GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

Transcription

1 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, September 14, :00 p.m. 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia R E V I S E D A G E N D A 1 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1.1 September 14, 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for September 14, 2016 as circulated. 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 2.1 July 20, 2016 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held July 20, 2016 as circulated. 3. DELEGATIONS 3.1 Wayne Wright, Metro Vancouver nominee to the Airport Authority Board Craig Richmond, President and CEO, Vancouver Airport Authority Marion Town, Director Environment, Vancouver Airport Authority Subject: Progress on the Airport Authority s strategic plan and supporting objectives 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS 1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable. September 13, 2016 IFC - 1

2 Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda September 14, 2016 Agenda Page 2 of 4 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF Added 5.1 TransLink s Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund That the GVRD Board: a. Approve funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund for the following projects proposed by TransLink in its Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund, as attached to the report dated September 2, 2016, titled 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund : i. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $4,674,000; ii. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,560,000; iii. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,500,000; iv. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,830,000; v. Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases $5,013,000; vi. Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases $5,605,000; vii. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $28,500,000; viii. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $11,700,000; and, ix. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $60,800,000. b. Send a letter to the TransLink Board communicating the importance of considering environmentally sustainable alternative approaches for technologies for its fleet, consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy and regional environmental objectives. 5.2 Metro Vancouver Legal Entities Name Change Designated Speaker: Ralph G. Hildebrand, Corporate Solicitor, Legal and Legislative Services and Heather Shoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations That the GVRD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the letters patent of the GVRD to rename it Metro Vancouver Regional District. That the GVWD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the Greater Vancouver Water District Act to rename it Metro Vancouver Water District. That the GVS&DD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act to rename it Metro Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District. IFC - 2

3 Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda September 14, 2016 Agenda Page 3 of Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Additional Information Designated Speaker: Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to bring forward a bylaw to amend the Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 to: a) incorporate the changes to Schedule B - Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings as presented in the report dated September 7, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Additional Information ; and b) incorporate the changes to Schedules A and C and housekeeping amendments as presented in the report dated July 6, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw. 6. INFORMATION ITEMS 6.1 Intergovernment and Finance Committee 2016 Work Plan 6.2 Correspondence re Federal Gas Tax Fund Expenditures Policy from TransLink 6.3 Correspondence re Environmental Assessment of the Proposed George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project from the Environmental Assessment Office 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING Note: The Committee must state by resolution the basis under section 90 of the Community Charter on which the meeting is being closed. If a member wishes to add an item, the basis must be included below. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for September 14, 2016 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (a), (e), (g) and (i) as follows: 90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (a) personal information about an identifiable individual who holds or is being considered for a position as an officer, employee or agent of the regional district or another position appointed by the regional district; (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district; (g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; IFC - 3

4 Intergovernment and Finance Committee Regular Agenda September 14, 2016 Agenda Page 4 of 4 (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose. 10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of September 14, Membership: Louie, Raymond (C) Vancouver Moore, Greg (VC) Port Coquitlam Brodie, Malcolm Richmond Clay, Mike Port Moody Corrigan, Derek Burnaby Deal, Heather Vancouver Mussatto, Darrell North Vancouver City Steele, Barbara Surrey Stewart, Richard - Coquitlam Walton, Richard North Vancouver District IFC - 4

5 2.1 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Intergovernment and Finance Committee held at 1:02 p.m. on Wednesday, July 20, 2016 in the 2 nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Councillor Raymond Louie, Vancouver Vice Chair, Mayor Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Mayor Mike Clay, Port Moody Mayor Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Mayor Richard Walton, North Vancouver District MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Councillor Heather Deal, Vancouver Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey Mayor Richard Stewart, Coquitlam STAFF PRESENT: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1.1 July 20, 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the revised agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for July 20, 2016 as circulated. CARRIED 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES 2.1 June 17, 2016 Regular Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held June 17, 2016 as circulated. CARRIED Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Wednesday, July 20, 2016 Page 1 of 5 IFC - 5

6 3. DELEGATIONS No items presented. 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented. Agenda Varied The order of the agenda was varied to consider a resolution to close the meeting at this point. 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for July 20, 2016 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e), (i), and (k) as follows: 90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district; (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; and (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 Adjournment The Intergovernment and Finance Committee adjourned its regular meeting at 1:03 p.m. to go into a closed meeting. Reconvene The Intergovernment and Finance Committee reconvened its regular meeting at 2:23 p.m. with the following members being in attendance: MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Councillor Raymond Louie, Vancouver Vice Chair, Mayor Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Mayor Mike Clay, Port Moody Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Councillor Heather Deal, Vancouver Mayor Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Mayor Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Mayor Richard Walton, North Vancouver District Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Wednesday, July 20, 2016 Page 2 of 5 IFC - 6

7 MEMBERS ABSENT: Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF 5.1 Rivershed Society of BC Request for Funding FraserFEST 2016 On-table report dated July 18, 2016 from Mitch Sokalski, Regional Parks Director, seeking GVRD Board approval for a sponsorship request in the amount of $5,000 from the Rivershed Society of BC for the FraserFEST 2016 event, and seeking direction to staff to report back with recommendations on addressing multi-year sponsorship requests as part of the Board Sponsorship Policy. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board: a) approve a $5,000 sponsorship contribution to the Rivershed Society of BC in support of the hosting of the 2016 FraserFEST; and b) direct staff to review the Board Sponsorship Policy to review the implications of receiving annual requests for sponsorship funding and report back to the Board with recommendations on how to address multi-year sponsorship requests. CARRIED 5.2 Metro Vancouver Five Year Financial Plan Framework for 2017 to 2021 Report dated July 13, 2016 from Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer, and Phil Trotzuk, Chief Financial Officer, presenting an outline of the 5-Year Financial Plan Framework for the preparation of the 2017 to 2021 Plan. Members suggested that consideration be given to presenting the Plan to all elected officials in the region, in a sub-regional format, after the Board considers the matter. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board receive for information the report dated July 13, 2016, titled Metro Vancouver s Five Year Financial Plan Framework for 2017 to CARRIED 5.3 Remuneration Bylaw Report dated July 6, 2016 from Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer, seeking GVRD Board consideration of amendments to the Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 to respond to changes in the Local Government Act and to clarify provisions associated with remuneration. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Wednesday, July 20, 2016 Page 3 of 5 IFC - 7

8 6. INFORMATION ITEMS It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board: a) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, 2016; and b) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, CARRIED 6.4 Correspondence re Metro Vancouver s Assessment of the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project incoming from the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure dated July 13, 2016 Members expressed concern about inaccuracies in the correspondence related to financial and utility impacts to Metro Vancouver resulting from the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive for information the following Information Items: 6.1 Intergovernment and Finance Committee Work Plan Update 6.2 Report titled Regional Industrial Lands Initiative dated April 15, Federal Review on Improving Environmental and Regulatory Processes Questionnaire 6.4 Correspondence re Metro Vancouver s Assessment of the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project incoming from the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure dated July 13, 2016 CARRIED Request of Staff Staff was requested to forward the following Information Item to the July 29, 2016 GVRD Board meeting for receipt of a staff presentation: 6.2 Report titled Regional Industrial Lands Initiative dated April 15, OTHER BUSINESS No items presented. 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS No items presented. 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING This item was previously considered. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Wednesday, July 20, 2016 Page 4 of 5 IFC - 8

9 10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee conclude its regular meeting of July 20, CARRIED (Time: 2:40 p.m.) Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees Raymond Louie, Chair FINAL Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Intergovernment and Finance Committee held on Wednesday, July 20, 2016 Page 5 of 5 IFC - 9

10 5.1 To: From: Intergovernment and Finance Committee Elisa Campbell, Director, Regional Planning & Electoral Area Services, Parks, Planning and Environment, and Tom Lancaster, Division Manager, Planning & Analytics, Parks, Planning and Environment Date: September 2, 2016 Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Subject: 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board: a. Approve funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund for the following projects proposed by TransLink in its Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund, as attached to the report dated September 2, 2016, titled 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund : i. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $4,674,000; ii. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,560,000; iii. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,500,000; iv. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,830,000; v. Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases $5,013,000; vi. Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases $5,605,000; vii. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $28,500,000; viii. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $11,700,000; and, ix. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $60,800,000. b. Send a letter to the TransLink Board communicating the importance of considering environmentally sustainable alternative approaches for technologies for its fleet, consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy and regional environmental objectives. PURPOSE This report provides the GVRD Board with the opportunity to consider TransLink s request for funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) for nine projects, as described in TransLink s Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (Attachment). BACKGROUND On May 27, 2016, the GVRD Board adopted the Federal Gas Tax Fund Expenditures Policy (GVRF Policy). The GVRF Policy establishes the criteria and process for approving expenditures from the Federal Gas Tax Fund - Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) for eligible regional transportation projects proposed by the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (TransLink). As laid out in the GVRF Policy, if TransLink desires expenditures from the GVRF for transportation projects, an application must be submitted to Metro Vancouver according to the format set out in the Federal Gas Tax Fund - Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Application Guide (Application Guide) IFC - 9-1

11 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 2 of 12 The GVRD Board will announce its decisions by September 30 of each year, and will notify the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) of the projects that it has approved for funding within seven business days of the decision. The UBCM holds the GVRF monies in trust, and may not transfer funds to TransLink for eligible projects until it has received an approved list from the GVRD Board On September 6, 2016, Metro Vancouver received an application from TransLink proposing nine projects for which expenditures from the GVRF are requested. The application reflects discussion between TransLink staff and Metro Vancouver staff, and underwent numerous revisions prior to being submitted. TransLink s Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund requests expenditures from the GVRF totaling $127,182,000, to be applied to nine projects. The application, along with a brief analysis by Metro Vancouver staff, is being conveyed to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee and the GVRD Board for consideration. FEDERAL GAS TAX ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT A renewed ten-year gas tax agreement, the Administrative Agreement on Federal Gas Tax Fund in British Columbia (the 2014 Agreement), came into effect in April 2014, and extends the Federal Gas Tax Fund to It provides the framework for the delivery of federal funding to BC municipalities to help build and revitalize public infrastructure. The 2014 Agreement sets out the following: The Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) pools 95% of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) and its member municipalities per capita allocation of gas tax funds to support regional transportation projects proposed and delivered by the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (TransLink). The GVRD Board must approve all eligible projects proposed by TransLink for funding. UBCM may not transfer monies to TransLink for eligible projects until it has received an approved list from the GVRD Board. The remaining 5% is allocated among local governments in Metro Vancouver through the Community Works Fund. Requests for new projects, amendments to the scope of prior approved projects, and use of approved but unspent funds for other projects must receive approval from the GVRD Board. Metro Vancouver s GVRF Policy sets out the criteria and process through which TransLink is to request funding from the GVRF. One of the criterion of the GVRF application is that TransLink must include an approved Capital Program to facilitate a better understanding of the broader strategic framework within which specific projects are situated. TransLink cannot operate outside of its approved long-term strategy and investment plan, which is currently the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook (2014 Base Plan), adopted in 2013.The 2014 Base Plan identifies the strategic initiatives, programs, investments, and services that the regional transportation authority intends to pursue from 2014 through 2016 while drawing only on established funding resources. An outlook period is also included to identify services TransLink plans to provide and the major capital projects TransLink intends to complete from 2017 through In accordance with legislated requirements, TransLink is currently undertaking consultation and preparing a new 10-Year Investment Plan to replace the 2014 Base Plan, which expires at the end of It is anticipated that upon adoption of the 10-Year Investment Plan, TransLink will move quickly to submit an additional application for GVRF funding for expansion-related expenses consistent with the 10-Year Investment Plan. IFC - 9-2

12 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 3 of 12 On August 16, 2016, a draft application to the GVRF was submitted by TransLink to Metro Vancouver staff pursuant to the GVRF Policy. In response to questions and comments from Metro Vancouver staff, TransLink submitted a final application package on September 2, This iterative process was anticipated by the GVRF Policy, particularly during the first experiences of implementation. In order to receive monies from the GVRF following approval by the GVRD Board, the UBCM and TransLink must sign an Administrative Agreement. The two agencies are currently working together on this, and it is anticipated that a signed Administrative Agreement will be in place by the end of September TRANSLINK S APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDING FROM THE GVRF TransLink s application requests $127,182,000 in funding from the GVRF for nine projects, all of which are for transit vehicle purchases to replace existing vehicles. Because TransLink cannot operate outside of the approved 2014 Base Plan, the request for funding is only for purchases needed through to the end of As detailed below, funding is requested for: 24 x 2015 community shuttle vehicles; 20 x 2016 community shuttle vehicles; 20 x 2017 community shuttle vehicles; 35 x 2017 HandyDART vehicles; 40 x 2018 HandyDART vehicles; 238 conventional buses. Project # Vehicles Total Cost ($ millions) Prior Approved GVRF Funding ($ millions) 2016 GVRF Funding Request ($ millions) Community Shuttle 24 gasoline vehicles Vehicle Purchases Community Shuttle 20 gasoline vehicles Vehicle Purchases Community Shuttle 20 gasoline vehicles Vehicle Purchases Community Shuttle 20 gasoline vehicles Vehicle Purchases HandyDART 35 gasoline vehicles Vehicle Purchases HandyDART 40 gasoline vehicles Vehicle Purchases Conventional Bus ft diesel buses Purchases Conventional Bus ft CNG buses Purchases (additional funding) ft diesel buses Conventional Bus Purchases ft CNG buses ft diesel buses Total 397 vehicles IFC - 9-3

13 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 4 of 12 Application Summary TransLink s Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (Attachment) contains the detailed application information and addresses evaluation criteria required in accordance with the GVRF Policy. To assist the Committee in reviewing the TransLink application, Metro Vancouver staff have summarized the application below, consistent with the template set out in the Application Guide. A. TRANSLINK CAPITAL PROGRAM AND PROJECTS IDENTIFIED FOR GVRF FUNDING Appendix A (page 6 of the Attachment) identifies TransLink s 2014 Base Plan Capital Program and Funding Sources, including a list of capital programs, budgets, expenditures, forecasted costs, other funding amounts, and planned future GVRF projects. B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN All nine projects relate to funding required to modernize vehicles in order to stay on track to maintain what is needed in a state of good repair. TransLink s 2014 Base Plan includes an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and provides a critical base for the expansion of public transportation in Metro Vancouver, as addressed by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. The nine projects for which GVRF funding is requested support the Mayors Council Vision by contributing to a reliable and well-maintained fleet for existing services. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be able to support maintenance of the transit system. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Executive Summary Projects 1 to 4 (Community Shuttle Purchases Projects) TransLink s Community Shuttle service began in 2001 and has expanded steadily over the years. Currently, the Community Shuttle fleet comprises approximately 11% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet and totals 193 vehicles. Projects 1-4 propose to replace 24 diesel-powered community shuttle vehicles that have reached the end of their useful service lives, with 24 new gas-powered vehicles. The vehicles are currently operated by Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) out of the Surrey Garage. The plan is to continue operating the new vehicles at the same location. The new Community Shuttles will allow CMBC to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce pollutants. Compared to the vehicles being retired, the new vehicles are expected to have a 64% reduction in CAC emissions and 10% reduction in GHG emissions. IFC - 9-4

