Agenda Index City of Vancouver

REPORT TO COUNCIL

STANDING COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL
ON CITY SERVICES AND BUDGETS

MAY 17, 2001

A Regular Meeting of the Standing Committee of Council on City Services and Budgets was held on Thursday, May 17, 2001, at 9:30 a.m., in Committee Room No. 1, Third Floor, City Hall.

* Denotes presence for a portion of the meeting.
** Acting Chair for a portion of the meeting.

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

The Minutes of the Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets meeting of April 26, 2001, were adopted.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Tender No. 2001-04: Rubble Hauling and Crushing -

The Committee had before it an Administrative Report dated May 3, 2001, in which the General Manager of Engineering Services sought Council approval to award Tender No. 2001-04 to haul excavated material from Engineering Services construction work to landfill sites, and to crush and transport asphalt and concrete slab rubble, to Columbia Bitulithic Ltd.

Tom Timm, Deputy City Engineer, described the purposes of the tender and reviewed the rationale for recommending approval. This is a one year tender, and there will be a future report to Council on this issue.

Ken Davidson, C.U.P.E. Local 1004, requested that the tender not be approved. A trial should be carried out to determine whether the Union could do the job with equal or greater cost-effectiveness. The Union has done some analysis and has suggestions to reduce costs while using civic work crews.

MOVED by Councillor Clarke
THAT the Committee recommend to Council

carried

AMENDMENT MOVED by Councillor Bass

LOST
(Councillors Clarke, Kennedy, Don Lee, McCormick, Price, Puil and Sullivan opposed)(Mayor Owen not present for the vote)

AMENDMENT MOVED by Councillor Bass

LOST
(Councillors Clarke, Kennedy, Don Lee, McCormick, Price, Puil and Sullivan opposed) (Mayor Owen not present for the vote)

MOTION AS PUT

MOVED by Councillor Clarke
THAT the Committee recommend to Council

CARRIED
(Councillors Bass and Louis opposed)
(Mayor Owen not present for the vote)

2. Downtown Eastside Economic Revitalization:

The Committee had before it an Administrative Report dated May 3, 2001, in which the General Manager of Community Services sought Council approval to enter into a new services contract between the City and the Vancouver Economic Development Commission(VEDC). Subject to approval of the services contract, conditional approval of a lease subsidy grant to the Downtown Eastside Residents Association (DERA) for the Call 'N Post was also sought.

Nathan Edelson, Planner, Downtown Neighbourhoods Group, reviewed the grant application and rationale for recommending approval, as well as legal issues which must be addressed because of the changing roles of the VEDC and the Partners for Economic and Community Health (PEACH).

Frank Gilbert, DERA, requested that the grant be approved and explained the program of the Call 'N Post to date. Mr. Gilbert was confident that there is a need for such services in the area, and that increasing printing business will eventually eliminate the need for a rent subsidy.

MOVED by Councillor McCormick
THAT the Committee recommend to Council

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
(Mayor Owen not present for the vote)

----------
Items 3 and 4 were dealt with concurrently and have been minuted accordingly
----------

3. Sewer Operations Branch Reorganization (File 1375)
AND
4. Waterworks Operations Branch Reorganization (File 1375)

The Committee had before it two Administrative Reports, both dated April 9, 2001, in which the General Manager of Engineering Services sought Council approval to restructure the Sewer Operations Branch and the Waterworks Operations Branch.

Tom Timm, Deputy City Engineer, reviewed the rationale for the proposed reorganization, effects on existing staff, and timing of implementation.

Ken Davidson, C.U.P.E. Local 1004, advised that the Union has reached agreement with the City and the Foremen's Association about the Sewer Operations and Waterworks Operations Branch reorganizations. However, there is still concern about the amount of time that
foremen in the new Working Foreman positions may have to spend on supervisory duties. It may also be necessary to fill Foremen II positions while the review is underway.

Sewer Operations Branch Reorganization

MOVED by Councillor Louis
THAT the Committee Recommend to Council

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
(Mayor Owen not present for the vote)

Waterworks Operations Branch Reorganization

MOVED by Councillor Louis
THAT the Committee Recommend to Council

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
(Mayor Owen not present for the vote)

INFORMATION

5. Anti-Graffiti Initiatives (File 3501)

The Committee had before it an Administrative Report dated May 7, 2001, in which the General Managers of Engineering Services and Community Services advised Council of the City's current anti-graffiti activities and recommended a series of initiatives which will improve the City's response to incidents of graffiti, particularly incidents occurring on private property.

Rowan Birch, Streets Administration Engineer, reviewed the proposed initiatives and their rationale, and responded to questions about legal issues, enforcement issues, the Toronto program, graffiti-free zones, notice to property owners, the causes of graffiti, assistance available to property owners dealing with incidents, and the potential costs if the City were to remove all graffiti at its cost.

Francie Connell, Acting City Manager, advised that if Council wished to consider restricting the sale of spray paint to minors, staff should be instructed to report back.

Patsy Scheer, Assistant Director of Legal Services, explained the usual method of setting minimum and maximum by-law fines. Council could amend the relevant by-law to increase the minimum fine.

The Committee then heard from speakers. During the hearing of speakers, Councillor Puil left the meeting on civic business, and Councillor Clarke assumed the chair.

The following speakers were generally in support of the proposed anti-graffiti initiatives:

Some of the comments made by the foregoing speakers follow:

· graffiti is a serious problem which victimizes property owners, and must be dealt with expeditiously;
· early, regular removal is the most effective deterrent against graffiti;
· to be effective as a deterrent, fines need to be considerably higher;
· the educational role should be expanded to ensure that schoolchildren, businesses, Police and the court system all realize the importance of this issue;
· the regulations must apply consistently to all levels of government, crown corporations and non-profits, as well as private property owners;
· there should be a program in place for the government to remove graffiti to support financially stressed property owners;
· representatives of the Strathcona Merchants Association and Downtown Vancouver and Mount Pleasant BIAs expressed willingness to have their areas declared graffiti-free zones, citing their histories of involvement in anti-graffiti initiatives;
· the entire city should be a no-tolerance zone for graffiti;
· issues about heritage buildings/monuments and hard to clean surfaces must be addressed (it was suggested that development permit regulations require easy-to-clean building surfaces);
· there was no objection to the requirement that property owners remove graffiti withina ten-day period of receiving notice to do so, provided there is some flexibility permitted for out-of-town owners, poor weather conditions, etc.;
· in jurisdictions where property owners are required to remove graffiti within a given time period, and notices are enforced, it is rarely necessary to issue notices a second time;
· consider contacting business owners with notices to remove graffiti, since many property owners are off-shore;
· the expense of liability insurance is a factor which deters non-profit organizations from taking an active role in graffiti removal;
· be careful not to put too much on volunteer organizations without funds;
· non-profit community policing centres cannot be responsible for Police enforcement;
· there were mixed views on the usefulness of murals;
· in response to a query, the Strathcona Merchants Association representative did not object to regulating the sale of spray paint to minors, but expressed some concern about keeping it in locked cabinets;
· it was noted that many substances besides spray paint are used to create graffiti.

The following speakers supported graffiti removal but expressed reservations:

Some of the comments made follow:

· graffiti-free zones only make sense when the intent is to expand the zone to the entire city; otherwise; it will be open season in other areas;
· concern was expressed about the inequitable discrepancy of giving property owners ten days from receipt of a notice to remove graffiti, while owners of furniture or amenities on the City street allowance are required to remove graffiti within three working days unless they implement a weekly cleaning and inspection program;
· concern was expressed that a weekly program satisfactory to the City would be administratively onerous;
· garbage containers have been newly added to the list of businesses using City street allowance which are required to remove graffiti, but differ from the other businesses listed because they are not for public use but for individual customers;
· concern was expressed that three days are not adequate time for response because containers are so large that it takes time to move them to a cleaning site, and replacements must be provided;
· containers cannot be cleaned on site, because potentially environmentally hazardous chemicals may be required, nor can they be repainted on site, because the surface must be properly prepared for paint to adhere;
· containers can be re-marked at incredible speed.

After hearing from all speakers, the Committee agreed to refer its decision to the Regular Council meeting immediately following the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment meeting to be held on the same afternoon, May 17, 2001.

[Note from Meeting Coordinator: Because of time constraints, Council subsequently postponed its decision on this item to a future date, to be advised. This item has now been rescheduled for the 2:00 p.m. Regular Council meeting on Tuesday, June 12, 2001, as Unfinished Business.]

The Committee adjourned at 12:20 p.m.

- - - - -

CITY OF VANCOUVER

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
STANDING COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON
CITY SERVICES AND BUDGETS

MAY 17, 2001

A Regular Meeting of the Council of the City of Vancouver was held on Thursday, May 17, 2001, at 5:05 p.m., in Committee Room No. 1, Third Floor, City Hall, following the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment meeting, to consider the recommendations of the Committee. Council approved the recommendations of the May 17, 2001 Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets at this Regular Council meeting. For ease of reference, Council's decisions have been recorded separately here.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by Councillor Price
SECONDED by Councillor McCormick

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Report of Standing Committee on Planning and Environment
May 17, 2001

Council considered the recommendations of the Committee, as contained in the following clauses of the foregoing report:

Clause 1

MOVED by Councillor Kennedy

CARRIED
(Councillors Bass and Louis opposed)

Clauses 2, 3 and 4

MOVED by Councillor Kennedy

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Clause 5

Because of time constraints, Council postponed its decision on this item to a future date, to be advised.

[Note from Meeting Coordinator: This item has now been rescheduled for the 2:00 p.m. Regular Council meeting on Tuesday, June 12, 2001, as Unfinished Business.]

RISE FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by Councillor Kennedy

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

ADOPT REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

MOVED by Councillor Kennedy
SECONDED by Councillor McCormick

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

The Council adjourned at 5:15 p.m.

* * * * *

cs010517.htm

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

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver