8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
1/30
GEORGE MASSEY TUNNELREPLACEMENT PROJECT
PHASE 3 – PROJECT DEFINITION REPORT
CONSULTATION SUMMARY REPORT
MARCH 2016
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
2/30
This independent report of findings was prepared by Lucent Quay Consulting Inc. for the Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure. The analysis includes input received through open houses, feedback
forms, written submissions and stakeholder meetings. The views represented in the feedback forms and
written submissions, which are summarized in this report, reflect the interests and opinions of people who
chose to participate in the consultation process. They may not reflect the views of the broader public.
The Ministry will consider the results of this consultation program along with ongoing technical and
financial analysis in determining how to move the Project forward.
Feedback form results presented in this report are a combination of online and hard copy feedback. Online
feedback was collected using the Interceptum survey platform. Interceptum stores all of its data in
Canada.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
3/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. i
1. OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 About the Project ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Previous Consultation and Engagement .............................................................................................. 1
1.3 About this Report ................................................................................................................................. 2
2. PHASE 3 CONSULTATION PROCESS ....................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Overview .............................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Notification ........................................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Engagement Methods .......................................................................................................................... 3
3. PARTICIPATION ......................................................................................................................................... 5
4. SUMMARY OF INPUT ............................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Participant Mix ...................................................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Summary of Input from All Sources ..................................................................................................... 6
4.3 Stakeholder Meetings Summary .......................................................................................................... 7
4.4 Open Houses Summary ..................................................................................................................... 10
4.5 Feedback Forms Summary ................................................................................................................ 10
4.6 Written Submissions Summary .......................................................................................................... 21
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 Advertisements and Other Notifications
APPENDIX 2 Feedback Form
APPENDIX 3 Display Boards
APPENDIX 4 Stakeholder Presentation Deck
APPENDIX 5 Stakeholder Meeting Notes
APPENDIX 6 Written Submissions
APPENDIX 7 Verbatim Responses1
1 Available under separate cover at the Project Office
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
4/30
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
5/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
About the Project
The George Massey Tunnel (Tunnel) is an important link in the regional and provincial transportation
system, connecting to key gateways that fuel our national, provincial and regional economies. The Tunnelis now at capacity during the morning and afternoon rush hours and near capacity throughout the rest of
the day. Population and employment on both sides of the Tunnel is forecast to continue growing, with
demand at the Tunnel increasing by about 20 per cent over the next 30 years.
In response to growing concerns about the impact of congestion and recognizing the age and condition of
the existing George Massey Tunnel, the Government of British Columbia announced in September 2012
that planning for a replacement would begin immediately.
Following two phases of public consultation, technical analysis and ongoing dialogue with stakeholders for
a period of approximately three years, the Project Definition Report and business case were released for
public feedback on December 16, 2015. The project scope includes replacing the Tunnel with a new 10-
lane bridge (eight lanes plus two dedicated transit/high-occupancy vehicle lanes) spanning the Fraser River
South Arm, decommissioning the Tunnel, and improving Highway 99 from Bridgeport Road in Richmond
to Highway 91 in Delta. Proposed improvements include replacing the Westminster Highway, Steveston
Highway and Highway 17A interchanges; widening Highway 99 to accommodate dedicated transit/high-
occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes; and providing multi-use pathways for cyclists and pedestrians across the
bridge that connect with the existing cycling and pedestrian networks on either side. The general
alignment of the Project will follow the existing Highway 99 corridor, including across the Fraser River.
The Project is designed to reduce congestion and improve travel times and reliability for commuters,
transit, commercial vehicles, and tourists; improve safety; provide new travel options for cyclists and
pedestrians; and provide capacity for improved transit.
Consultation Process
The Ministry adopted phased public and external stakeholder consultation program to support project
planning and development. This included:
• Phase 1: Understanding the Need (November to December 2012) – Focused on understanding theneed and potential constraints to develop the project scope and design requirements.
• Phase 2: Exploring the Options (March to April 2013) – Based on Phase 1 consultation results and
preliminary technical work, Phase 2 sought input on the draft project scope and goals, five potential
replacement scenarios and on the criteria to evaluate these options.
• Phase 3: Project Definition Report (December 16, 2015 to January 28, 2016) – Sought feedback onthe full Project scope and business case, including Project goals, design features, benefit and cost
analysis, draft performance evaluation/Project success measures, and tolling to fund the Project.
This report summarizes input received from Phase 3 consultation, which included participation from the
public and stakeholders from across the Greater Vancouver region. Phase 1 and 2 results are available
under separate cover and online at masseytunnel.ca.
Participation
• 1,037 people submitted a feedback form
• 258 people signed up for project update emails (in addition to the 1,487 who had previously signed up)
• 750 people attended the open houses
• 102 people representing more than 60 organizations participated in the nine stakeholder meetings
• 11 organizations provided written submissions
• 266 people emailed the Project Office
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
6/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 ii
• 310 people visited the Project Office in Richmond
• 67 people called the Project Information Line
• The Project website had 14,218 visits; the most popular downloads were:
o Project Definition Report (2,677 downloads)
o Business Case (286 downloads)
o
PDR Draft Reference Concept (256 downloads)
Summary of Feedback
The following is a high level summary of feedback from all sources, including stakeholder meetings, open
houses, feedback form respondents and written submissions.
• General support for the Project overall and interest in more detail about specific elements including
interchange designs, traffic forecasts, and the upcoming environmental assessment
• General support for the following physical scope elements:
o Strong support for proposed transit, cycling and pedestrian measures
o Strong support for capacity improvements to address congestion
o Support for the proposed interchange improvements
o
Miscellaneous recommendations for additional Project scope items• Respondents from Delta and Richmond were more likely to be supportive of the Project as compared
with Vancouver residents, who were more likely to say that the Project is not needed
• Mixed support for tolling as a funding mechanism:
o Most participants who commented about tolls supported tolling as a funding mechanism;
however, many participants suggested that tolling should be applied in the context of aregional tolling policy
o Some participants opposed any toll, for a variety of reasons
• Strong support for use of other funding sources such as a federal funding contribution and
contributions from Port Metro Vancouver
• Vancouver residents were more likely than residents of other areas to indicate support for tolls, while
Richmond residents were more likely to suggest tolling of all bridges at a lower rate and Delta
residents were more likely to oppose tolling
•
Concerns about potential increased traffic congestion at the Oak Street Bridge and, to a lesserextent, other Fraser River North Arm crossings
• Keen interest in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and how the Project will contribute to this
• Questions about tunnel decommissioning and the potential effects of increased marine
traffic/industrialization of the Fraser River if the Tunnel is removed
• Interest in additional transit improvements including timing of potential future rapid transit
extension – some participants expressed a preference for transit improvements instead of the Project
• Some participants asked for more information about previous phases of consultation and the
rationale for a new bridge as compared to other alternatives explored in Phase 2 consultation
About this Report
Sections 1 to 3 of this report provide the overview and context for the Project and the consultation
process as well as participation levels. Section 4 summarizes the key findings from each input source,including discussions at stakeholder meetings and open houses, feedback form responses, and written
submissions. Additional information is available in the report appendices.