14 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 5 of 12 The Community Shuttle fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 24 new Community Shuttles to be gas-powered. The new gas-powered vehicles have a shorter useful life of 5 years/320,000 km, as opposed to the retiring diesel-powered vehicles, 7 years/450,000 km. However, as explained in the TransLink application, gas-powered vehicles are preferred over the diesel vehicles for the following reasons: cheaper to purchase built on a less expensive van chassis, as opposed to a truck chassis more fuel efficient lower GHG and Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions less expensive to maintain Projects 5 and 6 (HandyDart Purchases Projects) TransLink owns 306 HandyDART vehicles, constituting 17% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet. HandyDART buses are operated and maintained by TransLink s contractors MVT Canadian Bus Inc. and Nat s Repair. These vehicles provide a valuable service to people with disabilities and are booked through a reservation system, with each vehicle being able to accommodate up to 2 wheelchairs. Projects 5 and 6 seek to replace 35 HandyDART buses (18 microbuses, 10 midibuses and 7 minibuses) that have reached the end of service life and have met criteria for replacement, with 35 new buses consisting of 27 microbuses and 8 midibuses. These vehicles must be replaced when they reach end of service life, because maintenance costs and down time will increase substantially, affecting provision of reliable passenger service. By 2017, major components (e.g. engine, transmission), minor components (e.g. air conditioning, wheelchair lift), and chassis and body (e.g. cracked frames, rusted doorframes, floors rotting) will be worn out. From a previous project experience in 2004, when buses were delivered 4-8 months late, road calls (i.e. call-outs for immediate service while the bus was on the road) increased by 33%, averaged across the fleet. As stated in TransLink s application, the new vehicles will have the following benefits: allow CMBC to maintain existing service reduce downtime avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs reduce pollutants The fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink for HandyDART vehicles include gas and diesel. Compared to retiring vehicles, it is noted that the 35 new vehicles are expected to have a 64% reduction in CAC emissions and 10% reduction in GHG emissions. Additionally, all of the new gas powered vehicles use a General Motors (GM) van chassis and power train as opposed to the older vehicles which were a mix of the GM as well as some Ford the GM van chassis and power train are far more durable and less costly to maintain. The vehicles using the GM van chassis also utilize a body that is less prone to familiar problems with plywood floors and door frames, which has led to the life expectancy of micro and midi buses increasing from previously expected figures of 6 years and 200,000 km. IFC - 9-5

15 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 6 of 12 Projects 7 to 9 (Conventional Bus Purchases Projects) TransLink has 1,345 conventional 40-foot and 60-foot buses in its fleet. TransLink is requesting funding to cover the replacement of foot diesel-powered conventional buses in TransLink is also requesting additional funding to cover the revised project budget for the purchase of foot CNG-powered and foot diesel-powered conventional buses in Finally, TransLink is requesting funding to purchase foot CNG-powered and foot dieselpowered buses in All of the buses for which funding is requested are to replace buses that need to be retired. The new buses will allow for existing service to be maintained, will avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and will reduce environmental pollutants. Supporting Information A Shift to Gasoline Community Shuttles and HandyDART Vehicles TransLink began introducing gasoline vehicles into the Community Shuttle and HandyDART fleet in As of 2014, all new Community Shuttles are gasoline powered; 2016 is the first year that all new HandyDART vehicles are gasoline powered. Currently, the Community Shuttle fleet comprises 124 gasoline shuttles and 72 diesel shuttles; the HandyDART fleet comprises 115 gasoline vehicles and 194 diesel vehicles. In the early 2000 s, the diesel engine was the preferred choice for its high fuel efficiency. According to TransLink staff, succeeding generations of diesel engines became more expensive to purchase and maintain with the addition of diesel particulate filters, cooled exhaust gas recirculation, and ureabased control systems. In contrast, gasoline engines have over the past 15 years become more fuel efficient and durable. Gasoline shuttles are based on a lighter-weight van chassis, which has shown to be more fuel efficient on higher speed suburban transit routes (but less so on more urban and slower speed routes). TransLink forecasts fuel consumption to be very similar between the two engine types with the added benefit that gasoline releases less carbon by volume. Overall, diesel shuttles are 50 percent more expensive than gasoline shuttles. Also, according to TransLink staff, the gasoline vehicles offer passengers a quieter and smoother ride, and fewer steps to enter and exit the vehicle. TransLink does not foresee compressed natural gas (CNG) to be an option for shuttles because the van chassis does not have surplus weight capacity or room to carry the extra bulk of high pressure CNG tanks. Moreover, the shuttles are relatively fuel efficient already so that any incremental fuel savings would not offset the incremental cost of the CNG equipment. Optimizing Vehicle Choice and Service Allocation TransLink will assign the new conventional buses to transit centres based on intended service characteristics, terrain, and fueling capabilities. For project 7, the 40 x 40-ft diesel buses will be deployed out of the West Vancouver Transit Centre and Richmond Transit Centre. Diesel-electric hybrid buses are not suitable for the steep hills of the North Shore nor the higher operating speeds in Richmond. Also, neither transit centres have CNG fueling infrastructure. For project 8, the ft CNG buses will be deployed out of the Surrey Transit Centre, which is being retrofitted for CNG fueling infrastructure, and the ft diesel buses will be deployed out of the Burnaby Transit Centre and Richmond Transit Centres. According to TransLink staff, there remain unresolved engineering issues specific to installing CNG engines on 60-ft buses. Finally, for project 9, the ft CNG buses will be deployed out of Surrey Transit Centre and the ft diesel highway buses will deployed out of the Richmond Transit Centre. Only 75 of the projects 7-9 vehicles are for the replacement of highway IFC - 9-6

16 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 7 of 12 coaches and these are all for project 9. All remaining replacement vehicles in projects 7, 8, 9 are replacement urban transit buses. 3. Project Need (Projects 1-9) Translink has stated that the objectives are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will reduce CAC and GHG emissions through the use of modernized vehicles with better fuel efficiency. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility, improved service reliability and reduced bus fleet emissions. 4. Project Eligibility (Projects 1-9) All nine projects are for Public Transit. 5. Project Purpose (Projects 1-9) Funding for all nine projects is to replace and modernize assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. 6. Project Type (Projects 1-9) All nine projects are Maintenance projects. 7. Project Staging Project # Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Project # Yes/No 1 Yes 2 No 3 No 4 No 5 No 6 No Year(s) of End of Service IFC - 9-7

17 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 8 of 12 7 Yes 8 Yes 9 No 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Project # Yes/No 1 No 2 No 3 No 4 No 5 No 6 No 7 No 8 No 9 No 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? Project # Yes/No 1 No 2 No 3 No 4 No 5 No 6 No 7 No 8 No 9 No METRO VANCOUVER STAFF ANALYSIS TransLink has provided responses to all of the application information requirements, including project description and the evaluation criteria. TransLink s application sets out for each project the eligible project category, eligible expenses, and consistency with established plans and TransLink corporate policies. It should be noted that even though the 10-Year Investment Plan box is checked, it is actually the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook that applies for this application. Because all of the projects are transit vehicle replacements, Metro Vancouver staff have evaluated them as a whole. Transit capacity and service levels are not expected to change with the replacement of aging transit vehicles. To the degree that these replacement vehicles maintain transit service levels while incrementally reducing tailpipe emissions, pre-empting costly maintenance expenses, reducing the likelihood of inconvenient breakdowns, and improving the customer experience, the projects warrant scores of good to excellent for all criteria, as noted in the table below. IFC - 9-8

18 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 9 of 12 In future applications, GVRD staff recommends that TransLink develop detailed metrics of transportation outcomes, tailpipe emissions, and economic effects the quantification and monitoring of project-specific performance are important ways of demonstrating value for money. Evaluation Criteria Summary The projects do not improve frequencies or expand the regional transit network, but do reduce emissions incrementally and maintain existing levels of service. The projects maintain current levels of service within and to/from Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. There are no incremental reductions in passenger vehicle kilometers travelled or shifts from non-auto modes. There are no incremental changes to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety. The investments demonstrate value for money for the purposes of maintaining the overall transit rolling stock in a state of good repair. The shift from aging diesel to new gasoline Community Shuttles and HandyDART vehicles will likely yield per unit reductions in particulates, nitrogen oxides, and greenhouse gas emissions. The projects maintain current levels of service. New vehicles will likely incur fewer reliability problems compared to the aging stock. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation YES Public transit Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C). YES Plan Consistency Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital YES Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies YES such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions, and infrastructure. INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy Supports the Regional The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five Good Growth Strategy goals in Metro Urban Centres and Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates Good Frequent Transit Development Areas tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Transportation Performance Headline Targets Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres Good Other Transportation Outcomes travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. Good Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). Good IFC - 9-9

19 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 10 of 12 Criterion Description Assessment Regional Environmental Objectives Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Supports Regional Prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. Excellent Good Good ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board: a. Approve funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund for the following projects proposed by TransLink in its Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund, as attached to the report dated September 2, 2016, titled 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund : i. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $4,674,000; ii. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,560,000; iii. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,500,000; iv. Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases $3,830,000; v. Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases $5,013,000; vi. Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases $5,605,000; vii. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $28,500,000; viii. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $11,700,000; and, ix. Project Conventional Bus Purchases $60,800,000. b. Send a letter to the TransLink Board communicating the importance of considering environmentally sustainable alternative approaches for technologies for its fleet, consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy and regional environmental objectives. 2. That the GVRD Board endorse in principle the report dated September 2, 2016, titled 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund and refer it to the Mayors Council for comment prior to final consideration by the GVRD Board. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves alternative one, the UBCM will be notified within 7 business days of the Board s decision that the GVRD has approved project funding. The GVRF funds under the 2014 Agreement are housed in a special account administered by the UBCM and will only be released to TransLink upon receiving notification from the GVRD Board that the proposed projects have been approved and that an Administrative Agreement has been signed between the UBCM and TransLink. Funds received by TransLink from UBCM under the previous Agreement reside in a dedicated account at TransLink. IFC

20 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 11 of 12 There is currently $ million available to TransLink from the GVRF. This includes $26.46 million in interest earned on funds received by TransLink between as part of the previous Federal Gas Tax agreement, $28.5 million in excess funds returned to the TransLink GVRF account from active projects, and $ million in funds that are still held by UBCM as a result of the lack of approved expenditures from the GVRF since the 2014 Agreement was signed. Metro Vancouver staff time required for the administration and evaluation of TransLink applications is currently managed through the 2016 Board-approved Regional Planning budget. There are no other direct financial implications for the GVRD. Under alternative one, staff propose that a letter be sent to the TransLink Board communicating the importance of exploring environmentally sustainable alternative approaches for technology within its fleet, particularly for future funding applications that will align with the proposed 10-Year Investment Plan. Under alternative two, the Metro Vancouver report and recommendations, along with the TransLink Gas Tax Application for funding, would be forwarded to the Mayors Council for comment prior to consideration by the GVRD Board. This would enable the GVRD Board to receive the evaluation of the Mayors Council regarding the proposed projects within the context of the Mayors Council Vision for transportation in the region. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The GVRD Board s Federal Gas Tax Fund Expenditures Policy establishes the criteria and process for approving expenditures from the Federal Gas Tax Fund - Greater Vancouver Regional Fund as a source of predictable, long-term funding for building and revitalizing eligible regional transportation projects proposed by TransLink. As laid out in the GVRF Policy, if TransLink desires expenditures from the GVRF for transportation projects, an application must be submitted to Metro Vancouver according to the format set out in the Federal Gas Tax Fund - Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Application Guide. TransLink submitted a final application package to Metro Vancouver on September 2, 2016 requesting $ million from the GVRF to fund the replacement of 84 Community Shuttles, 75 HandyDART vehicles, and 238 conventional buses investments consistent with the capital program of the 2014 Base Plan and Outlook. All of the new Community Shuttles and HandyDART vehicles will be gasoline powered, reflecting a trend in the Canadian and American transit industries toward such technology due to gasoline vehicles having lower capital and maintenance costs compared to diesel models. The conventional buses are a mix of diesel and compressed natural gas (CNG) buses. TransLink will assign these buses to transit depots and transit routes that best match the technology to the service characteristics (highway, urban), terrain (flat, hilly), and fueling infrastructure (CNG fueling infrastructure is available at a limited number of transit centres). The projects for which TransLink has requested funding from the GVRF have been submitted in the context of the current approved 2014 Base Plan and do not reflect projects identified in the TransLink Mayors Council Vision and forthcoming 10-Year Investment Plan. TransLink is not permitted to operate outside of the 2014 Base Plan until the new 10-Year Investment Plan has been adopted. Consequently, all nine projects proposed are oriented towards modernizing vehicles in order to maintain assets in a state of good repair critical to the success of the expansion of public transit in Metro Vancouver. IFC

21 2016 TransLink Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 12 of 12 While transit capacity and service levels are not expected to change with the replacement of aging transit vehicles, to the degree that the proposed replacement vehicles maintain transit service levels while incrementally reducing tailpipe emissions, pre-empting costly maintenance expenses, reducing the likelihood of inconvenient breakdowns, and improving the customer experience, the projects warrant scores of good to excellent for all evaluation criteria established by Metro Vancouver s GVRF Policy. Given the current constraints in the delivery of public transit service within the region, within which the 2014 Base Plan does not include service expansion, and TransLink s requirement to maintain the fleet in a state of good repair, staff recommend the approval of alternative one and the request that the TransLink Board explore environmentally sustainable alternative approaches for its fleet technology in the submission of future funding applications to ensure alignment with the proposed 10-Year Investment Plan. Attachment: (Orbit # ) 2016 TransLink Application IFC

22 ATTACHMENT To: From: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver Cathy McLay, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services Date: September 1,2016 Subject: Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund TransLink is requesting the Greater Vancouver Regional District (Metro Vancouver) approve $127.2 million in Federal Gas Tax Fund (FGTF) Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) to modernize vehicles. Since the FGTF program began in 2005, TransLink has received $799.5 million in funding to expand and modernise the transit network. Interest earned on funds received, which must be used for approved FGTF projects, totaled $26.5 million at June 30, The program was renewed in 2014, for another 10 years, and currently there is $382.8 million in funds available to TransLink. Metro Vancouver has specified that their portion of FGTF Funding go to public transportation, with a small amount going to the Community Works Fund, in the renewed program. Under the new program, Metro Vancouver must approve TransLink s applications for funding from the GVRF. The FGTF is administered through the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM). A summary of the funds and usage is provided below. Greater Vancouver Regional Fund In millions Funds received from UBCM $ Interest earned on funds received Funds with UBCM Total Gas Tax Funds $1, Less Funds applied to completed projects $( ) 1 Approved funds for active projects ( ) Interest allocated to projects (14.488) Add Excess funds returned from active projects Funds Available for use $ Proposed project Funding ( ) Funds Remaining $ See table of active projects with FGTF funding below 2. See table of proposed GVRF projects below 1 IFC

23 Concurrent with this application, TransLink is working with the UBCM on an Administrative Agreement, which will define the roles and responsibilities of both parties. With the Administrative Agreement in place TransLink can receive FGTF funding once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on TransLink s funding application. The terms of the Administrative Agreement will be in line with the terms of the agreement between UBCM, Canada and British Columbia. TransLink will work with UBCM to have the Administrative Agreement in place by September 2016, to align with the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision on TransLink s funding application - September 30, Subject to Metro Vancouver s approval, TransLink also requests that Metro Vancouver notify UBCM of the approved projects. This application is based on TransLink s currently approved strategic plan and aligns with the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Appendix A includes a summary of TransLink s currently approved strategic plan, the 2014 Base Plan, including the projects funded or anticipated to be funded by the GVRF, as required under the application process. Included in Appendix A is the other funding anticipated in the strategic plan. Additionally, Appendix B provides a short description of each line item in Appendix A. Active Projects The table below shows the status of active projects with FGTF funding. The total forecasted project cost for active projects is $594.0 million, with $478.8 million in FGTF funds approved for these projects. At June 30, 2016, project costs totalled $328.7 million, with $242.5 million in funds spent. Active Projects With GVRF Funding (Dollar amounts in millions) # Vehicles Forecast Final Cost Approved Funding Costs to Date Funds Spent Unspent Funds Expo Line Propulsion Power System Upgrade N/A nd SeaBus Replacement SkyTrain Mark I Vehicle Refurbishment N/A Community Shuttles Smart Cards /Bus Equipment N/A Conventional Bus Hamilton Transit Centre N/A HandyDART Vehicles HandyDART Vehicles HandyDART Vehicles Defective Community Shuttle Vehicles Replacement Conventional Bus Replacement Conventional 40' Bus Replacement Conventional 60' Bus Conventional Bus Metrotown - Trolley Overhead Rectifier Replacement N/A Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement N/A Surrey Transit Centre - CNG Facility Retrofit N/A Total IFC

24 Excess Gas Tax Funds from Active Projects TransLink has determined that some existing approved projects will have unspent FGTF funds on completion, due to a combination of reduced project costs and lower than expected eligible costs. In accordance with the Metro Vancouver s Federal Gas Tax Expenditures Policy, TransLink is returning $28.5 million in unspent funds and anticipated savings to the GVRF. The table below provides a list of projects and the amount of funds being returned. Project Excess Funds to be returned to the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Gas Tax Funding ($ Millions) Expo Line Propulsion Power System Upgrade nd SeaBus Replacement SkyTrain Mark I Vehicle Refurbishment Community Shuttles Conventional Bus Conventional Bus Replacement Conventional 40' Bus Replacement Total Once returned, these funds become available to fund other projects, as approved by Metro Vancouver. Proposed Project Funding TransLink is requesting $127.2 million for 9 projects, as shown in the table below. The projects are consistent with the 2014 Base Plan and Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, with some changes in vehicle quantities and costs, to reflect current asset assessment, pricing variation (largely tied to changes in the exchange rate), and service changes to improve efficiency of the bus network. Detailed project descriptions are included in Appendix C. TransLink is currently working with Mayors Council on the development of a new strategic Plan to replace the 2014 Base Plan. Should the Investment Plan that is approved include service expansion, TransLink anticipates making an application for further GVRF funds soon afterwards, outside of the annual application process. 3 IFC

25 Greater Vancouver Regional Fund TransLink Proposed Projects No. of Vehicles (if applicable) Total Costs ($ millions) Gas Tax Funding ($ Millions) 2015 Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases HandyDART Vehicle Purchases HandyDART vehicle Purcahses Conventional Bus Purchases Conventional Bus Purchases - Additional funding Conventional Bus Purchases Total The projects outlined in this request will put TransLink on track to maintain its vehicles in a state of good repair through In 2015, TransLink deferred the modernization of 24 community shuttle vehicles in order to allow for the replacement of 62 defective vehicles. This application includes the purchase of the vehicles, as well as the purchase of and vehicles, all of which should be ordered during The 2018 community shuttles will be included in TransLink s 2017 budget, currently in development, and these vehicles should be ordered in TransLink will provide an update on the 62 defective vehicles once a resolution to the issue has been finalized. TransLink also has the need to order 35 HandyDART vehicles in 2016, for service in The 2017 budget will include the purchase of 40 HandyDART vehicles, for service in During 2016, TransLink has a requirement to purchase 111 conventional buses to modernize vehicles reaching the end of their useful service lives. TransLink has received partial funding for 71 of these 111 vehicles, through previous applications. At the time of those applications, it was determined that future funding would be used to purchase the 40 remaining 2016 conventional buses, in order to divert funding to other priority projects. The projects which were prioritized ahead of the conventional buses were the West Coast Express Rail Car Lease Buyout, Metrotown Trolley Overhead Rectifier Replacement, Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement and the Surrey Transit Centre CNG Facility Retrofit. However, a delay in the funding process occurred with the renewal of the FGTF program, one year prior to the end of the first agreement. The new agreement also contained a new approval process which required time to be developed. As a result, TransLink is now requesting funding for the remaining 40 conventional buses. TransLink is also requesting additional funding for the purchase of 2017 conventional buses. TransLink has already received funding of $75 million for 106 buses. At the time of the funding submission, the preliminary project cost estimate was $101.2 million; the application would have requested 90% ($91 million) in funding, but other priority projects, noted above, were 4 IFC

26 added to the application. Hence, only $75 million was applied for and received by TransLink, as part of the FGTF funding for the 2017 buses. The revised project budget is now $96.3 million; with funding capacity now available, through the new agreement, to cover the remaining eligible costs, TransLink is requesting additional funding of $11.7 million be applied towards the 2017 Conventional Bus Replacement project. The 2018 conventional bus purchases will need to be ordered in 2017; therefore, TransLink is requesting FGTF funding from the GVRF for these vehicles. These purchases will form part of the 2017 capital budget and obtaining funding approval now will ensure the timely delivery of these vehicles, which generally require 12 to 18 months lead time. Risks The Community Shuttle vehicles that were deferred in 2015 to allow for the replacement of 62 defective vehicles are already operating beyond their useful life and in need of immediate replacement. Also, the 40 additional 40-foot buses requiring replacement in 2016 will be reaching the end of their useful lives at the end of the current year. There is a 12 to 18 month lead time required for vehicle purchases. If funding is not approved for the 2015 through 2017 vehicle replacements TransLink may not have sufficient lead time to purchase these replacement vehicles. As the vehicles usage extends beyond the expected life TransLink will incur higher maintenance costs and reduced service reliability. Conclusion TransLink relies on the FGTF funding, made available through the GVRF, to maintain an ongoing program of fleet modernization. Approving these projects will provide TransLink the ability to procure the vehicles necessary to keep TransLink s revenue vehicle fleets in a state of good repair, avoid increased maintenance costs, reduce airborne pollutants and protect the reliability of the transit system. 5 IFC

27 Appendix A TransLink 2014 Base Plan Capital Program and Funding Sources 6 IFC

28 Appendix B Descriptions of items in the Capital Program TransLink 2014 Base Plan Project Summary Bus Infrastructure Trolley Overhead (TOH) Exchanges/Bus loops Other Equipment Vehicles Conventional Custom Community Shuttle SeaBus Facilities Non-Revenue Corporate Major Projects Technology Applications Vehicles Non-Revenue Infrastructure Contribution MRNB TL-BICCS Project Descriptions Includes projects related to maintenance of infrastructure related to the trolley buses such as cables, poles and rectifier buildings and equipment. Various repairs and replacements to keep the exchanges/bus loops in a state of good repair. For example, replacement of lighting and security equipment, shelters and crew washroom facilities. Includes general projects related to bus infrastructure such as maintenance and rehabilitation of SeaBus and other facilities and paving replacement. A wide variety of equipment required to maintain and manage TransLink s systems related to the bus network. Examples include fuel delivery system, scheduling, warehouse and yard management systems etc. Fleet modernization of conventional buses to support maintenance of the transit system and realize benefits such as reduced congestion and emissions. Fleet modernization of HandyDART vehicles to support maintenance of the transit system and provide mobility to those with accessibility issues. Fleet modernization of community shuttle vehicles to support maintenance of the transit system and realize benefits such as reduced congestion and emissions. Replacement of a SeaBus vehicle reaching the end of its useful live to ensure TransLink continues to meet Transport Canada safety standards and also to reduce maintenance and repair costs associated with an ageing asset. Includes modernization of non-revenue generating vehicles used by Transit supervisors, security and maintenance staff. Includes the Hamilton Transit Centre and other projects related to mechanical and civil retrofits (including hoists) to facilities. Also includes PowerSmart upgrades partially funded by BC Hydro. Includes major projects that affect TransLink as a whole such as the Compass Card and Faregates system installation. Includes projects related to upgrades of various IT applications and systems, security programs, data warehousing etc. Includes projects related to non-revenue generating vehicles such as TransLink Police cars and administration vehicles. Consists of TransLink s contributions to municipalities for rehabilitation of the Major Road Network (MRN) and bike pathways. Includes TransLink s contribution to bicycle infrastructure programs for 7 IFC

29 TransLink 2014 Base Plan Project Summary Rail Evergreen Line Infrastructure Stations & Surroundings Wayside Power Propulsion Other Equipment Vehicles SkyTrain WCE Non-Revenue Facilities Roads & Bridges Infrastructure Pattullo Project Descriptions municipal owned pathways. TransLink s contribution to the Millennium Line s Evergreen Extension being constructed by the province. Includes projects related to upgrading SkyTrain stations consisting of station upgrades such as Metrotown station as well as minor equipment upgrades such as elevator/escalator overhauls and roof replacements to ensure assets are maintained in a state of good repair. Includes projects related to the propulsion power system for SkyTrain. Includes other rail infrastructure projects related to upgrades of guideway and running rail infrastructure and the SkyBridge. A wide variety of equipment required to maintain and manage the SkyTrain lines. Examples include power supply installations, automatic train control equipment, station equipment etc. Includes the refurbishment of Mark 1 SkyTrain cars reaching the end of their useful lives. Funding for the buyout of rail cars originally leased by TransLink. Includes projects related to non-revenue generating vehicles used by SkyTrain staff to respond to emergency and routine maintenance. Includes projects related to maintaining and upgrading the operations control centre. Included funding specific to the rehabilitation of the existing Pattullo bridge. 8 IFC

30 Appendix C Project Applications for Year-1 (2014/15) of the renewed Gas Tax Program 9 IFC

31 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases (Ref# a) 10 IFC

32 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2015 community shuttle vehicle purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision by contributing to a reliable and well-maintained fleet for existing services. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be able to support maintenance of the 11 IFC

33 transit system. This project will further support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision by reducing transit overcrowding and reducing GHG emissions. 12 IFC

34 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink s Community Shuttle service began in 2001 and has expanded steadily over the years. Currently, the Community Shuttle fleet comprises approximately 11% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet and totals 193 vehicles. 155 Community Shuttle vehicles are operated and maintained by CMBC, while the 38 remaining vehicles are operated and maintained by three contractors. Criteria for identifying vehicles due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 5 and 7 years for gas and diesel powered vehicles, respectively); Mileage (generally 320,000 and 450,000 km for gas and diesel powered vehicles, respectively); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. The criteria have changed from previous submissions with the inclusion of gas powered vehicles and the life expectancy of diesel vehicles increased from 6 to 7 years. This project is to retire 24 diesel powered vehicles, which have reached the end of their useful service lives, with 24 new gas powered vehicles. The vehicles are currently operated by Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) out of the Surrey Garage. The plan is to continue operating these vehicles at the same location. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2008 & 2009, have a median age of 7-8 years and median mileage of 500,000 km. The new vehicles to be acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 24 and 20 respectively. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This resource allocation is optimized through a continuous review and planning process. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The Community Shuttle fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 24 new Community Shuttles to be gas powered. The new gas powered vehicles have a shorter useful life of 5 years/320,000 km, as opposed to the retiring diesel powered vehicles, 7 years/450,000 km. However, gas powered vehicles are preferred over the diesel vehicles: they are cheaper to purchase, as they are built on a less expensive van chassis, as opposed to a truck chassis; they are more fuel efficient; they have lower GHG and Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions; and they are less expensive to maintain. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize TransLink s resource 13 IFC

35 allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new Community Shuttles will allow CMBC to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new vehicles are expected to have a 64% reduction in CAC emissions and 10% reduction in GHG emissions. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $4,920,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $4,674,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 14 IFC

36 2. Project Name 2015 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement (Ref# a) 3. Project Need The objectives of the project are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will reduce CAC and GHG emissions through the use of modernized vehicles, with cleaner fuel and better fuel efficiency. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, reduced vehicle downtime, improved accessibility and service reliability, and reduced shuttle fleet emissions. The vehicles currently in service are operating beyond their useful service lives, as their retirement was deferred in 2015, to allow for the replacement of 62 defective vehicles. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 15 IFC

37 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2022 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. Yes. This project was approved for Year 8 (2012/13) funding. In October 2015, TransLink requested funding for this project be cancelled to allow funds to go towards the replacement of 62 defective Community Shuttles. The change was approved by the Metro Vancouver Board on October 30, TransLink is now requesting funding to replace the vehicles that are now operating beyond their useful service lives. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. As described in Section 8, TransLink initiated a request in October 2015 to cancel funding for this project to allow funds to be directed towards replacing 62 defective Community Shuttles. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. Currently TransLink is on track to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $4,920,000 $4,920,000 $4,920,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $4,674,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 16 IFC

38 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded $4,674,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget $4,920, Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public and those who have accessibility challenges. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations. 17 IFC

39 c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. The original requirement was for TransLink to have these vehicles in service for 2015, in order to retire older vehicles reaching the end of their useful service lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have funding in place as soon as possible in order to avoid compounding delays in new vehicle deliveries. 1. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can continue operating vehicles which are already operating beyond their useful service lives; however, operating these vehicles will continue to increase incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 2. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the FGTF funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision, September 30, If this agreement is not signed within the required timeframe, the replacement of these vehicles may be delayed, further increasing maintenance costs and potentially impacting service reliability. d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations, as parts are procured from the US, and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new vehicles being gas powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by the manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. 18 IFC

40 In order to ensure the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time, TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 19 IFC

41 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 24 Community Shuttle vehicles $4,574,000 On-board equipment 153,600 Related debt financing charges 16,840 Total $4,744,440 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required 20 IFC

42 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Community Shuttles provide service to communities located outside of major bus routes and hubs, and offers an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. These vehicles transport passengers to urban centres and frequent transit networks (FTNs) to connect remote communities to populous destinations. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 21 IFC

43 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles will reduce emissions in the following ways: due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions; as the new vehicles will be built on a lighter van chassis, as opposed to a truck chassis, they will be quieter; and the lighter gasoline vehicle fuel efficiency is expected to be the same as the diesel vehicle and since gasoline has less carbon by volume than diesel, GHGs should be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 10% reduction in GHG emissions 64% reduction in CAC emissions 1-2 decibels reduction in noise emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the Community Shuttle fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the regional transportation system, by offering reliable service to more remote communities not close to conventional bus routes and/or hubs. Passengers will have better access to populous destinations for work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for the Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 22 IFC

44 movement of workers and goods. 23 IFC

45 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases (Ref# ) 24 IFC

46 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2016 community shuttle vehicle purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to 25 IFC

47 keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization TransLink will be able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 26 IFC

48 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink s Community Shuttle service began in 2001 and has expanded steadily over the years. Currently, the shuttle fleet comprises approximately 11% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet and totals 193 vehicles. 155 Community Shuttle vehicles are operated and maintained by CMBC, while the 38 remaining vehicles are operated and maintained by three contractors. Criteria for identifying vehicles due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 5 and 7 years for gas and diesel powered shuttles, respectively); Mileage (generally 320,000 and 450,000 km for gas and diesel powered shuttles, respectively); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. The criteria have changed from previous submissions with the inclusion of gas powered vehicles and the life expectance of diesel vehicles increased from 6 to 7 years. This project is to retire 20 diesel powered Community Shuttles, which will reach the end of their useful service lives in 2016, with 20 new gas powered Community Shuttles. The vehicles are operated by Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) out of the Surrey Garage (17), and First Canada ULC in Langley (3). The plan is to allocate new vehicles on a one-to-one basis with retiring vehicles at each noted location. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2008 & 2009, have a median age of 7-8 years and median mileage of 500,000 km. The new vehicles will have a person and seat capacity of 24 and 20 respectively. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This resource allocation is optimized through a continuous review and planning process. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The Community Shuttle fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 24 new community shuttles to be gas powered. The new gas powered shuttles have a shorter useful life of 5 years/320,000 km, as opposed to the retiring diesel powered shuttles - 7 years/450,000 km. However, gas powered shuttles are preferred over the diesel shuttles: they are cheaper to purchase, as they are built on a less expensive van chassis, as opposed to a truck chassis; they are more fuel efficient; they have lower GHG and Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions; and they are less expensive to maintain. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize TransLink s resource 27 IFC

49 allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new vehicles will allow CMBC to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new vehicles are expected to have a 64% reduction in CAC emissions and 10% reduction in GHG emissions. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $4,200,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $3,560,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 28 IFC

50 2. Project Name 2016 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives of the project are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will reduce CAC and GHG emissions through the use of modernized vehicles, with cleaner fuel and better fuel efficiency. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, reduced vehicle downtime, improved accessibility and service reliability, and reduced shuttle fleet emissions. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 29 IFC

51 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2022 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $4,200,000 $0 $4,200,000 $4,200,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $3,560,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 30 IFC

52 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded 3,560,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget 3,975, , Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public and those who have accessibility challenges. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations 31 IFC

