Inter River Sub Area Transportation Study District of North Vancouver Stakeholder Meeting #2b Meeting Minutes

Transcription

1 Inter River Sub Area Transportation Study District of North Vancouver Stakeholder Meeting #2b Meeting Minutes Held at: Municipal Hall - Meeting Room A Date/Time: June 2 nd 2016 at 7:00pm Adjourned: 8:30pm Attended By: Regrets: Minutes taken by: Antje Wahl Transportation Consultation Committee Brenda Barrick Neighbourhood Representative Elise Roberts Neighbourhood Representative Mark Thomson School District #44 Victor Penman Fire Department Ingrid Weisenbach - Transportation Shazeen Tejani Transportation Erin Black Vancouver Coastal Health Shazeen Tejani MEETING RECAP & APPROVAL OF MINUTES Weisenbach summarized key ideas that arose in the previous May 17 th Stakeholder meeting and confirmed feedback received from Antje Wahl. DISCUSSION OF GOALS & ASSUMPTIONS Goals Tejani shared the revised goals; making note of new additions based on feedback. Assumptions Tejani shared the revised assumptions with the group. Group recommended a change of wording to include Inter River with regard to park access. Group further recommended specifying that access to the park will be maintained from Inter River Road. Group also recommended revising the word commuter to make it more clear that these routes are used for people accessing key destinations, not just those who commute to work. Group also required further clarification on assumptions related to park use. Weisenbach informed the group that the District s Parks Department was currently reviewing any future uses. School District provided clarification on assumptions with Lynnmour Elementary: o Scenario 1: School remains as is (5 year horizon) Document Number: Page 1 of 2

2 o o Scenario 2: School redevelops on site, shifts current location onto gravel field and/or fronts Orwell Street, with primary pick up/drop off on Orwell. Scenario 3: School relocates to improved catchment area. OPTIONS & CRITERIA EVALUATION Options Weisenbach shared each of the draft options and rationales with the group. Group expressed concern about the impacts to the park with options 4a & 5, and for new residents that front the park, south of option 4a. Group was also concerned that option 1b would provide direct vehicular access to the school, thereby reducing the likelihood that children will walk or bike to school. Group further expressed concern with Option 1a as potentially increasing access and traffic along St. Denis Ave, a road currently used heavily by pedestrians and cyclists. Criteria Evaluation Weisenbach shared the draft evaluation of the proposed options. RECOMMENDATIONS Weisenbach summarized key recommendations produced using the evaluation criteria. Group discussed the potential of combining options and the benefits/impacts of each. Group recommendations: 1a + 1b provides circulation for school pick up/drop off and direct access to St. Denis; Doing a combination of options 1a + 1b, 4b, and 2, all as public roads was most preferred; 4b provides improved access if School were to have primary pick up/drop off on Orwell; 4b would be considered feasible if designed to reduce speeds and road widths; Group agreed option 5 was not reasonable; and Group suggested considering a 6 th option that bisects the school site from Forsman through to Option 4b, if the school relocates. Group acknowledged that improved connectivity to transit stops and improved transit infrastructure were needed adjacent to the sub area. WRAP-UP & NEXT STEPS Draft meeting minutes to be dispersed for confirmation of understanding. Transportation to present recommendations for Council s consideration this July. Document Number: Page 2 of 2

3 Inter-River Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #2 Meeting for Thursday, June 2 nd, 2016 AGENDA Invited: Fire Neighbourhood Representatives Public Health School District #44 Transportation Consultation Committee Topic or Sub-Topic Allotted Time (minutes) 1. Meeting #1 Recap & Meeting Minutes 5 2. Review Goals & Assumptions 5 3. Options & Criteria Evaluation Recommendations Wrap-Up & Next Steps 5 Total time: 60 minutes Document Number:

4 Inter-River Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #2 Monday, May 30 th, 2016 Goals Provide safe and efficient access to all key destinations within and outside of the neighbourhood; Minimize neighbourhood traffic impacts and improve livability; Provide secondary access where feasible to provide the following: redundancy, better circulation, better emergency access and ability to disperse vehicle traffic; Further develop formal and informal walking and cycling networks; Provide improved safety and connectivity of commuter and recreational routes as well as trail networks; Preserve and enhance existing natural areas; and Provide flexibility due to adjacent unknowns; Document Number:

5 List of Assumptions Inter-River Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #2 Monday, May 30 th, 2016 The following is a list of assumptions to consider during discussions over the Inter-River Transportation Review Process. 1. St. Denis: Assumption: Access to St. Denis Avenue will no longer be provided from E. Keith Road. 2. Lynnmour Elementary School Assumption: Lynnmour Elementary School will remain in its present location. 3. Fire Training Centre 4. Park Access Assumption: Continued access to the Fire Training Centre site would be provided. Assumption: Primary access to Inter River park will be maintained from the north using Inter River Road. 5. Property Access Assumption: Access to all properties must be maintained. 6. Existing Pedestrian & Cycling Commuter Routes Assumption: Commuter and Recreational routes that go through and to the Inter River Neighbourhood will be maintained. Document Number:

6 Sidewalks needed throughout site for enhanced pedestrian connectivity Option 5 Option 4 Option 4a Look for opportunities to create more formalized footpaths into the neighbourhood Maintain informal trails for bikes and pedestrians Option 1a Option 3 Private driveway Work with SD to create on-site pickup/drop-off circulation Option 4b Option 2 Public or Private Option 1b Look for opportunities to develop Drive to 5 drop off/pick up area Maintain/Improve Pedestrian & Cycling Commuter Route Look for opportunities to improve access to transit and improved transit infrastructure

7 Inter River Transportation Review Options Evaluation Criteria v1 Category Criteria Description Rating Option 1a Option 1b Option 2 Option 3 Option 4a Option 4b Option 5 Comments Improves safety for all users walking, cycling and driving. Minor or no impact on safety for all users walking, cycling and driving. Reduced safety for all users walking, cycling and driving. Options 1a & b would include sidewalks. Options 4-5 increases potential conflicts between people driving and people/kids moving between the park and school. Similar for Option 3 although people driving would likely be lower speed and volumes in the driveway. Public Safety Mobility and Connectivity Improves ease of access for emergencies throughout whole site. Improves ease of access for emergencies to part of the site. Does not improve ease of access for emergencies for most of the site. Improves access and circulation of all modes Has a minimal impact on access and circulation of all modes. Reduces ease of access and circulation of all modes Provides improved access for all users to key destinations (eg. natural areas, school etc). Provides improved access for only some users to key destinations (eg. natural areas, school etc). Reduces ease of access for all users to key destinations (eg. natural areas, school etc). Options 1a &1b likely provide the most direct route across the site to houses located along St. Denis and 1b improves ease of circulation for emergency vehicles. Option 2 improves ease of circulation for emergency vehicles. Option 3 does provide a more direct route to fire training centre but does not improve ease of circulation for emergency vehicles. Options 4a & 4b would provide better circulation for large emergency vehicles for the area N of the School & S of the park. Option 5 does not provide a more direct route to properties nor improve ease of circulation for emergency vehicles. Options 1a, 4 and 5 only provide one access point unless provided in conjunction with a second option does not improve circulation. Options 1a and 4 a/b improve access while option 5 does not improve access. Options 1b increases access and ease of circulation for all modes as well for parents dropping off/picking up children at school. Option 2 provides options for access and circulation. Option 3 provides more direct access but not improved circulation. Option 1a provides improved access to school but not to park. Option 1b does not provide improved access to school or park. Option 2 if public provides improved access to school and provides improved access to park for people living west of Orwell. If private, provides improved access to school and park primarily for residents. Option 3, 4 a/b and 5 does not improve access to the school or park. Natural Areas No impact on parkland/natural areas. Minimal impact on parkland/natural areas. Negative impact on parkland/natural areas. Option 1 a/b and 2 do not impact parkland or natural areas. Option Options 3 and 4a/b would require removal of some park trees. Option 5 would impact the Riverine Forest. Page 1 of 2 Document Number: Date Printed: Jun-2-16

8 Category Criteria Description Rating Option 1a Option 1b Option 2 Option 3 Option 4a Option 4b Option 5 Comments Livability Positively enhances neighbourhood livability. Has minimal to no impact on neighbourhood liveability. Negatively impacts neighbourhood livability. Option 1b would provide the opportunity to provide a public meeting place (square) Options 3 and 4b provide no benefit to the community. Options 4a and 5 would have an impact on the park and the quality of the park as a public space. Costs Private Interests The cost of implementation is low. The cost of implementation is medium. The cost of implementation is high. Has a positive impact on existing landowners and/or the development potential of land. Has a neutral impact existing landowners and/or the development potential of land. Has a negative impact on existing landowners and/or the development potential of land. Option 1a and 2 may be paid for by private development. Option 1b may be implemented if/when school redevelops. Option 3 costs may be high depending on alignment and require purchase of property). Option 4 assumes the section next to fire training centre would not relocate power lines and would be situated on training centre property. Costs for 4a may be high depending on alignment if property acquisition is required. Costs for 4b may be paid for by private development. Option 5 may not require land acquisition. Options 1a & 2 may impact the size of developable land. Option 1b may have a minor impact depending on size and location of public meeting place/square. Option 4a would negatively impact current residents adjacent to park. Option 5 would impact existing landowners and may have minor impact if properties were redeveloped. Page 2 of 2 Document Number: Date Printed: Jun-2-16

9 Inter River Sub Area Transportation Study Summary of Recommendations Priority High Priority Secondary Priority Not reasonable Option Public or Private Scenario & Conditions Depending on timing of development, Option 4b may serve as an alternative solution to providing access for St. 1a Public Denis. If MF Residential (current zoning) is approved for the Fire Training Centre site, Option 1a and 4b may collectively provide improved circulation to support the higher density. Would be timed if and when Lynnmour Elementary School 1b Public redevelops. Allows us to look for opportunities for public gathering spaces. 2 Either/or Can be either public or private depending on community benefit. - - Pursue opportunities to create a public meeting space and/or square near centre of the neighbourhood. - - Work with MOTI to preserve land for drive to 5 parking. - - Work with MOTI to maintain and improve commuter route. - - Pursue opportunities to formalize walking pathways between Lillooet Road and Premier St. Would serve as a private driveway exclusive of any St. 3 Private Denis connector roads. Could go through school property or may require purchasing of private property. Would require cooperation with school & fire training 4b Public centre. Could go through school property or may require purchasing of private property. 4a Public Would not provide the most reasonable E/W connection to St. Denis impacts outweigh benefits. 5 Public Does not provide a unique benefit as an E/W connection impacts outweigh benefits. Document Number: