Body: Council Type: Minutes Meeting: Regular Date: June 15, 2021 Collection: Council Minutes Municipality: South Frontenac
[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Minutes/Regular Council/Board/2021/Council - 15 Jun 2021 - Minutes.pdf)
Document Text
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 Time: 7:00 PM Location: Electronic Participation/Council Chambers
Meeting # 22 Council (Present in Council Chambers): Mayor Ron Vandewal, Pat Barr, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Staff (Present in Council Chambers): Neil Carbone - Chief Administrative Officer, Angela Maddocks - Clerk, Jamie Brash - Manager of Facilities and Solid Waste, Claire Dodds - Director of Development Services, Troy Dunlop - Manager of Technical Services and Infrastructure, Louise Fragnito, - Director of Corporate Services and Treasurer, Darcy Knott - Director of Fire and Emergency Servcies Staff (Present via Electronic Participation): Anna Geladi - Planner, Christine Woods Senior Planner
Call to Order and Roll Call
a)
The Clerk conducted the roll call as outlined in the attendance noted above.
b)
Resolution Resolution No. 2021-22-01 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That the Council meeting of June 15, 2021 be called to order at 7:00 p.m. Carried
Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof
a)
Councillor Leonard declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 12 a) Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing
b)
Councillor Sleeth declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 6 b) Public Meeting on Zoning By-law Amendment Z-21-05.
Approval of Agenda
a)
Resolution Resolution No. 2021-22-02 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Deputy Mayor Barr That Council suspend the rules of the Procedural By-law 2017-76 to allow for delegations prior to the public meeting portion and approve the agenda as presented. Carried
Scheduled Closed Session - not applicable
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 5.
Delegations
a)
Allan and Partners - Audit Findings Report for the Year Ended December 31, 2020 Howard Allan attended the meeting “virtually” and presented the audit findings for 2020. Resolution No. 2021-22-03 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That the 2020 Audit Financial Statement be accepted as presented. Carried
Public Meeting
a)
Resolution - Open Public Meeting and Statement The Clerk provided direction on how to make oral or written submissions on the Zoning By-law Amendments being heard, how to request notification of the decision and the process to appeal the decision of council and the manner in which to file the appeal. Resolution No. 2021-22-04 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That a public meeting be held to allow for input on planning matters related to Zoning By-law Amendments, Z-21-05 - 5056 Battersea Road (Catherine Reynolds) and Z-21-07 - 1127 Cliffside Drive (Scott and Dulande Joaquin). Carried
b)
Z-21-05 - Zoning By-law Amendment - 5056 Battersea Road (Storrington) Councillor Sleeth left the Council Chambers during this public meeting and discussions on this application. Christine Woods, Senior Planner presented the report. The subject property is located within the Battersea Settlement Area, and has frontage on Battersea Road. The lands are developed with a single detached dwelling and a barn. The lands are currently zoned Urban Residential First Density (UR1). The subject lands are subject to consent application S-08-20-S to create one residential lot. Provisional approval of the consent application was granted subject to conditions by the Committee of Adjustment on November 12, 2020. Conditions 9 and 10 require these lands to be rezoned. The new residential lot (severed parcel) consists of approximately 0.8 hectares (2 acres) of land with 61 metres of frontage on Battersea Road. The dwelling and barn are located on the severed parcel. The zone on the severed parcel needs to be changed to a UR1 Special Provision to recognize that the parcel would have less than the required minimum 76 metres of frontage on Battersea Road. The retained parcel consists of approximately 12.7 hectares (31.5 acres) of vacant land with 20 metres of frontage on Battersea Road. The lands consist primarily of farmland and forest. The retained parcel is intended to be used to assemble lands for future development. The zone on the retained parcel needs to be changed to UR1 Special Provision to recognize that the parcel would have less than the required minimum 76 metres of frontage on Battersea Road. The frontage of the retained parcel is sufficient to accommodate a future road that can provide access to the retained lands and has the potential to connect to other lands proposed for development in this area of Battersea. A future road would be required to be established via a plan
