|
CITY OF VANCOUVER SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 9, 2004 |
A Special Meeting of the Council of the City of Vancouver was held on Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, Third Floor, City Hall.
PRESENT: |
Councillor Sam Sullivan, Chair
|
ABSENT: |
Mayor Larry Campbell (Civic Business)
|
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE: |
Charlene Imai, Meeting Coordinator |
MOVED by Councillor Stevenson
SECONDED by Councillor Louie
THAT this Council resolve itself into Court of Revision for the purpose of hearing complaints against the proposed assessments or the accuracy of frontage measurements, or any other complaint which persons interested may desire to make and which is by law cognizable by the Court, Councillor Sullivan in the Chair.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
COURT OF REVISION
LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS
Projects by Petition: Court No. 615
June 9, 2004
Pavement, Curbs, Trees & Bulges - Local Residential |
Lane Pavement - Local Residential |
Speed Humps |
Pedestrian Collector Sidewalk |
Lane Lighting |
Before Council was a report from the Collector of Taxes dated June 9, 2004, with respect to Local Improvement Court of Revision No. 615.
COURT NO. 615 - PROJECTS BY PETITION
The Collector of Taxes certified that the projects in the report dated June 9, 2004, have been requested by the majority of the assessed owners by means of a sufficiently signed petition.
MOVED by Councillor Bass
SECONDED by Councillor Louis
THAT the report of the Special Assessment Roll for Court No. 615, dated June 9, 2004, submitted by the Collector of Taxes, be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RISE FROM COURT OF REVISION
MOVED by Councillor Woodsworth
SECONDED by Councillor Roberts
THAT the Court of Revision rise and report.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
COUNCIL
ADOPT REPORT OF COURT OF REVISION
MOVED by Councillor Roberts
SECONDED by Councillor Louie
THAT the Council adopt the report of the Court of Revision dated June 9, 2004.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Administrative Report
Local Improvements Subsequent Procedure - June 9, 2004
and Projects to be Cancelled
May 17, 2004
Prior to considering the recommendations in the Administrative Report dated May 17, 2004, David Desrochers, Streets Design Engineer, with the assistance of additional staff and an overhead presentation, reviewed the various projects. The following delegations were heard and actions taken as follows:
COURT NO. 615 - PROJECTS BY PETITION
Project No. 615/002
Messrs. Demetrios Fotiou and Eric Graholm registered support but did not speak.
MOVED by Councillor Roberts
SECONDED by Councillor Louis
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/004
Stanley Aur expressed opposition to the project and indicated his preference for the country lane option.
At the request of Council members, Dave Desrochers provided information on the status of country lanes where the initial concept was constructed on a fellow employee's driveway in 1996. Mr. Desrochers advised interest in country lanes has come from cities throughout North America. Mr. Desrochers also advised the cost for country lanes is roughly double the full pavement option. There is also a higher maintenance cost.
Council members queried whether owners are being informed of the country lane option, and Elizabeth Norris, Local Improvements Clerk, responded the country lane option, since February 2003, has only been noted on the information sheet as an alternate option but is currently undergoing evaluation and not yet available. However, the centre strip and full pavement options have always been offered. Mr. Desrochers advised staff will be reporting to Council in the Fall on country lanes. The report will include staffing and maintenance issues, as well as capital costs.
MOVED by Councillor Stevenson
SECONDED by Councillor Bass
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/005
Renjie Chen spoke in support of the project but expressed concerns about drainage.
In response, John Jang, Streets Design - Local Improvements, advised that lanes are paved in a way that no water will drain into private property.
MOVED by Councillor Louis
SECONDED by Councillor Roberts
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/006
James Ducommun indicated opposition to the project.
Elizabeth Norris, Local Improvements Clerk, drew Council's attention to the fact that Beneva Shillabeer had withdrawn her signature. Ms. Shillabeer registered opposition but did not speak.
Ms. Norris recommended the project be reballoted, as this petition now has insufficient signatures due to the withdrawal of Ms. Shillabeer's signature.
MOVED by Councillor Louis
SECONDED by Councillor Bass
THAT this project be reballoted.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/008
John Marconato registered support but did not speak.
MOVED by Councillor Woodsworth
SECONDED by Councillor Roberts
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/010
Nancy Mah registered her objection and advised she lives on the corner and will not utilize the lane.
