Calgary West LRT Navigating a Contracting Strategy through Stakeholder Management and Public Engagement

Transcription

1 Calgary West LRT Navigating a Contracting Strategy through Stakeholder Management and Public Engagement Jon Halford, P.Eng., Project Director The City of Calgary 1700, Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P 0T8 Canada Phone: (403) Fax: (403) Nathan Higgins, P.Eng., Vice President Hatch Mott MacDonald Ltd. 1250, Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P 3G2 Canada Phone: (403) Fax: (403) Word Count: 6,209

2 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page i of iv ABSTRACT The first 28 years of operation has demonstrated that Calgary s C-Train service provides the time savings, reliability, and other benefits necessary to entice Calgarians to change their mode of travel to public transit. The success of Calgary Transit s operations is evident when one considers that in the spring of 2008 ridership has grown to over 290,000 boarding passengers daily, which ranks as the highest among North American LRT systems. Implementation of the new West LRT line will be the largest single expansion to Calgary s LRT network in the past 20 years and will consist of eight (8) kilometres (5 miles) of double-track, six (6) LRT stations, and two (2) park and ride facilities. The projected daily ridership for the West LRT is estimated at 44,000 of which 20% is expected to be from people who make a modal shift from private auto to transit. Functional planning for the West LRT line began in 1983 and in 1988; Calgary City Council approved a route from the downtown 7 th Avenue LRT corridor to 69 Street SW. During the 20 years that passed since the 1988 route was approved, the City of Calgary has changed. In November 2007, City Council approved a modified alignment to address these changes and directed City Administration to proceed with design and construction of the line by December This paper documents the analysis leading to the design-build contracting strategy that the West LRT team adopted to implement the project. It also describes the process that was followed to manage current stakeholder expectations and input to the preliminary design. The paper describes the solutions that the West LRT team arrived at to; i) overcome public concerns towards an elevated guideway through the community of Sunalta; and ii) create station designs that incorporate a common theme along the West LRT corridor while respecting the unique nature of the communities that the line will serve. Finally, the paper will provide an update as to the status of the design-build contract procurement.

3 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page iii of iv Listing of Tables & Figures Figure 1 Calgary Location Map Figure 2 Calgary s LRT Network Figure 3 West LRT Alignment Figure 4 Artistic Rendering of Elevated Guideway & Station in Sunalta with future Transit Oriented Development Figure 5 26 Street LRT Station Rendering TABLE 1: Stakeholders Common to All Zones TABLE 2: External Stakeholders - Specific to Each Zone

4 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page iv of iv TABLE 3: Contract Package Options Summary TABLE 4: The City of Calgary s engage! Policy Summary TABLE 5: West LRT Public Engagement Levels

5 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 1 of 24 1) Introduction The first 28 years of operation has demonstrated that Calgary s C-Train service provides the time savings, reliability, and other benefits necessary to entice Calgarians to change their mode of travel to public transit. The success of Calgary Transit s operations is evident when one considers that in the spring of 2008 ridership had grown to over 290,000 boarding passengers daily, which ranks as the highest among North American LRT systems. Implementation of the new West LRT line will be the largest single expansion to Calgary s LRT network in the past 20 years and will consist of eight (8) kilometres (5 miles) of double-track, six (6) LRT stations, and two (2) park and ride facilities. The projected daily ridership for the West LRT is estimated at 44,000 of which 20% is expected to be from people who make a modal shift from private auto to transit. Figure 1 Calgary Location Map The effectiveness and efficiency of Calgary s LRT system is the result of the consistent application of key planning, design, and operating principles and planning for the new West LRT line was no exception. Nevertheless, over the 20 years since the first planning studies were undertaken, the City of Calgary has continued to mature and has seen significant growth such that Calgary is not what it was in the 1980 s. Ensuring that the transportation network stays ahead of population growth, Calgary City Council gave approval for the design and construction of the West LRT line with an ambitious in-service date of December 2012.

6 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 2 of 24 City Administration created the West LRT Office to manage the planning and delivery of the West LRT line based on City Council s direction including collaboration with stakeholders to integrate the line into their communities. After analyzing, available procurement models, a contracting strategy was established and then an intentional approach to public engagement was undertaken to manage stakeholder expectations and to ensure successful project implementation. 2) Project Background a) Project Planning In 1979, City Council directed the Transportation Department to undertake a comprehensive review of the West LRT line which was first identified in the Southwest Roads Study to reduce the scale of roadways connecting southwest communities with the downtown. In 1983, the West LRT Functional Study examined a number of alignment alternatives along the Bow Trail, 17 Avenue, and Crowchild Trail corridors as well as routes through inner city neighbourhoods. An alignment for West LRT, including station locations, was approved by City Council in 1988 following extensive study and public consultation. In 1990, City Council approved a report that provided updated capital construction costs, population and employment growth forecasts for West LRT and City Administration s recommendation to construct the West LRT line in one stage from downtown to 69 Street S.W. Due to insufficient capital funding, construction of West LRT line was deferred.

7 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 3 of 24 Figure 2 Calgary s LRT Network In 2006, City Administration conducted a review of the previously approved alignment and station locations to update capital construction cost estimates and land requirements. In 2007, City Council approved an updated alignment and capital budget for the West LRT line and authorized City Administration to proceed with design and construction.

8 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 4 of 24 b) Project Description The West LRT Project is an eight (8) kilometre (5 mile) extension of Calgary s C-Train Light Rail system consisting of: at-grade, elevated, tunnel and trenched sections of guideway, six (6) LRT stations, trackwork, traction power, signals and communication systems along with ancillary infrastructure related to roadworks, bus terminals, park and ride lots, utilities and a grade-separated interchange at Sarcee Trail and 17 Avenue S.W. Additional infrastructure to be constructed as part of the West LRT program includes a new high school and a 4-storey commercial building integral with the new Westbrook Station. The target schedule for revenue service on the West LRT line is December The West LRT alignment extends the current LRT corridor on 7 Avenue in the downtown from 11 Street S.W. to 69 Street SW. The route crosses 11 Street SW and follows the Bow Trail corridor to 33 Street where it traverses the Westbrook Mall area to 17 Avenue and proceeds westwards along 17 Avenue to 69 Street S.W. A plan is shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 West LRT Alignment

9 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 5 of 24 c) Service Area West LRT will serve communities in southwest Calgary that are generally located west of the downtown, between the Bow River and the Glenmore Reservoir. The long-term forecasted population in this area is expected to grow from approximately 90,000 today to about 120,000. Long-term employment growth is also expected to increase from the current 18,000 to 23,000. d) Service Plan Centrally locating the West LRT line within the service area was a key factor in the selection of this route to provide the most convenient access to the greatest number of residents, employees and students. Based on the projected population and employment for the West LRT service area, the daily ridership for West LRT is estimated to be between 37,000 to 44,000 assuming a modest level of transit oriented development at some stations. A number of land use planning initiatives have been undertaken to realize transit oriented development opportunities along the West LRT line. e) Key Stakeholders The West LRT Public Engagement Plan (PE Plan) was developed based on The City of Calgary s engage! Policy which governs public consultation on City projects. In the PE Plan, stakeholders were defined as: individuals, groups or organizations with an interest in, or who may potentially be impacted by the West LRT Project. A variety of methods and opportunities were made available to engage project stakeholders. The PE Plan organized external stakeholders along the alignment into three (3) zones. Zone 1 covered the area between 11 Street to 33 Street S.W., Zone 2 from 33 Street to Sarcee Trail S.W. and Zone 3 from Sarcee Trail to 69 Street S.W. The PE Plan was developed in collaboration with three (3) representatives from each of the three (3) zones and was presented to and approved by City Council in September The following tables provide a summary of the key internal and external stakeholders.

10 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 6 of 24 TABLE 1: Stakeholders Common to All Zones EXTERNAL MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC Adjacent residents and businesses Calgary Transit customers Youth and children Seniors Immigrants Federally & Provincially elected members Federation of Calgary Communities Community Associations (as defined by the Federation of Calgary Communities) Commuters Road Users Academic Institutes within the Project area o Private, Independent, and Postsecondary Calgary Board of Education Calgary Catholic School District Board Canadian Pacific Railway Churches, Temples, Mosques, Synagogues School bus companies INTERNAL - CITY Members of Council Calgary Transit Roads Transportation Planning Water Resources Land Use Planning & Policy Planning & Development Approvals Parks Recreation Corporate Properties & Buildings Finance & Supply Law Customer Service & Communications Calgary Police Service Calgary Fire Department Calgary Emergency Medical Services Community & Neighbourhood Services Access Calgary Calgary Housing Company Plan It Calgary TABLE 2: External Stakeholders - Specific to Each Zone Zone 1 (11 Street 33 Street S.W.) Residents, businesses and organizations in the following communities: o Downtown West o Sunalta o Scarboro o Shaganappi o Killarney Greyhound Bus Terminal 10 Avenue Businesses north side 10 Avenue Businesses south side Calgary Ski Club Kerby Centre Department of National Defence (Mewata Armoury) TELUS World of Science Calgary Parks Foundation Millennium Park users Jacques Lodges and Calgary Metropolitan Foundation Shaganappi Golf Course Sunalta Shelter

11 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 7 of 24 Zone 2 (33 Street Sarcee Trail S.W.) Residents, businesses and organizations in the following communities: o Glendale/ Glendale Meadows o Westgate o Rosscarrock o Spruce Cliff o Glenbrook o Wildwood o Glamorgan Businesses in the Westbrook Mall area (37 Street, Bow Trail, 33 Street 17 Avenue) Westbrook Mall Westbrook Professional Building 17 Avenue Businesses and property owners between 33 Street S.W. and Sarcee Trail Alberta Motor Association Westland Centre Calgary Board of Education Ernest Manning High School Zone 3 (Sarcee Trail 73 Street S.W.) Residents, businesses and organizations in the following communities: o Richmond Hill o Signal Hill o Signature Park o Westhills o Discovery Ridge o Springbank Hill o Aspen Woods o Strathcona Park o Christie Park o East Springbank Hill o Coach Hill Residents, businesses and organizations in the following communities: o Patterson Heights o Prominence Point o West Springs/Cougar Ridge o Crestmont Ambrose College Rundle College Calgary Board of Education Calgary Islamic Centre West Market Square Wentworth Manor Skateboard Park users Westside Recreation Centre The PE Plan was based on three (3) primary objectives, namely: 1. To build positive community relations and support for the project with the surrounding stakeholders; 2. To provide meaningful opportunities for stakeholders to be involved in the development of the project; and 3. To ensure the public engagement process support the project s timeline and budget. The PE Plan also included a Community Advocate to act as a technical liaison with communities during the public engagement process. The criteria and selection of the Community Advocate was done in collaboration with community representatives.

12 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 8 of 24 The West LRT Office also managed and coordinated other concurrent public engagement programs related to the West LRT line including an amendment to the Sunalta Area Redevelopment Plan (community redevelopment and land use concepts), the West LRT Land Use Study (future land uses around the LRT stations), the Westbrook Village Area Redevelopment Plan (a community redevelopment plan and land use based on The City s Transit Oriented Development policy), Calgary Transit s redesign of bus service routes for the West LRT service area and the relocation of the Ernest Manning High School in conjunction with the Calgary Board of Education. 3) Contract Strategy a) Evaluation of Project Delivery Models While there are a variety of project delivery models, two distinctly different models were considered for the West LRT line. The Design-Bid-Build (DBB) model in which the Owner engages design consultant(s) to develop the preliminary and final design. The Owner then enters into a separate contract(s) for the construction based on the design completed by the design consultant(s). In this model, the Owner and its consultants are responsible for the design and the Owner retains the risk for design changes during the course of construction. Over the years, most of Calgary s LRT infrastructure and facilities have been delivered using this model. In the Design-Build (DB) model, the Owner contracts with a single entity, the DB Contractor, to design and construct the project. The DB Contractor is responsible for all aspects of the design and construction according to scope of work and requirements established by the Owner. This model enables the Owner to transfer risk for design changes, design-interface issues, and coordination among disciplines to the DB Contractor. The DB model has become increasingly more popular with Owners over the past ten years by offering two primary benefits over the DBB model. The first is compression of the project schedule by increasing the overlap of design and construction activities. The second is by providing a greater level of cost certainty earlier in the project s lifecycle.

13 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 9 of 24 Public-Private Partnership (P3) models have also become increasingly popular in recent years which in their various forms include private sector financing. In the case of the West LRT line, this model was not considered due to the fact that The City had sufficient capital to finance the project and that it would be operated and maintained as part of Calgary s existing LRT network by Calgary Transit, The City s public transit business unit. In the early stages of the project, The City established a revenue service date in December 2012 for the West LRT line. Based on an assessment of the project schedule it was concluded that the DB model would provide a greater level of certainty of achieving the targeted revenue service date versus a DBB model which was unlikely to successfully achieve the targeted revenue service date. Having decided to adopt the DB procurement model it remained to evaluate a number of contract package options under this model. b) Evaluation of Contract Options Packaging of the work is an important consideration for the overall contracting strategy. At one end of the spectrum, an all-inclusive DB contract; at the other an array of smaller DB contracts, perhaps with some DBB packages in areas where it is necessary to be particularly prescriptive on the project requirements. There is no one contract package strategy that is always right. The specifics of the project, its complexity, schedule, cost, and the level of activity in the engineering and construction markets along with the Owner s preferences including risk tolerance must be considered in defining the most appropriate contract package scenario. The contract package options evaluated for West LRT line represent a spectrum of choices from one allinclusive DB contract progressing to options which increasingly divided the work into smaller contracts. The contract packages options are summarized in Table 3:

14 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 10 of 24 TABLE 3: Contract Package Options Summary Option No. Option Name Components 1 2 All-Inclusive DB Contract Separate Civil and Systems Contracts 3 Separate Civil and Systems DB Contracts. Stations as DBB contracts - Heavy civil, systems, stations in one DB Contract - Park/ride lots, demolition and certain utility relocations could be contracted as separate smaller packages outside of the DB Contract. - One DB contract for civil work, including trackwork and stations. - A separate DB contract for systems including traction power, overhead catenary, signals, communications, surveillance, and other systemwide components. - Park/ride lots, demolition and certain utility moves could be contracted as separate smaller packages outside of the DB Contract - Like Option 2, but stations would be delivered in traditional method. DB Contractor could build guideway through the stations, with station contractors following DB Contractor - Park/ride lots, demolition and certain utility moves could be contracted as separate smaller packages outside of the DB Contract 4 Split Civil into DB Contracts Separate stations contracts. Separate DB Systems Contract. - Civil would be split into separate DB contracts with geographic and work-nature split of scopes. - Systems delivered as a DB contract including trackwork. - Stations would be DBB contract packages. - Park/ride lots, demolition and certain utility moves could be contracted as separate smaller packages outside of the DB Contract The contract packages options were evaluated based on the following considerations: i) Cost Option 1 will inherently have more sub-contracts under the DB Contractor with markups, risk and contingency carried on each resulting in a premium being paid for combining all the work into one contract. In return, the Owner gains the benefit of cost certainty, schedule compression and transference of interface and coordination risks.

15 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 11 of 24 In Options 2 and 3, smaller packages offer the ability to potentially attract more bidders and therefore provide more competitive pricing to the Owner. However, the Owner s direct costs rise by increasing the number of contracts to manage without the benefit of risk transfer offered by Option 1. In Option 4 the breaking of the project into smaller packages may introduce a cost disadvantage incumbent contractors may be perceived to have a competitive advantage, thus driving away other bidders and actually increasing costs. The cost differences among the options were evaluated by considering: Reduced markups on LRT systems and stations sub-contracts in Options 2, 3 and 4; Additional owner s project management costs as more contracts are introduced in Options 2, 3 and 4. Additional station design costs in Options 3 and 4; Additional financing costs for extended construction periods in Option 3 (estimated to be six months) and Option 4 (estimated to be 12 months). A premium reflecting loss of economic scale for Option 4 where the heavy civil work is completely disaggregated. Cost Preference = Option 2 (Separate Civil & Systems Contracts) ii) Risk Transfer Option 1 achieves the greatest level of cost and schedule risk transfer by putting all the inter-discipline coordination and management within the responsibility of the DB Contractor. The Owner s main obligations are provision of right of way, some major utility moves, design reviews, construction oversight and general contract administration. Option 2 would result in a modest increase in risk being retained by the City, which would stem from the provision of accurate and timely systems information to the Civil Contractor. Conversely, there is a risk of delay claims by the Systems Contractor, whose work may be impacted by the Civil Contractor-caused

16 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 12 of 24 delays. For reference it was estimated that the Civil Contractor would have overhead costs three times greater than the Systems contractor. Options 3 and 4 represent decreasing levels of risk transferred to the contractors, and thus increasing risk retained by the Owner. As there are more contract interfaces, there is an increasing probability of delay claims and claims from other impacts. Option 1 is preferred, overall, from the risk transfer perspective. The additional risk transfer from the Owner achieved by Option 1 relative to Option 2 offsets the premium which would be paid for Option 1. Thus, combining these two measures (cost and risk), Option 1 would be preferred. Option 2 is a reasonable option, while Option 3 is considered to be a marginal prospect in the current construction market. From a risk perspective, Option 4 should not be entertained. Cost & Risk Preference = Option 1 (All-Inclusive DB Contract) iii) Schedule Option 1 has the highest probability of meeting the schedule, based on consolidation of decision making within a single contracting entity. Interfaces are reduced, with corresponding reduction in potential for delays attributable to the Owner or Other Contractor. Option 2 could achieve the targeted revenue service date in December 2012, but with less certainty than Option 1. It is conceivable, but unlikely, that Option 3 could achieve the schedule. Because of the disaggregating of the station contracts and the likely prolongation of the DBB procurement and completion it is believed that Option 3 would be prolonged by at least six months. For comparative purposes, Option 4 would prolong completion by approximately one year. Option 1 is preferred from the schedule perspective, with Option 2 a close second. It is not likely that Option 3 would achieve the project schedule, and Option 4 is the least preferred.

17 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 13 of 24 Overall, in particular from combined cost, risk transfer, schedule Option 1 was recommended. Option 2 is feasible and would be a realistic option to pursue. Option 3 would increase the City s risk exposure and it is unlikely that the project schedule could be achieved. In regard to Option 4, it is not a viable model for the project the heavy civil work is too disaggregated resulting in too many contract interfaces and a correspondingly increased likelihood of delay claims. Cost & Risk & Schedule Preference = Option 1 (All-Inclusive DB Contract) c) Station Design Development The West LRT Office recognized that a significant DB Contractor risk is the uncertainty arising from the public engagement process as it relates to station and station plaza design. To enable the level of public engagement expected by stakeholders while maintaining the mandated project schedule, it was decided to delay the issuance of the station DB reference concepts until after public engagement had been undertaken and development approvals were obtained by the West LRT Office. This approach enabled the public to provide meaningful input, enabled the West LRT Office to negotiate building code variances with The City s Building Regulations and ensured that the Owner achieved the full benefit of project design and construction coordination by the DB Contractor. The integrated West LRT Office/Consultant team structure, along with political and administrative will, enabled this process to be achieved within the project timeline. This process enables the DB Contractor to focus on their strengths, namely detailed design and construction means and methods, without the risk and prolonged timeline that public engagement can cause.

