MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on Monday, April 4^th, 2005, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION

2.

5 YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN PUBLIC PROCESS FEEDBACK

(Oral Report)

The Director of Finance, Andrew Nazareth, reported that the public meeting, held on February 16^th, 2005, was attended by six persons– two Richmond residents, two City staff members, one resident from Delta, and one resident from Edmonton, Alberta, who was participating in a ‘Best Practices’ Program. 

Mr. Nazareth indicated that following a presentation by the Budgets and Accounting Manager, Jerry Chong, questions were asked relating to such topics as the construction of the new fire halls, casino revenue, growth on the outskirts of the City Centre, and neighbourhood specific issues.  He advised that the overall opinion was that the residents were satisfied with the proposed increase as they now understood the challenges faced by the City.

It was moved and seconded

That the oral report given by the Director of Finance regarding the feedback resulting from the Five Year Financial Plan Public Process, be received for information.

CARRIED

3.

5 YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2005-2009) BYLAW 7939
(Report:  April 8/05, File No.:  8060-20-7939) (REDMS No. 1472890, 1481737)

Mr. Nazareth, accompanied by Mr. Chong, responded to questions on:

§           

the amount of revenue being transferred to the City’s reserve accounts

§           

whether the 5 Year Plan included additional level requests

§           

funding for parkland acquisition

§           

affordable housing and public art and the rationale for the lack of figures shown in “5 Year Capital Plan Funding Sources”

§           

the purpose of the “Enterprise Fund Provision”

§           

how funding would be provided for construction of the Richmond Oval

§           

whether any funding had been included in the plan to cover the cost of those projects which would be required on No. 3 Road as part of the RAV project, but were not included in the actual construction.

It was moved and seconded

That 5 Year Financial Plan (2005-2009) Bylaw 7939 be introduced and given first, second and third readings.

CARRIED

4.

2005 PROPERTY TAX RATE BYLAW 7940

(Report:  April 12/05, File No.:  12-8060-20-7940) (REDMS No. 1476028, 1473711)

It was moved and seconded

That 2005 Property Tax Rates Bylaw No. 7940 be introduced and given first, second, and third readings.

CARRIED

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

5.

Licensee Retail Stores and Liquor Primary Establishments
(Report:  April 5/05, File No.:  12-8060-20-7929; 8275-00; 4105-00; 8060-20-5300) (REDMS No. 1442705, 1478105, 1459139, 1449149, 1446070)

Discussion then ensued among Committee members and staff on the recommendations being proposed by staff, and in particular on:

§           

the definition of ‘temporary change’ and the need to advise Council when such a change had been approved by staff

§           

the rationale for recommending a 100 metre radius for a proposed liquor establishment

§           

the need for policies and guidelines to be used by staff when dealing with ‘temporary change’ applications.

As a result of the discussion on this matter, the following motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That staff prepare a set of policies and guidelines for consideration by Council, which would deal with ‘temporary’ changes to existing liquor licences.

CARRIED

Discussion then continued on:

§           

the issue of whether requiring additional public consultation (survey) should be mandatory rather than discretionary

§           

the number of sites within Richmond which could have new liquor outlets

§           

how extensive the notification radius would be to advise residents of applications received for those sites which were not zoned to permit Liquor Primary establishments

§           

the point at which the Development Permit process would be initiated for applications for renovations to existing ‘Liquor Primary’ establishments, and the steps which the applicant would have to follow

§           

the proposed removal of the “Licencee Retail Store” use from the C4, C5 and C6 Districts

§           

whether the need to require an economic market and impact analysis for new Licencee Retail Store applications should be approved, and whether this would limit competition amongst liquor establishments

§           

the need for guidelines to determine the most suitable locations in which to allow stand-alone Licencee Retail Stores.

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 7929 to amend Development Application Fees Bylaw No. 7276, which establishes the City’s notification process for Liquor-Related licences, be introduced and given first, second and third readings, with an amendment to delete subsection 1.9.6 in its entirety.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That the following Policy on Food Primary Licence and Liquor Primary Licence – Hours of Operation (Attachment 2 to the report dated April 5^th, 2005 from the Director of Development and the Manager, Customer Services), be adopted:

“It is Council policy that:

(1)

All applicants seeking approval to extend hours for a Liquor Primary Licence or a Food Primary Liquor Licence (new or amended) beyond 2:00 a.m. will not be recommended by the City.

(2)

All applicants seeking approval to extend hours for Liquor Primary Licence with the exclusion of Neighbourhood Pubs or a Food Primary Liquor Licence (new or amended) up to and including 2:00 a.m. shall submit an application to the Licence Inspector, and such application will be processed in accordance with the procedure specified in Bylaw 7276.

(3)

All Neighbourhood Pub applicants seeking approval for an extension of hours up to current permitted neighbourhood pub hours as outlined in Policy 9302 shall submit an application to the Licence Inspector and such application will be processed in accordance with the procedure specified in Bylaw 7276.”

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That staff bring forward amendments to Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to:

(1)

amend Liquor Licence related definitions to ensure consistency with Provincial Liquor Control and Licensing Regulations;

(2)

amend the applicable zoning districts to remove Licensee Retail Stores as an outright permitted use;

(3)

amend the “Downtown Commercial District (C7)” in order to limit Licensee Retail Stores to an accessory use to a Neighbourhood Public House; and

(4)

amend the “Comprehensive Development District (CD/157)” and the “Comprehensive Development District (CD/161)” in order to limit Licensee Retail Stores to an accessory use to a Neighbourhood Public House.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That:

(1)

Policy No. 9300 – Liquor Licences (adopted July 9^th, 1984), be rescinded;

(2)

the following Policy for Rezoning Applications Intended to Facilitate Provincially Licensed “Liquor Primary” Uses (Attachment 5 to the report dated April 5^th, 2005 from the Director of Development and the Manager, Customer Services), be adopted:

“It is Council policy that:

1.

Liquor Primary License Applications – Appropriately Zoned Sites

(a)

In the case of a Liquor Primary License application for a property that is appropriately zoned to permit a Liquor Primary Use, the applicant will be so informed.

(b)

Should an application for a Liquor Primary Licence be submitted to the City on a site that permits a Liquor Primary Use, the application will be processed in accordance with the procedure specified in Section 1.9 of the Development Application Fees Bylaw.

2.

Liquor Primary Use Applications – Site Rezoning Required

(a)

In the case of a Liquor Primary application for a property that is not appropriately zoned to permit a Liquor Primary Licence Use, the applicant will be so informed along with the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch.

(b)

Should the applicant wish to Rezone the property to permit a Liquor Primary Use, a rezoning application must be submitted to the Development Applications Department and all applicable application fees provided.

(c)

A rezoning application must be supported by a Neighbourhood Survey that is intended to collect public opinion on the proposed Liquor Primary use.  The Neighbourhood Survey will be required to be conducted by an independent Market Research Company at the sole cost of the applicant. The Director of Development will confirm approval in writing the following:

(i)

the minimum catchment area for the required Neighbourhood Survey;

(ii)

the name of the Market Research Company approved to conduct the Survey;

(iii)

the method used to conduct and compile the results of the Neighbourhood Survey; and

(iv)

the dates during which the Neighbourhood Survey must be conducted.

(d)

The results of the Neighbourhood Survey, together with any comments the Director of Development feels are appropriate, shall be presented to Council, through the appropriate standing committee, with a staff report including a recommendation either to support or deny the rezoning application.”; and

(3)

the following Policy for Licensee Retail Store (LRS) Rezoning Applications (Attachment 9 to the report dated April 5^th, 2005 from the Director of Development and the Manager, Customer Services), be adopted:

“It is Council policy that:

Rezoning applications intended to facilitate a stand-alone Licensee Retail Store (i.e. not an accessory use to a Neighbourhood Public House) will be considered under the following general guidelines and criteria:

1.

The proliferation of stand-alone Licensee Retail Stores is generally discouraged;

2.

Licensee Retail Store Rezoning Applications intended to facilitate the replacement of an existing BC Liquor Store, operated by the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch or an existing LRS, will be considered on a case-by-case basis;

3.

Except as noted in Section 4 below, all proposals for relocation of an existing or new Licensee Retail Store within the City of Richmond must be supported by a neighbourhood survey that is intended to collect public opinion on the proposed new location of the Licensee Retail Store.  The neighbourhood survey will be required to be conducted by an independent Market Research Company at the sole cost of the applicant.  The Director of Development will confirm approval in writing the following:

(i)

the minimum catchment area for the required neighbourhood survey;

(ii)

the name of the market research company selected by the applicant to conduct the Survey;

(iii)

the method used to conduct and compile the results of the neighbourhood survey; and

(iv)

the dates during which the neighbourhood survey must be conducted.

4.

Notwithstanding Section 3 above, proposals to replace an existing BC Liquor Store or existing LRS on the same site will not be required to conduct a neighbourhood survey.”

The question on the motion was not called, as the following amendment was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That Clause 2(c) of Part (2) of the main motion be amended by adding the following words after the word ‘must’, “at the discretion of Council”, (in Attachment 5 to the report dated April 5^th, 2005 from the Director of Development and the Manager, Customer Services).

The question on the motion was not called, as discussion ensued among Committee members on whether the neighbourhood survey should be mandatory or discretionary.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. Evelina Halsey-Brandt, Sue Halsey-Brandt and Steves opposed.

The question on the main motion, as amended, was called, and it was CARRIED with Cllr. Steves opposed.

It was moved and seconded

That staff prepare a policy on the appropriate locations in which to allow Licencee Retail Stores.

CARRIED

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (6:10 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Monday, April 18^th, 2005.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie
Chair

Fran J. Ashton
Executive Assistant, City Clerk’s Office