Loading...
AGENDA - General Committee - 20201020Town of Aurora General Committee Meeting Revised Agenda Date:Tuesday, October 20, 2020 Time:7 p.m. Location:Video Conference Pages 1.Procedural Notes This meeting will be held electronically as per Section 19. i) of the Town's Procedure By-law No. 6228-19, as amended, due to the COVID-19 situation. Added items are marked with an asterisk (*). Mayor Mrakas in the Chair. 2.Approval of the Agenda 3.Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof 4.Community Presentations 5.Delegations 1 Note: At this time, the Municipal Offices are closed. This meeting will be live streamed at https://www.youtube.com/user/Townofaurora2012/videos. Anyone wishing to provide comment on an agenda item is encouraged to visit www.aurora.ca/participation for guidelines on electronic delegation. 5.1.Nick Racanelli, Danielle and Jacob Stewart; Re: Item 8.5 - PDS20-062 - Heritage Permit Application for 31 Catherine Avenue 2 *5.2.Rebecca Beaton, Resident; Re: Road reconstruction on Holman, Johnson and Browning 3 6.Consent Agenda 7.Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 8.Consideration of Items Requiring Discussion (Regular Agenda) 8.1.FIN20-024 - 2021 and 2022 Fees and Charges 4 That Report No. FIN20-024 be received; and1. That a by-law be enacted to set the 2021 and 2022 Fees and Charges for applications, permits, use of Town property, the sale of documents and for the prescribed service charges for administrative matters as itemized on the attached schedules. 2. 8.2.FIN20-026 - 2020 Interim Forecast Update Report - as of August 31, 2020 38 That Report No. FIN20-026 be received for information.1. 8.3.OPS20-016 - Tree Removal Permit Applications for 126 Temperance Street and 53 Metcalfe Street 55 That Report No. OPS20-016 be received; and1. That the Tree Removal Permit Application for 126 Temperance Street be approved; and 2. That the Tree Removal Permit Application for 53 Metcalfe Street be approved. 3. 8.4.PDS20-060 - Heritage Designation for 28 Wellington Street West ("Alfred Love House") 73 That Report No. PDS20-60 be received; and1. That the property at 28 Wellington Street, where the building known as “Alfred Love House” is located, be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act as a property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; and 2. That the Town Clerk be authorized to publish and serve Council’s Notice of Intention to Designate in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act; and 3. That the designation by-law be brought before Council for adoption if no objections are received within the thirty (30) day period as per the Ontario Heritage Act. 4. 8.5.PDS20-062 - Heritage Permit Application for 31 Catherine Avenue 142 That Report No. PDS20-062 be received; and1. That Heritage Permit Application HPA-2020-10 to permit the demolition of an existing detached garage and construction of a new addition at 31 Catherine Avenue be approved, subject to the elimination of the one-storey extension at the rear of the proposed addition. 2. 9.Notices of Motion 9.1.Councillor Kim; Re: Great Canadian Achievements Mural 159 10.New Business 11.Public Service Announcements 12.Closed Session There are no Closed Session items for this meeting. 13.Adjournment ☐☐ ☐ ☐☐☐ . Please click here for more information. Electronic Delegation Request October 20, 2020 General Committee Road reconstruction on Holman, Johnson and Browning Rebecca Beaton, Resident Road reconstruction on Holman, Johnson and Browning, and parking tickets issued to the residents living on these streets. 4 4 4 Page 1 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Delegation Request Legislative Services This Delegation Request form and any written submissions or background information for consideration by either Council or Committees of Council must be submitted to Legislative Services. Council or Committee Meeting Date: Subject: Name of Spokesperson and Name of Group or Person(s) being Represented (if applicable): Brief Summary of Issue or Purpose of Delegation: Have you been in contact with a Town staff or Council member regarding your matter of interest?Yes տտ No տտ If yes, with whom? Date: տ I acknowledge that the Procedure By-law permits five (5) minutes for Delegations. I wish to submit my delegation by (select one): տ Video/audio* տ Phone*܈ In Writing տ In Person** *Must attend electronic meeting.Please click here for more information. **Subject to meeting format and submission of Screening Registration Form October 20, 2020 Heritage # HPA-2020-01, Property 31 Catherine Avenue Nick Racanelli, Danielle & Jacob Stewart. Present and familiarize committee with current property and adjacent properties. - Changes / updates since engagement with planning - Efforts to date to revive character of home with past and upcoming updates - Review depth of addition - North and East side design / facade Carlson Tsang Heritage Committee Start April 2020 to date Heritage Meeting Sep. 14, 2020    Page 2 of 159 ☐☐ ☐ ☐☐☐ . Please click here for more information. Electronic Delegation Request October 20, 2020 General Committee Road reconstruction on Holman, Johnson and Browning Rebecca Beaton, Resident Road reconstruction on Holman, Johnson and Browning, and parking tickets issued to the residents living on these streets. 4 4 4 Page 3 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FIN20-024 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: 2021 and 2022 Fees and Charges Prepared by: Laura Sheardown, Financial Management Advisor Department: Finance Date: October 20, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. FIN20-024 be received; and 2. That a by-law be enacted to set the 2021 and 2022 Fees and Charges for applications, permits, use of Town property, the sale of documents and for the prescribed service charges for administrative matters as itemized on the attached schedules. Executive Summary All fees and charges listed on the schedules attached to the Fees and Charges By-law are for user pay services, where the requesting party is the sole beneficiary from the service. Most of the fees are on a full cost recovery basis, which allows the Town to fully recover the costs of providing a specific service or use of property. The regular review of the Fees and Charges By-law allows staff the opportunity to ensure that the Town is recovering the cost of user pay services and make changes if required. Please note that this review of the by-law is adjusting fees and charges for 2021 and 2022, which is necessary in order to continue to be aligned with the Town’s multi-year budgeting framework.  Inflationary increases to fees and charges were previously approved by Council  The changes on the Town’s fees and charges for 2021 and 2022 are predominantly a combination of adjustments for easier cash payments and the clarification of wording surrounding the fees Page 4 of 159 October 20, 2020 2 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024  Should a need arise to modify the fees and charges for 2021 or 2022, the Town’s Fees and Charges By-law would require amendment Background Last review of Fees and Charges By-law Council last reviewed the Town’s Fees and Charges By-law in October of 2019. The by- law is structured to align fees with departmental owners in the form of schedules for each department in order to facilitate reviews and updates as required. It has been the Town’s practice to review the attached schedules annually and to make revisions as required. Analysis Inflationary increases to fees and charges were previously approved by Council In support of the multi-year operating budget framework, Council approved inflationary increases to most fees for 2021 and 2022 as part of the process last year. The inflationary increases are necessary in order to maintain desired applicable service cost recovery benchmarks. The changes on the Town’s fees and charges for 2021 and 2022 are predominately a combination of adjustments for easier cash payments and the clarification of wording surrounding the fees All fees changes that have not yet been presented to Council are being in a separate column from those previously approved with the reasons and rationales listed below and are flagged with the ‘*’ symbol on the right hand side. The final schedules to the Fees and Charges By-law will only include the 2021 and 2022 fee columns. To make it easier for Town Staff to provide correct change in return, changes being made include the rounding up or down of the existing fee to the nearest 25 cents. Any changes to fee explanations include the old information being struck-through and the new information is underlined within the schedules. Page 5 of 159 October 20, 2020 3 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024 Schedule A – General Fees and Charges Changes for items with frequent cash payments only, to make it easier for user to provide the exact change and staff to provide change. Schedule B – Planning and Development Services Planning and Development Services is currently in the process of reviewing all of their fees included on this schedule and comparing them to other municipalities within York Region. This review has been delayed from last year, however it is anticipated that it will be completed and presented to Council when complete. The explanations of several fees have been adjusted to better describe what is covered by these fees. The Engineering Drawings fee as well as the Request for Information fee have been revised to a more appropriate cost that is a better estimate of the services being provided. The financial security amount being held by the Town until the completion of grading reviews and pool inspections has also been increased. Schedule C – Corporate Services Almost all of the changes on this schedule include the refinement of the fee explanation to better describe what is covered by these fees. The only other change on this schedule is the clarification that the Commissioning of pension documents for seniors are completed at no charge. Schedule D – Community Services A user fee review is currently underway and the results of this review will be presented to Council at a later date. Almost all of the changes on this schedule include changes for items where a cash payment is often received to make providing change easier or the refinement of the fee explanation to better describe the purpose of the fee. The fee for all non-Aurora based groups to access our artificial turf fields has been reduced as the current fee is prohibitive and user groups will not pay it. Staff have reviewed similar fees for other municipalities and are presenting a rate which is reflective of the average of other municipalities. Page 6 of 159 October 20, 2020 4 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024 Schedule E – Operational Services Operational services is in the process of updating the Roads Occupancy and Encroachment By-law, which has resulted in the following changes to their fees: - Clarification of fee wording to ensure that it is consistent between the revised by- law and the Fees and Charges By-law - Increase of the Road Occupancy Permit to be more reflective of the cost of providing this service - Introduction of an Additional Inspection Fee for incomplete restorations that require more than the normal number of site visits (usually three are needed per permit) - Introduction of an Encroachment Application Fee to recognize the staff time and effort that goes into the review of each application. Schedule F – Finance No changes are being requested at this time. Schedule G – Building Division No changes are being requested at this time. Schedule H – Development Planning Division No changes are being requested at this time. Schedule I – By-law Services Division By-law Services is requesting the addition of an Officer Paid Duty fee, which will allow the recovery of officer related expenses for compliance with permitting and legislative requirements. Schedule J – Animal Services The following new Animal Services fees are being introduced: - Trapping Fee (includes food and trap): the provision of a trap and food bait to capture wildlife that is pestering the property owner Page 7 of 159 October 20, 2020 5 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024 - Private Property deceased wildlife removal (bagged): removal of deceased wildlife from private property that has already been bagged by the property owner - Private Property deceased wildlife removal (unbagged): collection and removal of deceased wildlife from private property that has not been bagged by the property owner - Deceased domestic – small size: removal of small deceased domestic animals from private property (up to 15 lbs) - Deceased domestic – medium size: removal of medium deceased domestic animals from private property (between 16 and 40 lbs) - Deceased domestic – large size: removal of large deceased domestic animals from private property (between 41 and 100 lbs) - Officer paid duty; similar to the By-law Officer Paid Duty fee but for Animal Control duties Should a need arise to modify the fees and charges for 2021 or 2022, the Town’s Fees and Charges By-law would require amendment. As staff are setting the Town’s fees and charges two years into the future, there is the possibility that one or more of these fees and charges may require revision as new information becomes available. In instances where staff determine that a new fee or charge revision is in order, a replacement fee and charge schedule for the year in question will be brought to Council for its review and approval. Advisory Committee Review The Finance Advisory Committee is not mandated to review the proposed fee changes prior to the review by General Committee. Legal Considerations Section 11(2)(3) and Section 391(1) of the Municipal Act allow a municipality to enact by-laws for its financial management, and in particular, to impose fees or charges on Page 8 of 159 October 20, 2020 6 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024 persons for services or activities provided or done by or on behalf of it. Other provisions affecting the setting of fees and charges appear in the Planning Act and the Building Code Act. Financial Implications With regards to the Fees and Charges Bylaw, the revised fees proposed here have been utilized by staff in the development of their 2021 and 2022 revenue projections which form a critical component of the Town’s identified tax levy requirements for each year. The proposed 2021-22 fees and charges have been adjusted to reflect changes to departmental costs in providing applicable services to users. All fee increases will alleviate pressure on the 2021-22 tax base; when costs increase as a result of inflation, but non-tax revenues do not, the tax levy must accommodate this additional budget burden. Consequently, it is important that the Town’s fees and charges keep pace with inflation; the proposed fees and charges contained within this bylaw strive to achieve this goal. Council should be aware that the fees presented in these schedules include HST where applicable. Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘inform’ as the level of engagement for this project. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision making process. There levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. Finance and Corporate Communications staff will work together to ensure the proposed fee changes are posted in accordance with the Town’s Notice Provision Policy. Link to Strategic Plan Reviewing and updating the Town’s fees and charges on a regular basis for user pay services contributes to achieving the Strategic Plan guiding principle of ‘Leadership in Corporate Management’ and improves transparency and accountability to the community. Page 9 of 159 October 20, 2020 7 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024 Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council may choose to accept, amend or reject any or all of the recommendations of this report. 2. Leave fees at previously approved 2021 and 2022 levels and absorb cost of providing services that a cost recovery fee has not been approved for within the Town’s tax levy for the next two years. Conclusions Staff recommend endorsement of the proposed changes to the Fees and Charges Bylaw. As part of the regular update of the Town’s fees and charges, staff have ensured that all changes brought forward are a fair representation of the cost of these services and that they are in line with surrounding municipalities for similar services. Attachments Schedule A – General Fees and Charges Schedule B – Planning and Development Services Schedule C – Corporate Services Schedule D – Community Services Schedule E – Operational Services Schedule F – Finance Schedule G – Building Division Schedule H – Development Planning Division Schedule I – By-law Services Division Schedule J – Animal Services Previous Reports None. Page 10 of 159 October 20, 2020 8 of 8 Report No. FIN20-024 Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 1, 2020 Approvals Approved by Rachel Wainwright-van Kessel, Director, Finance Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 11 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule A General Fees and Charges Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 Changes to already approved fees Photocopies (8 1/2 X 11 and 8 1/2 X 14) per page $0.82 $0.83 $1.00 $0.83 $1.00 Photocopies (11x 17) per page $1.48 $1.51 $1.50 $1.51 $1.50 first page $7.40 $7.54 $7.50 $7.54 $7.75 per additional page $2.55 $2.60 $2.50 $2.60 $2.50 As required to reimburse costs incurred by the Town of Aurora, including but not limited to Registration Fees, Courier Fees, Corporate and Title Search Fees, external File Retrieval Costs, etc., at the discretion of the Director. each Disbursement Cost Disbursement Cost Disbursement Cost All fees and charges associated with Central York Fire Services are managed and approved through the Town of Newmarket. For more information please visit https://www.newmarket.ca/fees-and-charges each Fire & Emergency Services Fax Transmittal General Fees Disbursements Page 1 of 1 Page 12 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule B Planning and Development Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Development Planning Division Maps Official Plan Schedule 'A' Map (18x24 inches) (colour)per map $19.00 $19.50 $20.00 Official Plan Schedules other than 'A' (11x17) (b/w)per map $8.50 $8.75 $9.00 Town Street Plan Map (b/w) (24x36 inches)per map $8.50 $8.75 $9.00 Town Street Plan Map (colour) (24x36 inches)per map $13.50 $13.75 $14.00 Town Air Photo Map (30x39 inches)per map $41.00 $42.00 $43.00 Application Status List Map (24x36 inches)per map $13.50 $13.75 $14.00 Oak Ridges Moraine Map Schedule 'J' as per Official Plan 48 (11 x 17) (b/w)per map $17.00 $17.50 $18.00 Official Plans Official Plan per OP $56.50 $57.75 $59.00 2C Secondary Plan per copy $34.50 $35.25 $36.00 Secondary Plans per Secondary Plan $24.00 $24.50 $25.00 Aurora Promenade Study per copy $56.50 $57.75 $59.00 Secondary Plans Consolidation per copy $45.00 $46.00 $47.00 Zoning Comprehensive Zoning By-law per copy $31.50 $32.25 $33.00 Comprehensive Zoning Exceptions per copy $89.00 $91.00 $93.00 Heritage Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan per copy $30.50 $31.25 $32.00 Other GIS Analysis per hour $81.00 $83.00 $85.00 Application Status Listing per copy $19.00 $19.50 $20.00 Vacant Employment Land Inventory per copy $19.00 $19.50 $20.00 Circulation Fees, including Labels per circulation $82.00 $84.00 $86.00 Pre-Application Consultation per consultation $400.00 $408.00 $416.00 Building Division Permitted Use Letter To respond in writing to enquires related to uses of specific properties with respect to permitted uses as set in the Town of Aurora Zoning By-law 2213-78, as amended each $43.00 $44.00 $45.00 Administrative Costs Additional costs associated with theadministration fee internal processing model homes applications with respect to outside agencies, and engineering review, and corporate policies and procedures per unit $454.00 $463.00 $472.00 Construction Activity Report Reports generated upon request providing permit numbers, location, description and construction value each $86.00 $88.00 $90.00 Zoning Review - Residential (single, semi or street townhomes) Zoning review of applications other than a building permit application including zoning review of Committee of Adjustment or Consent applications and determination of legal non-conforming status. each $86.00 $88.00 $90.00 Zoning Review - All Other Building Types Zoning review of applications other than a building permit application including zoning review of Committee of Adjustment or Consent applications and determination of legal non-conforming status. each $171.00 $174.00 $177.00 Page 1 of 2 Page 13 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule B Planning and Development Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Sign Review Sign By-law review of applications other than a sign permit application including Sign By-law review of Planning Applications. each $171.00 $174.00 $177.00 Permit fees related to By-law Number 4753- 05.P Pool Enclosure Permits each $321.00 $327.00 $334.00 Hot Tub Permits each $171.00 $174.00 $177.00 Subdivision and Site Plan Engineering Fees percentage of servicing costs 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% Benchmarks per benchmark $80.00 $82.00 $84.00 Plot WIMS/SIMS Maps, Engineering Drawings - drawings printed in-house 10 Drawings Maximum per sheet of map $4.25 $4.50 $8.75 $4.75 $9.00 * Plot WIMS/SIMS Maps, Engineering Drawings - drawings sent out for reproducing per sheet of map $20.50 or $4.25 per sheet, whichever is greater $21.00 or $4.50 per sheet, whichever is greater $22.00 or $4.75 per sheet, whichever is greater * Request for digital drawings per drawing $4.25 (fee applies only for large requests: over 10 drawings) $4.50 (fee applies only for large requests: over 10 drawings) $4.75 (fee applies only for large requests: over 10 drawings) Topsoil Preservation Permit flat fee + price per ha of site area $681.00 Flat Fee + $39.00/ha $695.00 Flat Fee + $40.00/ha $709.00 Flat Fee + $41.00/ha Request for Information (As per Plannings Cost of a GIS Analyst)per request hour $67.00 $68.00 $83.00 $69.00 $85.00 * 7-Day Traffic Counts per location $66.00 $67.00 $68.00 8-Hour Turning Movement Count per intersection $171.00 $174.00 $177.00 Traffic Signal Timings per intersection $83.00 $85.00 $87.00 Lot Grading review and inspection per lot $295.00 $301.00 $307.00 Grading review and inspection for pool construction (securities of $1,000 $3,000 will be collected at the time of permit fee payment) per lot $401.00 $409.00 $417.00 * Construction of new service connections by the Town each Actual cost, plus 10% administration subject to HST Actual cost, plus 10% administration subject to HST Actual cost, plus 10% administration subject to HST Inspection of services installed by Owner each 10% of construction cost 10% of construction cost 10% of construction cost Engineering and Capital Delivery Division REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC DATA Service Connections Fees Grading Review Page 2 of 2 Page 14 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule C Corporate Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees * Basic (Standard template - no mino changes required)per document $711.00 $725.00 $740.00 * Complex (requires changes to standard template)per document $1,882.00 $1,920.00 $1,958.00 * Condominium Agreement per document $6,534.00 $6,665.00 $6,798.00 Subdivision Agreement per document $8,731.00 $8,906.00 $9,084.00 Subdivision Registration Process per plan $2,091.00 $2,133.00 $2,176.00 Site Plan/Development Agreement per document $1,724.00 $1,759.00 $1,794.00 * Encroachment/Licence Agreement per document $711.00 $725.00 $740.00 Amending Agreement per document $711.00 (minimum) $725.00 (minimum) $740.00 (minimum) Information regarding the status of existing agreements and/or registered documents, including agreements and by-laws per document $131.00 $134.00 $137.00 Highway Dedication/Subdivision Assumption By-law Legal Administration Fee per by-law $821.00 $837.00 $854.00 Law Clerk per hour $115.00 $117.00 $119.00 Paralegal per hour $157.00 $160.00 $163.00 Solicitor per hour $261.00 $266.00 $271.00 Town Insurance Claim Legal Administration Fee per claim 10% of the value of the claim made by the Town plus disbursements 10% of the value of the claim made by the Town plus disbursements 10% of the value of the claim made by the Town plus disbursements REGISTRATION FEE (i.e. processing of any type of document that requires a title search or registration on title) per document $219.00 $223.00 $227.00 * CERTIFIED PHOTOCOPIES per page $11.50 $11.75 $12.00 Application Fee per application $5.00 $5.00 $5.00 Manual Search Time and Preparation Time per 15 minutes $7.50 $7.50 $7.50 Photocopies per page $0.20 $0.20 $0.20 Computer Programing (develop program to retrieve information)per 30 minutes $30.00 $30.00 $30.00 Disks per disk $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 AudioCD/DVD/ Tape - Council/General Committee/Public Planning/Advisory Committees/Boards meeting per CD/DVD/tape $34.00 $35.00 $36.00 DOCUMENT PREPARATION/REVIEW (General) - includes but is not limited to easements; permissions to enter; development charges deferral, predevelopment,and minor site plan agreements; and purchase and sale agreements LEGAL SERVICES Note: All Legal Services fees and/or service charges may be adjusted based on the complexity and nature of the agreement, document, or service as determined by the Town Solicitor to be fair and reasonable. DOCUMENT PREPARATION/REVIEW (Specific) GENERAL LEGAL FEES SERVICES RELATED TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS (excluding documents or agreements that fall under Document Preparation/Review (General)) MAIL OUT COST (Annual Subscription) FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (F.O.I.) REQUESTS (Fees related to search and records preparation are prescribed by legislation) LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Page 1 of 3 Page 15 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule C Corporate Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Civil Marriage Solemnization Fee per service $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 Marriage Licences per licence $141.00 $144.00 $147.00 Witness Fee (if Town staff are required to be witnesses)per witness $62.00 $63.00 $64.00 Rehearsal Fee for offsite Civil Marriage ceremony per service $92.00 $94.00 $96.00 Administrative Fee to be charged for change of wedding date within 7 days of scheduled ceremony per change $33.00 $34.00 $35.00 Administrative Fee to be charged for cancellation of Civil Marriage ceremony before consultation meeting each $64.00 $65.00 $66.00 Administrative Fee to be charged for cancellation of Civil Marriage ceremony after consultation meeting each $182.00 $186.00 $190.00 Commission Service (Pension documents for seniors are completed at no charge)per commission $21.50 $22.00 $22.50 * VITAL STATISTICS INFORMATION Burial Permits (HST Exempt) per permit $38.00 $39.00 $40.00 LOTTERY LICENSING Bingo Events (HST Exempt)regulated by Province of Ontario 3% of prize board 3% of prize board 3% of prize board Raffles (HST Exempt)regulated by Province of Ontario 3% of prize board 3% of prize board 3% of prize board BREAK OPEN TICKETS (NEVADA) (HST Exempt) regulated by Province of Ontario 3% of prize board 3% of prize board 3% of prize board Media Bingo (HST Exempt)regulated by Province of Ontario 3% of prize board 3% of prize board 3% of prize board Letters of Approval (HST Exempt) Town approval of Lottery Schemes Licenced by the Province of Ontario per application $38.00 $39.00 $40.00 LIQUOR LICENSE CLEARANCE LETTER each $187.00 $191.00 $195.00 NO OBJECTION LETTER each $84.00 $86.00 $88.00 CIVIL MARRIAGE SERVICES ADMINISTER OATHS/TAKE AFFIDAVITS This fee is to commission documents for work that is not in connection with business of the Town (i.e. third party) Page 2 of 3 Page 16 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule C Corporate Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Provision of AODA Training per person $56.00 $57.00 $58.00 By-Law Inspection and Attendance Fees Attendance Supervisory Fee Hourly/per Officer $107.00 $109.00 $111.00 Non Compliance Re-Inspection Fee Hourly/per Officer $107.00 $109.00 $111.00 Pool Enclosure Re-Inspection Fee Per Visit $55.00 $56.00 $57.00 Property Standards Appeal Per Order $102.00 $104.00 $106.00 Parking permits per permit $10.50 - $357.00 $10.75 - $364.00 $11.00 - $371.00 Property Information Request Review of departmental files and documents related to specific property requests relating to zoning, permits, occupancy and general property status each $146.00 $149.00 $152.00 By-law Exemption By-law Exemption per exception $113.00 $115.00 $118.00 Road Closure Fees (previously part of By-law 4750-05.T) Road Closure Deposit for Filming and Athletic Events per event $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Road Closure Deposit for Parades and Processions per event $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 Parades and Events per event $350.00 $357.00 $364.00 Athlettic Events per event $550.00 $561.00 $572.00 Filming per event $350.00 $357.00 $364.00 Parking Permit Fees ACCESSIBILITY FOR ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (AODA) TRAINING Page 3 of 3 Page 17 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees 1. ADMINISTRATION a)Membership Refunds (Except Medical Reasons)per refund $39.85 $40.65 $41.50 b)Membership On Hold (Except Medical Reasons)per hold $39.85 $40.65 $41.50 c)Program Refund (Except Medical Reasons)per refund $22.25 $22.75 $23.25 g) Vendor Permit Fee per event/ per day $55.65 - $552.00 $56.75 - $563.00 $57.90 - $574.25 h) Park Clean Up Fee - Refundable Deposit each $100.00 - $1,000.00 $100.00 - $1,000.00 $100.00 - $1,000.00 i) Program/Event Promotional Material each $0.50 - $11.50 $0.50 - $11.75 $0.50 - $12.00 j) Swim Diapers & Swim Goggles each $11.50 - $22.50 $11.75 - $23.00 $12.00 - $23.50 k) Park Event Set-Up Fee (Mandatory for all groups of 80 or more.) (Includes up to 6 tables + 6 garbage receptacles, access to electrical, water, washrooms, where available.) per event/ per day $363.00 $370.25 $377.65 l) Additional Parks Set-Up Fee (In addition to Park Event Set-Up Fee, for up to 6 additional tables and 6 additional garbage receptacles.) per event/ per day $83.65 $85.30 $87.01 $87.00 * m) Park Permit Maintenance/Damage Deposit (Refundable)(For groups of 25 or more, not requiring an event set-up.) per event/ per day $100.00 - $600.00 $100.00 - $600.00 $100.00 - $600.00 n) Park/Picnic Shelter Clean-up Fee (Mandatory for all groups of 79 or less) (As required for groups of 25-79.) per event/ per day $106.75 $108.90 $111.10 * o)Park/Picnic Shelter Clean-up Fee (As required for groups of 24 or less.)per event/ per day $40.00 $40.80 * p)Facility Permit Maintenance/Damage Deposit (Refundable)per event/per day $0 - $1,100.00 $0 - $1,100.00 $0 - $1,100.00 q) Program Guide Advertisement Per ad $202.00 - $1,441.00 $206.00 - $1,470.00 $210.00 - $1,499.00 2. REGISTERED SEASONAL PROGRAMS a) Pre-School Activities per class $4.65 - $23.20 $4.75 - $23.65 $4.85 - $24.10 b) Children's Activities per class $5.75 - $33.25 $5.85 - $33.90 $5.95 - $34.60 c) Youth Activities per class Free - $52.25 Free - $53.30 Free - $54.35 d) Adult Activities per class $5.10 - $60.85 $5.20 - $62.05 $5.30 - $63.30 e) Senior's Activities per class Free - $27.80 Free - $28.35 Free - $28.90 f) Family Activities per class $4.60 - $11.50 $4.70 - $11.75 $4.80 - $12.00 g) Fitness Programs per class $1.95 - $33.25 $2.00 - $33.90 $2.05 - $34.60 h) Seniors Bus Trips per person $5.80 - $220.40 $5.90 - $224.80 $6.00 - $229.30 3. REGISTERED AQUATICS PROGRAMS a) Lessons - Learn to Swim per class $7.35 - $30.00 $7.50 - $30.60 $7.65 - $31.20 b) Leadership Programs per program $33.25 - $517.75 $33.90 - $528.10 $34.60 - $538.65 c) Aquatics Specialty Programs per class $7.35 - $30.00 $7.50 - $30.60 $7.65 - $31.20 4. REGISTERED CAMP PROGRAMS a) Day Camps per day $11.50 - $54.60 $11.75 - $55.70 $12.00 - $56.80 b) Specialty Camps per day $13.35 - $98.10 $13.60 - $100.00 $13.85 - $102.00 c) Extended Care per person $27.80 - $117.00 $28.35 - $119.00 $28.90 - $121.50 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Page 1 of 7 Page 18 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge 5. DROP-IN ACTIVITIES a) Youth Drop-in per visit Free - $5.00 Free - $5.10 Free - $5.20 b) Youth Drop-in 10 visits $24.50/10 visits $25.00/10 visits $25.50/10 visits c) Adult Drop-In per visit Free - $5.10 Free - $5.20 Free - $5.30 d) Other per visit Free - $3.30 Free - $3.35 Free - $3.40 e) Other 10 visits $24.50 - $49.00/10 visits $25.00 - $50.00/10 visits $25.50 - $51.00/10 visits 6. P.A. DAY PROGRAMS per person Free - $104.55 Free - $106.65 Free - $108.80 7. WORKSHOP/ CLINICS/ TOURNAMENTS a) Individual per person $2.45 - $100.00 $2.50 - $102.00 $2.55 - $104.00 b) Team per team $22.50 - $30.00 $23.00 - $30.50 $23.50 - $31.00 9. SPECIAL EVENTS a) Individual per person $2.95 - $22.50 $3.00 - $23.00 $3.05 - $23.50 $3.00 - $23.50 * b) Family per family $18.30 - $27.85 $18.65 - $28.40 $19.00 - $28.95 Resident Commercial $81.25 $81.25 $81.25 Non-Resident Commercial $162.40 $162.40 $162.40 d) Ribfest Vendors each $441.00 - $3,858.00 $450.00 - $3,935.00 $459.00 - $4,014.00 e) Art Show Entry Fees each $11.45 - $44.00 $11.65 - $45.00 $11.90 - $46.00 f) Food Vendors - Non Profit Groups per day $55.30 $56.40 $57.55 g) Food Vendors per day $55.00 - $552.00 $56.00 - $563.00 $57.00 - $574.00 h) Senior Centre Special Event Vendors per day Free - $56.00 Free - $57.00 Free - $58.00 Adult 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $158.50/$264.80/$436.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $158.50/$264.80/$436.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $158.50/$264.80/$436.80 Additional Family/ Youth/Student/ Senior 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $126.70/$211.65/$349.25 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $126.70/$211.65/$349.25 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $126.70/$211.65/$349.25 1 Month Trial $40.15 $40.15 $40.15 1 Month Renewal $66.75 $66.75 $66.75 Winter Student Special - Home for the Holidays - 1 mth max $42.25 $42.25 $42.25 Spring Break Student Special - 2wk max $21.15/week $21.15/week $21.15/week Summer Student Special May 31 - Aug 31 (4mth)$126.70 $126.70 $126.70 Summer Student Special July 1 - Aug 31 (2mth)$63.40 $63.40 $63.40 Adult 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $141.80/$235.60/$387.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $141.80/$235.60/$387.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $141.80/$235.60/$387.80 Youth/Student/ Senior 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $112.60/$187.65/$310.65 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $112.60/$187.65/$310.65 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $112.60/$187.65/$310.65 1 Month Renewal $59.50 $59.50 $59.50 Adult 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $82.40/$124.10/$201.20 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $82.40/$124.10/$201.20 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $82.40/$124.10/$201.20 Youth/ Student/ Senior 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $65.70/$99.05/$161.60 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $65.70/$99.05/$161.60 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $65.70/$99.05/$161.60 Child n/a n/a n/a Adult 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $141.80/$235.60/$387.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $141.80/$235.60/$387.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $141.80/$235.60/$387.80 Youth/Student/Senior 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $112.60/$187.65/$310.65 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $112.60/$187.65/$310.65 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $112.60/$187.65/$310.65 1 Month Renewal $59.50 $59.50 $59.50 c) Float Registration Fees a) COMBO MEMBERSHIP (Equipment and Group Fitness) ADD ON: Pool Aquafit Squash 10. MEMBERSHIPS (Note: All memberships apply to Aurora residents only. Non-Residents are subject to a 25% surcharge.) b) c) GROUP FITNESS MEMBERSHIP ADD ON: Pool Aquafit Squash POOL MEMBERSHIP Lane & Leisure Only AQUAFIT MEMBERSHIP ADD ON: Pool d) Page 2 of 7 Page 19 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Adult 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $159.50/$265.85/$443.05 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $159.50/$265.85/$443.05 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $159.50/$265.85/$443.05 Youth/Student/Senior 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $128.25/$212.70/$354.45 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $128.25/$212.70/$354.45 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $128.25/$212.70/$354.45 1 Month Renewal $55.25 $55.25 $55.25 Pool Package 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $22.95/$33.40/$57.35 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $22.95/$33.40/$57.35 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $22.95/$33.40/$57.35 Aquafit Package 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $22.95/$33.40/$57.35 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $22.95/$33.40/$57.35 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $22.95/$33.40/$57.35 Squash 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $74.05/$113.65/$188.70 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $74.05/$113.65/$188.70 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $74.05/$113.65/$188.70 Group of 4+ 25% Discount 25% Discount 25% Discount i) Youth Summer Gymnasium Membership Youth - each 1 month (July or August) $23.50 1 month (July or August) $23.50 1 month (July or August) $23.50 j) Fitness Assessment Per Person $35.75 $35.75 $35.75 k) FIT Club Per Person $32.75 $32.75 $32.75 l) Youth Gymnasium Monthly Membership Youth - each 1 month $23.50 1 month $23.50 1 month $23.50 Adult 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $134.90/$224.45/$370.75 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $134.90/$224.45/$370.75 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $134.90/$224.45/$370.75 Additional Family/ Youth/Student/ Senior 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $108.10/$179.15/$296.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $108.10/$179.15/$296.80 3 mo. 6mo. 1 yr. $108.10/$179.15/$296.80 1 Month Renewal (Adult) $57.05 $57.05 $57.05 1 Month Renewal (Additional Family, youth, student, senior) $45.85 $45.85 $45.85 n)Promotional Membership Discount (with Director Approval)each 15 - 25% Discount on selected membership packages 15 - 25% Discount on selected membership packages 15 - 25% Discount on selected membership packages 11. DAILY USER FEES a) Youth/Adult $7.95/class or 62.00/10 visits $8.10/class or 63.00/10 visits $8.25/class or 64.00/10 visits Senior $6.15/class or 49.00/10 visits $6.25/class or 50.00/10 visits $6.35/class or 51.00/10 visits b) Leisure Pool - Casual User Fee each $3.60/use or 26.75/10 visits $3.65/use or 27.25/10 visits $3.70/use or 27.75/10 visits c)Squash - Daily User Fee (40 min Court Fee)Prime $9.55/use or 75.00/10 visits $9.75/use or 77.00/10 visits $9.95/use or 79.00/10 visits d)Squash - Daily User Fee (40 min Court Fee)Non Prime $5.50/use or 43.65/10 visits $5.60/use or 44.50/10 visits $5.70/use or 45.40/10 visits e)Squash - Daily User Fee (40 min Court Fee)Senior 20% of listed fee 20% of listed fee 20% of listed fee 12. SQUASH Private $33.25 $33.90 $34.60 Semi Private (per person) $24.85 $25.35 $25.85 3 or more (per person) $19.90 $20.30 $20.70 b) Clinics per 1.5 hour clinic $12.80 $13.05 $13.30 c) House League (40 min) - Member Per Session $38.15 $38.90 $39.70 House League (40 min) - Non-Member Per Session $76.60 - $120.50 $78.15 - $122.90 $79.70 - $125.35 d) Junior Squash Program per week $12.80 $13.05 $13.30 13. SEASONAL PACKAGES a) Summer Splash Pass per family $112.20 $114.45 $116.75 b) Summer Squash Special each $116.60 $118.95 $121.35 a) m) h) SQUASH MEMBERSHIP g) CORPORATE MEMBERSHIPS - Per Company f) EQUIPMENT AND WEIGHTS MEMBERSHIP ADD-ON OPTIONS Lessons (40 min) Fitness Centre - Casual User Fee (access to group fitness classes, including cyclefit and aquafit) Page 3 of 7 Page 20 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Private $64.05 $65.35 $66.65 Semi-Private (per person) $48.50 $49.45 $50.45 Private $149.90 $152.90 $155.95 Semi-Private (per person) $112.55 $114.80 $117.10 Private $261.60 $266.85 $272.20 Semi-Private (per person) $195.55 $199.45 $203.45 Private $495.90 $505.80 $515.90 Semi-Private (per person) $372.50 $379.95 $387.55 Private $973.25 $992.70 $1,012.55 Semi-Private (per person) $688.80 $702.60 $716.65 15. POOL RENTAL RATES per lane/per hour (plus lifeguard costs)$12.25 $12.50 $12.75 per lane/per hour (plus lifeguard costs)$12.25 $12.50 $12.75 c) SARC Teaching Pool - Private Rental per hour (plus lifeguard costs)$24.35 $24.85 $25.35 d) SARC Leisure Pool/Slide - Private Rental per hour (plus lifeguard costs)$39.80 $40.60 $41.40 f) Pool - School Instructional Lessons (30 mins)per person $22.90/class (1 or 2) $12.05/class (3 or 4) $9.85/class (5 to 10) $7.65/class (11 or more) $23.35/class (1 or 2) $12.30/class (3 or 4) $10.05/class (5 to 10) $7.80/class (11 or more) $23.80/class (1 or 2) $12.55/class (3 or 4) $10.25/class (5 to 10) $7.95/class (11 or more) h) Additional Instructor Fee per hour $22.15 $22.60 $23.05 h) Lifeguard Fee per hour $19.55 $19.95 $20.35 16. PUBLIC SKATING PROGRAMS a) Shinny Hockey per person $6.25 or 50.20/10 visits $6.35 or 51.20/10 visits $6.45 or 52.20/10 visits b) Public Skating (all) per person $3.05 or 24.50/10 visits, 45.90/20 visits, 66.30/30 visits $3.10 or 25.00/10 visits, 46.80/20 visits, 67.60/30 visits $3.00 or 25.00/10 visits, 47.00/20 visits, 68.00/30 visits $3.15 or 25.50/10 visits, 47.75/20 visits, 68.95/30 visits $3.00 or 25.00/10 visits, 47.00/20 visits, 68.00/30 visits * c) Family Skate Pass each $31.35 - $313.65 $31.95 - $319.90 $32.60 - $326.30 17. ICE RENTALS a) Ice Rental Prime Time per hour $212.80 $217.05 $221.40 b) Ice Rental Prime (Aurora Based Minor Hockey/Skating Club only) per hour $199.50 $203.50 $207.55 c) Ice Rental Non-Prime - Weekday (8:00am to 4:00pm) - and all Junior A Hockey at any time. per hour $130.25 $132.85 $135.50 d) Ice Rental Non-Prime - 6:00am to 8:00am Weekday - 8:00am to 4:00pm Summer Ice (July 1 - Aug. 31) - Weekend Summer Ice (July 1 - Aug. 31) per hour $137.90 $140.65 $143.45 d) e) Land Based Training - Single Session rate Land Based Training - 3 Session Rate (Get Started) One Time Offer Land Based Training - 5 Sessions Land Based Training - 10 Sessions Land Based Training - 20 Sessions SARC 8 Lane Pool - Private Rental AFLC Pool - Private Rentala) b) c) 14. PERSONAL TRAINING PACKAGES Note: All fees are for members. Non-members are subject to a 25% surcharge. a) b) Page 4 of 7 Page 21 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge 18. FACILITY RENTALS - INDOOR Full Facility - Monthly (rooms & event space) n/a n/a n/a Event/ Activity Space - Monthly n/a n/a n/a Event/ Activity Space - Daily (8hrs) n/a n/a n/a Event/ Activity Space - Hourly n/a n/a n/a Office/ Meeting/ Storage Spaces - Monthly n/a n/a n/a Office/ Meeting/ Storage Spaces - Hourly n/a n/a n/a b) COMMUNITY CENTRE - Auditorium per hour $61.95 $63.20 $64.45 c) COMMUNITY CENTRE - Auditorium per day (8 hours) Hourly Rate applies beyond 8 hours $368.30 $375.65 $383.15 d) COMMUNITY CENTRE - ACC#1 Meeting Room - available free of charge to Aurora non-profit groups per hour $33.10 $33.75 $34.45 e) COMMUNITY CENTRE - ACC#2 Meeting Room - available free of charge to Aurora non-profit groups per hour $25.60 $26.10 $26.60 f)Arena Floor Rental - Aurora based Youth groups per hour $45.90 $46.80 $47.75 g)Arena Floor Rental - Other per hour $60.85 $62.05 $63.30 h)Arena Floor Event Rental - Not for profit in Aurora per day - multi day event (open - close) $834.75/surface $851.45/surface $868.45/surface i)Arena Floor Event Rental - Other per day - multi day event (open - close)$1,179.60/surface $1,203.20/surface $1,227.25/surface Meeting Room - available free of charge to Aurora non-profit groups $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour Program Room C (2nd Floor) $38.45/hour $39.20/hour $40.00/hour Program Room A (Main Floor - small) $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour Program Room B (Main Floor - large) $38.45/hour $39.20/hour $40.00/hour Teaching Kitchen $28.85/hour (plus $55.00 clean-up deposit) $29.40/hour (plus $55.00 clean-up deposit) $30.00/hour (plus $60.00 clean-up deposit) k)Gymnasium - Prime Time - Aurora based Youth Full Gym - per hour $83.25 $84.90 $86.60 l)Gymnasium - Prime Time - Other Full Gym - per hour $112.10 $114.35 $116.65 Full Gym - per hour $61.95 $63.20 $64.45 n) Squash Courts per court per hour $13.40 $13.65 $13.90 Activity Room A $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour Activity Room B $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour Activity Room A & B $38.45/hour $39.20/hour $40.00/hour Activity Room A & B & Kitchen $60.85/hour $62.05/hour $63.30/hour Activity Room C $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour Activity Room & Kitchen $55.00//hour $56.10//hour $57.20//hour Craft Room $38.45/hour $39.20/hour $40.00/hour Multi-Purpose Room/Kitchen - Hourly $123.85/hour $126.30/hour $128.80/hour Multi-Purpose Room/Kitchen - Daily (8 hours) $734.40/day $749.10/day $764.10/day m) SENIORS CENTRE GYMNASIUM - Non-Prime - 7:00am to 4:00pm Weekdays p) a) j) LEISURE COMPLEX AURORA ARMOURY Page 5 of 7 Page 22 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge q) STRONACH AURORA RECREATION COMPLEX Meeting Room - available free of charge to Aurora non-profit groups $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour r) TOWN HALL - Coffee Service Per 25 people or less $31.00/25 people $31.60/25 people $32.25/25 people Leksand Room No Charge No Charge No Charge Holland Room (Staff support fee may apply) No Charge No Charge No Charge Leksand Room $33.10/hour $33.75/hour $34.40/hour Holland Room (Staff support fee may apply) $39.50/hour $40.30/hour $41.10/hour Leksand Room $39.50/hour $40.30/hour $41.10/hour Holland Room (Staff support fee may apply) $45.35/hour $46.25/hour $47.15/hour Aurora Based Groups $61.95/hour $63.20/hour $64.45/hour Non-Aurora Based Groups $128.65/hour $131.20/hour $133.80/hour Professional/Commercial Groups $251.95/hour $257.00/hour $262.15/hour v) per hour $61.95 $63.20 $64.45 w) TOWN HALL - EQUIPMENT SUPPORT Staffing charge for the use of the equipment in either the Holland Room and/or Council Chambers $80.10/hour (3 hour min) $81.70/hour (3 hour min) $83.35/hour (3 hour min) per hour $38.45/hour $39.20/hour $40.00/hour Daily (8 hours) $227.40/hour $231.95/hour $236.60/hour y) Locker Rental Per Person 1 mo. / 3 mo. / 6 mo. / 12 mo. $6.80/$19.60/$36.85/$70.30 1 mo. / 3 mo. / 6 mo. / 12 mo. $6.95/$20.00/$37.60/$71.70 1 mo. / 3 mo. / 6 mo. / 12 mo. $7.10/$20.40/$38.35/$73.15 19. FACILITY RENTALS - OUTDOOR Park Event/Large Company/School Picnic $362.95 $370.20 $377.60 Hourly (no set-up or staff support required)$31.00 $31.60 $32.25 Aurora Lawn Bowling Club $1,111.55/year $1,133.80/year $1,156.45/year Aurora Community Tennis Club $1,806.45/year $1,842.55/year $1,879.40/year c) TENNIS COURTS per hour $8.60 $8.75 $8.95 t) u) TOWN HALL - Aurora Based Groups TOWN HALL - Non-Aurora Based Groups TOWN HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS (Staff support fee may apply) McMAHON PARK TOWN HALL - SKYLIGHT GALLERY TOWN HALL - Aurora Based Non-Profit Groups (as defined by Town Policy) VICTORIA HALL BAND SHELL b) a) x) s) Page 6 of 7 Page 23 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule D Community Services Effective January 1, 20XX Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge 20. PLAYING FIELD USER FEES a) Ball Diamonds - Adult per hour $17.25 $17.60 $17.95 b) Ball Diamonds - Youth per hour $10.85 $11.05 $11.25 c) Rectangular Fields - Youth per hour $9.45 $9.65 $9.85 d) Rectangular Fields - Adult per hour $11.35 $11.60 $11.85 g) Tournaments each $239.00/ tournament plus hourly rate per field $243.80/ tournament plue hourly rate per field $248.65/ tournament plus hourly rate per field Youth - per hour $9.45 $9.65 $9.85 * Adult - per hour $11.35 $11.60 $11.85 * i) ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD - Aurora based non-profit based/representative Youth/Adult clubs/academies - Oct 1 - April 30 per hour $24.45 $24.95 $25.45 * j) ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD - All schools and Aurora based for-profit businesses or private people - May 1 - September 30 (regular season) per hour $30.05 $30.65 $31.25 * k) ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD - All schools and Aurora based for-profit businesses or private people - October 1 - April 30 per hour $66.70 $68.05 $69.40 * l) ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD - All non-Aurora based groups Youth/Adult - Any time of year per hour $211.20 $215.40 $85.00 $219.70 $86.70 * 21. CULTURAL SERVICES a) Visiting Researcher per 2 hours $26.55 $27.10 $27.65 b) Corresponding Researcher per hour $48.25 $49.20 $50.20 c) Photocopies / scans of text per page $0.53 $0.54 $0.55 d) High Resolution Image (existing) per image $30.15 $30.75 $30.35 e) High Resolution Scan per image $60.30 $61.50 $62.75 h) ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD - Aurora based non-profit based/representative Youth/Adult clubs/academies - May 1 - September 30 (regular season) Page 7 of 7 Page 24 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule E Operational Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Work Performed for Residents, Contractors and Developers Actual Labour, Material & Equipment plus 35% overhead and full cost of contracted services plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST Actual Labour, Material & Equipment plus 35% overhead and full cost of contracted services plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST Actual Labour, Material & Equipment plus 35% overhead or full cost of contracted services plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST Hydrant Deposit Each $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 Fire Flow Test Each $272.00 $278.00 $284.00 Sewer Camera Rate lump sum actual cost plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST actual cost plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST actual cost plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST Water Meters and Water Meter Accessories each Actual cost plus 35% overhead, subject to HST (overhead limited to a maximum of $500 per meter or accessory) Actual cost plus 35% overhead, subject to HST (overhead limited to a maximum of $500 per meter or accessory) Actual cost plus 35% overhead, subject to HST (overhead limited to a maximum of $513 per meter or accessory) Water Meter Wire Charge per box $128.00 $131.00 $134.00 Road Excavation Occupany Permit Deposit each $587.00 - $5,100.00 $599.00 - $5,202.00 $611.00 - $5,306.00 * Road Occupancy Permit Rush Fee each $100.00 $102.00 $104.00 Road Excavation/Occupancy Permit whichever is greater each $276.00 or 10% $282.00 or 10% $325.00 $287.00 or 10% $332.00 * Additional Inspection Fee per inspection n/a n/a $150.00 n/a $153.00 * Encroachment Application Fee per application n/a n/a $300.00 n/a $306.00 * Private Side Sanitary Sewer Remediation each Actual cost plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST Actual cost plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST Actual cost plus 15% administrative fee, subject to HST 24 hours or more of notice during business hours (8:00am - 4:00pm)each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Less than 24 hours notice during business hours (8:00am - 4:00pm)each $88.00 $90.00 $92.00 Outside business hours each $174.00 $177.00 $181.00 Blue Boxes each $10.25 $10.50 $10.75 Blue Totes each $153.00 + delivery charge of $34.00 for the 95 gal totes (which includes picking up old damaged totes) $156.00 + delivery charge of $35.00 for the 95 gal totes (which includes picking up old damaged totes) $159.00 + delivery charge of $36.00 for the 95 gal totes (which includes picking up old damaged totes) Green Bins each $22.50 $23.00 $23.50 Kitchen Catcher each $5.25 $5.50 $5.75 Backyard Composters each $42.00 $43.00 $44.00 Replacement Blue Tote wheel set each $20.50 $21.00 $21.50 Landscaping Administration Fees each 8.168% - less than $100K 7.148% - $100K to $250K 6.126% - $250K to $500K 5.105% - more than $500k 8.168% - less than $100K 7.148% - $100K to $250K 6.126% - $250K to $500K 5.105% - more than $500k 8.168% - less than $100K 7.148% - $100K to $250K 6.126% - $250K to $500K 5.105% - more than $500k Landscape Maintenance Fees each 25.525% of estimated value of landscape works installed on municipal property (excludes open space plantings) 25.525% of estimated value of landscape works installed on municipal property (excludes open space plantings) 25.525% of estimated value of landscape works installed on municipal property (excludes open space plantings) Tree Permit Fees up to 3 trees that are less than 20 cm $214.00 $218.00 $222.00 4 trees that are less than 20 cm $320.00 $326.00 $333.00 5 trees that are less than 20 cm $427.00 $436.00 $445.00 6 trees that are less than 20 cm $534.00 $545.00 $556.00 7 trees that are less than 20 cm $640.00 $653.00 $666.00 8 or more trees that are less than 20 cm (cost per tree) $107.00 $109.00 $111.00 A tree that is greater than 20cm, but less than 70 cm $534.00 $545.00 $556.00 Tree Permit Fees Road Encroachment and Occupancy Fees Water Turn On/Off Service Charges (previously included in By-law 5716-15) Waste Collection Fees Sanitary Sewer Remediation Landscape Fees Page 1 of 1 Page 25 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule F Finance Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 Changes to already approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 Changes to already approved fees Tax Bill Reprint - Per Tax Year per document 20.50$ 21.00$ 21.50$ Returned Cheques per cheque 51.00$ 52.00$ 53.00$ Payment Recalled by Bank per item 20.50$ 21.00$ 21.50$ Mortgage Administrative Fee per transaction 10.25$ 10.50$ 10.75$ Tax Reminder Notices per property 7.15$ 7.30$ 7.45$ Water and Wastewater Reminder Notices per property 7.15$ 7.30$ 7.45$ Tax and Water/Wastewater Certificate (for all properties) per property 143.00$ 146.00$ 149.00$ Online Tax and Water/Wastewater Certificate (for all properties)per property 143.00$ 146.00$ 149.00$ Tax Certificate per property 100.00$ 110.00$ 120.00$ Water/Wastewater Certificate per property 100.00$ 110.00$ 120.00$ Water Bill Reprint - Per Billing Period per document 20.50$ 21.00$ 21.50$ Official Tax Receipt Letter for Government Agencies per document 35.75$ 36.50$ 37.25$ Duplicate Receipt per receipt 15.30$ 15.60$ 15.90$ Detailed Analysis of Tax Account - Per Tax Year per property 35.75$ 36.50$ 37.25$ Tax Roll Ownership Change per property 56.00$ 57.00$ 58.00$ Water Account Ownership Change/ New Account Set-up per property 56.00$ 57.00$ 58.00$ Letter of Reference for Utilities each 30.50$ 31.00$ 31.50$ Addition of Unpaid Provincial Offences Act Fines to Tax Bill per addition 51.00$ 52.00$ 53.00$ Addition of Unpaid Charges to Tax Bill per addition 30.50$ 31.00$ 31.50$ DC Administration Fee per application 1,600.00$ 1,630.00$ 1,663.00$ Page 1 of 1 Page 26 of 159 By-Law 6219-19 Schedule GBuilding DivisionEffective January 1, 20XX Page 1 of 3 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Minimum Permit Fee for Part 9 Residential Building per application 286.00$ 292.00$ 298.00$ Minimum Permit Fee for all Other Buildings per application 576.00$ 588.00$ 600.00$ Restaurants/ Banquet Halls (Finished)per square metre 18.50$ 18.90$ 19.30$ Restaurant/ Banquet Hall (Shell)per square metre 11.25$ 11.50$ 11.75$ Recreation Facilities, Schools, Libraries, Churches, Theatres and All Other Group A Occupancies per square metre 18.50$ 18.90$ 19.30$ Group A Assembly (Alterations)per square metre 6.30$ 6.40$ 6.50$ Residential Care Facilities, Nursing Homes and All Other Group B per square metre 18.50$ 18.90$ 19.30$ Group B Institutional (Alterations)per square metre 6.30$ 6.40$ 6.50$ Single Family Detached (Semi,Row House,Link Dwellings)* *Permit includes Building,HVAC,Plumbing andResidential Occupancy Permits. per square metre 16.75$ 17.10$ 17.40$ Multiple Residential and Apartments per square metre 15.75$ 16.10$ 16.40$ Other Group C (Hotel/Motel Lodging Houses, Rooming Houses, Shelters, etc.)per square metre 15.75$ 16.10$ 16.40$ Group C Residential (Alterations)per square metre 6.30$ 6.40$ 6.50$ Second Suite Dwelling Unit per square metre 6.30$ 6.40$ 6.50$ Business and Personal Services (Finished)per square metre 15.75$ 16.10$ 16.40$ Business and Personal Services (Shell)per square metre 12.60$ 12.90$ 13.20$ Group D Business and Personal Services (Alterations)per square metre 7.30$ 7.50$ 7.70$ Mercantile (Finished)per square metre 15.75$ 16.10$ 16.40$ Mercantile (Shell)per square metre 12.60$ 12.90$ 13.20$ Group E Mercantile (Alterations)per square metre 7.30$ 7.50$ 7.70$ Industrial (Finished - Including Self-Storage Buildings)per square metre 10.50$ 10.70$ 10.90$ Industrial (Shell)per square metre 8.40$ 8.60$ 8.75$ Storage Garages per square metre 5.20$ 5.30$ 5.40$ Gas Stations/Repair Stations per square metre 9.40$ 9.60$ 9.80$ Farm Buildings per square metre 4.50$ 4.60$ 4.70$ Group F Industrial (Alterations)per square metre 5.20$ 5.30$ 5.40$ Wind Turbine Support Structure per structure 332.00$ 339.00$ 346.00$ Exterior Tank and Support not regulated by TSSA, 2000 per structure 281.00$ 287.00$ 293.00$ Retaining Walls per linear metre 8.20$ 8.40$ 8.60$ Solar Collectors per structure 332.00$ 339.00$ 346.00$ Accessory Structures (Residential)flat fee 286.00$ 292.00$ 298.00$ Accessory Structures (All Other)flat fee 551.00$ 562.00$ 573.00$ Alternative Solutions per application $1,071.00 - plus consulting costs as applicable $1,092.00 - plus consulting costs as applicable $1,114.00 - plus consulting costs as applicable Change of Use per square metre 7.30$ 7.50$ 7.70$ Construction and Sales Trailers per square metre 11.00$ 11.20$ 11.40$ Construction and Sales Trailers (Pre-Fabricated)per square metre 5.50$ 5.60$ 5.70$ Conditional Permits per square metre of applicable residential or commercial fee $1,071.00 - plus agreement preparation costs (min $1,020.00) $1,092.00 - plus agreement preparation costs (min $1,040.00) $1,114.00 - plus agreement preparation costs (min $1,060.00) 55m2 or less - flat fee 286.00$ 292.00$ 298.00$ Over 55m2 - flat fee 337.00$ 344.00$ 351.00$ Group C Residential (Applies to New Buildings and Additions) Group A Assembly (Applies to New Buildings and Additions) Group B Institutional (Applies to New Buildings and Additions) Group D Business and Personal Services (Applies to New Buildings and Additions) Group E Mercantile (Applies to New Buildings and Additions) Group F Industrial (Applies to New Buildings and Additions) Designated Structures Stand Alone Demolition (Singles, Semis, Row Houses, Accessory Structures) Page 27 of 159 By-Law 6219-19 Schedule GBuilding DivisionEffective January 1, 20XX Page 2 of 3 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Demolition (Others)flat fee 551.00$ 562.00$ 573.00$ Electromagnetic Locks per lock $32.60 - to a maximum of $326.00 $33.25 - to a maximum of $332.50 $33.90 - to a maximum of $339.00 Fire Alarm Retrofit per application 326.00$ 333.00$ 340.00$ Fireplaces, Woodstoves and Chimneys each 286.00$ 292.00$ 298.00$ Foundation for Relocated Buildings per square metre 3.90$ 4.00$ 4.10$ per residential system 286.00$ 292.00$ 298.00$ per all other systems 576.00$ 588.00$ 600.00$ Kitchen Exhaust System per system 551.00$ 562.00$ 573.00$ minimum fee - includes 10 hours of plan review and inspection 1,153.00$ 1,176.00$ 1,200.00$ per hour (after)117.00$ 119.00$ 121.00$ Miscellaneous Permits -Where a permit application isforaClassnotlistedherein,the Unit of Measure andFee shall be determined by the Chief Building Official each tbd tbd tbd Model Certification per square metre 6.00$ 6.10$ 6.20$ Permits for Certified Plans per square metre 10.70$ 10.90$ 11.10$ Model Type Change per square metre 836.00$ 853.00$ 870.00$ Outdoor Public Pool (3.11 OBC)per square metre 6.60$ 6.75$ 6.90$ per application - up to 4 hours of combined inspection time for building, plumbing and fire services 459.00$ 468.00$ 477.00$ per hour (additional time)115.00$ 117.00$ 119.00$ Partial Permits (Foundation, Structural and Foundation/Structural)per application 576.00$ 588.00$ 600.00$ Portables per portable $168.00 - to a maximum of $1,680.00 $171.00 - to a maximum of $1,710.00 $174.00 - to a maximum of $1,740.00 Revision to Permit Plan per application - up to 3 hours of review time 288.00$ 294.00$ 300.00$ Shoring per linear metre 7.90$ 8.10$ 8.30$ Solar Domestic Hot Water Systems per system 492.00$ 502.00$ 512.00$ Sprinkler Retrofit per square metre 0.66$ 0.67$ 0.68$ Temporary Building/Tent per structure $168.00 - to a maximum of $1,680.00 $171.00 - to a maximum of $1,710.00 $174.00 - to a maximum of $1,740.00 Transit/Bus and Terminal/Bus Shelter per square metre (see Group A Occupancies)14.30$ 14.60$ 14.90$ Underpinning per linear metre 7.90$ 8.10$ 8.30$ On Site Sewage Systems - New Systems (200m2 or less)per system 576.00$ 588.00$ 600.00$ On Site Sewage Systems - New Systems (Greater than 200m2)per square metre $3.90 - to a maximum of $3,300.00 $4.00 - to a maximum of $3,366.00 $4.10 - to a maximum of $3,433.00 Alterations to Sewage Disposal System per application 275.00$ 281.00$ 287.00$ Headers, Tank Removal or Decommissioning each 275.00$ 281.00$ 287.00$ Stand AlonePlumbing Fixtures,Equipment,RoofDrains - Single Family Dwelling per fixture 16.80$ 17.10$ 17.40$ Stand AlonePlumbing Fixtures,Equipment,RoofDrains- All Other Buildings per fixture 16.80$ 17.10$ 17.40$ Water Service (Residential)per application 26.50$ 27.00$ 27.50$ Each ResidentialDrain andSewer(IncludesbothStorm and Sanitary, Inside, Outside and Floor Drains)per application 63.00$ 64.00$ 65.00$ 50mm (2") or less each 26.50$ 27.00$ 27.50$ 100mm (4")each 46.90$ 47.80$ 48.80$ 150mm (6")each 68.00$ 69.00$ 70.00$ 200mm (8")each 89.00$ 91.00$ 93.00$ HVAC Systems Marijuana Grow-OP Remediation Occupancy of an Unfinished Building Permit Plumbing Commercial, Industrial, Institutional and Apartment (Buildings and Units) Water Services Page 28 of 159 By-Law 6219-19 Schedule GBuilding DivisionEffective January 1, 20XX Page 3 of 3 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees 250mm (10")each 110.00$ 112.00$ 114.00$ 300mm (12") or larger each 131.00$ 134.00$ 137.00$ 100mm (4")each 52.00$ 53.00$ 54.00$ 150mm (6")each 79.00$ 81.00$ 83.00$ 200mm (8")each 99.00$ 101.00$ 103.00$ 250mm (10")each 120.00$ 122.00$ 124.00$ 300mm (12") or larger each 141.00$ 144.00$ 147.00$ Manhole, Catch-Basin, Area Drain or Interceptors each 37.00$ 38.00$ 39.00$ Testable Back-Flow Preventer each 68.00$ 69.00$ 70.00$ Re-Inspection Fee (Applicable at the discretion of theChief Building Inspector)each 115.00$ 117.00$ 119.00$ Review of Plans per hour 115.00$ 117.00$ 119.00$ Permit Reactivation Fee per permit 163.00$ 166.00$ 169.00$ Administration Fee for Occupancy of a ResidentialBuildingPriortoIssuanceoftheRequiredResidential Occupancy Permit under the Building Code per unit 826.00$ 843.00$ 860.00$ Special Inspection Fee -per Hour,per Person(Applicable at the discretion of the Chief BuildingInspector)per hour per person 115.00$ 117.00$ 119.00$ Special Investigation Fee -Where work for which apermitisrequiredbytheBuildingBy-law hascommencedwithouttheauthorizationofapermit,inaddition to all other fees) each Half the permit fee payable pursuant to this By-law or $260.00, whichever is greater Half the permit fee payable pursuant to this By-law or $265.00, whichever is greater Half the permit fee payable pursuant to this By-law or $270.00, whichever is greater Transfer of Permit per application 115.00$ 117.00$ 119.00$ Zoning and Applicable Law Review per proposal 141.00$ 144.00$ 147.00$ Sewage System Maintenance Inspection per inspection 158.00$ 161.00$ 164.00$ Project by the Municipality each No Fees Charged No Fees Charged No Fees Charged Notes Miscellaneous Plumbing Other Fees A building permit or permit fee is not required for any detached structure having an area of less than 10 square metres, except where plumbing is installed. However, the Town of Aurora Zoning By-law Number 2213-78, as amended, applies to all structures. General Notes - Interpretation and Application of Schedule G Detached single family dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, row house and link house The service index applied to the construction of a new dwelling includes the building, plumbing, HVAC and occupancy permit components. Where a proposal for the construction of a new dwelling unit includes a deck, porch or similar amenity structures those amenities are included in the permit fee and will bot be charged the stand alone fee for such structures. The measurement of a floor area for a dwelling unit shall be measured from exterior face of exterior wall to same or centerline of party wall, firewall or common wall including the floor are of an attached garage, basements and cellars. The service index applied to the construction of a new dwelling includes the Building, Fire Services and HVAC components but does not include plumbing or site services which shall be charged a separate fee in accordance with this Schedule. Where a proposal for construction includes an addition, alteration, accessory structures or any combination thereof the permit fee shall be the sum of the fees for the individual components. All Other Classes of Permits Where a storage garage is located below a principle building and is considered a separate building the fee for the storage garage shall be calculated in accordance with the Group F industrial occupancy fees. Mechanical penthouses and floors, mezzanines, lofts and balconies are to be included in all floor area calculations. No deductions shall be made for openings in a floor area with the exception of interconnected floor areas. In accordance with the Town of Aurora By-law Number 4744-05P, as amended, additions and accessory structures to dwelling units and demolitions require a road damage deposit in the amount of $25/metre of frontage to a maximum of $750.00. In accordance with the Town of Aurora Policy regarding temporary sales trailers and construction trailers, a security deposit in the amount of $5,000.00 is required to cover the cost of removal, should it become necessary. In accordance with the Town of Aurora Policy regarding demolition permits for Listed Heritage Buildings or Structures, a security deposit in the amount of $10,000 is required prior to the issuance of the permit. The occupancy classifications in this schedule correspond with the Ontario Building Code. For mixed use floor areas, the service index for each applicable occupancy may be used. Security Deposits In accordance with the Town of Aurora Infill Housing Policy a security deposit of $10,000.00 is required prior to the issuance of a permit for the construction of new dwellings. Page 29 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule H Development Planning Division Effective January 1, 20XX Page 1 of 4 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes processing fee)43,927.00$ 44,806.00$ 45,702.00$ processing fee/surcharge prior to adoption of OPA n/a n/a n/a revision fees 2,353.00$ 2,400.00$ 2,448.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes processing fee)43,927.00$ 44,806.00$ 45,702.00$ processing fee/surcharge prior to adoption of OPA n/a n/a n/a revision fees 1,803.00$ 1,839.00$ 1,876.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes processing fee)25,497.00$ 26,007.00$ 26,527.00$ processing fee/surcharge prior to enactment of ZBA n/a n/a n/a revision fees 2,353.00$ 2,400.00$ 2,448.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes processing fee)13,806.00$ 14,082.00$ 14,364.00$ processing fee/surcharge prior to enactment of ZBA n/a n/a n/a revision fees 1,803.00$ 1,839.00$ 1,876.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes processing fee)9,890.00$ 10,080.00$ 10,282.00$ processing fee/surcharge prior to enactment of ZBA 5,460.00$ 5,569.00$ 5,680.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes processing fee)16,555.00$ 16,886.00$ 17,224.00$ processing fee/surcharge prior to enactment of ZBA n/a n/a n/aextension of the Temporary By-law 8,987.00$ 9,167.00$ 9,350.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes registration of subdivision agreement)45,575.00$ 46,487.00$ 47,417.00$ processing fee/surcharge (residential)n/a n/a n/a residential processing fee/surcharge 0 - 25 units (per unit) $797/unit and $9,647/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $813/unit and $9,840/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $829/unit and $10,037/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) residential processing fee/surcharge 26 - 100 units (per unit) $677/unit and $9,647/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $691/unit and $9,840/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $705/unit and $10,037/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) residential processing fee/surcharge 101 - 200 units (per unit) $575/unit and $9,647/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $587/unit and $9,840/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $599/unit and $10,037/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) Official Plan Amendment Zoning By-law Amendment Draft Plan of Subdivision Major (see Note 3) Minor (see Note 4) Draft Plan of Subdivision Temporary Use Major (see Note 1) Minor (see Note 2) Removal of Hold Page 30 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule H Development Planning Division Effective January 1, 20XX Page 2 of 4 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees residential processing fee/surcharge > 200 units (per unit) $489/unit and $9,647/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $499/unit and $9,840/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $509/unit and $10,037/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) processing fee/surcharge (non-residential) $9,447/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $9,636/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) $9,829/hectare or part thereof for all other lands (see Note 5) registration of Subdivision per agreement n/a n/a n/a revision fee (where applicant makes revisions to plans requiring recirculation) 1,874.00$ 1,911.00$ 1,949.00$ revisions to a Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision, or Conditions of Draft Approval 6,238.00$ 6,363.00$ 6,490.00$ extension of Draft Approval 3,267.00$ 3,332.00$ 3,399.00$ base fee n/a n/a n/a base fee (includes registration of subdivision agreement)30,167.00$ 30,770.00$ 31,385.00$ registration of Subdivision per agreement n/a n/a n/a revisions to Approved Draft Plan of Condominium 4,389.00$ 4,477.00$ 4,567.00$ extension of Draft Approval 2,353.00$ 2,400.00$ 2,448.00$ Part Lot Controls base fee 4,159.00$ 4,242.00$ 4,327.00$ base fee 11,053.00$ 11,274.00$ 11,499.00$ processing fee/surcharge $577/hectare or part thereof $589/hectare or part thereof $601/hectare or part thereof base fee 15,300.00$ 15,606.00$ 15,918.00$ plus: per unit for residential n/a n/a n/a plus: per unit for residential 0 - 25 units (per unit) 662.00$ 675.00$ 689.00$ plus: per unit for residential 26 - 100 units (per unit)397.00$ 405.00$ 413.00$ plus: per unit for residential 101 - 200 units (per unit)239.00$ 244.00$ 249.00$ plus: per unit for residential > 200 units (per unit)143.00$ 146.00$ 149.00$ plus: per unit for multi-residential (apartments)n/a n/a n/a plus: ICI buildings for first 2,000m2 - per m2 of GFA 6.76$ 6.90$ 7.04$ plus: ICI buildings portion of GFA between 2,001m2 and 10,000m2 - per m2 of GFA 4.40$ 4.49$ 4.58$ plus: ICI buildings portion of GFA beyond 10,000m2 - per m2 of GFA 2.20$ 2.24$ 2.28$ Draft Plan of Condominium Part Lot Controls Major Draft Plan of Subdivision (con't) (All Types) Block Plans Site Plan Approval Block Plans Page 31 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule H Development Planning Division Effective January 1, 20XX Page 3 of 4 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees base fee 8,217.00$ 8,381.00$ 8,549.00$ plus: ICI buildings for first 2,000m2 - per m2 of GFA 6.76$ 6.90$ 7.04$ plus: ICI buildings portion of GFA between 2,001m2 and 10,000m2 - per m2 of GFA 4.40$ 4.49$ 4.58$ plus: ICI buildings portion of GFA beyond 10,000m2 - per m2 of GFA 2.20$ 2.24$ 2.28$ each n/a n/a n/a Major Site Plan (each)8,217.00$ 8,381.00$ 8,549.00$ Minor Site Plan (each)4,414.00$ 4,502.00$ 4,592.00$ Site Plan Review (Stable Neighbourhood)each 1,046.00$ 1,067.00$ 1,088.00$ base fee 1,046.00$ 1,067.00$ 1,088.00$ request for site plan exemption beyond 2nd submission 261.00$ 266.00$ 271.00$ Radio Communication Tower/Antenna Facilities base fee 8,519.00$ 8,689.00$ 8,863.00$ base fee 5,195.00$ 5,299.00$ 5,405.00$ plus: per new lot created 2,609.00$ 2,661.00$ 2,714.00$ change of conditions (only before a final consent is granted)938.00$ 957.00$ 976.00$ recirculation fee (see Note 7)2,669.00$ 2,722.00$ 2,776.00$ Ground Related Residential Zoned Lands base fee 2,869.00$ 2,926.00$ 2,985.00$ Oak Ridges Moraine Residential base fee 2,397.00$ 2,445.00$ 2,494.00$ base fee 2,869.00$ 2,926.00$ 2,985.00$ plus: per lot or unit 1,503.00$ 1,533.00$ 1,564.00$ All Other Uses, including ICI base fee 3,517.00$ 3,587.00$ 3,659.00$ Recirculation/Revisions (see Note 7)each 1,415.00$ 1,443.00$ 1,472.00$ Owner's Request to Cancel Public Planning Meeting base fee 3,555.00$ 3,626.00$ 3,699.00$ Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Referral Fee (for all types of development applications)base fee 619.00$ 631.00$ 644.00$ Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Referral Fee (Minor Variances and Consent)base fee 320.00$ 326.00$ 333.00$ File Maintenance Fee per year 732.00$ 747.00$ 762.00$ Cash in Lieu of Parking Agreement base fee 5,228.00$ 5,333.00$ 5,450.00$ Section 37 (Bonusing Agreement)base fee 5,228.00$ 5,333.00$ 5,450.00$ Municipal Street Name Change each 1,681.00$ 1,715.00$ 1,749.00$ Municipal Addressing Change each 1,093.00$ 1,115.00$ 1,137.00$ Deeming By-law Fee each 4,159.00$ 4,242.00$ 4,327.00$ Additional Public Meeting Fee each 1,086.00$ 1,108.00$ 1,130.00$ Committee of Adjustment Consent Minor Variances or Permission General Fees Minor and Amending Plans (see Note 6: per m2 fee applicable only if there is an increase in GFA) Site Plan Exemption Recirculation/Revisions (where the applicant fails to revise drawings as requested by the Town beyond the third submission or the Applicant changes the plans/proposal) Lot Creation, Lot Addition, Establishment of Easements, Mortgage change over, Lease over 21 years More than one Variance related to a Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision Page 32 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule H Development Planning Division Effective January 1, 20XX Page 4 of 4 Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees 3) Major Zoning By-law Amendment An application that is a small scale amendment to the Official Plan policies and designations, having limited impact or policy implications beyond the subject lands. 2) Minor Official Plan Amendment 1) Major Official Plan Amendment Notes An application that is significant in scale and scope which may have greater impact or policy implication beyond the subject lands. Such applications may include those relating to multiple properties; site specific proposals that represent large scale development/significant change in use; and applications involving significant changes to the text/policies of the Official Plan. An application that is significant in scale and scope which may have greater impact or policy implication beyond the subject lands. Such applications may include: - an application relating to more than one property; - a site specific application, if considered to represent large scale redevelopment; - significant change in use and/or zone category; or - an application involving significant changes to the development standards or general provisions of the by-law. All fees set out herein shall be payable to the Town of Aurora upon the submission of the related application to the Town, unless otherwise provided herein. The fee amount shall be completed by the Applicant on the Fee Calculation Worksheet included with each Application Form. 50% of fees refunded if application is withdrawn prior to any Council or Committee of Adjustment consideration. Shall include amendments to existing site plan agreements for those properties with development agreements executed and registered after 2000. Staff shall determine, in consultation with other departments, if a site plan application is considered minor, an amendment or if a new site plan application is required. Payment of Fees Required due to an Owner's or Applicant's revisions or deferrals. 7) Recirculation Fee 6) Minor and Amending Site Plans All other lands within the draft plan excluding roads, road widenings and environmental protection lands. 5) Draft Plan of Subdivision An application for minor and small scale zoning amendment having no significant impact on adjoining lands. Minor application must be site specific and include:- a request for additional permitted use, within an existing building or with no significant impact on existing development standards; and - changes in development standards to accommodate a minor development or severance. 4) Minor Zoning By-law Amendment Page 33 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule I By-law Services Division Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Owner/Operator - Initial each $1,826.00 $1,863.00 $1,900.00 Owner/Operator - Renewal each $1,571.00 $1,602.00 $1,634.00 Entertainer - Initial each $165.00 $168.00 $171.00 Entertainer - Renewal each $150.00 $153.00 $156.00 Entertainer - Late Fee each $50.00 $51.00 $52.00 Entertainer - I.D. Card each $10.00 $11.00 $12.00 Initial each $138.00 $141.00 $144.00 Renewal each $71.00 $72.00 $73.00 Initial each $372.00 $379.00 $387.00 Renewal each $71.00 $72.00 $73.00 Owner - Initial each $1,969.00 $2,008.00 $2,048.00 Owner - Renewal each $1,694.00 $1,728.00 $1,762.00 Operator - Initial each $930.00 $949.00 $968.00 Operator - Renewal each $836.00 $853.00 $870.00 Provider - Initial each $115.00 $118.00 $121.00 Provider - Renewal each $99.00 $101.00 $103.00 Provider - Late Fee each $50.00 $51.00 $52.00 Provider - I.D. Card each $10.00 $11.00 $12.00 Officer Paid Duty (minimum three hours and two officers) per hour, per officer $56.00 $57.00 * Initial each $77.00 $79.00 $81.00 Renewal each $71.00 $72.00 $73.00 Instructors with vehicle - Initial each $105.00 $107.00 $109.00 Instructors with vehicle - Renewal each $94.00 $96.00 $98.00 Instructor with vehicle - Late Fee each $55.00 $57.00 $59.00 Instructor without vehicle - Initial each $99.00 $101.00 $103.00 Instructor without vehicle - Renewal each $83.00 $85.00 $87.00 Instructor without vehicle - Late Fee each $55.00 $57.00 $59.00 Change of Vehicle Fee each $55.00 $57.00 $59.00 Replacement Plate each $100.00 $102.00 $104.00 per season $77.00 $79.00 $81.00 per day $35.75 $36.50 $37.25 Application fee for an Existing Fence each $250.00 $255.00 * Application fee for a New Unconstructed Fence each $175.00 $179.00 * Initial each $255.00 $260.00 $265.00 Renewal each $204.00 $208.00 $212.00 Fence Exemption Fee (By-law coming Fall 2020 to Council) By-law Officer Paid Duty Adult Entertainment Parlour (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Auctioneers (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Billiard Hall (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Body Rub Parlour (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Driving School Instructors (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Door to Door Sales Agents (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Farmers Market (previously included in By-law 6092-18) Stall Permit Horse Riding Establishments (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Page 1 of 3 Page 34 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule I By-law Services Division Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Initial each $425.00 $434.00 $443.00 Renewal each $300.00 $306.00 $312.00 Owner - Initial each $168.00 $171.00 $174.00 Owner - Renewal each $87.00 $89.00 $91.00 Owner - Late Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Driver - Initial each $82.00 $84.00 $86.00 Driver - Renewal each $71.00 $72.00 $73.00 Driver - Late Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Change of Vehicle Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Replacement Plate each $100.00 $102.00 $104.00 I.D. Card each $10.00 $11.00 $12.00 Initial each $292.00 $294.00 $296.00 Renewal each $275.00 $277.00 $279.00 Owner/Operator - Initial each $275.00 $281.00 $287.00 Owner/Operator - Renewal each $117.00 $119.00 $121.00 Certificate of Compliance each $60.00 $62.00 $64.00 Insp (as per subsection 8.6.1 of By-law 4044-99.P) each $105.00 $107.00 $109.00 Owner - Motorized - Initial each $255.00 $260.00 $265.00 Owner - Motorized - Renewal each $224.00 $228.00 $233.00 Owner - Motorized - Late Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Owner - Motorized - Short Term each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Owner - No Motor - Initial each $235.00 $240.00 $245.00 Owner - No Motor - Renewal each $224.00 $228.00 $233.00 Owner - No Motor - Late Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Vendor - Initial each $100.00 $102.00 $104.00 Vendor - Renewal each $75.00 $77.00 $79.00 Vendor - Late Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Change of Vehicle Fee each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Replacement Plate each $100.00 $102.00 $104.00 I.D. Card each $10.00 $11.00 $12.00 Initial each $255.00 $260.00 $265.00 Renewal each $220.00 $224.00 $228.00 Mobile Sign each $110.00 $112.00 $114.00 Banner Sign each $110.00 $112.00 $114.00 Feather Banner Sign each $110.00 $112.00 $114.00 Portable Sign each $110.00 $112.00 $114.00 Special Event Sign each $110.00 $112.00 $114.00 Sign Retreival Fee per sign $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 Security Deposit Initial Application Only $510.00 $520.00 $530.00 Place of Amusement (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Second Hand Goods Vendors, Pawnbrokers and Salvage Yard Owners (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Refreshment Vehicles and Vendors (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Sign Application - Administered by By-law Services (previously included in By-law 5840-14) Property Standards (previously included in By-law 4044-99.P) Kennels (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Limousines (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Mobile Sign Installers (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Page 2 of 3 Page 35 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule I By-law Services Division Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Application for General Sign Permit (unless specified below)each $153.00 per application plus $10.20/square metre of total aggregate areas of all proposed signs $156.00 per application plus $10.40/square metre of total aggregate areas of all proposed signs $159.00 per application plus $10.60/square metre of total aggregate areas of all proposed signs Application for Billboard or Mural Sign per application $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Application for revision/renewal of a sign permit per application $153.00 $156.00 $159.00 Security Deposit per sign $510.00 $520.00 $530.00 Application for Sign Variance Request (within the scope limits described in 4.10(b) of By-law 5840.14)each $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Application for Appeal to Council (pursuant to 4.10(d) of By-law 5840.14)each $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Application for Sign Variance Request (exceeding the scope limits described in 4.10(e) of By-law 5840.14)each $612.00 $624.00 $636.00 Owner License - Initial each $528.00 $530.00 $532.00 Owner License - Renewal each $457.00 $459.00 $461.00 Owner License - Late Fee each $94.00 $96.00 $98.00 Broker License - Initial each $231.00 $233.00 $235.00 Broker License - Renewal each $83.00 $85.00 $87.00 Broker License - Late Fee each $83.00 $85.00 $87.00 Taxicab Driver License - Initial each $83.00 $85.00 $87.00 Taxicab Driver License - Renewal each $55.00 $57.00 $59.00 Taxicab Driver License - Late Fee each $55.00 $57.00 $59.00 Transfer of Owner License - General each $165.00 $169.00 $172.00 Transfer of Owner to Estate each $165.00 $169.00 $172.00 Transfer of Taxicab Plate to New Vehicle each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Annual Priority List Fee each $25.50 $26.00 $26.50 Replacement Taxicab Plate each $100.00 $102.00 $104.00 Taxicab Meter Reseal each $40.00 $41.00 $42.00 I.D. Card and Tariff Card each $10.00 $11.00 $12.00 Taxi Test Re-write each $30.60 $31.20 $31.80 Taxicab Identification Holder each $10.20 $10.40 $10.60 Initial $179.00 $183.00 $187.00 Renewal $255.00 $260.00 $265.00 Initial $204.00 $208.00 $212.00 Renewal $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Initial $204.00 $208.00 $212.00 Renewal $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Initial $204.00 $208.00 $212.00 Renewal $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Initial $204.00 $208.00 $212.00 Renewal $306.00 $312.00 $318.00 Inspection per hour $112.00 $114.00 $116.00 Re-Occupancy Inspection each $51.00 $52.00 $53.00 Taxicabs (previously included in By-law 5630-14) Sign Application - Administered by Building Services (previously included in By-law 5840-14) Vacant Registry (previously included in By-law 6114-18) Property Zoned Residential Property Zoned Commercial Property Zoned Promenade Property Zoned Institutional Property Zoned Industrial Page 3 of 3 Page 36 of 159 By-Law XXXX-20 Schedule J Animal Services Effective January 1, 20XX Description of Service for Fee or Service Charge Unit of Measure (i.e. per hour, page, document, etc.) 2020 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2021 changes to approved fees 2022 (Including H.S.T. where applicable) 2022 changes to approved fees Regular License each 20.40$ 20.80$ 21.20$ License for cat owned by Resident fifty-five (55) years of age or older each 10.20$ 10.40$ 10.60$ Regular License each 30.60$ 31.21$ 31.21$ License for 'Dangerous Dog' each 102.00$ 104.04$ 104.04$ License for dog owned by Resident fifty-five (55) years of age or older each 15.30$ 15.61$ 15.61$ License for guide dog or service animal (with proper documentation)each no charge no charge no charge First Impound each 20.40$ 20.81$ 20.81$ Second Impound each 30.60$ 31.21$ 31.21$ Third Impound each 51.00$ 52.02$ 52.02$ Dialy Maintenance each 15.30$ 15.61$ 15.61$ Cat or dog each 5.10$ 5.20$ 5.20$ Trapping Fee (Includes food and trap) per day $12.25 $12.50 * Private Property deceased wildlife removal (bagged) per animal $10.25 $10.50 * Private Property deceased wildlife removal (unbagged) per animal $20.50 $20.75 * Deceased Domestic - Small Size (up to 15 lbs) per animal $15.25 $15.50 * Deceased Domestic - Medium Size (between 16 and 40 lbs)per animal $30.75 $31.25 * Deceased Domestic - Large Size (between 41 and 100 lbs)per animal $46.00 $47.00 * Officer Paid Duty (minimum three hours, two Officers) per hour, per officer $56.00 $57.00 * Animal Control Services Replacement Tag (previously included in By-law 6197-19) Cat License (previously included in By-law 6197-19) Dog License (previously included in By-law 6197-19) Impound (previously included in By-law 6197-19) Page 1 of 1 Page 37 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FIN20-026 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: 2020 Interim Forecast Update Report – as of August 31, 2020 Prepared by: Tracy Evans, Financial Management Advisor Department: Finance Date: October 20, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. FIN20-026 be received for information. Executive Summary This report presents to Council the information to effectively monitor the financial performance of the Town’s tax levy and user rate funded operating budget as of August 31, 2020. COVID-19 continues to have a material financial impact on the Town’s operations.  An overall tax levy surplus of $130,000 is anticipated by fiscal year end based upon the Town’s present COVID-19 assumptions  A deficit of $254,800 is forecasted by fiscal year end for the Town’s water, wastewater and stormwater operations  COVID-19 continues to have a significant financial impact on the Town’s operations  The Town has and will continue to search for opportunities to mitigate its COVID- 19 financial impacts  The timing of the province’s implementation of its framework for reopening our province will have a particular impact on the forecasted financial results for the Town’s facilities and community programs These forecasted variances will continue to be subject to material change as the COVID-19 pandemic progresses over the remainder of the fiscal year. Future Council decisions may also have an impact. Any operational budget short-falls or surpluses remaining at year end will require an offsetting adjustment from/to the rate stabilization reserve as defined in the Town’s 2020 surplus control by-law. Page 38 of 159 October 20, 2020 2 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Background To assist Council in fulfilling its roles and responsibilities with respect to Town finances and accountability, Finance has worked with all departments to review the corporation’s operations financial performance to date. Each Director has reviewed their department’s operating budget versus its results to date and remaining outstanding plans in consideration of the Town’s present COVID-19 assumptions, and forecasted an expected year end position. Finance staff have reviewed each submission and performed the necessary consolidation. The magnitude of the impact of COVID-19 on the Town of Aurora remains unclear, but the existing physical distancing measures and economic shut-down impacts have already been significant. On March 20th the Town of Aurora announced financial relief measures which included the deferral of its second tax levy installment payment due date by approximately two months for residential tax payers. A similar offer was made available to commercial tax payers on an application basis. On March 20th the Town of Aurora announced the waiving of all late payment penalties on any unpaid water bill amounts owing until June 30, 2020. On April 28th, staff presented Council with its first projection of the possible financial impacts to the Town that were directly related to COVID-19. This forecast assumed the status quo at that time continued for the rest of 2020. On May 26th Council extended the Town’s waiving of all late payment penalties on any unpaid water bill amounts owing until the end of the calendar year. It also approved the commencement of the Town’s normal monthly rate of 1.25% for penalties on taxes for the period of July 1 to December 31, 2020 On June 16th Council approved ‘break-even’ rates for the Town’s water and wastewater services. It also approved the Town’s new stormwater rates for the next 12 months. These ‘break-even’ rates adjusted the Town’s originally approved 2020 rates to reflect its anticipated savings on wholesale water and wastewater treatment costs stemming from a York Region decision to maintain its 2019 rates. On July 24th the Province announced that York Region could move to Stage 3 of its Framework for Re-opening which allowed the Town to consider the reopening of additional facilities, programs and amenities. Page 39 of 159 October 20, 2020 3 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Analysis The COVID-19 pandemic continues to significantly impact the Town’s operations. Its impacts are volatile and difficult to predict. For this forecast, staff have made assumptions what the pandemic’s impact would be until fiscal year end. The Town strives to align its assumptions as much as possible with what it feels its reality might be. This report’s forecast assumptions are based on the report to General Committee on September 8, 2020 (CMS20-020) which outlined the Town’s steps to safely reopening services. These assumptions differ slightly from those used in the last Interim Forecast Update to Council as of the May 31, 2020, as this forecast assumes that the reopening of services will be at a more moderate pace. Staff will continue to adjust its assumptions in an effort to keep up with its changing pandemic reality. An overall tax levy surplus of $130,000 is anticipated by fiscal year end based upon the Town’s present COVID-19 assumptions The Town’s tax levy funded operations are forecasted to finish the year with an anticipated surplus of $130,000 based upon its present COVID-19 assumptions, representing a minor increase from what was forecasted at the end of May. This surplus continues to be much lower than what the Town would normally expect at this point in the year. A detailed break-down of the Town’s current forecasted variance by department can be found in Attachment #1. This report has been simplified to show only the net budget amount, the forecasted ending position for each item, and the variance to budget. Overall, the Town’s approved budget for 2020 includes $71,774,400 in approved expenditures, funded by $21,669,900 in revenues consisting of user fees, charges, and investment income, and a total tax levy of $50,104,500. The Town has budgeted a “salary gapping savings” amount of $150,000 as part of its total operating budget. This provision is to recognize that while salaries in all departments are based on 100% usage, with no staff departures, in reality there is some staff turnover and periodic vacancies that arise naturally during the year. A share of this amount has been formally allocated to each department Director’s Office on a pro-rata basis. The COVID-19 pandemic’s specific impacts upon the Town’s forecasted variances is presented in more detail later in this report. Page 40 of 159 October 20, 2020 4 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 A summary of the Town’s key forecasted variances by department follows. CAO and Council Council and the Office of the CAO are forecasting to conclude the fiscal year with a surplus of $140,100 on a net operating budget of $1,950,700. This surplus relates to COVID-19 driven sponsorship grant, committee and conference savings, as well as favourable consulting and advertising variances. Corporate Services Corporate Services is forecasting a surplus of $38,400 on a total net operating budget of $8,726,800. This surplus is mostly attributable to COVID-19 driven salary savings arising from the delay of all new staffing actions partially offset by higher than anticipated outside legal and heritage consultant fees relating to the Yonge Street heritage appeals. Finance Finance is forecasting a deficit of $53,500 on a net operating budget of $2,061,600 driven by reduced water and tax administrative revenues as a result of COVID-19. This deficit has been partially offset by COVID-19 driven salary savings resulting from the delay of all new staffing. Fire Services As of June 30, 2020 CYFS is forecasting a year end operating surplus of $1,281,400 on a total approved operating budget of $28,393,700. This surplus is mostly attributable to salary & benefit and vehicle repairs & maintenance savings. Aurora’s share of CYFS’ total approved budget is $11,749,300. As per normal practice, should a CYFS surplus or deficit arise by fiscal year end, it will be offset by an equal contribution to/from the shared CYFS Reserve, thus leaving the Town’s forecasted Fire Services requirements as budgeted. Operational Services Operational Services, excluding water, wastewater & storm water services, is forecasting an overall surplus of $211,900 on a net operating budget of $10,479,700. Key contributors to this surplus are COVID-19 driven salary and contract savings relating to Park Operations and Crossing Guard services. In addition, savings are forecasted from fleet management repair and operating material as well as, from solid Page 41 of 159 October 20, 2020 5 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 waste collection contracts. These favourable variances are partially offset by an unfavourable variance in winter management resulting from larger than anticipated contract, operating material and salary costs arising from a larger number of snow events at the beginning of 2020 and reduced ball diamond/soccer field revenues as a result of COVID-19. As per the Town’s winter control reserve policy, if the overall Town operating budget is unable to accommodate the full reported winter management deficit, any required funding short-fall can be drawn from this reserve. As the Town’s present overall forecasted position indicates that it will have sufficient funds available to offset this noted short-fall, a draw from the winter control reserve is not necessary at this time. However, should it become necessary the Town will access this reserve as required. Operational Services’ salaries and wages are split between tax levy and rate (water, wastewater & storm water services) funded programs. In any given year, the extent of operational service staff support of tax levy or rate funded programs is difficult to predict; consequently some variability is not unusual. Community Services Community Services is forecasting a $160,500 deficit on a net operating budget of $9,592,300. The key contributors to this deficit all relate to COVID-19 drivers including lost community program, sponsorship/advertising, ice rental and special event revenues partially offset by salary and contract savings. These unfavourable variances are partially offset by net facility operation utility/heating, contract and operating material savings. Library Square unspent savings are anticipated relating to the implementation of the Town’s financial strategy to phase in its projected incremental operating costs prior to it becoming fully operational in 2022. Any surplus funds relating to Library Square will be contributed to the Town’s rate stabilization reserve as per the 2020 surplus control bylaw. These funds can then be drawn upon as required in future years in order to manage any one-time implementation/start-up operating costs that may exceed the on- going operational funding estimates. Planning & Development Services Planning & Development Services is forecasting a surplus of $271,300. This surplus is attributable to higher than anticipated development driven engineering revenues and vacant position savings. Page 42 of 159 October 20, 2020 6 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Not included in this variance is a projected Building Services’ surplus of $322,800 as it is a self-funded function as per provincial legislation. If it is unable to recognize sufficient revenues to offset its expenses in a given fiscal year, it will draw from its dedicated reserve in order to balance its operating budget. If it recognizes excess revenues, these revenues are used to replenish its reserve. This year’s forecasted surplus results from vacant position salary savings, offset by a slight reduction in revenue. Corporate Revenues & Expenses Corporate Revenues and Expenses is forecasting a deficit of $317,800 on a net operating budget of $4,798,700. The primary drivers of this deficit are forecasted tax penalty and investment income revenue losses resulting from COVID-19. This unfavourable variance is partially offset by projected corporate salary and benefits savings. The Town’s recent of $1,298,000 in Safe Restart grant funding in support of its COVID- 19 pressures has been included as part of the Town’s corporate revenues. At present, the Town is forecasting to contribute this full amount to its tax rate stabilization reserve for access in future fiscal years in the management of its COVID-19 pressures. If required, the Town will access these funds in 2020. Aurora Public Library Contribution The Aurora Public Library anticipates that it may conclude the 2020 fiscal year in a surplus position as a result of COVID-19. Total Tax Levy The Town is forecasting to collect a total of $50,146,700 in tax levy revenue in 2020. This amount includes an anticipated BIA special tax levy of $41,200 which has not yet been considered for approval by Council. The Tax Levy Funded Net Operating Forecast Update can be found in Attachment 1. A deficit of $254,800 is forecasted by fiscal year end for the Town’s water, wastewater and stormwater operations The user rate funded operations service line budgets include primarily fixed operational costs, funded by the net proceeds from the sale of water, wastewater and storm water services. These fixed operational costs include staff and service maintenance costs related to maintaining the infrastructure systems, water quality testing, and the billing Page 43 of 159 October 20, 2020 7 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 and customer service functions. These costs are not directly impacted by the volume of water flowing through the system. The fixed costs relating to water and wastewater are funded from the net revenues earned by these services which are variable in nature due to the fact that they are based upon metered water consumption volumes. Storm water revenues are not subject to the same volatility as the water and wastewater service lines as it is billed as a flat fee. The Town’s user rate funded operations is currently projected to close the year with a deficit of $254,800. This variance is attributable to a deficit of $414,200 arising in storm water services partially offset by a $159,400 surplus from water / wastewater services. The primary driver of this overall deficit is a storm water revenue short-fall arising from the understatement of 2020 rates due to a calculation error. Water and wastewater services experienced a significant revenue short-fall as a result of their originally budgeted 2020 rates being reduced to reflect York Region’s offered wholesale water and wastewater savings. A revenue short-fall relating to the Town’s freeze of all water penalties until the calendar year end is also forecasted. These revenue short-falls were more than offset through savings achieved from wholesale water and wastewater and other COVID-19 mitigation measures such as the reduction of non-essential administrative expenses and a refocusing of available resources on operations and maintenance. No negative impact is anticipated to the Town’s delivery of these services as a result of these mitigation measures. This forecasted variance will continue to be subject to change over the remainder of the fiscal year. The COVID-19 variances will be presented in more detail later in this report. Should any user rate funded service deficits remain at fiscal year-end, they will require an offsetting funding transfer from their respective reserve funds as set out in the town’s 2020 surplus control bylaw. The user rate funded operations summary can be found in Attachment 2. COVID-19 continues to have a significant financial impact on the Town’s operations As one could expect, COVID-19 continues to have significant impact on the Town’s forecasted financial results. Table 1 offers a summary of the Town’s current forecasted COVID-19 financial impacts based upon present assumptions. Page 44 of 159 October 20, 2020 8 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Table 1Forecasted COVID-19 Revenue Losses $000s Tax Levy Funded Operations: Lost senior, aquatics, camp & fitness membership revenues $1,640.9 Lost ice and other rental revenues 1,037.0 Lost tax penalty revenues 371.6 Lost sponsorship & advertising revenues 164.3 Lost development revenues 118.7 Lost investment income 108.5 Lost water & tax administrative revenues 98.5 Lost bylaw enforcement revenues 72.5 Lost baseball diamond/soccer field rental revenues 64.4 Lost special event revenues 45.0 Other lost revenues 238.2 Total Tax Funded 3,959.6 User Rate Funded Operations: Lost water/wastewater revenues due to rate decrease 885.8 Lost water penalty revenues 165.8 Total User Rate Funded 1,051.6 Total $5,011.20 The Town has and will continue to search for opportunities to mitigate its COVID- 19 financial impacts To date the Town has already initiated several measures in an effort to mitigate its COVID-19 financial impacts such as the temporary release of over 280 part time and contract staff, the pulling of all ice pads and the draining of all recreation facility pools. Table 2 presents some of the key COVID-19 savings that they Town has already achieved, or is forecasting to achieve by fiscal year end based upon its present COVID- 19 assumptions. Table 2Town Mitigation Measure Savings to Date $000s Page 45 of 159 October 20, 2020 9 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Tax Levy Funded Operations: Community program part time and contract savings $1,596.8 Town facility closure net operating savings 616.8 Salary savings resulting from delayed recruitment of new staff 446.0 Business Support salary and other cost savings 330.5 Other salary savings 289.1 Park operations part time, maintenance & operating supply savings 213.1 Special event part time and contract savings 200.5 Crossing guard services salary & contract savings 78.8 Other savings 317.8 Total Tax Funded 4,089.4 User Rate Funded Operations: Water & wastewater wholesale cost savings 526.9 Other mitigating administration and operational savings 524.7 Total User Rate Funded 1,051.6 Total $5,141.0 The timing of the province’s implementation of its framework for reopening our province will continue to have a significant impact on the forecasted financial results for the Town COVID-19 has had the most profound impact on the Town’s facility and community program functions. The financial performance of these functions will hinge on the timing of the province’s relaxation of the present pandemic measures. To date, overall the Town has found sufficient mitigating savings to offset the significant COVID-19 driven deficits that it has been subject to. There is little opportunity for the mitigation of COVID-19 financial impacts within the Town’s user rate funded operations budget other than through direct wholesale cost savings as the majority of its costs are driven by clean drinking water legislation or a requirement to maintain the Town’s underground infrastructure at the Town’s desired levels of service. However, with this in mind, staff have examined its operations for possible financial mitigation opportunities. The following mitigation measures have been identified and are reflected in the above presented forecast: reduction of administrative expenses and a refocusing of available resources on operations and maintenance. There is the potential for further savings in contracts and supplies as a portion (30-35%) of the approved budget is earmarked for the response of emergency repairs required Page 46 of 159 October 20, 2020 10 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 due to breaks and leaks. However, it would not be prudent to re-direct these funds elsewhere as they would need to be available should emergency repairs be required. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Legal Considerations None. Financial Implications The actual resultant annual surplus or deficit in the general operating budget and water / wastewater budgets will be allocated by Council to / from various reserves at fiscal year- end as per the Town’s surplus control bylaw. In an effort to minimize the impact to the Town’s reserves resulting from COVID-19, if required it may access its available Safe Restart funding in order to offset any net COVID short-falls experienced from either its tax rate or user rate funded operations. There are no other immediate financial implications arising from this report. Council fulfills its role, in part, by receiving and reviewing this financial status report on the operations of the municipality relative to the approved budget. Page 47 of 159 October 20, 2020 11 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this project. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform, this report will be posted to the Town’s website. Link to Strategic Plan Outlining and understanding the Town’s present financial status at strategic intervals throughout the year contributes to achieving the Strategic Plan guiding principle of “Leadership in Corporate Management” and improves transparency and accountability to the community. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Not Applicable Conclusions Having completed eight months of operations, the Town is presently forecasting to end the year with a favourable budget variance from its tax levy funded operations of $130,000. This forecast is will continue to be heavily influenced by the Town’s COVID- 19 pandemic assumptions which will continue to be subject to change over the remainder of the fiscal year as the Town strives to keep pace with this volatile situation. This forecast will also continue to be subject to other more normal influencing variables such as the ultimate level of town services that will be consumed by fiscal year end. Any remaining surplus or deficit at fiscal year-end will be offset through a contribution or draw from the Town’s rate stabilization reserve as per the town’s 2020 surplus control by-law. The Water rate funded budget is presently forecasting an unfavourable budget variance of $254,800. Page 48 of 159 October 20, 2020 12 of 12 Report No. FIN20-026 Attachments Attachment #1 – Tax Levy Funded Net Operating Forecast Update Attachment #2 – Water Rate Funded Net Operating Forecast Update Previous Reports FIN20-017 – 2020 User Rate Funded Forecast Update – As of April 30, 2020 FIN20-018 – 2020 Tax Levy Funded Operations Forecast Update – As of May 31, 2020 FIN20-012 – Property Tax Due Dates & Penalties CMS20-020 – Pandemic Recovery Planning – Update No. 2 Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 1, 2020 Approvals Approved by Rachel Wainwright-van Kessel, CPA, CMA, Director, Finance/Treasurer Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 49 of 159 Attachment 1 Shown in $,000's Council Council Administration 564.9$ 540.2$ 24.7$ 4.4 % Council Programs/Grants 4.0 4.0 - - Advisory Committees 8.0 3.9 4.1 51.3 % Council Office Total 576.9$ 548.1$ 28.8$ 5.0 % Chief Administrative Office CAO Administration 564.7$ 553.2$ 11.5$ 2.0 % Communications 809.1 709.3 99.8 12.3 % Chief Administrative Office Total 1,373.8$ 1,262.5$ 111.3$ 8.1 % Council and C.A.O. Combined 1,950.7$ 1,810.6$ 140.1$ 7.2 % Corporate Services Corporate Services Administration 426.5$ 392.2$ 34.3 8.0 % Legal Services 1,568.2 1,710.7 (142.5) (9.1 %) Legislative & Administrative Services 741.7 716.2 25.5 3.4 % Human Resources 961.1 998.0 (36.9) (3.8 %) Elections 92.5 95.2 (2.7) (2.9 %) Information Technology 2,936.9 2,777.9 159.0 5.4 % Telecommunications 172.9 169.7 3.2 1.9 % By-law Services 635.7 633.4 2.3 0.4 % Animal Control 265.6 262.9 2.7 1.0 % Customer Service 883.9 890.8 (6.9) (0.8 %) Emergency Preparedness 41.8 41.4 0.4 1.0 % Corporate Services Total 8,726.8$ 8,688.4$ 38.4$ 0.4 % Favourable / (Unfavourable) Town of Aurora Tax Levy Funded Net Operating Forecast Update as at August 31, 2020 NET ADJUSTED BUDGET FORECAST Variance Page 50 of 159 Attachment 1 Shown in $,000's Favourable / (Unfavourable) Town of Aurora Tax Levy Funded Net Operating Forecast Update as at August 31, 2020 NET ADJUSTED BUDGET FORECAST Variance Finance Director's Office 325.5$ 335.4$ (9.9)$ (3.0 %) Financial Reporting & Revenue 573.3 703.6 (130.3) (22.7 %) Financial Management Services 645.0 577.7 67.3 10.4 % Procurement Services 517.8 498.4 19.4 3.7 % Financial Services Total 2,061.6$ 2,115.1$ (53.5)$ (2.6 %) Fire Services Central York Fire 11,755.3 11,755.3 - - Total Fire Services 11,755.3 11,755.3 - - Operational Services Operational Services Administration 299.8$ 327.7$ (27.9)$ (9.3 %) Fleet & Equipment 837.1 752.6 84.5 10.1 % Winter Management 1,662.5 2,191.3 (528.8) (31.8 %) Road Network Operations 2,652.2 2,310.6 341.6 12.9 % Parks/Open Spaces 2,654.8 2,458.5 196.3 7.4 % Waste Collection & Recycling 2,373.3 2,227.1 146.2 6.2 % Operational Services Total 10,479.7$ 10,267.8$ 211.9$ 2.0 % Community Services Community Services Administration 1,271.5$ 1,291.7$ (20.2)$ (1.6 %) Business Support (534.5) 360.9 (895.4) (167.5 %) Recreational Programming/Community Dev.2,078.8 1,940.5 138.3 6.7 % Facilities 6,776.5 6,159.7 616.8 9.1 % Community Services Total 9,592.3$ 9,752.8$ (160.5)$ (1.7 %) Planning & Development Services Development Planning (442.1)$ (338.6)$ (103.5)$ (23.4 %) Long Range & Strategic Planning 729.7 544.4 185.3 25.4 % Page 51 of 159 Attachment 1 Shown in $,000's Favourable / (Unfavourable) Town of Aurora Tax Levy Funded Net Operating Forecast Update as at August 31, 2020 NET ADJUSTED BUDGET FORECAST Variance Engineering Service Operations 493.9 304.4 189.5 38.4 % Net Building Department Operations 614.2$ 291.4$ 322.8 52.6 % Contribution from Building Reserve (614.2) (291.4) (322.8) (52.6 %) Total Building Services - - - - Planning & Development Services Total 781.5$ 510.2$ 271.3$ 34.7 % Corporate Revenues & Expenses Supplementary Taxes & Payments-in-Lieu (1,023.0)$ (1,128.4)$ 105.4$ 10.3 % Contribution of Excess SUPPs to reserves 400.0 502.0 (102.0) (25.5 %) Penalties on Unpaid Property Taxes (1,395.3) (1,023.7) (371.6) (26.6 %) Overhead Cost Re-allocation to Water & Building (2,050.3) (2,050.3) - - All Other Revenue (5,907.0) (5,798.5) (108.5) (1.8 %) Cash to Capital 5,700.2 5,700.2 - - All Other Expense 9,074.1 8,915.2 158.9 1.8 % 4,798.7$ 5,116.5$ (317.8)$ (6.6 %) TOTAL TAX LEVY FUNDED OPERATIONS 50,146.7$ 50,016.7$ 130.0$ 0.3 % TOTAL TAX LEVY (50,146.7)$ (50,146.7)$ -$ - OPERATING (SURPLUS) DEFICIT - (130.0)$ 130.0$ 0.2 % Surplus Surplus Page 52 of 159 Attachment 2 Shown in $,000's Water Services Retail Revenues (11,546.1) (11,264.2) (281.9)$ (2.4 %) Penalties (175.0) (9.2) (165.8) (94.7 %) Other (230.1) (270.9) 40.8 17.7 % Total Revenues (11,951.2) (11,544.3) (406.9)$ (3.4 %) Wholesale water purchase 7,569.5 7,567.0 2.5 0.0 % Operations and maintenance 922.9 901.8 21.1 2.3 % Administration and billing 1,009.7 800.5 209.2 20.7 % Corporate overhead allocation 749.1 749.1 - - Infrastructure sustainability reserve contributions 1,700.0 1,700.0 - - Total Expenditures 11,951.20 11,718.4 232.8$ 1.9 % Net Operating Water Services - 174.1 (174.1)$ n/a Waste Water Services Retail Revenues (14,741.0) (14,137.1) (603.9)$ (4.1 %) Penalties - - - n/a Other (90.0) (92.9) 2.9 3.2 % Total Revenues (14,831.0) (14,230.0) (601.0)$ (4.1 %) Sewer discharge fees 11,459.3 10,934.9 524.4$ 4.6 % Operations and maintenance 1,225.1 815.0 410.1$ 33.5 % Administration and billing 261.4 261.4 -$ - Corporate overhead allocation 585.2 585.2 - - Infrastructure sustainability reserve contributions 1,300.0 1,300.0 - - Total Expenditures 14,831.0 13,896.5 934.5$ 6.3 % Net Operating Waste Water Services - (333.5) 333.5$ n/a Total Water and Waste Water Services - (159.4) 159.4$ n/a Town of Aurora User Rate Net Operating Report as at August 31, 2020 ADJUSTED BUDGET FORECAST Variance Favourable / (Unfavourable) Page 53 of 159 Shown in $,000's ADJUSTED BUDGET FORECAST Variance Favourable / (Unfavourable) Storm Water Services Retail Revenues (2,511.4) (2,056.5) (454.9)$ (18.1 %) Penalties - - - n/a Other - - - n/a Total Revenues (2,511.4) (2,056.5) (454.9)$ (18.1 %) Operations and maintenance 769.6 728.9 40.7 5.3 % Administration and billing 105.4 105.4 - - Corporate overhead allocation 36.4 36.4 - - Infrastructure sustainability reserve contributions 1,600.0 1,600.0 - - Total Expenditures 2,511.4 2,470.7 40.7$ 1.6 % Net Operating Storm Water Services - 414.2 (414.2)$ n/a OPERATING (SURPLUS) DEFICIT - 254.8$ (254.8)$ (1.1 %) Defict Defict Page 54 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. OPS20-016 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Tree Removal Permit Applications - 126 Temperance Street and 53 Metcalfe Street Prepared by: Sara Tienkamp, Manager, Parks & Fleet Department: Operational Services Date: October 20, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. OPS20-016 be received; and 2. That the Tree Removal Permit Application for 126 Temperance Street be approved; and 3. That the Tree Removal Permit Application for 53 Metcalfe Street be approved. Executive Summary This report provides Council with information on two (2) Tree Removal Applications on properties with trees defined as “Heritage” under the Tree protection Bylaw 5850-16:  Locust tree in decline at 126 Temperance Street a safety concern for the resident and their children.  Removal of Black Walnut tree at 53 Metcalfe Street stopped by Bylaw Services. Page 55 of 159 October 20, 2020 2 of 5 Report No. OPS20-016 Background The Town of Aurora’s Tree Protection Bylaw 5850-16 defines a “Heritage Tree(s)” as: any tree, including but not limited to, pairs of trees, avenues or windrows of trees, grove or arboreal remnants, or one (1) or more trees that form part of cultural heritage landscape that is on private property and is: (i) Located within a heritage conservation district as designated under Part V of the OHA: (ii) Designated under, or located on a property designated under Part IV of the OHA: (iii) Designated by the Ontario Urban Forest Council; (iv) Listed on the Towns Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. The properties located at 126 Temperance Street and 53 Metcalfe Street are listed on the Towns Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest and as such are subject to Section 9 (1) (b) of the Bylaw 5850-16: If a tree subject to an application is found by the Director to be a Heritage Tree, the Director shall not issue a permit unless the injury, destruction or removal is approved by Council following a review by the Town’s Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC). Analysis Locust tree in decline at 126 Temperance Street a safety concern for the resident and their children In early June 2020, the owner at 126 Temperance Street contacted the Parks Division to inquire about the removal of a dying locust tree from their property. The tree apparently was dropping branches and causing a safety concern for the resident and their children when in the rear yard. The Town’s Forestry Technician attended the site to determine if the tree was of immediate danger or an imminent threat. It was determined that the tree is in a state of Page 56 of 159 October 20, 2020 3 of 5 Report No. OPS20-016 decline, due to the extreme deep freeze temperature variance over the past couple years. This extensive dieback in the crown is due to ruptured cells in the structure of the limbs. The arboriculture field has observed this problem throughout the Region of York. Staff advised the resident that the locust tree was alive and though in decline, staff could not authorize removal as it was not an immediate danger and the property is listed on the Town’s Registry of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Bylaw 5850 -16. The Owners were advised that their application for removal would need to proceed through the Heritage Advisory Committee as per the bylaw for review, followed by Council approval. On July 21 2020, the Parks Division received a formal Tree Removal Permit Application from the owners of 126 Temperance Street included as supporting documentation are photos of the tree, proposed replanting plan and letter explaining the desire to remove the tree. Removal of Black Walnut tree at 53 Metcalfe Street stopped by Bylaw Services On August 19, 2020, the Owner at 53 Metcalfe Street arranged for the removal of a 45 cm Black Walnut tree. A concerned resident called the Town regarding tree cutting and Bylaw Services deployed an officer to the site. When the officer arrived, the tree company was actively removing the tree and approximately 40 percent of the crown of the tree had been removed. The Officer immediately asked for the work to cease, explaining that the tree was on a Listed Property and that its removal was not permitted, without the approval of a Tree Removal Permit by Council, after review by the Heritage Advisory Committee. The Town’s Forestry Technician attended the site and has confirmed that the tree is in good health. While the tree was aggressively pruned with the intention of removal, what remains is viable and structurally sound; however, it is not aesthetically pleasing and crown is unbalanced. On August 28, 2020, the Parks Division received a formal Tree Removal Permit Application from the owners of 53 Metcalfe Street. Included as supporting documentation are photos of the tree and letter explaining the desire to remove the tree, due to safety concerns for their children, home and property. Page 57 of 159 October 20, 2020 4 of 5 Report No. OPS20-016 Advisory Committee Review The Tree Permit Applications for both properties were reviewed by HAC at its September 14, 2020 meeting. The reports were considered and discussed with the committee concluding there were no objections to the removal of the trees on either property. Legal Considerations Since the trees are located on listed properties, only Council has the authority to approve the removal of the trees, after review by the Heritage Advisory Committee. Financial Implications As the trees in question are located on private property, their removal will be solely at the property owner’s expense should Council approve their associated tree removal permit applications. The Town has also collected the appropriate fees and security deposits relating to these applications. Communications Considerations Enter text Link to Strategic Plan This report supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability by investigating opportunities to assess the merits of measuring the Town’s natural capital assets. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Enter further alternative options as required. Conclusions That Council receive the review of the report and applications and that the Tree Removal Applications for 126 Temperance Street and 53 Metcalfe Street be approved. Page 58 of 159 October 20, 2020 5 of 5 Report No. OPS20-016 Attachments Attachment #1 – Tree Removal Permit Applications for 126 Temperance Street and 53 Metcalfe Street Attachment #2 – Letter from Property Owners for 126 Temperance Street Attachment #3 – Photo of Locust Tree for Removal and Replanting Plan for 126 Temperance Street Attachment #4 – Letter from Property Owners & Neighbour for 53 Metcalfe Street Attachment #5 – Photo of Black Walnut Tree at 53 Metcalfe Street Previous Reports None. Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 1, 2020 Approvals Approved by Allan D. Downey, Director, Operational Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 59 of 159 Attachment 1 Page 60 of 159 Page 61 of 159 Page 62 of 159 Page 63 of 159 Page 64 of 159 Page 65 of 159 Attachment 2 Page 66 of 159 Attachment 3aPage 67 of 159 Attachment 3b Page 68 of 159 Attachment 4 Page 69 of 159 Page 70 of 159 Page 71 of 159 Attachment 5Page 72 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS20-60 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Heritage Designation for 28 Wellington Street West (“Alfred Love House”) Prepared by: Carlson Tsang, Planner/Heritage Planning Department: Planning and Development Services Date: October 20, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-60 be received; and 2. That the property at 28 Wellington Street, where the building known as “Alfred Love House”, is located be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act as a property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; and 3. That the Town Clerk be authorized to publish and serve Council’s Notice of Intention to Designate in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act; and 4. That the designation by-law be brought before Council for adoption if no objections are received within the thirty (30) day period as per the Ontario Heritage Act. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide General Committee with the necessary information to support the designation of 28 Wellington Street West as a Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.  The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) prepared by the owner’s Heritage Consultant concludes that the property meets the prescribed criteria in O. Reg. 09/06 for heritage designation. Page 73 of 159 October 20, 2020 2 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060  The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group is of the opinion that the property is in the ‘Group 1’ category, suggesting that it is of major significance and worthy of heritage designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Background Property Description 28 Wellington Street West is located at the northeast corner of Machell Avenue and Wellington Street West, approximately 130 m (426.5 ft) west of Yonge Street (see Attachment 1). The property is listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. There is a two-storey residence on the property known as “The Alfred Love House” constructed circa 1883. Vehicular access from Wellington Street is provided via a shared driveway with the property immediately to the east. History of the Property In 1797, the Crown granted 210 acres of land on Concession 1, Lot 81 in King Township (the lands located west of Yonge Street) to Thomas Philips. The lands were later sold to a local mill owner and farmer named Jacob Hollingshead. In 1853, the R.P. Irwin purchased the lands from the Hollingshead family and began to subdivide the lands into smaller lots, which created the subject property. In 1881, the property was purchased by Alfred Love who was a teacher in the local community. Biographical records and source material suggests that Love built the house that currently exists on the property in 1883. The house was constructed in the Second Empire Style which grew in popularity in Canada starting in the 1870s. Love later left the teaching profession and began work as a book-keeper for the Fleury Foundry located across the street from his new home on Wellington Street. Love continued to work for the foundry for a decade before again changing careers and becoming a real estate agent and an insurance agent around 1890. Love later became increasingly involved in the community and Town life. He served on Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was also appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896, in addition to duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes. Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. In his final years, he Page 74 of 159 October 20, 2020 3 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060 served as secretary of the public school board until 1941. Loved died in 1943 at the age of 94. Upon the death of Love’s eldest daughter in 1951, the property was sold outside the family. A plaque was added to the front of the house around 1984 which named it “Alfred Love House”. The property was then owned by Margaret Proctor for a decade before selling it to Hazel Kennedy in 1961. Kennedy sold the property to Edward and Dorothy Kavanagh in 1978, who then sold it two years later to Adrienne Cameron in 1980. At some point during this time, the house was converted to a duplex between the first and second floor. In 1999, the property was purchased by the current owner, Lois Creelman, who has maintained the property as a duplex rented to tenants. Architectural Features and Setting The Alfred Love House is one of the very few dwellings in Aurora of the Second Empire architectural style characterized by a square massing and a mansard roof with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing. The main house is supported by a fieldstone foundation with a central masonry wall. The exterior wall is clad with a yellow/buff brick on the south and west elevation, and a painted shiplap wood siding on the north and east elevation. The front façade features a central gable roof above a semi-circular brick door opening with decorative wood trim and semi-circular transom with wood shutter. The east elevation contains a brick chimney which was at some point cut down in height and repaired with new brick and metal cap. With the exception of the basement windows, the original masonry openings with both flat and arched brick lintels on the ground floor remain intact. There are several dormer windows complete with decorative wood window surrounds. The house is surrounded by generous lawns and is elevated from the public road with views overlooking Wellington Street. There are currently dense trees along the west property line that obscure the visibility of the house from Machell Avenue. The property is built with a stone retaining wall fronting Wellington Street and Machell Avenue. A concrete stair with metal handrail is located at the front to provide access to the property from the sidewalk. Page 75 of 159 October 20, 2020 4 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060 Ontario Heritage Act 28 Wellington Street West is currently a non-designated property listed on the Town’s Heritage Register. The Ontario Heritage Act enables municipalities to pass a by-law to individually designate a property of cultural heritage value or interest. Individual properties being considered for heritage designation must meet one or more of the prescribed criteria from the O. Reg. 9/06, with respect to design or physical value; historical or associative value; and contextual value. Provincial Policy Statement (2020) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest. The PPS identifies that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. Built heritage resource is defined in the PPS as a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community; and they are generally located on a property that has been designated under Part IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or included on local, provincial and/or federal registers. York Region and Town of Aurora Official Plans The York Region Official Plan encourages local municipalities to compile and maintain a register of significant cultural heritage resources, in consultation with heritage experts and local heritage committees. It requires local municipalities to conserve significant cultural heritage resources and ensure that development and site alteration of adjacent lands to protected heritage properties will conserve the attributes of the protected heritage property. The Town’s Official Plan states that all significant heritage resources shall be designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act to ensure effective protection and their continuing maintenance, conservation and restoration. Analysis The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) prepared by the owner’s Heritage Consultant concludes that the property meets the prescribed criteria from O. Reg. 09/06 for heritage designation. Page 76 of 159 October 20, 2020 5 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060 The owner retained Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) to prepare a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) to assess the heritage value of the subject property (see Attachment 2). The report concludes that the subject property meets the criteria for heritage designation under Ontario Regulation 09/06 based on the design and contextual association for its exterior elements and setting. Below is a summary of the comments in the CHER: Design or Physical Value The house is one of five remaining examples of the Second Empire Style of architectural design in the Town of Aurora. It is arguably one of the finest due to its location along a prominent street and its large lawn that surrounds the house (both key characteristics of the Second Empire Style). Historical or Associated Value The building has historical association with Alfred Love, a well-known public servant who made considerable contribution to the local community. Love served on Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for a local high school. He was also appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896 and work for the Town in this capacity well into the 20th Century. He also performed duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes and Secretary of the Public School Board. Contextual Value The property supports the historical character of this neighborhood within the “Old Town” of the Aurora Promenade. The house was constructed in 1883 and is one of the remaining houses in the residential neighborhoods that surround the main street. At one time, the house could conceivably have been a landmark due to its proximity to the commercial main street as well as its setting above Wellington Street, the major east-west thoroughfare in Aurora. The CHER recommends the following attributes be listed in the Designation By-law should the property become designated: Page 77 of 159 October 20, 2020 6 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060  Overall massing with main house and rear wing;  Fieldstone foundations of the main house;  Exterior yellow/buff brick walls with original mortar;  Arched and flat brick lintels and masonry openings;  Brick chimney (modified);  Mansard roofs with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing;  Central brick gable on the front elevation inclusive of round arched 2nd floor brick opening and decorative wood trim (similar to dormer window wood surrounds) at the sides;  Dormer windows (windows themselves are not original) complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards);  Front entrance wood screen door and inner wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges;  Second floor wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges;  Glazed semi-circular transom above second floor door complete with semi- circular wood shutter (hardware if extant);  The prominent height of the land with views to the site from Wellington Street and from the site to the east and west along Wellington Street;  The location and setback of the house from Wellington Street; and  The stone retaining wall and pedestrian access from Wellington Street. The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group is of the opinion that the property is in the ‘Group 1’ category, suggesting that it is of major significance and worthy of heritage designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act On August 12, 2020, the Heritage Advisory Committee’s Evaluation Working Group met with Planning Staff to perform an evaluation of the subject property (see Attachment 3). The property scored 84.6/100. The score places the property in Group 1, which suggests that the property is of major significance and should be subject to the following protection measures according to the Town’s criteria:  The designation of the building pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act; Page 78 of 159 October 20, 2020 7 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060  Every attempt must be made to preserve the building on its original site;  Any development affecting such a building must incorporate the identified building; Advisory Committee Review The Heritage Advisory Committee reviewed the item on September 14, 2020. The Committee agreed with the results of the evaluation undertaken by the Working Group and the recommendation in the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared by the applicant’s consultant. The Committee was of the opinion that the Alfred Love House is an important part of the heritage character of the neighbourhood and expressed support for the its heritage designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act for long-term protection. Legal Considerations If Council decides to proceed with designation, a notice of intention to designate will be served on the property owner, Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper. Once the Town issues a Notice of Intention to Designate, the property is protected under the Ontario Heritage Act as designated. Any person may object to the notice of intention to designate within 30 days of its publication. If there are no objections within the 30-day period, the designation by-law for the subject property will be brought forward to Council for approval. If there are objections, they will be referred to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal for a hearing. Financial Implications There are no financial implications arising from this report. Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this matter. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In Page 79 of 159 October 20, 2020 8 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060 order to inform the public, this report will be posted to the Town’s website, and the approval of the recommendations will authorize the Town Clerk to publish and serve Council’s Notice of Intention to Designate in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act, including notice in the local newspaper. Link to Strategic Plan The conservation of heritage resources supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in objective Celebrating and Promoting our Culture. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That 15074 Yonge Street continue to be a listed (non-designated) property on the Aurora Registrar of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. Conclusions Staff support the recommendations in the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared by the owner’s consultant and the results of the evaluation undertaken by the Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group. Staff are recommending that 28 Wellington Street West be designated under Section 29 (Part IV) of the Ontario Heritage Act. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Cultural Heritage Evaluation Recommendation Report Attachment 3 – Evaluation Working Group Score Previous Reports Heritage Advisory Committee Report HAC20-009 – 28 Wellington Street West Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 1, 2020 Page 80 of 159 October 20, 2020 9 of 9 Report No. PDS20-060 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 81 of 159 LOCATION MAP ADDRESS: 28 Wellington Street W ATTACHMENT 1 SUBJECT LANDS Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Building Services Department, August 29 2019. Base data provided by York Region & the Town of Aurora. Air Photos taken Spring 2018, © First Base SoluƟons Inc., 2018 Orthophotography. 0 10 20 30 40 4 Metres Subject Property Page 82 of 159 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION REPORT for 28 Wellington Street West Town of Aurora, Ontario SBA Project No.: 20048 Date: August 7th 2020 Front Elevation as of 2020 Credit: SBA $WWDFKPHQW Page 83 of 159 Owner Mrs. Lois Creelman 37 Spruce Street Aurora, ON L4G 1R7 Phone: 905-506-4256 (c/o Ian Creelman, email: ian.creelman@mac.com) Heritage Consultant Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) 301-40 St. Clair Avenue East Toronto, ON M4T 1M9 Phone: 416-961-5690 Authors:Kelly Gilbride OAA, P.Eng., CAHP, LEEP AP email: kellyg@sba.on.ca Julia Rady PhD email: juliar@sba.on.ca Page 84 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT..............................................2 2.1 Location .............................................................................................................2 2.2 Legal Description and Survey ...................................................................................3 2.3 Area Character and Physiography............................................................................4 2.4 Context - General Character.....................................................................................7 2.5 Context - Municipal Heritage Status .........................................................................8 2.5.1 Official Plan and Secondary Plan ...................................................................8 2.5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Heritage Properties ....................................................12 3.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY................................................................................................13 3.1 Development of the Area.........................................................................................13 3.2 Chronology of Ownership........................................................................................17 3.3 History of the Subject Property ...............................................................................18 4.0 BUILT and SITE RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS.............................................................24 4.1 Built Resource.........................................................................................................26 4.1.1 Exterior ..........................................................................................................27 4.1.2 Interior............................................................................................................35 4.2 Setting ...................................................................................................................39 5.0 HERITAGE EVALUATION OF THE RESOURCES........................................................41 5.1 Preamble ...........................................................................................................41 5.2 Application of Provincial Criteria: Regulation 9/06 Criteria.....................................41 5.2.1 Design Value or Physical Value....................................................................42 5.2.2 Historical Value or Associative Value ...........................................................425.2.3 Contextual Value...........................................................................................42 5.3 Overall Evaluation Summary...................................................................................43 5.4 Heritage Integrity.....................................................................................................44 5.5 Statement of Significance........................................................................................45 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................47 6.1 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................476.2 Recommendations...................................................................................................47 7.0 REFERENCES AND QUALIFICATIONS OF AUTHORS...............................................48 7.1 References ...........................................................................................................48 7.2 Qualifications of Authors .........................................................................................50 APPENDICES................................................................................................................................... Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Authors ...................................................................................A Page 85 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In July 2020 Ian Creelman, on behalf of the Owner of the property at 28 Wellington Street West, commissioned Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) to prepare a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property as part of an Owner initiated request to the Town of Aurora (“Town”) to have the property de-listed from the Town of Aurora’s Register of Properties of Heritage Value or Interest. The property at 28 Wellington Street West was added to the Town of Aurora’s Register of Properties of Heritage Value or Interest as a listed property in accordance with Section 27 (1.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act in 1984. Through the course of investigation and research it became clear that de-listing the property would not be defensible and SBA would not be in a position to recommend having the property de-listed and removed from the Register. With agreement from the Owner, the Owner’s representative, and the Town’s Heritage Planner the scope of work shifted from the format of a Heritage Impact Assessment to a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) with the recommendation that the property be designated by the Town under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Kelly Gilbride OAA, P.Eng., CAHP, LEED AP and Julia Rady PhD of SBA conducted a visual and photographic review of the property on July 27 th 2020. The Town’s Heritage Planner, Carlson Tsang, was contacted as well as Jackie Stewart and Shawna Lewis of the Aurora Museum and Archives for information pertaining to the history and context of the site. The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) was prepared in consultation with the following materials: x Ontario Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act - Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; x Provincial Policy Statements (PPS) dated 2020; x Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada; x Town of Aurora Official Plan, dated 2015 (revision); and x York Region Official Plan, dated 2019. All photographs and figures are credited to SBA unless otherwise noted. North orientation is to the top of any site plans/mapping unless otherwise cited. Page 86 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 2 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT 2.1 Location Figure 1: Site Context and Location Map (highlighted in red) Credit: Google Maps (2020) with SBA nnotations 28 Wellington St. W. is located in the Town of Aurora (formerly the Township of King) in the Regional Municipality of York on Lot 2 of Plan 36 to the west of Yonge Street and north of Wellington Street. The subject property is a corner lot fronting on Wellington Street West to the south and Machell Avenue on the west. There is a low-rise apartment building immediately to the east and a residence and barn on the property to the north. The subject property is obscured from view along Machell Avenue as a result of dense trees and shrubs. To both the immediate west and across Wellington Street are a series of low scale commercial buildings. Page 87 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 3 Given the elevation of the site, high above the adjacent streets, the prominent 2-storey residence (with a rear one-storey wing) has a large front lawn encircled by a stone retaining wall that follows the property lines along Wellington Street West and Machell Avenue. A concrete stair with a metal handrail provides access from the grassed area to the street; however, although there are indications of a former walkway, no path from the stair to the house currently exists. There is no garage, and parking for the property is accessible via a shared right-of-way driveway with the apartment building to the east. 2.2 Legal Description and Survey The house at 28 Wellington Street West is located at the corner of Wellington Street West and Machell Avenue in the Town of Aurora. The property is located on Lot 2 of Plan 36. Figure 2: Site Survey Credit: Property Owner Page 88 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 4 2.3 Area Character and Physiography The Town of Aurora is located 30km north of Toronto, north of the Town of Richmond Hill, and south of the City of Newmarket.1 King City is located to the west and the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville to the east. Yonge Street and its development north from Toronto to Cook’s Bay in Lake Simcoe during the 19th century had a formative influence on the geography of the area. Aurora was one of many towns established during the northern extension of Yonge Street. Aurora is situated just north of the Oak Ridges Moraine with some of the southernmost parts of the Town situated on the moraine. The Town is part of the Holland River watershed that formed after the recession of glaciers 12,000 years ago. The watershed contributed to rich soil, which made the area attractive to settlers wishing to farm in the 19th century. Figure 3: Area Physiography of Aurora and Surrounding Communities Credit: Google Maps, 2019 1 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora Page 89 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 5 The subject property is located substantially above the Wellington Street grade and is relatively level at the house. The front lawn slopes towards Wellington Street, and is completely raised along Machell Avenue with the property supported by a retaining wall along the property lines along Machell Avenue and Wellington Street. There is a small green space at the rear of the property. There are no permanent creeks or watercourses on the property. The area surrounding the subject property was predominantly rural throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries with residential settlements punctuated by the occasional industrial site such as the Fleury Foundry. As indicated within the following aerial photographs 2 (the property is outlined in red), the area remained largely rural in context at the midpoint of the 20th century but over the following decades became more a mixed-use commercial and residential neighbourhood. 