I.

CALL TO ORDER

1.

Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Recommendation:  That it BE NOTED that Councillor B. Armstrong disclosed a pecuniary interest in clause 4 of this Report, specifically having to do with the Residential Rental Licensing Fees, by indicating that he is a landlord.

II.

CONSENT ITEMS

2.

2013 Community Survey

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the City Manager, the staff report dated December 16, 2013 with respect to a survey of Londoners as conducted by Environics Research Group BE RECEIVED for information.

3.

Service London Update Report

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director of Neighbourhood, Children and Fire Services, the staff report dated December 16, 2013 on the deliverables and progress associated with the Service London Implementation Plan BE RECEIVED for information.

III.

SCHEDULED ITEMS

4.

Public Participation Meeting - Amendments to Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law

Recommendation:  That the following actions be taken with respect to amendments to the Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law:

a)            a proposed revised by-law which contains the various fees and charges included in the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated December 16, 2013, with the exclusion of item iv) under the Service Grouping “Fire Services”, contained within the Fire & Rescue Services/Fire Fighting activity, for the recovery of additional expenses through charging costs to the property owner, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting on December 17, 2013 for the purpose of repealing By-law No. A-46, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges” and replacing it with a new Fees and Charges By-law that updates, adds and increases certain fees and charges for services or activities provided by the City of London;

b)            item iv) under the Service Grouping “Fire Services”, contained within the Fire & Rescue Services/Fire Fighting Activity, for the recovery of additional expenses through charging costs to the property owner, as included in the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated December 16, 2013, BE REFERRED back to the Fire Chief for further review;

it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions in connection therewith:

·                     J. Hoffer, representing the London Property Management Association – expressing concern with the lack of specificity  in item iv) under the Service Grouping “Fire Services”, contained within the Fire & Rescue Services/Fire Fighting Activity, for the recovery of additional expenses through charging costs to the property owner; noting that the Fire Chief would have too much discretion as to when to apply the additional charges; further noting that those who could be charged the additional fees would be easy targets without any ability to challenge the application of those fees; stating that there is a systemic problem with the by-law as currently drafted; and asking that further consideration be given to this fee.

·                     G. Brown – 35A-59 Ridout Street South – expressing concern with any increase to Parks and Recreation user fees and charges; suggesting that before raising user fees, thought should be given to cancelling the project to pave a portion of Thames Park and applying those monies to mitigate any user fee increases; and noting that user fees affect those who can least afford them.

Motion Passed

YEAS: J.F. Fontana, N. Branscombe, D.G. Henderson, J.P. Bryant, B. Polhill, S. Orser, J.L. Baechler, M. Brown, P. Hubert, P. Van Meerbergen, D. Brown, H.L. Usher, B. Armstrong (13)

NAYS: S.E. White (1)

5.

2013 Report to the Community

Recommendation:  That the presentation from the City Manager and the Manager, Corporate Initiatives, with respect to the 2013 Report to the Community BE RECEIVED.

IV.

ITEMS FOR DIRECTION

6.

Cycling Advisory Committee

Recommendation:  That the following actions be taken with respect to the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee:

a)            the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee BE APPROVED;

b)            the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to report back with proposed terms of reference for the Cycling Advisory Committee, approved in a) above; and

c)            the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to report back with revised terms of reference for the Transportation Advisory Committee, which incorporate certain changes arising from the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee; and

d)            the following written submissions BE RECEIVED:

i)              a communication dated December 5, 2013 from S. Steel, speaking in favour of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee;

ii)             a communication from A. Eftekarpour, Vice-President External, University Students’ Council, speaking in favour of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee;

iii)            the attached communication from D.J. Rycroft, speaking in favour of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee;

iv)           the attached communication from P. Myers, Board of Directors of the London Cycling Club, speaking in favour of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee;

v)            the attached communication from M. Marsman, speaking in favour of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee;

it being noted that E. McMahon advised that she was unable to attend the meeting to make verbal representation with respect to this matter;

it being further noted that the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer and the Director, Roads and Transportation, gave a verbal overview with respect to the Civic Administration’s position on this matter;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made oral submissions in connection therewith:

·                     Gary Brown, 35A-59 Ridout Street South – making the attached presentation in support of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee; noting cities with successful cycling all have Cycling Advisory Committees; suggesting that London follow the model of other cities; claiming that London is the least friendly and safe cycling community in Ontario; indicating that staff could not provide a firm dollar amount for the City of London’s cycling budget; pointing out that the Ontario Bike Master Plan will have funding available for shovel-ready projects; and asking that the cycling community that wants to be engaged, be engaged by the City.

·                     Daniel Hall – noting he is a London resident and avid cycler; indicating support for a Cycling Advisory Committee; indicating that the City should be targeting the “interested but concerned” segment of the cycling community; noting that a “one size fits all” solution will not work; and asking that the City work with the community to build the cycling infrastructure.

·                     Henk Ketellars – making the attached presentation in support of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee;

·                     Ross Graham – indicating that he and his spouse are avid cyclists; speaking in support of the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee; indicating there is a serious communications issue that would be addressed through the establishment of a Cycling Advisory Committee; noting that 90% of people surveyed want to live in London, not cars first and this message doesn’t seem to be getting through—rather the opposite seems to be the case; stating that pushing for more individuals to bike on sidewalks is actually “car centric”; further noting that the next steps for transportation cited “generally pursue no cost and low cost solutions” and “engage the public and business community with respect to the Transportation Demand Management program”; stating that cyclists are over engaged and under serviced; expressing he understands why staff would like to see a more comprehensive committee, but more action would likely be taken if a separate Cycling Advisory Committee were established.

·                     Dave Mitchell – indicating he has been to a number of the Transportation Advisory Committee meetings and his view is that Committee is not serving such a limited scope as cycling; stating he is a diehard cyclist and that he does not want to see a piece meal solution; noting that cyclists are a growing demographic and need to be considered beyond automobile drivers.

·                     Anthea Rowe, 44 Kingsford Crescent – indicating she is a young professional with two children and two motor vehicles, living in South London; stating that she does not have a lot of time to devote to staying fit and healthy, so cycling to work offers her an opportunity to do that; further indicating that London’s quality of life and ability to get around the City on a bicycle keeps her family here as they don’t have other family here and job prospects might be greater elsewhere; stating that she will never be a “fearless” cyclist but does champion cycling with friends and peers; noting she is proud to live in London and can see what we can be and that we are making progress;  and expressing support for a Cycling Advisory Committee.

·                     Helen Reardon, 590 Piccadilly Street – expressing support for a Cycling Advisory Committee; noting it is very dangerous cycling off bicycle paths so safer bicycle routes are needed; stating that other cities, such as Quebec City where there is a lot of snow make year-round use of bicycle lanes and that is was time that London did too.

·                     Diane Szoller – noting she has seen a lot of change in the environmental area in the last 20 years and there is a need to provide focus to each aspect; stating she attended the former Cycling Advisory Committee meetings when it was reviewing the Bicycle Master Plan; noting the Bicycle Master Plan needs dedicated support and that a specific committee dealing with cycling would ensure that cycling was not forgotten in the bigger picture; further noting that she would like to see more work done to make cycling safer, as a lot more can be done in that regard; expressing that she does not like seeing more people ride bicycles on sidewalks and would like to see better cycling education; and expressing support for a Cycling Advisory Committee.

Motion Passed

YEAS: J.F. Fontana, N. Branscombe, J.P. Bryant, B. Polhill, S. Orser, J.L. Baechler, M. Brown, P. Hubert, D. Brown, S.E. White, B. Armstrong (11)

NAYS: D.G. Henderson, P. Van Meerbergen, H.L. Usher (3)

V.

DEFERRED MATTERS/ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

VI.

ADJOURNMENT