Page 2 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 of subdivision. A holding symbol must be placed on the zone in order to prohibit any building or development until such time as a subdivision agreement is entered between the owner of the lands and South Frontenac Council. Ms. Woods reported that the Building Department (Sewage System Review), Public Services Department and Cataraqui Conservation because they all had no objection to the consent application and therefore were not circulated the Zoning By-law Amendment application. Verbal comments were received from Chris Chesbro, 5088 Battersea Road. He does not have any objection to the severance but does not support a proposal for a future subdivision on the retained parcel. With respect to the policy framework that this application was assessed against, the proposal is consistent with the 2020 PPS. Specifically, section 1.1.3 which indicates that appropriate development standards should be promoted which facilitate intensification, redevelopment and compact form in settlement areas, while avoiding or mitigating risks to public health and safety. The proposal is consistent with the direction of the County Official Plan. The Township of South Frontenac Official Plan intends for a majority of new growth to be directed to existing settlement areas where it can be supported by appropriate servicing. The reduced road frontage for the severed parcel is appropriate as the parcel is located in a settlement area where growth is encouraged, and is in keeping with the character of Battersea. A 20 metre road frontage is appropriate for the retained parcel given the intent for this frontage to become a road that would be developed through a future plan of subdivision. The Township requires a standard 20 metre wide road allowance, as per the Road and Lane Standard Cross-Section Policy. Any future lot creation from the retained parcel must occur by plan of subdivision to ensure the orderly development of the land. The purpose of the Holding (H) symbol is to prohibit building or development on the retained parcel until such time as a subdivision agreement between the property owner and the Township has been executed and registered on title. Councillor Sutherland clarified that there are no buildings on the retained portion and questioned the holding symbol when it is placed in the zoning and if it clearly state what the holding provision is for. Christine Woods confirmed that the “H” holding symbol is to prohibit building and development until there is an application for a plan of subdivision and what is required to remove this provision. This provision assists with avoiding past situations where an owner would obtain a building permit before the approval process was completed. Councillor Morey referred to the map and noted that this parcel appears to go all the way to Sands Road. He wondered if the zoning follows the entire parcel of UR1 zone. Ms. Woods clarified that this property does not go all the way to Sands road, it only touches onto properties that front on Sands Road. Gary Beach, the agent, was on the line and offered to answer any questions that Council may have. There were no other comments from the public. At this time Councillor Sleeth returned to the Council Chambers. c)
Z-21-07 - Zoning By-law Amendment - 1127 Cliffside Drive (Loughborough)
Page 3 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 Christine Woods, Senior Planner, presented this application and indicated that the subject property is 0.7 hectares (1.74 acres) in area. The lands are developed with a single detached dwelling and two small sheds. The existing sewage system is located near the dwelling, between the dwelling and Cliffside Drive. The lands consist of lawn with wooded areas to the south and north. The Owner proposes to establish an additional residential unit in an ancillary (accessory, detached) building for a family member. The approximately 887 square foot ancillary building would be located to the south of the existing dwelling, between the dwelling and Cliffside Drive. It would be setback approximately 25 metres from the front lot line (Cliffside Drive). The ancillary building would be located approximately 6 metres from the southern property line. The dwelling and the additional residential unit in an ancillary building would share the existing driveway, well and hydro connection. The additional dwelling unit would have its own sewage system, south of the building, due to the building’s location relative to the existing sewage system and the cost associated with upgrading the existing system. The submitted sketch showed an alternative location for the ancillary building on the north side of the dwelling. The Owner has requested a zoning by-law amendment to change the Rural (RU) zone on the subject lands to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX). The special provision is requested to permit an additional dwelling unit in an ancillary building on the property and in the front yard. Comments have been received from Xavier and Eathamma Parayankuzhiyil (1110 Cliffside Drive) who expressed objection to the rezoning for three reasons. First, that it would set a precedent for other properties on the street which could lead to changing the population density of the area. Second, allowing an additional residential unit compromises the consistency and desirability of the neighbourhood and could negatively affect property values. And third, they noted the area may not be suitable for an additional septic system as the property is prone to surface flooding in the spring. They suggested that a granny suite attached to the dwelling is a more suitable solution. Ms. Woods reported that the Planning Act was amended in September 2019 by Bill 108 to permit additional residential units on a property which contains a detached house, semi-detached house or rowhouse. A second residential unit may be permitted within these structures, and an additional residential unit may be permitted in a building or structure ancillary to the house on the same property. This amendment to the Planning Act, once implemented in an official plan and zoning by-law, supports the accommodation of affordable housing in local municipalities. She further explained that the Township Official Plan does not provide