Body: Council Type: Minutes Meeting: Regular Date: March 6, 2012 Collection: Council Minutes Municipality: South Frontenac
[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Minutes/Regular Council/Board/2012/Council Meeting - 6 March 2012 - Minutes.pdf)
Document Text
Minutes of Council
March 6th-2012
Meeting No. 8 Time: 7:00 p.m. Location: Sydenham Present:
Mayor
Gary Davison
Deputy Mayor
John McDougall
Councillors,
AUan McPhail Cam Naish Bill Robinson Ron Vandewal
Larry York Del Stowe Staff:
Wayne Orr, Clerk-Administrator: Lindsay MUs, Planner, Mark Segsworth, Public Works Manager; Judy Herrington, Confidential Secretary
Call to Order Resolution No. 2012-OS-01
Moved by Deputy Mayor McDougall Seconded by Councillor Stowe
THAT the Council meeting of March 6th, 2012 be convened at 7:00 p.m. Carried. 2.
Declarations of Pecuniary Interest
Councillor Naish declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Page 24 of the Accounts Payable Voucher. 3.
Public Meeting
Resolution No. 2012-08-02
Moved by Deputy Mayor McDougall
Seconded by Councillor Stowe
That a public meeting be held to discuss planning matters related to: . . .
Official Plan Amendment #16, Pilon / Pardon Official Plan Amendment #17, Plans of Condominium
Review of Application (Freeman) for Zoning By-law Amendment in Part of Lot 8, Concession IX, Storrington District, Township of South Frontenac Carried.
(a) Official Plan Amendment #16, PUon / Purdon Lindsay Mills explained that an application has been submitted to amend the Township of South Frontcnac Official Plan as it applied to a 102 acre parcel of land located between Washbum Road and Sunbury Road in Storrmgton. The purpose of the application is to redesignate a parcel of land from “Agricultural” to “Rural”. The amendment would recognize that the Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs no longer has an interest in preserving this land for agricultural uses. Final approval of the
OPA is required from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Lindsay Mills explained that the Agricultural designation was placed on the Land Use Plan by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
during the preparation to the Township’s Official Plan. As required, in the Provincial Policy Statement, prime agricultural areas shall be protected for long term use for agriculture. The PPS further states that prime agricultural areas are areas where prime agricultural lands predominate
Minutes of Council
March 6th-2012
and contain Classes 1, 2 and 3 soUs which are soUs that are good for agriculture and it specifies that the creation of new residential lots in
agricultural areas shall not be permitted.
Lindsay Mills stated that a Public Meeting was necessary in order to gain comments from the public and Council.
Lindsay Mills cited Attachment #2, a letter to the applicant from the Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs which is in support of the amendment to the OP. The letter states that the ministry has completed a review of the proposed change in designation and recommends that the land be placed in the Rural designation.
Lindsay IVUUs noted that although the application is not specific about what is planned for the subject land if the amendment were approved, the owner of the land has previously discussed the possibility of creating a new residential lot from the large acreage. This would be a permitted use in the RU zone.
Lindsay Mills addressed two letters attached to the report from neighbours who are questioning the rationale for this proposed change in designation. In the letter from Dudley Shannon, 2307 Sunbury Road, he expresses that the change in designation will be incompatible to the adjoining agricultural land owners with respect to people in houses complaining about “smelly manure, big machines on the road,” etc. He also expressed his view that it was “unfair that one property can change its designation while the other can not.” In the other letter from Al and Joanne Perry, 1824 Washbum Road, concerns are expressed regarding increased traffic demand on Washburn Road and increased maintenance costs.
Lindsay Mills introduced two new letters received Tuesday, March 6, 2012. A letter from Fred, Cathy, Jeff, Richard & Robert Sonneveld, 2855 Sunbury Road, is opposing the proposed change in designation and the other letter is in support of the proposed change. The second letter dated March 6, 2012 is from the applicant, Ben Pilon advising that his neighbour to the east who owns a small piece of land designated Agricultural, is in support of the application. Lindsay Mills added that he talked to an OMAFRA representative on February 27,2012 who now thinks the application is premature. Mayor Davison said that he is opposed to it and asked for comments from the Councillors.
