MINUTES - Special Council - 19860625\
I
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD IN THE BOARDROOM AT THE
YORK REGION BOARD OF EDUCATION, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986 AT 7:30P.M.
Present Were: Mayor West; Councillors Buck, Jones, McKenzie, Pedersen,
Timpson and Weller.
Also in attendance were K.B. Rodger, Clerk-Administrator; C.E. Gowan, Deputy
Clerk; and S. Seibert, Director of Planning.
Absent Were: Councillor Barker due to illness and Councillor Paivio
due to a business commitment.
S. Seibert, Director of Planning outlined to the audience the process which
takes place when an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning Amendment are
received.
Mayor West advised those present that this meeting had been called as a
Public Meeting with respect to applications for amendment to the Zoning By-
law for Labour Council Development Management, Rodgers Estate, Dical
Investments and MacDonnell Investments.
The Deputy Clerk advised that the required notices of meetings were mailed
on May 16, 1986 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. The necessary signs were posted on the
various properties in accordance with the rules of procedure under The
Planning Act (1983).
Mayor West advised that any persons who wished further notice of the passage
of the By-laws under consideration should sign the forms available before
they leave the meeting.
The Public Meeting to hear Application No. Z-21-86 is now,open.
Mayor West requested the Planner to outline Application No. Z-21-86.
Number Z-21-86 (Labour Council Development
Location
The subject lands are located on the north side of Wellington Street between
Haida Drive and McDonald Drive. The subject property is 3.727 ha (9.210
acres) in area with a frontage along Wellington Street of 330 m (1,080 feet
approximately) and 132 m (430 feet approximately) of depth.
Propos a 1
The applicants propose to develop the site for 106 townhouse units
comprising 28 - 2 bedroom units, 49 - 3 bedroom units and 29 - 4 bedroom
units plus a communal facilities building. Each unit has a garage which
provides one parking space plus a parking space which would be accommodated
in the driveway. Twenty-eight additional parking spaces for visitors are
provided throughout the site, mainly near the entrances to the site. The
proposal provides for 15 blocks of buildings ranging in size from 4 units to
10 units each. Two tot lots are proposed, one for preschoolers, one for
primary school aged children. The area directly fronting Wellington Street
for a depth of approximately 30 metres (approx. 100 feet) is floodplain and,
therefore, cannot be used for buildings or overnight parking. This area
occupies approximately 2 acres of the overall site.
The applicants have indicated that they will provide fencing and landscaping
adjacent to the existing semidetached houses which front on McDonald Drive
and Haida Drive. As well, landscaping will be provided adjacent to the
entrances to the site.
Current Zoning
The subject lands are currently zoned "H -Holding". This zone is applied
to l'ands which are intended for future development, the plans for which are
uncertain. The lands were zoned for apartments and townhouses until 1980.
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
- 2 -
Number Z-21-86 (Labour Council Development
Official Plan
The subject lands are designated as Urban Residential in the Official Plan
of the Aurora Planning Area. That category permits low, medium and high
density residential uses and accessory and complementary uses.
In respect to density, Section 4.6 of the Official Plan provides as follows:
Residential Density
In order to provide a range of housing types to correspond with the incomes
and lifestyles of the residents of the Town of Aurora, it is intended that a
range of residential densities will be permitted. While low density
development will form the predominant housing type, higher density
residential development will be permitted in certain locations specified in
Section 8B of the Plan.
Section 8 B1 (d) states as follows:
Urban residential development shall be predominately low density, single
family residential. Apartment buildings, row houses, maisonettes and other
multiple family accommodation containing ten or more units shall only be
permitted:
(i) in proximity to the Central Business District, or
(ii) in proximity to shopping centres, or
(iii) adjacent to arterial roads, and
(iv) where it is previously established that the schools, parks,
roads,
sewers, and watermains, and other municipal services are
adequate, and
(v) where it is previously established that the traffic generated
can be safely handled by the road system and can be directed
away from adjacent local streets.
The subject site is approximately 800 metres (approximately 1/2 mile) from
the Central Business District and also adjacent to an arterial road. Four
schools are within walking distance (about 1/2 mile) of the site -two of
which, the high school and the senior public school, are directly across the
road. Several neighbourhood parks are also located within 1/2 mile of the
site. The attached plan shows the locations of these parks and the
facilities located in the parks.
Wellington Street is a four-lane arterial street which should easily be
capable of handling the additional traffic generated by this proposal.
Access to the site itself is to be provided from McDonald Drive and Haida
Drive. McDonald Drive is a major residential collector and is constructed
to that standard having a 26 metre {approx. 86 feet) right-of-way with a
traffic light controlled intersection with Wellington Street. Haida Drive
should be considered for widening from Wellington Street to the entrance
street to ensure an adequate area for traffic flow.
Municipal services are available to the site, although it will be necessary
to formally allocate sewage and water capacity to the project should it
proceed. The applicants should confirm that existing inground services are
large enough to accommodate projected flows and would be responsible for
upgrading these should it be required.
•'·''-"'•">'~-~~·-· ·-·-··-· ------·-···---·-·~---....,...,_.,,,"-'~"-•'"'·'"·"~"•"·~~ .-.-.. •.--.•-·• -,-.,-,-'"''.•.Lc<"">"-'-'-'·'·' · "·-~--->·~-~----~~---
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
- 3 -
Number Z-21-86 (Labour Council Development
The proposal has a density of 11.5 units per acre. Since approximately 2
acres of the site are unusable because of the floodplain, the actual
development area is approximately 7.2 acres. On that basis, the density
exclusive of the floodplain is about 14.7 units per acre. The Official Plan
allows 18.2 units per net acre for medium density residential area each
neighbourhood. Very limited medium density development exists in the
neighbourhood which comprises the area bounded by Wellington Street to the
south, Yonge Street to the east, St. Andrew's College to the north and the
Aurora West Secondary Plan area to the west. It is, therefore, felt that
the proposal is well within the limits established in the Official Plan for
medium density residential.
Comment
As was stated above, the Official Plan, while recognizing that Aurora will
continue to be a predominantly low density community, provides for a range
of housing types to correspond with the incomes and lifestyles of its
residents.
The Municipal Housing Statement prepared for the Town in January 1985
i denti fi ed the need for the yearly provision from 1984-1989 of 110 tenant
occupied dwelling units. In 1984, 109 rental units were constructed within
the municipality. In 1985 no rental units were constructed. Given the
present time of year and the lead time required to construct such
facilities, it is unlikely that new rental units will become available
during 1986. The last available statistic for vacancy rates in Aurora
indicated 0.1% vacancy rate.
The need to provide additional rental accommodation appears undeniable.
In respect to the location of the subject site for the proposed townhouse
development, as was stated under the comment on the Official Plan, it would
appear that site is appropriate for multiple family residential in that it
is well served by community facilities, parks, schools, on arterial road
where traffic can be directed away from lower density residential areas and
close to the Central Business District.
In respect to the actual site plan, in principle, staff is satisfied with
the layout as proposed. We would suggest that consideration be given to
expanding the senior tot lot on the western boundary of the property to
provide a hard surface general play area with a basketball court to provide
on-site play area for older children. This area should be landscaped since
it is at the intersection of Wellington and McDonald. Consideration should
also be given to increasing the number of visitors parking spaces since
parking is prohibited on Wellington Street.
In summary, the proposal appears to conform with the Official Plan in terms
of location and would provide much needed rental accommodation, the need for
which has been demonstrated in the Municipal Housing Statement. The actual
design appears acceptable in principle although a number of matters such as
provision of landscaping, recreational facilities and parking require
further discussion and review with the app 1 i cants. It is suggested that
should Council determine that an amendment to the by-law is appropriate,
third reading of such by-law should await the finalization of these details
through the site plan agreement.
Ms. Penny Bithke, Project Coordinator representing Labour Council
Development Foundation, addressed the meeting and advised that a meeting
with concerned residents had been held to gather input into the proposal and
to receive their concerns. The proposal as presented tonight has taken into
consideration these concerns. There will be 5 units designated for the
handicapped.
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
- 4 -
Number Z-21-86 (Labour Council Development
Concerns:
walkway;
landscaping;
increase of traffic -speeding;
fencing of property;
density of proposal;
water or lack thereof;
parking;
schools now overcrowded;
lack of day-care services to handle children; and
setback of buildings.
The Public Meeting on Application No. Z-21-86 is now closed.
Council Meeting is now open.
Buck:
Pedersen:
Resolved that the Director of Planning be directed to prepare
the necessary By-law and concurrently the Technical Committee
to discuss and make recommendations regarding the concerns of
the residents.
Be It Further Resolved that The Regional Municipality of York
be required to undertake a traffic study at Haida Drive and
Wellington Street West.
CARRIED
The Public Meeting to hear Application No. Z-24-86 is now open.
Mayor West requested the Director of Planning to outline Application No. Z-
24-86.
Proposal -Application Number Z-24-86 (D.E. Rogers Estate and W. Marko)
Location
The subject lands are located on the south side of St. John's Sideroad just
west of Yonge Street in Lot 85, Concession 1 W.Y.S. The surrounding lands
to the north and west are primarily agricultural with some limited rural
residential development, and the Aurora Conference Centre (Anglican
Church). To the east bordering Yonge Street is the original Wi 11 ow Farm
consisting of two detached buildings and accessory buildings. Lands to the
south include the St. Andrews College property and the abutting Lakeview
subdivision.
The site includes a large wooded area, located at the west half, and a
cultivated and abandoned field area partially wooded at times. The
topography of the site is highly variable and complex and is characterized
by a general slope from west to east toward the Tannery Creek floodplain and
a series of slopes and ravines which bisect the property at various points.
Proposal
The applicants propose to amend the zoning by-law from "RU -Rural" to "ER-
Estate Residential" and "Special Urban Residential" to permit the lands to
be developed for a plan of subdivision consisting of 11 lots in the ER zone
and some 198 lots (maximum density of 4.4 per hectare) in the Special Urban
Residential Zone.
The lands along the north border of the property would be designated Estate
Residential. These 11 lots have minimum lot areas of 0.8 hectares (2 acres).
COUNCIL MEETING ••. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
-5 -
Proposal -Application Number Z-24-86 (D.E. Rogers Estate and W. Marko)
cont'd ...
Lands to the south, the bulk of the property, would be designated Special
Urban Residential. This new zoning category would compliment the amended
Special Urban Residential land use category in the Official Plan. The
provisions are intended to ensure that physically sensitive or undevelopable
components of the site are conserved.
The proposal presently before Council is for 198 large lots having an
average frontage of 80 feet and an average area of 16,000 square feet.
Official Plan
The subject property is designated "Urban Separator" and "Special Urban
Residential" by Amendment No. 31 to the Official Plan.
The objectives of the Urban Separator area are "to maintain an identifiable
and distinct community" by limiting the permitted uses to those which have a
large open space component thereby providing a separation between the urban
areas of Aurora and Newmarket. Permitted uses inc 1 ude very 1 arge
residential lots, very limited commercial uses on large lots, such as
country inns, horse riding establishments and other uses as are considered
compatible with maintaining the rural appearance of the area.
The objectives of the Special Urban Residential area are to recognize lands
which because of their physical characteristics cannot be developed in their
entirety as urban res i denti a 1 uses. Permitted uses include one detached
dwelling per lot, an accessory building or use and a home occupation.
Comment
Official Plan Amendment No. 31 and the Special Urban Residential category
were specifically enacted to provide for lands which because of their
physi ca 1 characteristics cannot be deve 1 oped in their entirety as urban
residential uses. Official Plan Amendment No. 31 provides as follows:
"In these areas, large areas of open space will be set aside in order to
ensure that the physically sensitive or undevelopable components of the site
are conserved. Deve 1 opment of the site will take the form of clusters of
housing which will be located in areas having suitability for development."
The applicants prepared a report entitled "Landscape Analysis for
Development Suitability and Recommendations for Development". That stud.Y
specifically identifies certain parts of the site as being unsuitable for
deve 1 opment. These areas generally follow the tributaries to Tannery Creek
including an area through which Road "C" extends. Road "D" also crosses
this area which follows the southerly tributary and is identified as
unsuitable for development. The area around the more northerly tributary is
also identified as unsuitable for development. Most of this area has been
set aside as a linear park. Similarly, an area at the easterly edge of the
property which has been identified as unsuitable for deve 1 opment has been
set aside as a block and not presently proposed for development although its
future use is not specified on the plan submitted.
The original concept on which Official Plan Amendment No. 31 was based was
that the allowable development on the site was to be concentrated for the
most part within the open fields. These areas are relatively flat and have
been formed for many years.
The woodlot at the western end of the site was also judged capable of being
developed by the landscape analysis carried out by the applicants.
It was felt by clustering development in these areas the attractive and
sensitive valleys and woodlots of the site could be saved for the most part,
recognizing that road crossings and connections to other areas are necessary
and would cause some disturbance of the vegetation and other natural
features of the site.