The Ministry will consider this input along with technical, financial, environmental and policy
considerations as Project planning continues. This includes preparing the Application for Environmental
Assessment Review, which will be submitted in spring 2016, and in confirming the funding strategy for
the Project.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
7/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 1
1. OVERVIEW
1.1 About the Project
The George Massey Tunnel (Tunnel) is an important link in the regional and provincial transportationsystem, serving an average of 80,000 vehicles each day and connecting to key gateways that fuel our
national, provincial and regional economies. Since the Tunnel opened in 1959, Metro Vancouver’s
population has grown considerably. The Tunnel is now at capacity during the morning and afternoon rush
hours and near capacity throughout the rest of the day. Population and employment on both sides of the
Tunnel is forecast to continue growing, with demand at the Tunnel increasing by about 20 per cent over
the next 30 years.
In response to growing concerns about the impact of congestion and recognizing the age and condition of
the existing George Massey Tunnel, the Government of British Columbia announced in September 2012
that planning for a replacement would begin immediately. Since then, the Ministry of Transportation and
Infrastructure (the Ministry) has been conducting technical work and consulting with municipalities,
aboriginal groups, Metro Vancouver, TransLink, the agricultural community, first responders, recreational
groups, local businesses, local residents, cyclists, marine users, other stakeholders, and the public to
assist in developing a project scope and business case for proceeding, to ensure that Highway 99
continues to serve regional, provincial, and national transportation needs.
The Project will replace the Tunnel with a new 10-lane bridge (eight lanes plus two dedicated transit/high-
occupancy vehicle lanes) spanning the Fraser River South Arm, decommission the Tunnel, and improve
Highway 99 from Bridgeport Road in Richmond to Highway 91 in Delta. Proposed improvements include
replacing the Westminster Highway, Steveston Highway and Highway 17A interchanges; widening
Highway 99 to accommodate dedicated transit/high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes; and providing multi-
use pathways for cyclists and pedestrians across the bridge and to connect with the existing cycling and
pedestrian networks on either side. The general alignment of the Project will follow the existing Highway
99 corridor, including across the Fraser River.
The Project is designed to reduce congestion and improve travel times and reliability for commuters,
transit, commercial vehicles, and tourists; improve safety; provide new travel options for cyclists andpedestrians; and provide capacity for improved transit.
1.2 Previous Consultation and Engagement
Since announcement of the Project in September 2012, the Ministry has been conducting technical
analysis, raising awareness about the Project, engaging interested parties in dialogue, and responding to
Project-related enquiries.
More than 2,000 people have participated in earlier phases of consultation as summarized below. More
than 3,300 people have visited the Project Office in Richmond, and 1,745 people have signed up to
receive Project e-updates.
Phase 1: Understanding the Need (November to December 2012) – Conducted early in the Project’splanning process, this phase of consultation sought to understand travel demand, operating conditions,
and opinions and interests on the importance of various design considerations. A total of 1,150 people
participated in this phase of consultation. Participants identified congestion relief and economic growth as
the most important factors when considering solutions for the Tunnel.
Many participants strongly advocated moving forward quickly to replace the Tunnel, with many specifically
indicating that doing nothing was not an option. Participants noted the importance of considering all users,
including drivers, goods movers, transit riders, cyclists, and pedestrians. Participants were also interested
in short- term solutions while planning for a long-term solution continued. The consultation summary
report and related consultation materials are available on the Project website.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
8/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 2
Phase 2: Exploring the Options (March to April 2013) – Sought input on five potential Tunnelreplacement scenarios and the criteria to evaluate these scenarios. More than 1,000 people participated.
Participants expressed general support for Project goals and evaluation criteria. There was an overall
preference for a new bridge on the existing corridor (Scenario 2), with strong opinions for and against
other options, particularly maintaining and upgrading the Tunnel (Scenario 1), as well as constructing a
new crossing along a new corridor to the east (Scenario 5).
Participants asked questions and expressed concerns about the safety of tunnels and sought confirmation
that plans for the new bridge would allow for future rapid transit. Participants also requested more
information about cost and funding options. The consultation summary report and related consultation
materials are available on the Project website.
Community and Stakeholder Engagement (ongoing) – Following completion of Phase 2 consultation,the Ministry has continued to engage with stakeholders and community members as Project planning
continued. This has included:
• More than 90 presentations to business, professional and community groups
• Meetings with City of Richmond and Corporation of Delta representatives (more than 60 meetings
held with each municipality since December 2012)• More than 180 meetings with other municipalities, regulatory agencies, elected officials, regional
government agencies, agricultural organizations, business organizations, community and resident
groups, commercial and recreational marine users, cycling groups, and first responders
• Meetings with First Nations as part of a separate, but related, Aboriginal Engagement program
1.3 About this Report
This report provides a summary of feedback received during Phase 3: Project Definition Report(December 16, 2015 – January 28, 2016), which sought feedback on the full Project scope and business
case, including Project goals, design features, benefit and cost analysis, draft performance
evaluation/Project success measures, and tolling to fund the Project. The Project Definition Report and
related documents including consultation display boards, a technical presentation, draft reference concept
drawings, and the feedback form are available on the Project website. Feedback was gathered through thefeedback form, stakeholder group meetings, open houses and written submissions.
2. PHASE 3 CONSULTATION PROCESS
2.1 Overview
The Ministry undertook Phase 3 consultation (December 16, 2015 to January 28, 2016) to seek feedback
on the Project Definition Report, the business case and tolling as a funding source. Key tools and activities
during the six-week consultation period included advertising and notification, email and social media
engagement, stakeholder meetings, two open houses, and a feedback form available in print and online.
Details about the forms of notification and timing for each are presented in the subsections below.
The Ministry will consider this input along with technical, financial, environmental and policy
considerations as Project planning continues. This includes preparing the Application for Environmental
Assessment Review, which will be submitted in spring 2016, and in confirming the funding strategy for
the Project.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
9/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 3
2.2 Notification
The Ministry invited public participation through a variety of communication techniques as identified in the
following table. Copies of all notification materials are included in Appendix 1.
2.3 Engagement Methods2.3.1 Online Engagement
As with previous phases of consultation, the primary hub for Phase 3 information was the Project website,
masseytunnel.ca, which was built and promoted on the GovTogetherBC engagement platform.
