ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: February 28, 1996
Dept. File No: PL006.RPT
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Chief License Inspector
SUBJECT: Vehicle for Hire By-law Regulations
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council instruct the Chief License Inspector to issue the
1996 Vehicle for Hire License to Mr. George Mack to operate
his current vehicle for a limited period of time expiring June
29, 1996, subject to Mr. Mack agreeing in writing that he will
have a new vehicle by this date or will cease to operate until
such time as he has one.
CONSIDERATION
B. Should Council approve "A" above, it is recommended that as a
general policy, Council authorize the Chief License Inspector
to act on its behalf to consider a relaxation of Subsection
12(2) of the by-law regulation in these types of cases up to a
maximum of 4 months.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager, of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
'A' and submits 'B' for CONSIDERATION.
COUNCIL POLICY
There is no applicable Council Policy.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to recommend Council grant the request
from Mack Limousine Services Ltd. for relaxation of the Vehicle for Hire
By-law pertaining to the maximum age limitation for licensing a
limousine and further that Council delegate authority to the Chief
License Inspector to act on its behalf in similar cases if they arise up
to a maximum of a 4-month relaxation.
BACKGROUND
The City Regulates Vehicles for Hire through its Vehicles for Hire By-
law No. 6066 and in particular limousines in Section 12 of the By-law
which states:
12. (1) No person shall be licensed with respect to a charter
limousine or charter van unless the year of the vehicle's
manufacture is within 5 years of the date of application for
the license or any renewal thereof.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Inspector may license a
person with respect to a charter limousine or charter van
manufactured more than 5 years but less than 10 years from the
- 2 -
application or renewal date if the Inspector is satisfied, on
the basis of annual inspections, that the exterior appearance
of the vehicle and the condition of its interior finishings
are of a high standard.
DISCUSSION
In early 1996, Mr. Mack applied to the Vehicles for Hire Inspector for
renewal of the 1996 License for his Limousine. Upon receipt of the
application, the inspector informed Mr. Mack that the license could not
be issued because the vehicle was manufactured in 1986 and therefore did
not meet the requirements of Section 12(2) which requires the vehicle to
be less than 10 years of manufacture date in order for the inspector to
issue the license.
In early February, I met with Mr. Mack to reaffirm this regulation of
the By-law and to point out that I could not relax this regulation. As
a result, Mr. Mack wrote Council requesting an extension for his license
on the basis that he believed that his current vehicle could be licensed
until the end of this year at which time it would have to be replaced.
Mr. Mack has advised staff that he believes he could have a replacement
vehicle by early June.
CONCLUSION
Staff who have dealt with Mr. Mack over the years believe that he made
an honest mistake in his interpretation of this regulation. His vehicles
are always well maintained, including this particular 1986 limousine.
Therefore, the Chief License Inspector would not be opposed to Council
granting this relaxation request. Further, because there may be others
in similar situations in the future, if Council approves 'A' the Chief
License Inspector submits 'B' for Consideration.
* * * * *