53 c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. The original requirement was for TransLink to have these shuttles in service for 2016 in order to retire older shuttles reaching the end of their useful service lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have funding in place as soon as possible in order to avoid compounding delays in new vehicle deliveries. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, If this agreement is not signed within the required timeframe, the replacement of these vehicles may be delayed, further increasing maintenance costs and potentially impacting service reliability. d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new Community Shuttles being gas powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. Also, some of the shuttles are operated and maintained by contractors, who may lack the necessary infrastructure and resources to support a change in technology. g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts 32 IFC

54 pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 33 IFC

55 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 20 Community Shuttle vehicles $3,926,000 On-board equipment 132,000 Related debt financing charges 10,520 Total $4,068,520 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required 34 IFC

56 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Community Shuttles provide service to communities located outside of major bus routes and hubs, and offers an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. These shuttles transport passengers to urban centres and frequent transit networks (FTNs) to connect remote communities to populous destinations. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 35 IFC

57 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles will reduce emissions in the following ways: due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions; as the new vehicles will be built on a lighter van chassis, as opposed to a truck chassis, they will be quieter; and the lighter gasoline vehicle fuel efficiency is expected to be the same as the diesel vehicle and since gasoline has less carbon by volume than diesel, GHGs should be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 10% reduction in GHG emissions 64% reduction in CAC emissions 1-2 decibels reduction in noise emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the Community Shuttle fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the regional transportation system, by offering reliable service to more remote communities not close to conventional bus routes and/or hubs. Passengers will have better access to populous destinations for work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New community shuttles will provide improved reliability of the bus fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 36 IFC

58 the movement of workers and goods. 37 IFC

59 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases (Ref# ) 38 IFC

60 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2017 community shuttle vehicle purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from 39 IFC

61 the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 40 IFC

62 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink s Community Shuttle service began in 2001 and has expanded steadily over the years. Currently, the shuttle fleet comprises approximately 11% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet and totals 193 vehicles. 155 Community Shuttle vehicles are operated and maintained by CMBC, while the 38 remaining vehicles are operated and maintained by three contractors. Criteria for identifying vehicles due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 5 and 7 years for gas and diesel powered vehicles, respectively); Mileage (generally 320,000 and 450,000 km for gas and diesel powered vehicles, respectively); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. The criteria have changed from previous submissions with the inclusion of gas powered vehicles and the life expectance of diesel vehicles increased from 6 to 7 years. This project is to retire 20 gas powered Community Shuttles, which will reach the end of their useful service lives in 2017, with 20 new gas powered Community Shuttles. The vehicles are operated by third party contractors in New Westminster, Langley and Bowen Island. The plan is to allocate new vehicles on a one-to-one basis with retiring vehicles. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2012, have a median age of 4 years and median mileage of 220,000 km. Mileage is expected to be in line with the above retirement criteria at the time of their planned retirement. The new vehicles will have a person and seat capacity of 24 and 20 respectively. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This resource allocation is optimized through a continuous review and planning process. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 20 new community vehicles to be gas powered. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize TransLink s resource allocation. 41 IFC

63 Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new Community Shuttles will allow Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and provide modest reductions in GHG emissions in the shuttle fleet. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $4,189,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $3,500,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 42 IFC

64 2. Project Name 2017 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives of the project are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will provide modest reductions in GHG emissions in the shuttle fleet. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility and improved service reliability. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2022 Year(s) of End of Service 43 IFC

65 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $4,189,000 $0 $4,189,000 $4,189,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $3,500,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded 3,400, ,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget 3,770, , IFC

66 12. Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a modest reduction in the shuttle fleet s GHG emissions and maintains Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. TransLink requires these vehicles to be in service for 2017 in order to retire vehicles reaching the end of their useful service lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 45 IFC

67 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, If this agreement is not signed within the required timeframe, the replacement of these vehicles may be delayed, further increasing maintenance costs and potentially impacting service reliability. d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new Community Shuttles being gas powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. TransLink would also need to consider that these vehicles are operated and maintained by contractors who may not be able to support fueling or maintenance for a change in propulsion technology. 46 IFC

68 g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 47 IFC

69 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment Screening Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 20 Community Shuttle vehicles $3,685,000 On-board equipment 228,000 Related debt financing charges 9,600 Total $3,922,600 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required 48 IFC

70 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Community Shuttles provide service to communities located outside of major bus routes and hubs, and offers an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. These vehicles transport passengers to urban centres and frequent transit networks (FTNs) to connect remote communities to populous destinations. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 49 IFC

71 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Replacing older gas vehicles with new gas vehicles will maintain the shuttle fleet s fuel efficiency and provide modest improvements in emissions. Since the retiring vehicles are reaching the end of their useful service lives, if they were to remain in service, their ageing engines would become increasingly more difficult to maintain potentially resulting in lower fuel efficiency and higher emissions. Poor/Good/ Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from acquiring newer vehicles include less than a 3% reduction in GHG emissions, and maintain current CAC emissions. Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the Community Shuttle fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the regional transportation system, by offering reliable service to more remote communities not close to conventional bus routes and/or hubs. Passengers will have better access to populous destinations for work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for the movement of workers and goods. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 50 IFC

72 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases (Ref# ) 51 IFC

73 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2018 community shuttle vehicle purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to 52 IFC

74 keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 53 IFC

75 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink s Community Shuttle service began in 2001 and has expanded steadily over the years. Currently, the shuttle fleet comprises approximately 11% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet and totals 193 vehicles. 155 Community Shuttle vehicles are operated and maintained by CMBC, while the 38 remaining vehicles are operated and maintained by three contractors. Criteria for identifying vehicles due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 5 and 7 years for gas and diesel powered vehicles, respectively); Mileage (generally 320,000 and 450,000 km for gas and diesel powered vehicles, respectively); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. The criteria have changed from previous submissions with the inclusion of gas powered vehicles and the life expectance of diesel vehicles increased from 6 to 7 years. This project is to retire 20 gas powered Community Shuttles, which will reach the end of their useful service lives in 2018, with 20 new gas powered Community Shuttles. The vehicles are operated by First Canada ULC, in New Westminster and Langley, and West Vancouver Transit. The plan is to allocate new vehicles on a one-to-one basis with retiring vehicles. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2013, have a median age of 3 years and median mileage of 180,000 km. Mileage is expected to be in line with the above criteria at replacement. The new vehicles to be acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 24 and 20 respectively. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This resource allocation is optimized through a continuous review and planning process. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 20 new community vehicles to be gas powered. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize TransLink s resource allocation. 54 IFC

76 Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new Community Shuttles will allow Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and provide modest reductions in GHG emissions in the shuttle fleet. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $4,200,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $3,830,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 55 IFC

77 2. Project Name 2018 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives of the project are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate.. In addition, the project will provide modest reductions in GHG emissions in the shuttle fleet. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility and improved service reliability. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2023 Year(s) of End of Service 56 IFC

78 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $4,200,000 $0 $4,200,000 $4,200,0000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $3,830,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded 3,590, ,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget 3,780, , IFC

79 12. Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a modest reduction in the shuttle fleet s GHG emissions and maintains Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. TransLink requires these vehicles to be in service for 2017 in order to retire vehicles reaching the end of their useful service lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 58 IFC

80 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new Community Shuttles being gas powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. TransLink would also need to consider that some of these vehicles are operated and maintained by contractors who may not be able to support fueling or maintenance for a change in propulsion technology. 59 IFC

81 g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 60 IFC

82 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment Screening Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 20 Community Shuttle vehicles $3,650,000 On-board equipment 200,000 Related debt financing charges 15,000 Total $3,865,000 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required 61 IFC

83 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Community Shuttles provide service to communities located outside of major bus routes and hubs, and offers an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. These vehicles transport passengers to urban centres and frequent transit networks (FTNs) to connect remote communities to populous destinations. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 62 IFC

84 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Replacing older gas vehicles with new gas vehicles will maintain the shuttle fleet s fuel efficiency and provide modest improvements in emissions. Since the retiring vehicles are reaching the end of the useful service lives, if they were to remain in service, their ageing engines would become increasingly more difficult to maintain potentially resulting in lower fuel efficiency and higher emissions. Poor/Good/ Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from acquiring newer vehicles include, less than a 3% reduction in GHG emissions, and maintain current CAC emissions. Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the Community Shuttle fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the regional transportation system, by offering reliable service to more remote communities not close to conventional bus routes and/or hubs. Passengers will have better access to populous destinations for work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New Community Shuttles will provide improved reliability of the bus fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for the movement of workers and goods. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 63 IFC

85 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases (Ref# ) 64 IFC

86 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2017 Handy Dart purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from 65 IFC

87 the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 66 IFC

88 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink owns 306 HandyDART vehicles, which constitutes 17% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet. HandyDART buses are operated and maintained by TransLink s contractors MVT Canadian Bus Inc. and Nat s Repair. These vehicles provide a valuable service to people with disabilities and are booked through a reservation system, with each vehicle being able to accommodate up to 2 wheelchairs. Criteria for identifying buses due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 7 years for micro buses and midi buses; 8 years for mini buses); Mileage (generally 250,000 km); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. The criteria have changed from previous submissions which had micro and midi buses at 6 years and 200,000 km. These vehicles must be replaced when they reach end of service life, because maintenance costs and down time will increase substantially, affecting provision of reliable passenger service. By 2017, major components (e.g. engine, transmission), minor components (e.g. air conditioning, wheelchair lift), and chassis and body (e.g. cracked frames, rusted doorframes, floors rotting) will be worn out. From a previous project experience in 2004, when buses were delivered 4-8 months late, road calls (i.e. call-outs for immediate service while the bus was on the road) increased by 33%, averaged across the fleet. This project is to replace 35 HandyDART buses (18 microbuses, 10 midibuses and 7 minibuses) that have reached the end of service life and met criteria for replacement, with 35 new buses consisting of 27 microbuses and 8 midibuses. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2009, have a median age of 7 years and median mileage of 220,000 km. The new vehicles to be acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 8 for micro buses and 12 for midi buses. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand. This allocation is optimized through continuous review and planning process that allocates resources where they are most needed. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink for HandyDART vehicles include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 35 new vehicles to be gas powered with lower GHG and Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions compared to the diesel powered vehicles being replaced. Additionally, all of the new gas powered vehicles use a General Motors (GM) van chassis and power train as opposed to the older vehicles which were a mix of the GM as well as some Ford the GM van chassis and power train are far more durable and less costly to maintain. The vehicles using the 67 IFC

89 GM van chassis also utilize a body that is less prone to familiar problems with plywood floors and door frames, which has led to the life expectancy of micro and midi buses increasing from previously expected figures of 6 years and 200,000 km. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize our resource allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new vehicles will allow CMBC to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new vehicles are expected to have a 64% reduction in CAC emissions and 10% reduction in GHG emissions. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $5,600,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $5,013,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 68 IFC

90 2. Project Name 2017 HandyDART Vehicle Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles that are appropriate to routes on which they operate; in addition to reducing CAC and GHG emissions through use of newer, cleaner, more fuel-efficient and right sized vehicles. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility and fewer reservation cancellations, and reduced HandyDART fleet emissions. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 69 IFC

91 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2024 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $5,600,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $5,013,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 70 IFC

92 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded 3,747,000 1,182,000 84,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget 14,000 4,163,000 1,313, , Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public and those who have accessibility challenges. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations 71 IFC

93 c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. TransLink requires these vehicles to be in service for 2017 in order to retire vehicles reaching the end of their useful service lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, If this agreement is not signed within the required timeframe, the replacement of these vehicles will be delayed, further increasing maintenance costs and potentially impacting service reliability. d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new vehicles being gas powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. TransLink would have to take into account the fact that the HandyDARTs are operated and maintained by contractors who may not be able to support fueling or maintenance for a change in propulsion technology. g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability 72 IFC

94 of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 73 IFC

95 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 HandyDART vehicles; $5,349,000 On-board equipment 40,000 Related debt financing charges 14,150 Total $5,403,150 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required 74 IFC

96 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. HandyDART buses provide a valuable service to the community of people with disabilities. The service promotes greater mobility for social connectivity, running errands, attending appointments and improving quality of life. The buses also connect people with disabilities to the current transit network of train stations and bus hubs. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like vehicle fleet replacement project with no change in service provided, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like vehicle fleet replacement project with no change in service provided, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 75 IFC

97 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles will reduce emissions in the following ways: due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions; as the new vehicles will be built on a lighter van chassis, as opposed to a truck chassis, they will be quieter; and the lighter gasoline vehicle fuel efficiency is expected to be the same as the diesel vehicle and since gasoline has less carbon by volume than diesel, GHGs should be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 10% reduction in GHG emissions 64% reduction in CAC emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New HandyDART vehicles will provide improved reliability to the regional transportation system, resulting in improved service reliability to people with disabilities. Passengers will have better access to conventional bus routes and hubs, train stations, healthcare providers, and social functions. Passengers will enjoy a better quality of life and benefit from greater independence. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New HandyDART vehicles will provide improved reliability of the HandyDART fleet and help ensure that service requests are not denied due to a lack of availability. The improved reliability of the transit network will help customers with disabilities be more self-dependant and increase their contributions towards the economic success of the region. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 76 IFC

98 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project HandyDART Vehicle Purchases (Ref# ) 77 IFC

99 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2018 Handy Dart purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be 78 IFC

100 able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 79 IFC

101 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink owns 306 HandyDART vehicles, which constitutes 17% of TransLink s revenue vehicle fleet. HandyDART buses are operated and maintained by TransLink s contractors MVT Canadian Bus Inc. and Nat s Repair. These vehicles provide a valuable service to people with disabilities and are booked through a reservation system, with each vehicle being able to accommodate up to 2 wheelchairs. Criteria for identifying buses due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 7 years for micro buses and midi buses; 8 years for mini buses); Mileage (generally 250,000 km); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. The criteria have changed from previous submissions which had micro and midi buses at 6 years and 200,000 km. These vehicles must be replaced when they reach end of service life, because maintenance costs and down time will increase substantially, affecting provision of reliable passenger service. By 2018, major components (e.g. engine, transmission), minor components (e.g. air conditioning, wheelchair lift), and chassis and body (e.g. cracked frames, rusted doorframes, floors rotting) will be worn out. From a previous project experience in 2004, when buses were delivered 4-8 months late, road calls (i.e. call-outs for immediate service while the bus was on the road) increased by 33%, averaged across the fleet. This project is to replace 40 HandyDART buses (30 microbuses, 7 midibuses and 3 minibuses) that have reached the end of service life and met criteria for replacement, with 40 new buses consisting of 32 microbuses and 8 midibuses. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2011, have a median age of 5 years and median mileage of 190,000 km. Mileage is expected to be in line with the above criteria at replacement. The new vehicles to be acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 8 for micro buses and 12 for midi buses. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand. This allocation is optimized through continuous review and planning process that allocates resources where they are most needed. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink for HandyDART vehicles include gas and diesel. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 40 new vehicles to be gas powered with lower GHG and Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) emissions compared to the diesel powered vehicles being replaced. Additionally, all of the new gas powered vehicles use a General Motors (GM) van chassis and power train as opposed to the older vehicles which were a mix of the GM as well as some Ford the GM 80 IFC

102 van chassis and power train are far more durable and less costly to maintain. The new vehicles using the GM van chassis also utilize a body that is less prone to familiar problems with plywood floors and door frames, which has led to the life expectancy of micro and midi buses increasing from previously expected figures of 6 years and 200,000 km. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize our resource allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new vehicles will allow CMBC to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new vehicles are expected to have a 64% reduction in CAC emissions and 10% reduction in GHG emissions. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $6,145,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $5,605,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 81 IFC

103 2. Project Name 2018 HandyDART Vehicle Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles that are appropriate to routes on which they operate; in addition to reducing CAC and GHG emissions through use of newer, cleaner, more fuel-efficient and right sized vehicles. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility and fewer reservation cancellations, and reduced HandyDART fleet emissions. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 82 IFC

104 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2025 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $6,145,000 $0 $6,145,000 $6,145,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $5,605,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 83 IFC