Form ofNotification
Description Date(s)
Newspaper
advertising
Consultation launch public notices in the Vancouver Sun,
The Province, the Richmond News and the Delta Optimist
Public notices placed in the Vancouver Sun and
The Province, and eight Lower Mainland community
newspapers including one Punjabi language and two
Chinese language newspapers, to announce open house
dates
17-18 December, 2015
11-14 January 2016
Media event and
release
Media event at the Project Office in Richmond to launch
consultation, as well as a media release and two
backgrounders distributed to Lower Mainland mediaoutlets, which generated significant media coverage
16 December 2015
Media release Media release to announce consultation open house dates 14 January 2016
Website Three public notices posted online at masseytunnel.ca 16 December 2015
4 & 26 January 2016
Social media 17 tweets @TranBC 16 December 2015 -
28 January 2016
Project Information
Office
Office hours: 8:30 – 4:30 p.m. (Mon-Fri)
Information line: 1-8-555-MASSEY staffed during regular
office hours, with target response call within two business
days or less
Email: [email protected]
Office opened
January 2014
Phone/email since
November 2012
Email and letter
drop notices
3 emails sent to the 1,700+ Project database subscribers
21 letters distributed to residents living at Riverwoods in
Delta, adjacent to the Tunnel
16 &17 December 2015
26 January 2016
22 January 2016
Stakeholder
meeting invitations
Invitations to 28 stakeholder groups as well as elected
officials in Delta and Richmond16 December 2015
Follow Up Phone
Calls
Follow up phone calls and emails were made to remind
stakeholders about the open houses and feedback
opportunities
Weeks of
16 December 2015
and 28 January 2016
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
10/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 4
2.3.2 Consultation Discussion Guide and Feedback Form
The 40-page Project Definition Report served as the consultation discussion guide, providing information
about the Project and the consultation topics. A 20-question feedback form invited questions and
comments about the project scope, traffic management during construction, the upcoming environmental
review, level of agreement with specific Project elements, draft Project evaluation/success measures, and
tolling as a funding source. The Project Definition Report and feedback form were available in hard copy at
the open houses, stakeholder meetings, and the Project Office as well as online throughout theconsultation period.
2.3.3 Stakeholder Meetings
The Ministry hosted nine meetings with stakeholder groups who requested an opportunity to discuss the
Project in more detail, including two City of Richmond committees, as noted in the following table:
Stakeholder Group Date
Vancouver Board of Trade Transportation Committee 18 December 2015
Richmond Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors 12 January 2016
Cycling groups 12 January 2016
BC Trucking Association 13 January 2016
City of Richmond Active Transportation Committee 13 January 2016
Steveston 20-20 Group (a group representing
Steveston Village non-profit organizations) 18 January 2016
City of Richmond General Purposes Committee 18 January 2016
Rotary Club of Steveston 19 January 2016
Richmond Farmers Institute 25 January 2016
Meetings included a presentation from Project staff followed by a facilitated discussion. Meeting notes
were taken to capture the key themes and discussion at each meeting (see Appendix 5).
2.3.4 Open Houses
The Ministry hosted two open houses, as noted in the table below. These open houses were jointly
hosted by the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) and the Ministry, and provided participants an
opportunity to ask questions and to comment on the Project Definition Report (Phase 3 consultation) and
the Project Description and Key Areas of Study (pre-application for the environmental review).
Each open house included an informal drop-in style session where participants could view display boards
and Project design reference concepts, and speak with Project staff. Each participant was asked to sign in
and was offered a copy of the Project Definition Report guide and hard copy feedback form.
Open houses were scheduled late in the Phase 3 consultation period to run concurrent with the
environmental assessment public comment period, which commenced on 15 January 2016. This ensured
that interested parties would not have to attend two consultation events in short succession.
Community Date/Time Venue
Richmond Tuesday, January 26, 2016
2:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Sandman Signature Hotel Vancouver Airport
Round Room
10251 St. Edwards Drive, Richmond, BC
Delta Wednesday, January 27, 2016
2:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Delta Town & Country Inn
Ballroom
6005 Highway 17A, Delta, BC
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
11/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 5
2.3.5 Other Methods
Throughout the Phase 3 consultation, members of the public continued to visit the Project Office and the
telephone and email enquiry program established in November 2012 to manage and respond to Project-
related questions. Project staff responded to email inquiries, generally within two business days.
3. PARTICIPATION
Format Participation
Website
• More than 14,200 website visits during the consultation period
• 258 people signed up for Project update emails (in addition to the 1,487
people who had previously signed up)
Open Houses• 750 people attended the open houses, which were reported by 19 media
outlets
Stakeholder Meetings • 102 attendees representing at least 60 organizations participated
Feedback Forms• 1,037 people completed feedback forms, of which 905 were completed
online
Project Office
• 310 people visited the Project Office
• 67 people called the Project Information Line
• 266 people sent emails
Written Submissions • 11 organizations provided written submissions
4. SUMMARY OF INPUT
Input was collected through four key sources – stakeholder meetings, open houses, the feedback form
and written submissions. Key theme summary results from each of these sources are described in the
subsections that follow.
4.1 Participant Mix
Most stakeholder meeting and open house participants live in Delta and Richmond; 42 per cent of
feedback form respondents were from these municipalities.
Approximately one quarter of feedback form respondents who live in Delta work in Vancouver and about
13 per cent work in Richmond. Richmond respondents work primarily in Richmond (41 per cent) or
Vancouver (15 per cent).
Of the 20 per cent of feedback form respondents from Vancouver, most (75 per cent) work in locations
that don’t require use of the Tunnel.
Stakeholder meeting participants tended to be frequent users of the Tunnel, and just over half (54 per
cent) of feedback form respondents use the Tunnel at least once per week. Most (63 per cent) of
respondents indicated they will use the new crossing about the same amount of time as they do today,
while 13 per cent will use it more and 19 per cent will use it less frequently once the Project is complete.
Participants from all sources represented a broad mix of mode shares. Feedback form respondents were
primarily transit or carpool users (53 per cent), followed by single occupant vehicle drivers (39 per cent).
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
12/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 6
4.2 Summary of Input from All Sources
4.2.1 Project Scope
• General support for the Project overall and interest in more detail about specific elements including
interchange designs, traffic forecasts, and the upcoming environmental assessment
•
General support for the following physical scope elements:
o Strong support for proposed transit, cycling and pedestrian measures
o Strong support for capacity improvements to address congestion
o Support for the proposed interchange improvements
o Miscellaneous recommendations for additional Project scope items
• Respondents from Delta and Richmond were more likely to be supportive of the Project as compared
with Vancouver residents, who were more likely to say that the Project is not needed
4.2.2 Funding
• Mixed support for tolling as a funding mechanism:
o Most participants who commented about tolls supported tolling as a funding mechanism;
however, many participants suggested that tolling should be applied in the context of a
regional tolling policy – some for reasons of equity and others as a potential means tolower the cost of the toll
o Some participants opposed any toll, for a variety of reasons
• Strong support for use of other funding sources such as a federal funding contribution and
contributions from Port Metro Vancouver
• Vancouver residents were more likely than residents of other areas to indicate support for tolls, while
Richmond residents were more likely to suggest tolling of all bridges at a lower rate and Delta
residents were more likely to oppose tolling
4.2.3 Other Themes
• Concerns about potential increased traffic congestion at the Oak Street Bridge and, to a lesser
extent, other Fraser River North Arm crossings
•
Keen interest in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and how the Project will contribute to this• Questions about tunnel decommissioning and the potential effects of increased marine
traffic/industrialization of the Fraser River if the Tunnel is removed
• Interest in additional transit improvements including timing of potential future rapid transitextension – some participants expressed a preference for transit improvements instead of the Project
• Some participants asked for more information about previous phases of consultation and the
rationale for a new bridge as compared to other alternatives explored in Phase 2 consultation
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
13/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 7
4.3 Stakeholder Meetings Summary
The Project Team attended meetings with stakeholder groups on request. The following table provides a
summary of key themes from each of these meetings.
Organization Date
Vancouver Board of
Trade Transportation
Committee
(18 December 2015)
• Strong support for the Project
• Appreciation for the full Project scope, particularly improvements at
Highway 91/Westminster Highway
• Discussion of Highway 99 as an important national and provincial trade
and tourism corridor, and the need for efficient goods movement
• Support for tolling and suggestion that tolls collected should also be
used to help fund the next phase of improvements in the future
• Questions about plans to review the provincial tolling policy and
consideration of regional tolling
• Questions about potential effects on congestion at the Oak Street
Bridge given that traffic is primarily regulated by the traffic lights at 70 th
Avenue in Vancouver
•
Questions about HOV traffic merging to and from designated HOVlanes
Richmond Chamber of
Commerce Board of
Directors
(12 January 2016)
• Strong support for the Project
• Questions about funding, including how much will be funded through
user tolls, how much federal funding can be anticipated, if any, and
potential future plans for regional tolling
• Questions about how the Project benefits were quantified
• Questions about soil conditions in the area
• Preference for a Blundell interchange, but expectation that highway
widening between Steveston Highway and Westminster Highway may
go a long way to addressing congestion in this area of the Highway 99
corridor
Cycling groups
(12 January 2016)
The meeting included a detailed discussion of proposed cycling
improvements at Bridgeport, Odlin/Shell Road, Westminster Highway,Blundell Road, Steveston Highway and River Road, and across the new
bridge. Key themes were:
• Strong support for the proposed improvements, and preference for
considering additional improvements within the Highway 99 corridor
• Preference for bi-directional multi-use paths on both sides of the bridge,
for convenience and as a traffic calming measure; if path is only on one
side of the bridge, ensure efficient cross access routes to and from it
• Preference for the multi-use path(s) to be under the bridge, as a
weather protection measure
• Suggestion to use the Golden Ears Bridge cycling access/connections
as a best practice guide, including signs, sight lines, grades, etc.
•
Recommended using a skid-resistant surface and reflective markings,given the planned grade (5 per cent) of the new bridge
• Request to design connections to cycling networks and to the
integrated transit stops in a manner that appropriately considers the
needs of all cyclists (all ages and abilities)
• Suggested adding “zero fatality” as a specific goal and to include
cycling incidents in the Project’s performance measures
• Request for more information about the cycling connections planned on
the south side of the river
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
14/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 8
Organization Date
BC Trucking Association
(13 January 2016)
• Strong support for the Project, including the new Rice Mill Road
accesses at Steveston Highway/Highway 99
• Questions about traffic management during construction, and
recommendation to convene a traffic management advisory committee
to assist in planning and evaluating traffic management measures• Questions about soil conditions
• Specific questions about the reference concept
• Questions about procurement timing and use of local suppliers
• Questions about what future developments are included in traffic
forecasts (e.g. build out of Deltaport Terminal 2)
• Questions about traffic forecasts with respect to tolling
• Questions about Tunnel decommissioning
City of Richmond Active
Transportation
Committee
(13 January 2016)
The meeting included a detailed discussion of proposed cycling
improvements at Bridgeport, Odlin/Shell Road, Westminster Highway,
Blundell Road, Steveston Highway and River Road, and across the new
bridge. Key themes were:
• Strong support for the proposed cycling improvements, particularly at
Westminster Highway and Steveston Highway• Recommended additional improvements at Bridgeport/Van Horne
• Discussion of options for ramp connections to/from the new bridge –
some prefer spirals, while some prefer switchbacks provided that the
turning radii are large enough
• Suggestion to have one-way cycling traffic similar to the Burrard Street
Bridge, given the likelihood for significantly increased demand; would
require good connections and clear information signs
• Recommendations for human scale lighting along the bridge –
suggestion to use the City of Richmond’s trail system lighting standards
• Support for proposed transit improvements and questions about when
rapid transit will be extended
• Questions about feedback to date on tolling measures and potential
consideration of region-wide tolling• Questions about the toll rate and potential effects on Alex Fraser Bridge
as a free alternative
• Questions about how the Tunnel will be decommissioned
• Questions about the traffic forecasting methodology and how traffic
volumes on other tolled bridges compare with forecasts
• Questions about trucks/heavy construction equipment and potential
effects on traffic during construction
Steveston 20-20 Group
(18 January 2016)
• Appreciation for the presentation and the level of information provided
• Questions about traffic volumes and how the most recent origin-
destination data was collected
• Questions about the Steveston Highway interchange design and where
the additional Highway 99 lanes will pick up and drop off
•
Questions about the toll payback period assumptions, how muchfederal funding and municipal funding is anticipated, and if the Project
can proceed without a federal contribution
• Questions about Tunnel decommissioning and whether the
decommissioned tunnel could remain in place rather than be removed
• Questions about how rapid transit will be incorporated in the future
• Questions about the potential popularity of the new multi-use paths and
anticipated volume of cyclists and pedestrians as well as suicide
prevention measures on the new bridge
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
15/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 9
Organization Date
City of Richmond
General Purposes
Committee
(18 January 2016)
• Preference for an upgraded tunnel instead of a new bridge
• Questions about impacts to agricultural land and request for
confirmation that the Project will result in no net loss of ALR as well as
information about the quality of land expected to be returned for
agricultural use• Concern that the Project may negatively affect plans for agricultural
development as part of the City of Richmond’s Back Lands policy
• Concerns about potential impacts to Oak Street Bridge and questions
about the validity of recent origin-destination traffic statistics
• Recommendation that the Ministry work with the City of Vancouver to
improve timing of signal lights at 70th Avenue
• Questions about the benefits of a new bridge as compared with a new
tunnel and about constructability given soil conditions in the area
• Preference to extend rapid transit as part of, or instead of, the Project
• Desire for assurances that TransLink will deliver improved transit
service to make use of the transit infrastructure improvements planned
as part of the Project
•
Concern about potential impacts to Richmond roads and questionsabout whether the Project includes funding for local road improvements
• Concerns about potential increased shipping/industrialization of the
Fraser River
Rotary Club of Steveston
(19 January 2016)
• General support for the Project and appreciation for the cycling, transit
and pedestrian scope elements
• Questions about how a new bridge was selected as the preferred
option as compared with a new tunnel
• Questions about seismic challenges with the Tunnel and the improved
seismic standards of a new bridge
• Questions about how the traffic data was collected
• Questions about when rapid transit will be incorporated in the future
• Questions about traffic management during construction and how
impacts will be avoided• Suggestion to include new park and ride facilities as part of the Project
• Suggestion to consider improved access to the Vancouver International
Airport as part of the Project scope
Richmond Farmers
Institute
(25 January 2016)
• General support for the Project, given plans for no net loss of
agricultural land, improved drainage on Highway 99 and better access
within Richmond
• Strong support for plans to use median barriers on Highway 99, which
will also help with flood control and avoid the need for construction of a
mid-island dike elsewhere
• Discussion of potential salt wedge effects associated if deeper
dredging happens in the future (Ministry and RFI studies are ongoing)
• Preference for an interchange at Blundell Road as part of the Project
•
Request to ensure that the Rice Mill Road access under the new bridgebe wide enough to accommodate farm vehicles
• Request to ensure that all new underpasses/overpasses are built to
accommodate farm vehicles
• Questions about seismic risk
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
16/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 10
4.4 Open Houses Summary
Two open houses were held during which participants had the opportunity to speak with Project staff and
technical specialists as well as EAO staff. Project staff made note of their interactions with participants,
which are summarized in the following table.
Event Key Themes
Richmond
(26 January 2016)
• General support for the Project, particularly with respect to Steveston
Highway interchange improvements and transit improvements at
Bridgeport Road
• Questions of clarification about the Project scope, including
height/footprint of the new Steveston interchange
• Concerns about potential impacts to the Oak Street Bridge and other
North Arm crossings between Richmond and Vancouver
• Concerns about potential effects to agricultural land
• Questions about the origin-destination traffic data
• Concerns about increased industrialization of the Fraser River
Delta
(27 January 2016)
• Most people support the Project but many had concerns about tolling and
related effects for people living south of the Fraser River
• Concerns about port expansion and the potential for larger vessels to
begin using this area of the Fraser River
• Suggestions that Port Metro Vancouver should assist in funding the
Project
• Concerns about temporary construction impacts, given the amount of
construction that has happened in Delta over the past several years
• Questions about potential effects to migratory birds
• Questions about implications for the salt wedge
• Questions about increased transit and potential new park and ride areas
• Questions about how impacts to Deas Island Regional Park and the
neighbouring sloughs will be avoided
• Concerns about potential increased noise levels during construction and
long-term operation of the new bridge
• Questions about access to/from Highway 99, especially at River Road
4.5 Feedback Forms Summary
The Ministry received 1,037 feedback form responses during the consultation period. Nine people sent in
feedback forms from previous phases of consultation and these have been recorded as input but are not
incorporated into the response summaries included below.
It is important to note that almost all respondents answered questions about the Project scope elements
and tolling (questions 5-7 and 9), and most responded to the demographic questions. Significantly fewer
respondents provided comments or questions about other aspects about the Project. The number of
respondents is noted for each question in the sections that follow.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
17/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 11
4.5.1 Project Scope Elements
Participants were invited to provide comments or questions about the Project scope.
Q1. The Project includes a new 10-lane bridge to replace the Tunnel, reconstructing the Westminster
Highway, Steveston Highway and Highway 17A interchanges, a multi-use pathway for cyclists and
pedestrians on the new bridge, new transit/HOV lanes and improvements to Highway 99 between
Bridgeport Road in Richmond and Highway 91 in Delta. What questions do you have, if any, about thedraft project scope?
• 309 respondents (30%) provided no comments
• 55 respondents (5%) specifically stated they have no concerns
• 664 respondents (65%) provided comments or questions
o 24% were generally supportive
o 31% indicated conditional support
o 10% were generally opposed
Key themes are summarized in the following table.
Comments/Questions About Project Scope (n=1,028) Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Did not answer 309 30%
Requests for improvements to rapid transit as part of Project scope 103 10%
Concerns about Oak Street Bridge traffic effects 69 7%
Other Key Themes
Comments that the bridge is too big/too many lanes 62 6%
Statements that respondent has no comments/concerns 55 5%
Requests for improvements to other highways and bridges in region 50 5%
Questions about bridge exits/entrances and highway interchanges 41 4%
Comments about tolling 33 3%
Questions about potential traffic and noise management during construction 31 3%
Comments about the pedestrian and bike multi-use pathway 29 3%
Preference for an updated tunnel instead of a new bridge 29 3%
Suggestion to toll all bridges 24 2%
Statements of support for the Project 23 2%
Questions about construction and procurement 23 2%
Questions about why the Project did not go to plebiscite/referendum 23 2%
Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
18/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 12
Strongly Agree49%
Agree24%
Neither Agree norDisagree
9%
Disagree4%
Strongly Disagree8%
No answer6%
Strongly Agree
34%
Agree20%Neither Agree nor
Disagree
15%
Disagree7%
StronglyDisagree
17%
No answer7%
Q5. Please rate your level of agreement with the proposed transit/HOV lane extensions , which would
add one lane in each direction to the new crossing for use by transit and carpool vehicles with two or
more persons.
• 73% of respondents agree
(49% strongly, 24% somewhat) withtransit/HOV lanes
• 12% of respondents disagree
(8% strongly, 4% somewhat)
• 9% neither agree nor disagree
• 6% of respondents did not answer the question
Respondent base = 1,028
Q6. Please rate your level of agreement with the proposed addition of one general-purpose trafficlane in each direction , which would provide room for slower-moving and merging traffic, and
accommodate for future growth, while maintaining the three lanes in each direction for other traffic that
exist in the peak direction today.
• 54% of respondents agree
(34% strongly, 20% somewhat) with the additional
general purpose lanes
• 24% of respondents disagree
(17% strongly, 7% somewhat)
• 15% neither agree nor disagree
•
7% of respondents did not answer the question
Respondent base = 1,028
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
19/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 13
Q7. Please rate your level of agreement with the proposed multi-use pathway on the bridge for
cyclists and pedestrians, connecting to Steveston Highway in Richmond and River Road in Delta.
• 69% of respondents agree
(48% strongly, 21% somewhat) with the proposed
multi-use pathway• 14% of respondents disagree
(8% strongly, 6% somewhat)
• 11% neither agree nor disagree
• 6% of respondents did not answer the question
Respondent base = 1,028
4.5.2 Traffic Management During Construction
Participants were invited comment or ask questions about traffic management during construction.
Q2. The new bridge and Highway 99 improvements will be constructed while keeping traffic as it does
today. This includes maintaining counterflow operations throughout construction. What questions do you
have, if any, about traffic management during construction?
