Date:

Monday, April 6, 2009

Place:

Anderson Room

Richmond City Hall

Present:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie, Chair

Councillor Linda Barnes

Councillor Derek Dang

Councillor Evelina Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Greg Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Ken Johnston

Councillor Bill McNulty

Councillor Harold Steves

Call to Order:

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m.

MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on Monday, March 16, 2009, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

DELEGATION

2.

David Atkinson, President and Vice-Chancellor, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, provided a brief history associated with how Kwantlen College became a university.  He then spoke about the University’s future and highlighted the following points:

§   

Kwantlen Polytechnic University’s mission would evolve in the next few years, as the University continues to meet community demands;

§   

accessibility to education would be a priority, and unnecessarily high standard requirements would be reconsidered;

§   

consideration would be given to changing demographics, a volatile economy, and provisions for a new and different educational focus, as well as community needs related to teaching and research;

§   

the University’s most immediate problem was shortage of space, and  expansion of the Richmond campus was a priority.  The University was prepared to contribute 50% towards the costs for building an approximately 40,000 square foot facility which would be 18M to 20M;

§   

the degree and certificate programs offered by the University would respond to labour market needs, and prepare students for the workforce and as well as to be good citizens;

§   

it was anticipated that 17 new programs would be implemented by September 2010, including three degree programs related to horticulture, agriculture and food security;

§   

there were plans to resurrect the Continuing Education Program; and

§   

a new degree program in Asian studies would also be implemented. 

A discussion ensued between Committee members and the delegation about: 

§   

concerns associated with accessibility to programs offered in Langley and Cloverdale, and the feasibility of an internal transportation system between all Kwantlen campuses.  The delegation was encouraged to communicate with the Director of Transportation, Victor Wei, regarding the matter;

§   

a new committee that would be formed to work with City committees such as the Richmond Sister City Committee to integrate an Asian studies program;

§   

the difference in the amount of fees paid by domestic students in comparison to foreign students;

§   

the changes in the management of the institution’s affairs as a result of the status change from a college to a university;

§   

the expansion of the Richmond campus, and issues related to leasing space, and fundraising, as well as options available to the University.

CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

3.

sister city committee annual report and 2 year plan

(Report:  March 26, 2009, File No.: 01-0100-20-SCIT1-01) (REDMS No. 2568385)

Richard Toda, Manager, Customer Service, made reference to the City of Richmond’s Sister City Program Policies and Procedures (on file at the City Clerk’s Office), and indicated that costs were covered for the Mayor and two others as official delegations to Sister/Friendship Cities.  Local leaders in education, business, arts and culture, sport, science and technology, as well as other sectors actively engaging in supporting the Sister/Friendship City relationship may also be included as official delegations.

Sylvia Gwozd, Chair of the Richmond Sister City Committee, accompanied by Committee member Jim Kojima thanked Council and City staff for their support. 

A discussion then took place about:

§   

the breakdown of the student exchange program, and the Committee’s plan to revitalize it;

§   

several initiatives the Committee is currently involved in, including the proposed plan to invite the Xiamen Philharmonic Orchestra to Richmond;

§   

the need for a more detailed analysis about the estimated program costs for 2010; and

§   

possible areas for discussion with Kwantlen Polytechnic University regarding their Asian Studies Program.

At 5:02 p.m., Mayor Brodie announced that the open General Purposes Committee meeting would be recessed in order to call the Special Council meeting to order.

The open General Purposes Committee meeting reconvened at 5:03 p.m..

Discussion then continued about: 

§   

the existing Sister City relationship between Pierrefonds, Quebec and Richmond;

§   

looking at constituent parts of the Sister City Committee budget;

§   

the possibility and impact associated with engaging in sister city relationships with other countries; and

§   

the decline in foreign students coming here for their educational needs.

It was noted that the Richmond Sister City Committee – 2008 Year in Review and Two-Year Activity Plan and Budget did not mention that the Mayor had also visited Qingdao and Xiamen as part of an official visit partly funded by the province.