Councillor Vandewal indicated that we have held public meetings when a large portion of agricultural land is in question. He asked if the opportunity was given in other similar instances.
Councillor McPhail asked what is the process for applications proceeding through Ontario Ministry of Agricultural Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA).
Lindsay Mills responded noting that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs &
Housing has final approval and will consult with other Mmistrics including the OMAFRA. If the OMAFRA does not agree with a proposed change in designation, then it will not be approved.
Councillor Stowe asked if it was similar to an OPA process. Lindsay Mills responded that yes it was.
2
M’inutes of Council
March 6th-2012
Councillor York asked what is the point of doing this? Lindsay Mills explained that land designated Agricultural cannot be developed.’ If the owner is successful in having the land redesignated to Rural, then this opens up possibilities for severances, etc.
Councillor Naish asked for clarification on what the blue zone represents
on the map. Lindsay MUls responded that this represents areas reserved for mineral aggregate extractions.
Councillor Vandewal observed that this is one of the biggest agricultural areas in the County with many large farms and that a change In designation will impact both sides. He stated that he is opposed to the amendment.
Mayor Davison asked for comments from the public.
John Layton, 1896 Washburn Road asked what is the impact to our community if the zoning is changed? He stated that the owner wishes to
examine other options even though this property was prime agricultural land. He said 25 years ago when the property was designated Agricultural, the present owner was not involved. He said that Washburn Road is a
point of travel for people coming from Sydenham, Kingston, etc. The road is already heavily travelled. What will be the impact on the road if agricultural land is redesignated and more homes are built? He said if a
subdivision of 30 new homes were built, that many things would be impacted such as access to homes, maintenance of the roads, water How, etc.
Mayor Uavison responded by noting that we can only surmise what development might occur until we see a proposal for development. There are alot of restrictions on subdivision development. Without an official proposal we do not have any decisions to make.
Ben Pilon and his wife Michelle are the owners of the property in question. They expressed that they attended tonight in order to clarify what their intentions are for the use of the land. Mr. Pilon indicated that he was
planning on sending out letters to the neighbours and Council. He
explained that he and his wife bought the property two and one half years ago. The reason for their application to redesignate the land is to apply to sever a lot for their in-laws to retire to. They were advised that the property they purchased is designated as Al Agricultural and it would not be possible to sever unless it was rezoned to Rural. He was told that it
would be removed from the OP map if the land was found to not be suitable for good farming.
Mr. Pilon advised that he grew up in rural Ontario and appreciates the value of agricultural land and the contributions of farmers. He does not intend to build a subdivision, but to apply for three severances, one which would be for his in-laws, and to build out buildings. He renovates old buildings. He said the first step is to get a severance for his in-laws. After that, it will be another process. He mentioned that he and his wife love their property, especially the trees which they look forward to tapping for maple syrup. He said he appreciates the input from the public. A neighbour to the east says he wonders about the parcel of land at the end of the property - sand pit. He says he has no issue with this and we will be receiving a letter from him also.
Ben PUon advised that he will leave his phone number and will be happy to talk to anyone. Mayor Davison confirmed that a representative from OMAFRA viewed the property and walked it.
3
Minutes of Council
4
March 6th’ 2012
Wayne Jackson, Washburn Road advised that he has lived there for 50
years and says that at least 70 acres of the land is still good farmland even though there are some rocks and pine trees. He said it would not take much effort to clear the trees and return it to a productive farm. He was
told that he could not subdivide his land because it is designated
Agricultural. He said he wishes the Township would be consistent.