105 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded 4,380,000 1,225,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget 4,610,000 1,535, Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public and those who have accessibility challenges. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations 84 IFC

106 c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. TransLink requires these vehicles to be in service for 2017 in order to retire vehicles reaching the end of their useful service lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new vehicles being gas powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. TransLink would have to take into account the fact that the HandyDARTs are operated and maintained by contractors who may not be able to support fueling or maintenance for a change in propulsion technology. 85 IFC

107 h. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 86 IFC

108 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 HandyDART vehicles; $5,838,000 On-board equipment 61,000 Related debt financing charges 12,000 Total $5,911,000 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required 87 IFC

109 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. HandyDART buses provide a valuable service to the community of people with disabilities. The service promotes greater mobility for social connectivity, running errands, attending appointments and improving quality of life. The buses also connect people with disabilities to the current transit network of train stations and bus hubs. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like vehicle fleet replacement project with no change in service provided, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like vehicle fleet replacement project with no change in service provided, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 88 IFC

110 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles will reduce emissions in the following ways: due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions; as the new vehicles will be built on a lighter van chasis, as opposed to a truck chassis, they will be quieter; and the lighter gasoline vehicle fuel efficiency is expected to be the same as the diesel vehicle and since gasoline has less carbon by volume than diesel, GHGs should be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Measurable Beneficial Effects Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with new gas vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 10% reduction in GHG emissions 64% reduction in CAC emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New HandyDART vehicles will provide improved reliability to the regional transportation system, resulting in improved service reliability to people with disabilities. Passengers will have better access to conventional bus routes and hubs, train stations, healthcare providers, and social functions. Passengers will enjoy a better quality of life and benefit from greater independence. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New HandyDART vehicles will provide improved reliability of the HandyDART fleet and help ensure that service requests are not denied due to a lack of availability. The improved reliability of the transit network will help customers with disabilities be more Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 89 IFC

111 self-dependant and increase their contributions towards the economic success of the region. 90 IFC

112 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING APPROVED PROJECTS Project Conventional Bus Purchases - 40 remaining 40-foot vehicles (Ref# b) 91 IFC

113 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2016 conventional bus purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be 92 IFC

114 able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 93 IFC

115 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink has 1,345 conventional 40-foot and 60-foot buses in its fleet. Criteria for identifying buses due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 17 years); Mileage (generally 1,000,000 km); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. In 2016, TransLink has a requirement for 111 conventional buses (85 40-foot buses and foot buses) to replace vehicles reaching the end of their useful lives. These vehicles are currently operated by Coast Mountain Bus Company out of the Richmond Transit Center and by West Vancouver Transit. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 1999, have a median age of 17 years and median mileage of 1.2 million km. The new vehicles will have a person and seat capacity of 76 and 36 respectively. The plan is to allocate new vehicles on a one-to-one basis with retiring vehicles. TransLink has previously received $ million in funding for foot buses through Gas Tax funding for Year-8 (2012/13) and $ million for the foot buses through Year-9 (2013/14). While TransLink planned to purchase foot buses as part of the 2016 bus replacements, it was decided that funding from Year-8 would be requested for only 45 of the foot buses, due to prioritization of other projects for Gas Tax funding, and that the remaining foot buses would be purchased using Year-10 funding. The projects that were prioritized ahead of this project were the West Coast Express Rail Car Lease Buyout, Metrotown Trolley Overhead Rectifier Replacement, Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement and the Surrey Transit Centre CNG Facility Retrofit. It was determined, at the time of the Year-8 and Year-9 applications, that Year-10 funding would be in place early enough to fund the purchase of the remaining foot buses to replace the in service vehicles, before the end of their economic lives. In accordance with the terms of the Agreement between TransLink and UBCM and Metro Vancouver s Federal Gas Tax Expenditures Policy, TransLink is requesting funding be used to cover the replacement of remaining foot conventional buses. TransLink plans to allocate these replacement vehicles to the Richmond and West Vancouver transit centers. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This allocation is optimized through continuous review and planning process that allocates resources where they are most needed. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The bus fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include diesel, CNG, trolley and hybrids. 94 IFC

116 Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 40 new vehicles to be diesel powered vehicles. Diesel is optimal because neither the West Vancouver nor Richmond transit centers have CNG fuelling infrastructure. Also, hybrids are not considered viable for these routes, either due to the higher than optimal operating speeds in Richmond or the steep hills in West Vancouver. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize our resource allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new conventional buses will allow Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce environmental pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new vehicles are expected to have a 85% reduction in Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) and 8% reduction in GHG emissions.. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $30,000,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $28,500,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and labour. 2. Project Name 2016 Additional Conventional Bus Replacement (Ref# b) 3. Project Need The objectives are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will reduce CAC and GHG emissions through the use of modernized vehicles with better fuel efficiency. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility, improved service reliability and reduced bus fleet emissions. 4. Project Eligibility (check one): Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 95 IFC

117 5. Project Purpose (check one): Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify : ) 6. Project Type (check one): Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2034 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. Yes. Funding had been received under the Year-8 funding request for foot buses and under the Year-9 funding request for foot buses. The original demand was for the replacement of foot buses through Year-8 funding; however, due to prioritization of other projects, the funding request was made for only 45 of the foot buses from Year-8 funding. The projects that were prioritized ahead of the conventional bus project were the West Coast Express Rail Car Lease Buyout, Metrotown Trolley Overhead Rectifier Replacement, Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement and the Surrey Transit Centre CNG Facility Retrofit. Funding is now being requested for the remaining foot buses. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. 96 IFC

118 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $30,000,000 $0 $30,000,000 $30,000,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $28,500,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded $25,650,000 $2,850,000 Project Budget Total $27,000,000 $3,000,000 Project Budget 12. Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Proposed project expenditures to be funded include replacement vehicles and associated equipment along with other eligible project related costs. a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair, so as to allow TransLink to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public and those who have accessibility challenges. 97 IFC

119 b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. The original requirement was for TransLink to have these vehicles in service for 2016 in order to modernize older vehicles reaching the end of their lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, If this agreement is not signed within the required timeframe, the replacement of these vehicles may be delayed, further increasing maintenance costs and potentially impacting service reliability. 98 IFC

120 d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on the new vehicles being diesel powered. If a different technology is considered more appropriate, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. Also, TransLink would have to take into account its existing infrastructure when deciding on a particular technology. For example, not all depots have the capability to fuel CNG vehicles and maintenance infrastructure may need to change to accommodate hybrid vehicles which have specific requirements. Additionally, some of the vehicles are operated and maintained by a contractor, who may lack the necessary infrastructure and resources to support a change in technology. g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 99 IFC

121 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses Plan Consistency Corporate Policies As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) and based on past purchases eligible expenses are estimated at 95% ($28.5 million) of total project costs of $30 million. Eligible Item Expenditure Conventional Buses $28,500,000 On-board equipment 300,000 Related debt financing charges 60,000 Total $28,860,000 Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required Required Required 100 IFC

122 Criterion Description Assessment Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Conventional buses provide services to all lower mainland communities within TransLink s transportation service region, and offer an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. They link communities with business, institutional and social hubs and destinations, and facilitate the creation and expansion of Transit Oriented Developments (TODs). They also provide collector and distribution services to Expo, Millennium, Evergreen and Canada Lines, West Coast Express and Sea Bus. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 101 IFC

123 Criterion Description Assessment emissions will be reduced. Regional Environmental Objectives Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Measurable Beneficial Effects Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions compared to the retiring vehicles. Tangible benefits include GHG, CAC and noise reductions. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with new diesel vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 8% reduction in GHG emissions 85% reduction in CAC emissions 5-8 decibels reduction in noise emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New conventional buses will provide improved reliability to the regional transportation system by improving the reliability of arterial service to institutional, economic and other transit mode hubs. Passengers will have better access to work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New conventional buses will provide improved reliability of the bus fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for the movement of workers and goods. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 102 IFC

124 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project Conventional Bus Purchases Additional Funding (Ref# ) 103 IFC

125 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2017 conventional bus purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be 104 IFC

126 able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 105 IFC

127 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink has 1,345 conventional 40-foot and 60-foot buses in its fleet. Criteria for identifying buses due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 17 years); Mileage (generally 1,000,000 km); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. In 2017, TransLink has a requirement for replacement of 106 conventional buses consisting of foot and foot buses reaching the end of their useful lives. The vehicles due to retire were acquired in 2000, have a median age of 16 years and median mileage of 1.2 million km for 40-foot buses and 1.0 million km for 60-foot buses. The new vehicles acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 76 and 36 for 40-foot buses; and 115 and 49 for 60-foot buses respectively. The 40-foot buses will be allocated to the Surrey Transit Center and the 60-foot buses will be allocated to Burnaby, Richmond and Port Coquitlam Transit Centers. At the time of the Year-9 funding submission, the preliminary project cost estimate was $101.2 million. The Year-9 application would have requested 90% ($91 million) in Gas Tax funding, but only $75 million was applied for and received by TransLink for this project, due to prioritization of other projects for Year-9 funding. The projects that were prioritized ahead of this project were the West Coast Express Rail Car Lease Buyout, Metrotown Trolley Overhead Rectifier Replacement, Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement and the Surrey Transit Centre CNG Facility Retrofit. The revised project budget is now $96.3 million; with available funding capacity to cover the remaining eligible costs TransLink is requesting an increase in funding of $11.7 million for this project to bring the funding level to 90% of the total costs or $86.7 million. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This allocation is optimized through continuous review and planning process that allocates resources where they are most needed. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The bus fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include diesel, CNG, trolley and hybrids. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the foot buses to be CNG powered and the foot buses to be diesel powered. The 40-foot CNG buses will be allocated to the Surrey Transit Center, in order to take advantage of the new CNG fuelling facility at the Surrey Transit Center and the resulting fuel cost savings; the new CNG facility is expected to be in service for the delivery of these new CNG buses. The 60-foot diesel buses are required to be diesel for a number of reasons: the Burnaby and Richmond transit centers currently do not support CNG fuelling; the 60-foot buses tend to be too heavy for alternative engine types, due to the mountainous terrain found in the region; and the CNG engines have certain unresolved engineering 106 IFC

128 issues specific to the 60-foot buses. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize our resource allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new conventional buses will allow Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce environmental pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new 40-foot vehicles are expected to have a 86% reduction in Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) and 10% reduction in GHG emissions, while the 60-foot vehicles are expected to have a 88% reduction in Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) and 24% reduction in GHG emissions. Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The revised project budget is $96,300,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request for additional funding of $11,700,000 to align funding with eligible costs. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 2. Project Name 2017 Additional Conventional Bus Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles that are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will reduce CAC and GHG emissions through the use of modernized vehicles with lower emissions, improved fuel efficiency, and, in most cases, cleaner burning CNG fuel. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility, improved service reliability and reduced bus fleet emissions. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 107 IFC

129 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2034 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. Yes. Funding of $75 million has been received under the Year-9 Federal Gas Tax (FGT) fund. However, as indicated in the executive summary above, the original request was a portion of the total requirement. The revised project budget is $96.3 million. With available funding capacity to cover the remaining eligible costs, TransLink is requesting an increase in funding of $11.7 million for this project, which will bring the funding level to $86.7M, 90% of the total cost. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. 108 IFC

130 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost Variance (budget final forecasted cost) $101,200,000 $0 $96,300,000 $96,300,000 $4,900, b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $75,000,000 $11,700,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRF-funded $78,030,000 $8,670,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget $86,670,000 $9,630, Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions, and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public, including those who have accessibility challenges. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public 109 IFC

131 Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. The original requirement was for TransLink to have these vehicles in service for 2016 in order to modernize older vehicles reaching the end of their lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, If this agreement is not signed within the required timeframe, the replacement of these vehicles may be delayed, further increasing maintenance costs and potentially impacting service reliability. 110 IFC

132 d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on a vehicle propulsion technology mix of foot CNG vehicles and foot diesel vehicles. If a different technology, such as Hybrid, is considered more appropriate, or if the mix of CNG and diesel vehicles changes at a later time, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. Also TransLink would have to take into account its existing infrastructure when deciding on a particular technology. For example, not all depots have the capability to fuel CNG vehicles and maintenance infrastructure may need to change to accommodate hybrid vehicles, which have specific requirements. g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. 111 IFC

133 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Required Plan Consistency Corporate Policies Supports the Regional Eligible Item Expenditure Conventional Buses $91,485,000 On-board equipment 963,000 Related debt financing charges 192,000 Total $92,640,000 Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Regional Transportation Strategy Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Required Required Poor/Good/ Excellent 112 IFC

134 Criterion Description Assessment Growth Strategy Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Conventional buses provide services to all lower mainland communities within TransLink s transportation service region, and offer an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. They link communities with business, institutional and social hubs and destinations, and facilitate the creation and expansion of Transit Oriented Developments (TODs). They also provide collector and distribution services to Expo, Millennium, Evergreen and Canada Lines, West Coast Express and Sea Bus. Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology Poor/Good/ Excellent 113 IFC

135 Criterion Description Assessment Greenhouse Gas Management Plan improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions compared to the retiring vehicles. In addition, the project will replace 40-foot diesel vehicles with lower emission CNG vehicles; the 60-foot vehicles will remain diesel. Tangible benefits of these Measurable Beneficial Effects improvements include GHG, CAC and noise reductions. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with a mix of new diesel and CNG vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 40-foot CNG vehicles 10% reduction in GHG emissions 86% reduction in CAC emissions 5-10 decibels reduction in noise emissions 60-foot diesel vehicles 24% reduction in GHG emissions 88% reduction in CAC emissions 5-8 decibels reduction in noise emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New conventional buses will provide improved reliability to the regional transportation system by improving the reliability of arterial service to institutional, economic and other transit mode hubs. Passengers will have better access to work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New conventional buses will provide improved reliability of the bus fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for the movement of workers and goods. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 114 IFC

136 APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS APPLICIATION FOR YEAR 2014/15 FUNDNG (YEAR 1 OF THE RENEWED AGREEMENT) Project Conventional Bus Purchases (Ref# ) 115 IFC

137 B. MAYORS COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan. Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress TransLink has an ongoing program of fleet modernization to keep the transit network in a state of good repair. The 2018 conventional bus purchases were included as part of the modernization program in TransLink s 2014 Base Plan. This modernization program is foundational to TransLink, and it is critical to the success of Metro Vancouver s expansion, as outlined by the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation vision: Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver (Mayors Council Vision). The Mayors Council Vision on regional transportation outlines a long-term, region-wide, integrated, multi-modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast-growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The Mayors Council Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively, and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors Council, in June 2014, the Mayors Council Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The Mayors Council Vision is built on the foundation provided by the 2014 Base Plan. This project supports the Mayors Council Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective investments. The Mayors Council Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. Through fleet modernization, TransLink will be 116 IFC

138 able to support maintenance of the transit system. This project will also support desired outcomes from the Mayors Council Vision, such as reducing transit overcrowding and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 117 IFC