• 559 respondents (54%) provided no comments
• 104 respondents (10%) specifically stated they have no concerns
• 365 respondents (36%) provided comments or questions, as highlighted in the table below:
Comments/Questions About Traffic Management During Construction (n=1,028)
Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Did not answer 559 54%
Statements that respondent has no comments/concerns 104 10%
Questions about the traffic management plan 68 7%
Other Key Themes
Questions about Tunnel operations during construction 27 3%
Questions about congestion impacts during construction 27 3%
Statements of opposition to the Project 26 3%
Questions about impacts to interchange traffic flow during construction 24 2%
Concern about increased traffic on alternate routes during construction 23 2%
Questions/suggestions for increased/improved transit during construction 23 2%
Questions about construction hours of work/time of day 19 2%
Other Key Themes
# Respondents %
Concerns about construction delays 16 2%
Concern about traffic flow in Ladner during construction 15 1%
Concern about environmental impacts during construction 12 1%
Statements of support for the Project 10 1%
Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
Strongly Agree
48%
Agree
21%
Neither Agree nor
Disagree
11%
Disagree
6%
Strongly Disagree
8%
No answer
6%
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
20/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 14
4.5.3 Environmental Assessment Review
Participants were invited to provide comments or questions for the Ministry and the EAO to consider
during the upcoming environmental assessment review.
Q3. The Project will undergo Provincial Environmental Assessment review, which will consider the
potential effects of the Project and how to appropriately address them. What questions do you have, if
any, about the environmental review for this Project?
• 509 respondents (50%) provided no comments
• 95 respondents (9%) specifically stated they have no concerns or comments
• 424 respondents (41%) provided comments or questions. Of these:
o 33% were generally supportive
o 22% indicated conditional support
o 13% were generally opposed
Key themes are summarized in the following table.
Comments/Questions About Environmental Assessment Review (n=1,028)
Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Did not answer 509 50%
Statements that respondent has no comments/concerns 95 9%
Questions and comments about the transparency of the process 60 6%
Questions about the Environmental Assessment review process 60 6%
Other Key Themes
Questions about impacts to farm land (Agricultural Land Reserve) 52 5%
Questions about climate change, GHG and emissions 50 5%
Comments and questions about impacts to wildlife 31 3%
Questions about increased traffic on the corridor 23 2%
Questions about potential increases in marine traffic 21 2%Questions about tunnel decommissioning 19 2%
Comments and suggestions for improvements to rapid transit 17 2%
Comments and questions about impacts to fish and fish habitat 16 1%
Questions about potential noise impacts during construction 14 1%
Questions about impacts of construction 13 1%
Statements of support for the Project 13 1%
Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
Specific comments and questions related to the environment are being considered as part of the
Environmental Review process. Many comments mirror those sent directly to the Environmental
Assessment Office during the concurrent public comment period for the Project Description and Key
Areas of Study. The Ministry will prepare an overview of comments received during PDR consultation and
submit this to the EAO.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
21/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 15
4.5.4 Project Success Measures
Participants were invited to provide comments or recommended changes to draft performance/Project
success measures in determining success in achieving each of the Project goals as identified in the
Project Definition Report.
Q8. Page 30 of the Project Definition Report provides information on how each of the Project goals will be
measured and evaluated. Would you add or change any measurements to help determine the Project’ssuccess?
• 529 respondents (51%) provided no comments
• 90 respondents (9%) specifically stated they have no concerns
• 409 respondents (40%) provided comments or questions
Comments specifically related to recommended changes or new project success measures include:
Traffic Measures
• Increased transit capacity and ridership
• Change in mode share including cycling and walking
•
Change in transit travel time• Change in emergency response times
• Change in vehicle-kilometres travelled
• Change in vehicle idling times
• Change in traffic volumes on other crossings
• Number of cars per capita
Economic Measures
• Improved goods movement flow
• Economic benefit of construction jobs
•
Economic impact of tolls on south of Fraser residents• Toll payback period
Community Development Measures
• Change in residential/industrial development patterns
• Surveys of business customers in Richmond and Delta
• Aesthetic design of the new bridge
Environmental Measures
• Air quality
• Carbon footprint/Greenhouse Gas emissions
• Farmland protection
• Silt levels in Green Slough/changes in water quality
• Drainage and stormwater runoff
• General comments about a need for more specific
environmental success measures
Construction Performance Measures
• On time/early completion
• On or under budget at completion
• Keeping traffic moving during construction
Many respondents used this question as an opportunity to reinforce earlier comments rather than to
recommend new measures. Results of the key themes are as follows:
Comments/Questions About Project Success Measurements (n=1,028)
Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Did not answer 529 51%
Statements that respondent has no comments/concerns 90 9%
Requests for improvements to rapid transit 70 7%
Other Key Themes
Comments about reduced traffic congestion 42 4%
Comments about increased traffic on alternate routes 35 3%
Comments and complaints about process and transparency 31 3%
Comments about bridge usage by cyclists and pedestrians 28 3%
Statements of opposition to the Project 28 3%
Miscellaneous comments about the Project scope 27 3%
Comments about alternate crossing options 26 3%
Comments about climate change, GHG and emissions 26 3%
Comments about the overall Project budget 25 2%
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
22/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 16
Comments/Questions About Project Success Measurements (n=1,028)
Comments about potential environmental impacts 24 2%
Requests for no tolls 21 2%
Comments on tolling 18 2%
Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
4.5.5 Other Comments and Questions
The Project Definition Report outlines the proposed Project scope, rationale, and the business case for the
Project moving forward. Participants were invited to offer any specific questions.
Q4. What other questions do you have, if any, as the Project moves forward?
• 432 respondents (42%) did not have any questions
• 28 respondents (3%) specifically stated they have no concerns
• 568 respondents (55%) provided comments or questions
Key themes of questions are summarized in the following table.
Key Comments/Questions as the Project Moves Forward (n=1,028)
Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Did not answer 432 42%
Questions about tolling operations and costs 82 8%
Questions about transit improvements and increased service 80 8%
Other Key Themes
Questions about Project funding and budget 60 6%
Statements of opposition to the Project 45 4%
Statements of opposition to tolling 36 4%
Questions about the why the Project did not go to plebiscite/referendum 35 3%Questions and comments about the Project planning process and transparency 32 3%
Questions about Project scope 31 3%
Suggestions to toll all bridges 30 3%
Statements that respondent has no comments/concerns 28 3%
Questions about potential increased congestion at Oak Street Bridge 23 2%
Questions and comments about the consultation process 21 2%
Statements of support for the Project 20 2%
Questions/comments about specific highway interchanges 20 2%
Concerns about increased traffic on alternate routes 20 2%
Questions about alternate crossing options 20 2%Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
In addition, some participants took the opportunity to provide additional comments (Q20).
• 446 respondents (43%) did not provide additional comments
• 582 respondents (57%) provided comments
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
23/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 17
Key themes of these comments are summarized below.