COUNCIL MEETING ••. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
-6 -
Proposal -Application Number Z-24-86 (D.E. Rogers Estate and W. Marko)
cont'd •.•
The p 1 an as presently submitted has moved from the ori gina 1 concept of
cluster housing to a conventional subdivision design. The present design
has the objective of creating building envelopes within the wooded areas on
large lots to maintain the forest at the rear part of the lots. At the
western end of the property where the grades are not as extreme as on the
central and eastern parts of the property this may be successful. Along the
southern part of the property, particularly the area through which Road "C"
runs where greater grade change will be necessary, we feel and the
applicant's landscape analysis supports this, that "development of any kind
will result in very serious impacts" to quote from the landscape report.
The applicants have verbally advised that clustered housing such as we
originally envisaged, large unit condominium townhousing or very low rise
condominium apartments such as are proposed by Beacon Hall, are not
marketable under the present market conditions. If that is the case, then
it is necessary to reexamine the policy decision made in early 1985 where it
was determined that these lands could be developed on the basis of clusters
of housing which would be located in areas having suitability for
development.
Aside from the overall pol icy decision as to whether this proposal conforms
to the Official Plan, a further issue of discussions has been the traffic
flow patterns for the area. The Technical Committee reported to Council on
this matter in connection with the finalization of the Lakeview Suburban
residential lot. The Committee's recommendation, which was accepted by
Council, was that the connection of this development to Tribbling Crescent
was essential. A second exit to St. John's Sideroad was desirable to direct
traffic to the street which we envision will be reconstructed, paved and
eventually have traffic light controlled intersections at both Yonge Street
and Bathurst Street. As well, a connection to the west from this
subdivision should be provided. The westerly lands should also have a
connection to St. John's Sideroad.
In summary, we have some major concerns with the application presently
before Council particularly because it differs so greatly with the original
concept for the area as deve 1 oped through Offici a 1 Plan Amendment No. 31.
If Council wished to alter the concept thorough considerations of conformity
with the Official Plan should be given including the possibility of amending
the Official Plan to remove the references to "clusters of housing". It is
felt that any form of development which is approved on the site should
respect the limitations outlined in the landscape analysis unless the
applicants can now provide additional information as to why the analysis no
longer applies.
Mr. B. Corbett, representing the owners of the property, addressed the
meeting and advised that this matter has been before Council during the past
5 years. They were appearing tonight to request that the Zoning By-law be
prepar~d to implement Official Plan Amendment No. 31.
Concerns:
access to roads to the south;
traffic congestion;
safety of children;
unaware that two lots were for a roadway;
will become a truck route;
lack of school facilities;
water supply;
removal of trees; and
wells -drying up of.
The Public Meeting on Application No. Z-24-86 is now closed.
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
- 7 -
Proposal -Application Number Z-24-86 (D.E. Rogers Estate and W. Marko)
cont'd •.•
Council Meeting is now open.
Timpson:
Jones:
Weller:
Jones:
Resolved that this Application be referred to the Planning
Committee to specifically address the discrepancies between
Official Plan Amendment No. 31 and the Application presented
tonight with a report back to Council.
CARRIED
Resolved that the hour be extended and the Agenda completed.
CARRIED
The Public Meeting to hear Application No. Z-20-86 is now open.
Mayor West requested the Director of Planning to outline Application No. Z-
20-86 (Dical Investments).
Proposal -Application Number Z-20-86 (Dical Investments)
Location
The subject lands are located on the north side of Bloomington Road just
east of Bayview Avenue.
Proposal
The applicants propose to change the zoning category applying to the s.ubject
lands from "RU-Rural" to "E.R. Estate Residential" to allow the area to be
developed for a plan of subdivision having 37 lots ranging in size from
about 1. 75 acres to about 13 acres. Exception will be needed to both the
minimum lot frontages and the minimum lot sizes as stipulated by the
provisions of the Zoning By-law to accommodate the plan of subdivision since
the subdivision frontages and lot sizes are based on the landscape and are
in some cases smaller than the required minimums.
Official Plan
The subject lands are designated "Estate Residential" by Official Plan
Amendment No. 18. The proposed use would conform to this designation.
Comment
The purpose of the proposed By-1 aw is to rezone the subject 1 ands from RU
"Rural" to ER "Estate Residential", thereby implementing draft approved plan
of subdivision 19T-80094. The Estate Residential zone requires 45 m
(approx. 150 feet) of frontage and a lot area of 8,000 m (1.9 acres). Due
to the rolling topography there are a variety of 1 ot shapes and sizes, some
of which do not meet the requirements of the "Estate Residential" Zone.
However, conditions of draft approval require that the subdivision agreement
contains a master site plan which outlines optimum locations of houses,
wells and septic tanks. Hence all concerns regarding yards and setbacks
were addressed at the draft approval stage. During the draft approval
process local and provincial agencies were consulted and appropriate
conditions to alleviate any concerns raised by those agencies were applied.
Agency Comments
Ministry of Natural Resources -no objection
South Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority -no objection
Ministry of Agriculture and Food -no objection
Ministry of Transportation and Communications -no objection
York Region Board of Education -no objection
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
- 8 -
Proposal -Application Number Z-20-86 (Dical Investments) cont'd •.•
Concerns:
No persons for or against this Application appeared.
The Public Meeting on Application No. Z-20-86 is now closed.
The Council Meeting is now open.
Jones:
Timpson:
Resolved that the Director of Planning be directed to prepare
the necessary By-law.
CARRIED
The Public Meeting to hear Application Z-23-80 is now open.
Mayor West requested the Director of Planning to outline Application No. Z-
23-86.
Proposal -Application Number Z-23-86 (MacDonnell Investments)
Location
The subject lands are located just east of Yonge Street, having frontage on
the north side of Wellington Street and the south side of Centre Street.
Proposa 1
The applicants request an exception to the provisions of the "C2 -Central
Commercial Zone" and the parking requirements to allow the existing building
which fronts on Centre Street now used as a repairshop in conjunction with
the hardware store to be demolished and replaced with a 12 unit apartment
building. Twelve additional parking spaces would be provided under and to
the rear of the apartment building to serve its residents. It is intended
that as a second phase, the present hardware building will be renovated to
allow for 2 or 3 commercial tenants and one additional apartment added over
the commercial uses. The requested amendments, therefore, relate to
requirements that Residential be located over Commercial and to the number
of parking spaces required.
Official Plan
The Official Plan of the Aurora Planning Area designates the subject lands
as "Commercial". Section 4.5b (ii) as amended states:
5.b (ii) Residential units shall be permitted above business uses on the
second storey and on additional storeys in the Central Business
District, subject to the following provisions:
(a)
(b)
(c)
dwelling units shall be fully self-contained and suitable for
occupancy as per the requirements of the Ontario Building
Code with respect to such matters as structural soundness,
access and egress, plumbing and electrical systems,
insulation, vapour barriers, lighting and all other safety
provisions;
adequate parking shall be provided for residents of such
dwelling units; and
renovations to older buildings shall be encouraged to have
regard to energy efficiency by including insulated walls and
ceilings and double glazed windows.
Since the proposal is not for residential above commercial we feel it does
not conform with the Official Plan.
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
-.9 -
Proposal -Application Number Z-23-86 (MacDonnell Investments) cont'd •..
Comment
The app 1 i cant proposes to demo 1 ish the existing small engine repair shop
which fronts on Centre Street and construct a three storey, 12 unit
apartment building. In addition, the existing hardware store is to be
renovated and one additional apartment unit is to be added above the
store. Hence, the applicant seeks relief from the requirement that
residential uses not be permitted on the ground floor and from the parking
requirements of By-law 2213-78.
The construction of the new apartment building would provide a use much
more compatible to the surrounding use on Centre Street, as well as offer
much needed rental accommodation in the downtown core. The applicant
proposes to supply an additional 12 parking spaces for the apartment
building which would leave the entire site (including commercial) 24
spaces below the 62 which are required by the By-law. Since the site is
located within the downtown core it is felt that some of the demand for
parking on this site may be absorbed by other parking lots within the
downtown. In addition, the hardware store is to be renovated into two or
three smaller commercial units, which may not require as much parking.
The original site plan showed the new apartment to be located between the
existing hardware store to the west and the post office to the east. The
siting of the building in this location offered very little room on each
side as well as giving the development a 'cramped' appearance. Subsequent
to staff discussions with him, the architect has offered an alternative
proposal. The new proposal would have the apartment building as an
addition to the rear of the hardware store with the ground floor as
commercial. The revised proposal has 10 apartments. Twelve new parking
spaces would still be added, however, rather than being located underneath
the apartment building as in the original proposal, they would be at
ground level between the post office and the new addition.
The revised design alleviates two problems. Firstly, the proposal now
conforms to the provisions of the (C2) "Central Commercial Zone" and,
secondly, the proposal is not as 'tightly' developed and would provide for
some open space. The new proposal still offers only 38 parking spaces
overall, 24 spaces under what is required by the By-law. A road widening
of 16.5 feet on Centre Street would be required and hence the building, as
designed would encroach on the road allowance. However, the architect has
informed that the apartment building can be redesigned such that it is set
further back from the Centre Street road allowance.
If Council feels that the by-law should be amended to permit the proposal,
it is suggested that the details of the site plan agreement should be
finalized prior to enactment of the amendment.
Concerns:
No persons for or against this Application appeared.
The Public Meeting on Application No. Z-23-86 is now closed.·
The Council Meeting is now open.
Jones:
Pedersen:
Resolved that this Application be referred to Planning
Committee for discussion on the new design and report back to
Council.
CARRIED
--·-------------• • --~---~•-•>c~'--"'-• • ,.,_<.,. ,r,,.n ----·----··-
COUNCIL MEETING ..• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
-10 -
CORRESPONDENCE
1. Letter 14-44 -Cambria Developments Ltd. re: lots 3, 12, 13, 17 and
68, Registered Plan 65M-2281 -screen planting
Buck:
Weller:
Resolved that the proposal for screen planting pertaining
to Lots 3, 12, 13, 17 and 68, Plan 65M-2281 dated June 25,
1986 as revised by the Town of Aurora, showing the addition
of staggered rows of coniferous trees a minimum of 3 m high
to form an effective screen, be accepted.
Be It Further Reso 1 ved that no occupancy permits will be
granted for the homes on these lots until the screening in
its entirety is completed.
CARRIED
2. Letter 14-62 -The Iona Corporation re: Lot 98, Tamarac
Subdivision, Stage "B" -request to construct two-storey unit
Jones:
Timpson:
RESOLUTIONS
1.
Buck:
Weller:
Resolved that this request be rejected.
CARRIED
4 and Invoice No. 2071 {Vic Priestl
Resolved that, upon the recommendation of Reid and
Associates Limited, Consulting Engineers, Payment
Certificate No. 4 for Project Number 1151 (Temperance
Street Parking Lot Improvements) in the total amount of
$11,562.66 be paid to Vic Priestly Contracting Limited plus
Invoice No. 2071 in the amount of $600.00 and the seal of
the Corporation be attached hereto.
CARRIED
2. Memorandum of Settlement -C.U.P.E. Local 1359
Timpson:
Jones:
Resolved that the Memorandum of Settlement between C.U.P.E.
Local 1359 and the Town of Aurora dated March 26, 1985 be
accepted as presented and the Mayor and the Clerk be
authorized to sign same.
CARRIED
3. Memorandum of Settlement -C.U.P.E. Local 2870
Weller:
Jones:
Resolved that the Memorandum of Settlement between the
Aurora Professional Fire Fighters Association Local 2870 of
the International Association of Fire Fighters and the Town
of Aurora be accepted and the Mayor and the Clerk be
authorized to sign same.
CARRIED
- -··--••-•-"'•• •• • '"•'", • •'• .-~-~~-~~•-•~-•· ····-· •• ···--· -------~------•------~---"~·•A""'-~'-'•'' ···"-"-~" o_o_p, •.-,cc•o•,-,. •
COUNCIL MEETING ••• WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1986
BY-LAWS
Timpson:
Buck:
-J;J: -
Be It Hereby Resolved That:
Bill Number 2833-86 -Being a by-law to amend Zoning By-law
Number 2213-78 (Highland Chev-Olds
Limited); and
Bill Number 2856-86 -Being a by-law to regulate the supply
and use of water within the serviced
area of the Corporation of the Town
of Aurora
... be read a Third Time.
CARRIED
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Water Service -111 Metcalfe Street
Jones:
Weller:
ADJOURNMENT
Jones:
MAYOR
Resolved that the Public Works Department proceed with
replacing the existing water service from the curb box to
the shut off valve .in the basement of 111 Metcalfe Street.
Be It Further Resolved that payment of the cost sharing of
this service be decided at a later date.
CARRIED
Resolved that the meeting be adjourned at 11:55 p.m.
CARRIED
CLERK