139 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF. 1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview TransLink has 1,345 conventional 40-foot and 60-foot buses in its fleet. Criteria for identifying buses due for retirement are based on a number of factors including: Age (life expectancy of 17 years); Mileage (generally 1,000,000 km); State of repair/condition; and Severity of service duty cycle. Based on the criteria for vehicle retirement, this project is to replace 92 diesel conventional 40-foot buses, acquired in 2001, with 52 new 40-foot CNG buses and 40 new 40-foot diesel buses. The vehicles, due to retire in 2018, are currently operated out of the Richmond and Surrey transit centres, have a median age of 15 years and median mileage of 1.1 million km. The new vehicles acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 76 and 36 respectively. The plan is to allocate new vehicles on a one-to-one basis with retiring vehicles. TransLink strives to optimize its resource allocation by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This allocation is optimized through continuous review and planning process that allocates resources where they are most needed. This process is informed by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The bus fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include diesel, CNG, trolley and hybrids. Based on current demand and optimization of resources, TransLink expects the 92 new 40-foot buses to comprise of 52 CNG buses and 40 diesel buses. The CNG buses will be allocated to the Surrey Transit Center, in order to take advantage of the new CNG fuelling facility at the Surrey Transit Center and the resulting fuel cost savings; the new CNG facility is expected to be in service in The diesel buses will replace highway coaches and are required to be diesel, as the Richmond transit center currently does not support CNG fuelling, and the Richmond routes have higher than optimal operating speeds to operate hybrid buses. Choices of vehicle size and propulsion types will continue to be optimized, as informed by ongoing monitoring of ridership and propulsion technologies. This may result in the vehicle technology mix changing, if it is later determined that a different mix will better optimize our resource allocation. Tangible Benefits and Outcomes The new conventional buses will allow Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) to maintain existing service, reduce downtime, avoid incremental operating and maintenance costs, and reduce environmental pollutants. Compared to retiring vehicles, the new CNG vehicles are expected to have a 87% reduction in Criteria Air Contaminants (CAC) and 15% reduction in GHG emissions while the diesel vehicles will have a 88% reduction in CAC and 7% reduction in GHG emissions. 118 IFC

140 Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request The project budget is $66,652,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $60,800,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on-board equipment and debt financing charges. 2. Project Name 2018 Conventional Bus Replacement (Ref# ) 3. Project Need The objectives are to maintain high quality customer service and minimize maintenance and operating costs through continued provision of reliable, fully-accessible transit vehicles that are appropriate to routes on which they operate. In addition, the project will reduce CAC and GHG emissions through the use of modernized vehicles with lower emissions, improved fuel efficiency, and, in most cases, cleaner burning CNG fuel. The criteria for achieving these objectives are avoidance of incremental maintenance and operating costs, reduced vehicle breakdowns, less vehicle downtime, improved accessibility, and improved service. 4. Project Eligibility Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation Public Transit 5. Project Purpose Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement. State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair. Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Refurbishment New Other (please specify: ) 6. Project Type Growth 119 IFC

141 Upgrade Risk (Resilience) Maintenance Opportunity 7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction Year of Completion of Construction Year of Service Initialization Year(s) of Renewal N/A 2035 Year(s) of End of Service 8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain. No. This is the first application for GVRF funding for this project. 10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain. No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget. 11. Project Cost + Funding 11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures to Date Forecast to Complete Final Forecasted Cost $66,652,000 $0 $66,652,000 $66,652,000 $0 Variance (budget final forecasted cost) 11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding Current Year GVRF Funding Request $0 $60,800,000 N/A Other Funding Specify source and whether confirmed/pending 120 IFC

142 11.c Project Budget Schedule Item GVRFfunded 55,188,000 5,612,000 Project Budget Total Project Budget 59,987,000 6,665, Project Budget Rationale Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF This project provides a reduction in GHG and CAC emissions, and ensures TransLink s assets are maintained in a State of Good Repair to efficiently and effectively provide transit service to the general public, including those who have accessibility challenges. b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project? No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding to modernize its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly. The other sources of funding available to TransLink are Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below: Building Canada Fund (BCF) - the funding available is intended for major infrastructure and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects. Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as - the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government. In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017, and PTIF applies to projects initiating in and As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet modernizations 121 IFC

143 c. Identify potential risks corporate and regional of this project that could result in this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks. 1. The original requirement was for TransLink to have these vehicles in service for 2016 in order to modernize older vehicles reaching the end of their lives. Also, there is an approximate lead time of 12 to 18 months between TransLink ordering the vehicles and those vehicles entering service. As such, it is important to have the funding in place to ensure the timely retirement of vehicles before they reach the end of their useful service lives. 2. If funding is not received in time, TransLink can keep in-service older shuttles; however, it will lead to incremental maintenance costs. Alternatively, TransLink could reduce Community Shuttle service, potentially leading to decreased service reliability, as well as contingent liabilities. 3. TransLink is currently working with UBCM on an Administrative Agreement so that the federal gas tax funding can be received once Metro Vancouver has made a decision on funding. TransLink plans to have this agreement in place before the date by which Metro Vancouver is expected to announce its decision - September 30, d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as interest rates and currency exchange rates? Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations. e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other orders of government affect the project? There are no foreseeable changes in investment, regulation or policies from other orders of government that will affect the successful outcome delivery of this project. f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project? This application is based on a vehicle propulsion technology mix of 52 CNG buses and 40 diesel buses. If a different technology, such as Hybrid, is considered more appropriate, or if the mix of CNG and diesel buses changes at a later time, this might result in a higher or lower project budget. Also, TransLink would have to take into account its existing infrastructure when deciding on a particular technology. For example, not all depots have the capability to fuel CNG buses and maintenance infrastructure may need to change to accommodate hybrid vehicles, which have specific requirements. 122 IFC

144 g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery? There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange. In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers facilities. D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project. Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors Council Vision. Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA Eligible Project Category Local roads and bridges, including active transportation Public transit Required Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure 1 Convention Buses $63,319,000 On-board equipment 667,000 Related debt financing charges 133,000 Total $64,119,000 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a) Required Plan Consistency Projects must be consistent with TransLink s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy. 10-Year Investment Plan Mayors Council Transportation and Transit Plan Metro 2040: Shaping our Future Required 123 IFC

145 Criterion Description Assessment Regional Transportation Strategy Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure Sustainability policy Environmental policy Emissions policy Infrastructure policy n/a Required 124 IFC

146 Supports the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas INTEGRATED CRITERIA Regional Growth Strategy The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro Create a Compact Urban Area Support a Sustainable Economy Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Develop Complete Communities Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas. Conventional buses provide services to all lower mainland communities within TransLink s transportation service region, and offer an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation choice to single occupant vehicle travel. They link communities with business, institutional and social hubs and destinations, and facilitate the creation and expansion of Transit Oriented Developments (TODs). They also provide collector and distribution services to Expo, Millennium, Evergreen and Canada Lines, West Coast Express and Sea Bus. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Headline Targets Other Transportation Outcomes Transportation Performance Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental vehicle-kilometers travelled or shift to walk/cycle/transit mode share. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project. This is a like-for-like replacement vehicle project with no passenger capacity increase, so there are no incremental benefits to vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership and/or transportation safety. Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6). By maintaining TransLink s assets in good repair, vehicles will have fewer breakdowns and service disruptions, operating costs will not increase, and pollutant emissions will be reduced. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 125 IFC

147 Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan Measurable Beneficial Effects Regional Environmental Objectives Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan. Due to more stringent emissions regulations and technology improvements, new vehicles built with year 2017 compliant engines will have lower emissions compared to the retiring vehicles. In addition, the project will replace foot diesel vehicles with lower emission CNG vehicles; the remaining 40 vehicles will remain diesel. Tangible benefits of these improvements include reductions in GHG, CAC and noise emissions. Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project. Measurable benefits from replacing older diesel vehicles with a mix of new diesel and CNG vehicles include the following estimated reductions in emissions : 40-foot CNG vehicles 15% reduction in GHG emissions 87% reduction in CAC emissions 5-10 decibels reduction in noise emissions 40-foot diesel vehicles 7% reduction in GHG emissions 88% reduction in CAC emissions 5-8 decibels reduction in noise emissions Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent Supports regional prosperity Measurable Beneficial Effects Economic Development Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity. New conventional buses will provide improved reliability to the regional transportation system by improving the reliability of arterial service to institutional, economic and other transit mode hubs. Passengers will have better access to work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel. Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project. New conventional buses will provide improved reliability of the bus fleet, resulting in improved reliability to the transit network, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness. More reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, and markets, while reducing congestion and improving reliability for the movement of workers and goods. Poor/Good/ Excellent Poor/Good/ Excellent 126 IFC

148 127 IFC

149 5.2 To: From: Intergovernment and Finance Committee Ralph G. Hildebrand, Corporate Solicitor, Legal and Legislative Services Heather Shoemaker, Senior Director, External Relations Date: September 1, 2016 Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Subject: Metro Vancouver Legal Entities Name Change RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the letters patent of the GVRD to rename it Metro Vancouver Regional District. That the GVWD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the Greater Vancouver Water District Act to rename it Metro Vancouver Water District. That the GVS&DD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act to rename it Metro Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District. PURPOSE To update the Board on the recognition of the Metro Vancouver name and to recommend next steps in the development of the Metro Vancouver brand. This report is being brought forward to seek approval of the pursuit of name changes for the three related entities, GVRD, GVWD and GVS&DD by substituting the references to Greater Vancouver with Metro Vancouver. BACKGROUND In late 2006 the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) considered the desirability of changing its name to Metro Vancouver. The name Metro Vancouver was considered and viewed by the Board to be more accessible and understandable to both the public and to external agencies in describing the GVRD as a regional federation. The name change was submitted to the Province with the request to remove the reference to regional district to assist the organization in distinguishing Metro Vancouver as a large regional urban centre within a national and international context. At its July 27, 2007 meeting, the Board resolved: That the GVRD Board: Adopt the name of Metro Vancouver and petition the Minister of Community Services for formal recognition of the name change through letters patent; The Chair forwarded the request to the Minister and, in a letter dated December 20, 2007, Minister Ida Chong replied that she was unwilling to recommend a legal name change that did not include the term regional district. While the Minister refused the request, she did indicate support for the use of the name Metro Vancouver Regional District and acknowledged that the GVRD could use Metro Vancouver as a brand. The GVRD decided not to pursue a name change to the MVRD but in May IFC - 10

150 Metro Vancouver Legal Entities Name Change Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 2 of , the Greater Vancouver Housing Corporation (GVHC) did proceed to formally change its name to the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation (MVHC). This report is being brought forward to consider the options to revisit a formal name change for all three legal entities. SUCCESS OF METRO VANCOUVER AS A BRAND NAME Since receipt of the letter from the Minister, the GVRD, GVWD and GVS&DD have been actively using Metro Vancouver as a brand name both individually and collectively for all three legal entities. Public recognition of Metro Vancouver continues to grow with close to 80% of the public recognizing it in a 2016 survey. While the use of the name has been extremely successful and the brand Metro Vancouver is now broadly accepted both within the organization, and among the media, public and external agencies as an interchangeable reference to our three legal entities, this success occasionally creates some confusion. In the execution of legal documents, policies and in formal communications with outside agencies, for example, the interchangeable use of both the brand name and the legal entity names can be confusing. To simplify this practice and to build upon the success of Metro Vancouver as a brand, it is proposed that the Board may want to consider changing the legal names of all three entities (GVRD, GVWD, GVS&DD) by replacing Greater Vancouver with Metro Vancouver. LEGAL ENTITIES NAME CHANGE PROCESS The process for changing the name of the GVRD is different than that for the GVWD and GVS&DD. The differences are described below. GVRD Name Change. The GVRD was created by letters patent. Letters patent of a regional district may be amended by the Lieutenant Governor in Council upon the recommendation of the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development. The process to complete the name change is relatively straight forward and would be initiated by ministry staff upon receipt of a resolution from the GVRD requesting a name change. GVWD and GVS&DD Name Changes. Both the GVWD and the GVS&DD are statutory bodies created by their respective statutes. Section 3 of the Greater Vancouver Water District Act, SBC 1924 Chapter 22 states: There is hereby created and constituted a body corporate and politic under the name of the Greater Vancouver Water District, with the objects, powers, and mode of management set forth in this Act. Section 3 of the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District Act, SBC 1956 Chapter 59 uses identical language to create and constitute the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District. Since both of these bodies are incorporated by statute, the name change cannot be effected by an order in council but will have to proceed by way of statutory amendments to their respective acts. In all three cases ancillary amendments will need to be made to additional acts which reference either GVRD, GVWD or GVS&DD by name. IFC - 11

151 Metro Vancouver Legal Entities Name Change Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 3 of 3 Given the success of the Metro Vancouver brand through the broad use of the brand in referencing all three legal entities interchangeably, there exists an opportunity to build upon this success and to strengthen this relationship between the three legal entities and the MVHC by pursuing a formal name change for each entity as presented below. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD/GVWD/GVS&DD respectively adopt the following recommendations: That the GVRD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the letters patent of the GVRD to rename it Metro Vancouver Regional District. That the GVWD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to amend the Greater Vancouver Water District Act to rename it Metro Vancouver Water District. That the GVS&DD Board petition the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development to the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage Act to rename it Metro Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District. 2. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive the report dated September 1, 2016 titled Metro Vancouver Legal Entities Name Change and provide alternate direction. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications anticipated under alternative one. Since 2007 the Metro Vancouver entities have been utilizing Metro Vancouver as an identifying name for the three legal entities on the website, in advertising, correspondence, signage and business cards. It is not expected that the name changes will generate additional costs to the entities. While the name changes are relatively straight forward, ancillary changes will have to be made to approximately 11 other provincial acts such as the Local Government Act, the Vancouver Charter and the Environmental Management Act to ensure that the acts appropriately reference the respective entities. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS In 2007 the provincial government declined a request from the GVRD to change its name to Metro Vancouver. However, the province did indicate that it would support a name change to Metro Vancouver Regional District. Since 2007 the Metro Vancouver group of entities have successfully marketed the Metro Vancouver brand. With that success some confusion has been created between the use of the proper legal names, the reference Greater Vancouver and the use of the brand name Metro Vancouver. Given the overwhelming success of the Metro Vancouver brand name and its broad use in referring to all three legal entities interchangeably, the opportunity exists to build upon this success and to strengthen this relationship between the three entities by pursuing a formal name change for each entity. In light of the maturity of the Metro Vancouver brand, it is recommended that the provincial government be requested to rename the GVRD, GVWD and GVS&DD to Metro Vancouver Regional District, Metro Vancouver Water District and Metro Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District respectively as presented under alternative 1. IFC - 12

152 5.3 To: From: Intergovernment and Finance Committee Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer Date: September 7, 2016 Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Subject: Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Additional Information RECOMMENDATION That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to bring forward a bylaw to amend the Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 to: a) incorporate the changes to Schedule B - Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings as presented in the report dated September 7, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Additional Information ; and b) incorporate the changes to Schedules A and C and housekeeping amendments as presented in the report dated July 6, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw. PURPOSE To seek direction for amendments to the Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 (the Remuneration Bylaw ) to respond to changes in the Local Government Act and to clarify provisions associated with remuneration. BACKGROUND At its meeting of July 29, 2016, the GVRD Board considered a recommendation by the Intergovernment and Finance Committee to amend the Remuneration Bylaw. The motion was considered by the Board and referred back to the Committee: That the GVRD Board refer to staff the following motion and direct staff to report back to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee for further consideration: That the GVRD Board: a) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, 2016; and b) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, The Board requested that additional background information on board chair and vice chair remuneration, standing and select committee appointments, and the financial implications of the proposed amendments be provided in order to assist the Board in considering the proposed bylaw amendments. This report provides the additional information on the referral request. IFC - 13

153 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 2 of 6 PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENTS At its meeting of July 20, 2016, the Intergovernment and Finance Committee considered four categories of amendment, set out in proposed Bylaw 1235, which were subsequently forwarded to the Board for its consideration. As outlined in the Committee s July 6, 2016 report, the four categories for proposed amendments were as follows: 1. In Schedule A: Salary Remuneration General Provisions This proposed amendment related to establishing a four-year cycle for the salary survey. 2. In Schedule B: Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings This proposed amendment related to remuneration of the Board Chair and Vice Chair for their participation on standing committees. 3. In Schedule C: Qualifying Meetings This proposed amendment related to payment authorization for more than one individual invitee at a specified special event or occasion. 4. Housekeeping Amendments Two housekeeping amendments proposed related to (i) incidental expenses applying to both Directors and Committee Members, and (ii) renumbered section references in the revised Local Government Act. At the July 29, 2016 Board meeting, discussion focused on the second category of proposed amendments: Schedule B (Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings) related to remuneration of the Board Chair and Vice Chair for their participation on standing committees. An overview is provided below that responds to the Board s questions and provides additional detail on the history of Board remuneration and the financial implications of the proposed amendments. Select Committees and Standing Committees The Board requested additional information on the difference between Select Committees and Standing Committees. Section 218 of the Local Government Act sets outs the provisions for appointment to select and standing committees. The Board establishes a select committee to consider or inquire into any matter and to report its findings and opinion back to the Board. Appointments to a select committee expire when the committee reports its findings. Historically, the Board has appointed very few select committees. The Board Chair establishes a standing committee and appoints members to consider or deliberate on matters better dealt with by a committee. Typically, standing committees meet regularly throughout the annual term and have been used almost exclusively by the Board. Pursuant to GVRD Procedure Bylaw No ( Procedure Bylaw ), the Board Chair and Vice Chair are ex-officio members of all standing committees. In that capacity, if they attend committee meetings, they are not entitled to vote nor do they constitute quorum. However, when the Chair and Vice Chair are appointed to serve as members on a standing committee, they are doing so in their capacity as an appointed committee member with the authority to vote and not in their capacity as an ex-officio member. IFC - 14