2 The base map is from York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data https://ww6.yorkmaps.ca/YorkMaps/nindex.html Figure 4: Aerial Photograph, 1954 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotations Page 90 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 6 Figure 5: Aerial Photograph, 1978 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotations Figure 6: Aerial Photo, 2002 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotations Page 91 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 7 2.4 Context - General Character The residence is located within a mixed-use commercial and residential neighbourhood. The entire surrounding area is predominantly urban. The subject property is located one block west of Yonge Street and the commercial main street that extends south from the intersection at Yonge and Wellington Streets. During the 19th century this main street provided the primary transportation route north and south. Wellington Street, upon which the property is situated, provided the primary east-west transportation corridor for the Town. Presently, Wellington Street is a four lane arterial road. Machell Avenue is located immediately to the west of the property with its southern terminus at Wellington Street West. This avenue is a two lane road that runs north-south with houses and some low-rise residential buildings along it. A low-rise apartment building is located on the property to the east. A commercial wholesale building is situated on the south side of Wellington Street immediately across from the subject property. The property is located one block east from the York Regional District School Board head office. There is commercial development to the south and residential neighbhourhoods to its north. At one time the Fleury Foundry (now Beacon Basketweave Ltd.) was located on the south of Wellington Street immediately across from the subject property. The Foundry was one of the foundational industries within the Town in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Figure 7: Aerial Photo, 2019 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotation Page 92 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 8 2.5 Context - Municipal Heritage Status 2.5.1 Official Plan and Secondary Plan In the Town of Aurora’s Official Plan (Rev. 2015), the Town identifies policies to protect and preserve its history in order to “enhance the diversity, beauty and richness of the natural and built environments.”3 The relevant sections as they pertain to the subject property are 13.1 and 13.3. Section 13.1 - Objectives and the relevant subsections are as follows:4 13.1 a) Conserve and enhance recognized cultural heritage resources of the Town for the enjoyment of existing and future generations; b) Preserve, restore and rehabilitate structures, buildings or sites deemed to have significant historic, archaeological, architectural or cultural significance and, preserve cultural heritage landscapes; including significant public views; and, c) Promote public aware of Aurora’s cultural heritage and involve the public in heritage resource decisions affecting the municipality. The relevant subsections from Section 13.3 - Policies for Built Cultural Heritage Resources are as follows:5 a) The Town will maintain a Register of Cultural Heritage Resources that are considered significant and have been identified by one or more of the following means: i. designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; ii. protected by an easement entered into under the Ontario Heritage Act; iii. designated by the National Historic Sites and Monuments Board as a National Historic Site; iv. identified by the Province of Ontario; and, v. endorsed by the Council as having significant cultural heritage value, including built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes, areas with cultural heritage character and heritage cemeteries. b) The Register shall contain documentation, including legal description, owner information, statement of cultural heritage value and description of the heritage attributes for designated properties. A sufficient description of listed heritage resources will also be included. To ensure effective protection and to maintain its currency, the Register shall be updated regularly and be accessible to the public. c) All significant heritage resources shall be designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act to help ensure effective protection and their continuing maintenance, conservation and restoration. d) Evaluation Criteria for assessing the cultural heritage value of the cultural heritage resources have been developed by the Town in consultation with its Municipal 3 Town of Aurora, Official Plan (2015 Revision)155.4 Ibid 155.5 Ibid,158-160. Page 93 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 9 Heritage Committee. The identification and evaluation of cultural heritage resources must be based on the following core values: i. aesthetic, design or physical value; ii. historical or associative value; and/or iii. contextual value. i) Heritage resources will be protected and conserved in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, the Appleton Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built Environment and other recognized heritage protocols and standards. Protection, maintenance and stabilization of existing cultural heritage attributes and features over removal or replacement will be adopted as the core principles for all conservation projects. Once a property is listed on the local inventory an owner or party must make an application for the consideration of the removal of the property. This application will be submitted to the City for review by the Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee that will make recommendations with respect to the property and application that must be met with the Town Council’s approval.6 In addition to the heritage policies outlined in Section 13.0, the Town of Aurora Official Plan (Rev. 2015) indicates that the subject property is located within a secondary plan area identified as the “Aurora Promenade.”7 It is an area defined as one that “represents both the foundation of Aurora’s rich and proud history, as well as the definition of its potential future.”8 One of the primary objectives for the Aurora Promenade pertains to its Distinct Heritage and Culture: This Plan builds on the distinct heritage and culture of the Aurora Promenade. It defines the heritage resources and provides guidance on methods to conserve, protect and reinforce the neighbourhoods, streetscapes and significant buildings.” 9 6 https://www.aurora.ca/en/business-and-development/resources/development-planning/Heritage-Planning/Request- to-Remove-a-Listed-Property-from-the-Register-Application-Form.pdf7Town of Aurora Official Plan, Section 11: Aurora Promenade, (Revised 2015), 87. As noted in Section 2.4 of this evaluation, the inclusion of Section 11 in the Official Plan occurred in 2010 with the formulation of the OP documents and based upon the Aurora Promenade Concept Plan developed between 2009 and 2010. The Secondary Plan, too, is based in this planning data.8 Official Plan (2015 rev.), 879Town of Aurora, Aurora Promenade Concept Plan (September 2010), 1. Page 94 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 10 The property is located in the area identified as “Old Town” within the Aurora Promenade Concept Plan.10 Figure 8: Character Area Map Credit: The Aurora Promenade Concept Plan, with SBA annotation(subject property highlighted in red) Page 95 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 11 The General Character Area of “Old Town” descriptions that apply to the property are as follows: x The “Old Town” is centered on the Yonge and Wellington Street intersection. It includes the Historic Downtown, the Wellington Street Village, the Cultural Precinct and the residential neighbourhoods. x The adjacent neighbourhoods were the earliest residential areas built in Aurora. They have a diverse mix of predominantly historic houses on tree lined streets. The “Old Town” is a large character area that contains within it three other character areas: the Cultural Precinct, the Wellington Street Village, and the Historic Downtown.11 The subject property is not located within any of these identified supplementary character areas within the “Old Town.” 11 Town of Aurora, Aurora Promenade Concept Plan,(September 2010),16. Page 96 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 12 2.5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Heritage Properties The subject property is not identified as a designated heritage property or as part of the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District (HCD) on Schedule D of the Aurora Official Plan. This HCD is located east and north of the property (identified on the map below). The property is, however, within a “heritage resource” area as identified above in Section 2.5.1. The subject property is located adjacent to or nearby other heritage properties as identified on the location map and chart below. The adjacent/nearby heritage properties identified below are all Listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Heritage Value or Interest. The property is located one block north and west from the historic downtown main street of Aurora that proceeds south from the intersection of Yonge and Wellington Streets. Figure 9: Context Map showing Adjacent / Nearby Heritage Properties Credit: Google Map Base, 2020 with SBA annotations No. Address Listed/Designated Notes 1 28 Wellington Street W. Listed Subject Property 2 11 Machell Ave Listed Home 3 12 Machell Ave Listed Home 4 16 Machell Ave Listed Home 5 35 Wellington Street W. Listed The Fleury Foundry Northeast Old Aurora HCD Designated under Part V of Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) Page 97 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 13 3.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY 3.1 Development of the Area Prior to any settlement, the area that has since become known as Aurora was the traditional lands inhabited by the Mississauga, Iroquois, Huron, and Algonquin First Nations. These indigenous groups established trading networks amongst themselves and later with European voyageurs (fur traders) and settlers. After Britain established their colonial power in British North America in the 18th century the first Lieutenant-Governor, John Graves Simcoe (Simcoe), sought to capitalize upon the established portage route known as the Carrying Place trail for access to the northern Great Lakes.12 In 1795, Simcoe began a project to extend Yonge Street north from Toronto to Georgian Bay, in part as an effort to fortify British holdings and a military route to the Great Lakes from the threat of American attack, 13 and in part to encourage settlement and agricultural industry in the colony. Simcoe imposed his own plans for the road on the ancient route.14 As the new road developed as an extension of Yonge Street from Toronto, so, too, did small towns, villages, and corners. Newcomers and settlers from Europe were attracted to the promise of ample and inexpensive land and sought out opportunities in the new world. Surveyors began mapping the land to the east and west of the northern extension of Yonge Street from Toronto in the 1790s. In 1797, the Crown began to offer deeds of land to settlers, and by 1801 fourteen homes had been built at the crossroads of Yonge Street and Wellington Street, which became the foundational corners for the town of Aurora. Richard Machell was one of the earliest settlers in the area. He purchased the properties at the northeast, southeast, and southwest corners of Yonge and Wellington Streets in 1833. He established a mercantile business at the southeast corner that same year, and the area became more commonly known as “Machell’s Corners.”15 Tannery Creek, which forms a part of a smaller watershed of the East Holland River,16 cuts across the west side of the Town provided the area with the ability to establish a local mill that helped to bolster the Town’s early agro- industrial economy. This creek provided hydropower for the early industries in the Town, including the Fleury Foundry located along Wellington Street and established in the 1850s.17 Aurora underwent expansion and change during the mid-19th century in part due to the growth of the Town’s industries like the Fleury Foundry. The thriving wheat economy of the province and the expansion of transportation systems, especially railways, accelerated the pace of change due to the ability to transport goods not only across the province but to other markets along the St. Lawrence and further south.18 The Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) extended through Aurora beginning in 1853.19 Contemporaneous to the railway expansion, the area south of Yonge and Wellington Streets began to flourish and grow into a commercial and retail centre for the growing Town and surrounding area. 12 Glenn Turner, The Toronto Carrying Place: Rediscovering Toronto’s Most Ancient Trail (Toronto: Dundurn, 2015).13 Philip Carter, Paul Oberst, and the Town of Aurora, “Appendix C – A Short History of Old Northeast Aurora” in Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District: The Plan (2006), 191.14 Ibid15https//thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora16https://www.lsrca.on.ca/Shared%20Documents/newsletter/science-newsletter-vol4.pdf17https://www.auroramuseum.ca/assets/ifthese.pdf18Randall White, Ontario 1610-1985, A political and economic history,(Toronto: Dundurn, 1985) 108-110.19 http://casostation.ca/ontario-simcoe-h Page 98 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 14 “Aurora” was officially incorporated as a village in 1863. It was later incorporated as a town in 1888. Between 1850 and 1890, more settlers arrived to the area so that the population increased from around 700 in 1863 to about 2100 in 1888.20 The GTR helped with the Town’s prosperity. Aurora as the “head of the rail” became a significant shipping centre.21 With a growing community and the access to other communities that the train provided, other social, cultural, and institutional sectors emerged. The town boasted four churches, a post office, a school, a Temperance Hall, and a Masonic Hall, as well as a Town Hall and central market.22 20 https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora21http://www.cnr-in-ontario.com/Reports/index.html?http://www.cnr-in-ontario.com/Reports/RSR-013.html22Carter et al “Appendix C,” 198-199. Figure 10: The Lady Elgin on its first trip from Toronto to Machell’s Corners, 1853 Credit: Toronto Public Library Page 99 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 15 During the early twentieth century, Canadians became more engaged in an assortment of leisure activities. Recreational spaces like parks, rural spaces, or if you were able to afford the trip, the wilderness of northern Ontario, allowed citizens time to reflect and enjoy the outdoors.23 Within schools, churches, and broader reform movements, a trend began (and which continued throughout much of the 20th century) that equated leisure and activity for everyone with better citizenship and a sense of well-being and as an “antidote” for the hardships of labour and industrial life.24 Hotels sprang up in smaller communities to accommodate travelers, and the expansion of the railway and highways provided greater access to places outside of a person’s own town.25 In addition to the Grand Trunk, a radial line from Toronto extended to Aurora. By 1904, the Schomberg and Aurora Radial Railway was incorporated as a part of the Toronto and York Radial Rail Company. It expanded its complement of streetcars and extended the rail north along Yonge Street to Lake Simcoe.26 The rail allowed teenagers from surrounding communities to attend the high school in Aurora, and it meant families in Aurora could take day trips to other towns or Toronto easily (and vice versa).27 The Radial Railway ran through Aurora from around 1899 and lasted until 1930. The line was not profitable in large part due to the growing popularity of automobiles; by the late 1920s when more people owned and operated cars as opposed to using the rail, the radial line was retired. 28 Regardless of whether travel was done by train or car, Aurora provided an easy day trip for 23 Donald Kerr, editor, Historical Atlas of Canada – Volume III: Addressing the Twentieth Century 1891- 1961 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990) 68-69.24 Kerr, ed., Historical Atlas of Canada – Addressing the Twentieth Century,70.25 Ibid, 70.26 http://edrh.rhpl.richmondhill.on.ca/default.asp?ID=s10.127Ibid28https://onthisspot.ca/cities/aurora/heritage_aurora Figure 11: Fleury Foundry c. 1900s Credit: Aurora Museum and Archives Page 100 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 16 people living in the city who wanted to leave for the fresh air and quiet provided by the countryside and small town setting. 29 Over the course of the mid to late 20th century, Aurora continued to grow in industry and residential neighbourhoods due to improved and expanded transit infrastructure, especially related to automobiles and highways. Aurora, too, became a destination for tourists seeking a calm refuge from city-life. This industry was not isolated to Aurora, but instead coincided with a national effort to attract tourists, especially those from the United States to Canada and a broader publicity campaign to showcase the charm and beauty of the country.30 The suburban growth experienced across the province after the close of the Second World War in 1945 also transformed Aurora into a bedroom community for Toronto in large part due to its proximity to the metropole but with the added enticement of living outside of the busy city. Local development, such as that of Frank Stronach and his Magna Corporation, in the area also helped to provide new manufacturing and industrial opportunities to bolster the economy of Aurora and the surrounding area. The increased development in Aurora increased the pressure for development intensification. 29 http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/explore/online/tourism/transportation_cottage.aspx30Alisa Apostle, “Canada, Vacations Unlimited: The Canadian Government Tourism Industry, 1934-1959," Ph.D. dissertation. Queen’s University, 2003 Figure 12: Grand Trunk Railway Station, Aurora c. 1909 Credit: Toronto Public Library Page 101 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 17 3.2 Chronology of Ownership Instrument Type Year Grantor Grantee Price ($) Notes/ Comments Patent 1797 Crown Thomas Phillips -- 210 acres Deed Poll 1803 John Jones, Attorney for Thomas Phillips Thomas Hind -- As above Barter & Sale (B & S) 1803 Thomas Hind Jacob Hollingshead -- As above B&S 1853 Eli Hollingshead et al Robert P. Irwin $4200 140 Acres; Eli was Jacob’s son B&S 1876 Robert P. Irwin Richard Wells $1000 11-1/7 acres B&S 1881 Richard Wells Alfred Love $300 lots 1 & 2, Plan 36 Mortgage 1883 Alfred Love Samuel Jewett $800 lots 1 &2 The house was constructed c. 1883 on the property at its current site Discharge of Mortgage 1887 Samuel E. Jewett Alfred Love B&S 1918 Alfred Love William J. Mount $1,500 all lot 2, subject to right of way Grant 1930 Alfred Love Lois E. Love & Alfred Love, joint tenants L&A & 1.00 lots 1 &2 Grant 1951 executors of Lois Love Margaret L. Gillespie Value of Consideration (v.c) + 1.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Grant 1961 Margaret Louise Proctor [formerly Gillespie] Hazel Ilena Kennedy v.c. + 1.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Grant 1978 Hazel I. Kennedy Edward Kavanagh & Dorothy L. Kavanagh, joint tenants v.c. + 2.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Grant 1980 Edward Kavanagh & Dorothy L. Kavanagh Adrienne J. Cameron v.c. + 2.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Transfer 1999 Adrienne J. Cameron Lois Creelman $227,500 Present Owner Figure 13: Chronology of Ownership Credit: Land Registry Office and Aurora Museum and Archives Page 102 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 18 3.3 History of the Subject Property 31 In 1797 the Crown granted 210 acres of land on Concession 1, Lot 81 in King Township (the lands located west of Yonge Street) to Thomas Phillips. According to the Domesday Book for the County Phillips was one of the original patentees in the area who purchased land that closely abutted Yonge Street to form the early neighbourhoods in the area.32 There is little other historical information about Phillips. Land records show that Phillips’ attorney, John Jones, sold the entirety of the land in 1803 to Thomas Hind, who already owned land in the north west of King County. Early records for Upper Canada note that Hind owned a tavern on Lot 63 further west in the county,33 but there is no evidence that he established any tavern on Lot 81 which is also supported by the rapid turnover of the property from Hind to Jacob Hollingshead later that same year. Jacob Hollingshead was a local mill owner and farmer. 34 Hollingshead married Fanny Dunham who was a member of the Willson family who resided near Sharon, Ontario. The Dunhams and Willsons were members of the Society of Friends, which was heavily located in and around Sharon.35 It is very unlikely that Fanny would have married outside the faith, and so Jacob, too, was likely a member. The land passed to Jacob’s son, Eli. Eli sold 140 acres to R.P Irwin in 1853. Much earlier in the century, Irwin had emigrated from Pennsylvania to Canada in 1818 likely as a Late Empire Loyalist. Irwin worked as a millwright in the Aurora area and established a business in the trade.36 31 As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, access to assessment or tax rolls, fire insurance plans, local archival data, and archival pictures was limited32History of Toronto and County of York, Part III: King Township33http://edrh.rhpl.richmondhill.on.ca/default.asp?ID=saa34http://www.newspapers-online.com/auroran/?wpfb_dl=102735https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/12097563/the-willson-family-sharon-temple36York County “Biographical Notices, “404 Figure 14: Tremaine Map, 1860 Page 103 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 19 It was Irwin who began to subdivide the land into smaller lots. In 1876 Irwin sold about 11 acres of the property to Richard Wells. Wells was born in Aurora and worked on his father’s farm until 1862 when he set off west to work in the gold mines along the west coast of Canada and into the United States. Wells was successful and upon his return to Aurora in 1867 he established an agricultural and stock-raising business. 37 He also acquired more property in the Town, including the purchase of the Queen’s Hotel in 1881.38 Wells’ own dwelling was located east of Yonge Street but his land speculation in the 1870s and 1880s coincided with a period of time in the Town when more residential neighbourhoods were settled as the Town grew in size thanks to radial railway that extended north from Toronto. Figure 15: Survey of the Town of Aurora, 1878 Alfred Love purchased lot 2 and the neighboring lot 1 from Richard Wells in 1881.39 Alfred Love had been born in King County in 1847 to one of the early settler families in the area just to the east of what became Aurora.40 Love was educated and attended the high school in Newmarket. He became a teacher. 37 http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/CountyAtlas/showrecord.php?PersonID=5599238York county 443-44439All information about ownership of the property comes from the abstract index for Plan 36 at the provincial Land Registry Office, Aurora. See the notes attached to this report.40 York County “Biographical Notices, “237 Page 104 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 20 In 1876 Love married Mary Rank and he continued to teach until 1880 when the two moved closer to Aurora. Coinciding with the Loves move to Aurora and contemporary to the purchase of the property, Love left the teaching profession and began work as a book-keeper for the Fleury Foundry located across the street from his new home on Wellington Street. The Loves had four children, two daughters followed by two sons, one of whom died in childhood.41 In 1881 Love purchased the land on Lots 1 and 2 for $300. The survey of Aurora (above) dated 1878 shows no house on the property, which correlates to biographical records and source material that trace the construction to 1883 when Love had built a “fine brick house.”42 No archival data could be found that traced the architect or builder of the house. The house was constructed in the Second Empire Style. This style grew in popularity in Canada beginning in the 1870s. It had originated in Paris in the 1850s and gained popularity across Europe and into North America.43 The style is notable for its incorporation of the mansard roof that allowed for a greater ceiling height within the building or house.44 The Second Empire Style was meant to evince a kind of cosmopolitism or status within a community.45 In towns, this status was reinforced by the location of such houses along prominent streets and a large lawn or garden that surrounded the house.46 In Aurora there are a few examples of the Second Empire Style in residential buildings in the Town; however, it was not the predominant building style.47 Love’s choice of design was an interesting and unique one. The Keeper’s House at the Aurora Cemetery was constructed in 1879 in the same style by a local carpenter, as well as residential houses at 16 Maple Street, 37 Spruce Street, and 116 Wellington Street East were all built in the same style.48 41 York County “Biographical Notices”, 23842Commemorative Biographical Record of the County of York (Toronto: J. H. Beers & Co., 1907): entry for Alfred Love, page 238.43 https://www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/29_second_empire.aspx44Ibid45Ibid46http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/Second.htm 47 Jackie Stewart, the former curator of the Aurora Museum and Archives, mentions in her notes for the property that at one time there were seven examples of the Second Empire Style in Aurora, but as of c. 21st century only five examples remain, It is not known where these two examples were located in the Town or when they were demolished.48 Aurora Museum and Archives curator notes. Both 16 Maple Street and 37 Spruce Street are part of the Old Northeast Aurora HCD and therefore designated under Part V of the OHA; 116 Wellington Street E. is listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; and, the Keeper’s House was designated under Part IV of the OHA in 1987. Page 105 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 21 Figure 16: Map of Second Empire Style Houses in Aurora Credit: Google Base Map (2020) with SBA annotations Page 106 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 22 1 28 Wellington St. W Subject Property / Listed 2 16 Maple St. Listed 3 37 Spruce St Listed 4 116 Wellington St. E Listed 6 14253 Yonge St. Designated under Part IV of OHA Figure 17: Second-Empire Houses in Aurora Credit: Google, Canada’s Historic Places and Aurora Museum and Ahi Page 107 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 23 The house on the subject property likely stood out, in part due to its location along the main west-east thoroughfare in Aurora and, in part, because it was located across from one of the primary industries in the Town, the Fleury Foundry, while the Foundry was foundation of the local economy. Love continued to work for the foundry for a decade before again changing careers and becoming a real estate agent, at the time referred to as a conveyancer, and an insurance agent around 1890.49 Over his career, Love became increasingly involved in the community and Town life. He served on the Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896, in addition to duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes.50 Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. Love’s wife, Mary, died in 1928. Shortly after her death, Alfred said up a joint tenancy for the property with his elder daughter and oldest child, Lois. Alfred Love was active in the community throughl his final years. He maintained his position as secretary of the public school board until 1941.51 Love died in 1943 and was 94 years old.52 With his death, the property passed to Lois. 53 Lois worked as an operator for the telephone company in Aurora.54 Lois lived on the property until 1949. Upon her death in 1951 the property was sold out of the family. It had been owned by the Love family for close to seventy years.55 A plaque was added to the front of the house some time in the later 20th century (likely c. 1984 during an early heritage inventory of historic houses in the Town by the local archives and museum) noting that the house was the “Alfred Love House.” The Loves had owned both Lot 2 upon which the subject property is located and the adjacent Lot 1. After Lois’ death, lot 1 was sold but the subsequent owner of Lot 2, Margaret Procter, purchased the right of way between the two lots.56 The house remained residential through successive ownerships by Margaret Proctor (nee Gillespie) who owned the property for a decade before selling it to Hazel Kennedy in 1961. Kennedy sold the property to Edward and Dorothy Kavanagh in 1978, who then sold it two years later to Adrienne Cameron in 1980. There are few records for these owners. At some point during this time the house was converted to a duplex with an upstairs and downstairs apartment. More recently, the house was purchased by Lois Creelman in 1999 who has maintained the property as a duplex rented out to tenants. 49 Aurora Museum and Archives curator notes.50 York County “Biographical Notices,” 239.51 Ibid52“Till 94, Alfred Love Dies,” in Newmarket Era and Express, 12 August 1943, 553Ibid54Pp 23855Aurora Archives and museum curator notes56Title records, Land Registry Office Page 108 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 24 4.0 BUILT and SITE RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS Figure 18: Front/South Elevation, 2020 Credit: Property Owner Figure 19: Front/South Elevation, Prior to Removal of Porch Credit: Google, 2016 Page 109 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 25 Unless noted otherwise the following photographs were taken in July 2020. Figure 20: Side/East Elevation Figure 21: Side/West Elevation Page 110 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 26 4.1 Built Resource Style Number 28 Wellington Street West is one of only a very few examples in Aurora of residential architecture in the Second Empire style. Typical features of the style that are found in this house include: x Mansard roof: slightly sloping upper section and lower steeply pitched section, providing useable second floor instead of an attic; x Dormer windows; x Decorative window surrounds; somewhat buttress-like shaped boards; and x Round-arched door opening to balcony (balcony/porch removed in +/- 2018), with round- arched windows in doors (both front door and upper door to former balcony/flat roof of porch)57 Massing The almost square massing (in plan) of the main house is fairly simple with the second floor of the yellow/buff brick house clad with a steeply pitched mansard roof complete with dormer windows with decorative wood surrounds. A simple wood fascia board forms the transition between the lower roof and a low sloped upper roof (not visible at the site visit). Until recently the front elevation would have been graced with a similarly detailed mansard roofed porch with a walk-out from the central second floor door. Currently the ground floor front door opens onto a contemporary wood deck with a small gabled roof above. The rear one storey wing is clad with painted shiplap (coved profile) wood siding on the north and east elevations and the yellow/brick masonry is carried thru on the west wall facing Machell Ave. The west elevation may have been purposely constructed with brick given what is assumed to have been a former prominent view on Machell Ave. prior to the growth of the foliage/trees along this side of the property. On the east elevation a one storey yellow/buff brick element links the main house and rear wing (may have been a former side entrance). The wood fascia element between the lower and upper sections of this roof is clearly evident from the rear bedroom on the 2nd floor. No access to a crawl space or basement beneath this area was evident from within the basement. 57 Aurora Museum and Archives, Curator Notes by Jacqueline Stewart; see also, http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/Second.htm Page 111 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 27 4.1.1 Exterior Foundations The main house is supported by a fieldstone foundation with a central masonry wall running north to south and has a full height accessible basement. The basement is divided into 2 sections with 2” x 7 ½” floor joists @ 16” o.c. spanning the west section supported by a 11” wide x 10” high timber beam bearing on a 9 ½” square timber post to the east side of the wood basement stair. A second column, with multiple drill marks, supports the stair stringer at the north east side. Both basement sections have masonry benches constructed along their perimeter walls though a more contemporary L-shaped bench is located along the north east corner of the west section and is infilled in soil. A former entrance to the basement is evident on the east side though its arched brick lintel is partially hidden on the exterior by changes in the adjacent grading. The rear one storey wing is supported on rubblestone with no basement nor crawl space. Figure 23: East Side of Basement Figure 22: North Side of Basement with Stair Page 112 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 28 Exterior Walls The exterior walls of the main house are a yellow/buff brick laid in a common running bond. The original fine detailing of the mortar joints is most evident on the front façade. The brick work extends along the west elevation of the rear wing where at the northwest corner it changes to painted horizontal wood siding. To the north of the kitchen door (access to ground floor unit) masonry repairs have been completed with a concrete brick. With the exception of the basement windows that generally have been infilled or used for new mechanical and electrical services, the original masonry openings with both flat and arched brick lintels on the ground floor remain intact. Where the original porch was removed the brick was cleaned and some masonry repairs were completed. The original semi-circular brick arch above the door and transom on the second floor central gable remains intact. Discrete areas of repointing are evident as well as it appears that the kitchen window on the west elevation may have been once a door and the area below the window was infilled with brick to suit. Figure 24: Second Floor Central Gable Page 113 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 29 Chimney The brick chimney was at some point cut down in height, repaired at the upper 3 courses with new brick and capped in metal. Though there was no visual evidence of a fireplace or wood burning stove on the ground floor a metal cap remains in place on the east wall within the older (wallpapered) closet adjacent to the chimney on the 2nd floor. Venting for the furnace extends from the base of the chimney. Figure 25: Chimney at East Elevation Page 114 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 30 Roofs, Fascia and Soffits The lower mansard roof of the main house was recently reroofed in black asphalt shingles with matching black aluminum flashings and appears to be in good condition. It was not confirmed on site whether the upper mansard roof was similarly redone. The wood trim, still in a brown tone and separating the two roofs, appears to not have been addressed within this scope of work will require future repairs and repainting.Aluminum soffits were installed at some point and several sections are missing along the front elevation were it is possible to see the wood soffits above. Both the lower and upper sections of the rear wing were similarly reroofed in asphalt shingles with matching black aluminum flashings and appear to be in good condition. The wood trim, still in a brown tone and separating the two roof areas, appears to not have been addressed within this scope of work and will require future repairs and repainting. Eavestroughs and Downspouts Both the aluminum eavestroughs and downspouts appear to be new and in good condition. Figure 26: Roof and Aluminum Eavestroughs Figure 27: Missing Soffit Section along Front Elevation Page 115 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 31 Windows Both the ground and second floor dormer windows have been replaced with aluminum windows that may have similar glazing patterns (1over1) and operability as what is assumed to have been original double hung wood windows. The original wood window frames and sills on the ground floor may still exist and were capped in metal when the replacement windows were installed. Though no photographic evidence was found the upper sashes of these windows may have been arched on the exterior to suit the arched brick lintels and have flat heads within the interior to match the extant wood trim. Based on the size and age of a window transom above the sliding door to the rear wing it is possible that this window sash was repurposed when the original windows were removed. If this is the case the original windows may have had a 6 over 6 configuration. The original window and door openings are extant on both the ground and second floors of the main house. In the basement several of the windows have been infilled or repurposed to suit the integration of new electrical and mechanical services. Along the east elevation it appears that a previous opening, possibly a door to the basement was at one point infilled and the grade adjusted to suit. As compared to the adjacent basement wood lintel, an arched brick lintel can be seen above this infilled opening. Though interior modifications were made on the second floor to accommodate a bathroom and kitchen the contemporary infill wall was constructed to the north of the existing dormer window thereby keeping this opening intact. The exterior decorative trim to either side of the second floor dormers is generally intact though in need of restoration and possible recreation given the current condition of the wood. Figure 28: Ground Floor Windows Figure 29: Second Floor Dormer Window Page 116 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 32 Doors There are three entrances to the main house, each with an exterior screen/storm door and an inner door. Both the screen and inner door at the front entrance are wood and appear to be original or older. The inner wood door has double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of ceramic knobs and decorative hinges are present. Both doors appear to have been recently painted and could use some wood repairs in the future. The second set of doors to the current living room on the ground floor are currently closed and locked in situ. Both the exterior wood screen door and inner wood door are older, and it is assumed in need of wood repairs at the same time as the front doors. The third set of doors is at the kitchen/entrance to the ground floor apartment. The storm door is a contemporary aluminum door (appears to be fairly new) with an older wood inner door with an upper glazed panel and 2 solid bottom panels. At the second floor front gable a fourth exterior door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half and corresponding solid panels below matches the ground floor entrance door directly below. This door has a shuttered half round transom above with frosted/back painted glazing. Originally this door, off of the original central hall plan, would have provided access to the balcony atop the porch. Given that the door is still operable a contemporary metal railing has been added for safety. Generally, the hardware on the wood doors is older hinges with rim/box locks. Access to the rear wing, used as storage space, is thru a sliding solid wood door on the east elevation. An older door is fixed in place along the north/rear elevation. Figure 30: Exterior of Door at 2 nd Floor Gable Figure 31: Interior of Door at 2 nd Floor Gable Page 117 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 33 Figure 32: Exterior Transom/Shutter above Second Floor Door Figure 33: Interior of 2nd Floor Door Figure 34: Interior Transom and Decorative Trim Figure 35: Main Floor Door Page 118 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 34 Porches and Decorative Woodwork With the removal of the original front porch a small gabled roof above the entrance and wood deck were added at the front entrance. The remaining decorative exterior woodwork, inclusive of the detailing on each side of the dormer windows, the front round arched shutter and the decorative wood fascias between the lower and upper mansard roofs will need to be restored/repaired and painted in the near future to avoid additional damage and possible loss of the woodwork. Replacement of the woodwork, based on matching the original elements in terms of design and quality of the replacement wood, may be a more viable option if the existing elements have deteriorated to a point that restoration is not feasible. The retention of the original fabric is always the preferred option. Condition Assessment The building envelope is generally sound with recently installed new roofs, eavestroughs and downspouts. The older replacement windows appear still to be performing adequately though the condition of the adjacent woodwork and sills beneath the metal capping may be deteriorated and should be addressed in conjunction with future window replacements. There is a small masonry crack along the north east corner however it appears relatively minor in nature and could be addressed as future masonry repairs are required. Page 119 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 35 4.1.2 Interior Figure 36: Ground and Second Floor Plans Page 120 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 36 Though the house was converted into a duplex in the later 20th century (the date could not be confirmed) several of the original interior features are still intact with the central stair and hall simply blocked off from the ground floor and currently providing access to the second floor apartment. These infilled openings could be simply opened. Likewise, the introduction of contemporary closets and infill walls to create additional bedrooms, bathrooms and a second kitchen could be fairly easily removed. The second floor living room has an original or older closet (wallpapered) with a stove cover for a former stove pipe running out thru the chimney. Indicative of the Second Empire style the mansard roof allows for a highly useable second floor with high ceilings and alcoves at each window. It is assumed that the current low wall at the top of the stairs was introduced during the duplex conversion when a low handrail would not have met the code requirements. Although some of the finishes have been replaced some original features remain: x Central stair inclusive of ground floor newel post, handrail, treads, risers and stringers; x Interior wood paneled doors and hardware (inclusive of decorative hinges, rim/box locks and ceramic knobs); x Selective wood baseboards and wood trim around the window and door openings; x Wood wainscoting in the kitchen; andxWall and floor metal registers. Figure 37: Painted Stair Newel Post and Handrail Figure 38: Main Floor Central Hall Page 121 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 37 Figure 39: Second Floor Opened up for Living Room Figure 40: Main Floor Living Room Figure 41: Main Floor Bedroom No. 2 Page 122 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 38 Condition Assessment The interior is in fair condition indicative of a rented tenanted property. Figure 42: Typical Interior Wood Door Figure 43: Rim/Box Lock and Ceramic Knob Figure 44: Wall Register Figure 45: Interior Wood Trim Page 123 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 39 4.2 Setting The house is located on a prominent height of land with views overlooking Wellington St. both to the east and west and is encircled with a stone retaining wall.A concrete stair with a metal handrail, in relatively poor condition, leads from the street to a grassed area above. Remains of a former walkway to the front entrance are evident within the landscape but no longer exist. A newer deck is located at the front door and entrance to the 2nd floor apartment. Vehicular access off of Wellington St. is from a shared driveway with the apartment building to the east. Dense foliage/trees along the west property line obscure the visibility of the house from Michel Avenue and the neighbouring residential properties. A low chain link fence and small trees/shrubs extends along the north side and carries around the east corner where it ends for access to parking, adjacent to the kitchen entrance. Though no photographs of the original house were found archival research supports the notion that the house was purposely constructed on a highly visible corner on an important street in Aurora and that location remains intact today. Condition Assessment The overall condition of the site is fair, indicative of a rental/tenanted property. Though no evidence was found that confirmed when the stone wall was constructed it is an integral component of the site, even if solely to address the grade change, and should be repaired. At the same time the existing concrete stair, metal handrail and graffiti on the adjacent stone will need to repaired. The re-introduction of what is believed to be a former landscaped path/link from the house to the street would also contribute to the overall setting and appearance of the house. Figure 47: Concrete Stair and HandrailFigure 46: Siting of House above Wellington St. Page 124 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 40 Figure 48: View looking north along Machell Ave.Figure 49: View looking north along Driveway Figure 50: Rear Yard looking north Figure 51: Side/Rear Yard looking east Figure 52: View from House looking southeast Figure 53: View from House looking southwest. Page 125 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 41 5.0 HERITAGE EVALUATION OF THE RESOURCES 5.1 Preamble 58 Criteria for determining the cultural heritage value or interest of a property are listed in Regulation 9/06 made under the Ontario Heritage Act. These criteria are to assist municipalities in evaluating properties for designation under Part IV Conservation of Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. A property may be designated under Section 29 of the Act if it meets one or more of the criteria for determining whether it is of cultural heritage value or interest. The criteria are insufficient of themselves to make a comprehensive determination. Factors such as condition and integrity of heritage attributes as well as a community’s interest or value placed must also be taken into account. 5.2 Application of Provincial Criteria: Regulation 9/06 Criteria 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method, Yes ii. Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, No or iii. Demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. No 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, i. has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, Yes ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or No iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community No 3. The property has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, Perhaps ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings No or iii. is a landmark Perhaps 58 Ontario Heritage ToolKit Page 126 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 42 5.2.1 Design Value or Physical Value i.is rare, unique, representative or early example of style, type, expression, material or construction method, The house is one of five remaining examples of the Second Empire Style of architectural design in the Town of Aurora. It is arguably one of the finest due to its location along a prominent street and its large lawn that surrounds the house (both key characteristics of the Second Empire Style). ii.displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, The house is a fine example of a small residence designed in the Second Empire Style with a mansard roof punctuated with dormers and elegant moldings surrounding the windows; however, the simple detailing is not indicative of a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. iii.demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific merit. No - not shown. 5.2.2 Historical Value or Associative Value i.direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, The property was owned by Alfred Love who built the house c.1883 and lived there until his death in 1943. Over his career, Love became increasingly involved in the community and Town life. He served on the Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896 and worked for the Town in this capacity well into the 20 th century. In addition to his work as the Magistrate, he performed duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes. Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. He served on the Public School Board as its Secretary from 1916 until 1941, only two years prior to his death. Love was deeply connected to the Town of Aurora and worked as a public servant for most of his life, prior to which he worked at one of the foundational industries of the Town, the Fleury Foundry, located on Wellington St. across from his house. ii.yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, No - not shown. iii.demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. No - not shown. Page 127 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 43 5.2.3 Contextual Value i.important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, The site supports the historical character of this neighbourhood within the “Old Town.” The house was constructed c. 1883 and is one of the remaining houses in the residential neighbourhoods that surround the main street. ii. physically, functionally, visually or historically is linked to its surroundings, No - not shown. iii.is a landmark. At one time - and even today - the house could conceivably have been a landmark due to its proximity to the commercial main street as well as its setting high above Wellington Street, the major west-east thoroughfare. 5.3 Overall Evaluation Summary 28 Wellington Street West meets the criteria for designation under Reg. 9/06 for design and historical value and perhaps for contextual value for its setting. The designation does not include the interior elements. Page 128 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 44 5.4 Heritage Integrity Building The house has moderate heritage integrity. The following alterations have been made to the exterior of the house and have diminished its overall integrity: x Removal of the front porch and second floor balcony; x Construction of guard rail at second floor balcony door; x Construction of contemporary gabled roof over front door and front deck; x Reduction in the overall height and capping of the chimney; and x Replacement of the existing windows with aluminum windows and capping of the adjacent woodwork and sills. Despite these changes/alterations the overall heritage character of the house remains largely intact and these changes are generally reversible. Given the importance of the house’s front elevation and its highly visible presence on Wellington Street the recreation of the removed porch would reinstate an essential heritage defining characteristic of the house. The porch could be recreated based on photographic evidence and the markings on the existing brick. The extant architectural features of the building envelope include: x Overall massing with main house and rear wing; x Fieldstone foundations of the main house; x Exterior yellow/buff brick walls with original mortar; x Arched and flat brick lintels and masonry openings; x Brick chimney (modified); x Mansard roofs with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing; x Central brick gable on the front elevation inclusive of round arched 2nd floor brick opening and decorative wood trim (similar to dormer window wood surrounds) at the sides; x Dormer windows (windows themselves are not original) complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards);x Front entrance wood screen door and inner wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; x Second floor wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; and x Glazed semi-circular transom above second floor door complete with semi-circular wood shutter (hardware if extant). Setting The extant heritage features of the setting include: x The prominent height of the land with views to the site from Wellington Street and from the site to the east and west along Wellington Street; x The location and setback of the house from Wellington Street; and x The stone retaining wall and pedestrian access from Wellington Street. Page 129 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 45 5.5 Statement of Significance The property at 28 Wellington St. West in the Town of Aurora (“Town”) was constructed c. 1883. For nearly seventy years it remained the residence of Alfred Love. The building has design or physical value as a fine example of the Second Empire Style of architecture for small scale residences. This style is prominently displayed along the main thoroughfare of Wellington Street. Its setting has changed little over the past century and a half, which makes it one of the finest of the five remaining examples of this architectural style in the Town of Aurora. The traits that are exemplified in the house include its mansard roof with a slightly sloped upper section and lower steeply pitched section, providing a useable second floor instead of an attic, dormer windows complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards), and its central brick gable complete with round-arched door opening to the former balcony atop a mansard roofed front porch. The building has historical or associative value due to its long connection with Alfred Love. Love had the house constructed and he lived there until his death in 1943. Over his career, Love became very involved in the local community and Town life. He served on the Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896 and worked for the Town in the capacity well into the 20th century. In addition to his work as the Magistrate, he performed duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes. Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. He served on the Public School Board as its Secretary from 1916 until 1941, only two years before his death. Love was deeply connected to the Town of Aurora and worked as a public servant for most of his life, prior to which he worked at one of the foundational industries of the Town, the Fleury Foundry, located across from his house. The house has some contextual value because of its location within a block of the historic down town. At one time, the house’s location along Wellington Street would have made it a landmark because of the large lawn at its front and its high location across the street from the Fleury Foundry, one of the foundational industries of the Town in the late 19th century. The heritage attributes include: x Overall massing with main house and rear wing; x Fieldstone foundations of the main house; x Exterior yellow/buff brick walls with original mortar; x Arched and flat brick lintels and masonry openings; x Brick chimney (modified); x Mansard roofs with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing; x Central brick gable on the front elevation inclusive of round arched 2nd floor brick opening and decorative wood trim (similar to dormer window wood surrounds) at the sides; x Dormer windows (windows themselves are not original) complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards); x Front entrance wood screen door and inner wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; Page 130 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 46 x Second floor wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; x Glazed semi-circular transom above second floor door complete with semi-circular wood shutter (hardware if extant);x The prominent height of the land with views to the site from Wellington Street and from the site to the east and west along Wellington Street; x The location and setback of the house from Wellington Street; and x The stone retaining wall and pedestrian access from Wellington Street. Page 131 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 47 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The subject property at 28 Wellington Street West is located on Plan 36 in the Town of Aurora. The site is situated on the north side of Wellington Street at the corner of Wellington Street and at the southern terminus of Machell Avenue. The Town of Aurora’s Official Plan defines the site as part of the “Old Town.” 6.1 Conclusions The building has design or physical value as a fine example of the Second Empire Style of architecture for small scale residences. This style is prominently displayed along the main thoroughfare of Wellington Street. Its setting has changed little over the past century and a half, which makes it one of the finest of the five remaining examples of this architectural style in the Town of Aurora. The building has historical or associative value because of its association with Alfred Love, a prominent local citizen who had the house constructed in 1883. After constructing the house Love and his family remained in the house until Love’s eldest daughter, Lois, died in 1951. The long tenure of the family in the original house and the association of the Alfred Love with the early administration of the Town and his extensive career as a public servant for the town connects the house to its associative value. The building may have contextual value because it supports the character of the “Old Town” in the neighbourhood located north and west of the intersection of Wellington and Yonge Streets that dates to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. It may be considered a landmark due to its prominent location along the main thoroughfare of Wellington Street in the Town and its proximity to the former Fleury Foundry located on the south side of the Wellington Street W. The property has moderate heritage integrity. Although the building has interior heritage attributes it is recommended that they are not included in the designation as the public will likely not have an opportunity to see them and their retention may limit the building’s reuse. 6.2 Recommendations .1 that Council designates the building envelope and setting of 28 Wellington St. West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Page 132 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 48 7.0 REFERENCES 7.1 References Maps & Archives Aurora Museum & Archives Goad Fire Insurance Maps Library and Archives Canada – 1851, 1871, 1891, 1911, and 1921 census data Plan of Town Lots in Aurora, 1853 Tremaine Map, 1860 York County Atlas, 1880 York Region Maps and Spatial Data Municipal Town of Aurora, Official Plan 2015 rev., 87 Town of Aurora, Aurora Promenade Concept Plan, September 2010. Town of Aurora, Streetscape Design and Implementation Plan, January 2013. Philip Carter, Paul Oberst, and the Town of Aurora, Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District: The Plan. 2006. __________ “Appendix C: A Short History of Old Northeast Aurora,” in Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District: The Plan. 2006. Books Johnston, James. Aurora: Its early Beginnings. Aurora Centennial Committee, 1963. Donald Kerr, editor. Historical Atlas of Canada – Volume III: Addressing the Twentieth Century 1891-1961.Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990. McIntyre, John. Aurora: A History In Pictures. 1995. Turner, Glenn. The Toronto Carrying Place: Rediscovering Toronto’s Most Ancient Trail. Toronto: Dundurn, 2015. White, Randall. Ontario 1610-1985 – A Political and Economic History. Toronto: Dundurn, 1985. Reports, Newspapers, and Other Sources The Aurora Banner The Newmarket Era The Toronto Globe Page 133 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 49 Brea Bartholet, “Aurora dumps heritage plan as Cookstown awaits OMB hearing” Innisfil Journal (May 23, 2014) accessed at: https://www.simcoe.com/news-story/4537379-aurora-dumps-heritage-plan-as-cookstown- awaits-omb-hearing/ https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/en/plaques/aurora-armoury https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-imperial-bank-of-commerce http://casostation.ca/ontario-simcoe-h https://www.torontocarryingplace.ca/about-the-trail https://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=7299 https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/en/plaques/aurora-armoury http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/pearson_lester_bowles_20E.html https://www.sharontemple.ca/children-of-peace https://www.auroramuseum.ca/ http://casostation.ca/ontario-simcoe-huron-railway/ https://www.doorsopenontario.on.ca/en/aurora/aurora-readiness-centre-bunker-former-cold-war- em https://www.yorkregion.com/community-story/1415452-history-of-aurora/ http://www.bretz.ca/GenWeb/html/bretz/narratives/4/ Ontario Heritage Tool Kit Ontario Architectural Style Guide (University of Waterloo) People Contacted Carlson Tsang, Town of Aurora Shawna White, Curator, Aurora Museum & Archives Page 134 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 50 7.2 Qualifications of Authors Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. is an OAA licensed architectural practice specializing in heritage conservation. SBA has six licensed architects, three of whom are members of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP), two LEED accredited professionals and a staff trained in the application of heritage standards and best practice. In 1988, SBA was retained to assist the Trustees of The Old Stone Church in Beaverton, Ontario to assist in designation and conservation of the 1840’s stone church which became a national historic site. Since that time SBA has worked on over forty recognized or designated heritage properties and many more listed or eligible to be listed buildings. SBA Follows internationally recognized preservation principles as inscribed in the charters, SBA’s involvement with projects range from research and documentation to production of Heritage Significance Evaluations, Building Condition Assessments, Intervention Guidelines, Conservation Master Plans, Feasibility Studies, Heritage Impact Statements, Building Conservation, Retrofit and/or Reuse and Monitoring and Maintenance Plans. This CHER was prepared by a member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP), namely, Kelly Gilbride OAA, P.Eng., CAHP, LEED AP a partner of Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) and partner-in charge of heritage projects. Kelly’s architectural training is complemented by her building engineering degree. Shortly after joining SBA in 2001, Kelly became a partner and was able to work hand in hand with Jane Burgess and developed an expertise within the heritage field. Initially focused on built heritage conservation work, Kelly expanded her expertise to include heritage policy, conservation plans, impact assessments, and heritage evaluations and inventories. Kelly’s work with SBA has garnered multiple conservation and heritage awards. Julia Rady obtained her PhD in Canadian History from the University of Toronto in 2017. She has presented on her work to the Canadian Historical Association and the Canadian Society of Church History. She has worked as a historical consultant for the CBC, the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History, and Heritage Toronto, and she has published book reviews with Ontario History. She started working at SBA in 2017 assisting on historical research and writing for the firm’s heritage-related work. Page 135 of 159 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Authors Page 136 of 159 Senior Heritage Consultant Kelly Gilbride OAA, P. Eng., CAHP, LEED AP Partner EDUCATION Bachelor of Architecture (Honours), 1991, McGill University Bachelor of Engineering (Honours), 1987, Concordia University PROFESSIONAL 2001 to date Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd., Toronto EXPERIENCE 1998 to 2001 White and Gilbride Architects Inc., Deep River 1997 to 1998 Turczyn White + Gilbride Architects, Pembroke 1996 to 1998 Kelly Gilbride Architect, Deep River 1991 to 1996 Greer Galloway Architects and Engineers, Pembroke PROFESSIONAL Ontario Association of Architects, OAA ASSOCIATIONS Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, PEO Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals, CAHP Canadian Green Building Council, LEED AP Kelly’s architectural training is complemented by her building engineering degree. Shortly after joining SBA in 2001, Kelly became a partner and was able to work hand in hand with Jane Burgess and developed an expertise within the heritage field. Initially focused on built heritage conservation work, Kelly expanded her expertise to include heritage policy, conservation plans, impact assessments, and heritage evaluations and inventories. Kelly is the managing partner in-charge of SBA’s Vendor of RecordContractsand,accordingly, is well versed in working with municipal, government and private clients on challenging heritage projects. SELECT HERITAGE PROJECTS (+ indicates award winning) Infrastructure Ontario – 2 Surrey Place, Toronto ƒStrategic guidance and adaptive reuse study of property at 2 Surrey Place University of Toronto – Convocation Hall, Toronto ƒHeritage Consultant for masonry cleaning at Convocation Hall Exhibition Place – McGillivray Fountain Restoration, Toronto ƒRestoration of McGillivray Fountain at Centennial Square Infrastructure Ontario – Metro Court House and Osgoode Hall Disentanglement from Enwave District Steam Service, Toronto (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance, National Historic Site) ƒFeasibility Study to develop options for Remote Boiler Plant and Heritage Impact Assessment Town of Richmond Hill – McConaghy Centre Cenotaph, Richmond Hill (Listed) ƒRestoration of McConaghy Centre Cenotaph City of Cambridge – Old Galt Post Office Idea Exchange, Cambridge (Designated, National Historic Site) ƒHeritage Architect for Adaptive Reuse and Restoration Archdiocese of Toronto – Church of the Holy Name, Toronto ƒRenovations and accessibility upgrades +St. Michael’s Hospital – Stained Glass Windows Restoration, Toronto ƒFeasibility Study ƒRestoration of Chapel Stained Glass Windows +Redemptorists of Toronto and Edmonton – Redemptorists’ Monastery, Toronto (Designated) ƒStudy to determine feasibility of conversion to self-contained residential suites ƒConservation of the building envelope, interior retrofit and accessibility improvements City of Toronto – Ward’s Island Waiting Shed, Toronto ƒFeasibility Study ƒRelocation and rehabilitation of the Waiting Shed City of Hamilton – Jimmy Thompson Memorial Pool, Hamilton (Listed) ƒFeasibility Study to develop Heritage Intervention Guidelines City of Toronto – Alumnae Theatre, Toronto (Listed) ƒFeasibility Study, Phases I, II and II Accessibility Renovations City of Toronto – Toronto Railway Museum, Toronto (Designated, Pt V) ƒRestoration of Roundhouse Turntable Page 137 of 159 Kelly Gilbride +City of Hamilton – Dundurn National Historic Site, Hamilton (Designated, National Historic Site) ƒFeasibility Study to explore adaptive reuse of the outbuildings to augment the museum experience City of Toronto – Young Peoples Theatre, Toronto (Designated) ƒHeritage Window Conservation Feasibility Study ƒConservation of Wood/Metal windows +City of Hamilton – Gore Park Fountain, Hamilton (Designated) ƒDisassembly, restoration and re-assembly/conservation of Gore Park Fountain City of Toronto – Zion Schoolhouse Renovation, Toronto (Designated) ƒBuilding Condition Assessment ƒRenovation of Zion Schoolhouse +City of Hamilton – Gage Park Fountain and Watercourse, Hamilton (Designated) ƒRestoration of historic masonry of fountain and watercourse Infrastructure Ontario – Lanark Perth Justice Facility Site (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒStrategic Conservation Plan Infrastructure Ontario – Guelph Correctional Facility Site (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒStrategic Conservation Plan Infrastructure Ontario – St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital Site (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒSt. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital Demolition and Decommissioning Plan for site and sixteen heritage buildings Infrastructure Ontario – Thunder Bay District Courthouse, Thunder Bay ((Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒHeritage Inventory and Evaluation of heritage fixtures, fittings, and furniture Infrastructure Ontario – Sir James Whitney School, Belleville (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒHeritage Conservation Plan and Capital Plan for 96 acre Site and five Designated Buildings. Infrastructure Ontario – Century Manor, Hamilton Psychiatric Hospital, Hamilton (Designated) ƒAdaptive Re-use Study ƒPhase Two design development and construction documents and contract administration for roofing – Central Block +University of Guelph – Macdonald Institute, Guelph (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) +ƒRenovation to 1903 Italianate load bearing masonry building, reconstruction of Parapet, Terrace and Portico ƒRenovation of MINS 300 Lecture Hall MINS 300 to an IT lecture theater while conserving the heritage elements +Ontario Realty Corporation – Whitney Block and Tower, Toronto (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒHeritage Conservation Plan ƒMaintenance and Capital Plan for all interior and exterior heritage features Ontario Realty Corporation – Three Properties on ORC Heritage Inventory, Markham (ORC Heritage Inventory) ƒCondition Assessment for Adaptive Re-use of three properties SNC Lavalin/ProFac – W. Ross Macdonald School, Brantford (Designated) ƒSardarghar House: Repairs to front porch/rear porch and window restoration (heritage attributes) ƒIntermediate and Deaf/Blind Residences:Notice of Violation-Liaison with authorities to protect heritage attributes SNC Lavalin – Stratmore Building, Cobourg (Designated) ƒBuilding envelope conservation including of removal of Kenitex non-breathable coating Ontario Realty Corporation – Hamilton Psychiatric Institute, Hamilton ƒGrove Hall: ORC Class EA Consultation & Documentation Report for steel window restoration Huronia Provincial Parks – Sainte Marie Among the Hurons, Midland (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) +ƒConservation of the Chapel and Reconstruction of Blacksmith Shop, Carpentry Shop and Palisade. Ontario Realty Corporation – Leslie M. Frost Centre, Haliburton (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) ƒStrategic Conservation Plan ƒCultural heritage inventory and evaluation of approximately 20 buildings as part of an ORC Class EA Ministry of Environment – Office Relocation to the Old Kingston Psychiatric Hospital Site, Kingston (Designated) ƒHeritage Significance Study, Condition Assessment for Islandview Building (1880) and the Industrial Building ƒDesign and Feasibility Study for adaptive reuse of the buildings within a modern leading edge sustainable complex Page 138 of 159 Historian Julia Rady,PhD EDUCATION PhD, History, 2017, University of Toronto Masters of Arts, 2007, University of Toronto Bachelors of Arts (Honours), 2002, Western University PROFESSIONAL 2017 to date: Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd., Toronto EXPERIENCE PROFESSIONAL Canadian Historical Association ASSOCIATIONS Multicultural History Society of Ontario Toronto Preservation Board Julia has an academic background in Canadian history and has a special interest in heritage conservation and historical preservation, and the interpretation of Canadian sites of heritage significance. Since starting with SBA, Julia has provided assistance, research, and historical interpretations for the Town of Aurora, Toronto Water, Havergal College, Fort York Officers’ Mess, the Guelph Correctional Centre, the St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital Site, and the City of Cambridge Farmer’s Market. She has experience with qualitative and quantitative analysis of history, specialized research skills, and the ability to communicate historical ideas and facts in an accessible way to a variety of audiences. SELECTED PROJECTS: University of Toronto – University of St. Michael’s College, Toronto x Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports for the Kelly Library and Elmsley Hall 15 Properties along the main street, Town of Aurora ƒCultural Heritage Evaluation Reports Poplar Villa, 15074 Yonge Street, Town of Aurora ƒCultural Heritage Evaluation Report “M” and “T” Buildings – Ashbridge’s Bay Water Treatment Facilities, Morrison Hershfield ƒHistorical Research and Analytical Narrative, and Reg. 9/06 Evaluation Water Treatment Plant, Centre Island, Morrison Hershfield on behalf of Toronto Water ƒHistorical Research and Narrative 20908 Leslie Street, East Gwillimbury ƒCultural Heritage Evaluation Report 3824 Holborn Road, East Gwillimbury ƒCultural Heritage Evaluation Report 520 Bronte Road, Milton ƒHistorical Research and Narrative for Heritage Impact Assessment Queen’s Park Circle, Toronto - Pollination Garden ƒHeritage Impact Assessment 78 Park Street East, Port Credit ƒHeritage Impact Assessment 1775 Fifeshire Court, Mississauga ƒHeritage Impact Assessment Fort Frances Judicial Complex. Fort Frances,(Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance), Strategic Conservation Plan Guelph Correctional Centre. Guelph, (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance),Strategic Conservation Plan St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital, (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance),Strategic Conservation Plan Chatham Judicial Complex, Chatham,(Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance),Strategic Conservation Plan Page 139 of 159 Julia Rady SELECT OTHER HISTORICAL CONSULTATIONS / PROJECTS: ƒHistorical Consultant – Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History and Heritage Toronto ƒHistorical Commentator –CBC’s The Goods. ƒ“Worshipping,” an introduction for the SSHRC-funded website,www.wartimecanada.ca ƒVarious conference presentations –to the Canadian Society of Church History, the Canadian Historical Association, and the Political History Group. ƒDissertation –Ministering to an Unsettled World: The Protestant Churches in Early Cold War Ontario, 1945-1956.” Completed at the University of Toronto. ƒFinalist - Three-Minute Thesis Competition, University of Toronto, 2017. Page 140 of 159 Municipal Address: _______________________________________________ Legal Description: _____________________ Lot: ______ Cons: _______ Group: Date of Evaluation: ________________ Name of Recorder: _____________ HISTORICAL E G F P TOTAL Date of Construction 30 20 10 0 /30 Trends/Patterns/Themes 40 27 14 0 /40 Events 15 10 5 0 /15 Persons/Groups 15 10 5 0 /15 Archaeological (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 Historic Grouping (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 Construction Date (Bonus) 10 /10 HISTORICAL TOTAL /100 ARCHITECTURAL E G F P TOTAL Design 20 13 7 0 /20 Style 30 20 10 0 /30 Architectural Integrity 20 13 7 0 /20 Physical Condition 20 13 7 0 /20 Design/Builder 10 7 3 0 /10 Interior (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 ARCHITECTURAL TOTAL /100 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL Design Compatibility 40 27 14 0 /40 Community Context 20 13 7 0 /20 Landmark 20 13 7 0 /20 Site 20 13 7 0 /20 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL /100 SCORE INDIVIDUAL OLD AURORA Historical Score X 40% = _______ X 20% = _______ Architectural Score X 40% = _______ X 35% = _______ Enviro/Contextual Score X 20% = _______ X 45% = _______ TOTAL SCORE HERITAGE BUILDING EVALUATION: SCORESHEET GROUP 1 = 70-100 GROUP 2 = 45-69 GROUP 3 = 44 or less :HOOLQJWRQ6WUHHW:HVW /RW3ODQ $XJ&DUOVRQ7VDQJ              20  15 0   20 30 13 0  27 7 20 20 GROUP 1 = 70-100 Attachment 3 Page 141 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS20-062 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Heritage Permit Application for 31 Catherine Avenue Prepared by: Carlson Tsang, Planner/Heritage Planning Department: Planning and Development Services Date: October 20, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-062 be received; and, 2. That Heritage Permit Application HPA-2020-10 to permit the demolition of an existing detached garage and construction of a new addition at 31 Catherine Avenue be approved, subject to the elimination of the one-storey extension at the rear of the proposed addition. Executive Summary This report provides the General Committee with the necessary information to consider Heritage Permit Application HPA-2020-10. The permit proposes the removal of an existing detached garage, and the construction of a rear addition to the Reynolds House at 31 Catherine Avenue. The subject property is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and is located within the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District.  The Reynolds House has been the subject of Previous Heritage Permit Applications  Staff have no concern with the applicant’s proposal to demolish the existing detached garage in the rear yard because the structure does not contribute to the heritage value of the property.  The proposed addition is not anticipated to generate any adverse impact on the character of the streetscape. The proposed architectural style, roof design and sidings of the new addition are considered compatible with the Reynolds House. Page 142 of 159 October 20, 2020 2 of 7 Report No. PSD20-062  The rear extension of the proposed addition exceeds the maximum depth suggested by the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan. Staff recommend the rear extension be removed to achieve a building footprint that is more in keeping with the character of the host neighborhood. Background 31 Catherine Avenue is located north of Wellington Street East and east of Yonge Street, and within the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District (see Attachment 1). There is an existing residential dwelling on the property constructed circa 1886, known as “the Reynolds House”. Parking is provided in a detached garage located in the rear yard. Mature vegetation exists on the property including several large trees in the rear yard. The Reynolds House can be described as a 1-½ storey structure with a front gable roof. The building is finished with brick cladding. The building features double-hung windows, including a 3-bay window on the front and east elevations. A pale-green wood corner verandah leads up to the front entrance, comprised of six wood columns and wood railings. The building is ordained in decorative trim under the gable roof, also colored in pale-green. Overall, the building appears to be an excellent example of Gothic Revival architecture and is considered a contributing building within the Heritage Conservation District. Heritage Designation In 2006, Town Council passed By-Law 4809-06.D to designate 31 Catherine Avenue under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act as part of the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District. Council also passed By-Law 4809-06.D to adopt the “Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan” as the document to guide the preservation and restoration of properties and streetscapes located within the boundaries of the District. 31 Catherine Avenue has been identified as a contributing property to the Heritage Conservation District. The Reynolds House has been the subject of Previous Heritage Permit Applications Page 143 of 159 October 20, 2020 3 of 7 Report No. PSD20-062 On September 16, 2016, the Town approved Heritage Permit application NE-HCD-HPA- 16-07 to allow the installation of a new double hung window on the west elevation of the structure, near the north-west corner of the building. On February 16, 2017, the Town approved Heritage Permit application NE-HCD-HPA- 17-03 to allow the removal of existing vents underneath the front gable and side gable roofline on the front and west elevation, to be replaced with windows. The second component of the heritage permit was the installation of a new sunroof on the east facing roof. On June 15, 2017, the Town approved Heritage Permit application NE-HCD-HPA-17-07 to allow the installation of a new wood front door, removal of transom and replacement of the box window on the west elevation of the building. Proposed Alteration The owner is proposing to demolish the existing detached garage in the rear yard and construct a two-storey addition at the south east corner of the dwelling which includes a double-car tandem garage on the ground floor and a new bedroom on the second floor. The exterior wall will be finished with vertical board and batten siding. The addition will feature a gable roof that is similar in style to the main building. The new garage door will be made out of wood with horizontal panels. The proposed addition will be subject to a zoning review to confirm compliance with the zoning by-law prior to the issuance of a building permit. Analysis Staff have no concern with the applicant’s proposal to demolish the existing detached garage in the rear yard because the structure does not contribute to the heritage value of the property. Based on historical aerial photos, the existing detached garage in the rear yard was constructed as early as the 1950’s. The garage does not exhibit any significant architectural value and is clearly distinguishable from the Reynolds House. There is no evidence to suggest that the garage contributes to the heritage value of the property. Staff do not anticipate that the proposed demolition of the detached garage will adversely affect the heritage integrity of the building. Also, given the detached garage Page 144 of 159 October 20, 2020 4 of 7 Report No. PSD20-062 has always been located in the rear yard away from the street, there will be minimal impact on the historic character of the streetscape. The proposed addition is not anticipated to generate any adverse impact on the character of the streetscape. The proposed architectural style, roof design and sidings of the new addition are considered compatible with the Reynolds House. Section 9.1.2.5 of the District Plan states that additions should be located to the rear or an inconspicuous side where they are not visible from the street. The proposed addition is located at the south-east corner of the main building, which is approximately 20 m (65.61 ft) from the street to help mitigate its visual impact from public view. Further, the existing mature trees at the front and along the east property line will provide screening to further reduce the addition’s presence on Catherine Street. Section 9.1.3 of the District Plan states that additions and alterations to an existing heritage building should be consistent with the style of the original buildings. Staff consider the proposed gable roof of the new addition to be compatible with the architectural character of the existing home. The roofline from the front is designed with a steep slope to help reduce its vertical massing to ensure it will not dominate the streetscape. The proposed wooden panel garage door, board and batten siding, and asphalt shingles are considered appropriate materials to be used in the neighborhood as per Section 9.8.1 of the District Plan. The rear extension of the proposed addition exceeds the maximum depth suggested by the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan. Staff recommend the rear extension be removed to achieve a building footprint that is more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Section 4.2 of the District Plan suggests that additions to existing buildings should be limited to a maximum depth of 16.8 m (55.11 ft) to ensure the protection of the historic building patterns in the neighborhood. An additional 2.1 m (6.88 ft) will be allowed for one-storey extension that is less than half the width of the house. The proposed addition will increase the total depth of the building to approximately 22.43 m (73.6 ft), where approximately 5.9 m (19.35 ft) is attributed to the one-storey extension at the rear for the second tandem parking space in the garage. Staff are concerned that the additional depth is not consistent with the established building pattern of the host neighborhood. Staff requested the applicant eliminate the one-storey extension, to be more in line with the guidelines of the District Plan. However, the applicant would like to proceed with the application as submitted. Page 145 of 159 October 20, 2020 5 of 7 Report No. PSD20-062 Advisory Committee Review The Heritage Advisory Committee reviewed the application on September 14, 2020. Staff provided an overview of the report highlighting the details of the proposed additions noting the overall footprint will exceed the requirements highlighted in the Heritage Conservation District plan and a minor variance application will be required for the minimum side yard setback for Committee of Adjustment's consideration. The Committee inquired about the permitted lot coverage with respect to the zoning of the property, the finish of the board and batten and the materials to be utilized for the addition, and the applicant and staff provided clarification. The Committee discussed about the proposed attached garage addition, the permitted limits and expressed concerns about the additional building depth. The Committee acknowledged that the proposed addition is considered compatible with the original one-storey building and matches the architectural appearance of the building from the front elevation mitigating the visual impact to the surrounding streetscape. However, it was noted that the additional building depth may result in a built form that is not in keeping with the surrounding homes. Legal Considerations Under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, any developments or alterations that would potentially impact the heritage character of a property located within a Heritage Conservation District requires Council’s consent. This legislative requirement is implemented in the Town of Aurora through the process of a Heritage Permit Application, which is subject to Council’s approval in consultation with the Heritage Advisory Committee. Council must make a decision on a heritage permit application within 90 days after the notice of receipt is served on the applicant, otherwise Council shall be deemed to have consented to the application. The 90-day deadline for this permit application is January 5, 2021. Council may extend the review period of a heritage application without any time limit under the Ontario Heritage Act provided it is agreed upon by the owner. Financial Implications There are no direct financial implications from this report as all applicable fees and charges owing to date have been collected. Page 146 of 159 October 20, 2020 6 of 7 Report No. PSD20-062 Communications Considerations The Town will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this application. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision-making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform the public, this report will be posted to the Town’s website. Link to Strategic Plan The conservation of heritage resources supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in objective Celebrating and Promoting our Culture. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That Council provide direction. Conclusions While the applicant has incorporated various measures in the design of the proposed addition to reduce the impact on the Reynolds House and the streetscape character, staff are concerned that the proposed building depth is excessive within the context of the host neighborhood. It is recommended that the proposal be amended to eliminate the one-storey extension at the rear in order to achieve a footprint that is more in scale with the historic building pattern of the Heritage District. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Drawings Page 147 of 159 October 20, 2020 7 of 7 Report No. PSD20-062 Previous Reports None. Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 1, 2020 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 148 of 159 >Kd/KEDWZ^^͗ϯϭĂƚŚĞƌŝŶĞǀĞŶƵĞdd,DEdϭ^h:d>E^DĂƉĐƌĞĂƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞdŽǁŶŽĨƵƌŽƌĂWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĂŶĚƵŝůĚŝŶŐ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ͕ƵŐƵƐƚϮϵϮϬϭϵ͘ĂƐĞĚĂƚĂƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚďLJzŽƌŬZĞŐŝŽŶΘƚŚĞdŽǁŶŽĨƵƌŽƌĂ͘ŝƌWŚŽƚŽƐƚĂŬĞŶ^ƉƌŝŶŐϮϬϭϴ͕Ξ&ŝƌƐƚĂƐĞ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ/ŶĐ͕͘ϮϬϭϴKƌƚŚŽƉŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚLJ͘ϬϭϬϮϬϯϬϰϬϰDĞƚƌĞƐ^ƵďũĞĐƚWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJPage 149 of 159 x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x x x x x x x x xxxx x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx TWO STOREY REAR ADDTION ONE STOREY GARAGE ADDTION NEWWOODEN DECK BASEMENT ADDITIONBELOW GRADE A1 SITE PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO "UUBDINFOU Page 150 of 159 NEW RECREATIONAL AREA UNEXCAVATED UP15 RISERS A2 BSMT FLOOR PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 151 of 159 NEW 2 CARTANDEM GARAGE NEW WASHRM NEW LAUNDRY NEW CLOSET NEW DECK A3 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 152 of 159 NEW MASTERENSUITE NEW MASTERBEDROOM NEW WALK INCLOSET NEWROOF BELOW ATTICSPACE A4 SECOND FLOOR PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 153 of 159 PROPOSEDEXISTINGA6FRONT ELEVATION31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 154 of 159 A7 REAR ELEVATION 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 155 of 159 PROPOSEDEXISTINGA8 SIDE ELEVATION 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 156 of 159 PROPOSEDEXISTINGA9SIDE ELEVATION31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 157 of 159 ISSUED BY THE SURVEYORIn accordance withRegulation 1026, Section 29(3).THIS PLAN IS NOT VALIDORIGINAL COPYUNLESS IT IS AN EMBOSSEDLAND SURVEYORSPLAN SUBMISSION FORM2115903ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIOxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xA0 SURVEY 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 158 of 159 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 Aurora.ca Town of Aurora Notice of Motion ______________________________________________________________________________ Re: Great Canadian Achievements Mural To: Mayor and Members of Council From: Councillor Harold Kim Date: October 20, 2020 Whereas the Great Canadian Achievements mural was unveiled in November 23, 2001, and it highlights 30 great moments in Canadian history; and Whereas the mural includes Armand Bombardier - inventor of the snowmobile; Rick Hansen - 40,000 Km Wheel in Motion Tour; The Canadarm - first robotic space tool; the Prairies and Niagara Falls representing our topography; and the Donut - the highest consumed food per capita in the world; and Whereas there are many moments and Canadian persons deserving to be on the mural; and Whereas there is a lack of diversity on the mural despite the fact that there were/are many Canadians of racialized background who made significant contributions to the building of Canada; 1. Now Therefore Be It Hereby Resolved That staff investigate locations in Aurora for a second wall to celebrate the diversity in “Great Canadian Achievements” and report back to Council. Page 159 of 159