GEORGE MASSEY TUNNEL REPLACEMENT PROJECT PHASE 1 UNDERSTANDING THE NEED CONSULTATION SUMMARY REPORT MARCH 2013
This independent report of findings, including data entry and analysis of all the consultation input received (meeting notes, online and print feedback forms, and formal submissions received during the consultation period) was prepared by Lucent Strategies Inc. for the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure will consider the results of the consultation program in preparing a list of options for additional public input in Phase 2: Exploring the Options. The online survey was conducted using the FluidSurveys platform. Personal information collected in connection with responses to the survey is stored in Canada by FluidSurveys, not by the Government of British Columbia. FluidSurveys (fluidsurveys.com) stores all of its data in Canada and uses the latest in firewall and encryption technology to protect private information.
Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 1. PROJECT OVERVIEW AND CONTEXT... 3 1.1 About the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure... 3 1.2 About the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project... 3 1.3 Stakeholder and Community Consultation Process... 4 2. PHASE 1 CONSULTATION... 5 2.1 Overview... 5 2.2 Notification... 6 2.3 Online Engagement... 6 2.4 Consultation Discussion Guide and Feedback Form... 7 2.5 Pre-Consultation Stakeholder Meetings... 8 2.6 Open Houses... 8 2.7 Stakeholder Meetings... 9 2.8 Email and Phone Correspondence... 9 3. PARTICIPATION... 9 4. SUMMARY OF INPUT... 10 4.1 Overview... 10 4.2 Stakeholder Meetings... 10 4.3 Open Houses... 13 4.4 Feedback Forms... 15 4.5 Written Submissions... 19 5. RECAP OF KEY THEMES FROM ALL INPUT... 20 5.1 Needs and Constraints... 20 5.2 Key Considerations... 20 5.3 Moving Ahead... 20 5.4 Other Suggestions... 21 6. NEXT STEPS... 21 APPENDIX 1: DETAILED FINDINGS...A1 APPENDIX 2: CONSULTATION MATERIALS (under separate cover)
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 Executive Summary The George Massey Tunnel is a key component of the regional and provincial transportation system, carrying more than 80,000 vehicles each day. It connects to key gateways like the Vancouver International Airport, the Peace Arch Border Crossing, the BC Ferries Tsawwassen terminal and the Boundary Bay Airport. It is also an important goods movement route that fuels our national, provincial and regional economy and a key access point for businesses in Delta and Richmond. The tunnel is over capacity throughout the morning and evening rush hours and close to capacity throughout the day, leading to congested conditions for almost 13 hours a day. The existing tunnel has 10 to 15 years of useful life remaining before major components will need to be completely replaced. Additionally, while the tunnel remains safe for all users, it does not meet modern seismic standards. In response to growing concerns about the impact of congestion, and recognizing the age and condition of the existing George Massey Tunnel, the B.C. Government announced in September 2012 that planning for a replacement would begin immediately. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure is leading this initiative, and is undertaking a comprehensive planning and consultation process to determine the most appropriate solution to ensure that Highway 99 continues to serve as a key component of the provincial transportation network. Planning now will ensure that we have a solution in place within the next 10 to 15 years one that meets the growing needs of the communities, businesses and stakeholders that rely on this crossing. The Ministry has adopted an initial two-phase public and external stakeholder consultation program to support project planning and development. The two-phase consultation process includes: Phase 1: Understanding the Need This initial phase of consultation focused on developing an understanding of needs and potential constraints to help create project scope and design requirements, which are being used to evaluate project options Phase 2: Exploring the Options Based on Phase 1 consultation results and preliminary technical work, Phase 2 will seek input on potential bridge and tunnel options and on the criteria to evaluate these options This report summarizes input received from the Phase 1: Understanding the Need consultation, which took place between November 28 and December 19, 2012 and included participation from the public and stakeholders from across the Metro Vancouver region. Section 1 of this report provides an overview and context for the project. Section 2 describes the consultation program, including notification and consultation activities. Section 3 describes participation levels and reports out on input received, as summarized below: 1,147 people submitted a feedback form 627 people or organizations signed up for project update emails 310 people attended 1 of the 5 open houses held throughout the region 59 people representing 40 organizations participated in the 9 small-group meetings 16 people emailed the project information office, including 4 people who submitted detailed letters or presentations 1
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need Section 5 of this report provides a recap of key themes from all consultation activities, as noted below: Traffic congestion at the George Massey Tunnel is a significant problem that is causing safety concerns and significant community and economic impacts. More than one-third of feedback form respondents indicated needing to take an alternate route at least once a month due to traffic congestion at the tunnel Many respondents expressed a sense of urgency in finalizing a project scope and moving forward Congestion reduction was named the most important factor to consider in developing replacement options Economic growth was identified as the second most important factor to consider when developing replacement options, particularly given the importance of North Delta and Richmond as commercial and industrial areas, as well as the importance of the Fraser River for marine transport and Asia-Pacific Gateway trade Inclusion of transportation alternatives was identified as the third most important factor to consider when developing replacement options. Almost all participants noted the importance of considering the needs of all users, particularly