18 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 14 of 24 4) Stakeholder Management a) Sunalta Elevated Guideway Council approved the West LRT Functional Study in 1988 which established an alignment and right-ofway requirements from downtown to 69 Street S.W. The easterly portion of the alignment was predominately at-grade (ground level) with bridges to cross over 14 Street S.W. and the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) mainline. During the 20 years that passed since this alignment was approved, Calgary has changed. Some of the road network changes contemplated back in the 1980 s that would have enabled the LRT alignment to make its way from the downtown to 33 Street S.W., particularly along Bow Trail between 11 Street S.W. and Crowchild Trail, are no longer envisioned with new initiatives such as the Centre City Plan that was launched in The West LRT alignment approved by Council in November 2007 modified the previously approved alignment by elevating the guideway adjacent to the community of Sunalta, The elevated guideway minimizes changes to the existing road network while allowing flexibility for future upgrading, particularly in the vicinity of the congested Crowchild Trail/Bow Trail interchange, and minimized capital construction costs. The corridor for the West LRT posed several challenges in developing an alignment that would meet planning objectives, City Council policies, and stakeholder interests. Some of these key challenges were: the physical topography of the Bow River escarpment in west Calgary, CPR s existing mainline and future track requirements, minimizing impacts on existing landowners and adjacent communities and developing an LRT corridor that maximizes accessibility and encourages transit oriented development around stations.

19 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 15 of 24 Local community groups demonstrated a keen interest in how the LRT alignment would be integrated into their community and were well organized, and vocal in their opposition to the planned elevated guideway. Their main concerns were: Perceived negative visual impact of the elevated guideway Perception that the LRT would create an environment for increased criminal activity Perception that an elevated station would dominate the community surroundings. Having been directed by City Council, the West LRT Office developed several alternatives involving elevated, tunnelled and at-grade LRT alignments and reviewed them with consideration to the following City policies: City of Calgary Triple Bottom Line Policy Themes: Economic, Environmental, and Social Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Guidelines Plan It Calgary: Approved Sustainability Principles for Land use and Mobility imaginecalgary: Long Range Urban Sustainability Plan Centre City Plan: Vision to make Centre City a liveable, caring, and thriving place Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) After reviewing the many considerations in selecting an alignment that best serves the numerous stakeholders that have an interest in the project, in June 2008, City Council approved an alignment that: Maintained the proposed elevated guideway alignment and station at adjacent to the community of Sunalta; Incorporated active uses adjacent to the station and elevated guideway; and Altered the alignment by reducing the length of elevated guideway west of Sunalta to bring the LRT alignment to grade in the median of Bow Trail.

20 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 16 of 24 Figure 4 Artistic Rendering of Elevated Guideway & Station in Sunalta with future Transit Oriented Development Benefits to the community from this alignment were: Reduced visual impact of the elevated guideway; Station location that maximizes opportunity for TOD and accessibility; and Minimize long term impacts to Millenium Park and the existing road network. Trade-offs made to realize the above mentioned benefits were: Increased capital cost; and Increased short-term traffic impacts along Bow Trail during construction. b) Public Engagement Plan (PE Plan) Development of the PE Plan began with a Community Summit held in June Citizens were invited to bring forward issues important to them related to the West LRT line which were used to create a

21 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 17 of 24 community issues list. Following the Community Summit, a call was issued to more than 250 contact names asking for expressions of interest in working on a committee to develop the public engagement process for the project. During July and August 2008, the Public Engagement Planning Committee was formed with citizen representatives working in collaboration with the West LRT Office to develop a PE Plan based on the City s engage! Policy and Framework. Open and frank discussions between committee members and the West LRT Office usually resulted in agreeing on a level of engagement on issues that mattered to communities. Where committee members expressed interest in being involved to a greater degree than was initially proposed, the West LRT Office considered the suggestions and moved to higher levels of engagement wherever possible. TABLE 4: The City of Calgary s engage! Policy Summary engage! Level Strategy Promise Inform To provide information that will assist stakeholders in understanding issues, problems, alternatives and / or solutions. Both stakeholders and The City listen to and learn about each others views, plans, concerns, and expectations. We will endeavour to provide information that is timely, accurate, balanced, objective, easily understood, and highly accessible. We will respond to questions for clarification. We will listen to stakeholders and learn about their plans, views, issues, concerns and expectations. Consult Collaborate Stakeholders feedback is obtained through consultation to analyze issues and build alternatives, and thereby make contributions to the decision making process. Consulting with stakeholders ensures issues and concerns are understood and considered. Stakeholders are considered partners in the decision making process, including collaboration on analyzing issues, building alternatives, identifying a preferred solution, and making recommendations. We will consult with stakeholders to obtain feedback and ensure their input is considered and incorporated to the maximum extent possible. We undertake to advise how consultation affected the decisions and outcomes. We will partner with stakeholders in a process that results in joint recommendations. We undertake to advise how collaboration affected decision making.