specific direction on how many dwellings or dwelling units may be permitted on a property. In this situation, one must look to the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement for direction. As indicated above, the accommodation of affordable housing through additional residential units is required under the provisions of the Planning Act. In the absence of Official Plan policies, the Township looks to the information published by the Province in the Second Unit Info Sheet (Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Spring 2017) and to recent amendments to the Planning Act. The Info Sheet describes what an additional residential unit is, and provides considerations for where it may be appropriate to permit these units. These considerations include locations that are not prone to flooding or other natural hazards, locations on roads that are maintained year-round and accessible by Emergency Services, as well as demonstrating that on-site water and sewage services have sufficient capacity for the additional dwelling unit. Ensuring residential uses are not located in areas that are prone to flooding is an important consideration. Based on the observations of seasonal flooding raised by members of the public, and a further review of aerial photography, Planning staff will consult further with the Public Services and Building Services to determine whether the proposed location for the additional dwelling unit and the required sewage system is appropriate for the proposed use. There is an
Page 4 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 identified alternative location for the ancillary building on the north side of the dwelling. Planning staff are not supportive of the alternative location as it is not in proximity to the actively used portion of the property. The alternative location is not practical nor accessible given its distance from the existing driveway (approximately 30 metres) and the need to cross the existing sewage system. The land also appears to be a low-lying area. The proposed placement of the additional dwelling unit in an ancillary building on the south side of the property within the front yard is contrary to the Zoning By-law, which requires accessory buildings to be located behind the principal building. However, this appears to be the most appropriate location on the property, barring any flooding hazards. If appropriate, a site-specific zone permitting an additional dwelling unit in an ancillary building on the property would also permit the building’s location in the front yard. Staff recommend that this property be subject to site plan control to regulate the specific placement of the ancillary building on the property. Site plan control may also help to address concerns raised by members of the public. For example, by requiring vegetation to be maintained or established between the front lot line and the sewage system to provide visual screening from the road, and regulating the design and placement of the ancillary building. Site plan control would be required as the Planning Act does not permit conditions to be attached to a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application. Township of South Frontenac Site Plan Control By-law No. 200325 may be applied to the subject property, as it contains lands within 300 metres of a Sensitive Lake Trout Lake. Ms. Woods addressed the preliminary policy framework but noted that she has not made a recommendation. Councillor Revill asked if there is any opportunity to limit the use of ancillary buildings to prohibit short term rentals. Ms. Woods explained that the Zoning By-law can specify what the use is but zoning cannot regulate who lives in the building or the type or the tenure that they have. (family member living there for free or someone paying to live there) She acknowledges the concern about short term rentals and she indicated this matter will be looked into as part to of the Official Plan update. Councillor Sutherland appreciated the drainage issue being acknowledged. He also suggested that the township needs to require a site for a secondary septic system site. Ms. Woods explained that Development Services staff would typically look at shared systems such as a well, a driveway and the septic system but that there is not always space to allow for all these considerations. She further explained that only in a plan of subdivision or condominium is there a requirement to have two spaces allocated for a primary and alternate site. Councillor Sutherland suggested the requirement for an additional/alternate system be considered when during the Official Plan review. He noted that he is generally supportive of this type of additional dwelling units as a way to create affordable and diverse housing. With respect to the AirbNb issue, Councillor Sutherland felt this is becoming more of an issue on our lakes and in the community and it should be addressed sooner than later. Councillor Morey asked why the applicant had not explored the option of a granny suite had not been considered or explored. He also noted that the proposal for site (b) is in the back and near the existing well and wondered about potential problems for the future. Ms. Woods responded that there are no regulations that specify where exactly or how close a driveway can be to a well. She noted that the well is located within the fenced area behind the house and it is her understanding that the applicant wishes to reduce the fenced area so that the driveway would go around the outside of the fenced area and be a distance from the well. Ms.
Page 5 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 Woods suggested that the applicants confirm why they are proposing an ancillary building as opposed to a granny suite. Mayor Vandewal stated that his preference would be a granny suite as it creates less issues with the short term rental aspect. He recognized it may require an update to the septic system but would be more beneficial than having to find space for a secondary site. He noted that a sketch indicating site (a) for the septic system would have been helpful. He questioned the top of slope and the potential run off towards the lake. Ms. Woods responded that whether or not it is a granny suite or a separate building, the applicants will need to upgrade their sewage system. This property is not a waterfront property so the potential run off would not be a concern. The rezoning process will permit a building in the front yard. Mayor Vandewal appreciated the clarification and was not as concerned about his previous comments. Councillor Ruttan referred to communal systems and felt that two septic systems on one lot was contradictory. Are they putting in another system or upgrading the existing? He was concerned about multiple sewage systems on one small piece of land. Ms. Woods noted that site (a) would have required a separate system as the applicant thought this would be needed, however the Chief Building Official has indicated that this location is not suitable which means the option for the applicant is to find another location or to connect to the existing. It is known that the existing would not be sized properly for an additional dwelling and Ms. Woods indicated that In all likelihood there would only be one system. Councillor Ruttan asked if there is no requirement to have a proposed secondary site for septic system. Ms. Woods noted that they a have seen a number of applications recently to allow additional dwelling units in fairly rural areas. Applications for additional dwelling in a settlement area where lots are smaller, are required to demonstrate they have sufficient sewage system capacity or the area to add or to replace a septic system. Servicing is always a consideration regardless of where the property is in the township. Scott Joaquin, the applicant, noted that the application is being made to allow for his father-in- law to live closer but to also allow for his independence and having a stand alone meets that need. With regard to the septic system proposed locations, both sites were reviewed and site (a) soil was too shallow. Site (b) would allow for connecting to the existing site with upgrades to it. Cam Munroe, commented in the “chat” portal of the zoom meeting that this area floods regularly in the spring and it makes no sense to create a new structure as a granny suite and there should not be two septic systems on the same lot. Greg Millard, owner of the house to the north of the proposal, stated that if proposal site (b) is being put forward this would be in his backyard and he is not necessarily in favour. He noted the changes in Ontario Regulations and the ability to allow additional dwellings. Mayor Vandewal agreed that it was somewhat confusing that there are two options presented. He noted this would have to come back to Council with specific details. Judy and John Myers were connected virtually but had not comments.
Page 6 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 Xavier and Eathamma Parayankuzhiyil provided written concerns about setting a precedent for other properties on the street which could lead to changing the population density in the area. They felt that allowing an additional residential unit compromises the consistency and desirability of the neighbourhood and could negatively affect property values. They felt the area may not be suitable for an additional septic system as the property is prone to surface flooding in the spring. They suggested that a granny suite attached to the dwelling is a more suitable solution. Xavier Parayankuzhiyil reiterated his concern about this becoming a rental unit in the future. Christine Woods indicated that these concerns were also expressed by others and in addition they expressed concerns about the additional dwelling being used for short term rentals. Based on the comments received about flooding, Public Services and Building Services staff have had additional conversations about this proposal. Public Services staff have confirmed that there are drainage issues. Building Services staff have assessed the location for the sewage system and have indicated that the location is not appropriate due to shallow soil depth and they recommended an alternative site. d)
Resolution - Close Public Meeting Resolution No. 2021-22-05 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That having provided an opportunity for input, the public meeting be closed. Carried
Approval of Minutes - none
Business Arising from the Minutes - not applicable
Reports Requiring Action
a)
Official Plan Road Map & Engagement Claire Dodds, Director of Development Services and Monica Belliveau, Dillon Consulting presented the proposed engagement road map. Resolution No. 2021-22-06 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That Council endorse the Official Plan Road Map, Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation Strategy, and the Indigenous Engagement Strategy prepared by Dillon Consulting, dated June 9, 2021. Carried
b)
Request for Conservation Authority Review of Ministerial Zoning Order Applications Resolution No. 2021-22-07 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Deputy Mayor Barr That Council endorse the following resolution: That prior to tabling requests to endorse a Ministerial Zoning Order which affects lands regulated under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, municipal staff shall: •Notify the Conservation Authority of the request; •Provide a copy of the request to the Conservation Authority;
Page 7 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 •Request the conservation authority provide comments to the municipality regarding any issues or concerns related to natural hazards or natural heritage; and; •Request the Conservation Authority to delineate the extent of the regulated land on the site such that the development project can be directed outside of any regulated features. And direct the Clerk to notify Quinte Conservation, Rideau Valley Conservation Authority and Cataraqui Conservation Authority of the passing of this resolution. Carried c)
