

2. Manage the transportation system to be more efficient and user-focused; and

3. Partner to make it happen

Earlier draft versions of the RTS plan placed more emphasis on reducingdemand (e.g. through shifting land use, TDM & road pricing) and“optimizing” the system rather than on providing “supply” solutions,because due to on-going funding issues, this is seen by TransLink (staff) as

File #: i6-869O30/TLRTS (2045)/i Doc #: 1483746vl


Page 4

the most cost-effective approach to achieving regional plan goals and

targets

However the latest version of the Draft RTS, dated 10 June 2013 (see

Attachment 2) is more of a balanced plan in that it recognizes newly

developing parts of the region and the need for additional transit service in

those areas, as well as policies that support investment expansion in the

road network.

For example under Proposed Transportation Strategies and Actions —

Section 1.3 Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and

goods movement there are seven actions including the following:

“Find and implement a long-term solution to address goods movement along

the north shore of the Fraser River’

“Increase road connectivity in support of local access, especially in Urban

Centres and FTDA’s’ and

“Make infrastructure changes that improve road safety”

In addition there is a Map of the Major Roads (p 7) that identifies Confirmed

Regional Priorities illustrating the Pattullo Bridge with a connection from

the bridge through the east side of New Westminster to southwest

Coquitlam (i.e. along the United Blvd extension area).

In addition under Section 1.4 Make Investments in the transit network to

increase ridership there are seven actions including:

“Where demand is predicted to grow in thefuture, based on committed plans

and reasonable level ofsurety, provide higher service levels in advance of

demand”

Also on page 15 is a map that includes ‘Newly Developing Areas” which

includes the Burke Mountain area in northeast Coquitlam.

Section 3.4 Support Regional Land Use Objectives - the preamble

strengthens the link to the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) and the five

actions also provide additional links to RGS policies.

File #: 16869O3o/TLRTS (2045)/i Doc #: i483746.vi


Page 5

While the focus is still on the lowest - cost and lowest - impact forms oftransportation there has been some movement that acknowledges the needfor expansion is some parts of the region (i.e. transit to newly developingareas and street works along goods movement routes and to improve localaccess). It is noted in the Draft Framework however that in order to moveforward pricing measures will need to be approved via legislative changes bythe Provincial Government and that the pricing measures are intended to beimplemented as major investment decisions are made. Overall the plannotes that a coordinated approach to invest, manage and partner to achievegoals and objectives is required.

From a staff perspective, the issues that were raised previously have beenaddressed and the plan can be endorsed as the policies take into accountCity interests. However it is recommended that a coordinated approach betaken regarding the implementation of regional road pricing initiatives, inthat road pricing should be accompanied by an increase in transit services(e.g. both new bus routes and more frequent bus services) across the cityand in the northeast sector so that a viable alternate form of travel isavailable to city residents and employees.

In addition it is recommended that the City call on the Province todemonstrate leadership and enable TransLink with the necessary tools sothat transportation investments can occur in a timely manner (seeAttachment 1).

TransLink’s 2014 Base PlanSince its inception in 1997 TransLink has been a significant funding partnerto the municipalities both in supporting operations and maintenance of theMajor Road Network (MRN), but also as a funding contributor on manycapital street and cycling projects. Prior to 2011 the City was able toleverage approximately 25% of funding from TransLink on projects completein the previous ten years. However in 2012 funding for MRN and cyclingcapital projects was eliminated, TransLink has advised they are in the initialstages of preparing for the 2014 Base Plan, so there is an opportunity at thistime to request TransLink to reinstate funding levels per 2011 levels asfollows:

• Major Road Network and Bike from zero to $20 Million; and

• Regional Bike from $1.55 Million to $6 Million.

File #: 16-8690-30/TLRTS (2045)/i Dcc 4: 1483746.vi


Page 6

Pattullo Bridge Study and Goods Movement Routing

The North Fraser Perimeter Road (NFPR) was identified as a regional priority

in the early 1990’s and comprises of a set of proposed improvements to

various roads along the north shore of the Fraser River, to provide an

efficient, continuous route between the Highway 91 (Queensborough

Bridge) in New Westminster and Highway 7 (Golden Ears Bridge) in Maple

Ridge/Pitt Meadows.

A critical project that is interdependent and supportive of the NFPR is the

Pattullo Bridge replacement. In 2008 TransLink announced a project to

replace the bridge. One of the seven short-listed alternatives to replace the

bridge includes retaining existing Pattullo as a three-lane bridge plus adding

newfour lane bridge between Surrey and Coquitlam over 5apperton Island

landing west of King Edward. The short-listed alternatives will undergo

further evaluation by TransLink over the next few months.

If a new Coquitlam-Surrey Bridge is located near Sapperton Island between

the Port Mann and Pattullo bridges it raises the following questions: How

would a new bridge affect the road system travel patterns north of Fraser

and would a new goods movement route be relocated to this new bridge?

What are the impacts of a new Coquitlam-Surrey Bridge on the City’s street

system? With respect to the NFPR — what is the impact on this planned

goods movement route with a new Coquitlam - Surrey bridge?

What is needed is an effectively coordinated vision and plan. These

improvements which directly impact three municipalities and indirectly

impact much more of the Metro Vancouver region as well as Port Metro

Vancouver, Transport Canada, CN Rail, and the trucking industry is a key

component of the major road network. Therefore it is recommended that

TransLink confirm the needfor a north of Fraser goods movement routefor

the region and that if it is needed incorporate project initiatives into the RTS

Implementation strategy.

And it is also recommended that the City request TransLink, in concert with

the Province, conduct system level analysis of the short-listed Pattullo

Sapperton option and assess the impacts of the option on the City’s street

network with and without a Highway 1 connection and United BLvd.

connection to Brunette Avenue in New Westminster and advise impacts,

opportunities, and costs.

Fle #: 16-8690-30/TLRTS (2045)/i Doc #: 1483746vi


Page 7

NESectorArea Transit Plan —TransLink recently initiated the NE Sector AreaTransit Plan forming a Public Advisory Group as well as a Technical AdvisoryCommittee. As outlined in the STP key requests from Coquitlam include:

• lncreasedfrequencies and service to growing areas of Coquit/amincluding the northeast and Part/ngton Creek, Maillardville, AustinHeights, Fraser Mills, as well to support the Evergreen corridor;

• Introduction or improved service with Surrey City Centre area (viaLougheed), and points east (i.e. Port Coquit/am, Pitt Meadows, MapleRidge)

TransLink has advised they will be conducting an Elected Officials meetingfor all northeast sector politicians on September 12, 2013, to give themunicipalities an opportunity to provide input into the NEATP process.(Attachment 2 provides the NEATP Process). This elected officials meetingprovides an opportunity to utilize the recently discussed Tn-CitiesTransportation Committee as a means to provide input into Translink’sprocess. Therefore it is suggested that Council appoint an appropriateCouncil representative for that committee at this time in advance of this upcoming session with TransLink.

Financial Implications:There are no financial implications for this City as this time.

Conclusion:While the draft RTS Framework Strategy provides a more balanced set ofpolicies should road pricing initiatives be implemented in the region theyshould be linked with an expansion of transit services so that a viablealternative to vehicle travel is available to those that will be affected.

There is also a need for coordinated efforts in managing goods movementand large scale transportation improvements in the region. This involvessystem level planning, leadership and coordination to ensure projects andinitiatives are identified and implemented in a timely manner.

File #: 16-869030!TLRTS (2045)/i 0CC #: 1483746.vl


Page 8

While Coquitlam staff are participating in the various technical committees

this provides Council an opportunity reflect the City’s position on these

significant regional initiatives and to share perspectives toward achieving

shared objectives.

Attachments:1 — Letter to Premier dated June 18, 2013 Regarding “Leadership and

Governance of Metro Vancouver Transportation System

2 — TransLink’s Regional Transportation Strategy, Draft Strategic Framework

for Consultation, June 10, 2013

3 — Northeast Area Transit Plan process

This report was prepared by Catherine Mohoruk, Manager of Transportation

Planning and reviewed by Carl Johanssen, Manager Community Planning.

File #: 16-8690-3OITLRTS (2045)/i Dcc #: 1483746vl


Appendix A

Appendix A — Resolutions and Proposed Agency Circulation

iiiio } gknalAge n cy

Province Call on the Province to exercise TransLink Board,leadership by ensuring TransLink Metrohas the tools necessary to Vancouver, andimplement regional plans memberincluding transit, goods municipalities,movement and road system Transportationprojects in a timely manner Committee

TransLink - RTS — Endorse the Regional TransLink Board,Draft Strategic Transportation Strategy, (Draft) MetroFramework - Strategic Framework Vancouver,

MoTI,lOJune 2013

TransLink - RTS — Advise TransLink that future road TransLink Board,Implementation pricing initiatives will need to be MetroStrategy linked to the provision of transit Vancouver,

expansion (i.e. new and frequent MOTI, City ofbus service) as increasing transit Port Coquitlam,service in the northeast sector is City of Portnecessary to provide a viable Moodyrealistic alternative to travel byvehicle

TransLink - Base Request TransLink to reinstate TransLink Board,2014 Plan funding levels as per 2011 levels

in the 2014 Base Plan to $20Million for Major Road Networkand Bike Program and to $6Million for the Regional BikeProgram


Appendix A - Page 2

TransLink Pattullo Request TransLink in concert with TransLink Board, -

Bridge Study the Province address the City’s Metro Vancouver

questions and comments as Transportation

outlined in this report pertaining Committee, Port

to the Pattu Ito Bridge Study, MetroVancouver,

short-listed Coquitlam-Surrey City of Surrey,

Alternative as part of the next City of New

stage of the work; Westminster

NE Area Transit Plan As part of the Northeast Area — TransLink, City of

Transit Plan request TransLink to Port Coquitlam,

incorporate and implement City of Port

transit supply related initiatives Moody

as outlined in the City’s StrategicTransportation Plan

File #: 16-8690-30/TLRTS (2045)/i Doc : 1483746Vi


Attachment I

CoQuitlam‘ Office of

the Mayor

June 18, 2013Our File: 01-0410-201034!2013-1Doc#: 1464885.v4

Honourable Christy ClarkPremier of the Province of British ColumbiaP0 Box 9041, Stn Prov GovtVictoria. BC, V8W 9E2

Dear Premier Clark:

Re: Leadership and Governance of Metro Vancouver Transportation System

Firstly we would like to acknowledge the work of the Province and indicate ourappreciation for the leadership that has been afforded by the Province in developing aProvincial Transit Plan and bringing the Evergreen rapid transit line to Coquitlam. Inthat vein we would like to see similar leadership and focus on the current road networkthat impacts our municipality and our neighbouring cities.

While we have experienced a number of road improvements that directly or indirectlybenefit our area, including the Port Mann Bridge/Highway 1 upgrade, the South FraserPerimeter Road and the Pitt River Bridge upgrade, there continues to be significantcongestion and capacity issues that have yet to be addressed. From our perspective, werequire additional road network improvements to resolve the current safety, reliability,efficiency, economic, social and environmental concerns that many of the stakeholdersin our area have raised. Major parts of the North Fraser corridor such as the BrunetteInterchange at Highway 1, United Boulevard Extension, Braid Street/Rail Intersection,Braid Street Bailey Bridge, Pattullo Bridge replacement and road improvements throughNew Westminster do not appear to be planned and managed in a holistic or integratedmanner. In addition, another example of regional road connections in our area thathave not been proceeding satisfactorily includes the Murray Clarke Connector in PortMoody, a needed piece of infrastructure that we support.

TransLink is currently in the process of preparing an updated Regional TransportationStrategy. We believe that TransLink’s planning processes require better leadership andsupport from a more effective governance model, In our view, to be successful, majorinfrastructure investments must be supported by a wide variety of stakeholders and, tothe extent possible, aligned with their priorities. Coquitlam Council is therefore asking

Offce of the Mayor City of Cowtiam31000 Gwdftod Way Coqoitiam., vtt 7N2

• Df.ce. 604 2’ 300 3’ boa 077

a.a.w.Cotar Ca


the Province to resolve the TransLink governance issues so that the organization ispositioned with the appropriate leadership, authority and accountability which willallow them to comprehensively plan and implement a number of overdueimprovements in the region, for the benefit of the entire region, Fundamental changeis required so that stakeholder concerns can be addressed, funding secured and projectscompleted within a reasonable timeframe.

I took forward to your comments and feedback.

c. Transportation Minister

Mayor

Fi’e 4 Q1O4tO2O?O34/2O131 Do L 1464883v4


Attachment 2June 14, 2013 DRAFT for Consultation

Regional Transportation StrategyDraft Strategic Framework for ConsultationJune 10, 2013

A SHARED VISIONMetro Vancouver is, by every measure, one of the most liveable regions in the world, It is beautiful,prosperous and, by global urban standards, environmentally pristine.

One of the region’s enduring strengths is its consistent vision for regional growth management that issupported and reinforced by an effective transportation system. Metro Vancouver introduced its first“Livable Region Plan” in 1975, setting out an urban development pattern that would serve the peopleand save the land. Given the region’s limited land base and its rapidly growing population, the leaders ofthe day — and all those since — resolved to focus growth and development in a series of compact centresthat would be easy to get around and would allow for the preservation of the parks, natural spaces andagricultural lands that enhance our quality of life.

1975 Livable Region Plan

To help realize this vision, TransLink was founded in 1999 as an integrated, multi-modal, regionaltransportation authority to provide a regional transportation system that moves people and goods andsupports:

1, the goals of the Regional Growth Strategy (successors to the Livable Region Plan);

2. regional economic development; and

3. regional and provincial environmental objectives.

In service to these goals, TransLink is in the process of updating the current Regional TransportationStrategy, Transport 2040. Over the coming year, and working in collaboration with its partners and thepublic, TransLink will reconsider, refine and seek broad agreement on a transportation action plan thatwill help maintain Metro Vancouver’s position as one of the best places in the world to live.

1


June 14, 2013 I DRAFT for Consultation

1. A region that is vibrant and sustainable

Adopted in 2011, Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy articulates five regional growth

management goals: create a compact urban area; support a sustainable economy; protect the

environment and respond to climate change impacts; develop complete communities; and support

sustainable transportation choices. The RGS also emphasizes the importance of coordinating land use

and transportation, recognizing that location of jobs and housing fundamentally determines where and

how much people, goods and services need to travel. In seeking to reduce the distances that people

(and goods) need to travel and in increasing the likelihood that those trips can be made by walking,

cycling or transit, TransLink will work even closer with its partners to align transportation infrastructure

with land use decisions that are the responsibility of Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities.

2. A region where businesses prosper

Every economic activity depends upon the transportation system to bring together people, goods, and

services at the right time and place. An efficient system ensures that: employers can recruit and retain

skilled workers from across the region; students can make it to class; manufacturers and distributors can

be confident of “justintime” deliveries within the region and throughout North America; families can

get to the store; and service providers can reach client sites, reliably, each day. TransLink recognizes that

where our transportation system performs well, individuals and businesses reap direct economic

benefits; where it falls short, we all incur costs—through lost productivity and foregone transactions.

3. A region where air is clean and the land — and the people — are healthy

Transportation is a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in BC. The BC Climate Action Plan

aims to reduce GHGs by 33% by 2020 and by 80% by 2050, from 2007 levels. Motor vehicle traffic is also

the principal regional source of hazardous air contaminants. Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Air Quality

and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan set goals to protect public health and the environment; improve

visual air quality; and minimize the contribution to global climate change. The Regional Transportation

Strategy can help achieve these objectives by creating and supporting a cleaner, more efficient

transportation system,

WE ARE MAKING PROGRESSThanks to the support from local, provincial and federal governments, we have made sweeping changes

to regional transportation infrastructure in the last three decades. We built three rapid transit lines

since 1986, with another now under construction; increased bus service by 50% since 2002; built

strategic links in the road network; and added, rebuilt or replaced bridges. The result is a transportation

system that supports the local economy, connects the region to the rest of Canada, connects Canada to

the rest of the world, and is frequently held up as a North American model of integrated, multimodal

planning.

A Challenge

Over the next 30 years, Metro Vancouver is expected to welcome one million additional residents,

adding 500,000 jobs and three million more passenger trips every day. Bumped up against mountains,

an ocean, an international border and a protected agricultural zone, there is little room to continue

expanding outwards, little room to accommodate all of these additional trips by car. The economic

reality has also changed. The 2008 recession was not so much a bump in the road as a shift in gears. The

new economy can still be healthy. It will still expand. There are promising signs that senior levels of

government are committed to supporting public transportation. But in general, individuals, businesses

2


June 14, 2013 DRAFT for Consultation

and governments are all looking more carefully at large new spending proposals. Our challenge — as wework to improve our quality of life even as we increase our population — is to make communities and thetransportation system work better, and do so at a cost that taxpayers find affordable.

and an Opportunity

We have demonstrated already that this is possible. Metro Vancouver is a continental leader in buildingcompact, complete communities that enable people to live closer to their work, to the services theyneed and the amenities they want. And residents have an increasing amount of choice in how they getaround. More than 90% of the places where people live and work in Metro Vancouver can be reachedby public transit— a much higher level than most comparably sized regions in North America.

Now we need to raise the bar — and to set two clear and measurable “headline targets” that we can useto track our progress.

First, in Transport 2040 the region agreed that the most affordable and efficient way of achieving ourlivability, environmental and economic goals would be to make it possible for people to make half of alltrips by walking, cycling, and transit.

These are the lowest-cost and lowest-impact forms of transportation. They require the least land, inflictthe least environmental Impact, have the greatest economic payback, and, in the case of walking andcycling, they actually promote the active lifestyles that contribute to personal and community goodhealth. If we can achieve this target by 2045, we will be able to accommodate population growth andmaintain or improve travel-time reliability for commuters and — importantly — for goods movement onthe regional road system, even in the face of physical and economic constraints.

Percentage of all trips by walking, cycling, and transitTc 50%

The second headline target will measure our success in getting people closer to jobs and services and,again, ensuring the smooth flow of traffic to enable efficient goods movement within and throughMetro Vancouver. It is: to reduce distances driven by onethird.

If we achieve both these targets, by 2045, people, goods and services will all spend less time, energy,money and hassle moving around, improving quality of life, protecting the environment, and supportinga prosperous economy.

3



RETHINKING TRANSPORTATIONIt must be clear, in thinking about transportation policy, that we are not trying to build a transportation

system; the goal is to support a vibrant, sustainable, prosperous and healthy community. To this end,

TransLink is an essential service provider: it is one of the most complex multi-modal transportation

authorities in North America. But it is just one partner in a region-wide c1laboration. TransLink can build

roads, bridges and rapid transit lines, it can buy and operate buses, trains and seabuses, it can provide

funding to build walkways, bikeways and roadways. It can help promote, coordinate, and organize. But

others have the responsibility and authority to make decisions about land use, to manage and direct

development, to raise or assign funds for transportation investments and to establish some of the

pricing mechanisms that will make those investments pay bigger dividends.

In an era of increasing fiscal constraint, the best opportunities that lay before us will be found in

cooperation. We must make commitments to Invest, Manage and Partner concurrently. We can’t do

any one of these in isolation.

INVEST — DO MORE WITH LESS

Times are tight. In addition to an array of operating and maintenance demands, many communities

within the region have reasonable and pressing ambitions to expand the transportation system, to keep

pace with growth, achieve our shared goals for livability and economic prosperity.

In that context, we must affirm that we are providing maximum value from our existing assets and that

we work with our partners to make new investment decisions in a more integrated way, considering all

possible solutions on an equal tooting. For example, when seeking to resolve a traffic chokepoint, we

will compare demand management solutions on par with strategies to increase capacity. We will give

equal consideration to all of the modes. We will assess capital budget decisions along with operating

budget decisions.

What this means for the region

We will continue to use taxpayer resources efficiently. Decision-making will be transparent. Moreover, it

will ensure investments are indeed moving the region closer to its goals.

Not all performance objectives might be equally important and different partners might have different

priorities. Through this regional transportation planning process, we will have to balance competing

interests based on clear agreed-to criteria. In TransLink’s Moving Forward expansion plan, we did this

for the first time. We evaluated cycling, road and transit initiatives against a common set of goals, and

prioritized and advanced the most effective combination of solutions to get us there with the limited

funds we had available. We will continue to take this performance based approach as we plan and

deliver on future investment.

MANAGE — GIVE PEOPLE THE TOOLS TO MAKE CHOICES

To make the system work more efficiently, we have to make informed choices about how we travel. In

any market system, pricing acts as the key link to balance supply and demand. Aligning price with the

cost of a service means that users pay more directly for what they use, making the system more

efficient. It also generates revenue that is more closely related to demand, People have the right signals

4


June 14, 2013 IDRAFT for ConsuIttion

to help make travel decisions that work best for them and for the system. Pricing is about givingtravellers more choice and value.

in 1993 Metro Vancouver adopted a regional transportation strategy that included commitments toroad pricing. More recently, Transport 2040 and the Regional Growth Strategy reaffirmed this policydirection. In 2013, the Mayors’ Council supported user fees to shape demand and recommendedexploring implementation of road pricing in this region. TransLink can make some of these changesindependently, for example by establishing transit prices that more accurately reflect demand by time ofday, location or distance travelled, or adjusting its parking parking taxation levels. Other agencies andlevels of government have authority over road pricing, some changes for which require legislativeapproval from the Provincial government.

Cooperation between partners will be critical to make new investments affordable and existinginfrastructure more efficient and sustainable. Going forward, we need to work to have pricing measuresaproved as major investment decisions are made to ensure our system continues to enjoy financial goodhealth, provides maximum benefit to users and, ultimately, delivers us the quality of life we expect.


Traffic congestion and overcrowding during peak hours will be reduced, enhancing reliability for highestvalue trips (e.g. commercial trucks). Those who choose to forego a trip, bundle some trips together,travel at a less busy time, use a less busy route, or travel by another mode, will be rewarded withsavings in time and money. A challenge that needs to be addressed will be potential increased costs forsome users who are not able to change their travel patterns. In addition, the technical andadministrative challenge of collecting user fees must be considered.

PARTNER — WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE PLANS A REALITYIt is often said that the best transportation plan is a good land use plan, and for good reason: thelocation of jobs and housing fundamentally determines where and how much people, goods andservices need to travel. Ultimately, land use has as great an impact on transportation outcomes thanmost transportation decisions.

The core issue here is the necessity for greater certainty on land use and investment commitments — bylocal governments, by TransLink, and by the development community. Metro Vancouver’s record ofinter-governmental coordination is already widely admired. But closer cooperation between TransLinkand municipal partners — and clearer commitments to land use and development goals as investmentdecisions are made — will give TransLink the guidance and certainty it needs to prioritize major capitalprojects.


Well-managed development around new and existing transportation infrastructure will maximize theaffordability and usefulness of the entire transportation system At the same time, well-planned anddelivered transportation services will make compact communities easily accessible. With.at least half ofall trips made by walking cycling and transit, people and goods will move freely, at the least cost andwith the least environmental impact. It is a recipe for livability. Recognizing that total certainty is notrealistic (e.g. resources may not be available to expand service, zoning changes don’t necessarily lead todesired development), stronger partnerships — in community plan development, through considerationand approval of developments or through agreements in advance of investment — can still increase thelevel of certainty that we all need to plan effectively.

S



INVESTING IN OUR FUTUREIn 2008, Transport 2040 displayed existing and committed road network projects and laid out a 30-year

conceptual network for transit, as shown in the maps on the next page.

• Billions have been invested in the regionals road network in the past number of years, and the

regional road network is largely complete. In thirty years, regional traffic is targeted to be at

today’s levels. Our focus now is in dealing with a few major investment needs for example,

implementation of a long-term solution for the Pattullo Bridge and its network connections and

select connections for goods movement, in a way that does not increase general purpose traffic.

The Province has also identified the Massey Tunnel as an investment priority. Substantial

investments will be also be required to complete local networks in developing areas and improve

road safety.

• The transit network concept shows increased levels of service and investment on many new

corridors. Since 2008, TransLink and its partners have further studied several of these corridors

and confirmed the following are priorities for rapid transit investment: Broadway-USC corridor,

Burnaby mountain/SFU, Expo Line upgrades, and Surrey (104th Aye, Fraser Hwy, and King George

Blvd), Other corridors shown require further study and will be discussed as part of this update to

the Regional Transportation Strategy.

• For decades the region has called for priority for walking and cycling, but our investment

prioritization has not reflected that. Early and significant investment will now be required to

complete the walkway and bikeway networks with a particular focus on traffic protected bikeways

in Urban Centres and other areas of high cycling potential.

Metro Vancouver’s current transportation network — including the roads, bridges, sidewalks, cycling and

transit infrastructure — is extensive and costly. Major new investment, including the priorities described

above will require substantially more funds. Consider these numbers:

• $5 billion — the currently unfunded cost to keep the system in a state of good repair and keep pace

with growth in the coming decades.

• $18 billion—the cost for the highest priority new projects identified by our partners.

• $275 million to $1 billion — the increase in the region’s share of annual spending required to cover

the $5 billion to $23 billion cost of those items, combined.

These are big numbers, representing more than we’ve historically

spent on transportation in this region and coming at a time when the

economy is strained and government is trying to contain spending. It

presents a challenge to the citizens and leaders in the region —to

agree upon how much they want to spend on transportation and then

how to spend it. To come to this agreement, TransLink will facilitate a

dialogue over the rest of 2013 to develop a 15-year implementation

plan to this Strategy Framework. In 2014, TransLink will bring forward

a Regional Transportation Strategy that includes this longer term

Strategy Framework as well as investment program identifying

initiatives and priorities for the next 15 years.

6


June

14,

2013

DR

AFT

for

Con

sult

atio

n

‘4.4

I

/

9,

I

Fig

ure

1-

Maj

orR

oads

,H

ighw

ays

and

Gat

eway

s,30

-Yea

rC

once

ptfr

omT

rans

port

2040

(200

8)w

ith

conf

irm

edre

gion

alpr

iori

ties

(201

3)

,

4

8

7


Jun

e14

,20

13ID

RA

FTfo

rC

on

su1

tato

n

I

!I’5

rir

Figu

re2—

Reg

iona

lTra

nsit

Net

wor

k,30

-Yea

rC

once

ptfr

omT

rans

port

2040

(200

8)w

ith

conf

irm

edre

gion

alpr

iori

ties

(201

3)

IPI

8



BE PART OF THE PLANTransport 2040 has laid out a transportation vision for this region where most destinations are handier,where most trips are made by walking, cycling, and transit; where travel is easier, more reliable and lessstressful; where goods move efficiently; where people and businesses have more transportationchoices; where the roads are safer, the air is cleaner, the climate is protected, and where we leadhealthier, more active lives.

This vision can only be achieved by coordinating our efforts to get the investments we need, along withcommitments to the pricing and land use policies that will ensure best value out of every transportationdollar spent. Working together and refocusing our efforts, we can achieve this vision.

The dialogue is just getting started. We invite you to join the conversation at wwwtranslink.ca/rts

9



DRAFT STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK

PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION VISION, GOALS & TARGETS

VisionWe maintain our global position as one of the best places in the world to live because we meet our

transportation needs in a way that simultaneously enhances the health of our people and communities,

economy, and environment.

