June 18, 2018 - Minutes

Date:

Monday, June 18, 2018

Place:

Anderson Room
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie, Chair
Councillor Chak Au
Councillor Derek Dang
Councillor Carol Day
Councillor Ken Johnston
Councillor Alexa Loo (entered at 4:03 p.m.)
Councillor Bill McNulty
Councillor Linda McPhail
Councillor Harold Steves

Call to Order:

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.

AGENDA ADDITION

It was moved and seconded

That “Richmond Sports Council Facility Needs Assessment 2018” be added to the agenda as Item 4.

CARRIED

MINUTES

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on June 4, 2018, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

COMMUNITY SAFETY DIVISION

1.

UBCM Resolution – Safety Regulations for Trampoline Parks 
(File Ref. No. 12-8275-01) (REDMS No. 5860738 v. 2)

It was moved and seconded

That the proposed UBCM resolution titled “Safety Regulations for Trampoline Parks” be submitted to the Union of BC Municipalities as outlined in the staff report titled “UBCM Resolution – Safety Regulations for Trampoline Parks”, dated May 31, 2018, from the General Manager, Community Safety.

CARRIED

Councillor Loo entered the meeting (4:03 p.m.).

COMMUNITY SERVICES DIVISION

2.

Review of Council Approval Process for Public Art Projects on Private Land 
(File Ref. No. 11-7000-09-00) (REDMS No. 5722457 v. 5)

In response to questions from Committee, Eric Fiss, Public Art Planner, advised that:

§   

public art submissions on private land currently go through a rigorous review process under the leadership of a public art consultant;

§   

a selection panel  made up of (i) representatives from the City and community stakeholders, (ii) staff, to ensure compliance with Council policies and goals, and (iii) the Richmond Public Art Advisory Committee (RPAAC) reviews the proposed project;

§   

there is a policy that manages de-accessioning public artwork if requested by the property owner, which may include selling or returning it to the artist;  

§   

various Area Public Art Plans recommend that developers contribute to a pool of public art contributions to facilitate larger public art installations;

§   

funds donated to the public art reserve fund are allocated for public art capital projects;

§   

examples of public art throughout the city are listed on the City’s website and new public art provided by developers on their private property is listed in the annual report;  

§   

public art must meet fundamental community standards and a multi-department staff review of public art on private land is carried out to ensure compliance with Council guidelines; and

§   

in staff’s review of other municipalities, public art programs are primarily managed by municipal staff, art agencies or autonomous art commissions in order to maintain an arm’s-length approach.

Examples of public art on private property were distributed to Committee (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office) and discussion ensued with regards to the subjectivity of art and the potential to review the staff-led process for public art on private property.

Chris Charlebois, former member of the Richmond Public Art Advisory Committee, expressed concern for the speculation of art commissioned by developers and expressed his support for local artists.

Linda Barnes, 4551 Garry Street and Paul Dufour, 3031 Williams Road, representing the Richmond Arts Coalition, spoke in favour of the staff report and was of the opinion that policies set by Council should set standards and avoid subjective decision making.

In response to questions from Committee, Ms. Barnes commented that (i) any policy that seeks to promote local artists would be worthwhile, (ii) art work is subjective and should generate conversation, and (iii) a public art policy that does not impose a final approval from Council is crucial in establishing a strong art program.

As a result of the discussion, the following referral motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That staff be directed to add policy in which Council has the discretion to approve or refuse artwork on public or private property or recommend allocating equivalent funds for other projects, and consider restrictions to local artists.

The question on the referral motion was not called as discussion took place on (i) whether the process should be amended to allow Council approval for art on private land, (ii) requesting equal value of an art project for another project or amenity from developers, and (iii) increasing support of local artists.

The question on the referral motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. Dang, Loo, and McPhail opposed.

ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION

3.

BC ENERGY STEP CODE 
(File Ref. No. 10-6125-07-02) (REDMS No. 5827315 v. 4)

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That Building Regulation Bylaw No. 7230, Amendment Bylaw No. 9769, which adds Part 10 Energy Step Code, be introduced and given first reading;

(2)

That Richmond Zoning Bylaw No. 8500, Amendment Bylaw No. 9845, which amends Sections 3.4, 4.2.1, 4.3.3 and 4.4.1, be introduced and given first reading;

(3)

That Richmond Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 9000, Amendment Bylaw No. 9771, which amends Sections 12.4 and 14.2.10.A, be introduced and given first reading;

(4)

That Richmond Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7100, Amendment Bylaw No. 9770, which amends Sections 2.2.3 and 2.5, be introduced and given first reading;

(5)

That Bylaw 9771 and Bylaw 9770, having been considered in conjunction with:

(a)

the City’s Financial Plan and Capital Program; and

(b)

the Greater Vancouver Regional District Solid Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans;

are hereby found to be consistent with said programs and plans, in accordance with 477(3)(a) of the Local Government Act;

(6)

That Bylaw 9771 and Bylaw 9770, having been considered in accordance with Official Community Plan Bylaw Preparation Consultation Policy 5043, are hereby found not to require further consultation;

(7)

That the creation of a two-year temporary full time Building Energy Specialist, partially funded by a $100,000 contribution from BC Hydro, with remaining salary and benefits of $130,000 fully recovered through building permit fees, be endorsed and that the Chief Administrative Officer and General Manager, Engineering and Public Works be authorized to enter into a funding agreement with BC Hydro to support the Building Energy Specialist position;

(8)

That the creation of new Plan Reviewer and Building Inspector 1 positions, with total salary and benefits of $200,000 fully recovered through building permit fees, be endorsed;

(9)

That the Consolidated 5 Year Financial Plan (2018-2022) be amended to include the temporary full-time Building Energy Specialist, Plan Reviewer, and Building Inspector 1 positions funded by an increase in grant revenue and building permit fees;

(10)

That the Energy Step Code training programs identified in the staff  report titled "BC Energy Step Code" dated May 5, 2018, from the Senior Manager, Sustainability and District Energy, and Acting Director, Building Approvals, be approved with $110,000 from the Carbon Tax Provision, as funded in the 2018 Operating Budget; and

(11)

That for Part 3 and Townhouse developments, notwithstanding the adoption of Building Regulation Bylaw No. 7230, Amendment Bylaw No. 9769:

(a)

If a Development Permit has been issued prior to September 1, 2018, the owner may, while their Development Permit remains valid, apply for a Building Permit in compliance with the energy efficiency requirements applicable prior to the adoption of Bylaw 9769; and

(b)

If an acceptable Development Permit application has been submitted to the City prior to the adoption of Bylaw 9769, the owner may, until December 31, 2019, apply for a Building Permit in compliance with the energy efficiency requirements applicable prior to the adoption of Bylaw 9769.

CARRIED

4.

Richmond Sports Council Facility Needs Assessment 2018 
(File Ref. No.)

Discussion ensued regarding the Sports Facilities Needs Assessment submitted by the Richmond Sports Council (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 1).

As a result of the discussion, the following referral motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the 2018 Richmond Sports Council Facility Needs Assessment be referred to staff for review and input.

The question on the referral motion was not called as staff was directed to include a copy of the Richmond Major Facilities Projects (2016-2026) report when reporting back.

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

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (4:56 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, June 18, 2018.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie
Chair

Amanda Welby
Legislative Services Coordinator