Resurfacing of Verona/McMullen Netsport Courts Resolution No. 2021-22-08 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council authorize the cancellation of Capital project 21-21 being the Resurfacing of the McMullen Park Netsports Courts, and reconsider the project in 2022 in the context of the Recreation, Parks and Leisure Master Plan Carried
d)
Support for application to the Canadian Health Communities Initiative funding for Multi Use Facility roof construction Resolution No. 2021-22-09 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That Council approve staff to submit a grant application to the federal infrastructure fund – Canada Healthy Communities Initiative (CHCI) – in the amount of $250,000 to construct a roof on the Multi-Use Facility at Centennial Park in Harrowsmith. Carried
e)
Tender # PS-2021-23- Stafford Lane Culvert Rehabilitation Resolution No. 2021-22-10 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That Council accept the bid from Crains Construction Ltd. in the amount of $289,027.40 (Including Non-Refundable HST) for the Stafford Lane culvert rehabilitation project; And That Council award the third stage of the engineering assignment with Ainley Group for contract administration services at the bid rate of $2,800 per week (RFP PW-P02-2019); and That the estimated budget shortfall of $64,211.84 be funded from the Asset Investment Reserve. Carried
f)
Fire Hall Supplemental Report Councillor Sutherland proposed an amendment to the original motion. See Resolution 2021-22-12. Resolution No. 2021-22-11 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill
Page 8 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 That Council support the use of an air-source heat pump with electric backup for the office portion of the new Station 8 Fire Hall and maintain the use of a highefficiency propane boiler system for the remainder of the heating requirements; and, That Council support further investigation of a net-metering solar option concurrent to the construction of Station 8; and That Council direct staff to continue to assess alternatives for possible implementation provided it does not delay the design or tendering process for the new Station 8 Fire Hall.
Resolution No. 2021-22-12 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Morey Amendment (after the first paragraph the following be included) That Council supports the construction of a minimum 10 kilowatt per hour netmetered solar power installation on the Station 8 firehall site and; Carried Resolution No. 2021-22-13 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That Council support the use of an air-source heat pump with electric backup for the office portion of the new Station 8 Fire Hall and maintain the use of a highefficiency propane boiler system for the remainder of the heating requirements; and That Council supports the construction of a minimum 10 kilowatt per hour netmetered solar power installation on the Station 8 firehall site and; That Council support further investigation of a net-metering solar option concurrent to the construction of Station 8; and That Council direct staff to continue to assess alternatives for possible implementation provided it does not delay the design or tendering process for the new Station 8 Fire Hall. Carried - as amended g)
Community Safety and Wellbeing Plan Resolution No. 2021-22-14 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That South Frontenac Council adopts the joint Community Safety and Well Being Plan for the Townships of Central Frontenac, North Frontenac, South Frontenac and Frontenac Islands; and, That Council directs the Clerk to post a copy on the Township’s website and have a copy available in the Township office within 30 days of this approval. Carried
h)
CAO Performance Evaluation Committee Resolution No. 2021-22-15 Moved by Deputy Mayor Barr Seconded by Councillor Morey
Page 9 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 That Council appoints Mayor Vandewal, Councillor Roberts and Councillor Leonard to a CAO performance review committee for 2021. Carried i)
2020 Project Closures Resolution No. 2021-22-16 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council approve the cancellation/closure of projects as listed in the staff report. Carried
j)
Zoning By-law Amendment Z-21-03 - 4826 North Shore Road - Kapler/LuceKapler See By-law 2021-33
k)
Heritage Designation: 3981 Harrowsmith Road - The Stewart House See By-law 2021-34 also. Resolution No. 2021-22-17 Moved by Deputy Mayor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That Council receive the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value and Designation of Heritage Attributes for 3981 Harrowsmith Road - The Stewart House, and that this Statement be used as the basis for staff to prepare the Notice of Designation and Designation by-law for the property; and That Council approve a by-law designating 3981 Harrowsmith Road under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and That Council direct staff to serve a Notice of Designation for the property located at 3981 Harrowsmith Road being called The Stewart House, as a property of cultural heritage value or interest pursuant to Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18,; and carry out the requirements as prescribed under Section 29(6) of the Ontario Heritage Act. Carried
l)
Communal Services - Approval to Conduct Business Case Resolution No. 2021-22-18 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That Council endorse the recommendations of the Communal Service Governance/Operations Committee to create a Municipal Service Corporation (MSC) to manage communal service development across the Frontenac’s, with initial municipal ownership based on a weighted assessment model; and, That Council agree to participate in the next step in the Communal Services initiative being the development of a business case based on the recommendations of the WSP report. Carried
Committee Meeting Minutes
a)
Lakes and Trails Committee Meeting held June 7, 2021 Resolution No. 2021-22-19 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill
Page 10 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 That Council receives for information the minutes of the Lakes and Trails Committee meeting held June 7, 2021. Carried 11.