154 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 3 of 6 Background to the Remuneration of the Board Chair and Vice Chair The Board Chair and Vice Chair have historically been compensated with a base salary to fulfill the roles of Chair and Vice Chair and the duties that go with those roles. Over the years, the remuneration bylaws confirm that the Chair and Vice Chair should be remunerated for fulfilling his or her duties as Chair or for fulfillment of their respective duties of chair, vice chair as shown in the current Bylaw (Bylaw 1057). The duties and responsibilities of the Chair (and by extension the Vice Chair in absence of the Chair) are set out in section 216 of the Local Government Act. These duties include communicating information to the Board, presiding at board meetings, directing the conduct of officers and employees, and directing the management of the regional district business and affairs. Remuneration provisions have been set to compensate for the duties associated with the role of Chair. Remuneration Bylaw 912, In 1999, the Board reviewed Board remuneration and passed the following amendment: In addition to the remuneration provided for in sections 2 and 3, if the Board appoints either the Chair or the Vice-Chair or both of them to serve on any committee of the Board, the Board may provide by resolution for the Regional District to pay the Chair and the Vice- Chair the sum of $125 for each such committee meeting attended by the Chair or Vice Chair. Over time, very few select committees have been established and the Board has relied upon the appointment of standing committees to consider matters and report findings and opinion back to the Board Remuneration Review. The Board continued to consider remuneration matters and at its meeting of March 28, 2002 appointed a 5-member independent review committee to consider remuneration. The Independent Review Committee (representing the labour, business, banking and elected officials sectors) reported its findings to the Board at its June 27, 2003 meeting. Below is a summary of the Committee s recommendations and the policy positions ultimately adopted by the Board: Chair Remuneration: a percentage of the median of member municipalities mayors salaries. The Board adopted this provision which remains the current policy. Vice Chair Remuneration: 50% of the Chair s remuneration. The Board adopted this provision which remains the current policy. Electoral Area Director Remuneration: the director s remuneration (35% of the Chair remuneration) plus a monthly stipend. The Board rejected this provision opting for an annual stipend plus a per-meeting fee, which remains the current policy. Director Remuneration: 35% of the Chair remuneration. The Board rejected this provision opting for the status quo: the per-meeting fee, which remains the current policy. Alternate Director Remuneration: that the alternate be remunerated. The Board opted for the status quo: the per-meeting fee, which remains the current policy. IFC - 15

155 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 4 of 6 Committee Member who is not a Director Remuneration: that the committee member be remunerated. The Board opted for the status quo: the per-meeting fee, which remains the current policy. The policy with respect to the appointment of the Chair and Vice Chair to select and standing committees was not reviewed by the 2002 Independent Review Committee. The 1999 policy direction to remunerate the Chair and Vice Chair for participation on any committee of the Board where the Board passed a resolution to that effect remained in place and continues as the current policy. Remuneration Bylaw 1057, 2007 In September 2006, the Board considered a number of policy and housekeeping issues pertaining to board and committee remuneration. Changes were proposed to payments for events associated with external agencies, to meeting fee payments of committee members other than elected officials, and to the remuneration formula. Clarification was also requested for payment of Chair and Vice Chair meeting fee for service on select versus standing committees. Among other changes, the new Bylaw 1057, adopted in March 2007, authorized remuneration of Chair and Vice Chair for service on select committees only. Role of Standing Committees and Membership As noted above, the Board has typically used standing committees rather than select committees to consider and report back on matters to the Board. With the exception of Council of Council s Committee, Part 14 of the Procedure Bylaw allows for the appointment of persons who are not directors to be appointed to select or standing committees provided that the majority of members of a committee are board directors. A majority of directors on a standing or select committee ensures that the deliberations and recommendations of a standing committee are properly communicated and considered at the subsequent Board of Directors meeting. Members that participate on select and standing committees do so as representatives of their respective communities and not as directors of the regional board. In recent years, participation on a standing committee by the Chair and Vice Chair has become more frequent. Participation on standing committees has not been in an ex-officio capacity, but rather, as full members that participate in discussion, voting and constitute quorum. Comparison of Other Regional Districts A 2015 UBCM survey on regional district remuneration shows that more than 50% of regional districts provide a per-meeting payment to their Board Chairs in addition to the annual salary. Furthermore, more than 50% of regional districts provide a per-meeting payment to their Electoral Area Directors when serving on a standing committee. In 2015, the Capital Regional District reviewed its compensation practices for board remuneration. It concluded that an annual stipend be adopted for all directors (instead of a meeting per diem), with an add-on annual stipend for the Board Chair and Vice Chair in recognition of other responsibilities. PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENT CONSIDERATIONS Given that their roles are identical, the recommendations presented in the July 20, 2016 report to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee proposed that the Chair and Vice Chair be remunerated in the same manner for standing committees as they are for select committees. The difficulty with IFC - 16

156 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 5 of 6 this proposed amendment is that the Chair may be placed in a conflict by having the power to appoint himself or herself to an unlimited number of standing committees. To address this potential conflict, it is proposed that a small amendment to the July 20, 2016 report recommendations be considered to place a limit on the total number of standing committee meetings that a Chair and Vice Chair could attend that would be eligible for remuneration. It is proposed that this amendment would limit the number of standing committee meetings that a Chair or Vice Chair would receive remuneration as committee members to a maximum of 18 standing committee meetings per year. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to bring forward a bylaw to amend the Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw No. 1057, 2007 to: a) incorporate the changes to Schedule B - Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings as presented in the report dated September 7, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Additional Information ; and b) incorporate the changes to Schedules A and C and housekeeping amendments as presented in the report dated July 6, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw. 2. That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee direct staff to bring forward a bylaw to amend the Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 to incorporate the changes to Schedules A and C and housekeeping amendments as presented in the report dated July 6, 2016 titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves alternative one, the financial impact to provide remuneration to the Chair and Vice Chair for attendance of up to 18 standing committee meetings would be approximately $13,400. The 2016 annual budget for board and standing committee remuneration is $1,849,016 and is included within the general government function approved by the Board. There are sufficient funds to cover the costs associated with the proposed amendment to the Remuneration Bylaw with no requirement for an additional allocation of funds. If the Board approves alternative two, there is minimum financial impact related to the proposed amendments. The only financial impact would apply under the proposed changes to Schedule C Qualifying Meetings where committee members, other than the Committee Chair or Vice Chair, may be eligible to receive remuneration for attendance at a special occasion or event if their attendance is authorized by the Board Chair. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Board considered amendments to the Remuneration Bylaw at its July 2016 meeting, and subsequently referred the Bylaw back to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee for further consideration of remuneration for the Board Chair and Vice Chair when appointed to a standing committee. This report provides additional background information on board chair and vice chair IFC - 17

157 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: September 14, 2016 Page 6 of 6 remuneration, standing and select committee appointments, and the financial implications of the proposed amendments. Based on the discussion raised at the Board meeting and the information presented on the policies that are in place regarding remuneration for attendance at select and standing committees, staff have drafted proposed language for the Remuneration Bylaw that clarifies how remuneration for the Chair and Vice Chair would apply should those changes be supported by the Board. Proposed changes in the bylaw would include limiting the number of standing committee meetings that a Chair or Vice Chair would receive remuneration as committee members to a maximum of 18 standing committee meetings per year. This approach is presented under alternative one. If the Committee does not support recommending this approach to the Board, it is suggested that the alternative two be approved to proceed with the amendments to Schedules A and C and housekeeping amendments. Attachments: 1. Initial report dated July 6, 2016, titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw (Orbit#: ) 2. Consolidated version of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 identifying proposed amendments with track changes. (Orbit#: ) IFC - 18

158 ATTACHMENT 1 To: From: Intergovernment and Finance Committee Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer Date: July 6, 2016 Meeting Date: July 20, 2016 Subject: Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board: a) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, 2016 ; and b) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, PURPOSE To seek Board consideration of amendments to the Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 (the Remuneration Bylaw ) to respond to changes in the Local Government Act and to clarify provisions associated with remuneration. BACKGROUND A review of the Remuneration Bylaw was included in the Committee s 2016 work plan to coincide with the start of the 3-year cycle on which the current Remuneration Bylaw operates. Given the changes within the Local Government Act to implement local government elections on a four year cycle, an amendment is now being brought forward to update the Remuneration Bylaw to align with the new election cycle. Some additional amendments are also being brought forward for the Board s consideration that provide clarification on some aspects of Board and Committee remuneration and propose some minor housekeeping amendments for consideration. PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENTS The Board provides for payment of remuneration to board and committee members by provisions set out in the Remuneration Bylaw, which also gives authority for the payment of expenses that a member may incur on the business of the regional district. Proposed changes to the Remuneration Bylaw are summarized below. Schedule A: Salary Remuneration General Provisions Under Schedule A of the Remuneration Bylaw, remuneration is defined based on a formula that was first developed by an independent review committee in The formula calculates the annual salary of the Board Chair at 75% of the median of GVRD Mayors salaries (surveyed every three years) with an annual adjustment on January 1 of each year. In non-survey years, the annual salary is adjusted based on the Vancouver Consumer Price Index (CPI). The annual salaries for the Vice Chair, the Alternate Chair or Vice Chair, the Electoral Area A Director, IFC - 19

159 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 20, 2016 Page 2 of 3 as well as the stipend paid to members for attendance at various meetings, is then calculated based on defined percentages. Currently, Schedule A provides for a salary survey to be undertaken every three years. As a result of changes in the election cycle, it is proposed that the Remuneration Bylaw be amended under Schedule A General Provisions (Sections 1 5), to establish a four year cycle for the salary survey which will coincide with the new four year term of Directors. The annual salary would continue to be adjusted in non-survey years based on CPI. Schedule B: Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings Schedule B to the Remuneration Bylaw authorizes payment to the Board Chair, Vice Chair, Electoral Area Directors, Directors and Committee Members. The current remuneration provisions compensate the Board Chair and Vice Chair for responsibilities associated with those roles. Base remuneration for the Chair (and by extension, the Vice Chair in the absence of the Chair) reflects the responsibilities of Chief Executive Officer as defined under s.216 of the Local Government Act. Responsibilities include communicating information to the Board, presiding at Board meetings, directing the conduct of officers and employees, and directing the management of the regional district business and affairs. While the Remuneration Bylaw provides base remuneration for Chair and Vice Chair duties and includes remuneration for participation on select committees, the bylaw is silent with respect to remuneration for participation on standing committees. This aspect of the bylaw is inconsistent with the remuneration provisions for other directors of the Board. To address this inconsistency, it is proposed that section 1 of Schedule B Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings be amended to delete the word select in the first paragraph and to add the words subject to a daily cap of 1% of the Board chair s annual salary. This amendment would bring section 1 in line with the remaining provisions of Schedule B. These changes will ensure consistency in standing committee remuneration for the Board Chair and Vice Chair with that of other standing committee members and will recognize the different responsibilities expected of standing committee members. Schedule C: Qualifying Meetings Schedule C to the Remuneration Bylaw enumerates all the events and meetings that qualify for a meeting payment. However, it does not authorize payment for more than one individual invitee at a specified special event or occasion where it would be beneficial for a larger group to attend. To provide an ability to respond to these special event invitations, it is proposed that the Board amend s.8 of the Remuneration Bylaw to include the words or occasions within the definition of other meetings, which would thereby be deemed to capture unique events where attendance is given by special invitation. This provision would be conditional on authorization by the Board Chair and sufficient budget. Housekeeping Amendments Incidental expenses. One-third of remuneration is an allowance for expenses incidental to the discharge of duties, as per Canada Revenue Agency guidance on the Income Tax Act. It is therefore recommended that the bylaw be clarified to expressly indicate that it applies to both Board and Committee members. IFC - 20

160 Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Intergovernment and Finance Committee Meeting Date: July 20, 2016 Page 3 of 3 Local Government Act Numbering. The Local Government Act was revised, with the revisions taking effect January 1, For the most part, the Act was reorganized and renumbered to improve the readability of the Act without changing the legal effect. On that basis, the Remuneration Bylaw should be updated to reflect the updated section references. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board: a) give first, second and third reading to Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, 2016 ; and b) pass and finally adopt Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, That the Intergovernment and Finance Committee receive for information the report dated July 6, 2016, titled Proposed Amendments to the Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If alternative one is approved, there will be no change to the way in which salary increases are determined, as the salary survey would be undertaken once every four years rather than once every three years. CPI adjustments would be made in non-survey years. With respect to the other amendments proposed in the bylaw, remuneration associated with meeting attendance at standing committees and special occasion invitations is anticipated to be minor and well within the annual General Government budget approved by the Board. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Remuneration Bylaw sets out provisions for remuneration of Board and Committee members and currently operates on a three-year cycle. As 2016 is the start of a new cycle, a review of the Bylaw was undertaken and several amendments are being brought forward for consideration. Proposed amendments relate to a change in the salary survey cycle, clarification of standing committee remuneration for the Board Chair, Vice Chair, and for other special invitations, and finally some housekeeping amendments. The proposed changes will bring the bylaw in line with the new four year term for directors and will address some inconsistencies in the current bylaw with respect to remuneration for standing committees and special invitations. It is recommended that the GVRD Board approve alternative one. Attachments: 1. Greater Vancouver Regional District Board and Committee Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 1235, 2016 (not attached) 2. Markup of Proposed Changes to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 (not attached) IFC - 21

161 ATTACHMENT 2 Greater Vancouver Regional District Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 A bylaw to establish payment of remuneration and expenses for board and committee members. Whereas: A. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (the Board ) is authorized by section of the Local Government Act and section 122 of the Community Charter to exercise powers by bylaw or resolution; B. The Board wishes to provide for the payment of remuneration and expenses to Board and committee members; NOW THEREFORE the Board enacts as follows: Citation 1. The official citation for this bylaw is Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, This bylaw may be cited as Remuneration Bylaw. Repeal of Bylaw 2. Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 912, 1999, as amended by Bylaw 989, 2002, Bylaw 995, 2003, and Bylaw 1001, 2003, is hereby repealed. Remuneration of Board Chair, Vice Chair and Electoral Area A Director 3. The Greater Vancouver Regional District (the GVRD ) will pay the amounts set out in Schedule A to this bylaw as remuneration to the Board chair, Board vice chair and the electoral area A director for fulfillment of their respective duties as Board chair, Board vice chair and electoral area A director. Where the alternate chair or alternate vice chair of the Board is serving as chair or vice chair because the chair or vice chair is unable to serve because he or she is not a member of the Greater Vancouver Water District or the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District as the case may be, the GVRD will pay to that alternate chair or vice chair remuneration in the amount set out in Schedule A. Payment for Board and Committee Meetings and Other Attendances 4. The GVRD will pay the amounts set out in Schedule B to this bylaw for each attendance by the Board chair or Board vice chair at a select committee meeting, and for each attendance by a Board director or alternate director ( Board member ), committee member, committee chair, and committee member who is not a Board member at a qualifying meeting as defined in Schedule C to this bylaw. These amounts are in addition to the salary amounts provided for under section 3 of this bylaw for the Board chair, the Board vice chair and the electoral area A director. Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 1 of IFC - 22