Dudley Shannon, 2307 Sunbury Road advised his letter was Attachment #3
to the Report. He restated his worry about the proposed designation of the land to Rural and it being incompatible with the agricultural land designations. He said that this wUl allow more people to live in the area and in turn will increase complaints about the noise of farm equipment and the smell of manure. He feels the land still has good prospects to be viable farmland.
Bob Heaney, Washburn Road asked if the property was within legal distance of the landfill site. Lindsay Mills advised that it was beyond the 500 metre limit.
Brian Hetherington expressed two concerns. One relates to the impact on the water table. He asked who is responsible for contaminated wells now
and in the future. He stated that the dump is a time bomb. The second relates to a question with respect to land that was divided on the north side
of the road - two blocks were severed even though it was Agricultural designation. Lindsay Mills coufirmed that the land in question is designated “Rural” and not “Agricultural.” Mayor Davison responded regarding the contaminated well issue. He
advised that if a subdivision is planned that test wells are required to be drilled in order to ensure there will be no negative impact. Mayor Davison agrees that the dump does pose a threat of contamination to wells in the
future, but this is a long way off. Without science, it is just a guess as to potential contamination at this point in time. The question was asked that assuming a well is contaminated, whose responsibility is it. Mayor Davison said it depends on what contaminates it. The dump is tested every six months. It is believed to be outside of the Provincial guidelines.
Councillor Vandewal said he thinks the dump is owned by the City. He also advised that wells have to be tested before they are approved. Resolution No. 2012-08-04
Moved by Councillor McPhail
Seconded by Councillor York
That Council receive the report dated February 29, 2012 from the Planning Department and that all comments and discussion from the public meeting be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for their review.
Carried.
(b) Official Plan Amendment #17, Plans of Condominium Lindsay Mills advised that the Committee of the Whole and the Committee
of Development Services have reviewed policy changes to the Township of South Frontenac Official Plan that require immediate attention and
directed that they be brought forward to Council at a public meeting. There are four policy changes as foUows. .
“Proposed new wordmg for section 5.2.7 of the Official Plan regarding setbacks in Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Minutes of Council
5
March 6th’ 2012
The Official Plan intends that aU new development in the Township be well
set back from any water body at a minimum setback of 30 metres. There is
a need to clarify the wording. It has been the experience of the Planning
Department at the Ontario Municipal Board that these policies are not set out clearly enough in the Plan.
It is proposed that the present policies in the Plan be reinforced to more
clearly and definitively convey what Council’s intent is regarding setback
from our lakes and streams.
Councillor Vandewal said that the language is vague on page 13 and 14 of Attachment #2. He asked who sets the criteria with respect to the distance of Environmentally Sensitive Areas to the high water mark of lakes and rivers. He also noted that it is important that we try to apply the criteria and guidelines equally to all.
Lindsay Mills responded that anything within 90 metres of a wetland is envu-onmentally sensitive where we may apply more restrictive setbacks and where we can apply site plan control. .
Adding a new section into the Official Plan to recognize Plans of Condominium as a method of development in the Township
Lindsay Mills explained that under this development arrangement which is very similar to a plan of subdivision, “units” are created that can be mortgaged and bought and sold exactly like in a plan of subdivision. A major difference is that no new lots are being created but individual units are identified within a single large parcel of land instead of a number of
new lots being created. Each unit within the single large parcel would be accessed by a private lane which is termed a “common element” and this common element lane is maintained through the Condominium Corporation.
Councillor McPhail noted that at the last Committee of the Whole meeting condominium development was discussed. He believes the standards of private lanes (4 inches of gravel) compared to municipal standards for public roads (15 inches of gravel) is an important consideration for Council. Further, he expressed that he feels it is the duty of Council to ensure that new residents living in condominiums should be assured of having a certain road standard in order to avoid future problems. He noted that existing private lanes going into cottages, etc. create difficulties in trying to get people to upgrade their lanes. He does not believe the
private lane standards were discussed by Council for new development. Councillor Naish expressed concerns with respect to communal garbage
facilities at the public road, Attachment #4, page 19, item (j). Lindsay Mills responded saying that we can specify how such things as garbage are to be handled, and this is something that we will have to look at further. Councillor York noted that condominiums must have clear cut private road standards that should apply to all. Councillor Vandewal said that communal garbage guidelines should be
prepared and stipulations included (e.g.) such as usage of bins for garbage for every 20 units.
