February 3/04 Report

Present

Kelly
Ferguson
Merulla
Mitchell
McHattie
Pearson
Whitehead
Horwath

Others Present:

Braden
Bruckler

Meeting started at 9:36 and ended at 10:44

Minutes:

Whitehead noted an error in the minutes which indicated that McHattie's motion to table item 6.2 did not get a seconder. In fact, as Whitehead corrected, Merulla had seconded McHattie's motion (although he didn't vote for it). This was the item that McLean had complained about where land inside an ESA was being rezoned to industrial.

5.1 This was a request for a demolition permit for a house on Rymal Road in Ward 7. It was in the "Consent items" so staff likely did not expect any discussion. Consequently there wasn't anyone from staff there to address the issue. But Horwath and Whitehead both raised questions and concerns and it fell to Tim McCabe, Director of Development to field them. The property is owned by Hydro One Networks Inc, a provincial government company. Their intent is to demolish the house and leave the land vacant at this time. Whitehead asked about the tax implications and it was confirmed that the City would get less taxes once the house was demolished. Horwath said there was a larger problem of houses being left to deteriorate and then being demolished and asked for review of property standards bylaws. This is due in the spring. Part way through the discussion, Lee-Ann Coveyduck, head of planning, arrived. She basically said they didn't have a problem with the demolition because the land was owned by Hydro. Interestingly, Kelly didn't speak on the matter even though it is in his ward. The item was adopted, moved by Pearson and seconded by Ferguson.

6.1 This is the rezoning and sale of the old Stoney Creek Library (on Second Street) to Assante Capital Management Ltd for offices. Part of the land was donated to the City for the library with the proviso that it revert back to the owner if the library closed. The other part is owned by the City. Horwath raised the issue of process, noting that Assante had approached the City on this deal and that no public offer had been made. The explanation was that the city owned part of the land was not large enough to be a viable property. The recommendation was adopted without anyone registered as opposed.

6.2 This is on Wilson Street in downtown Ancaster and proposed dividing a property into two and rezoning one to allow a home to be built there and a dentist's office on the other half. There was no discussion and the item was adopted.

8.1 Sale of 123 Princess Street (just east of Sherman and adjacent to the CN rail line) for $50,000. The owner has been in tax arrears since 1987 and has made no tax payments whatsoever since 1991. The total tax arrears are $1,423,999.76! The building has two tenants, one of which pays about $20K a year and the other of whom is the daughter of the owner (not sure whether the current owner or the new one). The property is believed to be contaminated which apparently is the reason that the City has never seized for non-payment of taxes, because then the City would become legally liable to clean up the contamination. The new owner promises to do a litter cleanup of the site and fix the windows, but not an environmental cleanup. New Ontario law permits the City to seize and sell simultaneously so it avoids the liability issues. There was lots of discussion on this item and it's unfortunate that the tape wasn't functioning. Whitehead wanted to know if the City could go after the owner of the property, especially if he/she owns other properties. He was told 'no'. He also asked if the City could charge taxes on the new owner based on the real value of the property or only on the $50K price. Staff felt that they could collect on the basis of the real value. Ferguson asked if an environmental assessment was a condition of the sale. It isn't because the City is in a poor bargaining position. Braden, Mitchell and Horwath also spoke on the issue. One concern was whether the new owner (a numbered company) is really a front for the old owner. Staff said they had checked this. There was also concern that the property could be flipped again.

Horwath moved a motion asking staff to review these issues and explore how the City could recover outstanding taxes from other properties owned by the same owner and whether there was need for changes to provincial legislation to assist the City in dealing with these types of problems. Seconded by Pearson and adopted. The sale was approved.

Motion: McHattie introduced a motion (distributed separately) "That approval be given for the formation of a CPR Community Advisory Panel, to provide a forum for the City, residents and CPR to review changes and developments in local railway opeations, in particular, the railway operations at the Aberdeen Railyard; and that the matter be referred to the General Manager of Planning and Development for a Report back to Committee, providing background information, structure and mandate, responsibilities, membership expertise, and other relevant details, as per Appendix "I" of the Procedural by-law." Seconded by Merulla. McHattie explained that such advisory groups have been set up by CPR in other communities. Motion was adopted.

Ferguson asked that staff be directed to provide photographs of buildings related to proposals. This was moved as a formal motion and adopted.

Horwath asked about the status of the "urban braille" item on the outstanding business items list and got a promise from staff that a report would be provided shortly.

Braden asked for a status report on the 'freeze' imposed by the provincial greenbelt moratorium. Coveyduck said that staff were meeting with the province on February 10.

Braden noted that he has sent an email to every other member of council about a tree deal he is willing to pay for out of his office budget. Braden would get the trees at a good price ($15-20) from the Grand River Conservation Authority, and any councillor could purchase them from him at the same price and then re-sell these to anyone in their ward. While other councillors seemed supportive, there wasn't staff there to comment, and Kelly raised the issue of City maintenance costs if the trees were planted on City land. It was agreed that they would try to avoid city land and plant on private land. Mitchell raised the issue of people planting the wrong type of tree and/or in the wrong location and ending up with clogged sewer pipes.

Whitehead asked about policy on mobile signs, including on the content of the signs. Staff said there is a complete review of the policy this year.

SPECIAL MEETING OF COUNCIL

A special council meeting was scheduled for 12:30 pm to address a deal that has apparently been reached between the City and Hamilton Health Sciences to transfer lands between Wellington and Ferguson to the hospital. This item, however, was scheduled to be 'in camera'. I [CATCH reporter] couldn't stay for the meeting, but did pick up the agenda. It included a report from the Planning and Economic Development Committee that had concluded 105 minutes !! earlier. The report only dealt with one item - the sale of 123 Princess Street. It is unclear why other things were not in the report, including McHattie's motion. Under motions, the report says "none".