162 Expenses 5. The GVRD will pay the expenses incurred by Board and committee members as set out in Schedule D to this bylaw. Effective Date 6. The effective date of this bylaw is October 1, Read a first, second and third time this day of, Reconsidered, passed and finally adopted this day of, Lois E. Jackson, Chair Paulette A. Vetleson, Secretary Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 2 of IFC - 23

163 Schedule A replaced by Bylaw 1183, 2013 Schedule A to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Salary Remuneration General Provisions: 1. The median of the gross salaries of the mayors in the GVRD will be determined every 43 years ( 43 Year Cycle ). The first 43 Year Cycle will commence in the year For year 1 of each 4 Yyear Ccycle, tthe 2013 median gross salary will be calculated using information obtained from the previous year s 2012 Statements of Financial Information [RGH1] produced by each municipality in the GVRD pursuant to the Financial Information Act R.S.B.C c. 140 and will include all of the mayors remuneration including salary, any taxable benefits, the 1/3 non taxable allowance and any transportation/vehicle allowance. 3. For year 2 of eachthe 43 Year Cycle, the 12 month Vancouver Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar year will be applied to the median gross salary calculated during the first year 1 of the 43 Year Cycle and the rates adjusted accordingly. 4. For year 3 of eachthe 43 Year Cycle, the 12 month Vancouver Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar year will be applied to the year 2 adjusted median gross salary and the rates adjusted accordingly. 5. For year 4 of each 4 Year Cycle, the 12 month Vancouver Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar year will be applied to the year 3 adjusted median gross salary and the rates adjusted accordingly. 65. Rates established during any year will be retroactive to January 1 of that year. Position: Annual Salary: 1. Board chair An amount equivalent to 75% of the median of the gross salaries of the mayors in the GVRD as calculated pursuant to the General Provisions above. 2. Board vice chair An amount equivalent to 50% of the sum paid to the Board chair. 3. alternate Board chair and alternate Board vice chair An amount equivalent to 6% of the sum paid to the Board chair. 4. electoral area A director An amount equivalent to 14.5% of the sum paid to the Board chair. Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 3 of IFC - 24

164 Schedule B replaced by Bylaw 1143, 2011 Schedule B to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Remuneration for Attendance at Qualifying Meetings Position: Calculation for determining payment: 1. Board chair and Board vice chair.5% of the Board chair s annual salary for: a) each meeting attended when serving on any select committee; b) each meeting attended when serving on any standing committee, subject to an annual overall cap of 18 standing committee meetings; and twice that amount when a meeting lasts longer than 4 hours, subject to a daily cap of 1% of the Board chair s annual salary. 2. Board and committee members except Board chair and Board vice chair 3. committee chair except Board chair and Board vice chair.5% of the Board chair s annual salary for each meeting attended and twice that amount when a meeting lasts longer than 4 hours, subject to a daily cap of 1% of the Board chair s annual salary. A monthly amount equivalent to.5% of the Board chair s annual salary as payment for meetings with staff of the Regional District and other routine business of their committees including reviewing agenda, signing correspondence and other matters of a routine administrative nature. Such payment is in addition to the amount paid under item 2, above..5% of the Board chair s annual salary for each event the committee chair or designate attends for events or occasions as an official representative of the Regional District, including but not limited to, the official opening of facilities, public events sponsored by a committee, or such other events or occasions as may be authorized by the Board chair; and for non routine meetings with staff or the Board chair or vice chair or other directors including briefings for newly appointed committee chairs and vice chairs and substantive policy discussions. Payments for such events or occasions are in addition to amounts paid under item 2, above, but subject to a combined daily cap of 1% of the Board chair s annual salary. Amended by Bylaw 1183, committee members who are not Board members.5% of the Board chair s annual salary for each meeting attended, and twice that amount when a meeting lasts longer than 4 hours, subject to a daily cap of 1% of the Board chair s annual salary. Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 4 of IFC - 25

165 Schedule C replaced by Bylaw 1183, 2013 Schedule C to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Qualifying Meetings The following will be considered qualifying meetings for the purposes of determining entitlement to remuneration for attendance as provided for in section 4 of this bylaw: Amended by Bylaw 1221, 2015 Replaced by Bylaw 1221, 2015 Amended by Bylaw 1221, meetings, workshops and strategic planning sessions of the Board to which all Board members have been invited; 2. meetings of a select or standing committee of which they are a member; 3. meetings of a subcommittee of a select or standing committee of which they are a member; 4. public information meetings and public hearings where the Board appoints a panel; 5. Courts of Revision for the lists of electors and parcel tax rolls for the Electoral Area of the GVRD to which they are appointed; 6. meetings of other outside organizations where the Board member has been appointed by the Board to represent the GVRD provided no other payment is received from such organizations; 7. meetings of other outside organizations (excluding courses and similar education or research activities, conventions, seminars, workshops and conferences ( Events )) where the Board member has been nominated by the Board to serve on the outside organization s board or governing body, and where meeting attendance and associated expenses have been approved by the Board at the time of nomination; 8. such other meetings or occasions on the business of the GVRD as authorized by the Board chair within the Board approved budget; 9. except as set out in sections 10 and 11 below, Events within the scope of the Board approved budget for Events, which have been approved by a resolution passed by the standing committee that has oversight of the general government budget, and where the attendance and associated remuneration has been authorized by the Board chair. 10. Events attended by Board chair, Board vice chair or electoral area director where there are sufficient funds within the Board approved budget for Events. 11. Where remuneration for attendance at Events will exceed a board approved budget, a request for remuneration for attendance at an Event must be made to the board and the board may pass a resolution authorizing remuneration for attendance at an Event. Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 5 of IFC - 26

166 Schedule D replaced by Bylaw 1183, 2013 Schedule D to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Payment of Expenses General Provisions: 1. Travelers are expected to minimize expenses and travel time such as overnight stays wherever possible based upon the particular circumstances of their travel. 2. The lowest available fares applicable or appropriate to particular itineraries shall be sought and bookings shall be made as far in advance as possible. 3. Where commercial transportation is authorized and used, travelers will make their own travel arrangements and may use travel agencies of their choice. 4. Taxis, shuttles and local transportation services are alternative means of transportation for short local trips. 5. Travelers must complete their own travel expense claim forms. 6. A summary of travelers travel expenses will be posted on the Metro Vancouver website. Position: 1. Payment to Board and committee members for expenses incurred: a) in attending courses, conventions, seminars, workshops and conferences as approved by the Board chair; b) in attending a meeting on the business of the GVRD as approved by the Board chair Payment: a) Travel time to and from a particular destination at.5% of the Board chair s annual salary for travel time less than 4 hours and twice that amount when travel time is longer than 4 hours with the exception that the Board chair and Board vice chair are not entitled to payments for their travel time. b) Meals and incidentals based on Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Appendix C Allowances (Canada & USA) and Appendix D Allowances (International). The traveler is not eligible for reimbursement where meals are provided. c) Actual and reasonable out of pocket expenses for hotel accommodation and registration fees as applicable. d) Mileage based on Canada Revenue Agency s (CRA Revenue Canada) acceptable non taxable mileage rates. This does not apply to attendance at qualifying meetings within the GVRD. e) Air travel based on the following: i. The standard for air travel is economy class. ii. Where continuous air travel exceeds nine hours, the traveler may choose: a) to travel economy class; or b) to travel business/executive class, if available; or Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 6 of IFC - 27

167 c) to travel economy class with scheduled arrival being an extra day ahead of the business purpose of the travel, in which case the traveler will be paid for the extra day the meeting rate of.5% of the Board Chair s salary notwithstanding section a) above. continuous air travel starts at the scheduled departure time of flight, and ends with the arrival at destination or with an overnight stop or layover equivalent to an overnight stop. f) Rail travel based on the following: i. The standard for rail travel is the next highest class after the full economy class. g) Taxis, shuttles and local transportation services based on receipts for actual and reasonable out of pocket expenses including gratuities. 2. Payment to Board members who have been nominated by the Board to other outside organizations and where meeting attendance outside GVRD boundaries and associated expenses have been approved by the Board at the time of nomination 3. Payment to Board and committee members for hosting 4. Payment for expenses for committee and Board members a) Travel time to and from a particular destination at.5% of the Board chair s annual salary for travel time less than 4 hours and twice that amount when travel time is longer than 4 hours with the exception that the Board chair and Board vice chair are not entitled to payments for their travel time. b) Meals and incidentals based on Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Appendix C Allowances (Canada & USA) and Appendix D Allowances (International). The traveler is not eligible for reimbursement where meals are provided. c) Actual and reasonable out of pocket expenses for hotel accommodation, and registration fees as applicable. d) Mileage based on Canada Revenue Agency s (CRA Revenue Canada) acceptable non taxable mileage rates. Actual and reasonable expenses for hosting meals and refreshments. 1/3 of payments will be paid as an allowance for expenses incurred incidental to discharging duties. Consolidation of Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007 Page 7 of IFC - 28

168 6.1 Intergovernment and Finance Committee 2016 Work Plan Report Date: September 14, 2016 Priorities 1st Quarter International Program and Events Approval Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) Presentation George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Definition Report BC Public Sector Compensation Emergency Program Act Review Regional Prosperity Initiative - Roundtable Update Quarterly Legal Update Report Intergovernmental Relations Updates as required Collective Bargaining Update as required 2nd Quarter Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) Update Regional Entities Review Overall Annual Budget and Five Year Financial Plan Update approval for Districts Regional Parks Service Review Project Update Regional Growth Strategy Update Asset Disposal Policy George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Project Update Regional Prosperity Initiative Roundtable Update Capilano Watershed Project Update Provincial and Federal Transportation Projects - Utilities Update National Zero Waste Council Update Zero Waste Communication Update Quarterly Legal Update Report Intergovernmental Relations Updates as required Collective Bargaining Update as required Status Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete In Progress Complete Pending In Progress In Progress In Progress Complete Complete In Progress In Progress In Progress In Progress Complete Complete Pending In Progress IFC - 29

169 3rd Quarter International Program and Events Reports Pending UBC Memorandum of Understanding Steering Committee Activities In Progress 2016 Metro Vancouver Zero Waste Conference Pending GVRD Remuneration Bylaw Review In Progress Regional Prosperity Initiative - Roundtable Update In Progress Quarterly Legal Update Report In Progress Regional Parks Service Review Project Report Pending Regional Growth Strategy Update Pending George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Project Update In Progress National Zero Waste Council Update In Progress Zero Waste Communication Update Pending Collective Bargaining Update as required Pending Sponsorship Policy Update Pending 4th Quarter Regional District Service Area, General Government and Corporate Support Annual Pending Budget Review Overall Annual Budget and Five Year Financial Plan Update approval for Districts Pending Long term Financial Plan Policy Direction Pending 2016 Metro Vancouver Zero Waste Conference Pending Quarterly Legal Update Pending Regional Prosperity Initiative - Roundtable Update Pending National Zero Waste Council Updates Pending Zero Waste Communication Updates Pending George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Project Update Pending Capilano Watershed Project Update Pending Intergovernmental Relations Updates as required Pending Collective Bargaining Update as required Pending Board Policy Development as required Pending IFC - 30

170 6.2 FF40. TRANS/111K TransLink New Westnnste BC Tel nk.ca South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority July 11, 2016 Greg Moore, Chair Greater Vancouver Regional District Board of Directors 4330 Kingsway Burnaby, BC V5H 4GB Gd CS?JL1 3 2fl ,, Aj4th%t -JoCopy Doc Na: CAOTrawrNo: Hi:sE:: Dear Chair Moore: Re: Federal Gas Tax Fund Expenditures Policy Thank you for your letter of June 17 regarding the current Federal Gas Tax Expenditures Policy recently adopted by the Metro Vancouver Board. The policy and associated guidelines create the certainty of expectations that both parties need to more effectively work together to achieve our mutual aims. The information forwarded also provides greater clarity on the process by which applications for project funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund will be considered. TransLink staff is now working with Metro Vancouver staff to ensure that our submission for this September addresses the information requirements and evaluation criteria appropriately. TransLink looks forward to continuing to work with Metro Vancouver to advance the Mayors Council Vision and the Metro 2040 regional growth strategy. Vours Truly, Don Rose Chair, TransLink Board of Directors IFC - 31

171 File: /GMTR-O&03 COLUMBIA BRITISH I 6.3 mb Copy CPc IFC - 32 office Victoria BCV8W 9V1 Victoria Assessment PD Box 9426 Stn Prov Govt 1 & 2 Fl 836 Yates Street Environmental Mailing Address: Location: technical advice on issues and potential effects of GMTR that are related to their organization s mandate. MV has participated throughout the EA to date, including As you are aware, MV is a member of EAO s advisory Working Group for the GMTR Aboriginal Groups. The role of Working Group representatives is to provide EAO with EA, which includes representatives from provincial, federal and local governments and the outcome of EAs by providing input on the potential for adverse effects on Aboriginal Interests as well as environmental, economic, social, heritage and health effects from proposed projects in BC. thorough reviews of major projects in BC. These reviews provide significant opportunities for Aboriginal Groups, government agencies and the public to influence EAO is a neutrally administered office that is required by law to undertake rigorous, Replacement Project (GMTR), which included Metro Vancouver s (MV) June 24, 2016 regarding the environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed George Massey Tunnel impact assessment report summarizing its concerns with GMTR. Thank you for your letter of July 7, 2016 to the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) Dear Ms. Mason: Carol.Masonmetrovancouver.orq CommissionerlChief Administrative Officer.:::. :::z: 4330 Kingsway Metro Vancouver SENT VIA Carol Mason FIbONO Burnaby BC V5H 4G8 August 3, 2016 Aclion ;;..._ C-MD CM/?AU Reference: N

172 -2- reviewing and providing input into the development of the Application Information Requirements (AIR) document, which outlines what information is required to be included in the Application for an EA Certificate, and submitting comments to inform EAO s completeness evaluation (screening) of the Application. EAO also sought MV s input on revisions of the Application prior to EAC accepting the Application, and MV will continue to have opportunities to submit comments and concerns for consideration as part of the ongoing EA. Several of the concerns that were outlined in MV s letter of July 7, 2016, have been raised by MV s Working Group representatives, and their feedback informed the AIR accordingly. Such concerns include assessment of potential adverse effects of GMTR on: Traffic, which is included as an Intermediate Component (IC) of the EA; MV s regional park lands in the vicinity of the GMTR, which is included in the Land Use Valued Component (VC) Assessment chapter; and MV s utilities infrastructure in the vicinity of the GMTR, which is included in the Marine Use and Land Use VC Assessment chapters. EAO has been in discussion with MV staff, and can confirm that many of the other issues outlined in the June 24, 2016 report that are not mentioned directly in this letter will be assessed in detail during the Application Review stages of the EA. EAO wishes to note that the intent of an EA is to inform decision makers about potential adverse effects of proposed projects, including potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. EAO has not reached conclusions on these potential effects to date, nor is public consultation, including stakeholder input (including Metro Vancouver s), considered by EAO to be complete at this point in time. EAO will continue to require information gathering and public consultation activities throughout the 180-day Application Review phase of the EA. EAO looks forward to working further with MV throughout the EA process, including during Application Review. EAC will be providing further detail to the Working Group about the next steps and timelines of Application Review, which will include the review of the Application by the Working Group, upcoming Working Group meetings, and the review and comment of EAO s draft Assessment Report. IFC - 33

173 Lindsay.Waltongov.bc.ca. Lindsay Walton, Project Assessment Officer, by telephone at or at , or by at Michael.Shepardgov.bc.ca. You can also reach If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me by telephone IFC - 34 Metro Vancouver, Marcin.Pachcinskimetrovancouver.org Marcin Pachcinski, Division Manager, Electoral Area and Environment Geoff.Freergov.bc.ca George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Geoff Freer, Executive Project Director Metro Vancouver, KimberlyHometrovancouver.org cc: Kimberly Ho, Executive Assistant, Chief Administrative Officer Executive Office Project Assessment Manager Michael Shepard Yours truly, -3-