Mayor Davison asked if the road is to stay 30 metres away from the water with respect to the map on page 17 and Linsday Mills responded that yes this is correct.
Minutes of Council
6
March 6th-2012
Deputy Mayor McDougaU said that he supports Councillor Vandewal’s comment regarding a consistent standard being applied to all setbacks to
avoid problems such as individuals applying and getting a 200 metre setback and reapplying and getting a 100 metre setback which has happened in the past. He said this is too arbitrary.
Councillor Robinson cited the map on page 17 showing one building in the corner right against the line and asked what will stop them from further dividing the lot. Lindsay Mffls responded noting that you have to leave an
acre for one septic and a backup scptic, and this is why the property is large. Also, the land has rough terrain and the lot needs to be large to have a proper building envelope. Mayor Davison noted that severance would
need to be applied for. Councillor Vandewal indicated that this is only an example.
Mike Keene, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner FoTenn Consultants Inc. said he
appreciates the effort the Township is making to provide direction for condominium development. He began by explaining the two types of condominiums - Vacant Land Condominium; and Common Element
Condominium. Mayor Davison advised that Council was well acquainted with the concept of condominium development due to a recent presentation on the subject by our lawyer.
Mr. Keene advised the benefit in either case for the municipality is extra assessment with limited municipal responsibility. There are also opportunities for the municipality to contract services to the Condominium such as snow removal and garbage pick-up. He asked that Council consider two points: First, the proposed policies are silent on the Common Element Condo approach. He suggests the only wording that is needed to address this situation is included in Ms hand out and relates to
access policies. .
The second point relates to policy (f) which addresses the road standards. We appreciate that the Township has recommended private road requirements as the base standard but he has a few
examples he wishes to share with Council before the policy is finalized. The primary reason for including this policy is to ensure safe access in the event of an emergency. Mr. Keene cited the Haliburton example. Haliburton places the onus on the developer to design the roads to their situation. Through a development agreement the Township takes a security to ensure the road is built as it was designed.
Mr. Keene cited the Kingston example which requires developers to design the roads. They are reviewed by engineering/emergency services to ensure they arc adequate. Mr. Keene cited the Loyalist example which also requires developers to design the roads.
He recommended that the Township of South Frontenac
.
Place the onus on the developer to demonstrate adequate access; Clause (f) could read: “Roads must be designed by a professional engineer to ensure the condominium/private road is capable of providing adequate emergency service access to the satisfaction of the Township.”
He concluded that the key to remember
Minutes of Council
7
March 6^ 2012
An Official Plan is a guiding document. The municipality has other tools to handle prescriptive requirements.
.
Flexibility should be designed into the policies to streamline process
and eliminate the need for amendments that may be needed when
policy guidance would have been sufficient
Request: Add clarification to access policies to address Common
Element Condos and consider flexibility in the road policy We are excited to work with you on the evolution of development in South Frontenac.
Ruth Ferguson Aulthouse, RFA Planmng Consultant Inc addressed Council and said that she concurs with Mike Keene’s comments and added
in Hastings County, her client was asked to provide an engineering
assessment of the private lanes in a vacant land plan of condominium. In
the assessment the engineer provided an overview of the private roadway construction surface material, grade, stability, drainage and erosion, horizontal and vertical alignment, overhead clearance, and intersection safety. The engineer was able to address safety concerns such as traction,
sight distance, safe stopping, design speeds, turn-around, emergency access. The assessment also prescribed a year-round maintenance routine and strategy for the condominium corporation. This assessment could be part of the prescribed conditions of draft plan approval.