cyclists and pedestrians, who currently are limited to using the Ministry s shuttle service Many participants also suggested interim solutions to help address current congestion and safety concerns while planning for a replacement continues. These include improved lighting and painting in the existing tunnel, as well as improving traffic flow at existing interchanges A number of participants provided suggestions for long-term solutions, which are discussed in more detail in Section 2.7 of Appendix 1 Many participants expressed desire for a visionary, long-term solution that would address forecast population and employment growth and also encourage people to consider alternative modes of transportation A small number of participants recommended no replacement, suggesting that the Ministry instead focus on rehabilitating the existing tunnel and investing in transit-only solutions or investing in other regional transportation priorities Detailed results of feedback form input by question are included in Appendix 1. Section 6 details next steps, including additional technical analysis and consultation. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure project team is considering the findings in this report in developing a draft project scope and options for additional public input in the Phase 2: Exploring the Options consultation, which will begin in March 2013. 2
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 1. Project Overview and Context 1.1 About the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure The British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure plans transportation networks, provides transportation services and infrastructure, develops and implements transportation policies, and administers many related acts and regulations. The Ministry also administers federal-provincial funding programs, including the Building Canada Fund, to help build sustainable communities. The Ministry opens up B.C. through innovative, forward-thinking transportation strategies that move people and goods safely, and fuels our provincial economy. Improvement of vital infrastructure is a key goal, along with enhancing the competitiveness of B.C. s transportation industries, reducing transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions and providing B.C. with a safe and reliable highway system. To do this, the Ministry: Works to expand and integrate various modes of transportation in consultation with local and regional authorities and stakeholder groups, and with industry members and port, railway and airport partners, and in co-operation with transportation-related Crown corporations Pursues policies and other initiatives to enhance the competitiveness of B.C. s ports and airports, our gateways for economic growth and development Works with partners and other levels of government to provide funding to develop and deliver cost-effective public transit, ferry services, and cycling networks Builds highway infrastructure to fulfil the economic and social needs of British Columbians 1.2 About the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project In response to growing concerns about the impact of congestion and recognizing the age and condition of the existing George Massey Tunnel, the B.C. Government announced in September 2012 that planning for a replacement would begin immediately. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure is leading this process to determine the most appropriate solution to ensure that Highway 99 continues to serve as a key component of the provincial transportation network. Planning for a replacement involves extensive technical and financial analysis; consultation with all levels of government, including Transport Canada, Port Metro Vancouver, Metro Vancouver, TransLink, Delta, Richmond, Surrey and Vancouver; and consultation with residents, businesses and the public. 3
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 1.3 Stakeholder and Community Consultation Process The Ministry has adopted an initial two-phase public and external stakeholder consultation program to support project planning and development. The consultation program incorporates a variety of methods for the public and stakeholders to be involved and to provide input, including online engagement, open houses and small-group meetings. The online engagement, using the GovTogetherBC platform, provides a continuum of information exchange across all stages of the planning process including technical evaluation, consultation and decision-making. This is designed to help increase participation by making it easy for people to be involved. The two-phase consultation process includes: Phase 1: Understanding the Need This initial phase of consultation focused on developing an understanding of needs and potential constraints to help create project scope and design requirements, which are being used to evaluate project options Phase 2: Exploring the Options Based on Phase 1 consultation results and preliminary technical work, Phase 2 will seek input on potential bridge and tunnel options and on the criteria to evaluate these options 4
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 2. Phase 1 Consultation 2.1 Overview The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure undertook Phase 1 consultation from November 28 to December 19, 2012. The consultation included a variety of methods for people to learn about the project, participate in the consultation program and provide their feedback. This included a comprehensive advertising and notification program using English print media (and Chinese print media), online media, social media, community and stakeholder meetings, open houses, a feedback form, and online engagement through the project website (masseytunnel.ca) using the Province s GovTogetherBC platform. The purpose of the consultation was to discuss and seek input on: Community and provincial interests including: peak period and non-peak period congestion reduction measures, economic development, goods movement, land use, agricultural and environmental protection, and community livability Crossing design elements, including: the role of the Highway 99 corridor, access to designated growth areas, and the needs of all users, including car drivers, goods movers, transit riders, carpoolers, cyclists and pedestrians Opportunities and challenges with constructing a replacement crossing Connection to and support for local, regional, provincial and national growth and transportation plans The Ministry will consider input from this consultation, along with existing provincial plans and priorities, to develop a project scope and options for additional consultation and engagement. 5
