Agenda Index City of Vancouver

CITY OF VANCOUVER

SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES

JUNE 13/22, 2000

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by Cllr. Don Lee,
SECONDED by Cllr. Sullivan,

1. Sign By-law Text Amendment: Location of Billboards

Staff Comments

· staff do not have an accurate count of how many billboards are located in the city; it would require staff to drive every street to count the structures;
· video billboards are not allowed under the current by-laws;
· Council does have the power to devise neighbourhood-limited billboard bans.

Summary of Correspondence

· one letter and two ‘e’-mails opposed to billboards in residential neighbourhoods

· six ‘e’-mails opposed to billboards in general

· one letter and one ‘e’-mail in support of the proposed amendment

· 11 letters opposed to the proposed amendment

Clause No. 1 (cont’d)

Speakers

· Ann Roberts, Kensington-Cedar Cottage CityPlan Committee
· David Cadman, Society Promoting Environmental Conservation
· Letter read on behalf of Mark Lawrence by Mrs. Lawrence
· Helen Spiegelman, Dunbar Residents and Business Associations
· Mary Sherlock
· Nancy Alexander
· Ron Eckert
· Kim Stansfield
· Susan Adams
· Bruce Coates
· Ken Baker (letter filed)
· Bill Edbrooke
· Jim Grierson
· John Colenutt
· Valerie Howander
· Linda Wishart
· Stephen Hunter
· Sharon MacNeill
· Maeve Moran
· Alex Martin
· Eleanor O’Donnell
· Gary Trowski

· Strongly support the proposed amendment; however, urge Council to consider banning all billboards in the City of Vancouver;
· Billboards violate the work of CityPlan to plan a greener, lively pedestrian heart to neighbourhoods;
· Billboards are visual pollution, intrusive and an invasion of neighbourhood space;
· Billboards use public space to make a profit and offer nothing to the public;
· Billboards offend and do not improve the community nor provide any community benefit;
· There is no justification for the continued presence of billboards; local small businesses rarely utilize them;
Clause No. 1 (cont’d)

· Billboards have gotten out of control in the past two or three years;
· Residents are opposed to the strong lights from the billboards, the noise of transformers and the grating of the signs and having billboards located immediately next to their home;
· Residents request restricting index rotating signs;
· Whose interests do billboards address? Billboard companies do not consult area residents before putting up billboards.

· Bob Sinclair, Outdoor Advertising Association of Canada (brief filed)
· Geoffrey Lee
· David Struthers
· Fran Hackatt
· Wayne Ellis (letter filed)
· Sylvester Spagnuolo
· Joe Lepore
· Dan Bennett
· Walt Swanson
· Norm Gallicano (letters filed)
· Hugh Madden
· Blair Murdoch, Outdoor Advertising Association of Canada (brief filed)
· Simon Terlinden
· Chris Mackenzie, Omni

· The proposed 60-metre restriction would make it nearly impossible to find new suitable sites;
· The proposed amendment would stifle growing competition and would not allow new available sites;
· Billboards are an effective means of communication not just for advertising of products but also for charities and community groups;
· The illumination from billboards helps prevent crime in high crime districts;
· Billboard companies provide employment;
· The proposed amendment would put severe limits on the industry and it would be difficult for the outdoor advertising business to continue to develop;
Clause No. 1 (cont’d)

· The Outdoor Advertising Association of Canada proposes the following recommendations:

· The rights of commercial property owners are being trampled on; their opportunities to lease billboards will dry up as will the lease revenue which assists them in paying property taxes;
· Commercial property owners were not consulted about the proposed amendment;
· The choice for advertisers will be limited;
· Billboards are a source of creativity and amusement and are an effective medium for advertisers;
· The proposed amendment does not take into consideration that railway right of ways are considered residential and therefore billboards will be excluded from those areas as well.

Staff Closing Comments

MOVED by Cllr. Louis,

Clause No. 1 (cont’d)

AMENDMENT MOVED by Cllr. Clarke,

(Councillor Louis opposed)

MOTION AS AMENDED

RISE FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by Cllr. Don Lee,

ADOPT REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by Cllr.Don Lee,
SECONDED by Cllr. Louis,

The Special Council recessed at 10:30 p.m. on June 13, 2000
and adjourned at 10:20 p.m. on June 22, 2000.

* * * * *


ph000613.htm


Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver