MINUTES - Special Council - 19840126l-.-~.J
··v
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD IN THE BOARD ROOM AT THE
YORK REGION BOARD OF EDUCATION, THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1984 AT 7:30 P.M.
Present Were: Mayor Illingworth and Councillors Evelyn Buck, Tim Jones, Len
Ostick, Earl Stewart, Martin Paivio and John West.
Councillor Richard Barker was absent due to employment obligations.
A 1 so in attendance were Cl erk-Admi ni strator K.B. Rodger and Region a 1 Planner S.
Seibert.
Mayor Illingworth advised those present that this meeting has been called as a
Public Meeting with respect to' the introduction of By-Laws amending the Zoning
By-Law for Granada Investments Ltd., Ballymore Farms and also, the provisions
relating to parking spaces and Private Home Day Care. The Mayor also advised that
an amendment to the Official Plan proposed by Corridor Developments and amendments
proposed by the Town pertaining to Holding Provisions, Community Improvement
Policies, Site Plan Control and Bonusing Policies were included on the Agenda.
Clerk-Administrator K.B. Rodger advised that Notices of the Meeting were mailed on
December 16th, 1983, by first class mail, to addresses within 120 metres of the
areas, as shown on the last revised Assessment Roll of the Town of Aurora, to which
the By-Laws would apply and further, the necessary signs were posted on the various
properties in accordance with the rules of procedure under The Planning Act (1983).
Mr. Rodger a 1 so advised that the advertisements required for the Private Home Day
Care, parking standards amendments and the Official Plan amendments proposed by the
Town were published in the Aurora Banner on December 21st, 1983 and January 18th,
1984, also in accordance with the provisions of The Planning Act (1983).
Mayor Illingworth advised that any persons who wished further notice of the passage
of any of the By-Laws under consideration should sign the forms available before
they leave this meeting.
Mayor Illingworth requested Planner S. Seibert to outline the proposed parking
standards amendments:
Proposal (By-Law Respecting Parking Standards)
The Municipal Council proposes to amend By-Law 2213-78 to alter the requirements of
the by-law respecting parking requirements for commercial uses.
Type of Building
Any commercial use
except those uses
specifically listed
e 1 sewhere.
Medical Clinic
Banks
Individual retail
uses whose gross
leasable area lots
not exceed 300
square metres.
Current Requirement
Minimum Requirement
5.5 spaces for each 90
square metres. 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
5.5 spaces for each 90
square metres. 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
Not specified.
5. 5. spaces for each 90
square metres. 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
Proposed Requirement
Minimum Requirement
6 spaces for each 100
square metres of com-
mercial floor area. 1
space for each 179
square feet.
6. 5 for each 100 square
metres. 1 space for each
165 square feet.
8 spaces for each 100 m2.
1 space for each 134
square feet.
4. 5 spaces for each
100 square metres. 1
space for each 239 square
feet.
' .. -.~:"7''0';':·>-'-'"''''•'-'~'" ~<-~·--:----~--:~·-:~7;""":~~-"'""''"""'~~""'"'-'~""-'U::~'-.'<),"Ql.W,-i;'<(;};,~'0(-;;c\i'~%'is:Rili',0~-;$;>..'QXW;-;<:;J;:Gi1;'.;,';<;<--'-'M·-<•""-"'''~"-:".-, .-----,-------.----··-----------·· ·-------------,--~-~•-··· ... ----·-·----·----
. :·::.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING .•. THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 2 -
Proposal (By-Law Respecting Parking Standards) (continued)
Type of Building
Shoping centres whose
gross leasable floor
area does not exceed
28,000 square metres
and the food store
component does not
exceed 50 percent of
the floor area.
Where the food store
component exceeds 50%
of the floor area
the food store
component.
Shopping centres whose
gross leasable floor
a rea exceeds 28,000
square metres.
Comment
Current Requirement
Minimum Requirement
5.5 spaces for each 90
square metres. 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
5.5 spaces for each 90
square metres, 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
5.4 spaces for each 90
square metres. 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
Proposed Requirement
Minimum Requirement
4.5 spaces for each
90 square metres. 1
space for each 239
square feet.
6 spaces for each 100
square metres. 1 space
for each 176 square feet.
5.4 spaces for each 100
square metres. 1 space
for each 200 square feet.
These standards were recommended by Barton Aschman Canada Limited, Consulting
Engineers, who participated in a study sponsored by the Town of Aurora regarding
the Downtown area. The standards are intended to be town wide with the exception
of the provision respecting "individual retail uses whose gross leasable area does
not exceed 300 square metres", which is intended to apply to the downtown area.
Barton Aschman's recommendation in this area was 3.5 spaces for each 100 square
metres floor area (1 space for each 307 square feet). Council was concerned that
this might not produce sufficient parking. The requirement was therefore increased
to 4.5 spaces for each 100 square feet of floor area (1 space for each 239 square
feet). Should this standard be adopted, the By-Law should be specific about the
intended area of application of this standard.
West:
Buck:
Resolved that the necessary By-Law be prepared for Council's
consideration.
CARRIED
Mayor Illingworth then requested the Planner to outline the Proposed Private Home
Day Care provision.
Proposal (Private Home Day Care)
The Municipal Council proposes to amend By-law 2213-78 to extend the residential
zones in which private home day care is permitted.
Current Zoning
By-law 2213-78 currently permits private home day care in the residential zones in
which home occupations are permitted. Home occupations are permitted in the Rural
Residential (R) Zone, the Estate Residential (E.R.) Zone, Detached Dwelling First
Density Residential (R1) Zone and R1-1 Exception Zone, Detached Dwelling Second
Density Residential (R2) Zone and the Exceptions to that zone.
Council are now considering adding private home day care as a permitted use in the
Semi-detached and Duplex Dwelling Third Density Residential (R3) Zone, the Triplex
and Double Duplex Fourth Density Residential (R4) Zone Special Mixed Density
Residential (R5) Zone and the R6-Row Dwelling Residential Zones.
·~-· •• , .•. _,,c .. ~ .... •"''""·•···--=···~"''"~'~"'~'-'~f~:··"'"~'·""~~--~---·---,-. -~---::-~•="".w.'·~·>O<:>:>.:,.:.>.:.<o<OC;.'i~0.'m@'l;<i'.'"'=i'W-i&:C8i'£K0.'&';5;'}X'X"'A'<~f<'-.'>C.W·;c/.<!G'CJ:!-">C·•·=""'-<-<·•·:""'"~~-:~--·· ----------~~----~-----------------··-------··
-·--.--------·------'---'-~'·-"='·\'·'~·~~~~"''==-=·""'-""•""'""" . ~"' -=.,_,,.~.,.,,..,.=-"~-="·-=~--~---~--~-,.--~------------·-·-----·------·----~------
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 3 -
Proposal (Private Home Day Care) (continued)
Comment
Home Occupations were restricted in the higher density residential areas because of
the concern with additional pressure for parking, noise problems, etc., potentially
associated with such occupations. While private home day care does place some
parking stresses on a neighbourhood they tend to be very temporary, i.e. morning
drop off and evening pick ups mainly. Other than that there are no anticipated
unusual repercussions other than normal neighbourhood noise from children playing,
etc. In additional private home day care does occur in most neighbourhoods
presently whether or not it is specifically permitted.
Buck:
Paivio:
Resolved that the necessary By-Law be prepared for Council's
consideration.
CARRIED
Mayor Illingworth requested the Planner to outline the proposed Official Plan
amendment pertaining to "Holding Provisions".
Proposal (Holding Provisions)
Section 35 of An Act to Revise the Planning Act provides that the Council of a
local municipality may, by by-law, use Holding provisions in connection with a
zoning category provided that there are policies in the Official Plan governing the
use of such provisions. The Holding symbol may then be removed by an amendment to
the by-law under a simplified procedure which does not allow any person or agency
the right of appeal since that right existed when the original zoning was put in
place.
Comment
The Holding provision may have fairly limited applications in Aurora since most
higher density and commercial development are done in conjunction with a site plan
procedure.
The main uses foreseen for the Holding provision relate to:
1. control of phasing, e.g. in a plan of subdivision the first phase would be
zoned and the remainder could be placed in a Holding zone which establishes
the minimum lot sizes, etc. thus reducing uncertainty for purchasers in the
first phase;
2. the provision of services e.g. the site would be zoned and when water and
sewers were available, the "H" provision removed; and
3. where studies, such as conceptual design studies, are needed which when
completed, would result in the "H" provision could be removed.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing have set up guidelines for the use of
the "H" provisions which have been released this week. It is suggested that if
Council has an interest in utilizing the Holding provision, a draft Official Plan
Amendment be prepared through the Planning Committee and further discussed at a
future public meeting, the date for which could be established at this time.
West:
Buck:
Resolved that this matter be referred to the Council in Committee
meeting scheduled for February 15th, 1984 for discussion.
CARRIED
-•-•• ,., •. ,.,-.~"-•c~,-.~, .•. v~--'-'•'<'>'-''='-''-'·'.w-..-.•.~-···-v•·---·------,~·-·~·""'-'"'""'"'-o.,-,,~~«l.""'''J( ;py.;-• .--, ~"'-w'"''Z''W'·p>:f)?~--,~:;;;;:;<;<;';"';>;<,"" • ...,-·f""'·'--'="'--'0~-. --------;--~-•·--:··--------··-------·__.,.-~ •• ~ .. -·--·-·~---------
·---.,
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 4 -
Mrs. Seibert was then requested to describe the Community Improvement Policies to
be incorporated into the Official Plan:
Proposal (Community Improvement Policies)
Section 28 of an Act to Revise the Planning Act sets out provisions respecting
Community Improvement. Under the previous legislation there were fairly extensive
policies respecting "Redevelopment". The new provisions replace these and place
greater emphasis on community improvement as part of the planning process and as
part of an official plan document. This is based on the Province's restraint
program and the perception that financial and land use planning have to be more
closely tied to ensure increased efficiency in the use of existing public services
and facilities.
It is felt that by ensuring that a comprehensive pol icy framework is in place
before provincial grants and public funds expended that this increased efficiency
is more likely to be achieved.
The intension of a Community Improvement Pol icy then is to look at deficiencies
within the municipality in accordance with a set of criteria which are based on a
set of goals and objectives. The Province stresses that the community improvement
policies will vary since no two municipalities are alike. Both the problems and
their solutions will be varied.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Guidelines suggest that criteria for
the selection of community improvement areas in a residential neighbourhood could
include lack of or inadequate parks, deficiencies in the sewer and water system,
poor housing and building conditions, conflicting land uses, etc. In a commercial
area they suggest that these criteria could be broadened to include deficiencies
such as a lack of off-street parking and other amenities condusive to a pleasant
shopping environment, poor mix of uses (inappropriate zoning) and so on. Similar
criteria would have to be developed for industrial and institutional areas as well.
The Ministry requires that community improvement areas be delineated on maps
particularly so that the public are aware where improvements are required and what
these improvements are.
The phasing of the improvements should be addressed if possible with attention
given to the priorization of such improvements.
The policy must also address methods of implementation and suggestions by the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing are as follows:
designation of community improvement project areas and preparation of
community improvement plans
utilization of public funds through a variety of municipal, provincial
and federal programs
acquisition of land
passing and enforcing a property standards by-law
considering a more liberal approach to zoning by providing for mixed land
uses and allowing for bonus provisions for infill development
encouragement of rehabilitation
establishment of a Business Improvement Area
application of the Ontario Heritage Act in terms of both the designation of
buildings and heritage districts.
----·-~•-~•-·_.,-;,_-_,,,"'""•'· '"··•'"'"'""""~"'·~-"-•~ ,o,•··~-"-··-·-~--:--.. -.. -~-,::':"'=~-"~''•'~~>S:o;.""''""-'.:'>C0.\>0\.\_>S'}';(;.Q-:<f&':¥.>:'.'J;"i:;%{'-i4¢;1"..(>;..;.~,;g;;;;u~;<;>T,fX.O:..'.'«',,""""~"-"-'"C':"~~-~-~-- --------------~---·~-,,..~-----···-··---~--,---··
'-----~
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 5 -
Proposal (Community Improvement Policies) (continued)
Once the policy issues have been addressed in the official plan, it is necessary to
translate these directly to a Community Improvement Plan which is basically an
implementing document and spells out the details of the project. It is necessary
to have approva 1 of the Community Improvement Po 1 icy before funding will be made
available under the provincial funding programme -ONIP and Commercial Area
Improvement programme CAIP.
Interest was expressed by Council within the last year to the Province to obtain
funding under the Province's "Main Street" programme. That programme has now been
replaced by Commercial Area Improvement Programme and many fundamentals of the
programme have been changed. The current programme consists of both loans and
grants. Some parts of a project qualify for both loan and grant, others qualify
for only the loan portion. In order to qualify for 1984 funding application under
the "CAIP" programme must be made by January 31st. To qualify for 1984/85 funding
application must be made by May or June 1984.
Since very few municipalities now qualify for funding under this programme as the
basic criteria requires the municipality to have Community Improvement Policies
within its official plan, the Ministry has advised that it will accept applications
which spell out the time frame for completion of that policy.
Comment
Community Improvement Policies have become, under the new Planning Act, a necessary
and valuable component of the municipality's planning program.
If Council decides that it wishes to proceed with the development of such a pol icy
it is suggested that the matter be referred to Planning Committee to prepare a
draft document to bring back to a further public meeting, the date for which can be
established now, thus eliminating the need for further notice.
If Council is interested in trying to obtain funding under the "CAIP" programme for
1984 the application should be made immediately to the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing on the basis that an amendment will be prepared within a
certain number of months.
West:
Buck:
Resolved that the Planner be requested to draft policies pertaining
to this matter, to be presented to the Council in Committee meeting
scheduled for February 15, 1984 for discussion.
CARRIED
The Planner then explained the proposed Site Plan Control provision to be
incorporated within the Official Plan.
Proposal (Site Plan Control)
The Act to Revise the Planning Act became effective on August 1, 1983 with the
exception of the provisions relating to site plan control. It is intended that
these provisions which are contained in Section 40 of the legislation would be
proclaimed at a later date. The reason for this delay is that the new legislation
requires that an area of site plan control be established in the Official Plan
either graphically or by description. This must take place by Official Plan
Amendment.
Comment
The provisions of the legislation have been discussed with officials of the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing who have expressed concern with the
concept of designating the entire municipality as an area of site plan control as
it presently is. They suggest that where other controls such as subdivision or
zoning approvals are available that those tools be used rather than site plan
control and that site plan control areas be designated where the municipality
intends to use that power such as commercial, industrial, institutional multiple
residential and infill developments. The new legislation contains a number of new
provisions relating to site plan control •
.. c."''''"~~~'·'-""''<' •'">'•'X>'-''-"C=<"~<~'~'"~-·-~-~--•"···~"-•--,-•-.-.-. -:-·~~~•""'-"•'''''<."\,.>l,~:<;,-.;,'L';i-,.."i:"-'iSP ?S"~'';'i)''0"'Y,T§">"<5>·yy•·<,<f't!Mi;Q:<;,;<CX"-4,<Jf,zy""!cr'-''"'-'-"''·W.C";"\"-.-, ---.-.-.,--. -----------·-~......,.-;--;---~-·-
~,. __ ,,.,
i
1.---.~-~
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 6 -
Proposal (Site Plan Control) (continued}
Comment (continued)
It specifically permits the municipality to require the conveyance of road
widenings but only where "the highway to be widened is shown on or described in an
Official Plan as a highway to be widened and the extent of the proposed widening is
likewise show or described." (An Act to revise the Planning Act, Chapter 1 s.o.
1983).
The Council may also specifically define any class or classes of development that
may be undertaken without the approval of the required drawings in a by-law. In
addition, the Council may delegate to a Committee of Council or to an appointed
officer of the municipality any of the Council's powers or authority as specified
under Section 40 as is the case under the present legislation.
Drawings showing plan elevation and cross-section views for each building may be
required for each building to be erected with the exception of buildings to be used
for residential purposes and containing less than 25 units unless Council
designates specific areas in the Official Plan where these plans may be required
for residential buildings containing less than 25 units. It is suggested that in
the older sections of the municipality where infill type redevelopment projects
might occur it would be advantageous to require elevations, etc. so that Council
would have a better concept of the types of proposals envisioned. A number of
agencies have expressed interest in the Official Plan policies to be developed for
site plan control. Regional Engineering have verbally indicated interest in the
provisions respecting road widenings. As well the South Lake Simcoe Conservation
Authority would like to investigate the possibility of utilizing municipal site
plan control in conjunction with its "Fill Regulations". It is suggested that it
would be appropirate to discuss the options with these agencies and develop
policies based on those discussions and Council's recommendations regarding the
above noted new or altered provisions. These policies could be developed through
the Planning Committee and further discussed at a future public meeting, the date
for which could be set at this time.