22 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 18 of 24 Empower Aspects of the decision making process are delegated to stakeholders. Where legislation permits, we will abide with the decisions made under delegated authority. Where legislation precludes making such a commitment in advance, we undertake to be guided by the outcome. TABLE 5: West LRT Public Engagement Levels Issues engage! Level Track and Rail Systems Rail alignment Elevated Guideways Aesthetics Rail Crossings to control LRVs Rail Signals to control LRVs Inform Inform Inform Station Canopy Platform Location & Configuration Circulation & Processing Area passenger flow, ticket purchase area and access to station platform. Passenger Safety Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Signage Station identification & way-finding Furniture Placement (location, not type) Stairs, Escalators & Elevators Materials Lighting Service Rooms Calgary Transit operations and maintenance. Station Name Public Art (within station) Collaborate Inform Consult Consult Consult Inform

23 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 19 of 24 Issues engage! Level Station Site Bus Access Bus Stop/Bay/Terminal Locations Pedestrian Access Bicycle Access & Facilities Park-and-Ride Kiss-and-Ride Streetscape benches, garbage receptacles, lighting Landscaping Consult Collaborate Collaborate Collaborate Traffic and Detours Road Intersection Design Turning Lanes Level crossings Pedestrian & Cycle crossings Laneways Road Traffic Signals Detour Requirements (outside work zone) Detour Requirements (inside work zone) Road Detour / Closure Notifications Road Closures including permanent street closures Construction staging Pathways & Cyclist Routes (connection between the station and existing pathway networks) Pedestrian & Cyclist Bridges (outside site) Consult Inform Collaborate Collaborate Consult Other Noise Walls Aesthetics and Location Portals, Bridges, Tunnels Consult Inform

24 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 20 of 24 Issues engage! Level Calgary Transit Bus Route Changes Landscaping outside of Station areas Existing tree relocations Land Use Plans Future Transit Oriented Developments and Area Redevelopment Plans Consult Consult Consult With the support of the Public Engagement Planning Committee, the PE Plan was presented to City Council s Standing Policy Committee on Land Use, Planning & Transportation and correspondingly approved by City Council in September The public engagement process was run concurrently with the preliminary design with the PE Plan organized into two (2) stages. Stage 1 from September to December 2008 focused primarily on the conceptual design of the six (6) LRT Stations. Stage 2 from February to June 2009 focused on the urban design of LRT Station plazas, noise attenuation, landscaping, pedestrian/cyclist facilities and mobility assessment plans for each station area. For Stage 1 of the PE Plan an initial large format workshop-style meeting was held in September 2008 to present and discussion elements common to each of the Stations. Following this initial workshop, five (5) community advisory committees were established for the six (6) stations to discuss elements that were specific to each of the station locations. From October to November 2008, each community advisory committee met three (3) times with the West LRT Office and its Owner s Engineer to discuss and provide input into the conceptual design of the LRT stations. Two (2) public information meetings were held in December 2008 to present Station design concepts and the results of the community advisory committees discussions and to solicit feedback from the general public.