MOVED by Councillor Bass
SECONDED by Councillor Louis
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/011
Ms. Norris drew Council's attention to an e-mail from Michael Smith who opposed the project and did not sign the petition. In his e-mail, Mr. Smith expressed concerns about lane traffic speed increasing even with speed humps, security and safety issues, drainage and cost.
MOVED by Councillor Louis
SECONDED by Councillor Roberts
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/013
Allan Diamond spoke in opposition (letter submitted). In his presentation, Mr. Diamond expressed concerns about the definition of a "lane" not a "street", condition of the lane, petition process, cost benefit, traffic and environmental issues.
In response to questions from Council members regarding the governance of Courts of Revision, Ms. Norris responded Courts of Revision are governed by the Vancouver Charter.
When asked if he had presented his proposal to the other owners, Mr. Diamond replied he had not. Mr. Diamond requested a review of the process as he feels there are many inequities.
A member of Council enquired if any traffic analysis had been done and Ms. Norris responded that when a project is petition-generated, a traffic analysis is not carried out.
Paul Haym spoke in opposition to the project, noting this is the second petition circulated for this project. Mr. Haym expressed concerns about increased traffic flow as a result of the lane pavement, as well as the environmental impacts. He enquired as to whether there was a correlation between lane paving and the need for speed humps. Mr. Haym indicated the lane already has more traffic from persons not residing in the area.
Ms. Norris responded that staff advise people to do lane first, wait, then install speed humps if necessary. She indicated a large majority do not come back for speed humps.
Council members enquired about traffic flow and the owners' awareness of this, and Ms. Norris replied that as 11 of the 16 owners had signed the petition and many had been long-time residents of the area, they would be aware of the traffic situation.
Gordon Carkner spoke in support of the project and advised he does not notice much traffic. Mr. Carkner noted that without the pavement, there is more dust and noise.
With Council's approval, Mr. Diamond read into the record a letter from Grant Close, owner/occupant, who is opposed to paving, but supports the country lane option. Mr. Close did not sign the petition.
Council members questioned staff on Council's role in the decision-making process. As two-thirds of the owners have signed the petition, wouldn't Council just rubber stamp and approve? What happens if Council does not approve?
Peter Judd, Assistant City Engineer - Streets, responded that Council is not obligated to approve the project. If Council chooses not to proceed, the project is dead. However, Ms. Norris stated that those who signed in support would not have their opportunity to speak to Council.
Robert Anderson spoke in support of the project. As an avid gardener he stated he will be planting shrubs to beautify the lane, as will many others.
MOVED by Councillor Stevenson
SECONDED by Councillor Louie
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED
(Councillors Bass and Woodsworth opposed)
Court No. 615/015
Jack Buchanan registered support but did not speak.
MOVED by Councillor Roberts
SECONDED by Councillor Louis
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Court No. 615/016
David Crowe spoke in opposition, stating that speed humps will not help anybody.
MOVED by Councillor Bass
SECONDED by Councillor Louis
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/020
Marie Cairns spoke in opposition, stating there is no need for lighting. Ms. Cairns expressed concern about the cost.
In response to a question about cost to the owners, Ms. Norris advised of payment options available to Ms. Cairns. Ms. Norris also advised Council members of the City's Tax Deferment Program and stated she would speak to and provide Ms. Cairns with a brochure regarding the Program after the meeting.
MOVED by Councillor Louis
SECONDED by Councillor Roberts
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Project No. 615/023
Selim Causevic registered support but did not speak.
MOVED by Councillor Louie
SECONDED by Councillor Louis
THAT this project be approved.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MAY 17, 2004
Council then considered the Administrative Report dated May 17, 2004.
MOVED by Councillor Louie
SECONDED by Councillor Roberts
THAT the recommendation of the General Manager of Engineering Services, as contained in the Administrative Report dated May 17, 2004, and quoted below, be approved, taking into account the specific actions taken this day:
A. THAT the projects by "Petition" in Court #615 be approved.
B. THAT previously approved projects numbered Court #566, Item #066, and Court #580, Items #015 and #043, and Court #585, Items #035 and #036, as described in detail in the Administrative Report Local Improvements Subsequent Procedure - June 9, 2004, and Projects to be Cancelled dated May 17, 2004, be cancelled.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
The Special Council adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
* * * * *
