Kootenay Lake Ferry Sparwood Town Council East Shore Advocacy Society Herve Blezy Oct 20th, 2019 Agenda • Presentation Purpose • Ferry and Road Maps • The opportunity • Project Review • Background • MOTI • Appendices • Safety • Environment • Service • Economics , business capital and operating cost • Stakeholders • MOTI Resolution • Community Concerns Presentation Purpose • Provide awareness of a significant transportation problem in the Kootenays • Request a letter of support for the East Shore Advocacy Society that would be sent to the MOTI Marine Division and Highway Divisions to do due diligence. It would compare both the Balfour terminal and Queens Bay terminal. Kootenay Lake Ferry Map Kootenay Bay to Queens Bay sailing distance is 5.4 km Kootenay Bay to Balfour sailing distance is 8.8 km The Opportunity • Relocate the Balfour ferry terminal to QueensBay and improve safety, reduce emissions, improve service, reduce operating costs for 9,000,000 ferry users over the next 25 years. • In addition, a smaller ferry can be built and would be able, due to the significant reduction in crossing time, to surpass the car carrying capacity of the new proposed 60 car ferry during a major transportation disruption of the Kootenay Pass. • It would improve the economic and societal benefits in the Kootenay region Project Review Balfour terminal • A new ferry is required for both scenarios since the Balfour ferry needs to be decommissioned and the Osprey 2000 will need to be refurbished in 2023. • The Balfour ferry terminal needs to be refurbished, with a large parking lot extension over green space. Minor improvements at Kootenay Bay. • No significant improvement in service since travelling time remains the same. • Lower operating costs and small reduction in CO2 emissions than today due to a more efficient ferry. In the future lower electrical costs. • Dredging ( 9000m3) is required in the West Arm for two months. Will be required again in the future and repeated. Recent “impeller grounding on lake bottom at Balfour narrows” in Spring 2019. Dredging planned for fall 2019. Project Review Queens Bay terminal • Terminal and Parking lot located on Crown Land impacting 2 residential titles, some negative impact to Queens Bay residents. Located on shore line. • Balfour residents in West Arm, possible positive or neutral impact to residents • Parking lot/ terminal needs an Environmental Assessment and mitigations • Parking lot/ terminal needs an Archeological Assessment, no mention of Kootenay Bay scope • Provides a substantial better service to 9,000,000 users • Significant improvement in safety and environmental performance • Significantly lower operating costs and lower CO2 emissions/ electrical costs than today • One time dredging required for construction Background • The proposed relocation of the ferry terminal has been a topic of discussion for decades. • After various conceptual studies, SNC Lavalin completed a technical feasibility study in 2016 on behalf of the MOTI • The study strongly recommended a relocation based on safety, environment, service, stakeholders and cost. • Balfour and QueensBay residents protested, circulated a petition against the change and had four Face 2 Face ( F2F) meetings with the MOTI consultants. • Public F2F consultations engagements requested by our East Shore elected officials and residents were ignored. No regional meetings. • Being an election year, it became a political decision to cancel the terminal change to avoid the protest. Decision in Fall 2016 Since Spring 2018 - 2019 • A landslide in the Kootenay Pass caused significant traffic and business delays for several days and two forest fires closed off the Pass twice last summer. The traffic was backup for 5 km, resulting in 9 hour waits • A non partisan East Shore Advocacy Society was formed and began circulating a petition and submitted on Oct 31. • Over 2500 signatures were obtained, 1250 signatures in the Nelson Creston riding. • The petition was read by the Hon. Andrew Weaver in the Legislative Assembly on Nov 27. • Signs and billboards signs are going up and down the lake and in Creston/Wynndel. There is also a large billboard in Crawford Bay. • Received a letter of support from Kaslo and Creston Town Council, City Of Trail and Cranbrook and the Creston, Cranbrook, Kaslo and Kootenay Lake Chamber of Commerces. Nelson Chamber requested a review of the transportation systems. MOTI did not meet their obligations to the public. • MOTI advised they did not calculate the reduction in CO2 emissions for the two cases and in addition did not take into account the reduction in CO2 emissions due to the reduce traffic going around Kootenay Pass or region • There has been repeated requests via letter, public notices and telephone calls for the capital and operating cost for both cases; they were not provided. • There was no public consultation on the East Shore and larger region in 2016. Only surveys were provided. Appendices • Safety considerations • Environment • Service • Economics • Stakeholder Engagement • MOTI Resolution • Community concerns • Wasted Taxpayer $ • Cost of non conformance per Kootenay Pass event Safety Considerations Balfour / Kootenay Bay Queens Bay/ Kootenay Bay - Highway queuing issue at West Partial, increase size of parking lot. Better, new parking lot on Crown terminal location resolved Improved but not resolved. land, more space, grade 2 %. - Kootenay Bay terminal queuing Extending the parking lot is not in Not resolved, however parking lot resolved existing scope. significantly smaller. - Pleasure craft collision resolved No Significantly better. As Low as Reasonably Practical (ALARP) - Beaching issue due to sand bars Not resolved, constantly shifting Not an issue - Additional Kootenay Bay Higher probability Much lower probability runaway lane required - Windy conditions More exposure due to distance but 40 % shorter distance. May have to calmer at terminal. May have to cancel trips more often. cancel trips. - High water lake levels Challenging and more Not an issue - Low water lake levels infrastructure required at terminal. Prop and vessel damage Environmental Balfour / Kootenay Bay Queens Bay/ Kootenay Bay - 17% less fuel (CO2)with existing The new 60 car ferry will be more Yes* ( approx) summer schedule. efficient but unknown fuel 570 tonnes less or 124 cars off the (estimated at 13.7 l/km) road for a year - 28 % less fuel with 6 additional Not applicable Yes ( approx.) sailings 970 tonnes less or 210 cars off the road for a year - Dredging required Yes and ongoing. First Nations Yes, one time for construction only. consultation is required. Dredging First Nations consultation is amount 9000? m3. required. - Parking lot extension Parking lot is required but larger Higher impact on shoreline. Balfour/Queens Bay than necessary. Lower impact than Mitigations may be required/ QB however, green space removed. anticipated. 90,000 m3 material. EIA required EIA required. - Kootenay Bay runaway Same ( if required) Same(if required) lane/parking lot Parking lot extension Smaller parking lot Ext’ required Service Balfour / Kootenay Bay Queens Bay/ Kootenay Bay - Time to cross (min) 35 17 - Overall time load/cross/ unload 50 30 (min) - Crossing frequency 15 summer, 10 F/W/S 16 year round - Number of ferries Summer 2, Winter 1 Summer 1, Winter 1 - Response time fire, EMS services, Slower Faster - Education Students catch 7:10 AM ferry Students catch later ferry - Vehicle line ups during summer Yes, presently. Fewer line ups. Reduced and long weekends Reduced with new 60 car ferry significantly with new 45 car ferry - Kootenay Pass pass blocked (car 30 % improvement with new 60 90% improvement with smaller 45 moving capability) in comparison car ferry car ferry to today Economics: Capital and operating costs, business impacts -. Balfour / Kootenay Bay Queens Bay/ Kootenay Bay - Tourism impact Similar ( improved car capacity) Increased car capacity - Ferry work shifts Same Less ( summer) - West Shore /Balfour/ - Same after construction? 4 businesses Provide more services to E. Shore. Nelson business impact - Unknown during construction Need business transition plan. - East Shore business impact. - No change, continued downward trend Provide more services to W. Shore - Operating costs - Lower fuel with 60 car ferry Much lower fuel with 45 car ferry - * = estimated $300K/year* nearly $510K/year - Ongoing dredging in future ? - New ferry lower draft requirements - Capital April 29th $54 MM. Ferry terminal $25M *? ( SNC 2016) but smaller upgrades. Sizing not yet finalized. backup ferry cost not known Balfour Remediation? Geotech. - Kootenay Bay runaway lane Cost the same Cost the same, maybe not required - Terminal /Kootenay Bay Required ( warm up shelter) Required (warm up shelter) amenities Stakeholder Engagement Balfour / Kootenay Bay Queens Bay/ Kootenay Bay - First Nations Not known Not known - Ferry Users, 377,000 annually Not known Not known 9,000,000 - 25 years - Transportation Industry Not known Not known - Proctor/Harrop Not known Not known - Balfour Preference X - Queens Bay Preference X - Riondel, Gray Creek Preference X - Crawford Bay Preference X - East Shore Businesses X - SNC / MOTI/ WMPacific X ( SNC Report) 2016 MOTI Resolution proposed • Stop all work on the Balfour terminal refurbishment and do the following due diligence. • Complete a socio economic study of the Central Kootenay region including the East and West Kootenays on the impact of relocating the ferry terminal/KP traffic • Determine the cost of non conformance