|
|
M E M O R A N D U M January 31, 2000
TO:
Mayor Owen and Councillors
COPY TO:
City Clerk -- Court of Revision
Judy Rogers, City Manager
Peter Vaisbord, BIA CoordinatorFROM:
Ann McAfee, Director of City Plans
SUBJECT:
Court of Revision Application by the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association to Establish the Proposed Chinatown BIA - Results of Property Owner Survey
ACTIONS
After reviewing the survey responses and hearing from delegations Council may choose to:
A. APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO ESTABLISH THE PROPOSED CHINATOWN BIA
Council practice has been to approve the application if less than one-third of property owners or business tenants are in opposition. If Council wishes to approve the application, the following motion is appropriate:
"THAT the application of the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association to establish the proposed Chinatown BIA, as described in Appendix A, be approved and that the Director of Legal Services, in consultation with the Director of City Plans, prepare a by-law to establish the BIA boundaries and funding ceiling."
B. NOT APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO ESTABLISH THE CHINATOWN BIA
Should Council choose to reject the application the following motion is appropriate:
THAT the application of the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association to establish the proposed Chinatown BIA, as described in Appendix A, not be approved.
C. COUNCIL WISHES FURTHER INFORMATION
Since there are a large number of properties involved, representing considerable variation in assessed values, Council may require additional information to assess the level of opposition. If after hearing delegations, Council wishes further information, the following motion is appropriate:
THAT the hearing of the application by the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association to establish the proposed Chinatown BIA, as outlined in Appendix A, be concluded;
and
THAT, before Council decides on the application, the Director of City Plans, in consultation with the Director of Finance and Director of Legal Services, assess information received from opponents of the BIA proposal and report to Council on the proportion of property owners and/or business tenants, by number of properties and assessed value, who do not support the proposal.
1. BACKGROUND
On February 4, 1999, Council considered an application by the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association (VCMA) to establish the proposed Chinatown BIA (Appendix A). Council referred the application to the Court of Revision for consideration as a Council Initiative, and instructed staff to notify all property owners and business tenants within the proposed BIA area. For information, a copy of the Council Report, dated January 22, 1999, is attached as Appendix B.
Under Section 506 of the Vancouver Charter, a Council Initiative is defeated if 50% of the property owners, representing 50% of the assessed property value, are opposed to the proposal. However, Council policy with respect to a BIA Initiative is that one-third of the property owners, representing one-third of the assessed property value, or one-third of the businesses, counted separately, is sufficient to defeat a BIA proposal.
At the Court of Revision held on March 9 1999, staff reported that the number of letters of opposition received from property owners was more than sufficient to defeat the BIA proposal. The final count of objections was:
Number of Property Owners Opposed 82
Percentage of Total 63.1%
Number of Assessed Parcels Opposed 131
Percentage of Total 65.5%
Assessed Value Opposed $111,897,351
Percentage of Total 47.9%
Number of Tenants Opposed 41
Percentage of Total 13.7%At the hearing, speakers supporting and opposing the BIA agreed about the need for economic development initiatives for Chinatown, but disagreed on how this should be accomplished. Also, questions were raised as to whether the letters forwarded to City Hall provided a reliable assessment of the level of support and opposition among property owners.
After hearing delegations, Council adjourned the hearing and instructed staff to report back with proposals for clarifying the state of approval or of disapproval toward the proposed Chinatown BIA. At the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment held March 25, 1999, Council instructed staff to prepare and deliver a survey to property owners within the proposed BIA. In addition to asking property owners whether or not they support the VCMA's BIA proposal, staff were instructed to determine whether the property owners would be in favour of other initiatives to improve business vitality in Chinatown. A copy of the survey is attached as Appendix C. Business tenants were not surveyed, as only 13.7% of tenants registered opposition to the BIA proposal.
At the request of the VCMA, delivery of the survey was postponed to provide an opportunity for the VCMA and the Chinatown Property Owners Association (CPOA) to attempt to resolve differences. In early December 1999, the VCMA advised staff that the discussions had not been successful. The survey forms were then mailed to theproperty owners, along with formal notification of the next Court of Revision hearing and information on the BIA proposal. The current VCMA proposal is the same as March 1999, except that the proposed budget has been reduced from $300,000 to $90,000. The proposed security item has been reduced from $180,000 to $30,000.
The survey and all notification material was written in English and Chinese. A copy of the notification package is attached as Appendix D.
The survey results are being reported at the Court of Revision to enable Council to act on the BIA proposal.
2. NOTIFICATION
Individually addressed notification packages / surveys were sent, postmarked on or before December 24, 1999, to 158 property owners, owning 216 legal parcels located in the proposed BIA area. Three letters were returned either because the property had sold to new owners, the owners had moved, or the address was incorrect.
A few properties were inadvertently omitted from the property-owner data base. When this was discovered, the data base was corrected and notification packages were immediately couriered to the property owners. Under the circumstances, an extension of the deadline for responses was permitted. Also, a number of property owners on the notification list had either not received a survey, or had misplaced it. Replacement copies were couriered to these owners.
3. SURVEY RESULTS
The survey asked property-owners four questions (paraphrased):
1. Are you in favour of the VCMA BIA proposal for Chinatown? (Yes/No)
2. If `No', would you be in favour of a different BIA proposal? (Yes/No) (Comments)
3a. If you are not in favour of a BIA in any form, are you in favour of other initiatives to improve business in Chinatown? (Yes/No) (Comments)
3b. If in favour of other business improvement initiatives, are you willing to pay additional taxes to help fund such initiatives? (Yes/No)
The responses to survey question 1, which indicate the level of support / opposition, are tabulated in the body of this report. Tabulation of the other survey questions is set forth in the Tabulation of Survey Responses attached as Appendix E.
As of Monday, January 31, 2000, the total number of property owners responding to the survey was 86 out of a possible 158.
A. Support for / Opposition to BIA Proposal
Survey Question 1
`I, the undersigned, support the establishment of a Chinatown BIA, as proposed by the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association (VCMA).' YES/NO
The survey results for Question 1 are as follows:
YES: 34 property owners (40% of respondents).
NO: 52 property owners (60% of respondents).If the "NO" responses are counted as `objections', and calculated as a percentage of a) the total number of property owners, b) the total number of assessed properties, and c) the total assessed property value within the proposed BIA, the level of objections is:
a) Number of Property Owners Opposed 52
Percentage of Total 32.9%b) Number of Assessed Properties Opposed 96
Percentage of Total 44.4%
c) Assessed Value Opposed $75,670,278
Percentage of Total 37.5%
For information, should Council wish to apply the one-third guideline then:
· one-third of the number of assessed properties is 72 properties;
· since there are many multiple owners, one-third of the actual owners is 53 owners; and
· one-third of the assessed property value is $67,185,416.Based on the survey results, opposition based on assessed property value is well over Council's `one-third' guideline, and is borderline with respect to the number of property owners opposing. If Council's guideline means that a BIA will be defeated only if both measures are over one-third, then Council would be within the policy to approve the BIA. However, staff also note that, if 100% of the surveys had been returned in the same proportions of `yes' and `no' responses, the opposition rate among property owners would have been 60%.
If, at the Court of Revision, delegations representing additional support or opposition are heard, Council may wish to conclude the Court of Revision and have staff review the calculations. Recommendation C offers a way for staff to provide additional advice prior to Council deciding on the BIA application.
B. Other Survey Responses
If a respondent answered `NO' to survey question 1 (i.e., the respondent does not support the VCMA BIA proposal), survey questions 2 and 3 were intended to find out if they might support a different BIA proposal or some other initiatives to improve the business climate in Chinatown. Among those respondents, there appears to be little support for an alternative BIA proposal (Question 2), and a relatively small minority supports other initiatives to improve business vitality in Chinatown (Question 3a). As property owners almost universally rejected paying additional taxes (Question 3b) to help fund other initiatives, it may be that respondents answered `NO' to `other initiatives' because they were concerned that their property taxes would be increased if other initiatives were pursued.
Respondents were also invited to provide comments as to what kind of BIA proposal they would support or what kind of other initiatives should be pursued. The survey results, and a summary of the comments, will made available to interested parties when detailed tabulation of responses is completed.
CONCLUSIONS
Response to survey question1 indicates that close to 33% of property owners, representing 37.5% of the assessed property value are opposed to the current BIA proposal. There appears to be little property-owner support for an alternative BIA proposal (Question 2), and a relatively small number supports other initiatives for Chinatown (Question 3a). Property owners almost universally rejected paying additional taxes (Question 3b) to help fund other business improvement initiatives. At the Court of Revision, the level of opposition may be equal to, or greater than, the numbers indicated in this Report. In that case, Council may conclude, based on BIA practice, that the BIA proposal is defeated. (A BIA proposal will not succeed if one-third of the property owners representing one- third of the assessed value are opposed). If so, Council might consider a motion to recommend the following:
THAT Council seek advice from the Vancouver Economic Development Commission and the Downtown Eastside Community Revitalization Program on future initiatives which could be considered to include the Chinatown Area in the City's broader revitalization initiatives in the Eastern Downtown area.
____________________________________
Ann McAfeeAM/PV/ws
R:\CC\INTERNET\CNCLSAVE\2000\000201\CR2
AttachmentsAPPENDIX E
Page 1 of 1TABULATION OF SURVEY RESPONSES
Survey Question 1
`I, the undersigned, support the establishment of a Chinatown BIA, as proposed by the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association (VCMA).' YES/NO
The survey results for Question 1 are as follows:
YES: 34 property owners (40% of respondents).
NO: 52 property owners (60% of respondents).Survey Question 2
`If your answer to Question 1 is "NO", would you support a different BIA proposal for Chinatown?'
YES 7 property owners
NO 43 property ownersIf respondents answered `yes', they were invited to indicate in what way(s) the proposal should be changed. A summary of these responses will made available to interested parties when tabulation of responses is completed.
Survey Question 3
3a. `If you do not support the establishment of a Chinatown BIA in any form, are you in favour of other initiatives to improve business vitality in Chinatown?'
YES 12 property owners
NO 30 property ownersIf the answer was `YES', respondents were asked to indicate what kind of initiatives they would like to see pursued. A summary of suggested initiatives will be made available to interested parties when tabulation of responses is completed.
3b. `If your answer to Question 3a is yes, and you are in favour of other initiatives to improve business vitality in Chinatown, are you willing to pay additional taxes to help fund those other initiatives?'
YES 5 property owners
NO 34 property ownersStaff believe that the negative response to this question may have influenced the negative response to 3a, i.e., that the prospect of higher taxes to pay for `other initiatives' may have convinced respondents to say `no' to other initiatives.
* * * * *
![[City Homepage]](/graphics/footnava.gif)
|
![[Get In Touch]](/graphics/footnavb.gif)
|
|
|
|
(c) 1998 City of Vancouver