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 2.2 Notification The Ministry invited participation through a variety of techniques as noted in the following table. Sample print advertisements are included in Appendix 2A. A sample stakeholder meeting invitation letter is included in Appendix 2B. Form of Notification Newspaper Advertising Road signs Media release and information bulletin Website Social media Project information line Email notice Stakeholder meeting invitation letters Description 4 public notices placed in the Vancouver Sun and Province, as well as 18 notices in various Lower Mainland community newspapers, including 1 ethnic paper. See Appendix 2C for a complete listing. 5 project information signs along Highway 99, Steveston Highway, River Road and Highway 17 to alert travellers about the project and how to find out more information. A media release and backgrounder, and subsequent information bulletin, were broadly distributed to Lower Mainland media outlets, which generated significant earned media. Both are available in Appendix 2D. Public notices were posted online at masseytunnel.ca 20 @TranBC tweets 4 TranBC blogs Staffed during regular office hours. The public was invited to sign up to receive information about the project. Emails were sent reminding people to complete their feedback forms prior to close of consultation on December 19. Invitation letters were sent to 130 stakeholders encouraging them to participate in consultation workshop meetings. Date(s) November 21 to December 1 Installed November 27 November 21 November 26 November 21 Various dates between November 24 and December 1 Launched November 20 December 17 November 29 30 2.3 Online Engagement Anticipating keen interest from across the Lower Mainland, the Ministry launched a project website (masseytunnel.ca) using the province s GovTogetherBC online engagement platform. GovTogetherBC is the hub for government engagement opportunities and supports the government in its objective to be transparent and accessible. 6
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 During Phase 1 consultation, the project website provided the following information and engagement tools: Online database registration and comments Information centre, including consultation materials as well as previous studies about the tunnel Access to the online feedback form Calendar of events, including dates, times and locations for all public open houses Project schedule Information about the history of the existing tunnel, with links to YouTube videos of the original construction @TranBC Twitter feed, the Ministry s social media link, which has more than 4,000 followers 2.4 Consultation Discussion Guide and Feedback Form A 20-page consultation discussion guide provided information about the project, including: History of the tunnel and its namesake George Massey Tunnel Needs and Operating Conditions, including traffic volumes, seismic conditions, safety, and forecast population and economic growth Community, Provincial and National Interests, which discussed the issues identified to date, such as congestion, community livability, and environmental and agricultural land protection Towards a Solution, which discussed current plans and policies of various levels of government that will influence development of solution options, tunnel replacement alternatives studied in the past, and current design considerations Next Steps in the planning process The discussion guide is attached as Appendix 2E and available at http://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel/files/2012/11/george-massey-tunnel-replacement-project-discussion-guide.pdf An 8-page feedback form mirrored the discussion topics presented in the discussion guide, with questions about people s experience with the tunnel, their reasons for and frequency of use, their level of agreement with various policy statements, the importance of various design considerations for use in developing and evaluating options, and general demographic information. The feedback form was available in hard copy at the open houses and stakeholder meetings, and was also available online throughout the consultation period. The feedback form is included in Appendix 2F. 7
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 2.5 Pre-Consultation Stakeholder Meetings In developing the consultation program, project team representatives met with staff from various government agencies, as well as community groups with a known interest in the tunnel, to discuss the proposed consultation process and seek input regarding planning policies, assumptions or initiatives that would potentially affect the tunnel. These agencies and groups included: Agricultural Land Commission BC Trucking Association Boundary Bay Airport Corporation of Delta City of Richmond City of Surrey City of Vancouver Fraser Surrey Docks Delta Farmers Institute Metro Vancouver Port Metro Vancouver Richmond Agricultural Advisory Committee Richmond Chamber of Commerce Richmond Farmers Institute TransLink Vancouver International Airport (YVR) Delta Chamber of Commerce 2.6 Open Houses The Ministry hosted 5 open houses in 3 municipalities, as noted below. Each open house featured 2 hours for participants to view the display boards and speak one-to-one with project staff, followed by a 20-minute presentation and 40- to 60-minute facilitated question and answer session. A copy of the presentation is included in Appendix 2G. Each attendee was asked to sign in as they entered the open house venue, and were provided with a discussion guide and feedback form. Open House Schedule Delta Richmond Surrey/ Cloverdale South Surrey Richmond December 1, 2012 10:00 a.m. 1:00 p.m. December 4, 2012 6:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. December 6, 2012 6:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. December 10, 2012 6:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. December 11, 2012 6:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. Delta Town & Country Inn, 6005 Highway 17 Signature Sandman Hotel 10251 St. Edmonds Drive Cloverdale Fairgrounds Alice McKay Building, 6050A 176 Street Morgan Creek Golf Course 3500 Morgan Creek Way Richmond Olympic Oval 6111 River Road 8