Additional Comments/Questions (n=1,028)
Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Did not answer 446 43%
Statements of opposition to tolling 180 18%
Other Key Themes
Appreciation for opportunity to comment and consultation process 96 9%
Recommendations for various transit improvements and service increases 75 7%
General concerns about potential environmental impacts 66 6%
Recommend lower toll rates/discounted toll rates 43 4%
Concerns about increased traffic on alternate routes 40 4%
Comments about the Project process and transparency 27 3%
Comments about the size of the new bridge (too many lanes) 25 2%
Comments about the bridge design 17 2%
Comments about the pedestrian and bike multi-use pathway 12 1%
Statements of support for the Project 12 1%
Questions about potential for increased marine traffic 12 1%
Statements of opposition to the Project 10 1%
Suggestions to toll all bridges 9 1%
Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
4.5.6 Tolling as a Funding Source
Participants were invited to provide comments about tolling as a funding source.
Q9. The Province intends to fund the Project through user tolls and is working with the federal
government to determine potential funding partnerships. Please provide your comments about tolling
as a funding source.
• 154 respondents (15%) provided no comments
• 874 respondents (85%) provided comments or questions. Of these:
o 13% support of tolling as proposed
o 44% indicated conditional support for tolling (lower toll or toll all bridges)
o 14% recommended alternative sources of funding
o 22% opposed tolling
Vancouver residents were more likely than residents of other areas to indicate support for tolls as a
funding source generally. Richmond residents were more likely to indicate support for tolling if all bridges
were tolled at a lower rate, while Delta residents were more likely than other respondents to oppose
tolling – about 26 per cent of respondents from Delta indicated a preference for no tolls.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
24/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 18
Private vehicle,alone
39%Private vehicle,
with other
passengers46%
Other commercialvehicle (smaller
truck, bus, taxi,delivery vehicle,
service vehicle)
2%
Transit7%
Cycling or walking,and used the
shuttle service1%
Commercialvehicle, over 5,500
kg1%
No answer4%
Key themes are summarized in the following table.
Comments/Questions About Tolling as a Funding Source (n=1,028)
Top Key Themes # Respondents %
Suggestions to toll all bridges at a lower rate 384 37%
Statements of opposition to tolling 229 22%
Did not answer 154 15%
Statements of support for tolling 135 13%
Other Key Themes
Suggestions that current taxes should fund Project 80 8%
Concerns that tolling is unfair to local residents and businesses 79 8%
Requests for discounted toll for high-frequency users and off-peak hours 69 7%
Comments about alternate funding sources 58 6%
Comments about increased traffic on alternate routes 32 3%
Suggestions to improve rapid transit instead of building a bridge 27 3%
Comments about tolling operations 14 1%
Concerns about increased marine traffic 11 1%
Comments about the planning process and transparency 8 1%
Comments about traffic management and comparisons to other projects 7 1%
No concerns 6 1%
Note: Respondents may have commented on more than one topic.
4.5.7 Participant Demographics
Current Use of the Tunnel and Highway 99Participants were asked to indicate how frequently they use Highway 99 today, how they typically travel
and where they typically enter or exit the highway.
Q10. On average, how frequently do you use theGeorge Massey Tunnel?
• Most respondents (54%) use the Tunnel at least
once a week.
o 28% use it four or more days/week
o 26% use it at least once a week
Q13. When using the Tunnel, how do you most
frequently travel?
• 53% of respondents carpool or take transit
• 39% of respondents are single occupant drivers
• 3% of respondents are commercial vehicle
drivers (large and small)
See chart to the right for details
Respondent base = 1,028
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
25/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 19
Delta32%
Vancouver20%
Surrey12%
Richmond11%
Othermunicipality
11%
Other MetroVancouver
7%
No answer4%
White Rock3%
Origins and Destinations
Respondents were asked to indicate where they usually enter and exit Highway 99 when they travel.
Q11. When you travel Highway 99 between Oak Street Bridge and the U.S. border, where do you usually
enter Highway 99 (e.g., from what on-ramps)?
Q12. When you travel Highway 99 between Oak Street Bridge and the U.S. border, where do you usuallyleave the Highway (e.g., from what off-ramps)?
The most common points of entry and exit are noted in the table below.
Most Common Points of Entry % Most Common Points of Exit %
Oak Street Bridge or north 25% Highway 17A/River Road 19%
Highway 17A/River Road 15% Oak Street Bridge or north 14%
Steveston Highway 10% Steveston Highway 10%
Note: Respondents may have selected more than one option.
Future Use of the Tunnel and Highway 99
Participants were asked to indicate their use
of the crossing when the new bridge opens.
Q14. When the new bridge opens, it will
help relieve congestion and provide more
travel time reliability. Because of this my use
of the crossing will…
• 63% of respondents will use the Tunnel
about the same as they do today
• 13% will use it more
• 19% will use it less
Respondent base = 1,028
Place of Residence
Participants were asked to indicate where they live.
Q15. Where do you live?
The vast majority of respondents (89%) live in Metro
Vancouver, including 32% from Delta, 12% from Surrey
and 11% from Richmond.
Respondents from Delta and Richmond were more likely to
be supportive of the Project (as expressed in comments
about Project scope) as compared with Vancouver
residents, who were more likely to say that the Project is
not needed.
With respect to comments about the Project, Vancouver
residents were more likely to have environmental concerns, Respondent base = 1,028
while Delta residents were more likely to express concerns
about transparency of the planning process.
Will stay about
the same
63%
Will decrease
19%
Increase, because I
will travel more
often generally7%
Increase, because I
will travel more
often on thiscrossing instead of
others6%
No answer
5%
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
26/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 20
Age of Respondents
Q19. Please indicate your age range.
• Respondents are primarily aged 25 to 44 (33%)
or 45 to 64 (38%)
• 21% of respondents are aged 65+ (much higher thanthe Metro Vancouver average of about 13.5%)
The most common age range for respondents is 45 to 64
for all municipalities except Vancouver, where 61% of
respondents are 25 to 44 years of age.
Delta/Ladner/Tsawwassen area respondents are slightly
older than Richmond and Surrey/White Rock area residents.Respondent base = 1,028
Recreational UseRecognizing the recreational value of areas near the Tunnel, the Ministry sought to better understand
whether consultation participants also use these areas. Results are shown in the following two charts.
Q17. In the past year, have you visited Deas Island Regional Park or crossed over the Tunnel using the
Millennium Trail in Delta or the Dyke Road Trail in Richmond?
Q18. In the past year, have you visited Deas Slough or one of the marinas near the George Massey Tunnel
by boat?
!"#$ &'( )*$ +,(
)* -.#/"0$ &(
!"#$ &'( )*$ +'(
)* ,-#."/$ 0(
19-24
4%
25-44
33%
45-64
38%
65-74
17%
75+
4%
No answer
3%
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
27/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 21
4.6 Written Submissions SummaryThe Ministry received 11 written submissions from stakeholders and 80 written submissions from
members of the public. Stakeholder submissions included:
• BC Trucking Association
• The City of Richmond
• Delta HUB
• Delta South MLA Vicki Huntington
• HUB Cycling
• Metro Vancouver
• Port Metro Vancouver
• Richmond Chamber of Commerce
• Surrey Board of Trade
• TransLink
• Vancouver Board of Trade
Key themes from each of these submissions are summarized in the table below, in chronological order by
date received. Copies of these submissions are included in Appendix 6.