Councillor Vandewal agrees with the private lane as opposed to the public with respect to the condominium.
Councillor York asked Ms Aulthouse about her application for 13 homes. Ms Aulthouse repUed that there are chaUenges due to large rocks, etc. Councillor Vandewal stated that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing is adamant that we do not develop on private lanes. Mr. Keene responded that a condominium road is the one exception.
Wikna Kenney asked for clarification on the location of the property in question and was advised that it is located on Cranberry Lake in Storrington District. Councillor McPhail added that he supports a private road with an engineer’s approval as he feels the road would be of a higher quality. Lindsay Mills responded that South Frontenac’s private road standards are higher than those governed under the condominium guidelines. Mayor Davison commented that the Site Plan Agreement dictates that if a private road fell out of the jurisdiction of a condominium, that it would change to a public road. .
Proposed additions to section 6.17 to include Institutional uses and
Multi-unit residential development in the list of uses where site plan control may be applied Lindsay Mills explained that under section 41 of the Planning Act, Council
may utilize site plan control as a tool to help minimize the impacts of development on neighbouring properties or environmental areas and water
bodies. In order to use site plan control the specific types of uses to which it is to apply must be listed in the Official Plan. It is proposed that institutional uses and multi-unit residential uses be added to the list as
these uses are often associated with large developments within built-up areas with the potential to negatively impact surrounding uses and where site plan control may mitigate such negative effects.
Minutes of Council
8
March 6th-2012
.
Adding a new section into the Official Plan to enable use of the
Holding “h” Symbol for any zoning by-law.
Lindsay Mills advised a new section 8.1.3 is proposed to be added to enable the use of a holding symbol under section 36 of the Planning Act. Under this planning tool, a municipality may pass a zoning by-law with an “h” attached to it when the proposed use of the subject land is known and is
specified in the zoning by-law but certain conditions may be required or studies must be undertaken before the use is permitted to go ahead. When the conditions are finally met, the holding symbol may be removed by amendment to the by-law.
Lindsay Mills concluded his report noting it is the Planning Department’s conclusion that the Official Plan amendments can be supported on the basis that they would enable the Township to assess condominium
development applications. Also, the policies will be effective in helping to clarify the intent of the Plan to keep all development well set back from water bodies and because they would enable Council to utilize site plan control and the holding symbol as planning tools to better mitigate land use conflicts associated with new development proposals. Lindsay Mffls said he would like the Township to go with our own approved standards, e.g. emergency standards, etc. with respect to private roads.
Lindsay iYUUs read the words in Mike Keene’s assertion roads should be
properly constructed…..to a minimum of our private lane standards. Councillor Vandewal noted that he thought Mike Keene’s comments on the
Plans of Condominium method of development in the Township were good particularly with respect to engineers.
Lindsay Mills added for clarification that if South Frontenac adopts Mike Keene’s comments, we would need to have another public meeting. Councillor McPhail added that Mike Keene is saying that we should be
referring to engineers standards which would also keep all townships on the same footing, e.g. Loyalist, etc.
Lindsay Mills advised that the condominium standards for private roads are lower than the Township’s standards for private roads. He noted that condominium private road standards are just up to the safe level. Councillor McPhail said that he felt Mike Keene’s opinion to have engineers take responsibility is best and it will maintain a common standard between townships. Councillor York asked if we were setting ourselves up for a backlash. Mayor Davison asked if we change, do we have to have another public meeting?
Councillor McPhail said he thinks we should use the same wording as other townships.
Lindsay Mills said that we are proposing to follow the private road standards as set out in our municipality and Mike Keene is suggesting that we follow condominium engineers’ standards.
Minutes of Council
9
March 6th-2012
Mayor Davison stated that Mike Keene may have a vested interest as he has an application in to develop a condominium. He asked Mark Segsworth what road standards we should use.