25 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 21 of 24 The West LRT Office has placed a high priority on open and effective communication. A variety of communication modes were employed to maximize the reach of project related information to those who had an interest in staying informed. The West LRT Website is the most current and comprehensive source of information. It is the easiest and most accessible means of project updates, including the public engagement process, and all other related information to all Calgarians. It also provides a portal to parties outside of Calgary who may be interested in transportation-related projects. Meeting Notes of public meetings are posted on the West LRT website. e-newsletters are regularly issued to stakeholders who have subscribed through the West LRT website. Media relations will continue to be conducted throughout the process to keep stakeholders and citizens informed. Information will also be provided through other media such as newspaper advertisements, newsletters, mail-outs and hand-outs at public meetings to reach stakeholders and citizens. Through the terms of reference for community advisory committee members, they committed to reporting back, verbally or in writing, to their respective community, including their Community Association, on the progress of work being undertaken in the engagement process and recommendations being made. For Stage 2 of the PE Plan the public engagement on the conceptual design of LRT station plaza areas was initiated in February 2009 with an educational presentation on what urban design entails. Two (2) community advisory committees were formed by consolidating the Stage 1 LRT Station community advisory committees to provide a broader discussion on urban design elements. A total of three (3) meetings with the urban design community advisory committees were held between February and June 2009 with two (2) public information meetings will be held in June 2009 to present

26 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 22 of 24 urban design and landscaping concepts for the LRT station plaza areas and to solicit feedback from the general public. During Stage 2, sound attenuation warrants and proposed mitigations were also discussed with the Urban Design Community Advisory Committees and with over 60 directly affected residents. In parallel with public engagement on urban design, landscaping and sound attenuation, each of the community associations along the West LRT line were requested to provide a traffic representative to work with the West LRT Office and The City s Transportation Planning group to discuss transportation matters related to pedestrians, cyclists, parking and vehicular traffic. A Mobility Assessment and Planning (MAP) study around each of the six (6) Station areas was launched in March 2009 to examine transportation issues related to pedestrians, cyclists, parking and vehicular traffic. The results of the MAP studies were presented to the community traffic representatives in June The West LRT Office will continue to work with the community traffic representatives on to address traffic management issues during construction of the West LRT line. c) West LRT Station Design Theme It was the desire of the West LRT Office for the stations along the corridor to share a common identity or theme while maintaining the unique character of each of the communities in which they would be situated. West LRT architectural consultants, GEC Architecture, Ltd., envisioned stations that embody curvilinear forms that complemented the host community s surroundings. An elliptical shape with the major axis rotated 10 degrees from horizontal was selected as the common theme. Station concept designs were developed, with the direction of elliptical tilt varying with the orientation that capitalized on the position for sunlight to illuminate the station by day and for the station lighting to blend with the surroundings at night. Station concepts were presented to community advisory committees early in the public engagement process and the groups enthusiastically embraced the elliptical theme. Representatives from each

27 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 23 of 24 community advisory committee were solicited for input to station building materials as well as urban design treatments and pedestrian access for the station plazas. Having obtained community buy-in, the resulting station reference concepts were further developed and incorporated into an addendum to the DB Request for Proposals per the established project contract strategy. Figure 5 26 Street LRT Station Rendering 5) Design-Build Procurement Status Report Between September and November 2008, three (3) Industry Bulletins were issued by The City s West LRT Office to advise interested parties of the West LRT project and the Design/Build procurement process. In November 2008, the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was issued with four (4) respondents providing submissions in January In February 2009, three (3) teams were short-listed to become the proponents and enter the Request for Proposal (RFP) stage. Technical submissions from each of the proponent teams were received in July 2009 with evaluations being completed in early September in advance of the proponents financial submissions being received. With selection of the Preferred Proponent, the schedule is to complete finalization of the Design/Build Agreement scope of work and costs to award the contract by the end of October 2009.

28 Jon Halford, P.Eng. Page 24 of 24 6) Conclusion Implementing a project of the magnitude of Calgary s new West LRT line requires knowledgeable and intentional program planning, careful management of stakeholder expectations, and diligent execution. The key to success has been balancing economic, environmental and social considerations with the myriad of City policies, Council directives, and stakeholder expectations while focusing on the goal of commencing revenue service by December The transit industry recognizes Calgary as a leader by the efficiency of its LRT system. A recent paper entitled Calgary s C-Train, Effective Capital Utilization, published by the Transportation Research Board, places Calgary in the top third of all LRT systems with respect to having the lowest capital costs per kilometre and as a top performer with respect to daily ridership. The road map by which the West LRT is being navigated through stakeholder management and public engagement will ensure that Calgary Transit s legacy of achievement continues with the successful implementation of West LRT service in 2012.