Organization/Date Key Themes
Vancouver Board
of Trade
(16 December 2015)
Welcome the release of the Project Definition Report and Business Case and
pledge support for the Tunnel’s replacement in an effort to improve the
movement of goods and people along the Highway 99 corridor.
BC Trucking Association
(27 January 2016)
Support replacing the Tunnel with a 10-lane bridge to support the movement
of commercial goods. Referenced importance of considering over-
dimensional loads, dangerous goods and long combination vehicles. Recommendations include:
• Tolling all bridge crossings as a move towards mobility pricing and to avoid
traffic diversion
•
Use Golden Ears Bridge vehicle classifications rather than Port Mann• Institute a Traffic Advisory Committee to help guide traffic management
during construction and include penalty clauses for congestion
• Increase vertical clearance of overpasses
TransLink
(27 January 2016)
Support plans to toll the bridge, indicating that it is consistent with the
Regional Transportation Strategy and the Metro Vancouver Mayors’ Vision.
Suggested that the Project provides a good opportunity to review the
Provincial Tolling Guidelines and move towards a mobility pricing strategy.
Request to include a direct transit ramp at Highway 17A and that if Project
scope is expanded, a direct connection for buses to Ladner Trunk Road.
Note that the Project supports regional goods movement.
Request more information about connections to local cycling and pedestrian
networks on both sides of the new bridge, noting that a south sideconnection is critical for access to and from BC Ferries. Also request an
opportunity to review preliminary transit access designs from a passenger
safety and comfort perspective.
Request that greenhouse gas emissions, vehicle-kilometres-travelled and
mode share shift be included in the Project performance measures.
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
28/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 22
Organization/Date Key Themes
Delta HUB
(28 January 2016)
Strongly support a multi-use path on both sides of bridge and provided
detailed recommendations for design and safety for these paths, as well as:
• Coordinated signage
•
Ground level connections to the multi-use path from both sides of bridge,to maximize accessibility from all potential origins
• Improve community roadway (Vasey Road and 60th Ave) and the regional
cycling gateway as a whole with integrated transit stops at key locations
Request more information about:
• Funding of Delta Trails
• Plans for park and rides along Highway 99
• Potential extension of River Road (Corporation of Delta project)
• New overpasses at Highway 10 and 112th Street
Delta South MLA
Vicki Huntington
(28 January 2016)
Supports many of the objectives outlined in the Project Definition Report and
noted the following outstanding items:
•
Concern that tolling will create inequity for residents south of the FraserRiver
• Suggests consultation on a region-wide tolling system and a funding
contribution from Port Metro Vancouver
• Request for more information regarding “no net loss” of farmland
• Request for more specific information about how South Delta residents will
access from Highway 17A, including passenger vehicles, transit, foot and
bicycle traffic
HUB Cycling
(28 January 2016)
Feedback on scope and performance measures related to cycling,
specifically:
• Request a more comprehensive plan for safe and convenient cycling along
the entire Highway 99 corridor to help address gaps in the regional cyclingnetwork
• Recommend creating a clear cycling goal with an objective to increase
cycling along the length of the corridor
Metro Vancouver(28 January 2016)
Key interests are regional growth management, air quality and climate
change, environment, regional utilities and infrastructure, and regional parks.
Specific comments and requests for additional information include:
• Information on transportation patterns associated with a new tolled bridge,
its effect on goods movement, and changes in greenhouse gases
• Details on tolling options and refinements to provincial tolling policy
• How air emissions will change per vehicle and overall (regional total) and
how will it compare to regional green house gas emission reduction targets• Recommendation to consider air quality impacts in the design of cycling
and pedestrian infrastructure
• How climate change impacts are being considered in bridge design and
restoration projects
• Recommendation to add a Health Impact Assessment
• Details outlining impacts of the Project on agricultural land and possible
mitigation or enhancement options
• Detailed information about the planning and design of the area within Deas
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
29/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
29 Mar 2016 23
Organization/Date Key Themes
Island Regional Park and a request to work with the Ministry to ensure
strong ecological and trail connections to the park
• Request to consider opportunities to advance the Experience the Fraser
Concept Plan
• Request information about construction and maintenance access
• Scope details to ascertain extent of impacts on regional utilities
Port Metro Vancouver
(28 January 2016)
Advise that Port Metro Vancouver had reviewed the PDR and does not have
any feedback/comment on the report.
Richmond Chamber of
Commerce
(28 January 2016)
Endorse the concept of a replacement bridge as outlined in Project Definition
Report, in particular the benefits of the new bridge.
Note that in a membership survey conducted in January 2016, 87 per cent of
decided respondents supported a new bridge.
Request that more information be provided about:
• Net gain of agricultural land
•
Specific environmental benefits• Potential effects at Oak Street and 70th Ave
• Land use planning for the region
• An economic, social and environment benefit-cost analysis, to help
communities understand overall effects of the Project
Surrey Board of Trade
(28 January 2016)
Support replacement of George Massey Tunnel in principle and
recommended mobility pricing as the preferred option for funding future
infrastructure and transit projects.
Recommend that governments work toward a coordinated regional tolling
policy.
Provided detailed individual responses from members to the questions
outlined in the Ministry’s Project Definition Report feedback form.
City of Richmond
(3 February 2016)
Support in principle, the objectives of the Project.
Request that the following items be addressed before advancing further
design and procurement:
• More details on plans for no net loss of agricultural land
• More details on how riparian management and environmentally sensitive
areas in Richmond will be maintained and protected
• How tolling will be implemented
• Contingency plan for potential increased traffic at the Oak Street Bridge
• Collaboration with Richmond on other infrastructure improvements
• An iconic bridge design
Offer specific recommendations for cycling and transit improvements.
Members of the Public
(16 Dec 2015 to
28 Jan 2016)
Comments primarily with respect to support for the Project and
comments/questions about project funding. Key themes are as follows:
• Very strong support for a new bridge
• Very strong support for adding light rail as part of the project
• Strong support for other aspects of the project scope, specifically including:
o Steveston interchange improvements
o Maintaining a River Road off ramp
8/18/2019 Massey - Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report March 2016
30/30
GMT Project
Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report
Organization/Date Key Themes
o Highway 17A interchange improvements
o Improving HOV and transit travel across the river and for moving these
lanes from the shoulder to the median
o Cycling improvements
• Many suggestions to also fix the problem of congestion at Oak Street
Bridge as part of the Project
• Very strong opposition to tolling generally
• Numerous suggestions to toll every bridge and/or lower the toll rate
A low number of correspondents offer suggestions to change the project
scope including:
• Reduce the number of lanes to on the new bridge to six or eight
• Keep the Tunnel in place once it is decommissioned
• Construct a new tunnel instead
Top Related