GoalsMake transportation decisions that:

Choice 1. Support Sustainable Transportation Choices

People 2. Foster Safe and Healthy Communities

Economy 3. Enable a Sustainable and Resilient Economy

Environment 4. Protect the Environment

Headline TargetsAs a region, we can best achieve these goals by designing our communities and transportation system in

a way that allows us to reduce distances driven by one-third and by making it possible for people to

make half of all trips by walking, cycling, and transit.

Achieving these targets will benefit everyone by:

• Making travel more reliable

• Giving people and businesses more transportation choices

• Making it easier and less stressful to get to work and school

• Giving us more time for doing the things we love

• Ensuring businesses continue to prosper with better access to more workers and more markets

• Making living, working and doing business in this region more affordable

• Giving people better access to more jobs and more opportunities

• Making our roads safer

• Helping us live healthier and more active lives, reducing the burden on the healthcare system

• Helping us get out on the sidewalk to meet our neighbours and deter crime

• Making the air we breathe cleaner

• Protecting our climate by meeting our greenhouse gas reduction targets

10



PROPOSED PRINCIPLESWe commit to advancing transportation solutions that are:

1. Outcome-Driven

In planning and decision-making, we will set regional priorities together and make spending and policydecisions based on an assessment of the best ways to achieve the outcomes we all agree that we want.In this assessment, we will consider all solutions on an equal footing. For example, we will comparedemand management solutions on par with strategies to increase capacity. We will give equalconsideration to the choices between and the potential to integrate different modes — walking, cycling,driving and all forms of transit. And we will assess capital budget decisions along with operating budgetdecisions against our long term goals.

2. Seamless

The regional transportation system is a quilt of components managed by different jurisdictions, andchanges in transportation infrastructure or land use in one part of the region can affect the entiresystem. Users have a right to expect that the system will be managed seamlessly, efficiently andresponsibly.

3. Resilient

We will recognize our vulnerability to forces beyond our control (e.g. global economy, natural disasters,technological change, fuel prices), seeking out and prioritizing solutions that best prepare us for a rangeof possible futures and not just the future we think is most likely today.

4. Affordable

We will continue to invest over the long term to meet the diverse needs of all parts of the region. As weimplement initiatives, we are mindful of other needs — regional priorities such as water, sewer andparks, and broader ones such heath and education. There are limited dollars and one taxpayer. We willdesign investment plans that can be implemented in a timely way and that have public support for boththe level and sources of funding.

11



PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES & ACTIONS

There are three key transportation levers the region can use to achieve our overarching goal of getting

people and goods where they need to go as reliably, safely, efficiently, and cleanly as possible, We can:

1. iNVEST strategically to maintain and expand the transportation system;

2. MANAGE the transportation system to be more efficient and user-focused; and

3. PARTNER to make it happen.

Each of these levers has implications for the entire transportation system, relating to the movement of

both people and goods. Far example, if more people ride their bicycles, they free up more road space

for car commuters and trucks moving goods. If car drivers change their hours, they can reduce peak-

hour congestion, thereby delaying the need to build new infrastructure, or removing the need

altogether.

Moving People

By helping to reduce trip distances and increase the opportunities for people to walk, cycle and take

transit, transportation investments can support growth in Urban Centres and along frequent transit

corridors. Accurate pricing for transit and driving can also help reduce congestion and increase fairness.

The goal is a system that enables people to walk, cycle, take transit or drive safely, comfortably and

without major congestion, crowding or delays.

Moving Goods

Given the critical nature of goods movement to the local economy and to Metro Vancouver’s function as

Canada’s Pacific Gateway, we can help protect industrial land, support safety improvements for rail and

trucks, help to streamline regulations, support pricing to reduce congestion on the road network and

make room for high-value commercial vehicle trips, and work together to coordinate regional planning.

We can provide new road capacity where necessary to ensure that goods can move in a timely and

reliable way, around and through Metro Vancouver.

Achieving Regional Objectives

The ease, convenience and affordability of transportation affects every aspect of Metro Vancouverites’

quality of life. Accordingly, a strategy in which we Invest to maintain and expand the system, Manage

the assets optimally and work closely with Partners to maximize its effectiveness will reinforce Regional

Growth Strategy goals, even as it supports the economy and safeguards the environment. The result will

be a collaborative process among all Metro Vancouver governments and agencies that deliver complete,

compact communities that are connected efficiently and that remain comfortably within the Urban

Containment Boundary, protecting the natural and agricultural lands that help make this one of the

most livable regions in the world.

12


June 14, 2013 j DRAFT for Consultation

1. INVEST STRATEGICALLY TO MAINTAIN AND GROW THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

Understanding what land uses and demand-management measures are in place and anticipated for thefuture wil provide us with a good idea of what investment is needed, where and when. We will maintainthe system to ensure its safety, reliability and resilience. Where basic networks are incomplete or supplyis insufficient to meet demand, we will consider expansion in a way that achieves our goals as cost-effectively as possible.

1.1. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair

Maintenance costs will continue to grow as the system ages and expands. It is important to use strategicasset management principles to keep infrastructure in a safe and functional condition.

Key actions include working with partners to:

• Evaluate an asset’s condition, vulnerability and importance to the performance of thetransportation system when balancing state-of-good repair funding against other investmentpriorities.

• Upgrade infrastructure to respond to climate and seismic risks.

1.2. Make early investments to complete the walkway and bikeway networks

Walking and cycling are low-cost, emission-free, energy efficient, and space efficient. Walking andcycling also lead to better public health and safer roads for all users. Parts of this region still have majorgaps in the walkway network. This region was also late to invest in cycling infrastructure, so there is ashortage of traffic-protected bikeways which are needed to support more cycling by people of all agesand abilities. Walkways and bikeways are predominantly on municipal networks. TransLink plays inimportant role by supporting municipal investments that move us towards are regional goals.


• As a near-term regional priority for investment, invest in the walkway network to strategicallyimprove connectivity, especially connecting to and within the Frequent Transit Network.

• As a near-term regional priority for investment, make significant and early investment to completethe bikeway network, as outlined in the Regional Cycling Strategy, with a focus on Class 1 facilitiesin Urban Centres and other high cycling potential areas.

1.3. Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access, and goods movement

The region’s roads form the foundation of the transportation network, carrying people, goods andservices by foot, bicycle, bus, car and truck, For our transportation system to work well, we need ourroads to work well. Beyond the need to maintain our infrastructure in a state of good repair, we proposeto support additional investments in streets, roads, and bridges for three main reasons: to improvesafety, increase connectivity, and improve goods movement.


• ensure the effectiveness of road investments by making concurrent commitments to appropriateoptimization actions (see Strategy 2.3), pricing measures (see Strategy 24); and land use measures(see Strategy 3.4)

• Increase road connectivity in support of better local access, especially in Urban Centres and FTDAs• Make infrastructure changes that improve road safety

13



• Provide additional capacity where needed to improve travel time reliability on key goodsmovement corridors in a way that does not increase general purpose traffic.

• Find and implement a long-term solution for the Pattulio Bridge

• Find and implement a long-term solution to address goods movement along the north shore of theFraser River.

• Work with the Province to ensure a replacement to the Massey Tunnel is integrated with the

regional network and supports regional goals.

1.4. Make investments in the transit network to increase ridership

The cost-effectiveness of transit routes vary depending on the demand, which is generally a factor ofnearby land use. The highest and most balanced transit demand comes from within transit-orientedcommunities or that connect such centres on well-populated major routes. These high-demand areastend to have a finer-grained network of well-connected streets, higher densities, diverse mixes of landuses, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly design, and priced or managed parking. Sparsely populated

communities, on the other hand, generate little demand and are more costly to service,

In 2008, TransLink identified a Frequent Transit Network within which it could more affordably provideservice every 15 minutes or less, throughout the day, seven days a week, Further, by shifting resourcesfrom high-cost, low-ridership routes to the FTN, it was also able to increase ridership for the same or

less investment. In future, the direction is to continue to direct resources to the FTN to increase

ridership; and to expand the FTN level of service in areas where demand has increased adequately orwhere commitments to a level of development can be expected to create such demand.


• ensure the effectiveness of transit investments by making concurrent commitments to appropriate

optimization actions (see Strategy 2.3), pricing measures (see Strategy 2.4); and land use measures

(see Strategy 3.4)• Invest in future transit service on the basis of performance with “productivity” targets guiding

investment in ridership-focused service and “extent of coverage” guiding investment in basic

access service.• For ridership-focused service, focus on matching service levels with current transit demand.

• Where demand is predicted to grow in the future, based on committed plans and reasonable level

of surety, provide higher service levels in advance of demand.

• Develop and communicate meaningful, manageable, and measureable transit service standards.• Use development review process to align expectations for transit in planned communities with

service standards.• Complete high-priority rapid transit projects including the Broadway-UBC corridor, Burnaby

mountain/SFU, Expo Line upgrades, and Surrey (104th Aye, Fraser Hwy, and King George Blvd).

1.5. Ensure the continued provision of basic access transit service in low-demand neighbourhoods

While working to maximize ridership and, therefore, the value and affordability of existing

infrastructure, TransLink has maintained basic access service in low-demand neighbourhoods for thosewith few mobility options.


• Maintain basic access services in stable, low-demand areas where use stays above a criticalthreshold, based on meaningful, manageable, and measureable transit service standards.

14


vi

x r.

-l US z 0 0 ‘-S

U.S

r’J

Q vi

0 -1 0 n ci C Di ci


mC

alt

—w

0)1

zrn

c. — at

3t1

10101

Zr,

a.

a--

-F,

Ca,.

XC

ro

’a--

-,a

a_

vC

o 0 C 01 0 90 m 3 •0 0 -C 3 a C a z VI z a.

0) Iso 0) a 0) 0)

C D a 1-

NI

0 w 0 ,, -I --F

,0 n 0 U

,C 0) 0

H it



2. MANAGE THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM TO BE MORE EFFICIENT AND USER-FOCUSEDMetro Vancouver’s integrated transportation system offers users a complex array of choices for everytrip. To help people and businesses make choices that are best fort’nem and for the transportationsystem requires excellence in design, regulation and pricing — and in making available the informationthat will give individuals and businesses a better travel experience and help them make efficient travelchoices. Technology and supply-management solutions can also make the transportation system morespace and energy efficient.

2.1. Make travel safe and secure for all users

The transportation system should be designed so that people and businesses can use it as safely andsecurely as possible and free of fear from harm. There are many things we can do to make travel lessstressful, more comfortable and even enjoyable.


• Support laws, enforcement, skills, training and designs that improve road safety and protectvulnerable road users.

• Use physical design and enforcement to deter crime.• Be prepared to respond effectively in the event of natural disasters and other emergencies.

2.2. Make travel easy and attractive for all users

The transportation system should be as accommodating as possible, so that people of all ages andabilities can move about the region independently, with confidence and in comfort.


• Design for universal accessibility.• Offer protection from the elements and provide places to rest.• Provide incentives, marketing, information, and support programs to help make travel easier for

people and for businesses moving goods and services.• Provide on-demand access to a full range of transportation services with the Compass Card.• Make it easy to share — by supporting car-sharing, ride-sharing, bike-sharing and taxis.• Make the transportation system easy to understand and navigate, with a consistent region-wide

wayfinding system and real-time travel information for all modes.

2.3. Optimize roads and transit for efficiency, safety and reliability

System optimization is about using technology and management solutions to operate our road andtransit networks more efficiently, safely and reliably. We need to make the most of what we havebefore pursuing major investment in expansion.


• Continue to reallocate savings from system efficiency measures into initiatives that most costeffectively achieve regional transportation goals.

• Integrate Intelligent Transportation Systems, incident management, road works management,lane management, and signal priority for goods and transit.

• Explore possible opportunities and impacts of new vehicle technologies including low-carbon,connected, and self-driving.

17



• Assess site-specific road usage and, as a priority, reallocate road space where appropriate to

improve capacity, safety and reliability for walking, cycling, transit and goods movement.

2.4. Price roads and transit for fairness, efficiency and revenue

Aligning the pricing of transportation with the full cost of providing it makes the system fairer since

people pay more closely for what they use. It can make the system more efficient and reliable by

spreading demand to less busy times, routes, and modes. It can also help raise revenue to pay for the

system. TransLink can institute pricing changes directly on transit fares and can administer and fine-

tune the road-related pricing mechanisms that must be established, approved or legislated at the

municipal or Provincial government levels.


• Link pricing decisions to investment commitments.

• Adopt a transit fare structure that allows for more fine-grained variation in prices based on time,

distance travelled or location.

• Undertake a near-term field study and supporting technical work to understand the impacts and

implementation requirements of a region-wide road pricing system.

• Support a region-wide road pricing system that allows for more fine-grained variation in prices

based on time, distance travelled or location.

• Introduce road user pricing concurrent with the introduction of major transportation investment

to reflect user value and to incent appropriate choices.

2.5. Manage parking for fairness, efficiency and revenue

Bicycles and cars both need places to park at the beginning and ends of their trips. While the shortage of

bicycle parking across the region discourages some people from cycling, abundant and frequently free

automobile parking is often an invitation to drive for even the shortest of trip. Actively managing,

pricing, and right-sizing parking can improve convenience and reliability by ensuring parking is available

when and where you need it, thereby reducing congestion in Urban Centres from cars circling for

parking, improving housing affordability, and supporting more compact transit-oriented communities.


• Install sufficient bicycle parking in Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas.

• Ensure that automobile parking requirements are not excessive and reflect availability of walking,

cycling, and transit options.

• Unbundle costs for auto parking and commercial and/or residential space.

• Use pricing and/or time limits to make most efficient use of on-street and off-street parking in

Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas.

• Facilitate area-wide parking management and other opportunities for shared parking.

18



3. PARTNER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN

To make our plans a reality, they need sufficient funding and strong partnerships. To ensure that ourcollective actions are effective, we need consistent monitoring and evaluation.

3.1. Establish funding that is stable, sufficient, appropriate and influences travel choicesMany of the initiatives described above need money— especially for major road and transit expansionand ongoing operations. In order to make these things happen, we need a mix of revenue tools thatprovide funding that is stable and predictable over the tong-term, We need sufficient financial capacityto deliver on our plans and the public support to use this capacity. We also have the opportunity toexplore innovative funding approaches to reinforce our goals for managing and focusing regionalgrowth, and for encouraging efficient travel.

The Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation has set forth transportation funding principles,including:

o Transportation should be priced more accurately to better align behaviour andtransportation objectives.

o Transit fare rates should be sensitive to public affordability.o Funding should be generated from the goods movement sector to recognize the costs.o The proportion of funding from property taxes should not increase.o Collectively, funding sources should be reliable and predictable, but adjustable against

each other.o Funding options should be economically efficient in their administration and collection.o As newer, more effective revenue sources are introduced, reductions should be

considered for funding sources that are less consistent with these principles.

• The Government of British Columbia has specified that new transportation funding mechanismsshould take into account the following considerations:

o Affordability for families;o Effects on the provincial economy;o Revenue generation across the region;o AbilityforTransLinkto share in the local benefit of transit investments.

TransLink supports the principles laid out by the Mayors’ Council and Government of British Columbia.TransLink will continue to work towards these and advocate for approaches that provide funding thatis stable, sufficient and appropriate to the travel choices the region seeks to encourage. On land use,on most pricing decisions and on any substantive changes to the funding sources and amounts,TransLink relies up its municipal partners and on senior levels of government for support andcooperation.


• Advocate and advance immediate and longer-term transportation funding solutions that reflectthe principles set forth by the Mayors’ Council and the Province.

• Develop a sustainable funding strategy that responds to the trends affecting TransLink’s existingrevenue sources, and supports goals for managing transportation demand.

a Balance contributions from users of the transportation system and from broad-based sources, toensure stable and resilient revenue.

19



• Enable policy-based adjustments to funding rates and sources over time, to account for changes in

travel patterns and other trends.

• Advocate for regional transportation needs at the provincial and national level and continue to

pursue transportation funding from senior levels of government.

• Continue to broaden TransLink’s non-transportation revenue base — from real estate, advertising,

and commercial partnerships.

3.2, Monitor progress towards our desired outcomes

Performance-based decisions require good data. Monitoring and evaluation are essential to assess

progress towards our goals, and to help understand how initiatives are performing and how different

options might perform in the future.


• Establish a robust and coordinated system of monitoring, evaluation, and reporting, including

feedback loops to adjust course as necessary.

• Build into funding framework the ability to adjust the mix and rates of different revenue tools to

respond to changes in behaviour.

• Collaborate with partners to continuously improve data collection and evaluation tools.

• Make transportation data available in an open format whenever possible to enable third-party

analysis and tool development.

3.3. Ensure effective coordination through strong partnerships

Making progress on these strategies and actions will require coordinated effort from many partners,

including governments, the private sector, labour, community organizations and residents. We can work

to improve Metro Vancouver’s record of inter-governmental coordination by establishing stronger

partnerships and making reciprocal commitments to deliver the policy measures, land ue changes or

investments needed to get the best performance from each solution. This coordination will provide

greater certainty about who will do what and under what conditions. TransLink is uniquely positioned to

help coordinate these efforts.


• Convene and facilitate ongoing regional dialogue through stakeholder forums, standing advisory

corn mittees, and a goods movement council.

• Advocate for the development of a regional economic development strategy that clearly

articulates actions related to transportation.

• Develop strategies to ensure a skilled and qualified labour force to plan, build, operate and

maintain the transportation system.

20



3.4. Support regional land use objectives

It is important to get jobs, housing and major trip generators in the right locations to facilitate shortertrips and more trips by walking, cycling, and transit. In this region, municipalities are responsible forlocal land use planning which must be consistent with Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. In2011, TransLink endorsed the Regional Growth Strategy and its commitments including policies to focusgrowth in Urban Centres, Frequent Transit Development Areas and along the Frequent Transit Networkwithin a clearly defined Urban Containment Boundary. It also contains policies to protect industrial landand industrial uses. Through investing, managing and partnering to deliver the regional transportationsystem, we can reinforce these regional land use objectives.


• Continue to support and implementation the transportation-related actions, including thoserequested of TransLink, contained in the Regional Growth Strategy

• Make commitments to supportive land use concurrent with investment commitments.• Establish mechanisms such as partnership agreements and joint planning to provide greater

certainty around expected land use, policies and investments.• Develop corridor and area plans, and provide supportive funding, to improve access to and within

frequent transit areas• Encourage affordable and rental housing along the Frequent Transit Network.Continue to develop

and communicate resources to help support local governments and the development communityin the implementation of transit oriented communities.

21


(UC

LL

C,

C1(U

U(1)

AC0:3

:3o

04

C-o

L(:3

u-i

:3in

13aI-i,

A0‘(-‘4

‘1

w;z

‘n4m

G

(3

-c(3--3,

:3-(3-

0:33

:3CU

(VCC‘-33-3

‘1’

(.3(-3ft_U)

c-iC1(33-_i

(3-3i_i)

‘3-1

’pc_3

(_

3-U

3-3-3V

t

-903--

p-pCP0‘-3-‘-U3-U

(33-,

3-V11_iC

(—3

C)

-3CV

,‘(3

(j

9>çi

-C,3-I

(-

CD

3-)(33

(_

2-;

(z-E)

(3-3

D

(13:3

3-U

CCC

-3-fl

JED

‘-3.)

(JO

(1)CC

92

(3)

-U

C)03

3--

(UCC

(1’‘3-(3)C

C0

C:

(U(3-’

-c(U(U(3,

C-:3-0

II)

.2

pC:3.

:310-c

(-U

-C

11

_c

—a.

t3-3-

CCl-’1

a:

U,

3;u.I

ID!.fl

:j4

13:(U:3-0?

.2C0C

4-

-4-i

0)÷

-

.0.Y

:3(U

‘1(U

tci.

,0)

C.2

40J

C>

cL

o,—

.2-oC

O-3

(0U

(U‘(3

0)

:3C

0-

-i-i—

0)

3-

o.2

I

0C-

0-—

_3.

(U

0)

-4-,(-(3

:33

:3t(U

03

:3-2

OQ

)‘oE

0V

..

zV

3p

0,

rI


Backgroumter

What is included in the Northeast SectorArea Transit Plan?

TNurieas: ScxAmc iras Pia l rieu ard rr)9reruat ors or tne trar St nato t c tioribras:Secto incLia r bot’ trs’t srv e a c hrvrv tore

c-oeraDr tc r -riceLiceJ areco lreaci the Dco or Teme, be cos od

F :nia

a te o an s. aourass tras n:eora: or for toeOCC9IO OF tbc rca Ervroree Line extens on o therogonc reh ran d r’ash s1sem, so no in:! id’ p nmjfor the rari d trds: exteos’on irself Reoon& transit issucs(e.g fare policy, service de!er rnode!s transit fleet), transtoperd ons (inc ding depots, schedu’e rc!ah1t arid skechmoenjes’ coo aiStO ciar,sit (-tcnd;DA°J) are cho noaci’odoo h :he pan

How is the public involved?

Toe p ar no proLess ci a opptun t’ fo s:akebodersand toe pb’ic to a trv mcjt to Pa’sUr P on the Ljjr

of trans tin toe Nor:beast Sector Trans[mk soil proade asahety of oppoounit’es on ire and in the conor ries oci a Northeast Saror to engagn wth ad receive feedbackfrom stakehoders ad the pub! c on toe transit netvorPraconimendarors V the par

arid non. thc Nortneac: Secto- Orea Transi: Pan Pub!Adjisory Comm::ee (PAC) is being es:abhshed as arneanrgfu part of TransLinks stakeho!drn and pubicconsu1tation for the ratv yLunched area transt planPAP members from across the Northeast Seotor are se’tedbased on the r expert se, transportator interest, common trvoivement and leade’sh’p ao on their aM ty to r ae

pos rye contribot on

or vu! ne oao rC the a*er feeoac cciie:rvci frcie brcader oo!c corsnji:n: or omcess v;h ch

cors’dered ar anu to ne!p T’a-mL.nk ma<e beoerJormed decisons drig the consL:atio process a’d

the ae;eLipoeot of toe Nor:heas: Sector Area FranC: Plan

How are the Northeast Sectormunicipalities involved?

Toe enthe Northeast Sector sub-regon vsih beconsidered as a r.ersoork, and a! flue

ne CiD5Ci in voLed in me area transrr p anprocess.

T -‘--“‘‘ .5S i, ,OS i 0’

s:akeho’ders, inc!udrg Metro Vancouuer ad theBC M nhtry of iranspartaor and lnfrdstructure,to ensure land use and tranpoia:ion policiesare ahgned

Tv- a

For Information

Learn more about the Northeast Sector Area TransitPlan arid how to get involved at translink.ca!nesatp

or contact Kate Grossman atkate [email protected] 2

4fr

TRANS,.Ktranslink ca



JUl 312013z7

GMD CMD

_____

GAO Tracker No ‘3Q L>4July 30, 2013

Delia LaglagaronDeputy Commissioner/Deputy Chief Admrnistrative OfficerGeneral Manager, Planning Policy and EnvirormentMetro Vancouver4330 KngswayBurnaby, BC V5H 4G8

Dear Ms. Laglagaron:

Re: PMV Land Use P’an Update Phase 3a Legacy Map Designation Feedback

Thank you for your letter of May 3, 2013 in which you provided comments from MetroVancouver on the existing Port Metro Vancouver map designations.

Attached is a document outlining PMV s responses to the items raised in your letter for yourinformation, The document outlines how your comments have been considered in the DraftDesignation Maps that were presented during PMV’s Stakeholder Workshops held in June, 2013.

A summary of all comments received during this phase will be available later this summer. Thefinalized report will be circulated to all participants and will be posted on our website.

Thank you again for your comments, and we appreciate Metro Vancouver’s participation in thisand future phases of PMV’s Land Use Plan Update.

Yours truly,

PORT METRO VANCOUVER

reg YeomansManager. Planning

Enc PMV Response Chart

100 the Po,rtc. Q9 ana a Place, V ncou er B C anada V60 f4?ortmetrOanu\er corn

lOu re P nte, 999 Canada Pla e, ancoi er, B Canada \60 314

infocopyFI No.: ‘XThz(.a—Ooc.No.:.... 222.-21

CaiiadTRANSPORTATION - 168

DDavis

Text Box

6.2

Met

roV

anco

uv

er(M

ay3,

2013

)P

reli

min

ary

Consu

ltat

ion

(Apr

il-

May

2013

)C

om

men

ts-

PMV

Res

ponse

July

2620

13

Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PAN

Map

NA

CN

Def

inin

gth

eS

hore

line

acco

rdin

gto

the

best

avai

labl

em

apba

se:

Agr

eed.

PMV

’sju

risd

icti

onbo

unda

ryis

info

rmed

byM

etro

The

reex

ist

num

erou

sin

stan

ces

wh

ere

the

Por

tm

arin

eV

anco

uver

surv

eyda

ta.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edde

sign

atio

nen

croac

hes

onth

efo

resh

ore

and

RG

Sla

ndsu

rvey

data

from

Met

roV

anco

uver

toas

sist

inre

solv

ing

the

desi

gnat

ions

,an

dvi

ce-v

ersa

.T

his

may

bedu

eto

eros

ion,

map

ping

inco

nsis

tenc

ies,

espe

cial

lyar

ound

Fra

ser

Riv

eris

land

s.ac

cret

ion,

orsi

mpl

ya

by-p

rodu

ctof

usin

gm

appi

ngfr

omO

urre

cen

tm

eeti

ngha

sal

read

ym

ade

prog

ress

inth

isre

gard

.M

etro

vari

ous

sour

ces.

Hav

ing

aco

nsi

sten

tsh

orel

ine

boun

dary

whi

chis

Van

couv

er.

.

Map

ping

MV

1updat

edfr

omti

me

toti

me

will

bebe

nefi

cial

toP

ort

Met

ro(M

ayV

anco

uver

,M

etro

Van

couv

er,

mun

icip

alit

ies,

and

oth

erpa

rtie

s20

13)

soth

atde

sign

atio

nsan

dla

ndan

dm

arin

eus

esca

nbe

refe

renc

eifr

oma

com

mon

base

.A

spa

rtof

the

updat

eto

the

Por

t’s

desi

gnat

ions

,w

esu

gges

tth

atth

eP

ort

pre

par

ean

updat

edsh

orel

ine

boun

dary

pert

aini

ngto

itsju

risd

icti

on,

and

idea

lly

for

the

enti

reM

etro

Van

couv

erre

gion

.

Sta

ndar

dizi

ngU

plan

dD

esig

nati

ons:

Met

roV

anco

uver

’sre

gion

alR

egio

nal

park

sha

vebe

enid

enti

fied

inth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Met

ropa

rks

and

gree

nway

sar

ein

dica

ted

un

der

ava

riet

yof

Map

s.W

ew

ould

appre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISda

tare

late

dto

Van

couv

erM

MV

2de

sign

atio

ns,

and,

inso

me

inst

ance

s,ev

eno

mit

ted

.T

here

gion

alR

egio

nal

Par

ksan

dG

reen

way

sto

consi

der

inou

ran

alys

isan

d(M

ay3,

appi

ngpa

rks

and

gree

nway

ssh

ould

besh

own

assu

ch.

We

wou

ldbe

inco

rpo

rate

into

PMV

’sG

ISsy

stem

.W

ew

ant

park

boun

dary

2013

)pl

ease

dto

prov

ide

map

ping

info

rmat

ion

toin

dica

teth

ecu

rren

tin

form

atio

nto

beco

nsi

sten

tw

ith

Met

rod

atab

ases

.bo

unda

ries

ofre

gion

alpa

rks

and

gree

nway

s.

Cla

rify

ing

Ove

rlap

ping

Por

tan

dR

GS

Des

igna

tion

s:In

ou

rin

itial

Ack

now

ledg

ed.

PMV

’sL

and

Use

Plan

isin

tended

tobe

ahi

ghle

vere

view

,w

efo

und

inst

ance

sw

her

eP

ort

desi

gnat

ions

over

lapp

edpo

licy

plan

indi

cati

ngla

ndan

dw

ater

desi

gnat

ions

.In

assi

gnin

gR

GS

land

use

desi

gnat

ions

and

whi

chdo

not

app

ear

tobe

draf

tde

sign

atio

ns,

PMV

cons

ider

sm

unic

ipal

OC

Pdat

a,M

etro

s

Met

rore

late

dto

diff

eren

ces

insh

orel

ine

boun

dari

es.

Gen

eral

ly,

the

RG

S,en

vir

on

men

tal

data

and

exis

ting

FRE

MP

dat

a,an

d

Van

couv

erP

ort’

sde

sign

atio

nsbe

consi

sten

tw

ith

the

RG

Sde

sign

atio

ns,

com

men

tsm

ade

thro

ugh

cons

ulta

tion

,as

wel

las

oth

er

(May

3M

appi

ngM

V3

Whe

reth

ere

isa

vari

ance

,ad

diti

onal

info

rmat

ion

shou

ldbe

stak

ehol

ders

,te

nan

ts,

Firs

tN

atio

nsan

dth

epu

blic

.W

ew

ould

be

2013

)‘

prov

ided

asto

the

rati

onal

ean

dcr

iter

iaus

edto

esta

blis

hth

epl

ease

dto

disc

uss

any

rem

aini

ngar

eas

wher

edr

aft

land

use

Por

tde

sign

atio

n.T

heob

ject

ive

isto

mov

eto

war

ds

cons

iste

ncy

desi

gnat

ions

may

not

beco

nsi

sten

tw

ith

RG

Sde

sign

atio

ns.

wit

hth

eR

GS.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

po

nse

PA#

Map

UA

CU

Und

eter

min

edD

esig

nati

on:

Anu

mbe

rof

loca

tion

sha

veth

eA

ckno

wle

dged

.U

nder

PM

Vs

Let

ter’

sP

aten

t,th

eP

ort

does

not

Und

eter

min

edD

esig

nati

on.

We

reco

gniz

eth

atth

eP

ort’

sha

veth

eab

ilit

yto

des

ign

ate

land

sfo

rag

ricu

ltur

alus

e.A

llla

ndin

tent

ion

isth

atth

ede

sign

atio

nsan

dpo

lici

esre

flec

tth

ebe

stan

dw

ater

use

desi

gnat

ions

wit

hin

the

Por

tm

ust

abid

eby

wha

tis

use

for

part

icul

ate

site

inth

eco

ntex

tw

ith

the

Por

t’s

man

dat

e.In

allo

wed

inPM

V”s

Let

ters

Pat

ent

and

Pro

vinc

ial

Hea

dL

ease

the

case

ofag

ricu

ltur

alla

nds,

itis

the

esta

blis

hed

posi

tion

ofth

eA

gree

men

ts.

Dra

ftD

esig

nati

onM

aps

have

curr

entl

yid

enti

fied

the

Met

roM

etro

Van

couv

erB

oard

that

the

Por

t’s

Lan

dU

sePl

anno

tsm

all

num

ber

ofag

ricu

ltur

alsi

tes

under

PMV

’sju

risd

icti

on,

such

Van

couv

erin

clud

ean

yde

sign

atio

nth

atw

ould

allo

wno

n-ag

ricu

ltur

alus

esas

the

Gil

mor

eF

arm

sin

Ric

hmon

d,as

“Spe

cial

Stu

dyA

reas

”.T

his

(May

3D

esig

nati

ons

MV

4on

Agr

icul

tura

lL

and

Res

erve

land

s.T

hepr

ovis

ions

and

inte

rim

desi

gnat

ion

reco

gniz

esth

atfu

rth

erco

nsul

tati

onw

ith

2013

)in

tent

ions

ofth

eA

gric

ultu

ral

Lan

dR

eser

veA

ctsh

ould

beup

held

stak

eho

lder

sw

illbe

requ

ired

befo

rea

per

man

ent

desi

gnat

ion

can

Fur

ther

,w

ere

com

men

dth

atal

lla

nds

wit

hth

eU

ndet

erm

ined

bed

eter

min

ed.

All

form

erly

un

det

erm

ined

”pa

rcel

sha

vebe

enD

esig

nati

onbe

des

ign

ated

wit

hth

esa

me

oreq

uiv

alen

tre

view

edto

assi

gna

land

use

desi

gnat

ion.

desi

gnat

ion

asin

the

RG

S.T

ore

iter

ate,

the

obje

ctiv

eis

tom

ove

tow

ards

cons

iste

ncy

wit

hth

eR

GS.

Cla

rify

ing

Mul

tipl

eP

ort

Des

igna

tion

s:In

our

initi

alre

view

,w

eIn

som

eca

ses

the

Leg

acy

Por

tA

utho

rity

plan

sha

dm

ulti

ple

foun

d55

inst

ance

sof

reco

rds

havi

ngm

ulti

ple

desi

gnat

ions

.de

sign

atio

nsan

dw

ere

not

consi

sten

tac

ross

PMV

’sju

risd

icti

on.

Mos

tco

mm

only

,w

eob

serv

edar

eas

that

are

des

ign

ated

asLo

gT

his

phas

eof

wor

kin

clud

esde

velo

ping

aco

nsi

sten

tse

tof

Sto

rage

inad

diti

onto

oth

erde

sign

atio

ns.

Inca

ses

whe

reth

ere

isde

sign

atio

nsba

sed

onpr

imar

yus

esac

ross

PMV

’sju

risd

icti

on.

Ma

com

bine

dC

onse

rvat

ion

and

Log

Sto

rag

e/M

oo

rag

ede

sign

atio

nLo

gst

ora

ge

site

sar

ebe

ing

revi

ewed

base

don

cons

ider

atio

nof

etro

fron

ting

regi

onal

park

s,th

etw

ode

sign

atio

nsm

aybe

com

pati

ble

curr

ent

use,

futu

rene

eds,

indu

stry

need

s,up

land

acti

viti

esan

dan

couv

erD

esig

nati

ons

MV

San

dth

elo

gbo

oms

may

aid

inre

duci

ngth

era

teof

shor

elin

een

vir

on

men

tal

info

rmat

ion

such

asFR

EM

Pco

ding

.(

ayer

osio

n.In

oth

erca

ses

wh

ere

the

upla

ndis

aR

egio

nal

Par

kor

2013

)re

serv

ela

nds

wit

ha

cons

erva

tion

focu

s,th

eex

isti

nglo

gst

orag

ede

sign

atio

nm

ayno

long

erbe

appro

pri

ate

rela

tive

toth

eFR

EM

P’s

Hig

hly

Pro

duct

ive

hab

itat

desi

gnat

ion

and

shou

ldbe

phas

edo

ut

whe

nlo

gst

ora

ge

tenure

sar

eno

long

erre

new

ed.

Cla

rify

ing

For

esho

reD

esig

nati

ons:

For

esho

rede

sign

atio

nsar

eA

ckno

wle

dged

.T

hedr

aft

desi

gnat

ions

incl

ude

a“L

ogS

tora

gean

dim

port

ant

wit

hre

spec

tto

the

appr

aisa

lva

lue

ofup

land

park

Bar

geM

oora

ge”

desi

gnat

ion

for

area

sw

ith

those

type

sof

Met

rola

nd.

Iflo

gst

ora

ge

isa

perm

issi

ble

use,

then

the

valu

eof

log

prim

ary

uses

.S

eed

raft

desi

gnat

ion

map

sfo

rar

eas

assi

gned

the

Van

couv

erD

esig

nati

ons

MV

6st

ora

ge

isca

pita

lize

dan

din

clud

edin

the

land

valu

e.A

chie

ving

draf

t“L

ogS

tora

gean

dB

arge

Moo

rage

”de

sign

atio

n.(M

ay3,

cert

aint

yon

area

sw

her

elo

gst

ora

ge

ispe

rmis

sibl

eor

proh

ibit

ed20

13)

byth

eP

ort

will

bebe

nefi

cial

toal

lpa

rtie

s.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PAif

Map

ifA

Cif

Sim

plif

ying

the

Num

ber

ofD

esig

nati

ons:

The

wid

era

nge

ofA

ckno

wle

dged

.T

heL

egac

yD

esig

nati

onha

dm

ulti

ple

desi

gnat

ions

con

serv

atio

n-o

rien

ted

desi

gnat

ions

shou

ldbe

unif

ied

for

gre

ater

and

wer

en

ot

consi

sten

tac

ross

PMV

’sju

risd

icti

on. T

his

phas

eof

sim

plic

ity

and

effe

ctiv

enes

sin

sett

ing

exp

ecta

tio

ns

for

wha

tis

wor

kin

clud

esde

velo

ping

aco

nsi

sten

tse

tof

desi

gnat

ions

base

dpe

rmis

sibl

ean

dw

hat

isno

tpe

rmis

sibl

eon

land

san

dm

arin

eon

prim

ary

uses

acro

ssP

MV

sju

risd

icti

on.

Log

stor

age

site

sar

ear

eas

under

the

Por

t’s

juri

sdic

tion

,be

ing

revi

ewed

base

don

cons

ider

atio

nof

curr

ent

use,

futu

reFo

rex

ampl

e,it

isun

clea

rw

hat

the

diff

eren

ceis

bet

wee

nth

ene

eds,

indu

stry

need

s,up

land

acti

viti

esan

den

vir

onm

enta

lR

ecre

atio

n/P

ark

and

Par

kA

reas

Wat

erde

sign

atio

ns.

We

sugg

est

info

rmat

ion

such

asFR

EM

Pco

ding

.FR

EM

Pde

sign

atio

nsar

eno

tth

atth

eR

GS

Con

serv

atio

n/R

ecre

atio

nla

ndus

ede

sign

atio

nbe

adm

inis

tere

dby

PMV

:th

eyw

ere

deve

lope

dth

rough

am

ulti

-M

etro

cons

ider

edas

am

odel

for

sim

plif

ying

the

Por

t’s

cons

erva

tion

-st

akeh

old

erpr

oces

sw

hich

has

now

larg

ely

diss

olve

d.W

ear

eV

anco

uver

Env

iron

men

tal

MV

7ori

ente

dde

sign

atio

nsw

ith

perh

aps

poli

cies

deta

ilin

gpe

rmis

sibl

eco

nsid

erin

gth

eex

isti

ngFR

EM

PA

rea

Des

igna

tion

sin

our

anal

ysis

(May

3,D

ata

uses

,su

chas

log

stora

ge/

mo

ora

ge

inap

pro

pri

ate

loca

tion

s.T

his

and

inth

eas

sig

nm

ent

ofdr

aft

desi

gnat

ions

.FR

EM

Psh

orel

ine

2013

)co

mbi

ned

wit

hFR

EM

Psh

orel

ine

hab

itat

desi

gnat

ions

will

set

ou

tcl

assi

fica

tion

sco

nti

nu

edto

beut

iliz

edby

PMV

.cl

eare

rex

pec

tati

on

sfo

r

man

agem

ent

and

shor

elin

ese

nsit

ivit

y.W

ew

ould

appre

ciat

eth

eP

ort

ensu

ring

suff

icie

ntti

me

ispr

ovid

edto

Met

roV

anco

uver

and

stak

eho

lder

sto

revi

ewan

dco

mm

ent

onan

ypr

opos

edde

sign

atio

ns.

Anm

ore

and

Bel

carr

a-T

hw

ayte

sL

andi

ngR

egio

nal

Par

kR

egio

nal

park

sha

vebe

enid

enti

fied

inth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:M

aps.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISdat

are

late

dto

M-T

hway

tes

Lan

ding

Reg

iona

lP

ark

isom

itte

dR

egio

nal

Par

ksan

dG

reen

way

sto

cons

ider

inou

ran

alys

isan

de

ro-

Tw

inIs

land

are

inco

rrec

tly

show

nas

Reg

iona

lP

ark

-th

eyar

ein

corp

ora

tein

toPM

V’s

GIS

syst

em.

The

area

infr

ont

ofT

hway

tes

Van

couv

erM

appi

ng&

..

..

..

..

MV

8pa

rtof

the

prov

inci

alpa

rkL

andi

ngis

curr

entl

yas

sign

edth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

ofP

ort

682

(May

3,D

esig

nati

ons

..

.,,

..

.

2013

’-B

elca

rra

Reg

iona

lP

ark

boun

dary

isin

corr

ect

Wat

erw

hich

allo

ws

publ

icre

crea

tion

alar

eas

asa

cond

itio

nal

!M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:us

e.G

ener

ally

,on

lyw

hen

ther

eis

leas

ew

ith

PMV

wou

ldw

e-

Wat

ers

inba

yfr

onti

ngT

hway

tes

Lan

ding

bed

esig

nat

edco

nsid

eras

sign

ing

the

area

the

draf

tde

sign

atio

nof

“Rec

reat

ion”

.re

crea

tion/P

ark

We

can

disc

uss

this

furt

her.

Anm

ore

and

Bel

carr

a-

Bel

carr

aR

egio

nal

Par

kT

hela

rger

map

sin

clud

edre

gion

alpa

rks

dat

afo

rre

fere

nce.

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:R

egio

nal

Par

ksha

vege

nera

lly

been

iden

tifi

edin

the

Dra

ft-

Rac

oon

and

Tw

inIs

land

are

inco

rrec

tly

show

nas

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Des

igna

tion

Map

s.W

ew

ould

appre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISit

ispa

rtof

the

Pro

vinc

ial

Park

data

rela

ted

toR

egio

nal

Park

san

dG

reen

way

sto

cons

ider

inou

rM

etro

-B

elca

rra

Par

kbo

unda

ryis

inco

rrec

t-

land

aro

un

dea

stsi

deof

anal

ysis

and

inco

rpor

ate

into

PMV

’sG

ISsy

stem

.G

ener

ally

,on

lyV

anco

uver

Map

ping

&M

V9

Sas

amat

Lak

eo

mit

ted

asw

ell

asA

dmir

alty

Poi

ntA

rea

whe

nth

ere

isle

ase

wit

hPM

Vw

ould

we

cons

ider

assi

gnin

gth

e6

77(M

ay3,

Des

igna

tion

sM

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:ar

eath

ed

raft

desi

gnat

ion

of“R

ecre

atio

n”.

The

wat

erar

ea20

13)

-S

houl

dw

ater

fron

ting

the

wes

tsi

deof

Bed

wel

lB

ayw

ith

the

fron

ting

the

wes

tsi

deof

Bed

wel

lB

ayis

curr

entl

yas

sign

edth

eup

land

all

regi

onal

park

bed

esig

nat

edre

crea

tio

n/p

ark

?dr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

of“P

ort

Wat

er”

whi

chal

low

spu

blic

recr

eati

onal

area

sas

aco

ndit

iona

lus

e.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PA#

Map

UA

CU

Bur

naby

-B

elca

rra

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Gen

eral

ly,

only

whe

nth

ere

isle

ase

wit

hPM

Vw

ould

we

cons

ider

Mar

ine

Des

igna

tion

s:as

sign

ing

the

area

the

draf

tde

sign

atio

nof

“Rec

reat

ion.

The

Met

ro-

Par

kA

rea

Wat

erfr

onti

ngB

elca

rra

Par

ksh

ould

exte

ndfu

rth

erL

egac

yD

esig

nati

onis

‘Por

tW

ater

”.T

here

has

been

nopr

opos

edV

anco

uver

.up

toth

eco

astl

ine

toth

eno

rth

tore

flec

tth

epa

rkup

land

.ch

ange

toth

ede

sign

atio

nor

use.

The

wat

erar

eafr

onti

ngth

eD

esig

nati

ons

MV

1O6

77,

78(M

ay3,

wes

tsi

deof

Bed

wel

lB

ayis

curr

entl

yas

sign

edth

edra

ft20

13)

desi

gnat

ion

of“P

ort

Wat

er”

whi

chal

low

spu

blic

recr

eati

onal

area

sas

aco

ndit

iona

lus

e.

Del

ta-

Dea

sIs

land

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Ack

now

ledg

ed.

No

desi

gnat

ion

chan

ges

have

been

prop

osed

for

Upl

and

Des

igna

tion

s:ar

eas

arou

ndD

eas

Isla

nd,

whi

chis

curr

entl

yas

sign

edth

edr

aft

Met

ro-

Dea

sIs

land

RP

show

nas

“env

iron

men

tall

yse

nsit

ive

area

”as

desi

gnat

ion

of“C

onse

rvat

ion”

.C

urre

ntly

iden

tifi

edas

regi

onal

Van

couv

erD

esig

nati

ons

MV

11pe

rD

elta

OC

P-

shou

ldju

stsh

owas

regi

onal

park

land

park

.W

ew

ould

appre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISda

tare

late

dto

225

,26

(May

3,M

arin

eD

esig

nati

ons:

Reg

iona

lPa

rks

and

Gre

enw

ays

toco

nsid

erin

our

anal

ysis

and

2013

)C

onse

rvat

ion

desi

gnat

ion

arou

ndD

eas

Isla

ndP

ark

isin

corp

ora

tein

toPM

V’s

GIS

syst

em.

appro

pri

ate

Del

ta-

Fra

ser

Riv

erR

egio

nal

Res

erve

-D

onan

dL

ion

Isla

nds

-A

ckno

wle

dged

.The

area

arou

ndD

onan

dLi

onIs

land

sis

curr

entl

yD

elta

Sou

thS

urre

yG

reen

way

“un

det

erm

ined

’.T

hey

have

now

been

assi

gned

the

draf

tU

plan

dD

esig

nati

ons:

desi

gnat

ion

of“P

ort

Wat

er”

whi

chth

epr

imar

yus

eis

for

Met

ro-

Don

and

Lion

Isla

ndP

ark

rese

rve

stat

us

om

itte

d.

navi

gati

on.

Inth

eep

rop

ose

dlis

tof

gene

ral

uses

,“C

onse

rvat

ion”

Van

couv

erD

esig

nati

ons

MV

12M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ions:

uses

orac

tivi

ties

are

per

mit

ted

inal

lde

sign

atio

nsan

dth

roug

h2

312.

34(M

ay3,

Un

det

erm

ined

desi

gnat

ion

onfo

resh

ore

aro

un

dD

onan

dLi

onPM

V’s

juri

sdic

tion

.W

ew

ould

appre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

IS20

13)

Isla

nds

shou

ldlik

ely

beco

nser

vati

onm

uch

ofth

efo

resh

ore

dat

are

late

dto

Reg

iona

lP

arks

and

Gre

enw

ays

toco

nsid

erin

our

arou

ndth

ese

con

serv

atio

n-o

rien

ted

park

rese

rve

land

sis

anal

ysis

and

inco

rpor

ate

into

PM

Vs

GIS

syst

emsh

allo

wan

dno

tsu

ited

for

log

sto

rag

e.

Lan

gley

Tow

nshi

p-

Der

byR

each

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Ack

now

ledg

ed.

Par

tof

the

area

fron

ting

Der

byR

each

Reg

iona

lU

plan

dD

esig

nati

ons:

Par

kha

sb

een

assi

gned

the

draf

tde

sign

atio

n“C

onse

rvat

ion’

and

M-

Der

byR

each

part

lysh

own

asre

gion

alpa

rkan

dpa

rtly

as“L

ogS

tora

gean

dB

arge

Moo

rage

’fr

omth

eL

egac

yD

esig

nati

ons

etro

natu

ral

area

-sh

ould

beal

lre

gion

alpa

rk.

of“W

ater

Ori

enta

ted

Res

iden

tial

Com

mer

cial

”an

d“L

ogS

tora

ge”.

anco

uver

Des

igna

tion

sM

V13

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Thi

sis

tore

cogn

ized

ther

eis

exis

ting

log

stora

ge

uses

onth

e3

58,

593.

26,

3.27

‘

-Lo

gst

ora

ge

prov

ided

inm

ixed

desi

gnat

ion

wit

hco

nser

vati

onea

ster

nen

dof

the

Der

byR

each

Reg

iona

lPa

rk.

We

wou

ld)

alon

gpo

rtio

nof

cent

ral

Der

byR

each

-ac

tual

log

sto

rag

eis

appre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

updat

edG

ISda

tare

late

dto

Reg

iona

lP

arks

furt

her

toth

eea

stin

anar

ead

esig

nat

edas

cons

erva

tion

.U

sean

dG

reen

way

sto

cons

ider

inou

ran

alys

isan

din

corp

orat

ein

tode

sign

atio

nsfr

onti

ngth

epa

rkn

eed

tobe

rati

onal

ized

.PM

V’s

GIS

syst

em.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PM

VR

esp

on

sePA

ifM

apif

AC

if

Map

leR

idge

-D

erby

reac

hR

egio

nal

Par

k-

Kan

aka

Cre

ekS

eere

spo

nse

for

Der

byR

each

un

der

MV

13.

Are

ain

fron

tof

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:K

anak

aC

reek

has

been

assi

gned

the

draf

tde

sign

atio

n“L

og

-D

erby

Rea

chR

egio

nal

Par

ko

mit

ted

Sto

rage

and

Bar

geM

oora

ge”

from

the

lega

cyde

sign

atio

nof

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

“Ind

ustr

ial”

and

“Und

eter

min

ed”.

Thi

sis

tore

cogn

ize

ther

ear

e

Met

roLo

gst

ora

ge

prov

ided

toC

athe

rwoo

dT

owin

gfr

onti

ngth

eno

exis

ting

orin

tended

futu

rein

dust

rial

use

inth

isar

ea,

but

ther

Van

couv

erea

ster

npo

rtio

nof

Der

byR

each

Reg

iona

lPa

rkw

hich

isis

exis

ting

log

sto

rag

eus

es.

3.27

,3.

28,

(May

3D

esig

nati

ons

MV

14d

esig

nat

edco

nser

vati

onon

the

map

-m

ixed

con

serv

atio

n/l

og

329

2013

)st

ora

ge/

moora

ge

zone

fron

ting

the

cent

ral

port

ion

ofth

epa

rk

shou

ldbe

cons

erva

tion

.

-U

nd

eter

min

edde

sign

atio

nfr

onti

ngth

epa

rtof

Kan

aka

Cre

ek

shou

ldpe

rhap

sbe

cons

erva

tion

.

New

Wes

tmin

ster

-S

appe

rton

Lan

ding

Reg

iona

lP

ark

-B

rune

tte

The

mou

thof

Bru

nett

eR

iver

isas

sign

edth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

of

Fra

ser

Gre

enw

ay“C

onse

rvat

ion”

.T

hear

eaac

ross

from

the

mou

thof

the

Bru

nett

e

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Riv

eris

assi

gned

the

draf

tde

sign

atio

nsof

“Log

Sto

rage

and

Bar

ge

Met

ro-

Con

serv

atio

nde

sign

atio

nap

pro

pri

ate

atth

em

outh

ofth

eM

oora

ge”

tore

flec

tex

isti

nglo

gst

ora

ge

uses

.

Van

couv

er-

.B

rune

tte

Riv

er.

Des

igna

tion

sM

V1S

239

2.61

,2.

62(M

ay3,

-L

rgS

tora

ge/

moora

ge

desi

gnat

ion

cove

rsea

ster

npo

rtio

nof

2013

)is

land

and

shal

low

sof

the

mo

uth

ofth

eB

rune

tte

Riv

erw

hile

cons

erva

tion

zone

ison

wes

tern

part

-lo

gst

ora

ge/

mo

ora

ge

des

ign

ated

area

appea

rsto

nee

dto

bere

duce

d.

Nor

thV

anco

uver

City

-C

apil

ano

Riv

erR

egio

nal

Par

kan

dW

ew

ould

app

reci

ate

rece

ivin

gu

pd

ated

GIS

data

rela

ted

to

Sey

mou

rR

iver

Gre

enw

ayR

egio

nal

Par

ksan

dG

reen

way

sto

cons

ider

inou

ran

alys

isan

dM

etro

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:in

corp

ora

tein

toPM

V’s

GIS

syst

em.

The

dra

ftde

sign

atio

n

Van

couv

erM

V16

-S

eym

our

Riv

erG

reen

way

om

itte

d.

curr

entl

yas

sign

edis

“Ind

ustr

ial”

due

toex

isti

ngin

dust

rial

use

in4

684.

07(M

ay3,

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

the

area

.20

13)

-S

houl

dan

yno

n-P

ort

Mar

ine

desi

gnat

ion

beas

soci

ated

wit

hth

e

mou

thof

the

Sey

mou

rR

iver

?

Nor

thV

anco

uver

Dis

tric

t-

Cap

ilan

oR

iver

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Reg

iona

lpa

rks

have

been

iden

tifi

edin

the

Dra

ftD

esig

nati

onM

ap

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:w

here

poss

ible

.W

ew

ould

appre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISda

ta

M-

Cap

ilan

oR

iver

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Om

itte

dre

late

dto

Reg

iona

lP

arks

and

Gre

enw

ays

toco

nsid

erin

our

V

ero

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

anal

ysis

and

inco

rpo

rate

into

PMV

’sG

ISsy

stem

.T

hear

eain

fro

nt

anco

uver

MV

17-

Are

afr

onti

ngA

mbl

esid

eP

ark

coul

dha

vea

park

sde

sign

atio

n.of

Am

bles

ide

Par

kis

curr

entl

yas

sign

edth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

of4

62(ay

“Por

tW

ater

”.T

here

iscu

rren

tly

nole

ase

for

recr

eati

onal

uses

,)

alth

ough

recr

eati

onus

eis

per

mit

ted

in“P

ort

Wat

er”

desi

gnat

ion.

Apo

rtio

nof

the

park

isal

soco

nsid

ered

tobe

part

ofS

quam

ish

Res

erve

.


Org

.—

Cat

egory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PM

VR

esp

on

sePA

UM

apU

AC

U

Nor

thV

anco

uver

Dis

tric

t-

Bek

arra

Reg

iona

lP

ark

See

MV

110

Res

pons

e.

Upla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Met

ro-

Bel

carr

aR

egio

nal

Par

ko

mit

ted

.V

anco

uver

MV

18M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:6

77(M

ay3,

2013

>-

Rec

reat

ion/

Par

kde

sign

atio

nco

uld

beap

plie

dto

wes

tern

half

ofB

edw

ell

Bay

fron

ting

Bel

carr

aR

egio

nal

Park

.

Nor

thV

anco

uver

Dis

tric

t-

Thw

ayte

sL

andi

ngR

egio

nal

Par

kS

eere

spo

nse

un

der

MV

8.

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:M

etro

-T

hway

tes

Lan

ding

Reg

iona

lP

ark

om

itte

d.

Va

ncou

ver

Des

igna

tion

sM

V19

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

(May

3,-

Rec

reat

ion/

Par

kde

sign

atio

nsh

ould

beap

plie

dto

2013

>la

ndin

g/be

ach

area

fron

ting

the

deve

lope

dpo

rtio

nof

Thw

ayte

s

Lan

ding

.

Pit

tM

eado

ws

-.B

arns

ton

Isla

ndR

egio

nal

Park

,S

urre

yB

end

Mos

tpa

rkna

mes

have

been

added

toth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Reg

iona

lPa

rk,

Pit

tR

iver

Gre

enw

ayM

aps.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISdat

are

late

dto

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:R

egio

nal

Par

ksan

dG

reen

way

sto

cons

ider

inou

ran

alys

isan

d

-P

arks

not

show

n.E

ast

port

ion

ofP

itt

Riv

erG

reen

way

show

nas

inco

rpo

rate

into

PMV

’sG

ISsy

stem

.M

ost

ofar

eas

arou

nd

open

spac

efr

omPM

OC

P.B

arns

ton

Isla

ndha

vebe

enas

sign

edth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

of‘L

og

-E

aste

rnen

dof

Pit

tR

iver

gree

nway

show

nas

indu

stri

alla

nd.

Sto

rage

and

Bar

geM

oora

ge”.

Ple

ase

indi

cate

spec

ific

area

sw

her

e

Met

roM

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:M

etro

fore

sees

“Rec

reat

ion”

uses

asm

ore

appro

pri

ate.

Dot

ted

Van

couv

er-

Por

tion

sof

Man

nP

oint

onB

arns

ton

Isla

ndne

edto

have

aye

llow

line

sre

fere

nce

mun

icip

albo

unda

ries

.53

,54

,55

,

(May

3M

V2O

Rec

reat

ion/

Par

kde

sign

atio

nan

dbe

free

from

log

stor

age

toS6

2013

)al

low

smal

lcr

aft

ingr

ess

and

egre

ssto

park

.T

his

isal

soa

sedim

ent

depo

siti

onar

eaan

dpa

rts

nolo

nger

suit

able

for

log

sto

rag

e.

-A

corr

idor

for

park

use

acce

ss/e

gre

ssre

quir

edfr

onti

ngR

ober

ts

Poi

ntpa

rkla

ndar

eaat

the

wes

ten

dof

the

isla

nd.

-W

hat

does

hab

itat

com

pen

sati

on

area

dott

edal

lar

ound

Bar

nsto

nIs

land

indi

cate

-ha

sco

mp

ensa

tio

nbe

end

on

e?


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PA#

Map

#A

CIt

Pit

tM

eado

ws

-P

itt

Riv

erG

reen

way

The

area

fron

ting

the

Pit

tR

iver

Gre

enw

ayis

curr

entl

yus

edfo

rlo

g

Upl

and

Des

igna

tion

s:st

orag

e,an

dth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

assi

gned

isLo

gS

tora

gean

d

-P

orti

ons

ofG

reen

way

belo

wth

eL

ough

eed

Hig

hway

show

nas

Bar

geM

oora

ge”.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

IS

open

spac

ebu

tn

ewer

port

ions

ofgr

eenw

aybet

wee

nth

eda

tare

late

dto

Reg

iona

lP

arks

and

Gre

enw

ays

toco

nsid

erin

our

Lou

ghee

dH

ighw

ayan

dth

eA

loue

tte

Riv

ero

mit

ted

.an

alys

isan

din

corp

ora

tein

toP

MV

sG

ISsy

stem

.PM

Vis

wor

king

Mar

ine

Des

igna

tion

s:to

map

ou

tal

lh

abit

atco

mp

ensa

tion

area

sw

ithi

nP

ort

-F

ores

hore

desi

gnat

ions

alon

gth

eea

stsi

deof

the

Pit

tR

iver

inju

risd

icti

on.

The

sear

eaw

illbe

cons

ider

edw

hen

assi

gnin

gdra

ft

this

stre

tch

shou

ldbe

fair

lyco

nsi

sten

t-

som

eis

show

nas

desi

gnat

ions

duri

ngth

ere

view

proc

ess.

Met

roco

nser

vati

onan

dso

me

asm

ixed

log

MV

21st

ora

ge/

moora

ge/

conse

rvat

ion

whi

leth

eac

tual

uses

are

the

345

,46

,47

2013

)‘

sam

e.Lo

gst

ora

ge

can

beac

com

mo

dat

edfr

onti

ngth

egr

eenw

ay

both

nort

han

dso

uth

ofth

eL

ough

eed

Hig

hway

.U

ndet

erm

ined

port

ion

imm

edia

tely

nort

hof

the

Lou

ghee

dH

ighw

ayis

infa

ct

used

for

log

stor

age.

-W

ater

area

fron

ting

the

Pit

tR

iver

Gre

enw

ayat

the

bott

om

of

the

map

issh

owed

asundet

erm

ined

byis

infa

ctlo

gst

ora

ge.

-U

nd

eter

min

edar

eaon

the

wes

tsi

deof

the

Pit

tR

iver

fro

nts

a

maj

orfi

sher

ies

com

pen

sati

on

proj

ect

and

shou

ldbe

cons

erva

tion

.W

FPha

sre

mov

edits

pilin

gsfr

omth

isst

retc

h.

Pit

tM

eado

ws

-M

inne

khad

aR

egio

nal

Park

,P

itt

Riv

erG

reen

way

Loa

d-ou

tar

eafr

onti

ngth

equ

arry

has

been

assi

gned

the

dra

ft

Mar

ine

Des

igna

tion

s:de

sign

atio

nof

‘In

du

stri

al.

Are

ab

etw

een

Lou

ghhe

edH

ighw

ay

-P

orti

ons

ofgr

eenw

ayab

ove

Alo

uett

eR

iver

show

nas

open

and

nort

hto

DeB

ouvi

lleSl

ough

has

been

assi

gned

the

draf

t

spac

e,sh

ould

bed

esig

nat

edas

gree

nway

.de

sign

atio

nof

“Con

serv

atio

n”.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

Upl

and

Des

igna

tion

s:updat

edG

ISd

ata

rela

ted

toR

egio

nal

Par

ksan

dG

reen

way

sto

Met

ro-

All

wes

tsi

deP

itt

Riv

erfo

resh

ore

bet

wee

nth

eL

ough

eed

cons

ider

ino

ur

anal

ysis

and

inco

rpor

ate

into

PMV

’sG

1Ssy

stem

.

Van

couv

erM

V22

Hig

hway

and

nort

hto

DeB

ouvi

lleSl

ough

shou

ldp

erh

aps

be3

4546

3.09

,

(May

3’co

nser

vati

onde

sign

atio

nno

wth

atfo

rest

com

pani

esha

ve‘

3.lO

a

2013

)re

mov

edpi

les

and

maj

orfi

shhab

itat

com

pen

sati

on

proj

ects

have

bee

nco

mpl

eted

.

-L

oad

ou

tar

eafr

onti

ngqu

arry

shou

ldbe

des

ign

ated

indu

stri

al.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PAft

Map

ftA

Cft

Pit

tM

eado

ws

-W

idge

onM

arsh

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Res

erve

.R

egio

nal

Par

ksha

veb

een

iden

tifi

edin

the

Dra

ftD

esig

nati

on

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:M

aps.

Are

afr

onti

ngS

iwas

hIs

land

has

been

assi

gned

the

dra

ft

-W

idge

onM

arsh

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Res

erve

om

itte

dal

thou

ghde

sign

atio

nof

Con

serv

atio

n’.

Are

afr

onti

ngpr

ivat

ere

crea

tion

al

Siw

ash

Isla

ndd

esig

nat

edco

nser

vati

on,

pro

per

ties

have

been

assi

gned

the

draf

tde

sign

atio

nof

“Por

t

Met

roM

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:W

ater

whi

chal

low

sfo

rpr

ivat

ere

crea

tion

aldo

cks

and

uses

.

Van

couv

erM

V23

The

sout

hea

stS

iwas

hIs

land

fore

shore

shou

ldha

veth

elo

g3

50,

513.

12,

3.13

(May

3,st

ora

ge/

moora

ge

desi

gnat

ion

chan

ged

toco

nser

vati

on.

2013

)T

hein

dust

rial

desi

gnat

ion

onth

efo

resh

ore

fron

ting

priv

ate

resi

dent

ial

pro

per

ties

sout

hof

the

desi

red

sout

hbo

unda

ryof

Wid

geon

Mar

shP

ark

Res

erve

(Ton

yE

dwar

ds’

prop

erty

)se

ems

inap

pro

pri

ate.

Itm

akes

sens

efu

rther

sout

hfr

onti

ngth

equ

arry

.

Por

tC

oqui

tlam

Col

ony

Far

mR

egio

nal

Park

,F

rase

rR

iver

Isla

nds

Reg

iona

lP

arks

have

been

iden

tifi

edin

the

Dra

ftD

esig

nati

on

Dou

glas

Isla

ndM

aps.

Col

ony

Far

ms

isou

tsid

eof

the

Dra

ftD

esig

nati

onm

apar

ea.

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:A

rea

aro

un

dD

ougl

asIs

land

iscu

rren

tly

assi

gned

the

draf

t

-C

olon

eyFa

rmbo

unda

ries

inco

rrec

t,de

sign

atio

nof

“Log

Sto

rage

and

Bar

geM

oora

ge”.

Con

serv

atio

nis

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

per

mit

ted

inth

isan

dal

lde

sign

atio

ns.

Met

ro-

Con

serv

atio

nan

dlo

gst

ora

ge

and

moo

rage

desi

gnat

ion

aro

un

d

Van

couv

erD

ougl

asIs

land

.A

fore

stco

mpa

nyha

sth

est

atuto

ryri

ght

ofw

ay

(May

3M

V24

for

log

stor

age.

Ifst

ora

ge

grou

nds

tobe

give

nup

infu

ture

,th

en3

42

2013

)‘

mix

edde

sign

atio

nsh

ould

bere

view

edas

enti

reup

land

isa

con

serv

atio

n-o

rien

ted

park

rese

rve.

To

beco

mpa

tibl

ew

ith

cons

erva

tion

,it

ises

sent

ial

that

log

boom

sar

eno

tgr

ound

ing

as

accr

etio

nis

occu

rrin

gar

oun

dso

me

port

ions

ofth

eis

land

.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PAU

Map

UA

CU

Por

tC

oqui

tlam

-P

itt

Riv

erG

reen

way

Are

ano

rth

ofP

itt

Riv

erB

ridg

eha

scu

rren

tly

been

assi

gned

the

Upla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

dra

ftde

sign

atio

nof

Log

Sto

rage

and

Bar

geM

oo

rag

e.A

rea

in-

Pit

tR

iver

Gre

enw

ayom

itte

d-

goes

the

leng

thof

the

east

side

front

ofA

loue

tte

Riv

eris

assi

gned

the

daft

desi

gnat

ion

of“L

ogof

the

rive

r.S

tora

gean

dB

arge

Moora

ge.

Con

serv

atio

nus

esar

ep

erm

itte

din

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

all

desi

gnat

ions

.N

oted

conc

ern

rega

rdin

glo

gst

orag

eat

mou

th-

Un

det

erm

ined

desi

gnat

ion

onfo

resh

ore

imm

edia

tely

nort

hof

ofA

loue

tte

Riv

er.

Will

cons

ider

whe

nco

nduc

ting

seco

ndre

view

Met

roP

itt

Riv

erbr

idge

fron

ting

MV

park

land

shou

ldbe

con

sist

ent

wit

hof

dra

ftde

sign

atio

ns.

desi

gnat

ion

upto

the

mou

thof

the

Alo

uett

eR

iver

.T

hat

Van

couv

er3.

08,

MV

25de

sign

atio

nsh

ows

cons

erva

tion

whe

nin

fact

itcu

rren

tly

344

,45

(May

33.

lOb

2013

)ac

com

modat

eslo

gst

orag

e.L

ogst

ora

ge

has

bee

np

erm

itte

dby

MV

asth

eup

land

owne

ras

itis

com

pati

ble

wit

hpa

rkus

eat

this

loca

tion

.C

onse

rvat

ion/

log

sto

rag

e/m

oo

rag

eas

belo

wbr

idge

am

ore

appro

pri

ate

desi

gnat

ion.

-A

cons

erva

tion

zone

atth

em

outh

ofth

eA

loue

tte

Riv

ersh

ould

bees

tabl

ishe

dw

her

epo

ssib

le.

The

reis

am

arin

eon

the

sout

h

side

but

log

sto

rag

eon

the

nort

hsi

desh

ould

bepu

lled

away

from

the

mou

th.

Por

tC

oqui

tlam

Nor

th-

Col

ony

Far

mR

egio

nal

Par

k,F

rase

rR

iver

See

MV

24R

espo

nse

Isla

nds

-D

ougl

asIs

land

Up

lan

dD

esig

nat

ion

s:M

etro

-C

olon

eyFa

rmbo

unda

ries

inco

rrec

t.V

anco

uver

MV

26M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:(M

ay3,

-C

onse

rvat

ion

and

log

stor

age

and

moo

rage

desi

gnat

ion

arou

nd20

13)

Dou

glas

Isla

ndsh

ould

bere

view

edin

futu

reas

enti

reup

land

isa

conse

rvat

ion-o

rien

ted

park

espe

cial

lyif

requir

emen

tsfo

rlo

g

sto

rag

ear

ede

crea

sing

.

Por

tM

oody

-B

elca

rra

Reg

iona

lP

ark

See

MV

1OR

espo

nse

Met

roU

pla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Van

couv

er-

Bel

carr

apa

rkbo

unda

ries

inco

rrec

t.

(May

3M

V27

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

2013

)‘

-W

est

side

ofB

edw

ell

Bay

shou

ldpe

rhap

sha

vea

recr

eati

on/p

ark

desi

gnat

ion.

Por

tM

oody

-B

elca

rra

Reg

iona

lP

ark

See

MV

1OR

espo

nse.

Are

aar

ound

Adm

iral

tyP

oint

toC

arra

holl

y

Met

roU

pla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Poi

ntis

desi

gnat

ed“P

ark

Are

asW

ater

s”u

nd

erth

eL

egac

y-

Bel

carr

aP

ark

bo

un

dar

ies

inco

rrec

t.D

esig

nati

on.

Itis

curr

entl

yas

sign

edth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

ofV

anco

uver

..

MV

28M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:“R

ecre

atio

n”.

We

can

disc

uss

this

furt

her

asn

eed

ed.

574

(May

3,

2013

)-

Isa

Por

tM

arin

eIn

dust

rial

desi

gnat

ion

app

rop

riat

efo

rth

epo

rtio

nof

fore

shore

arou

ndA

dmir

alty

Poi

ntto

Car

raho

lly

Poi

nt?


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PM

VR

esponse

PA#

Map

#A

C#

Ric

hm

on

dP

acif

icS

pir

itP

ark

-lo

na

Isla

nd

Reg

ion

al

Park

Reg

ion

al

Park

sh

av

eb

een

identi

fied

inth

eD

raft

Desig

nati

on

Map

Upl

and

Des

igna

tion

s:w

here

po

ssib

le.

Are

afr

onti

ng

Pacif

icS

pir

itP

ark

curr

entl

yassig

ne

-P

acif

icS

pir

itP

ark

om

itte

d.

the

dra

ftdesig

nati

on

of

“L

og

Sto

rag

ean

dB

arg

eM

oo

rag

e”.

There

-lo

na

show

nas

Pu

bli

cand

Op

en

sp

ace

on

Ric

hm

ond

OC

P.

iscurr

entl

ya

lease

wit

hG

VR

Dalo

ng

the

fo

resh

ore

for

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

recre

ati

onal

uses.

“L

og

Sto

rag

eand

Barg

eM

oo

rag

e”

desig

nati

on

Metr

o-

Sh

ou

ldco

nserv

ati

on

zone

be

exte

nded

furth

er

west

alo

ng

the

would

perm

itcondit

ionall

ysom

ep

ub

lic

recre

ati

on

uses.

We

Vanco

uv

er

MV

29

Pacif

icS

pir

itP

ark

bo

un

dary

(fro

mM

usqueam

#2)

tota

ke

inth

ew

ould

apprecia

teconfi

rmati

on

ifM

etr

ois

requesti

ng

11

23

4

(May

3,

near

foreshore

shall

ow

s?

This

isF

RE

MP

red

zo

ne

and

there

isconserv

ati

on

use

or

recre

ati

on

al

use

for

this

are

ao

rif

recre

ati

on

2013)

dep

osit

ion

alo

ng

these

sh

ore

sand

incre

asin

gpote

nti

al

for

log

as

asecondary

use

under

“L

og

Sto

rag

ean

dB

arg

eM

oora

ge”

is

boom

sgro

undin

g.

adequate

.A

rea

fro

nti

ng

lona

Beach

Reg

ion

al

Park

curr

entl

y

-Is

the

very

lim

ited

co

nserv

ati

on

zo

ne

fro

nti

ng

sm

all

south

west

assig

ned

the

dra

ftdesig

nati

on

of

“L

og

Sto

rag

ean

dB

arg

e

port

ion

of

lon

abig

en

ou

gh?

Moora

ge”

as

this

iscurr

entl

yth

epri

mary

use

of

this

are

a.

Con

serv

atio

nus

esar

eper

mit

ted

inal

lde

sign

atio

ns.

Ric

hmon

d-

Dea

sIs

land

Reg

iona

lP

ark

Reg

iona

lP

arks

have

bee

nid

enti

fied

inth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Map

Upl

and

Des

igna

tion

s:w

her

epo

ssib

le.

Are

asu

rrou

ndin

gD

onan

dLi

onIs

land

sha

vebe

en

-D

eas

Isla

ndR

egio

nal

Par

ksh

ould

bein

dica

ted

onm

ap.

assi

gned

the

dra

ftde

sign

atio

nof

“Por

tW

ate

r”w

hic

hperm

its

Met

roM

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:co

nser

vati

onus

es.

The

prim

ary

use

ofth

isar

eais

tope

rmit

For

esho

rear

ou

nd

Don

and

Lion

isla

ndis

show

nas

navi

gati

onth

roug

hna

rrow

chan

nels

toac

cess

indu

stri

alar

eas

to

MV

3O“u

nd

eter

min

ed”.

Muc

his

shal

low

sand

bar

(esp

ecia

lly

bet

wee

nth

eno

rth

ofth

eis

land

s.2

25,

312.

34

2013

)‘

isla

nds)

and

shou

ldbe

des

ign

ated

Con

serv

atio

nA

reas

Wat

eras

isFR

EMP

red

zone

.N

ote

adja

cen

tti

pof

Ann

acis

Isla

ndis

des

ign

ated

cons

erva

tion

and

com

pen

sati

on

zone

.

Met

roR

ichm

ond

-D

eas

Isla

ndR

egio

nal

Par

kR

egio

nal

Park

sha

vebe

enid

enti

fied

inth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Map

Van

couv

erM

V31

Upl

and

Des

ign

atio

ns:

wh

ere

poss

ible

.2

25

(May

3,-

Dea

sIs

land

Reg

iona

lP

ark

shou

ldbe

indi

cate

don

map

.

2013

)—

Metr

oS

urr

ey

-B

run

ette

Fra

ser

Gre

en

way

,S

appert

on

Lan

ding

Reg

iona

lR

egio

nal

Par

ksha

vebe

enid

enti

fied

inth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Map

Par

kw

her

epo

ssib

le.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISda

ta

Van

couv

er.

(Ma

3M

V32

Upl

and

Des

igna

tion

s:re

late

dto

Reg

iona

lP

arks

and

Gre

enw

ays

toco

nsid

erin

our

2013

)‘

-S

appe

rton

Lan

ding

and

Bru

nett

eF

rase

rG

reen

way

om

itte

d.

anal

ysis

and

inco

rpor

ate

into

PMV

’sG

ISsy

stem

.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PA#

Map

#A

C#

Sur

rey

-C

olon

yF

arm

Reg

iona

lPa

rk,

Dou

glas

Isla

nd,

Pit

tR

iver

See

MV

24R

espo

nse.

Gre

enw

ay

Upla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Col

ony

Farm

and

Dou

glas

Isla

ndno

tsh

own

asR

egio

nal

Par

k

land

.

-P

itt

Riv

ergr

eenw

ayo

mit

ted

.

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Met

ro-

Dou

glas

Isla

ndfo

resh

ore

des

ign

ated

both

cons

erva

tion

and

log

Van

couv

erM

V33

stor

age

and

moo

rage

.A

fore

stco

mpa

nyho

lds

ast

atu

tory

righ

t(M

ay3,

ofw

ayfo

rth

eri

pari

anri

ghts

for

log

stor

age.

Lon

gte

rm,

iflo

g20

13)

stor

age

grou

nds

aro

un

dth

eis

land

are

give

nup

,p

erh

aps

give

n

the

stat

us

ofth

eup

land

asco

nse

rvat

ion

-ori

ente

dre

gion

alpa

rk

rese

rve,

port

ions

ofth

efo

resh

ore

(FR

EM

Pre

dzo

ne)

shou

ldbe

desi

gnat

edfo

rco

nser

vati

onas

wel

l.

-W

ater

fron

ting

the

low

erpo

rtio

nof

the

Pit

tR

iver

Gre

enw

ayis

show

nas

undet

erm

ined

desi

gnat

ion

whe

nit

isin

fact

log

stor

age.


Org

.C

ateg

ory

No.

Co

mm

ents

PMV

Res

ponse

PA4*

Map

4*A

C4*

Sur

rey

-S

urre

yB

end

Reg

iona

lPa

rk,

Bar

nsto

nIs

land

Reg

iona

lM

ost

park

nam

esha

vebe

enad

ded

toth

eD

raft

Des

igna

tion

Par

kM

aps.

We

wou

ldap

pre

ciat

ere

ceiv

ing

up

dat

edG

ISdat

are

late

dto

Upla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Reg

iona

lP

arks

and

Gre

enw

ays

toco

nsid

erin

our

anal

ysis

and

-S

urre

yB

end

boun

dary

inco

rrec

tan

dsh

ould

show

asR

egio

nal

inco

rpor

ate

into

PMV

’sG

ISsy

stem

,A

rea

fron

ting

Sur

rey

Ben

d

Park

.R

egio

nal

Par

kha

sbe

enas

sign

edth

edr

aft

desi

gnat

ion

of‘L

og

-B

arns

ton

Isla

ndR

egio

nal

Par

kla

ndis

om

itte

d.

Sto

rage

and

Bar

geM

oora

ge”.

The

area

infr

ont

ofC

entr

eC

reek

Mar

ine

Des

ign

atio

ns:

seem

sdo

esha

vean

exis

ting

Log

Sto

rage

leas

e.W

illco

nsid

erth

e

-S

urre

yB

end

Reg

iona

lP

ark

desi

gnat

ion

issp

lit

bet

wee

nde

sign

atio

nw

hen

unde

rgo

seco

ndph

ase

ofre

view

ofD

raft

cons

erva

tion

(eas

tsi

deof

Cen

ter

Cre

ek)

and

recr

eati

onpa

rk/l

ogD

esig

nati

ons.

See

MV

20R

espo

nse

for

Bar

nsto

nIs

land

,w

hich

we

sto

rag

ean

dm

oora

ge(w

est

side

ofC

entr

eC

reek

).S

ome

area

ondi

scus

sed

wit

hM

etro

inou

rre

cent

mee

ting

.

eith

ersi

deof

Cen

ter

Cre

ekes

tuar

ysh

ould

beco

nser

vati

onan

d

wes

tsi

deof

park

ism

ore

con

serv

atio

n-o

rien

ted

and

east

side

Met

roha

sse

enm

ore

dis

turb

ance

sope

rhap

sde

sign

atio

nssh

ould

beV

anco

uver

MV

34re

vers

ed.

Wit

hhe

exce

ptio

nof

the

mou

thof

Cen

tre

Cre

elo

g3

3.02

,

(May,

sto

rag

em

aybe

acco

mm

odat

edal

ong

the

park

’sw

ater

fro

nt

asit

3.17

a

2013

)ca

nhe

lpco

ntro

ler

osio

n.

-A

llof

Bar

nsto

nIs

land

fore

sho

reis

des

ign

ated

for

log

sto

rag

e

moo

rage

.A

sect

ion

righ

tat

the

east

ern

tip

ofB

arns

ton

Isla

nd

Nee

dsto

bed

esig

nat

edre

crea

tion/p

ark

toal

low

smal

lcr

aft

acce

ssto

and

from

the

sand

beac

hat

the

tip

ofM

ann

poin

t.

Sim

ilarl

yan

open

ing

isre

quir

edat

the

wes

tti

pof

the

isla

nd

fron

ting

Rob

erts

Poi

nt.

-Si

nce

the

enti

reB

arns

ton

isla

ndfo

resh

ore

isFR

EM

Pre

dzo

ne

and

aco

mpen

sati

on

area

,it

isim

port

antth

atth

eac

cret

ion

zone

atth

eea

sten

dof

the

isla

nd(M

ann

Poi

nt)

bere

cogn

ized

and

log

boom

ing

mov

edsu

bsta

ntia

lly

off

shor

eto

avoi

dgr

ound

ing

and

subst

rate

dam

age.

Van

couv

er-

Sey

mou

rR

iver

Gre

enw

aySe

eM

V16

Res

pons

e.

Met

roU

pla

nd

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Van

couv

erM

V3S

-S

eym

our

Riv

erG

reen

way

om

itte

d.

(May

3,M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:

2013

)-

Pos

sibl

eco

nse

rvat

ion/r

ecre

atio

nde

sign

atio

nfo

rth

em

outh

of

the

Sey

mou

rR

iver

.W

est

Van

couv

er-

Cap

ilan

oR

iver

Reg

iona

lP

ark

See

MV

17re

spon

se.

Met

roU

pla

nds

Des

ign

atio

ns:

Van

couv

erM

V36

-C

apil

ano

Riv

erR

egio

nal

Park

om

itte

d.

(May

3,M

arin

eD

esig

nat

ion

s:

2013

)-

Are

afr

onti

ngA

mbl

esid

eP

ark

coul

dha

vea

park

sde

sign

atio

n.



DDavis

Text Box

6.3



DDavis

Text Box

6.4

OCTOBER 31, HOLD THE DATE!

A COMMUNITY PRESENTATION OF

Major decisions about the future of transportation across the lower mainland are about to be made. The choices we make will significantly shape and impact our livability and prosperity.

Join community, business, political and economic leaders and experts in this important debate at Moving the Future: A New Conversation about Transportation and the Economy, October 31, Vancouver Convention Centre.

Participate in thought-provoking conversations that bring experience and innovative thinking to the table, helping to build a better future by rethinking transportation’s connections to our economy and our lives.

Moving the Future: A New Conversation about Transportation and the Economy

Vancouver Convention Centre (West)Thursday, October 31, 2013 • 7:30am – 2:00pm

REGISTER ONLINE NOW AT www.movingthefuture.ca

A detailed agenda will be provided in the days ahead.

Do you know someone who

would be interested in attending this conference? Let us know at

[email protected]

SustainableTransportation

Coalition TRANSPORTATION - 184

DDavis

Text Box

6.5

Documents

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE › boards › Transportation › ... · 2014-08-20 · September 17, 2013 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION