ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Date: September 5, 2000

Author/Local: J. Griffin/7928

RTS No. 1682

CC File No. 5804-8
Council: September 26, 2000

TO: Vancouver City Council

FROM: General Manager of Engineering Services

SUBJECT: Local Improvements by Initiative - November 21, 2000

First and Second Step Report

RECOMMENDATION

A. THAT the projects listed in Appendix I be advanced as Local Improvements on the Initiative and brought before a Court of Revision on November 21, 2000.

B. THAT the reports of the City Engineer and Director of Finance be adopted together with details of the Second Step Report as summarized in Appendix II, and Council declare it is desirable that the projects set out in Appendix I of this report be undertaken and deems that each will specially benefit the real property abutting it. (Requires two-thirds approval of those present).

C. THAT sidewalk projects Numbered 28 - 34 inclusive, as described in Appendix I, be designated as "pedestrian collector routes" so that the abutting residential property owners' rates are reduced by the required 25%.

COUNCIL POLICY

Policies governing the Local Improvement process are set out in the Vancouver Charter and Local Improvements Procedure by-law.

PURPOSE

A Court of Revision is scheduled for November 21, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. to review a number of petition and initiative projects. The report for petition projects will be advanced to Council separately at a later date to allow as much time as possible for residents to circulate their petitions. The purpose of this report is to begin the formal Local Improvement process by advancing the initiative projects to the Court of Revision and reporting on the financial arrangements for the projects. Approval of this report does not commit Council to undertakethe projects.

First Step

As required by the Local Improvement Procedure By-law, projects for the following categories and detailed on the attached schedule (Appendix I), are advanced to Council by Initiative for review at a Court of Revision, which will be held at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, November 21, 2000.

Court #600

I	Lane Lighting
II	Pavement & Curbs, Higher Zoned
III	Pavement & Curbs, Local Residential
IV	Lane Pavement, Higher Zoned
V	Lane Pavement, Local Residential
VI	Speed Humps
VII	Pedestrian Collector Sidewalks
VIII	Sidewalk Reconstruction

Capital Funds

Funds for the City's share of the projects are available from existing Engineering Department Basic Capital Accounts, or are subject to approval of the 2001 Streets Basic Capital Budget.

Second Step

The Director of Finance reports as follows:

In accordance with the Local Improvements Procedure By-law, I am submitting the attached City Engineer's report. The estimated cost of these projects is $2,523,359. The property owners' share of the projects is $902,601. The City's share is $1,620,758. I have to report that the necessary financial arrangements can be made to carry out this work, subject to approval of the 2001 Streets Basic Capital Budget.

- - - - -

Appendix I

COURT OF REVISION - NOVEMBER 21, 2000

INITIATIVE PROJECTS - SCHEDULE #600

I. LANE LIGHTING

1. L/S 10th Avenue from Kaslo Street to L/W Renfrew Street & L/W Renfrew Street from 10th Avenue to the dead end south

This project is being initiated following the request for assistance by an adjacent owner who is concerned with his neighbourhood and has not been successful in circulating a petition because of some absentee owners and an adjacent commercial property. The concerned petitioner has petitioned for the lane improvement as well as speed humps and lighting but one large property on the south side which occupies the entire length of the lane has informed the City that there is no interest in supporting any improvement. As a result even if a majority of residential owners supported these improvements the petition would not be successful because the value of the single commercial owner out weighs the value of all the residential owners. Also due to occurances of criminal activity, the police department has recommended that the petitioner pursue these improvements which they believe would be beneficial to his neighbourhood and deter further crime.

II. PAVEMENT & CURBS - HIGHER ZONED

The following higher-zoned streets being initiated have strip pavements and are all in poor condition. Higher-zoned streets that are in poor condition are often difficult to improve by the petition process due to the large number of absentee land owners on the block. These streets therefore deteriorate, resulting in complaints and maintenance concerns. The initiative process is an effective way of improving these situations.

Note that 17th Avenue from Main Street to Quebec Street and Stainsbury Avenue from Victoria Drive to Commercial Street have residential owners who would be unsuccessful in circulating a Petition because the residential owners lack the required value in order for the Petition to be successful.

2. Lakewood Drive from Triumph Street to Dundas Street except 10 ft. frnt Lot 8, Blk26, DL184
3. Salsbury Street from Hastings Street to Franklin Street
4. Stainsbury Avenue from Victoria Drive to Commercial Street
5. 17th Avenue from Main Street to Quebec Street

III. PAVEMENT & CURBS - LOCAL RESIDENTIAL

The following residentially zoned streets are being initiated because of the poor condition of the existing strip pavement. Many of these projects have been balloted in advance and a majority of those owners responding support the proposed improvement. Those projects thathave not been balloted are being initiated for reasons as noted.

6. Balaclava Street from 34th Avenue to 35th Avenue
7. Crown Street from 17th Avenue to 18th Avenue
8. Crown Street from 18th Avenue to 19th Avenue
9. Manitoba Street from 17th Avenue to 18th Avenue

10. Mayfair Street from Blenheim Street to Collingwood Street

This street is unusual because the properties on the south side are double fronting lots and properties on the north side are standard lots with a back lane. The double fronting lots are lots where the front and back of the lot are adjacent to a street. These lots have their garages and parking areas adjacent to Mayfair Street and they use and treat the street as if it were a lane. Although there is support for street improvement work from owners on the north side there is reluctance to support by some of the owners on the south side. A request for assistance by the Petitioner who resides on the north side was made in an effort to improve the street which is in poor condition. The petitioner advises that not as many owners on the south side are interested, making it difficult to acquire the required majority.

Note that the owners on the south side of the street have an improved street fronting their property and were only assessed for one half of their frontage instead of the full width. The remaining half of their frontage will be assessed if the back of their property is improved. In this way the owners on the south side are not penalized by having to pay for street improvement on both sides of their property.

11. Montgomery Street from 46th Avenue to 47th Avenue
12. Prince Albert Street from 57th Avenue to 58th Avenue

13. Vanness Avenue from Earles Street to Rupert Street

This project is being initiated because of the poor condition of the street and flooding of property and the lower end of the street. This is also the remaining section of Vanness Avenue which is adjacent the ALRT that has not been improved.

14. Windermere Street from 27th Avenue to 28th Avenue

IV. LANE PAVEMENT - HIGHER ZONED

Higher-Zoned lane paving addresses Council's stated priority on infrastructure renewal. These lanes tend not to be improved by petition because of absentee ownership, yet they carry much more traffic than residential lanes, and the lane surface deteriorate as a result. This causes high maintenance cost and a significant number of complaints from commercial and/or apartment tenants.

Note that the L/S of 4th Avenue from Stephens Street to Trafalgar Street and L/S of 16th Avenue from the L/W Heather Street to Ash Street and L/E Heather Street from 16th Avenue to 17th Avenue has a mixture of strata owners and residential property. Usually the influence of the strata owners skews the outcome of the project in their favour but for these two projects the residential owners were balloted in advance to determine if the project should proceed. Of those residential owners responding, a majority supported the proposal for lane paving.

15. L/S Franklin Street from Victoria Drive to Semlin Drive
16. L/S 4th Avenue from Stephens Street to Trafalgar Street
17. L/S 7th Avenue from 162 ft. east of Keith Drive to L/W Clark Drive and L/W Clark Drive from 7th Avenue to 8th Avenue
18. L/S 11th Avenue from Victoria Drive to 60 ft. east of Commercial Drive
19. L/S 16th Avenue from L/E Heather Street to Ash Street and L/E Heather Street from 16th Avenue to 17th Avenue

V. LANE PAVEMENT, LOCAL RESIDENTIAL

20. L/S 10th Avenue from Kaslo Street to L/W Renfrew Street and the L/W Renfrew Street from 10th Avenue to the dead end south

This project is being initiated following the request for assistance by an adjacent owner who is concerned with his neighbourhood and has not been successful in circulating a petition because of some absentee owners and an adjacent commercial property. The concerned petitioner has petitioned for the lane improvement as well as speed humps and lighting but one large property on the south side which occupies the entire length of the lane has informed the City that there is no interest in supporting any improvement. As a result even if a majority of residential owners supported these improvements the petition would not be successful because the value of the single commercial owner out weighs the value of all the residential owners. Also due to occurances of criminal activity, the police department has recommended that the petitioner pursue these improvements which they believe would be beneficial to his neighbourhood and deter further crime.

VI. SPEED HUMPS

The following speed hump projects are being initiated as a result of complaints about safety due speeding vehicles using the lanes as an alternate route in order to avoid signalized intersections or as a short cut to their destinations. Circulating a petition would be difficult because of the number of strata owners involved of which some are absentee owners.

21. L/S Barclay Street from Jervis Street to Bute Street
22. L/S Broadway from Arbutus Street to Yew Street

23. L/E Gothard Street from 29th Avenue to Norquay Street

A petition for this project was unsuccessful because one of the locations of the speed humps was contentious with an adjacent owner. The Petitioner has requested assistance because there are safety concerns with children in the lane. A review confirms there is a Montessori Daycare facility using the local church. The children and staff use the lane to walk to a nearby park. Since this lane is longer than usual, vehicle traffic tends to travel faster than normal making any conflict between the younger pedestrians and vehicles potentially more serious. Therefore, it is appropriate that this project be initiated for safety reasons.

24. L/S Harwood Street from Bute Street to Thurlow Street
25. L/S Smithe Street from Thurlow Street to 330 ft. east on S/S and 313.62 east on the north side
26. L/S 8th Avenue from Stephens Street to Trafalgar Street
27. L/S 10th Avenue from Kaslo Street to L/W Renfrew Street

VII. PEDESTRIAN COLLECTOR SIDEWALKS

On February 9, 1982, Council reaffirmed its policy objectives of providing sidewalks:
- on both sides of arterial streets;
- on both sides (as needed) of pedestrian collector routes;
- on both sides of higher-zoned streets; and
- on local residential streets, where property owners petitioned for them.

The construction of new pedestrian collector sidewalks responds to Council's top two priorities for transportation improvements; pedestrians and transit. Of the 8 new sidewalk projects initiated, 4 projects provide access to bus routes and 2 projects provide access to schools or parks.

28. S/S Durward Avenue from Fraser Street to 78 ft. east of Fraser Street

Infill, access to bus route on Fraser Street

VII. PEDESTRIAN COLLECTOR SIDEWALKS(cont'd)

29. E/S Kaslo Street from Venables Street to Parker Street

Infill, adjacent to Notre Dame School

30. E/S Lillooet Street from 4th Avenue to 6th Avenue

Infill, access to bus route on Broadway

31. W/S Penticton Street from Broadway to L/N Broadway

Infill, access to bus route on Broadway and Vancouver Technical Secondary

32. W/S Ross Street from 54th Avenue to 57th Avenue

Infill, access to Ross Park at 57th Avenue and Walter Moberly School at 59th Avenue

33. W/S Trafalgar Street from 32nd Avenue to L/S 32nd Avenue

Infill

34. N/S 5th Avenue from Brunswick Street to 186 ft. west of Brunswick Street

Infill

VIII. SIDEWALK RECONSTRUCTION

The Sidewalk Reconstruction Program is directed toward poor condition sidewalks in commercial areas which involve high pedestrian usage and are on transit routes. In this report there are 5 projects recommended for initiative. Sidewalks rating reconstruction are often badly cracked and sloped and may be patched in many places by asphalt fillets. In spite of inspection and regular maintenance by City staff, sidewalks in this condition are more prone to trips, water ponding and liability concerns for the City. Sidewalks in poor condition also provide obstacles for the disabled and seniors.

These sidewalk reconstruction projects are shared 50/50 with the abutting commercial owners, and the program has been very well received since it began about 18 years ago.

40. S/S Davie St. from Broughton Street to Jervis Street

41. S/S Davie Street from L/E Burrard Street to Hornby Street except 12 ft. Frnt Lot C

48. N/S Hasting Street from Penticton Street to Slocan Street
49. E/S Salsbury Street from Franklin Street to L/S Franklin Street
50. W/S Salsbury Street from Hastings Street to L/N Hastings Street

APPENDIX II

CITY OF VANCOUVER - LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS DETAILED SECOND STEP REPORT
Summary of Estimated Costs and Certificates to the Attached Local Improvement Estimates
Advanced on the Initiative Principle for a Court of Revision November 21, 2000

Court #600

The estimated costs provide for necessary incidental work. The cost of the property owner's share of the above noted projects, and interest, is repayable over 15 years.except for lane lighting which is repayable over five years.

Certified correct as to measurements.

_____________________________ ___________________________ _________________________

Collector of Taxes Director of Finance City Engineer

Certified adopted by the City Council on ___________________________ ___________________________ City Clerk

* * * * *