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 2.7 Stakeholder Meetings The Ministry hosted 9 stakeholder meetings (see table below), to seek input from a broad cross-section of interested groups. The 2-hour meetings featured the same presentation as the open houses, followed by a facilitated discussion. These meetings covered the same information as the open houses and allowed for more in-depth dialogue between participants and project staff on matters of specific interest. Stakeholder Meeting Date Agricultural Interests December 7 Tourism Interests December 10 First Responders December 11 Environmental and Recreational Interests December 12 Port, Industry and Business December 13 Richmond Community December 13 Goods Movement and Trucking December 17 Delta Community December 17 Surrey Community December 18 2.8 Email and Phone Correspondence The Ministry established a project telephone and email inquiry program to manage and respond to project-related questions. Contact information was available on all notices, including advertising and road signs and on the project website. Project staff responded to all inquiries, generally within 2 business days. 3. Participation More than 1,100 people participated in the Phase 1 consultation program, as noted below: 1,147 people submitted a feedback form 627 people or organizations signed up for project update emails 310 attendees at the open houses 59 attendees representing 40 organizations at stakeholder meetings 16 submissions to the project email address 9
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 4. Summary of Input 4.1 Overview Input was collected through four sources stakeholder meeting discussions, open house question and answer sessions, the feedback form, and email submissions. Key theme summary results from each of these sources are described in the subsections that follow. Additionally, Appendix 1 of this report provides detailed findings for each of the feedback form questions. 4.2 Stakeholder Meetings Stakeholder meetings provided an opportunity to collect input from a broad cross-section of interested groups. A number of key themes emerged across all the groups, including: Congestion at the existing George Massey Tunnel results in safety concerns and has significant community and economic impacts Important to consider the needs of all users when developing plans for a replacement Ensure that the project scope includes improvements to related interchanges on Highway 99 Using the existing corridor likely has fewer impacts than considering an alternate corridor Need for interim solutions if the long-term solution is 10 15 years away Continue to consult with stakeholders as options are developed Key themes from each of these meetings are summarized in the table below. Additionally, detailed meeting notes are available in Appendix 2H. Stakeholder Group Agricultural Interests Tourism Interests Key Themes Congestion has an impact on farming especially in terms of getting perishable goods to market in a timely manner Strong desire to use the existing corridor as a means to reduce impacts on agricultural land Look for mitigation options that benefit agriculture The project should include Highway 17 and Steveston interchanges, which are equally important Consider needs of slower moving traffic Implement interim improvements while planning for the long term Keep working together Community connections with interchanges are critically important and need to be included in the scope of the project Need to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists (important to tourism and the waterfronts) Current alignment is favourable Consider maintaining the current tunnel and providing additional capacity by using a parallel crossing 10
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 Stakeholder Group First Responders Recreational Interests Port, Industry and Business Richmond Community Key Themes Prefer a new bridge instead of a tunnel, due to concerns related to driver behaviour and emergency response concerns with a tunnel Consider access and egress as well as future capacity Need shoulders, pullouts and U-turn routes Need to improve merging (use electronic message boards) Consider designated lanes (trucks, HOV, local traffic) Look at the impact of minor motor vehicle incidents and how they cause gridlock Appreciate the opportunity for early input and encourage Ministry to continue consulting Improving cycling and pedestrian access in the tunnel is critical East/west connectivity is also important, connecting to the feeder networks on both sides of the river, and regional and national networks There must be a balanced, mixed solution to the congestion problem Prefer a new bridge instead of a tunnel, due to safety concerns related to driver behaviour Opportunity to enhance recreation and tourism, as well as parks on either side of the river to allow the public to enjoy the structure The existing tunnel is a barrier to improved shipping and economic growth along the Fraser River; it is unclear what opportunities might be realized because the tunnel is so constrained All modes of transportation need to be considered in developing a replacement Look long term Importance of green zone and recreation on both sides of the Fraser River Continue to work together because a lot of agencies are doing concurrent long-term planning Suggestion to collect more data and not rely on traffic models alone Include interchange improvements along the Highway 99 corridor as part of the project scope The existing tunnel results in economic and environmental impacts, and there is an urgent need for corrective action Include transit in the tunnel replacement Think holistically and outside the box, including incorporating rapid transit and moving the location of the Tsawwassen ferry terminal 11
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need Stakeholder Group Goods Movement and Trucking Delta Community Surrey Community Key Themes Highway 99 and tunnel improvements are needed this is a key gateway to the border, Deltaport, Richmond, North Delta and Surrey Maximize use of the Fraser River as a means to keep goods moving Build improvements that accommodate the size and needs of trucks (wide lanes, curves, pullouts with washrooms) Use the Port Mann Bridge traffic communications program as a model for communications during construction There is a lack of reliability and predictability of the tunnel in its existing condition People would use transit if it were more efficient. Some recent changes made transit more awkward with connections into Vancouver We need to consider local connections from both sides of the crossing More options need to be presented in Phase 2 consultation, to contrast some different potential solutions Existing merge lanes south of the tunnel are problematic Consider banning trucks in rush hour There is a desire to further investigate short-term improvements (i.e., lighting, colour of tiles) In the mid-term, travel advisory signs could be used to provide advance notice to traffic in the event of an incident/congestion in the tunnel Build something new Consider tolling the existing crossing now, to fund construction of a new crossing, and discourage congestion in the meantime Do not restrict the viability of the Fraser River as an economic corridor Invest for road traffic as well as river traffic 12
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 4.3 Open Houses The Ministry held 5 open houses, all of which included a facilitated question and answer session. Key themes from each of these sessions are summarized below. Open House December 1 Delta (181 participants) December 4 Richmond (50 participants) December 6 Surrey/Cloverdale (17 participants) Key Themes Congestion is a problem, particularly for Delta, and something needs to be done Desire to see rapid transit or light rail extended over the Fraser River Concern about the potential environmental effects of additional marine traffic if the existing tunnel is removed Concern about potential loss of agricultural land Some participants suggested that tunnel capacity isn t causing congestion, but rather: Overreliance on single-occupancy vehicles Nearby exits on Highway 99 (at Steveston Highway and Highway 17) cause huge lineups Current traffic light locations on either side of the tunnel Frustration with truck traffic and suggestions to limit or eliminate use of trucks through the tunnel during rush hour, or entirely Increasing capacity alone won t solve any of the region s problems While transit is imperative, the tunnel replacement cannot be transit only Questions about Port Metro Vancouver s plans: Plans for Fraser River if tunnel is removed and depth is increased Potential to shift current truck traffic through the tunnel to another highway Port Metro Vancouver s goods movement strategy on the river; barging instead of container trucks Desire for specific figures and sources re: emissions calculations, rush hour vehicle stats, projected traffic growth, etc. Financing of the replacement: Start tolling the George Massey Tunnel now Consideration of a third party to finance the project Questions and suggestions about what a replacement will look like, including: Bridge or tunnel Number of lanes Cyclist/pedestrian options Questions about the cost of a replacement and whether tolling would be considered Questions about replacement options considered in the past. Interest in shortening the timeline for constructing a replacement Questions and suggestions about the project scope (e.g., interchanges along Highway 99) Concerns about the seismic stability of the existing tunnel 13
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need Open House December 10 South Surrey (29 participants) December 11 Richmond (54 participants) Key Themes Comments about shortcomings of the existing tunnel/highway 99 including: Buses are overloaded or at capacity Most buses lead to Canada Line; unhelpful if travelling elsewhere Congestion Suggestions for short-term solutions, including: Improving Steveston exit (and others) Improving tunnel lighting Reducing/removing truck traffic through tunnel Consider alternative to tolls; tolls unfair to South of Fraser residents Suggestions to study traffic improvement examples from around the world to see if we can make better use of the existing Highway 99 corridor in its current configuration Questions about the source of, and assumptions, for the traffic information presented in the discussion guide, and how the South Fraser Perimeter Road will influence traffic volumes Questions about Port Metro Vancouver s participation in the planning process Questions about cost, tolling and the timeline for potential region-wide tolling Questions and suggestions about restricting truck traffic during peak periods Suggestion to include rapid transit as part of a tunnel replacement Concern that more capacity could move the congestion bottleneck elsewhere Concern about the impact of accidents when there is an incident on any of the crossings, it creates chaos everywhere Suggestion to maintain the existing tunnel and consider a new crossing in an alternate location, to help provide an alternate route in the event of an accident 14
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 4.4 Feedback Forms The Ministry received 1,147 feedback forms during the Phase 1 consultation period. Appendix 1 of this report presents detailed results by question. Following is a high-level overview of findings: 1 Current Travel Needs and Operating Conditions: 67% of respondents use the tunnel at least once a week 44% of respondents use the tunnel four times per week or more, specifically: 78% of those who use the bridge 4 days a week or more are commuters travelling to/from work or school 89% of frequent users travel by car most often, including 21% who travel with other passengers 6% of frequent users take transit most often 17% On average, how frequently do you use the George Massey Tunnel? (n=948) 23% 14% 44% 4 or more days a week 23% At least once a week 44% 17% At least once a month 14% A few times a year 1% Never 1% Once a year or less 1 The reader is cautioned that, since respondents to this survey were self-selecting and not a random sample, the findings in this report should be considered as indicative only, and cannot be statistically projected to the population at large. In the past 12 months, 79% of respondents used the tunnel for entertainment/recreation other reasons for use included personal business (66%) and commuting to/from work (56%). With respect to the most frequent mode of transportation: 89% of respondents travel by car, with 34% of these travelling with other passengers; 6% take transit most frequently 90% of frequent users (those travelling once a week or more) travel most frequently by car, including who travel with a passenger Reliable travel times are very important. I travel from my home in Cloverdale to my office downtown. Lately, it often takes me 110 minutes to get home in the evening. This is whether I take the tunnel or the Alex Fraser Bridge the congestion is horrendous and government must act soon to tackle it. Surrey resident 15
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need Have you used the tunnel for one or more of the following in the past 12 months? (n=948) 80% 70% 79% 60% 66% 50% 40% 56% 29% 0% Commuting to/from work 7% Commuting to/from school Travel for business Travel for personal business Entertainment or recreation 13% Other Transit as a Transportation Option: 24% of respondents have used transit through tunnel at least once in past 12 months, with 6% of respondents using transit as their primary mode of travel through the tunnel 38% of respondents indicated they need their vehicle for all (100%) of their trips, while 7% said they needed it for none (0%) of their trips. (14% needed their vehicle for only up to of their trips, as illustrated in the chart to the left) of respondents indicated they could use transit if it were readily available for all (100%) of their trips, while 28% said they could not use it for any of their trips. (48% could use transit for up to of their trips, as illustrated in the chart to the right) Need a personal vehicle Could use transit if it were available and suitable 3% 28% 38% 7% 14% For 100% of trips For 71% to 99% of trips For 51% to 70% of trips For 31% to 50% of trips For 11% to of trips For up to of trips 13% 11% 48% 2% 15% Transit not an option for any trips. Transit is a viable option if available, for all trips. 16
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 Use of Alternate Route 81% of respondents reported taking an alternate route at least once in the past 12 months, due to traffic congestion at the tunnel, and 37% report this happening at least once a month 68% of respondents diverted to another route because of an accident at the tunnel The majority of drivers (78%) divert to the Alex Fraser Bridge, and 11% cancel their trip 19% In the past year, how often have you taken an alternate route, delayed your trip or not travelled at all due to traffic congestion at the George Massey Tunnel? (n=854) 16% 7% Always (more than 4 times a month) 21% 15% Most times/numerous/frequent (2 4 times per month) 16% Often/several/ many (1 2 times per month) 15% 21% A couple of times/rarely/infrequently 22% Occasionally/sometimes 22% 7% 19% Never 38% at least once per month Access to Gateway Destinations: 77% of respondents used the tunnel to access YVR in the past year, 69% to access the BC Ferries Tsawwassen terminal, 58% to access the U.S. border and 15% to access the Boundary Bay Airport Key Interests in Planning for a Replacement: More than 90% of respondents agree that: Traffic congestion is a problem for the region Highway 99 provides important access to businesses in Richmond and Delta An efficient network is important to creating healthy communities The needs of all users should be considered when planning for a long-term solution for the Massey Tunnel More than 80% of respondents agree that: Highway 99 is an important goods movement route Current congestion at the tunnel has a negative impact on air quality Congestion at the tunnel is a problem for them personally 60 70% of respondents agree that: New infrastructure should be developed in a way that minimizes impacts on local communities Some Agricultural Land Reserve could be used in constructing a replacement, provided that appropriate mitigation for loss of these lands is incorporated into the project scope With mitigation in place, the environmental benefits of a new crossing would outweigh the costs, and Protecting agricultural land on both sides of the tunnel is important 17
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need With respect to consideration of transportation alternatives: 78% of respondents agree that new infrastructure should consider alternative forms of transportation 68% of respondents agree that increasing transit options is a meaningful way to reduce traffic congestion 52% of respondents agree they would use transit more if light rail/rapid transit service were available through the tunnel of respondents agree they would use transit more if more frequent bus service were available through the tunnel Priorities to Consider in Developing Long-Term Solutions: Congestion Reduction is considered the most important factor when developing and evaluating options to address the current situation at the tunnel. The second most important factor is Economic Growth, and the third is inclusion of Transportation Alternatives. With respect to evaluation considerations, respondents also offered the following comments: Importance of travel time reliability and congestion relief A sense of urgency in finalizing a project scope and moving forward Importance of considering transportation alternatives in all options Desire for a visionary, long-term solution Importance of Various Design Considerations 90% 90% 80% 70% 82% MOST Important (n=820) 80% 70% LEAST Important (n=790) 60% 60% 50% 40% 25% 50% 48% 40% 46% 41% 39% 39% 27% 27% 28% 12% 48% 35% 48% 0% Regional objectives alignment Environment Congestion reduction Community livability Transportation alternatives Agricutural lands Economic growth Cost 0% Regional objectives alignment Environment Congestion reduction Community livability Transportation alternatives Agricutural lands Economic growth Cost 28 respondents (2%) recommended no replacement, with comments centred around 4 key themes: Rehabilitate the existing instead (including suggestions to widen or add another tube adjacent to the existing tunnel) Make other investments to improve traffic flow, such as improvements to the Steveston interchange and improved lighting Spend the money on improved transit instead Opposition to increased vessel traffic in the Fraser River 18
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 4.5 Written Submissions During the Phase 1 consultation period, the Ministry received 16 submissions by email, including 4 detailed submissions from the following groups or individuals: Metro Vancouver The long-term sustainability of the region (environmental, social and economic) not shortterm alleviation of symptoms of our car-dependent culture. Transit, expandability/flexibility, usability by cyclists/pedestrians, safety. Vancouver resident Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council Surrey Board of Trade A private individual Key themes from these submissions are as follows: Current congestion is a problem that has community and economic impacts Construct a replacement that provides additional capacity and improves options for transit users, cyclists and pedestrians Preference for a bridge instead of a tunnel, with some also preferring an option that maintains the existing tunnel, while others prefer full replacement Move quickly, 10 years is too long Consider short-term solutions as well, including improved transit as a means to reduce overall demand All submissions are included in Appendix 2-I. For privacy reasons, the names of individuals have been removed. 19
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 5. Recap of Key Themes from All Input 5.1 Needs and Constraints Traffic congestion at the George Massey Tunnel is a significant problem that is causing safety concerns and significant community and economic impacts. More than one-third of feedback from respondents indicated needing to take an alternate route at least once a month due to traffic congestion at the tunnel Many respondents expressed a sense of urgency in finalizing a project scope and moving forward 5.2 Key Considerations Congestion reduction was named the most important factor to consider in developing replacement options, with many participants commenting specifically on the need for improved travel time reliability Economic growth was identified as the next most important factor to consider when developing replacement options, particularly given the importance of North Delta and Richmond as commercial and industrial areas, as well as the importance of the Fraser River for marine transport and Asia-Pacific Gateway trade Inclusion of transportation alternatives was identified as the next most important factor to consider when developing replacement options. Almost all participants noted the importance of considering the needs of all users, particularly cyclists and pedestrians, who currently are limited to using the Ministry s shuttle service No single factor stood out as least important, although cost, alignment with regional objectives and protection of agricultural land were identified as less important than other factors The most frequently suggested other design considerations include effects on tourism, design esthetics and impacts during construction 5.3 Moving Ahead A number of participants provided suggestions for long-term solutions, including: Suggestions to include transit, particularly LRT, along with additional road capacity Preference for a new bridge rather than a tunnel, due in part to perception of improved safety and reduced environmental impact, as well as maximizing flexibility for future uses of the Fraser River for marine transportation Ensuring that replacement options consider the needs of all users, including cyclists, pedestrians, transit and HOV users, and trucks Be a visionary and ensure that you take into consideration long-term growth. Minimizing congestion is key. Richmond resident 20
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 General consensus to construct a new crossing using the existing corridor, both in terms of serving primary origins and destinations as well as minimizing agricultural, environmental and community impacts; however some participants suggested keeping the existing tunnel as a local crossing and building a second crossing either adjacent to the existing crossing or on a new corridor such as No. 8 Road Suggestions for improvements to related interchanges, particularly Highway 99/17 and Highway 99/ Steveston Many participants expressed desire for a visionary, long-term solution that would address forecast population and employment growth and also encourage people to consider alternative modes of transportation A number of participants noted concerns about the potential agricultural, environmental and community impacts of a new crossing and expressed a desire for more information as planning continues 5.4 Other Suggestions Many participants also suggested interim solutions to help address current congestion and safety concerns while planning for a replacement continues. These include improved lighting and painting in the existing tunnel, as well as improving traffic flow at existing interchanges A small number of participants recommended no replacement, suggesting that the Ministry instead focus on rehabilitating the existing tunnel and investing in transit-only solutions or investing in other regional transportation priorities 6. Next Steps The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure will consider input from this phase of consultation in conjunction with existing provincial plans and responsibilities to develop a vision and design criteria for the replacement crossing. This information will then be used to develop a short list of potential replacement options for additional community input and feedback during Phase 2: Exploring the Options in early 2013. For more information: Email: masseytunnel@gov.bc.ca Web: masseytunnel.ca Phone: 1-8-555-MASSEY (1-855-562-7739) Fax: 604-940-7992 Mail: George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project C/O 7351 Vantage Way Delta, BC V4G 1C9 Get on with it! Delta resident 21
Consultation Summary Report March 2013
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need GEORGE MASSEY TUNNEL REPLACEMENT PROJECT PHASE 1 UNDERSTANDING THE NEED CONSULTATION SUMMARY REPORT FEBRUARY 2013 Appendix 1: Detailed Findings 1 Current Travel Needs and Operating Conditions...A1 1.1 Travel Frequency...A1 1.2 Purpose of Trip...A2 1.3 Mode of Transport...A3 1.4 Transit as a Transportation Option...A4 1.5 Tunnel Use to Access Gateway Destinations...A5 1.6 Use of Alternative Routes Due to Congestion and Accidents...A5 2. Community, Provincial and National Interests...A6 2.1 Congestion...A6 2.2 Alternative Modes...A7 2.3 Planning Considerations...A7 2.4 Economic Interests...A7 2.5 Recreational and Community Interests...A7 2.6 Synthesis of Interests...A8 2.7 Other Comments...A12 3. Towards a Solution...A13 3.1 Highest Ranked Design Considerations...A14 3.2 Lowest Ranked Design Considerations...A14 3.3 Other Design Considerations...A14 3.4 Additional Input...A14 4. Demographic Profile...A16 5. Staying in Touch...A16
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need Appendix 1: Detailed Findings This Appendix provides a detailed report of findings from the feedback form input collected from 1,147 respondents during Phase 1 consultation. The reader is cautioned that, since respondents to this survey were self-selecting and not a random sample, the findings in this report should be considered as indicative only, and cannot be statistically projected to the population at large. 1. CURRENT TRAVEL NEEDS AND OPERATING CONDITIONS 1.1. Travel Frequency Respondents were asked how frequently they use the George Massey Tunnel. Many are very frequent users, travelling at least 4 times per week, with two-thirds of respondents using the tunnel at least once a week. 78% of those who use the bridge 4 days a week or more are commuters travelling to/from work or school 89% of frequent users travel by car most often, including 21% who travel with other passengers 6% of frequent users take transit most often Almost half of those travelling 4+ days per week live in Delta 17% On average, how frequently do you use the George Massey Tunnel? (n=948) 23% 14% 44% 4 or more days a week 23% At least once a week 44% 17% At least once a month 14% A few times a year 1% Never 1% Once a year or less A1
Consultation Summary Report March 2013 1.2. Purpose of Trip Respondents were asked to indicate the various reasons that they have used the tunnel in the past year as well as their most frequent reason for travel. Most respondents indicated using the tunnel for entertainment and recreation purposes (79%), followed by travel for appointments; however, all trip purposes were well represented, including 29% travelling for business. Have you used the tunnel for one or more of the following in the past 12 months? (n=948) 80% 70% 79% 60% 66% 50% 40% 56% 29% 0% Commuting to/from work 7% Commuting to/from school Travel for business Travel for personal business Entertainment or recreation 13% Other Commuting to/from work was reported as the most frequent purpose of trip for 40% of respondents. The majority of commercial vehicle drivers are frequent users. 16% What was your most frequent trip purpose in the past 12 months?? (n=939) 24% 43% Commuting to/from work 5% 24% Entertainment or recreation 16% Travel for personal business 43% Travel for business 5% Other 2% Commuting to/from school A2
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 1.3. Mode of Transport Respondents were asked to indicate the various modes of transportation they have used to travel through the tunnel in the past 12 months. Most have travelled by car, with or without other passengers. 24% have taken transit at least once in the past year, and 4% have cycled or walked, using the Ministry s shuttle service to transit through the tunnel. With respect to most frequent mode of transportation, 89% travel by car, with 34% of these travelling with other passengers; 6% take transit most frequently. Which of the following modes of transportation have you used to travel through the tunnel in the past 12 months? (n=943) 80% 70% 81% 78% 60% 50% 40% 24% 0% Private vehicle, alone Private vehicle, with other passengers 4% Commercial vehicle over 5,500 kg 9% Other commercial vehicles Transit 4% Cycling, walking 90% of Frequent users (those travelling once a week or more) travel most frequently by car, including who travel with a passenger. 88% of Casual users (those traveling a few times a year) travel most frequently by car, 44% with another passenger. Commercial drivers cluster as either frequent users (once a week or more) or infrequent users (once a year or less), with 93% of Commercial vehicle drivers over 5,500 kg being frequent users. Half of those who use transit as most frequent mode are frequent users, travelling through the tunnel at least once a week, while about half are casual users (a few times a year or more). Currently, cycling is primarily for casual use, with only 1% indicating this as their most frequent mode of travel. 34% 6% What is the mode of transportation you used most frequently to travel through the tunnel in the past 12 months? (n=945) 55% Private vehicle, alone 34% Private vehicle, with other passengers 55% 6% 2% 2% 1% Transit Commercial vehicle over 5,500 kg Other commercial vehicle Cycling/walking A3
George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Phase 1 Understanding the Need 1.4. Transit as a Transportation Option: To help determine demand for transit, respondents were asked, Sometimes people use their personal vehicle for travel because they want to and sometimes because they have to. Thinking about all of the trips you described above, for what PERCENTAGE of these would you require a vehicle if suitable public transit service was available within 1 km of your origin and destination? 38% of respondents indicated they need their vehicle for all (100%) of their trips, while 7% said they needed for none (0%) their trips. (14% needed their vehicle for only up to of their trips, as illustrated in the chart to the left) of respondents indicated they could use transit if it were readily available for all (100%) of their trips, while 28% said they could use it for none (0%) of their trips. (48% could use transit for up to of their trips, as illustrated in the chart to the right) Considering responses from all participants, on average, people need their vehicle for 72% of their trips and could use transit for 38% of their trips. The most frequent response regarding need for vehicle was 100% of trips and the most frequent response for could use transit was 50% of trips Additional information is available in the following comparison chart. Many respondents commented on the importance of improved transit service on the Highway 99 corridor. Some noted that improved transit service would eliminate the need for tunnel improvements, while others noted that transit improvements should be considered as part of tunnel improvements/a new crossing. Need a personal vehicle Could use transit if it were available and suitable 3% 28% 7% 14% For 100% of trips For 71% to 99% of trips For 51% to 70% of trips For 31% to 50% of trips For 11% to of trips For up to of trips 13% 11% 2% 48% 38% 15% A4