By-laws
a)
First and Second Readings of By-laws Resolution No. 2021-22-20 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That By-law 2021-33 and By-law 2021-34 be given first and second reading. Carried
b)
By-law 2021-33 - Rezone Concession 6, Part Lot 21, Loughborough (Kapler and Luce-Kapler) - Third Reading Resolution No. 2021-22-21 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That By-law 2012-33, being a by-law to amend By-law 2003-75, as amended, to rezone land from (RLSW) to RLSW - Special provision (RLSW-59) and Waterfront Residential, Concession 6, Part Lot 21, Loughborough, be given third reading signed and sealed. Carried
c)
By-law 2021-34 - Designate Stewart House to be of Cultural Heritage Value and Interest - Third Reading Resolution No. 2021-22-22 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Morey That By-law 2021-34, being a by-law to designate the Stewart House at 3981 Harrowsmith Road to be of Cultural Heritage Value and Interest pursuant to the Provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act (R.S.O. 1990 c. 0.18) be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried
Reports for Information
a)
Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing
b)
27th Annual Battersea Bumpkin Festival
c)
2021 New Funding
Information Items
a)
Thank you from the “Save the Bellrock Mill Committee”
b)
County of Frontenac - Destination Steering Committee Invitation
Notice of Motions
a)
Mayor Vandewal served two notices of motion. The first one is with amending the parking by-law to include restricting the parking of vehicles along roads with no shoulders. The second one is an environmental assessment for the Wilton Road and Yarker Road intersection to determine whether a four way stop or a round-about would be best suited for this intersection.
Page 11 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021 15.
Announcements/Statements by Councillors
a)
Councillor Sutherland referenced the pesticide spraying program and noted that organic farmers have requested not to have the road allowances next to their property sprayed. Jamie Brash asked for a listing of the organic farms that would be affected and confirm that the spraying takes place where there are guardrails.
b)
Councillor Ruttan asked about deep ditching along Perth Road and installation of guard rails. He inquired about this being the “standard” going forward. Neil Carbone responded that the guard rails are required in this area based on engineering standards. There had been a vehicle that went off the road. Moving forward with capital projects there will be more consideration for drainage and ditching implications. He cautioned Council on the intent for this portion of the announcements and encouraged Council to contact staff in advance for clarity on any matter.
c)
The CAO provided an update on vacancies in the Public Services Department and the recruitment process. The Director of Public Services position is posted and open for recruitment and interviews have been conducted for the “Construction and Technical Services Supervisor” position.
Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items)
a)
There were no members of the public still connected virtually at this time.
Closed Session - not applicable
Confirmatory By-law
a)
By-law 2021-35 Resolution No. 2021-22-23 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That By-law 2021-35, being a by-law to confirm generally all actions and proceedings of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac be given first and second reading. Carried Resolution No. 2021-22-24 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Deputy Mayor Barr That By-law 2021-35, being a by-law to confirm generally all actions and proceedings of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac, be given first and second reading this 15 day of June 2021. Carried
Adjournment
a)
Resolution Resolution No. 2021-22-25 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That the Council meeting of June 15, 2021 be adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Carried
Page 12 of 13
Minutes of Council June, 15, 2021
Ron Vandewal, Mayor
Angela Maddocks, Clerk
Page 13 of 13
