Loading...
BYLAW - Amend 1863 - 19741216 - 203674v BY-LAW NUMBER 2036-74 OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AURORA A BY-LAW TO AMEND BY-LAW NUMBER 1863, A COMPREHENSIVE RESTRICTED AREA BY -LAW TO REPEAL BY -LAW NUMBER 2027-74. WHEREAS By-Law Number 2027-74 passed on the 4th day of November, 1974 by the Municipal Corporation of the Town of Aurora purported to amend By-Law Number 1863 of said Town of Aurora. AND WHEREAS because of a problem of drafting By-Law Number 2027-74 did not set forth the true intent of the Municipal Council at the time said By-Law was passed. AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to repeal By-Law Number 2027-74 and pass this By-Law to Annex to By-Law Number 1863 in accordance with the true intent of the Municipal Council: NOW THEREFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AURORA ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: l. THAT By-Law Number 2027-74 of the Corporation, passed on the 4th day of November, 1974, be and the same is hereby repealed. 2. THAT the Zoning Map annexed as Schedule "A" to By-Law Number 1863 is hereby amended by attaching to the lands shown on Schedule "X" which forms part of this By-Law the permitted use as Commercial. 3. THAT SECTION IX, Exceptions of By-Law Number 1863, be amended by the addition of the following clause: .Notwithstanding the other provisions of this By-Law Number 1863: (a) the lands shown on Schedule "X" to By-Law Number 2036-74 being a parcel on the north-west corner of Yonge Street North and Orchard Heights Boulevard and comprising an area of 656,000 square feet shall be used for no other purpose than for the erection of an Indoor Mall Shopping Centre where the buildings comprising the same are situated in the locations shown on the site plan annexed as Schedule "Y" to By-Law Number 2036-74, and which buildings must include a Food Store of floor area not less than 25,000 square feet and a Department Store of floor area not less than 86,400 square feet, and other Retail Store space with floor area of not less than 74,700 square feet and a Cinema- Theatre and Community Room with floor area not less than 18,300 square feet; (b) minimum parking requirements for the said lands are 1,060 car parking spaces or 5.5 car parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross leaseable space in the buildings comprising the Shopping Centre, whichever is greater, and arrangement of parking and landsc~ping of the said lands must be in conformity with the said site plan, Schedule "Y". 4. THAT this By-Law shall take effect on the date of passing by Council subject to the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 16th day of DECEMBER, 1974. --~-~~-':~~--MAYOR CLERK READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS l6thday of DECEMBER, 1974. ' THIS IS SCHEDULE "X" TO BY-IJIW # r-uJ MUt.TIPLE FAMILY L!!!..J R ESIO E NT I A L r-Aj, APARTMENT L!!....J RESIDENTIAL m OP!ri SPACE ITJ COMMERCIAl. m UMITED IHSnTUTIONA&.. ~ DEYELOPNEMT CD INOUSTRI At. . D '" ml AMENOMENT, •· Ttl C "ZONING TOWN, OF MAP" AURORA COUNTY OF YORK I I I "' 0 w "' ~ .... . ', .. ... ...... i ·-... ·\' ''' ' ' I I .. I .. ~w '.•.:..: • \ ' . ... -... : ;. . ,: . ~-... ;: ····~~---.--_---. -·'·'~--:"-.----·-----~-~-. ~-~.-~--:-~t o.c, . .JQfll lrG ExecUtivP. Council Copy of an Order-in-Council approved by Her. Honour the Lieutenant Gover·nor, da~ed the 3rd day of November, A.D. 1976. The Committ~e of Council have had under consideration the report of the Honourable t~c Minister of the Environmen~ and Acting Chairman, Cabinet Committee on Legislation, wherein he states that, \~HEREJI.S A. f•1erzur and Sons Limited and The Aurora Shopping Centre Nercha~ts Association of Aurora, have filed a Petition praying that t!-1e decision of the Ontario H:.micipal Board made on the 8th day of July 1976, (whereby the Ontar·io 1-1unicipal Board approved an application by the Corporation of the Town of Aurora for approval of its Res.tricted Area By-law 2036-74 >vhich 1·wuld amend -t;he existing use from '· "D" (Development), which is a holding zone and permit development of an lndoor mall shopping centre on an area of land of approximately 15 acres at the noPUnrest quadrant of the intersection of Orchard Heights Boulevard and Yonge Street) be varied or rescinded and rem:'Lt'~ed to · . the municipality in ordel' that a market study be obtained prior to· passing a further by-law. The Honourable the Minister of the Environment and Acting Chairman, Cabinet Committee on Legislation pfter due consideration of the said Petition, therefore recommends that pursuant to the provisions of Section 94 of•The Ontario Municipal Board Act, R.S.O. 1970, Chaptel' 323, the aforementioned decision of the Ontario Nunicipal Board, dated the 8th day of July 1976, be confirmed. The Committee of Ct'U!'lcil concur in the ! ! ·'I I I I I I ; . i j ' . '. I ' . -•'' . .-, . -. ~ .-_, -2...; . . recommendation of the i:0::ourable the i''iir.ister of the Environment and ·Actj.:-,g Chairman, Cabinet ·c · · 't·t· I _-,.r-ic:o,·-:~...-~,.. ...... :-: ..... u· omm.l ce on ... e,. ___ ,.,.L ..... •----~-•.. ,J .be .... · .... ·: Cot.<ncil. •/ R 75986 Ontario Municipal Board IN THE MATTER OF Section 35 of The Planning Act (R.S.O. 1970, c. 3.49)' -and -. IN THE !1\ATTER OF an appl,ication by The Corporation of the Town of Aurora for .approv!ll of its Restricted,Area By-:-law 2036-74 C 0 U N S E L : R.S. Thomson, Q.C. Robert ~. Jarvis and N. Jane.Pepino Charles B. Cohen Thomas B. McPherson for The Corporation of the Town of Aurora for Larma Investments Limited for Merchant Association of Aurora Shopping; Centre and owner A. Merkur for Downtown Business Mens Associatibn DECISION OF THE BOARD delivered bv H. E. STEWART The Corporation. of the Town of Aurora passed By-law 2036-74 on December 16, 1974. The processing which precedes an application for approval of such a by-law was carried out followed by an application on May 27, 1975 to t.he Ontario. Municipal Board for approval •. On November 19, 1975, "A motion for directions, namely, to determine whether the application for approval of By.o.law 2036-74 should be given a hearing or whether consideration of the application by this. Board should be deferred until an Official Plan had been adopted by the Regional Council and submitted to the Minister for approval. The motion hinged on whether or not this is a regional shopping centre that should await the establishment of policy in the Official Plan of the Region for such centre". In that instance, the evidence and argument in support of the application being deferred "was not sufficient to satisfy the Board that the matter should not proceed to a hearing where it could be determined on .its merits". . ···-. ·· ...... -"""·-· -2-R 75986 Accordingly, a hearing was set to commence on March 11, 1976. At the outset of the hearing, a motion was proposed that the application be dismissed for the following reasons: 1. The plaza is Regional, hence it should wait for the Regional Official Plan. 2.· A market study is lacking to support the appli- cation, and 3. The site has problems so far as the .conservation .authority having jurisdiction in the area is concerned. The Board. decided that on point No. 1, the previous decision ' ' on this question should be upheld -namely, the application should be heard on its merits. On point No. 2, the Board stated "that while in the opinion of the Board in this instance the financial viability study is not legally required, it must be the applicants'responsibility to determine·whether to pro- ceed in light of the possibility of similar studies being placed in evidence.by the opposing forces setting out an opposite position in terms of the market situation in the municipality''. The third point was the subject of recent corres- pondence from the conservation authority and based on the know- ledge that further detailed evidence would be forthcoming on this aspect in the hearing, the Board concluded that this point should not be a basis for dismissal of the application at this point. The motion was dismissed and it was decided to proceed with the hearing, A motion of adjournment was then proposed by Larma Investments to a time when the whole hearing could take place at one time because the remaining li days would not provide sufficient time to finish the hearing. That motion was resolved by granting the adjournment to Monday, May 31st at 10:00 a.m. and continue, if necessary, on June 1, 2, 3. The hearing being scheduled for the above days was preceded by a further motion on May 20, 1976 for the purpos.e of an "Order . ,. ' - 3 - R 75986 for Examination for Discovery of the Corporation of the Town of Aurora .and of an Officer of Larma Investments Limited, owner of the subject property and production of documents which are or have been in their respective possession or power, etc." A similar application was made by Larmainvestments in the event that the Board saw fit to grant the Order as requested. The Board did not provide for discovery for reasons elaborated in this decision~ On the matter of production - "To prevent anyprejudice which may not have been thought of today, the. Board is not going to restrict production. Produc- . . tion will be in the form of the Order of Production, Form 4, of the Ontario Municipal Board regulations. The Order will be granted for the production both ways within 6 days after the service of the Order". With these matters having been disposed of, the hearing commenced as scheduled on May 31 and continued until it concluded on June 4. . . . . . . The property tinder consideration in this application is located at the north end of the Town of Aurora. The subject parcel is approximately rectangular having a frontage along Orchard Heights Boulevard of 1079.19 feet with a depth along Yonge Street of 548 feet and 588.76 feet at the westerly end. The are.a of the site is approximately 15 acres. There is an Official Plan for the Town ·Of Aurora (a copy of which was placed in evidence as Exhibit 5), approved by the Minister on November 20, 1967. The lands are designated as "Commercial". There is also a new draft Interim Official Plan for the Town of Aurora adopted by Council on June 2, 197 5, submitted to the Minister for approval but, as yet, unapproved. .,, ' ' - 4 - R 75986 The Board heard convincing evidence on the preparation and purpose of the Interim Official Pla!l and was satisfied that it basically brings the land use designations of the existing 1967 Official Plan forward and provides for some greater development control. Insofar as the subject site is concerned, the designation has not changed and the decision to proceed with the development of it was made prior to the adoption of the Interim Official Plan by.approximately 5l months. Under By-law 1863, the lands are presently zoned "D" which is a holding zone and the subject By-law 2036-74, if approved, would remove the holding zone and permit development of the lands for "no other purpose than for the erection· of an Indoor Mall Shopping Centre" in accordance with the further ' details as set out in .the by-law and site plan which is attached as Schedule "Y" to the by-law. According to the. evidence of Kenneth Rodger, Clerk Administrator for the Town, several proposals had been put to the town for the development of the sU:bject site for general commercial but the municipality wanted a more specific proposal with development controls; The hearing was informed that the site had not only had proposal for commercial development over the years but the residential development surrounding the site had been designed with the understanding that the site would develop commercially. The street patt.ern for the area, the design for the construction of Orchard Heights Boulevard along the south side of the site, the lay-out of different types of residential development, and the over sizing of services on Orchard Heights Boulevard were all planned over the years on the basis of .the subject lands being developed as des~gnated in the Official Plan. Specific reference was made to the proposal of the shopping centre on the subject site as being a fairly major factor in choosing the location of the senior citizens apartments. .. •' - 5 - R 75986 This proposal is for a total of 215,400,000 square feet of leasable floor space. According to the by,-law, there must be a food store of not less than 25,000 square feet, a depart- ment store of not less than 86,400 square feet, other retail floor space of not less than 74,700 square feet and a Cinema- Theatre,and Community Room of not less than 18,)00 square feet. According to Exhibit 21 and Exhibit 23, being the site plan and second floor plan for the proposal, the required sizes for the above facilities have been provided. The ,pro- posed development has been designed to fit the site in such a way as to avoid as much as possible the necessity of changing the existing contours. Thomas Brown, the architect responsible for the design, gave evidence to the effect that the layout was the result of several meetings with staff of the municipality, staff of the South Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority, Council for the Town of Aurora, and two meetings with home owners in the vicinity of the subject site. Originally, the proposal located the buildings 30 feet from the westerly lot line and as a result of meetings with th~ residents, it was changed to provide a, further 20 feet or a total set back of 50 feet. The revised site plan is to be attached if the by-law is approved. The entrances on Orchard Heights were located to fit the street design which has already been constructed and the entrance from Yonge Street was placed as far north as possible to take traffic movements away from the corner of Yonge .and Orcha:rd I:! eights. Because of the physical characteristics of the site, there was some concern raised at the hearing whether the site could be developed in a manner acceptable1 to1 the South Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority. The evidence of Andrew Brodie, a Professional Engineer with James F.;Mctaren Altantic Limited and John Murray, land use planner with the Conservation Authority, made it clear to the Board that the plans as proposed - 6 - R 75986 conformed to the requirements of the Conservation Authority and that the site could be developed without creating pro- blems. On this point, it should be noted that while the South Lake Simcoe .Conservation Authority has no legal juris-:- diction in the Town of Aurora, there has been co-operation to the point of the Authority working out the conditions that should be met and the developer agreeing to meet those conditions in the design and development of .the site. · The planning which led to the passing of the subject by-,law was primarily based on the fact that the Official Plan designated the site for the proposed use, the development in the area had taken place with this in mind, the Council's decision that such a facility was needed in Aurora and the desir.e on the part of an entrepreneur to invest in· and develop a shopping centre. While the muni.cipality does not have a planning department of its.own, the area planning services branch of the Region of York prepared the Interim Official Plan and Gordon Bush, now a professional planning consultant who was previously with York Region Planning Depart- ment was in charge of the preparation of the Interim Official Plan for Aurora. He gave evidence in support of the proposed development. He took the position that the north end of· I Aurora had developed recognizing the subject site and could see no problem with .Aurora having two plazas. Under strenuous cross-examination he maintained his. view that the impact on the existing plaza could be beneficial as a result of good competition and that no detrimental effect would result. Reginald Willis, a planning consultant with many years of experience, most of which has been in the public sector, supported the need for the proposed mall. While in the Borough of Scarborough, his responsibilities included planning for commercial development related to population. His experience is that a consistent pattern exists between population growth ---------.. ·~----'~"'""'-·~-~'------------------ .;,. $-R 75986 decisions which have already been made based on the designa- tion in the Official Plan road patterns, services, grading of residential densities, location of s.enior citizens. housing and the relationship of this site to and its effect on industrial development,. He pointed out the interest that I ' industries have in terms of services to their employees as a factor in industrial development. He agreed, as did Gordon Bush, that this proposal would impact the C.B.D. and both planners were of the opinion that the C.B.D. had for some time been in the process of changing fr01ri a retail area. to a ser- vice area and that trend could be expec.ted to continue even without the proposed mall. To go into a redevelopment scheme within the C.B.D. and provide for retail facilities simila.r to that proposed with the necessary provisions for parking and traffic would, in.the opinion of the planner, be a massive project with s.ich an impact on the residential area behind the commercial strip along Yonge Street that it would require the entire Town to be replanned. The best approach in his view is .. . ' .. to proceed to implement the Official Plan and create a seconcl. commercial area at the.opposite end of Town, thus increasing the exposure to the service area in the C.B.D. Mr. Willis· could not'be moved from his position that when the designation has been on the Official Plan as long as this one has, ·that it has not been his experience,that a market study is necessary that this is more a neighbourhood shopping centre than a regional type centre in that it is unlikely that the department store required in the by-law will be other than a junior depa.rtment store and because of this, some of the chain stores which go in only where there is a major department store, will not go in here. In an attempt to accommodate persons with an interest either for or against the application, time was taken on the second day of the hearing to receive their evidence. Two of the ratepayers who appeared in support were members of - 7 - R 75986 and various types of commercial growth. Referring to the Toronto Central Region Plan, he out- lined the proposal to encourage development to take place in Richmond Hill, Aurora and Newmarket· and that if Aurora is to meet the proposal of that plan it should have commercial development relative to the residential growth. The population projection for Aurora under the Toronto Central Regional Plan originally was 25,000, but because of a request by the County of York, it was changed to 28,000 -30,000. His studies included the existing commercial development in all three municipalities -each was inspected to determine the square footage used for.retail sales,the comm~dities being sold so that the various types and areas could be categorized, The results of this study showed the Town of Aurora to be deficient in terms of Commercial Square Footage related to Planned Population (Exhibit 15), .particularly with reference to depart- ment store type merchandise. It must be recognized that the projections used in terms of the planned population could change because the amount of commercial space could be expected to . . . increase. However, the figures based on the existing popula- tion are significant. In.the opinion of Mr. Willis, this is really the crux of the future of Aurora, if the Town is to justify its existence as a separate municipality. It must have a commercial square foot ratio to population more similar to the other two centres. If the pro.posal does not go ahead, there can be a detrimental effect because the community will satisfy its shopping needs in the facilities outside the municipality. On this point, he stated that some of their needs would have to be satisfied beyond Aurora even if the Mall proceeds because it is not a regional centre and will not provide stores that could be expected to be found in the larger centres. In summing up his evidence, he cited many points in support of going ahead with the proposed development, the -9-R 75986 the Aurora Council. Evylin Buck, the mayor, expressed her desire to see Aurora have the convenience of indoor shopping, a theatre and a larger choice of stores. The people in the Town have expected this Site to develop commercially for a long time and it. would benefit the Town by bringing some of the shopping dollars back to Aurora and providing jobs for people in the area. These views were supported by Peter Miller. In opposition to the applications, four residents· appeared, Rhea and Paul Morris own their house at 27 Laurentide Avenue which is just south of Orchard Heights Boulevard on the east side of Laurentide therefore, close to the proposed Mall. They have lived there for 6 years and are not sure if they we:re aware before they purchased that the site was planned for ' . commercial development. Mrs. Morris feels that the town should be kept the way it is. She likes the stores and tries to do most of her shopping locally. In her opinion, the proposed mall will be made up of boutique type stores which do not provide the best day to day shopping and the theatre is a carrot. She was also concerned about the traffic on' Laurentide. Paul Morris informed the Board that he tries to shop in town. If the mall is not a success, the Town will.have a white elephant on its hands. Osbourne Higgins, 71 St. Andrews Court stated that he was horrified at the start but now looks at the situation more objectively. He likes. the small ;town atmosphere and shops ' locally, but because the Town is mobile and most.people work in Toronto, they can be expected to shop competitively. In ' . his opinion, insufficient research was carried out by the applicant. Francis Camenzuli a resident of Aurora, graduated f.romU. W. 0. as a planner and.is presently a student at M.I.T., appeared first on his own and later was called as a witness by counsel for the Merchants' Association of the Aurora Shopping Centre. .-:' ··: ' .. -10 -R 75986 A study carried out under his direction titled "The Effect of Perriferal Commercial Development on the Gore" was submitted in evidence as Exhibit 13. In his study which was prepared as a thesis for his work at University he looked at the role of the Core Area the community attitude the commercial inventory and an inventory of all off street parking. He expressed.a cop.cern for the poor and the elderly who live next to.the bore Area should the function of the Core change. Based on his report a small town should not become "multi nucleated" in terms of commercial centres because when this happens it is his opinion that only one centre can service. He describes the town as being multi nucleated now and suggested that from a planning point of view, the present Aurora Plaza should be closed although he realized this is not practical. In its present situation, he feels that the C.B.D. can be saved with a lot of effort and a lot of money. The study shows consumer attitude to be confused. The percentage of people who prefer to shop in the core area is higher than the percentage 1vho actually shop there and he found no preference for owner operated stores as compared to chain stores. Mr. Camenzuli agreed with the evidence of Mr. Willis on the commercial inventory and that a high percentage of shopping is done outside the town. He also agreed with Mr. Willis that the mall cannot be described . as regional but the affect will be that there .will be a regional impact. His major difference from the two planners supporting the. application was that the new mall would seriously aff.ect .the C.B.D., however, that conclusion was based on an earlier assumption on page 6: "It is assumed that peripheral cqmmercial development does have an effect '. I~ \ -11-R 75986 on C.B.D's. Therefore, t)l.e essence of this study is to determine the nature and degree of the effect." A quota- tion forming part of the conclusion on page 77 of Exhibit 13 states: "Decline of' retailing downtown is concomitant of deep-seated changes in resident,ial and transportation •patterns that are not likely to be reversed by attempts to revitalize the Core". The author of Exhibit 13 proceeded to express his view when he states: "The challenge is not to return the .Core to its original condition or what it was prior to peripheral commercial development but rather to modify the existing core, while maintaining its historical heritage, so that it can better accommodate consumer demands and again become the vibrant focus of the community it once v.,ras." Murray Pound, Commissioner for the Region of York, was brought to give evidence on his report on the subject by-law and particular reference was made to the regulations as set out in the Interim Official Plan. His comment was to the effect that whether they were in an Official Plan or not, the regulations form a basis of a.sound planning approach but he was not sure that the Planning Act gives a planner the right to consider the matter of competition. George Przybylowski from the Community Renewal Branch of the Ministry of Housing was brought to give evidence on the new programme called Ont.ario Do,wnt,own Revitalization Programme. This program is presently in a conceptual stage. and .while there is some money set aside, he didn't known when the program would become ac.ti ve -and at any rate, Aurora had not been discussed nor had an application been made by the town to participate in the program. ' . The remainder of the witnesses for the respondents were business men. David Blandford, Vice President, etc., didn't think expansion of commercial facilities should take place until 1979 or 1980 because of the amount of space available .· -12 -R 75986 at present. However, his company raised no objection to the mall because it would not have a significant long term impact on the Upper Canada Mall. Keith Goodman gave figures to show that his store sales had decreased when the Upper Canada Mall opened and they had recovered. He was concerned that the pie would be cut into smaller pieces if increased competition was permitted. Omar Khamissa has had the Kiddie Store for 8 years and the shoe store for 6 years. When Upper Canada Mall and Richmond Hill opened, his Kiddie Store went down slightly in dollar value and his shoe store sales in dollars have not decreased but his unit sales have gone down. He too was concerned about the possibility of too many stores creating a competitive situation were no one could survive. Richard Isaacson, Donald Green and Gerald Simmons were witnesses from the Downtown Business Mens Association. Richard Isaacson, as stated before, owns two stores in Aurora and is a strong supporter of Community events. He is concerned that if the core businesses go out of business it will affect the whole coiillllunity because the chain stores do not give the community the same kind of support. His business stayed level for a year when Upper Canada opened but since then it is back to normal. With regard to the proposed mall, it will take some of his business but in his words it will not "destroy" him, however, he believes that the C.B.D. and Aurora Plaza will be destroyed. In cross-examination, he agreed that only the marginal businesses would go out of business and his main concern /•· was not from a business but from· an aesthetic point of view. Donald Greenbaum, Men's Clothing Store and Pant Store, has his store located in a small strip development at the south end of Aurora. He has been in business 10 years and the Upper Canada Mall did not affect the clothing business very much, although the pant store was affected by '. R 75986 -lJ ~ 25 -JO percent. The pant store has recovered only partially. The proposed mall, he expects, would have some effect on his stores but .did not know how much. He, too, is a strong supporter of community activities. Mr.· Greenbaum does not express a great deal of concern in that he obviously feels he can compete because he is in the process of building his own commercial development of 14,000 square feet in the south end of Town. His decision to go ahead was made in the fall of 1975 and the subject by-law was passed December 16, 1974. The basic thrust of the evidence in opposition to the application was one·of impact on the existing commercial establishments. However, on this point, the witnesses generally concluded that while there would be an affect, they would be able to meet the competition. As previously stated, one merchant decided to change from a tenant operation to a much expanded owner operation, knowing that the new I . mall had been approved by Council. Having reviewed all of the evidence and argument of legal counsel, the Board feels that it would have been prudent of both or either the Town or the developer to have produced a market study supporting the need for the proposed new plaza, even though such a study is not mandatory because the proposed mall is not a regional shopping centre. The Board, .however, is satisfied that: 1. the planning actions.of the Town of Aurora over the.pp.st 10 years have been based on the concept that the subject. si.te is being developed for commercial use; 2. the proposed development, while drawing shoppers from an area larger than the Town of Aurora, cannot be considered as being a Regional Shopping Centre and no concerns of competitive effect have \ . . • >:.': •,. t. -14 -R 75986 been expressed by either of the Regional Shopping Centres in Newmarket and Richmond Hill; 3. the Council of the Town of Aurora honestly believes that the timing for the development of the subject site is right and that the need for the shopping facility.has been in- dicated by the people of Aurora; 4. the planning evidence and statistical data provided indicate the desirability of the proposed Mall; 5. any attempt to reverse the multi-nucleated development of the Town of Aurora through the establishment of a complex shopping. centre in the Central Business District is unrealistic; 6, the Council of the Town of Aurora will continue to support and encourage the development of the c.B.D, to maintain its role within the multi- nucleatia structure of the community; 7. the proposed development has been designed in a manner to fit into the community and the natural characteristics of the site, and 8. the technical evidence does not indicate any problems regarding.the execution of the pro- posed project. The Board also feels that the opposition to the proposed shopping centre has failed to show that the development of the subject site is premature. No market study was produced to prove such prematurity, The witnesses in opposition expressed legitimate fear of an increased competition. but the Board was not satisfied that the concern was sufficient to cause the application to fail. (. -15 -R 75986 The by-law is, therefore, approved with the amended site plan attached as Schedule "Y" to provide for the set back of 50 feet from the west boundary as agreed with the homeowners in the area. DATED at Toronto this 8th day of July, 1976. H. E. STEWART MEMBER K. D. BINDHARDT ·· MEMBER ' ' ' ; ' . Ontario Municipal Board IN THE MATTER OF Section 35 of The Planning Act (R.s.o. 1970, c. 349). -and - IN THE MATTER OF an application by The Corporation of the Town of Aurora for approval of its Restricted Area By-law 2036-74 B E F 0 R E : H.E. STEWART Member -and - K.D, BINDHARDT Member ] ) J ] ] ) ) Tuesday, the 22nd day of May, 1979 THIS APPLICATION having come on for public hearing on the 31st day of May, 1976 and the lst, 2nd, 3rd and 4th days of June, 1976 at the Town of Aurora and after the hearing of the application the council of the applicant corporation having an opportunity to consider certain R 75986 amendments to the said by-law and the said council having on the 7th day of May, 1979 passed By-law 2271-79 amending By-law 2036-74 and incorporating certain recommendations of the Board and having caused a certified copy thereof to be filed and the Board having dispensed with notice and hearing in respect of By-law 2271-79; THE BOARD ORDERS that By-law 2036-74 as amended by By-law 2271-79 is hereby approved. ENTERED o. 8. Ho ...• ;ll.."Z§::..?.: ...... ... folio No. .... ~2 .. 'f. .............. . MAY 2 3 '1979