It was moved and seconded

That:

(1)

the staff report dated March 31, 2009 from the General Manager, Corporate Services, which includes the Sister City Committee 2008 Annual Report, be received for information;

(2)

the Sister City Committee Activity Plan for 2009 be approved; and

(3)

the Sister City Committee Activity Plan for 2010 be referred back to staff for further analysis.

CARRIED

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

4.

Proposed Work Program – Railway Avenue Corridor

(Report:  March 13, 2009, File No.:08-4105-10-08) (REDMS No. 2586703)

With the aid of a diagram of the Railway Avenue Corridor, Terry Crowe, Manager, Policy Planning, identified the portion of the Corridor owned by the City and by the Canadian Pacific (CP) Railway.

In answer to questions and concerns about the Proposed Work Program – Railway Avenue Corridor, staff provided the following information: 

§   

CP had requested the City for authorization to initiate and conduct a public consultation to gain perspective on the community’s preferences for future planning of the corridor;

§   

property owners surrounding both sides of the corridor would be contacted to participate in the public consultation;

§   

details regarding the information that would be presented to the public during the public consultation would be presented at a future Planning Committee meeting;

§   

there was a total of 30 linear acres to be considered, of which the City and CP each owned 15 acres;

§   

current zoning for the lots surrounding the corridor consisted mostly of single-family residential; and

§   

approval of the Proposed Work Program would allow commencement of a community process. 

Further questions were raised and concerns expressed, particularly about: 

§   

an assumption that planning of the corridor would definitely be taking place at some point;

§   

the timing of this matter and a possible connection with the Metro Vancouver Growth Management Strategy.  Staff advised that the matter was not directly related to the Metro Vancouver Strategy and that the timing had been a coincidence;

§   

whether CP would sell their share of the property to the City; and

§   

constraints related to development along the corridor, as the existing right-of-way may not be included in the width of the corridor which varies but is approximately 120 feet.

In conclusion, Committee members shared their views and requested additional information with regard to what other cities have done in similar situations, and how the Proposed Work Plan would relate to Translink’s needs for a transit corridor along Railway Avenue.  Comments were also made about finding out the possible cost to purchase CP’s lands prior to approaching the public for a consultation, as well as giving consideration to the future of other similar corridors in Richmond. 

It was moved and seconded

That the Proposed Work Program - Railway Avenue staff report be referred back to staff to meet with Council to discuss Council's position on the matter.

The question on the motion was not called, as direction was given that further information be brought before Council relating to (i) the possible asking price for the lands; (ii) relevant court cases; (iii) the situation with the Vancouver transit corridor and what other cities have done in similar circumstances; (iv) zoning on the subject lands; and (v) transit plans as they may relate to the subject lands.

Discussion continued on the matter and staff were requested to also look at previous studies and the history of the City's relationship with CP as it pertains to the Railway Avenue corridor as well as the possibility of looking at other potential transit corridors through Richmond.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

RICHMOND OLYMPIC BUSINESS OFFICE

5.

Ticket Allocation for 2010 Games

(Report:  March 11, 2009, File No.:  11-7400-30-01) (REDMS No. 2593469)

Jeff Day, General Manager, Olympic Business & Major Projects, and Gary Young, Director, Legacy and Integration were available to answer questions.

A discussion ensued, and the following was noted:

§   

the distribution of the tickets could not be completely determined at this time, as priorities were expected to change closer to the 2010 Olympic Games;

§   

the tickets provided an opportunity to strengthen ongoing relationships with key partners for economic development;

§   

allocation of tickets should not be determined by staff, consideration may be given to a Ticket Allocation Committee or Community Task Force;

§   

a total of 75 passes per day would be available to co-host with VANOC at the Legacy Lounge, located in the Richmond Olympic Oval, therefore, VIPs may be taken there; and

§   

those with Legacy Lounge passes would be restricted to the lounge, and not be permitted to utilize any seats in the Oval;

During the discussion, there was some support expressed about giving tickets to those who would otherwise not have an opportunity to attend the event, however, there was concern associated with giving away tickets to volunteers and dignitaries.

Upon expressing their views, Committee members emphasized that further information was needed regarding the ticket allocation, including the following:

§   

a written statement from VANOC regarding any restrictions related to donating tickets to a charity, and whether a charity may use those tickets for fundraising purposes;

§   

guidance about the requirements of having tickets available for VIPs;

§   

information regarding exactly how many tickets the City would receive for each event; and

§   

whether the City would be permitted to trade tickets with partners.

It was moved and seconded

That the City of Richmond enter into the Government Partners Ticket Program, as outlined in the staff report dated March 11, 2009 from the Director, Legacy and Integration, entitled “Ticket Allocation for 2010 Games”.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That the matter of the allocation of tickets and possible payment arrangements be referred back to staff for further analysis and discussion and a report back to Council.

The question on the motion was not called, as direction was given to provide information related to: (i) charity use of tickets for fundraising; and (ii) the exact number of tickets the City would receive.  

Discussion continued on (i) the possibility of striking a committee to determine the ticket allocation; (ii) which volunteer groups might receive tickets, if any; and (iii) the need to know the reason or purpose behind the allocation of the tickets to other groups such as the Chamber of Commerce.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

6.

Recreational Infrastructure Canada - Shovel Ready Projects

(Report:  March 26, 2009, File No.:  xr:06-2052-01/2009-Vol 01, 03-1080-01) (REDMS No. 2593690)

It was moved and seconded

That the following shovel ready projects be endorsed for submission to the Recreational Infrastructure Canada program:

(1)

Steveston Community Centre - Energy Management and Structural Upgrades;

(2)

Solar Hot Water Panels - Watermania Swimming Pool, Water Play Park, South Arm Community Centre, Minoru Aquatic Centre;

(3)

South Arm Community Centre - Energy Management and Structural Upgrades; and

(4)

Hamilton Community Centre Space.

CARRIED

BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

7.

Remote Access Agreement WITH BC Assessment

(Report:  March 23, 2009, File No.: 03-1000-06-021 ) (REDMS No. 2507916)

It was moved and seconded

That the Director of Finance be authorized to execute the Remote Access Agreement with BC Assessment.

CARRIED

MAJOR PROJECTS

8.

RICHMOND OLYMPIC OVAL DYKE WORKS – SITE FURNISHINGS PUBLIC ART CONCEPT

(Report:  March 27, 2009, File No.:  06-2052-50-11-05) (REDMS No. 2592417)

With the aid of a powerpoint presentation, Chris Phillips of Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg, and the artists, Javier Campos and Elspeth Pratt, accompanied by Doug Shearer, Park Planner, Major Projects / Parks Design & Construction, and Greg Scott, Director, Major Projects, provided a detailed overview of the Richmond Olympic Oval Dyke Works – Site Furnishings Public Art Concept.

A discussion ensued about:

§   

the intention to provide artistically designed site furnishings rather than public art;

§   

strategies for deterring skateboarders, which included the use of gravel instead of pavement on the pathways;

§   

marsh grass and various plantings; and

§   

the importance of knowing exactly what the project would consist of prior to approval.

Cllr. Greg Halsey-Brandt left the meeting, and did not return (7:06 p.m.).

It was moved and seconded

That:

(1)

the integrated design concept for site furnishings, public art and landscape for the dyke area fronting the Richmond Olympic Oval site as outlined in the staff report dated March 27, 2009, from the Director, Major Projects entitled “Richmond Olympic Oval Dyke Works – Site Furnishings Public Art Concept” be approved, and that the detailed design be brought back to Council;  and

(2)

the Director of Major Projects be authorized to enter into contracts with artists, Javier Campos and Elspeth Pratt, and Consultant, Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg, for detailed design and construction documents, in a combined amount not to exceed $70,000.00.

The question on the motion was not called, as in answer to questions, staff advised that Council would need to give final approval upon completion of the detailed design.  It was also noted that there was a tight deadline associated with the project.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllr. Barnes opposed.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (7:18 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 6, 2009.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie

Chair

Shanan Dhaliwal

Executive Assistant, City Clerk’s Office