Council likes “no camping” bylaw
Victoria City council’s Governance and Priorities Committee voted Thursday to send the proposed anti-camping bylaw to a final reading.
The committee, made up of members of council, endorsed the bylaw which would forbid camping on City medians and boulevards and would bar trespassing on medians after dark. The bylaw is intended to break up the Pandora Avenue tent city and reduce the increasing number of pedestrian/vehicle collisions.
Mayor Dean Fortin talks to the media after Council voted to send the anti-camping bylaw to final reading. Photo by Robert Randall © VibrantVictoria.ca.
Council voted to allow public comment on September 23 so that citizens could give feedback on the bylaw before it becomes official. Normally, public hearings and not held for bylaws dealing with streets and boulevards.
Councillor Phillipe Lucas was the lone “no” vote, saying council should delay introduction of the bylaw so that additional research could be made on the causes and consequences of homelessness and its relation to addictions. Claiming HIV/AIDS and Hep C were deadlier than nearby speeding traffic, Lucas reiterated his call for increased harm-reduction services, including a fixed needled exchange site. Lucas also recommended traffic calming measures on Pandora avenue in order to slow down traffic passing by the tent city.
Mayor Fortin abruptly cut off Lucas saying there was no link between harm reduction services and the problem of mind-altered pedestrians blindly wandering into traffic at all hours. Fortin said speed bumps would serve as a “launching pad” for cars and cyclists coming down the avenue, rather than making the street safer. A visibly angry Lucas insisted the bylaw would increase long-term problems on the boulevard.
The City says 14,000 to 15,000 vehicles a day come down Pandora Avenue. Vic PD reports that collisions on the block this year are up 58 per cent.
Councillors Chris Coleman and Sonya Chandler were absent from the meeting. Final hearing and vote is scheduled for September 24, the day after the public are invited to speak to council on the subject.
To discuss homelessness on the VibrantVictoria discussion forum, click here.
Copyright © 2010 by VibrantVictoria.ca. All rights reserved.
Responses to this Headline or Article
The five most recent replies to VibrantVictoria.ca's discussion forum's Victoria homelessness / drug abuse issues thread, the most relevant thread to the above headline or article:
VicHockeyFan
Mar 19, 2012 at 1:00 amQuote: Your math is out a bit, that 110m is only for 719 residences, which essentially doubles your unit cost.
Oh, ok, then we have over $2350 for each homeless person, per month. That'll get them each a two-bedroom at the Aria.
JohnN
Mar 19, 2012 at 7:03 amInteresting that the headline shouting out on page A1 was the $110 million capital cost, but the annual cost of $13.7 million over 7 years equals $95.9 millions, and with the capital cost, the actual total estimate is
Wouldn't a headline of $206 million be even
Good public relations to get a Sunday paper front-page story - and without the actual report available for critical review.
Monitor their website to see if/when its posted:
maniac78
Mar 19, 2012 at 9:19 amQuote: OK, then. How exactly do we make themnot be unemployed drug addicts?
Arrest them and force them into treatment.
tedward
Mar 19, 2012 at 10:30 amQuote: I'm glad you asked. Well, I can't solve the unemployed drug-addict part, but I can solve the homelessness, although I'm not confident that employing my method won't attract more homeless from other parts of the country.
But here's what we do...
We don't agree on everything but this sounds like a plan that might work. Too bad it makes sense as it means none of Fortin, Clark, or Harper could support it.
martini
Mar 19, 2012 at 10:38 amQuote: We don't agree on everything but this sounds like a plan that might work. Too bad it makes sense as it means none of Fortin, Clark, or Harper could support it.
I was just about to post the same thing. That VHF and I don't always agree, but I do agree with him here.
You're right. It makes sense which means it won't get a second glance.
The calculations done here and the costs just astound me!
