White Rock council faces a tough decision on the second phase of the Johnston Road upgrade.
It can choose to close a section of Johnston to traffic for six months, or keep one lane of traffic open and face a longer construction period and significantly increased costs.
While the first phase of Johnston Road, from North Bluff Road south to Russell Avenue, was completed in 2018, similar work remains to be done in the second phase, from Russell Avenue south to Thrift Avenue.
But White Rock engineering manager Corinne Haer’s recommendation in a corporate report – to close that section of Johnston Road to traffic for a six month period from March to September of next year – received resistance from Couns. David Chesney and Christopher Trevelyan at Monday’s (Nov. 27) council meeting (Coun. Ernie Klassen, as a Johnston Road business owner, recused himself from voting on the issue).
Staff was seeking council authority to issue a request-for-proposal (RFP) to contractors for the project, which would improve underground electrical infrastructure and upgrade water mains and sanitary sewers, as well as replace the sidewalk on the east side to remove tripping hazards and improve accessibility, and introduce a traffic-calming median and shortened mid-block crosswalks.
READ ALSO: Johnston Road to close for streetscape work
The western side of that stretch of Johnston has already been updated as part of the second phase of the Miramar Village development, Haer’s report noted.
Estimated cost of the project, city CAO Guillermo Ferrero said, is $3.1 million.
Operations manager Jim Gordon said that the six-month closure of the street would be mitigated by extending construction hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily, and that sidewalks would remain open for pedestrian traffic during the construction period.
However, Gordon and Ferrero said that keeping one lane of Johnston open, with flag-people on duty – as suggested by Chesney – could extend the construction to 10 months and double the costs.
Chesney, who said he found it “hard to believe” that keeping one lane open would boost the price tag that much, pushed for that option to be included in the recommendations to be endorsed by council and that full public consultation take place before council finally approved the project.
Ferrero said that, given council’s preliminary endorsement, all such considerations could be included in the RFP stage of the project.
Ultimately council endorsed proceeding with an RFP, with options for both a full road closure and one lane remaining open, along with extended construction hours and an implemented public engagement schedule.
“I know we’re going to have a big blow-back on this,” Chesney said. “I think we need to have public engagement before we move ahead.”
Planned public engagement includes written notification to businesses and organizations (such as the White Rock BIA and the South Surrey and White Rock Chamber of Commerce) by early December, an online TalkWhiteRock site for the project and an open house on Dec. 14 between 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. at the White Rock Community Centre.
Coun. Elaine Cheung said that while she expects opposition to a road closure for the project, “the benefits outweigh the inconvenience of construction” in terms of improving safety, accessibility and opportunities for ‘placemaking’ that will make the city more attractive to residents and visitors.
“In the long term, it will bring more people into White Rock.”
Trevelyan said the previous council, of which he was a member, had questioned the value of doing the work while the east side of Johnston is likely subject to redevelopment.
Gordon responded that arrival of development is hard to predict, but that the basic work on the road does need to be done; echoing a comment from Mayor Megan Knight that costs for the project will continue to rise.
“Is it a crisis?” he said. “No. But does it need to be upgraded? Yes.”