West:
Buck:
Resolved that this matter be referred to Council in Committee for
further discussion and study.
CARRIED
The Mayor requested Mrs. Seibert to explain the proposed amendment to the Official
Plan pertaining to Bonusing Policies.
Proposal (Bonusing Provisions)
Section 36 of An Act to Revise the Planning Act provides as follows:
Comment
"The Council of a local municipality may, in a bylaw passed under
Section 34, authorize increases in the height and density of
development otherwise permitted by the by-law that will be
permitted in return for the provision of such facilities, services
or matters as are set out in the by-1 aw."
In order to use this provision the municipality must have an official plan policy
relating to the authorization of increases in height and density of development.
The types of provisions which may be appropriate as conditions of allowing such
increases in height or density would be the provision of underground parking, the
establishment of special or assisted housing, the retention of buildings of
historic or architectural value, in return for the provision of innovative building
designs, in return for services such as open space, parking, etc.
It appears, for example, that in areas zoning RA3 -40 units per acre, in return
for an innovative building design, the municipality might be able to offer 45 to 50
units per acre. This may make it feasible for the developer to propose buildings
complimentary in design and scale (i.e. lower height) than would otherwise have
been possible if the preferred building were a more expensive proposal.
·.~--·~·"·'•"•'•'•'•''"'·'•'"''""~~-Y'-W"'•'<"·-~"M•M".o'" -.-----·-~-.-.,.-~--:-~·~•·W"~-.c.~<,'"'"A'~-;,:,,<;,w;:_"Q;;=<zz;,;;'>'R'i3"c<o<eco->."•"''~W~-q<W£fG{0'/;:';.'i'lC'•'i~'(.;e.c-"•'-"·"~~~.-.------,,•--;:-. -.. -. ~------··-·-··---··--~~~~~"'·-·---~---,.·-------··
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 7 -
Proposal (Bonusing Provisions)
Comment (continued)
The Official Plan Amendment must be specific as to what the objectives of the
policy are, the circumstances in which the provisions would apply, etc. There does
seem to be merit in persuing the use of this provision from a planning
perspective. If Council are in agreement it is suggested that policies be
developed through the Planning Committee and further discussed at a future public
meeting, the date for which should be set at this time.
West:
Jones:
Resolved that this matter be referred to Planning Committee and that
they be requested to develop draft objectives.
CARRIED
Mrs. Seibert then explained the Granada Investments Limited (Murch Property)
rezoning request:
Proposal (Murch Property)
The applicants propose to rezone a property having approximately 53 metres of
frontage on Kennedy Street West on an area of 1.05 ha (approx. 2 1/2 acres) which
extends to the south to Murray Drive from Detached Dwelling First Density
Residential (R1) to Detached Dwelling Second Density Residential (R2) Zone to
permit the development of an 8 lot plan of subdivision which has been draft
approved.
The provisions of the R1 Zone require 30 metres (approximately 100 feet) of
frontage and .2 ha (1/2 acre) of (approximately 50 feet) of frontage and 468 square
metres (approximately 5,000 square feet) of area.
Comment
The proposed plan of subdivision was subjected to review by government agencies and
boards in the draft approval process. As well informal meetings were held between
residents of Highland Court and staff concerning the design of the lots on the end
of Pinehurst Court. The result of those discussions was that the developer reduced
the number of lots proposed at the end of Pinehurst Court by one.
The existing house on Kennedy Street will maintain the same frontage as it
currently has and the proposed lot size will be compatible with lots in the
surrounding area. The four lots at the end of Pinehurst Court are generally larger
than those on Murray Drive and form a transition between the larger lots on
Highland Court and the smaller lots on Murray Drive. Three lots will have frontage
on Murray Drive and these are somewhat oversized particular with respect to depth
in relation to the lots within the area.
Agency comments received
Ministry of Transportation and Communications -no objection.
Regional Planning -no objection.
York Region Roman Catholic Separate School Board-no objection.
West:
E. Stewart:
Resolved that the necessary By-Law be prepared for Council's
consideration.
CARRIED
Mayor Illingworth requested Mrs. Seibert to outline the Corridor/Avery/Boland
Official Plan amendment proposal.
·--~---.-, -~-~'-~-·-~"'""""''w.~·"''·'~'-""'·'·•-•-v-•"-'~---~--~·---·-~~ -~~F""~=<.•<•"•''=~;JJ;&'? ''"Y'':W..'t:<Z""'""'VY'"·',-~-,;;zo,;:,x,;;c$x>;>~W-;-;<:>lo"'>"17-=""'"'""""'"'•'"'c~=~.c~---~---,--. -. • -------------------.. -. ::-;-----~--~------·
I
L.-.-.y·
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 8 -
Proposal (Corridor/Avery/Boland)
The applicant proposes to redesignate the subject lands from "Suburban Residential"
in the south half of the amendment area to "Urban Residential" and in the north
from "Rural" to "Suburban Residential" and "Urban Residential" as shown on the
attachment. The amendment would provide for a further phase of the Corridor
development and allow the development, at quite a low density of the Bolands and
Avery properties.
Comment
The area of the Corridor development which is under consideration for redesignation
from "Suburban Residential" to "Urban Residential" is on open area which has been
recently planted in corn. The original development concept for the area envisioned
servicing with municipal water and private sewage disposal systems. Since that
time detailed studies have revealed that soil conditions in the area are unsuitable
for the proper operation of private sewage disposal systems and it has been
determined that the area should be fully serviced.
In the development areas further north (Wimpey, Lakeview Estates and Salpam) the
heavy tree cover and extreme grades have made it necessary to continue with large
lots despite the altered servicing method.
In this area because of the openness and more gently rolling topography, there
appears to be some justification for redesignation of part of the area to "Urban
Residential". It is suggested, however, that the most westerly strip of land
adjacent to Bathurst be designated "Suburban Residential" as appears to be the
applicant's intention based on the concept plan which indicates l/2 acre lots in
this area.
The area to the north (Avery and Boland) is more complex being heavily treed with
steep slopes. The applicants propose a small cluster of urban residential lots at
the southern most portion of the area with the remaining area being a "Suburban
Residential" category. The development concept indicates lots considerably in
excess of the minimum 1/2 acre lot permissable size. The "Suburban Residential"
category in the Official Plan makes provision that lot size should be based on a
review of the physical characteristics of the site. The applicants have carried
out a review of this nature which for the most part appears to be consistent with
the "Development Concept" proposed. Further review at a draft plan stage may
produce details which would require alteration of the development concept. Since
the Suburban Residential policies already indicate this particular concern, it is
suggested that a clause in the Urban Residential provisions to apply to the subject
property indicating that "on review of the physical characteristics of the area
somewhat larger lots may be necessary" would be advisable in view of the extreme
grades in the northern area shown as "Urban Resiential".
Agency Comments
Regional Planning -"In view of the complexity of the topography, vegetation and
soils of much of the subject lands, we are not in a position to comment on this
proposal at present. A detailed review will be carried out following receipt and
circulation of an Official Plan Amendment if one is adopted by the Council of the
Town of Aurora.
Comments should be obtained from the Regional Medical Officer of Health concerning
individual services and from the Regional Engineering Commissioner concerning
municipal services and access to Bathurst Street (Y.R. Number 38).
Regional Engineering and Health were circulated, copies of the application and have
not replied.
~~~-----------------------------------~--~-~~~~··~· ~·~-~~~~~---"-"-""'"'~<=~'"-'"''..---· ---.,-,.,---,-------------------,.,......,_------~-----·---------.--
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
- 9 -
Proposal (Corridor/Avery/Sol and) (continued)
Agency Comments (continued)
Township of King -"Planning Committee of the Township of King, at its meeting of
January 9, 1984, received and considered the Notice of Public Meeting for the above
noted proposed amendment. It was recommended by the Committee that the Official
Plan Amendment be supported on the basis of the Development Concept which was
attached to the Notice, showing larger lots backing onto Bathurst Street. The
Committee further requested that your office provide the Township with details
concerning the screening necessary to be implemented along the Bathurst Street
frontage of this proposed development."
Note: The Official Plan requires screening in open areas along Regional Roads.
West:
Buck:
Resolved that the necessary By-Law be prepared for Council's
consideration.
CARRIED
The Planner was then requested to outline the Ballymore Farms rezoning application.
Proposal (Ballymore Farms)
The applicant proposes to construct an additional detached residence on Part of Lot
86, Concession 1, E.Y.S. Northwest corner of St. John's Sideroad and Bayview Avenue
on the subject property which has an area of 18.549 hectares {approx. 45 acres).
There is an existing residence on the farm which has access to Bayview Avenue. The
proposed additional residence is intended to be a "Gate-House-Farm Manager's"
residence to be 1 ocated at the farm service entrance on St. John's Side road. The
main entrance gates to the farm located on Bayview Avenue have been designed so
that large vehicles cannot gain access through them and therefore must use the farm
service entrance of St. John's Sideroad.
Current Zoning
The property is currently zoned "RU-Rural General" which permits one single family
dwelling including an accessory attached residential dwelling unit occupied by a
person employed full time on the farm where the farm is not less than 40 hectares
(approximately 100 acres) in area.
This clause was intended to apply to large farms where it was anticipated that farm
help would logically be required. The reason that the dwelling unit is to be in
the form of an apartment is to avoid future pressure for severance when a separate
residence becomes unnecessary to the farm operations.
Comment
In the present application we are advised that the farm is an intensive cattle
breeding operation requiring less acreage than some operations but because the
cattle are valuable pure breds a greater degree of security than normal is required
thus necessitating the controlled access. On that basis, the additional residence
appears to be justifiable. However, should the farm operation change, the
municipality will no doubt be subjected to pressure to allow a severance of the
additional residence.
Agency comments received.
Regional Planning -no objection.
York Regional Board of Education -no objection.
West:
E. Stewart:
Resolved that the necessary By-Law be prepared for Council's
consideration.
CARRIED
~ •• w-.."~o-L.'••--'-'"-'--'-~".<O.O..'~"""'>C~V<'•'•'• <•-•~~L>-~,~--~--~---. -.-, ....... ,..,._.>.<>.=,;W,"O'd=~"\,'t:=-=oi)~~ij~;;_<;,>~c,t.,;.\;\:).;>'.'>N;>;>hJo'-'.<.0•'•••~A•';"0 -:":"'--~--,---,---. -~~-~---,-, . .,.-;;-~--''" '••·---~--··
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
-10 -
NEW BUSINESS
1. Proposal (Commercial Area Improvement Program)
Mrs. Seibert was requested to give details of this program.
As was mentioned in the discussion concerning "Community Improvement Policies" the
Province has introduced a new program intended to assist Municipal Councils and
business groups in making improvements in downtown area and other older existing
commercial districts. The objectives of the program are:
1. To encourage and support the improvement of downtown and other older
commercial districts by municipalities and business groups.
2. To encourage continued maintenance and promotion of existing viable
commercial areas and the replacement of incompatible land uses.
3. To stabilize and/or improve property and business tax bases through the
stimulation of private investment.
4. To promote co-ordination and joint, comprehensive planning and design by the
municipality, business groups and the community at large.
5. To ensure effective use of existing municipal services and encourage infill
and small anchor developments which will contribute to the improvement of
the commercial area.
6. To provide increased opportunity for economic expansion and development in a
municipality by creating viable and attractive commercial areas.
7. To encourage conservation of buildings and areas of historic significance.
8. To encourage energy conservation through energy efficient land use.
Funding
1. Province will contribute 50% of approved eligible costs within the overall
agreement.
2. Maximum provincial funding $500,000.00.
3. Provincial contribution will be in the form of loans and grants -grants
will not exceed 1/3 of Province's contribution.
4. Provincial contribution paid upon submission of completed claim form with
the necessary documentation after the expenditures have been paid for by the
municipality.
5. Projects must be completed in 4 years and comply with the following rate of
expeditures.
(a) Minimum of 1/3 of approved gross cost by end of second year.
(b) Up to 2/3 by end of third year.
(c) Remaining 1/3 by end of fourth year.
Repayment of Loan
100% of loan paid over 10 years at 50% of the provincial borrowing rate set at the
date of provincial funding. Retirement of the loan may be shared with B/A Board of
Management.
~~,_....,_, ..• ,.,v.-•. ~ "-<.;~''"'""~"-""•'~'"-'•~'•'""""·~·-·~~~--;-:---.-:-~'*?'~'>~'"-·"'"'·""''"'""'~<'<W?~';:;;~}:)<~;,%;>*'~,;:g_h.,";;#,;';¥.~{•l0:'X<;il'.",•.:i:;:;<><.:<.;,;'-""'"'"'"-u.<":~":"'C~'-----.. :-\~---·-~~M~~.--·-~:r."~.'~'·"-~-~~·•···-----
···-~
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING ••• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
-11 -
NEW BUSINESS (continued)
Proposal (Commercial Area Improvement Program) (continued)
Eligible Costs
Loan and Grant
Administrative:
Salaries of staff and/or consultants fee in preparation or refinement of
Community Improvement Plan, the development of a streetscape design concept
and development of a maintenance and promotion strategy for business area.
Preparation of maps, site office rental, citizen participation.
Staff salaries.
Attendance at seminars sponsored by Ministry.
Services and Utilities:
Preparation of detailed architectural plans and engineering drawings.
Construction or repair of new sewer and water main.
Abandonment of sewer and water or other services.
Construction of new and/or paving and repairing of existing roads, streets,
lanes, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, catch basins, street signs, street
lighting and traffic signals.
Land acquisition for same.
Land acquisition and improvements for the provision of parkettes or tot
1 ots.
Loan Only
Parking:
Acquisition of land, resurfacing, construction, parking control booths,
amenities such as lighting and landscaping, acquisition of land and site
preparation for pedestrian access (walkways) to parking areas.
Aesthetic Improvements:
Streetscape improvements such as street furniture, decorative lighting, flag
poles, banners, brick sidewalks, etc.
Small Ancher Redevelopment Projects:
Acquisition of land and site preparation.
Acquisition of an existing building and renovations and/or restoration.
Proposal:
The Commercial Development Advisory Committee at its most recent meeting discussed
the Commercial Area Improvement Program and felt participation in the program would
be beneficial to the community since loans at favourable interest rates and grants
are available to carry out work which has been agreed to by Council, i.e. the west
side parking lot. That particular project has recently been estimated by the
Director of Public Works to be a $100,000 project, considerably more than was
originally invisaged. The Committee also feels that the opportunity exists to
fund, over a 4 year time period, the east side parking lot as well as some start on
landscaping (i.e. tree planting) and lighting on Yonge Street. As well the program
allows 15% of the total costs for administration and promotion. The provincial
part of this can be in the form of a grant which would help fund preparation of
working drawings, concept plans and a promotion program for the commercial area.
• ·····'·"·'"'"' ••••• ,,., ... ,_.,.,,"•"'"'.·•1~""t••··" .. '''·'"''···~·-~~-""~--·---. -. -,.,.....,...-:--:-C:":"~"·~·""~""""""'"'''o""'~~'f,;_'i%'$'${1.\.f•~;;;;yJ{>;>;tii%•R&<"Ji'~R~E~;;,;,.·~:i'i!,'"''""~·.;-•=7-"""'"'"'''~"'·-:·~::------~.~---------.. ·-----------~--~--.... -----~---.. ----·
~-~--~~-~.~~-UHO-~·--·
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING .•• THURSDAY, JANUARY 26th, 1984
-12 -
NEW BUSINESS (continued)
Proposal (Commercial Area Improvement Program). (continued)
The following program is proposed by the Commercial Development Advisory Committee.
Prov. Share
Project Total Municipal Share Grant * Loan -
Administration $ 37 ,800 $ 18,900 $ 18,900
Sewer (west) 16,000 8,000 8,000
Parking Lot West 8,400 42,000 42,000
42,000
30,000
Sewer( east) 16,000 8,000 8,000
Parking Lot East 84,400 42,000
Landscaping and
Lighting 60,000 30,000
$297 ,800 $148,900 $34,900 $114,000
* There are a number of provisions respecting eligibility which are subject to
interpretation. These figures represent estimates.
Municipal share $148,900 over 4 years= $37,225 municipal commitment per annum not
including $20,000 not spent in 1983 for west side parking lot.
B/A may contribute to municipal share and also to repayment of loan.
E. Stewart:
West:
Buck:
Paivio:
ADJOURNMENT
Buck:
West:
Resolved that this matter be referred to the Council in Committee
meeting scheduled for February 15th, 1984 for further discussion.
DEFEATED
Resolved that the Clerk-Administrator be authorized to apply on
behalf of Council of the Town of Aurora for funding under the
Commercial Area Improvement Program for the amount of $297,800.00.
CARRIED
Resolved that this meeting be adjourned at 10:24 p.m.
CARRIED
~~
Mayor ~ ClerK