Mark Segsworth said that the Township of South Frontenac’s private lane standards should be used because they meet all of the requirements of emergency services and so why would we change it? Councillor York agrees with Mark Segsworth. Councillor Vandewal says he agrees with Mike Keene. Resolution No. 2012-08-05
Moved by Councillor Stowe
Seconded by Councillor McPhail
That Council receive the report dated March 1, 2012 from the Planning Department and that all comments and discussion from the public meeting be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for fheir review.
Deferred.
(c)
Review of Application (Freeman) for Zoning By-law Amendment in Part of Lot 8, Concession IX, Storrington District, Township of South Frontenac Lindsay Mills advised that Council approve the recommendation for a zoning by-law amendment that would rezone a proposed new residential lot in the Hamlet of Battersea to recognize that it has less than the normally-required lot frontage and lot area. The rezoning is a condition of Consent Application S-59-11-S.
The purpose of this report is to bring to Council an application for a zoning by-law amendment and to hold a public meeting on the application as required under section 34 of the Planning Act. The report includes a location map attachment and a proposed amending by-law. The land is presently zoned Urban Residential-First Density Zone (UR1). The new zone would specify the reduced lot frontage of 64 metres (211 ft.) and the reduced lot area of 0.57 hectares (1.4 ac.). The proposed new zone to incorporate these special provisions is Special Rural (UR1-12) Zone. Lindsay MUs advised that aU agencies commented favourably to the proposal at the consent stage and no comments have been received by the public.
From a planning perspective, the proposal appears to be generally consistent with the intent of the Official Plan in terms of development in
the settlement areas. The plan directs such development to these built-up areas where they can be supported by the services offered there. The proposal would have the favourable effect of separating two existing dwelling onto their own separate lots - consistent with the intent of the Official Plan. Even though agricultural facilities are in proximity to the new lot as noted above, the dwelling is already well established on the site along with other dwellings nearby so that any harmful odours are already well known. Planning therefore supports the application.
Mayor Davison asked what the rationale was for not adhering to the minimum requirement of a 2 acre lot. Lindsay Mills responded that it was because the property was already developed. Councillor Stowe asked if we are making any changes with respect to the public meeting reports.
Minutes of Council
10
March 6th-2012
Lindsay Mms responded that we are not making any changes and are going to keep the wording as it is.
WayneOrr reiterated that all comments from the public with respect to
the review of the official PIan Amendment PUon appUcation wiU be sent to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Resolution No. 2012-08-03
Moved by Councillor Stowe
Seconded by Councillor McPhail
That _an opportunity having been provided to discuss planning matters, that the public meeting be closed.
Carried. 4.
Approval of Minutes
(a)
Council Minutes Resolution No. 2012-08-06
Moved by Councillor York
Seconded by Councillor McPhail
THAT the minutes of the February 14th, 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting be approved as amended. Carried. Resolution No. 2012 -08-07
Moved by Councillor McPhail
Seconded by Councillor York
THAT the minutes of the February 21st, 2012 Council meeting be approved. Carried. 5.
Business Arising from the Minutes - nil
Reports Requiring Action
(a)
Accounts Resolution No. 2012-08-08
Moved by Councillor York
Seconded by Councillor McPhail
THAT Council approves the payment of the Accounts Payable Voucher th
dated March 6In, 2012 in the amount of $572,634.02. Carried.
(b) Report from Lindsay Mills, Planning Coordinator re Review of Proposal for a Road Name Change, Storrington District, Township of South Frontenac (See By-laws 2012-09 and 2012-10) (c)
Report from Mark Segsworth, Public Works Manager re Tender 2012-01 for One Three Quarter Ton Extended Cab Truck, Tender 2012-07 for One Half Ton Extended Cab Truck, and Tender 2012-11 for One Half Ton Crew Cab Truck Resolution No. 2012-08-09
Moved by Councillor York
Seconded By Councillor McPhail
That Council accept the bid provided by Taylor Auto Mail for Tender 2012-01 for One Three Quarter Ton Extended Cab Truck in the amount of $30,193.00, for tender 2012-07 for One Half Ton Extended Cab Truck in the amount of $29,632.00, and tender 2012-11 for One Half Ton Crew Cab
Truck thin the amount of $29,808.00, for a grand total of $89,633.00 plus HST tUs 6In day of March 2012.
Carried.
Minutes of Council
11
March 6th'2012
- By-laws (a)
Resolution No: 2012-08-10
Moved by CounciUor Robinson Seconded by Councillor Vandewal THAT By-law 2012-17, being a By-law to amend By-law No. 2003-75, as amended,_ to rezoue lands from urban resldential-first density zone (UR-1) to special urban residential-first density zone (UR1-12); Part Lot 8, Concession DC, District ofStorrington: Freeman be given a first and second th reading this 6” day of March 2012.
Carried.
Resolution No: 2012-08-11
Moved by Councillor Vandewal
Seconded by Councillor Robinson
THAT By-law 2012-17, being a By-law to amend By-law No. 2003-75, as amended, to rezone lands from urban residential-first density zone (UR-1) to special urban residential-first density zone (UR1-12); Part Lot 8, Concession IX, thDistrict of Storrington: Freeman be given a third and final reading this 6" day of March 2012.
Carried.
(b)
By-law 2012-09, being a by-law to approve the re-naming of a portion of an existing public road from Spooner Road to Dover Road; Part Lot 19, Concession VII, District of Storrington, (third reading) Resolution No: 2012-08-12
Moved by Councillor Vandewal Seconded by Councillor Robinson That By-law No. 2012-09, being a by-law to approve the re-naming of a portion of an existing public road from Spooner Road to Dover Road; Part Lot 19, Concession VII, District of Storrington be given a third and final th reading this 6In day of March 2012.
Carried.
(c)
By-law 2012-10, being a by-law to approve the rc-naming of a portion of an existing Public Road from Spooner Road East to Spooner Road; part Lots 25, 26 and 27, Concession VII, District of Storrington, (third reading) Resolution No: 2012-08-13
Moved by Councillor Robinson
Seconded by Councillor Naish
That By-law No. 2012-10, being a by-law to approve the re-naming of a portion of an existing public road from Spooner Road East to Spooner Road; part Lots 25, 26 and 27, Concession VII, District of Storrington be th given a third and final reading this 6 day of March 2012. Carried. 8.
Reports for Information
(a) Delegation with the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Resolution No. 2012-08-14
Moved by Councillor Naish
Seconded by Councillor Robinson
That Council receive for information the Staff Report titled Delegation with the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure. Carried.
Minutes of Council
12
March 6th'2012
Information Items
(a)
Le^er to Mr- Wayne Orr from M. Bredeson, Executive Correspondence
Officer, Office of the Prime Minister 10.
New Business - nil
- Committee Meeting Minutes Resolution No: 2012-08-15
Moved by Councillor Vandewal
Seconded by Councillor Naish
THAT Council receives the Committee minutes of various Township Committees of Council as presented at the March 6th, 2012 meeting: .
Minutes of the Loughborough District Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting held November 28, 2011
.
Minutes of the Storrington District Recreation Committee Meeting held on November 28, 2011.
Carried.
- Confirmatory By-law Resolution No: 2012-08-16
Moved by Councillor Naish
Seconded by Councillor Vandewal
THAT By-law 2012-18, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of thethTownship of South Frontenac, be given first and second reading this 6 day of March 2012.
Carried. Resolution No: 2012-08-17
Moved by Councillor Vandewal Seconded by Councillor Naish
THAT By-law 2012-18, be read a third time, signed and sealed this 6th day of March, 2012. Carried.
- Adjournment Resolution No. 2012-08-18
Moved by Councillor Naish
Seconded by Councillor Vandewal th
THAT the Council meeting of March 6"1, 2012 be adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Carried.
/} *
yor
^e
A
inistrator
